2.2L L61 Performance Tech 16 valve 145 hp EcoTec with 155 lb-ft of torque

2.4 Throttle Body on 2.2

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-07-2007, 11:53 PM
  #1  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
HackAbuse's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-16-05
Location: Central NY
Posts: 11,137
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
2.4 Throttle Body on 2.2

So I just bought Beck's old 2.4l Intake Manifold and Throttle Body.

I don't want the throttle body to go to waste, So I want to try to use it.

I know people have tried it before and it causes limp mode at high RPMs, probably because the MAF reads more air than the fuel tables can handle.

This thread was created specifically for ideas.

I thought about using an MAF-T to try to fix the problem. But i'm not sure if it'll work.

Does anyone know exactly how the MAF outputs its readings? Is it resistance based?

Maybe if I can get a digital multimeter on it, I can take MAF outputs with both the 2.2 and the 2.4 throttle bodies and figure out the measured difference in airflow for a better idea of how to fix the problem.
Old 11-07-2007, 11:56 PM
  #2  
Banned
 
D4u2s0t's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-18-05
Location: North Jersey
Posts: 17,838
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
what are you looking to gain from this? because you're not going to gain anything, even if you get it to work. the throttle body you have on the car now is plenty big. putting a bigger one won't do anything for it.
Old 11-07-2007, 11:59 PM
  #3  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
HackAbuse's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-16-05
Location: Central NY
Posts: 11,137
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by D4u2s0t
what are you looking to gain from this? because you're not going to gain anything, even if you get it to work. the throttle body you have on the car now is plenty big. putting a bigger one won't do anything for it.
Well, for one, I won't need a TB adapter
Old 11-08-2007, 12:03 AM
  #4  
Banned
 
D4u2s0t's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-18-05
Location: North Jersey
Posts: 17,838
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
it's going to slow down the velocity of the air going into the engine. along with the bigger intake manifold i bet you'll run slower than you do now. i would recommend not putting it on.
Old 11-08-2007, 12:11 AM
  #5  
Senior Member
 
tonio5555's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-10-05
Location: USA
Posts: 2,477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I agree with Kevin its probably not a good idea, but in the sense of adventure I say go for it. I'm sure the people that are using AEM FIC etc to run turbo's may be interested in a better TB.
Old 11-08-2007, 12:18 AM
  #6  
Banned
 
D4u2s0t's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-18-05
Location: North Jersey
Posts: 17,838
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
yea. the 2.0 guys may benefit from a slightly larger tb because the super is forcing air into the engine. on the 2.2 there's nothing forcing the air in. even with a tune, it's not the amount of air that's going in that you want to worry about. it's the velocity of the air that is important.
Old 11-08-2007, 12:29 AM
  #7  
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
06Pursuit's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-28-06
Location: Strathroy, ON, CANADA!
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
well this might help the guys running juice
Old 11-08-2007, 12:30 AM
  #8  
Banned
 
D4u2s0t's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-18-05
Location: North Jersey
Posts: 17,838
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by 06Pursuit
well this might help the guys running juice
i seriously doubt it. untill you're very, very modded on a 2.2 there's no reason to change the tb.
Old 11-08-2007, 07:05 PM
  #9  
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
06Pursuit's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-28-06
Location: Strathroy, ON, CANADA!
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
whats the diffrence in diameter between the 2?
Old 11-08-2007, 11:18 PM
  #10  
Senior Member
 
XM15's Avatar
 
Join Date: 05-16-06
Location: CT
Posts: 6,298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hack, I believe that the guys that pioneered the whole 2.4 manifold thing didn't get any gains with the 2.4 TB added to the manifold.


And take it from another '05 guy with some experience, the manifold is probably not the best thing for you right now. Your mid range torque is going to suffer much more than the '07s. (Which is what the CED test vehicle was)
Old 11-09-2007, 12:17 AM
  #11  
Banned
 
YzRider452's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-29-06
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
i love my 07
Old 11-09-2007, 05:54 AM
  #12  
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
HunterKiller89's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-20-06
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 11,183
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by XM15
Hack, I believe that the guys that pioneered the whole 2.4 manifold thing didn't get any gains with the 2.4 TB added to the manifold.


