2.4 SS Motor "THE REAL DEAL"
Senior Member
Joined: 03-07-06
Posts: 7,224
Likes: 1
From: west virginia
Originally Posted by djt81185
a.
I'm faster now..I trap 109 to ur at best 94?..I run 21ish psi all day on 94 octane...last dyno was 270...im aiming for 290 this weekend
b.
I'll always be faster...I'm building a twincharger this winter for my lsj...350whp...no lag
c.
I'm building a turbo kit for your 2.4 so bow down lol
but seriously there is nothing to be upset about...only 2.4 owner who can talk **** is that one in HCI that makes 1000hp. Once we get some turbos on these 2.4s and 2.0s well see who is really faster and who is stronger internally...the 2.0 has higher quality materials in its bottom end so I was implying if urs can take 400whp ours should take a lot.
I'm faster now..I trap 109 to ur at best 94?..I run 21ish psi all day on 94 octane...last dyno was 270...im aiming for 290 this weekend
b.
I'll always be faster...I'm building a twincharger this winter for my lsj...350whp...no lag
c.
I'm building a turbo kit for your 2.4 so bow down lol
but seriously there is nothing to be upset about...only 2.4 owner who can talk **** is that one in HCI that makes 1000hp. Once we get some turbos on these 2.4s and 2.0s well see who is really faster and who is stronger internally...the 2.0 has higher quality materials in its bottom end so I was implying if urs can take 400whp ours should take a lot.
Senior Member
Joined: 07-11-06
Posts: 3,462
Likes: 0
From: Hubert NC
I'm not quite sure how you would "Barely pull 11.5 outta your ass". It seems to me that the Corvette is a phenominal machine, just maybe it's a fast car, from the factory or otherwise. In any case, 11.5 is not an et you pull outta your ass.
Senior Member
Joined: 07-11-06
Posts: 3,462
Likes: 0
From: Hubert NC
This is baffling, we both buy from the same car company with the same engineers why argue? I personally wouldn't mind seeing some turbo 2.4's running around. That further increases the mantra of our cars. Cars don't get a good rep by being slow, we need some fast as hell 2.4s.
Senior Member
Joined: 01-02-05
Posts: 833
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg, MB
Originally Posted by Bad06SS
You obviously haven't read very many of my posts, much less actually READ the one I just posted. I don't like twincharging, never said I did. But atleast we have the option, and we'll have kit's out for us. You're completely right, a single turbo will make more power-that's OLD news! And with a more boost friendly motor, and less compression, we can safely run more boost than a 2.4. YOU'RE NOT GETTING THE POINT. I've said it before, I'll say it again. The one that wants to spend the most money will have the faster car. If you've got the money, it doesn't matter if you have a 2.4 or 2.0. Just to clarify, if a person with a 2.0 has more money than the person with a 2.4, the 2.0 would win and vice versa. When you're comparing a modded car to a modded car, it's run what ya brung. When you're comparing a stock car to a stock car, the 2.4 doesn't stand a chance. The 2.0 was designed to be the superior motor, and it is. My main point in even speaking up is because all of you 2.4 guys are starting to act all high and mighty, saying that the 2.4 is better, and that when you turbo it, you're going to be the fastest cars on earth. Have you guys even reached the 14's? Get over the fact that you're 2.4 wasn't designed to be as good or hold as much power from the factory as the 2.0. To clarify another point one more time, both engines are capable of making great power, if someone wanted to make either the 2.0,2.2,or the 2.4 run 11's, it can be done. It's all about who wants to spend more money. However, if someone just wants to do some bolt-ons and run 12's safely, so far the 2.0 is the only one who's doing it with ease.
I don't like twincharging, never said I did. But atleast we have the option, and we'll have kit's out for us. You're completely right, a single turbo will make more power-that's OLD news! And with a more boost friendly motor, and less compression, we can safely run more boost than a 2.4. YOU'RE NOT GETTING THE POINT. I've said it before, I'll say it again. The one that wants to spend the most money will have the faster car. If you've got the money, it doesn't matter if you have a 2.4 or 2.0. Just to clarify, if a person with a 2.0 has more money than the person with a 2.4, the 2.0 would win and vice versa. When you're comparing a modded car to a modded car, it's run what ya brung. When you're comparing a stock car to a stock car, the 2.4 doesn't stand a chance. The 2.0 was designed to be the superior motor, and it is. My main point in even speaking up is because all of you 2.4 guys are starting to act all high and mighty, saying that the 2.4 is better, and that when you turbo it, you're going to be the fastest cars on earth. Have you guys even reached the 14's? Get over the fact that you're 2.4 wasn't designed to be as good or hold as much power from the factory as the 2.0. To clarify another point one more time, both engines are capable of making great power, if someone wanted to make either the 2.0,2.2,or the 2.4 run 11's, it can be done. It's all about who wants to spend more money. However, if someone just wants to do some bolt-ons and run 12's safely, so far the 2.0 is the only one who's doing it with ease.
