2.4 SS Motor "THE REAL DEAL"
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: 02-28-06
Posts: 950
Likes: 0
From: Greensburg (PA)
2.4 SS Motor "THE REAL DEAL"
So can we finally say enough of the doubters saying
"your engine needs upgraded internals to run boost...nah nah nah...blah blah blah." Well may be, but not until 340+ whp ..
Check out post #20 in particular....
http://www.solsticeforum.com/forum/s...ad.php?t=19280
"your engine needs upgraded internals to run boost...nah nah nah...blah blah blah." Well may be, but not until 340+ whp ..
Check out post #20 in particular....
http://www.solsticeforum.com/forum/s...ad.php?t=19280
Member
Joined: 02-05-05
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
From: ?
This quote turned me on:
"This is a world-class DOMESTIC engine, folks. I know that we're not used to hearing that, after so many black eyes from the Japanese. But the Ecotec is a breath of fresh air. GM is*expletive deleted* serious about it, and it's not all in marketing, it's in engineering too."
Makes me want to go drive the hell outta my 2.4.
"This is a world-class DOMESTIC engine, folks. I know that we're not used to hearing that, after so many black eyes from the Japanese. But the Ecotec is a breath of fresh air. GM is*expletive deleted* serious about it, and it's not all in marketing, it's in engineering too."
Makes me want to go drive the hell outta my 2.4.
Senior Member
Joined: 02-21-06
Posts: 3,454
Likes: 0
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Haha... George this was posted a while ago. I thought we had talked about this?
At any rate... post #20 is the important one, as you said. While they're pushing over 400HP at the crank on stock internals, be prepared to replace internals if you want to go that far with this engine.
At any rate... post #20 is the important one, as you said. While they're pushing over 400HP at the crank on stock internals, be prepared to replace internals if you want to go that far with this engine.
Senior Member
Joined: 05-09-06
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 0
From: .
Until I say otherwise, I am NOT endorsing the 2.4 as a 400 HP engine in stock form. But for it to even stay together so far is a testament to its capabilities. Should you build one just like ours? With what's known so far, the answer is yes, but ONLY if you can stand the disappontment of a failed stock engine, treating such a failure as your impetus to move forward to an internally-enhanced engine. It's a cavalier attitude, but actually, it's grounded in sincere realism. You should only risk breaking eggs if you don't mind cleaning up the mess.
He is completely right in saying that. I have argued with a couple of you on the boost question with the 2.4. The 2.4 seems to do very well with boost, but do not expect to be running this kind of power on stock internals for very long unless it is not your daily driver. There are many motors that can handle many times their stock output, but not many will keep making that power as long as they would make the stock power. Only a few are famous for that (the toyota 2jz motors and the nissan sr/det motor come to mind). I'd say from this information, you can definately go f/i on the 2.4, but i wouldnt push it near the boost they are pushing if your car is a daily driver.
He is completely right in saying that. I have argued with a couple of you on the boost question with the 2.4. The 2.4 seems to do very well with boost, but do not expect to be running this kind of power on stock internals for very long unless it is not your daily driver. There are many motors that can handle many times their stock output, but not many will keep making that power as long as they would make the stock power. Only a few are famous for that (the toyota 2jz motors and the nissan sr/det motor come to mind). I'd say from this information, you can definately go f/i on the 2.4, but i wouldnt push it near the boost they are pushing if your car is a daily driver.
Originally Posted by 8cd03gro
Until I say otherwise, I am NOT endorsing the 2.4 as a 400 HP engine in stock form. But for it to even stay together so far is a testament to its capabilities. Should you build one just like ours? With what's known so far, the answer is yes, but ONLY if you can stand the disappontment of a failed stock engine, treating such a failure as your impetus to move forward to an internally-enhanced engine. It's a cavalier attitude, but actually, it's grounded in sincere realism. You should only risk breaking eggs if you don't mind cleaning up the mess.
He is completely right in saying that. I have argued with a couple of you on the boost question with the 2.4. The 2.4 seems to do very well with boost, but do not expect to be running this kind of power on stock internals for very long unless it is not your daily driver. There are many motors that can handle many times their stock output, but not many will keep making that power as long as they would make the stock power. Only a few are famous for that (the toyota 2jz motors and the nissan sr/det motor come to mind). I'd say from this information, you can definately go f/i on the 2.4, but i wouldnt push it near the boost they are pushing if your car is a daily driver.