And take it from another '05 guy with some experience, the manifold is probably not the best thing for you right now. Your mid range torque is going to suffer much more than the '07s. (Which is what the CED test vehicle was)
you know XM...i noticed you tell everyone this, but it might not be true...we all know different cars will act differently to the same mod...what if yours is a rare case, and the 05-06 cars also make gains worthy of the mid tq loss? im not saying your wrong...id just be sure to include that this happened during your personal experience.

as for the 1st paragraph...idk if they ever dynoed the 2.4 TB....i dont think they could keep it out of limp mode. there might have been gains, but again, they would have been up high, and probably minimal....better gains if you had a 8k redline or something...but seeing as how almost no 2.2 has a modified redline, thats probably not the case
Old 11-09-2007, 04:06 PM
  #13  
Senior Member
 
XM15's Avatar
 
Join Date: 05-16-06
Location: CT
Posts: 6,298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by HunterKiller89
you know XM...i noticed you tell everyone this, but it might not be true...we all know different cars will act differently to the same mod...what if yours is a rare case, and the 05-06 cars also make gains worthy of the mid tq loss? im not saying your wrong...id just be sure to include that this happened during your personal experience.
as for the 1st paragraph...idk if they ever dynoed the 2.4 TB....i dont think they could keep it out of limp mode. there might have been gains, but again, they would have been up high, and probably minimal....better gains if you had a 8k redline or something...but seeing as how almost no 2.2 has a modified redline, thats probably not the case
I did.



And they did dyno with the TB.

In order to get to 8K someone would have to do a build. I don't think there are any appreciable gains with the TB for someone with a stock redline.

Anyways, the reason I keep saying what I'm saying is not necessarily to discourage others from going in this direction, its just that no one else is saying it. I think its the responsible thing to do to let both sides be heard. Maybe that will keep some people from wasting $250 like I did. And its not like I don't have any data to back me up, either. I've never said that it won't work for everyone, its just that people need to think before doing this mod.
Old 11-09-2007, 04:16 PM
  #14  
Senior Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Switt23's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-10-06
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 3,021
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Basically what everyone is trying to say is...

Intake Manifold has mixed feelings, some like the HIGH RPM Gains. Otheres hate the loss of mid range loss.

Throttle Body... Overal has a Negative effect on performance. The bigger diameter creates more room for the air and hence slows down the movement, which was already stated that hurts your power.
Old 11-09-2007, 04:22 PM
  #15  
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
HunterKiller89's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-20-06
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 11,183
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
understood, and i completely agree...just sometomes it sounds like you word it like "oh you have an 05, its gonna hurt more than itll help" opposed to "youll lose a lot of mid tq, which might or might not be worth the gain in high end power. for me, it wasnt, for others, it was"

again, im not trying to criticize, and i do fully agree that they should be warned of possible consequences
Old 11-09-2007, 05:08 PM
  #16  
Senior Member
 
IonNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-29-05
Location: AZ
Posts: 7,926
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
on that 2.4 mani note, so far I have been disappointed...now I'm not sure if I have a leak or what (no CELs) but I haven't gained anything from this mod.

That high RPM pull and loss of torque was done when I swapped the head on this car.

I'd have to say I've been so disappointed with this car N/A wise that I feel like turning it back to stock. I wouldnt' be surprised if it was quicker then...
Old 11-09-2007, 07:18 PM
  #17  
Senior Member
 
XM15's Avatar
 
Join Date: 05-16-06
Location: CT
Posts: 6,298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by HunterKiller89
understood, and i completely agree...just sometomes it sounds like you word it like "oh you have an 05, its gonna hurt more than itll help" opposed to "youll lose a lot of mid tq, which might or might not be worth the gain in high end power. for me, it wasnt, for others, it was"

again, im not trying to criticize, and i do fully agree that they should be warned of possible consequences
I'm with you, Hunter. It just seems like a waste of time to me to beat around the bush on every post and say "I hate it, but you might like it. Who needs mid-range torqe, but on the other hand, who needs a little extra peak horsepower." Meh. I'll state my opinion and try to back it up with facts the best I can.

There seems to be too much gray area for this mod. It would be nice to have more black and white, ya' know? Pretty much, if someone is on a tight budget, this mod seems to be so up and down performance wise that I would suggest that they don't chance it.
Old 11-10-2007, 04:53 AM
  #18  
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
HunterKiller89's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-20-06
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 11,183
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by XM15
I'm with you, Hunter. It just seems like a waste of time to me to beat around the bush on every post and say "I hate it, but you might like it. Who needs mid-range torqe, but on the other hand, who needs a little extra peak horsepower." Meh. I'll state my opinion and try to back it up with facts the best I can.

