Does anyone know a place or site where i can purchase a stoker kit for my 2.0 ss?

 

Yes. GM.

A crank from a 2.2L or a 2.4L will work. From what I understand, the main journals are the same size. The cranks can be swapped with no problem.

The only difference I'm aware of is the 2.4L uses a larger bore than the 2.2L and the 2.0L. So, theoretically, the 2.2L crank, rods, and pistons will drop right into a 2.0L block.

 

What's a stoker kit????
or are you asking where can I get a STROKER kit from?
^^^ If so see the above info for what your asking ^^^

 

Where can i find a stroker kit for my 06 cobalt ss/sc... does anyone know a site or place and how much it would be?

 

Threads merged. Please only ask once.

The Ecotec was not built to be stroked. It was designed to be de-stroked, and it was, when they built the LSJ. In fact, the L61 GMPP has a de-stroker rotating assembly for it.

This is a forced induction design engine. Short stroke, high RPM, high HorsePower, low torque.

Not a N/A engine. High stroke, low RPM, low HP, high Torque.


The crank of the L61 or the LE5 might fit your journals, but there is no connecting rods to match. They have to work together.

 

Huh?

Of course there are rods to match. The rods that came in either the L61 or the LE5 will work using the same crank. AAMOF, if you took the crank rods and pistons from an L61 and put them in an LSJ block, can you guess what size engine you'd get?

My suggestion is to buy forged pistons if someone is going to do it. Then they can get some custom made with the right compression height, as well as any dome or dish needed to get the proper static compression.

Why would you think a forced induction engine = short stroke, high RPM, high HP, low torque?

Have you seen a diesel engine in a big rig or a locomotive? Both of those are frequently turbocharged. AAMOF, I drive a shuttle wagon at work that has a 4.0L straight six turbo diesel engine that has a max 2,500 RPM. I have no idea what size turbo it has, but I'm sure I could find out if you really must know. But that thing has enough torque to move at least 10 rail cars at once. And each one of the rail cars weighs ~130 tons (that's ~260,000 lbs. each for those who don't conceive what a "ton" is.). That's 2.6 million lbs moved by a long stroke, small bore, 4.0L turbocharged engine.

A naturally aspirated engine can also be short stroke, high RPM, high HP and low torque. Look at F1 cars. Toyota has a 2.4 L V8 with a 98 mm bore and 39.7 mm stroke that makes over 740 HP with a 19,000 RPM redline, naturally aspirated.

My guesses (I have two) to why GM used a short stroke for the supercharged engine is just what you suggest though; to lower torque output. Based on the TSB about "abusing the car" when you develope a crack in the transmission, and refusing to warranty it, it becomes obvious that the torque from this engine has already surpassed the tolerance of this transmission.

The other guess is because of the displacement of the supercharger, the desired PSI, to lower supercharger revolutions, and lower the amount of heat produced, all to keep longevity in tact. These all were probably factored into their decision to use a shorter stroke.

If I were to increase the displacement of this engine, using a stoker kit would not be my first choice. Increasing the cylinder bore would be. Unshrouding the valves by increasing the bore will allow more air/fuel in easier at the same PSI, therefore lowering heat output and lessen HP lost by driving the supercharger.

But that's just me.

 

I think it because I always speak in terms of this engine and this car. They don't put diesel strokers in Cobalts. They put Ecotecs in them. And the thread author wants to modify his Ecotec, not his Ford F-350.

Yes, an L61 rotating assembly will work with an LSJ block. An LE5 will not, different dimensions. However, if you are going to do, then you are going to do it with an aftermarket assembly, like the Eagle crank and rod combo. And if you are doing it on purpose, then you are building a race car. To do a modification like this to a street car is pointless. You can make a great deal of power with an LSJ engine without having to spend the LARGE amounts of money that would be involved for just a small displacement gain. It's just very poorly advised.

 

First off, you spoke a vague description about supercharged engines. That's what I was commenting on.

And please, elaborate on how the Ecotec was designed to be "destroked"?

Second, you said "there is no connecting rods to match", which there are. They're the ones that came in either engine.

And please, elaborate on what "different dimensions" means. Of course they're different dimensions, they have a different stroke. If you mean the size of the journals are different, from what I've read, they are not. All Ecotecs are the same.

To do a modification like this to a street car is pointless.
That's a matter of opinion.