Senior Member
Joined: 02-23-06
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta
Originally Posted by PpAzZ1101
No one on here can get along. 2.4 owners try to justify why they bought the cheaper car, 2.0 owners try to justify why they paid more. It's an ugly endless cycle.
Senior Member
Joined: 08-19-05
Posts: 3,018
Likes: 0
From: Horseheads, NY
Originally Posted by mike25
youl always be faster....?....good luck witht he twinchraging.....and no lag...wow yo must have figured out a modern way to get rid of tubo lag.....unless you set it up for the super to take over until the turbo spins up.....wow thats real poductive.....50whp....we can make that with a stage 3 turbo on ur cars....well once it comes out....sorry to be an ass but cmon get realistic bout this.....
I'm using the s/c to spool the turbo...my 2.0 will spool a larger turbo than the 2.4 quicker...and yes that is more productive as it sets both power adders into their peak efficiency ranges but I dont want to lose you with technical details.
trust me ill be adding about 60whp with the twincharger if I decide to finish it...I may just go with a full exhaust and water injection
But we are turboing Dan's 2.4
Either way youve got atleast 15mph to make up in the 1/4 before u can start talking ****
And btw what did u 2.4 owners pay...I paid 18k on my redline
Senior Member
Joined: 03-07-06
Posts: 7,224
Likes: 1
From: west virginia
Originally Posted by djt81185
I'm using the s/c to spool the turbo...my 2.0 will spool a larger turbo than the 2.4 quicker...and yes that is more productive as it sets both power adders into their peak efficiency ranges but I dont want to lose you with technical details.
trust me ill be adding about 60whp with the twincharger if I decide to finish it...I may just go with a full exhaust and water injection
But we are turboing Dan's 2.4
Either way youve got atleast 15mph to make up in the 1/4 before u can start talking ****
And btw what did u 2.4 owners pay...I paid 18k on my redline
trust me ill be adding about 60whp with the twincharger if I decide to finish it...I may just go with a full exhaust and water injection
But we are turboing Dan's 2.4
Either way youve got atleast 15mph to make up in the 1/4 before u can start talking ****
And btw what did u 2.4 owners pay...I paid 18k on my redline
New Member
Joined: 05-18-06
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Originally Posted by djt81185
blocks are good to 500whp ish...it the internals that set them apart
I own a GM performance build book that takes the 2.2I to 1300hp!!! Your block has a massive amount of potential!
And they change out the 2.2 parts with 2.0 or LSJ parts without changing bore size or anything...
All of these ecotecs share the same block the VVT has nothing to do with the block!!!
You guys need to know what you are talking about before you post... this is ridicules!
Any how... if the 2.4 is stronger than the 2.2 and I think the internals are... just assuming here then they should be good to 250hp at least... after 250hp the build book has you change upgrade the 2.2 to 2.0 internals.
Thanks
Jack
Senior Member
Joined: 05-09-06
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 0
From: .
well here is the thing.... it is not a stock block if internals are changed. It is a stock CORE maybe, but short block is not the same. Changing out the crank will mean the long block is not the same. And changing out the sleeves which you will have to do to reach 1300hp will mean even the core is not stock. You are the one that needs to do some reading. There are VERY few cars that can handle over 1k horsepower with a stock block. VERY FEW.
New Member
Joined: 05-18-06
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Originally Posted by Brandon97Z
How come when the S/C guys found out we have a stronger block they started getting all defensive? "well we have forged rods" blah blah blah the block is stronger and thats it plain and simple no need to bring up all the other parts the LSJ has that are better then the 2.4.
I don't think they changed the block to make it stronger I am sure if they changed it they did it to make it better I don't think there motives were to make it stronger though.