There seems to be too much gray area for this mod. It would be nice to have more black and white, ya' know? Pretty much, if someone is on a tight budget, this mod seems to be so up and down performance wise that I would suggest that they don't chance it.
i definitely agree with that...this mod is right on the border of helping and hurting. if we made a few more horses stock then this mod would probably only help...but we dont, so its hard to say
Old 11-10-2007, 10:41 AM
  #19  
Senior Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Switt23's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-10-06
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 3,021
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So as an overall assumption, would you say it would be beneficial as long as you have the mods to back up the lost power in the mid-rpm range? I have read mixed reviews that the car pulls really hard in the upper RPMS, but really how long is that, unless your in a higher gear that's like 2 seconds!?

(I'm looking to add some punch to my 2.2L, more than just an intake and exhuast, so I am studying)
Old 11-24-2007, 03:59 AM
  #20  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
HackAbuse's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-16-05
Location: Central NY
Posts: 11,137
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I installed my 2.4 manifold today with the 2.2 TB, I didn't have any of the CED ****, I just bought a longer brake booster hose, and bolted on the TB.

No leaks, no engine codes, works good. Didn't notice much, if any, torque loss in the midrange RPM band. Definitely noticed more pull on the top end though.

I was thinking about the 2.4 Throttle body though. If putting it on a 2.2 with no tuning, and it causes limp mode because the MAF readings are beyond what the computer can handle, doesn't that mean increased air flow? If there is an increased air flow over stock, correct me if I'm wrong, but the car would almost undoubtedly be making more power in that case.

I think if it warms up, I'll throw the 2.4 throttle body on for ***** 'n giggles to see what happens for myself. I'll update this thread with my findings.
Old 11-24-2007, 09:04 AM
  #21  
Senior Member
 
409Cobalt07's Avatar
 
Join Date: 05-29-07
Location: Beaumont, TX
Posts: 584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
i installed the 2.4 on my 07 and i like it. i am very pleased with it. the loss of power down low doesn't effect me so much because when i am drivin around day to day i dont haul ass anyway. but when i go to the track im always in the higher rpm range so i benefit from the swap. i would recomend this to anyone who has an 07, seeing as how the 05-06's are not seeing the gains it is up to the owner of the car on the decision to do the swap...


just my 2 cents. waitin to here about the TB swap to....
Old 11-24-2007, 10:40 AM
  #22  
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
umrdyldo's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-06-06
Location: MO
Posts: 11,666
Received 65 Likes on 59 Posts
I have an 06 and my gains were very nice. Pulls like never before. I got a 15.97 at the track. I've seen a lot of guys hit mid sixteens and it was my first run ever at a drag strip. Somethings works or it was perfect beginners luck. All three runs were right at that time so it is not a fluke. On the street I really don't notice much.
Old 11-24-2007, 11:02 AM
  #23  
Banned
 
D4u2s0t's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-18-05
Location: North Jersey
Posts: 17,838
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by HackAbuse
I installed my 2.4 manifold today with the 2.2 TB, I didn't have any of the CED ****, I just bought a longer brake booster hose, and bolted on the TB.

No leaks, no engine codes, works good. Didn't notice much, if any, torque loss in the midrange RPM band. Definitely noticed more pull on the top end though.

I was thinking about the 2.4 Throttle body though. If putting it on a 2.2 with no tuning, and it causes limp mode because the MAF readings are beyond what the computer can handle, doesn't that mean increased air flow? If there is an increased air flow over stock, correct me if I'm wrong, but the car would almost undoubtedly be making more power in that case.

I think if it warms up, I'll throw the 2.4 throttle body on for ***** 'n giggles to see what happens for myself. I'll update this thread with my findings.
it's not just the air flow, you have to look at the velocity too. i don't think it would work for the same reason why you don't just slap a 6" exhaust on. in theory, it sounds good, bigger tubes = more flow. but, it's not just the flow it's the velocity.
Old 11-24-2007, 11:15 AM
  #24  
Senior Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Switt23's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-10-06
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 3,021
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Is there a happy medium between the two TBs? My dad works at a machine shop making custom steel products, bolts and such. He has the machines to bore out a 2.2L tb, but where would be best... or leave it as is?
Old 11-24-2007, 11:19 AM
  #25  
Banned
 
D4u2s0t's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-18-05
Location: North Jersey
Posts: 17,838
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Switt23
Is there a happy medium between the two TBs? My dad works at a machine shop making custom steel products, bolts and such. He has the machines to bore out a 2.2L tb, but where would be best... or leave it as is?
i think what you would have to look at is how much air does the 2.2 have the ability to flow. can it flow more than it does? not sure. but think of it like this. you drink soda through a straw. easy, quick, doesn't take any work. now, try drinking that same soda through a paper towel roll. you won't get it out of the cup. same principle here. IF you can get that soda through the paper towel roll, you're working 20 times harder to get it.


Quick Reply: 2.4 Throttle Body on 2.2



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:47 AM.