He is completely right in saying that. I have argued with a couple of you on the boost question with the 2.4. The 2.4 seems to do very well with boost, but do not expect to be running this kind of power on stock internals for very long unless it is not your daily driver. There are many motors that can handle many times their stock output, but not many will keep making that power as long as they would make the stock power. Only a few are famous for that (the toyota 2jz motors and the nissan sr/det motor come to mind). I'd say from this information, you can definately go f/i on the 2.4, but i wouldnt push it near the boost they are pushing if your car is a daily driver.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: 02-28-06
Posts: 950
Likes: 0
From: Greensburg (PA)
Well good points by all but in no way was I supposing to run more than say 250-275 whp in street trim on a front daily driver. That said the point of my posting this was to coherce those who kept saying the 2.4 was like the wet noodle of internals and we were nuts for wanting to boost it. With 10-12 psi 275 or so whp this motor and drivetrain will be perfectly streetable and almost wicked in torque.
Senior Member
Joined: 02-21-06
Posts: 3,454
Likes: 0
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Originally Posted by GTP
Well good points by all but in no way was I supposing to run more than say 250-275 whp in street trim on a front daily driver. That said the point of my posting this was to coherce those who kept saying the 2.4 was like the wet noodle of internals and we were nuts for wanting to boost it. With 10-12 psi 275 or so whp this motor and drivetrain will be perfectly streetable and almost wicked in torque.
Senior Member
Joined: 05-09-06
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 0
From: .
Originally Posted by Bad06SS
Thank you. That was the exact paragraph I was going to quote. We already knew how strong the ecotec's are-they've been around awhile. But even Hahn doesn't agree you should run this much power withouth realizing it could fail. Just because his new, low mileage motor has made great power thus far, does not mean you can go around acting like you don't have to upgrade anything "untill 340whp". Another IMPORTANT NOTE: THE SOLSTICE IS RWD, AND HAS A DIFFERENT TRANS/DRIVETRAIN SETUP. While the motor is strong, I assure you the tranny's are not as strong.
THANK GOD, SOMEBODY FINALLY UNDERSTANDS WHAT I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO SAY IN EVERY TURBO THREAD THUS FAR!!!!! Everybody thinks that since somebody is running that much power, it is not bad for the motor AT ALL. This is not the truth. The PowerHouse 4.0 mustang with the pipeline turbo kit is running over 450whp with stock internals, but it is a dedicated track car. I would NEVER consider running that much power on my car with stock internals. It isnt a question of if something is going to break with that much power, it's a question of when!
That being said, i think a good 270-300whp for you guys would make for a very good sleeper
Senior Member
Joined: 04-01-06
Posts: 703
Likes: 0
From: Atlantic Canada
Originally Posted by avro206
actually we don't have the same block. The 2.4L is stronger!
I remember reading online that the 2.0 turbo and 2.4 share the same block because of VVT. The 2.2 and 2.0 S/C share the same block.
Needless to say, the block may be stronger but not all the internals are forged like the 2.0 SC so the point is moot really.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: 02-28-06
Posts: 950
Likes: 0
From: Greensburg (PA)
Originally Posted by sethallen
i'm just sick of a lot of 2.4 owners finding any reason possible to justify buying the 2.4 over the ss/sc. Your car is what it is. Nothing more, nothing less.
Well if you are sick of it don't read our forums section dude...damn... g'way..
Senior Member
Joined: 09-17-05
Posts: 5,844
Likes: 0
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Originally Posted by sethallen
i'm just sick of a lot of 2.4 owners finding any reason possible to justify buying the 2.4 over the ss/sc. Your car is what it is. Nothing more, nothing less.
j/k I am in the same boat as you. We almost had George too but when he say he kept up with me stock, he changed his mind
Senior Member
Joined: 04-17-04
Posts: 2,994
Likes: 0
From: Calgary Alberta Canada
Here we go---real info from GM
http://media.gm.com:8221/us/powertra...06_PWT_LE5.pdf
Read under, increased displacement
So skip the grains of salt!
Everytime us 2.4L guys feels good--some S/C people have that bad attitude
http://media.gm.com:8221/us/powertra...06_PWT_LE5.pdf
Read under, increased displacement
So skip the grains of salt!
Everytime us 2.4L guys feels good--some S/C people have that bad attitude