 

So if this works would you be able to buy a stroker kit made for a older 2.2 ecotec (sunfire,cavy) and it would fit? Would it be useful? I dont know at all Im just typing my thoughts.

 

You would not need new connecting rods for the LSJ if you swap in the L61 crank since the rod's in the LSJ and L61 are the same length...

 

Dude, did I **** you off or something?

The Ecotec engine was originally designed by Saab to be a forced induction engine. The knew when they designed it that they could easily increase the RPM to over 10,000 by destroking the crank, along with other design modifications.

No, I wasn't there in the room when the Saab engineers had the conversation. It is simply what I have learned in the course of reading stuff about the development process of the engine.

The idea was later proven in 2002 when GM Racing built the first destroked L61 engine by swapping out the crank and put the engine into J-body FWD drag cars. From there, GM developed the LSJ.

To correct myself, I said that an L61 rotating assembly would work in an LSJ. That's actually wrong. You are correct that the crank journals are the same size across platforms. The rods are also all the same length. However, the engine block cylinder heights are different between all three engines, L61, LSJ, and LE5. If you put an L61 or LE5 rotating assembly into an LSJ block, you would push the pistons up past the top of the cylinder deck and right into the head. You are failing to take into account the longer stroke of the crank.

And obviously my comment about it being pointless was an opinion, but it's a damn good one! He has an LSJ, which means to stroke his crank, he would either have to use an L61 block, or custom made shorter rods. And the pure expense involved in doing so is money that could be better spent making more power using the engine he has then anything a stroked Ecotec could do!

 

But the block is the same between the L61 and LSJ

 

Thank you.

It would be nice if someone were willing to post links to documentation showing what they've read.

I've searched endlessly for actual dimensions on all three engines, such as rod length, deck height, compression height, rod and main journal sizes, etc., but I can't seem to find any consistent numbers.

Normally, when a company shortens the stroke of an engine they either increase rod length or increase the compression height of the pistons. They hardly ever shorten the deck height. That would just be odd if that's what GM/Saab did, although with GM's record of doing weird things within the past 10 yrs, it wouldn't surprise me.

Companies don't normally design blocks to have an increase in stroke nor a decrease in stroke. They normally design it for a specific stroke, then whatever it is capable of thereafter is simply a plus. The only reason they'll do either to a block is if it's "Cheap" & easy to do.

E.G., the Chevrolet 302 cid V8. Chevrolet used a 283 crank in a 327 block (the 350 wasn't thought of yet), 5.7" rods (which were used in every Gen I, and II SBC engines except the 400), and changed the compression height of the pistons. All those parts where readily available and interchangeable sans pistons.

To say the 327 was designed to be de-stroked just because GM used it for the 302 would be silly. It was designed to be bigger than the 283, and that's it.

I'm not going to go into the history of the SBC. There are many other places to find that info. But I would appreciate any links that anyone could post to any information about the Ecotec engine design, as well as dimensions, that is from a credible source.

 

The only diff. on the LSJ and L61 is the shortened (destroked) crank on the LSJ, the block, connecting rods and the bore is still the same....

 

Here is some broad info on the ECOtec engines, they all share the same block, connecting rod length and cylinder bore... You have the L61(2.2L) then the LSJ a destroked version of the L61(2.2L) and the LE5 (2.4L) is a stroked version of the L61 (2.2L) Only differences in the rotating assembly are the cranks.

You can take the LSJ rods and put them in the L61 for stronger connecting rods, it's even in the GM build book...

L61
The basic Family II architecture was substantially reengineered in 2000, becoming the Ecotec 2.2, model L61 (or L42 for the CNG version). First appearing in the 2000 Saturn LS1, the L61 spread throughout North American GM products, displacing the Quad 4 and its descendents.

Unlike its notably harsh predecessor, the L61 was designed for smoothness. dual in-block balance shafts were integral to the design, and all accessories were mounted directly to the engine block to reduce vibration. The oil filter was cast into the block with a removable cover and replaceable paper element.

Displacement is 2.2 l (2189 cc) with an 86 mm (3.38 in) bore and 94.6 mm (3.72 in) stroke. Compression is 9.5:1 or 10:1, delivering 135 hp to 143 hp (101 kW to 107 kW) and 142 ftˇlbf to 152 ftˇlbf (193 Nˇm to 206 Nˇm) of torque. The Ecotec line is manufactured in Tonawanda, New York, Kaiserslautern, Germany, and (for Saturn) in Spring Hill, Tennessee. The L61-powered Saturn ION replaced the Saturn-powered Saturn S-series.

