View Poll Results: If you could afford it
Ditch the 2.4L and fo 2.0 S/C
36
52.17%
No thanks--I'll keep the 2.4L
33
47.83%
Voters: 69. You may not vote on this poll
Would you step up to a 2.0 S/C
Senior Member
Joined: 02-23-06
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta
I am glad I went with the 2.4.
1. The SS/SC cost like 3 grand more.
2. I personnally HATE the huge wing.
3. Not a big fan of the grey wheels, I do want 18's just not that color.
4. Gas mileage is better with the 2.4
5. The ride is more comfortable with the 2.4
6. With the money I saved by not getting the SS/SC I can wait until a GOOD supercharger or turbo is out, the car is not slow so I can wait.
7. I really like the VVT.
8. I do not like the colored inserts on the SS/SC interior.
1. The SS/SC cost like 3 grand more.
2. I personnally HATE the huge wing.
3. Not a big fan of the grey wheels, I do want 18's just not that color.
4. Gas mileage is better with the 2.4
5. The ride is more comfortable with the 2.4
6. With the money I saved by not getting the SS/SC I can wait until a GOOD supercharger or turbo is out, the car is not slow so I can wait.
7. I really like the VVT.
8. I do not like the colored inserts on the SS/SC interior.
Senior Member
Joined: 02-28-06
Posts: 950
Likes: 0
From: Greensburg (PA)
Originally Posted by Bad06SS
That link didn't pull up anything??? Most of what you described there is about the block. The block itself is extremely strong no matter which ecotec you have. The transmission is the same getrag and will not support 300hp, sorry. I'll map this out for you guys:
Forged pistons ~$700.00
Intercooled Turbo Kit ~$3500.00-$4000.00
Basic Beefed up tranny components (+stronger clutch if manual) ~$1500.00
Tuning ~$200 for a custom, or $500 for HP Tuners
Wideband ~$300 depending on brand, have to have to be safe on the tune
Aeroforce or scanner ~$240.00 have to have to know what's going on
Labor in case you can't do all of the above ~$1800+
That's over 8K TO DO IT THE RIGHT WAY. Anything less than what's above is risky. To have it tuned and running properly, this is what you're looking at. You CAN do a supercharger from a 2.0 and it be cheaper, but again-what's the point? If anyone is considering making their 2.4 run alot faster than stock or run 13's-SHOULD'VE GOT THE 2.0 IN THE FIRST PLACE, BOTTOM LINE! The 2.4 cars were not designed to be that fast, that's why they made the 2.0's! Anything more than intake, header, exhaust, pulley, and tuning, and you're risking alot. The couple thousand you'll spend to make it reliably fast, you've could've spent less just buying the 2.0, and taking off the wing if that's you're issue.
Forged pistons ~$700.00
Intercooled Turbo Kit ~$3500.00-$4000.00
Basic Beefed up tranny components (+stronger clutch if manual) ~$1500.00
Tuning ~$200 for a custom, or $500 for HP Tuners
Wideband ~$300 depending on brand, have to have to be safe on the tune
Aeroforce or scanner ~$240.00 have to have to know what's going on
Labor in case you can't do all of the above ~$1800+
That's over 8K TO DO IT THE RIGHT WAY. Anything less than what's above is risky. To have it tuned and running properly, this is what you're looking at. You CAN do a supercharger from a 2.0 and it be cheaper, but again-what's the point? If anyone is considering making their 2.4 run alot faster than stock or run 13's-SHOULD'VE GOT THE 2.0 IN THE FIRST PLACE, BOTTOM LINE! The 2.4 cars were not designed to be that fast, that's why they made the 2.0's! Anything more than intake, header, exhaust, pulley, and tuning, and you're risking alot. The couple thousand you'll spend to make it reliably fast, you've could've spent less just buying the 2.0, and taking off the wing if that's you're issue.