I don't think they were thinking "you know what the LSJ block is just not strong enough... we need one that is capable of 3000HP for all of the kids out there"
NO way man... you guys are nuts and just uninformed... the block is the last thing any of us needs to worry about.
Internals are another story... if any of us want to go past 300hp we need to start replacing internals including the LSJ.
New Member
Joined: 05-18-06
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Originally Posted by 8cd03gro
well here is the thing.... it is not a stock block if internals are changed. It is a stock CORE maybe, but short block is not the same. Changing out the crank will mean the long block is not the same. And changing out the sleeves which you will have to do to reach 1300hp will mean even the core is not stock. You are the one that needs to do some reading. There are VERY few cars that can handle over 1k horsepower with a stock block. VERY FEW.
But still man they dont do that till they reach the 600hp mark...
They say the crank is good to 600hp too
They put in the LSJ rods and pistons for over 250hp aplications and leave them in till 300hp.
Senior Member
Joined: 08-19-05
Posts: 3,018
Likes: 0
From: Horseheads, NY
Originally Posted by JackD
Where are you getting this info from man?!?!!?
I own a GM performance build book that takes the 2.2I to 1300hp!!! Your block has a massive amount of potential!
And they change out the 2.2 parts with 2.0 or LSJ parts without changing bore size or anything...
All of these ecotecs share the same block the VVT has nothing to do with the block!!!
You guys need to know what you are talking about before you post... this is ridicules!
Any how... if the 2.4 is stronger than the 2.2 and I think the internals are... just assuming here then they should be good to 250hp at least... after 250hp the build book has you change upgrade the 2.2 to 2.0 internals.
Thanks
Jack
I own a GM performance build book that takes the 2.2I to 1300hp!!! Your block has a massive amount of potential!
And they change out the 2.2 parts with 2.0 or LSJ parts without changing bore size or anything...
All of these ecotecs share the same block the VVT has nothing to do with the block!!!
You guys need to know what you are talking about before you post... this is ridicules!
Any how... if the 2.4 is stronger than the 2.2 and I think the internals are... just assuming here then they should be good to 250hp at least... after 250hp the build book has you change upgrade the 2.2 to 2.0 internals.
Thanks
Jack
oh...wait...thats funny I have the same book
http://www.gm.com/company/gmtunersou...rque_specs.pdf
Notice the first part...upgraded gmpd prepped race block...GM Part # 88958630
I think YOU need to know what your talking about before you post...and since this is the 600hp+ level build that is why I quoted 500+ hp on stock block.
Like the quote in the sig says...Don't question Dan
New Member
Joined: 06-05-06
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
From: Valencia
Well just keep thinking your going to go somewhere with your twin chargered setup. This is my old supra with 680whp. I am working on my new project of a 72 corvette with a bored out 427. And if or when your ready lets line then up for pinks? Or you can just shut your mouth........
Senior Member
Joined: 07-11-06
Posts: 3,462
Likes: 0
From: Hubert NC
Originally Posted by Jasper
Well just keep thinking your going to go somewhere with your twin chargered setup. This is my old supra with 680whp. I am working on my new project of a 72 corvette with a bored out 427. And if or when your ready lets line then up for pinks? Or you can just shut your mouth........
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: 02-28-06
Posts: 950
Likes: 0
From: Greensburg (PA)
Originally Posted by Jasper
Well just keep thinking your going to go somewhere with your twin chargered setup. This is my old supra with 680whp. I am working on my new project of a 72 corvette with a bored out 427. And if or when your ready lets line then up for pinks? Or you can just shut your mouth........
You do understand its written "you're ready" there is a Big difference. Also, what in flaming suicide does a 427 Vette have to do with a 2.4 Ecotec engine strength?
So you have a 680 whp Supra. So you are building a 427 Vette. Well then give him a chance to build a tubbed 572 Nova (where could I find one of those
).....So I had a 500whp Subaru big deal.... I don't see the relevance of the comments or as a matter of fact, what point you are making.
If there was one. If he wants to twin charge let him. Do you think losing to a 427 Vette is suddenly going to make him take all his stuff off his car and sell it while sending you all the money for the parts and following you around like a rock star groupee because your "427 Vette" beat him??
This thread is discussing the STRENGTH of the 2.4. First we have gotten spammed by 2.0 owners now some esoteric 427 Vette owners. Have fun driving that everyday.