There are a few variations to the standard L61. The new Chevrolet Malibu uses a version with electronic throttle control and a special unitized exhaust manifold and catalytic converter. The 2003 Saturn L-Series has a high output version with higher (10:1) compression and hotter camshaft. The Malibu and Saturn versions also use returnless fuel injection. There is also a stroked out version of the original 2.2L (the LE5 2.4L) that increases to 170 hp and 170 foot/pounds of torque, in the (2006) Saturn Ion 3.


LSJ
Ecotec LSJ engine in a 2006 Saturn ION Red Line
Enlarge
Ecotec LSJ engine in a 2006 Saturn ION Red Line

The LSJ is a de-stroked (to 86 mm) version of the L61 Ecotec with an Eaton M62 Roots-type supercharger and air-to-liquid intercooler. It is rated at 205 hp and 200 ftˇlbf, but many dynamometer tests have shown up to 20% more power in actual cars.

The LSJ was on the Ward's 10 Best Engines list for 2006.

This engine is used in:

* 2004-2007 Saturn ION Red Line
* 2005-2007 Chevrolet Cobalt SS Supercharged Coupe

* Pulled from Wikipedia

 

Two things:

First, the LE5 block is not the same as the LSJ and the L61. It has a larger bore.
L61: 86x94.6
LSJ: 86x86
LE5: 88x98

Second, I am still looking for the block dimesions, but I believe I was wrong about the deck height differences. The difference in stroke is accomodated by the different pistons. Which would mean if you put an L61 crank with rods (LSJ or Eagle or whatever), you would have to use L61 aftermarket pistons as well to maintain the proper clearance. If you used LSJ pistons (like the Diamond brand ones), that would exceed the deck height.

 

the bigger issue would be the vaccum created, the blower wouldn't be able to keep up and keep boost levels high. in other words, without making the blower "bigger" it really wouldn't ingest all that much more air/fuel, so it wouldn't make all that much more power.

unless you're starting to build a race car.

 

that makes more sense...

 

I don't think anyone said the LSJ and L61 were the same block as the LE5, but OK.
And are you sure the blocks are different? The LS'x' V8 engines, regardless of size, use the same block with different size sleeves for a bigger bore. But, being different bores may justify using a different block. That 2mm calculates to .039" which is quite a bit of difference in bore diameter.

You may have been wrong, you may not have. Honestly, finding information about the ECOTEC block is more difficult than I care to mention. I did find something about a race team that used a block with a shorter deck height than the standard production L61, but they found it tended to overheat easier and warp the cylinder head. Right. A different compression height would need to be used. Although, using a different rod is another alternative available.

I don't know how I came off as being "pissed off", but I'm certainly not. I have a tendency to be somewhat curt sometimes, but I mean no harm. I tend to speak directly about the task at hand and leave feelings aside when discussing things such as this.

If I'm pissed at anything, it's the lack of information available about the ECOTEC engine. You'd think the CIA or FBI were involved.

 

The LSJ and LE5 rod is shorter than the L61 rod, AND the LSJ rod uses a larger piston pin compared to the other 2 variants. The stock piston compression height is different on all 3 engines.

The blocks are all slightly different as well, with the LE5 and LSJ both having machining for the oil squriters and aux oil cooler. The 2006 LE5 also has slightly beefier main webs and therefore weighs about 6lbs more than the LSJ block. However, AFAIK the deck heights are all identical but use different sleeves. The LSJ sleeve (68mm) is actually a different PN# than the 68mm L61 sleeve as the "finish" is different due to the differences in ring materials.
HTH
WopOnTour

 

in other words, LE5 FTW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Don't know if anyone has mentioned this yet, but the 2.3L stroker kit can be found in Europe for 2.0L SAAB turbos. Comes with a chromalloy crank, new rods and pistons, both made to handle lots of power.

 

any links vandy

 

http://www.abbottracing.com/2003/index.htm

Click "enter"
"Products" In left hand column,
"9-5" In right hand column
"Engine" Below pic of rod and piston
Scroll to bottom

 

Any links or other sources of information about these facts? They would be very helpful and appreciated.

I mean... what's a "shorter" rod? What's "a larger piston pin?" Etc., etc.

To me, someone who's built several Hi-Po SBC engines, these things mean nothing without numbers.

Thanks