Maybe we should send this to the Hyundai forums and get their take on the Tiburon motors because that's all relevant to helping us discuss ECOTECs.
Last edited by GTP; Jul 26, 2006 at 11:00 AM.
Senior Member
Joined: 08-19-05
Posts: 3,018
Likes: 0
From: Horseheads, NY
Originally Posted by Jasper
Well just keep thinking your going to go somewhere with your twin chargered setup. This is my old supra with 680whp. I am working on my new project of a 72 corvette with a bored out 427. And if or when your ready lets line then up for pinks? Or you can just shut your mouth........
First off I owned you with knowledge and fact...so u go off topic and brag about the supra you USED to own...I'll race your corvette for pinks right now...but as u put it its not together yet so I win by default...cars dont run that well on hopes, dreams, and promises.
And wtf does this post have to do with the original topic and what does u posting that have to do with proving u do know anything...we all know supras are dyno queens...what do a 400whp and a 900whp supra have in common...they both run 12s lmao
And besides the twincharger is being considered...im looking at other options such as water injection w/ cams and exhaust...I havent decided yet...we'll see...either setup should have me trapping around 115 in the quarter on pump gas...plenty fast for a front driver...any more contradicting statements u wanna make?
Senior Member
Joined: 03-07-06
Posts: 7,224
Likes: 1
From: west virginia
Originally Posted by JackD
THE 2.2s BLOCK MADE 1300HP why would they need to make it stronger?
I don't think they changed the block to make it stronger I am sure if they changed it they did it to make it better I don't think there motives were to make it stronger though.
I don't think they were thinking "you know what the LSJ block is just not strong enough... we need one that is capable of 3000HP for all of the kids out there"
NO way man... you guys are nuts and just uninformed... the block is the last thing any of us needs to worry about.
Internals are another story... if any of us want to go past 300hp we need to start replacing internals including the LSJ.
I don't think they changed the block to make it stronger I am sure if they changed it they did it to make it better I don't think there motives were to make it stronger though.
I don't think they were thinking "you know what the LSJ block is just not strong enough... we need one that is capable of 3000HP for all of the kids out there"
NO way man... you guys are nuts and just uninformed... the block is the last thing any of us needs to worry about.
Internals are another story... if any of us want to go past 300hp we need to start replacing internals including the LSJ.
Senior Member
Joined: 04-03-06
Posts: 507
Likes: 2
From: Jacksonville, FL.
This is sad to see. It should not be about which motor you have, but the fact you all drive Cobalt's. See the same thing on J-body.org as well. I can say I have seen SC people acting like there cars are god on here. I have said since before the 2.4 was release it would be the motor (not saying the 2.0 is bad, or even the 2.2), I just like the 2.4, and it is starting to show with what Hahn has shown so far. I read a post from Hahn that stated the 2.4 internals and 2.0 internals were made of the same parts (not saying it is true). Like some one said who spends the most money will be faster (for the most part that is correct). Someone will always be faster. Simply put the Ecotec (in general) is a great motor (regardless if it is a 2.2, 2.4, or 2.0). Let the 2.4 guys have there day things are looking good for them ( after seeing post like "should a 2.4 be a SS", and others similiar) they just want to hear good things. Is there anything wrong with that? You are always going to have people run there mouth saying this is better and that is better oh well. I do not even own a Cobalt but I fully support you guys because we are on the same side. I'm glad GM made a effort and put the 2.0 SC out there. One comment I have to reply to, just because the 2.0 was put out first does not make it better than the 2.4. If that was true then the 2.2 would be better than the 2.0. That would also mean the 2.0 turbo motor coming out is not as good as any of these, but we do not know.
Senior Member
Joined: 05-21-06
Posts: 5,577
Likes: 3
From: Gainesville, FL
Originally Posted by Jasper
Well just keep thinking your going to go somewhere with your twin chargered setup. This is my old supra with 680whp. I am working on my new project of a 72 corvette with a bored out 427. And if or when your ready lets line then up for pinks? Or you can just shut your mouth........
72 corvettes came with either one of two 350 or a 454. the only way to get a a 427 was to have an L-88.
IF one has an L-88 and is willing to ruin it by boring it over, the car gods should smite them... ORRRR you've got the (debateable) most desireable year for a C3 corvette and are ruining it again by putting in an engine that is not correct for the time period.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ThoR294
Wanted - What to buy - All categories
4
Oct 4, 2015 08:44 PM