Additionally, there's many different ways to build a fast car. A SS/SC supercharger on a 2.4 with a SS/SC tranny is going to be faster. For instance when I was building this car (an unproven commodity i.e., tranny, ecu, turbo etc) http://www.renickpix.com/album/DETAIL.aspx?ALBUMID=25
Many said it couldn't be done etc. It ends up being faster than alot of STIs and alot of forester owners are doing it the same way with STI parts.
The 2.0 SS/SC parts will go onto the 2.4 motors. We don't need forged pistons for 300 -350 hp, the 2.4 has forged rods already. I have done Honda D-motors with 100k blocks on 10 psi making 250 from a 1.5 liter on stock old as crap pistons.
SO what if the 2.4 tranny is weak and if/when it dies we replace it with a SS/SC tranny. Some can be found in wrecks, some off ebay etc. We aren't saying the 2.4 doesn't have weak spots (tranny) we're saying its not as weak as what you may make it out to be just to justify buying the 2.0 SS/SC.
Senior Member
Joined: 02-28-06
Posts: 950
Likes: 0
From: Greensburg (PA)
Originally Posted by Bad06SS
Only the 2.0 gets forged rods, last I checked.
The only real differences between the 2.2 and the 2.4 are the displacement, and the VVT. Everything else is pretty much the same.
I have no problems with people wanting to "build it", I just don't understand why you would spend so much more money to get to a certain level than a 2.0. For example, say your goal is 250whp, or mid-high 13's. You spend roughly 5-6K making sure you do everything right, it's tuned, and your setup is complete. You've reached your goal, but you could've spent $700.00 in a S/C 2.0 and been there. To each his own, but I'm just being truthful, not "negative".
The only real differences between the 2.2 and the 2.4 are the displacement, and the VVT. Everything else is pretty much the same. I have no problems with people wanting to "build it", I just don't understand why you would spend so much more money to get to a certain level than a 2.0. For example, say your goal is 250whp, or mid-high 13's. You spend roughly 5-6K making sure you do everything right, it's tuned, and your setup is complete. You've reached your goal, but you could've spent $700.00 in a S/C 2.0 and been there. To each his own, but I'm just being truthful, not "negative".Well here you say that ONLY the 2.0 gets forged rods...just clarifying. And this can be done RIGHT for alot less than you are quoting.
Originally Posted by YoAdrian
I am glad I went with the 2.4.
1. The SS/SC cost like 3 grand more.
2. I personnally HATE the huge wing.
3. Not a big fan of the grey wheels, I do want 18's just not that color.
4. Gas mileage is better with the 2.4
5. The ride is more comfortable with the 2.4
6. With the money I saved by not getting the SS/SC I can wait until a GOOD supercharger or turbo is out, the car is not slow so I can wait.
7. I really like the VVT.
8. I do not like the colored inserts on the SS/SC interior.
Last edited by Bad06SS; May 11, 2006 at 05:54 PM.
Originally Posted by GTP
Additionally, there's many different ways to build a fast car. A SS/SC supercharger on a 2.4 with a SS/SC tranny is going to be faster. For instance when I was building this car (an unproven commodity i.e., tranny, ecu, turbo etc) http://www.renickpix.com/album/DETAIL.aspx?ALBUMID=25
Many said it couldn't be done etc. It ends up being faster than alot of STIs and alot of forester owners are doing it the same way with STI parts.
The 2.0 SS/SC parts will go onto the 2.4 motors. We don't need forged pistons for 300 -350 hp, the 2.4 has forged rods already. I have done Honda D-motors with 100k blocks on 10 psi making 250 from a 1.5 liter on stock old as crap pistons.
SO what if the 2.4 tranny is weak and if/when it dies we replace it with a SS/SC tranny. Some can be found in wrecks, some off ebay etc. We aren't saying the 2.4 doesn't have weak spots (tranny) we're saying its not as weak as what you may make it out to be just to justify buying the 2.0 SS/SC.
Many said it couldn't be done etc. It ends up being faster than alot of STIs and alot of forester owners are doing it the same way with STI parts.
The 2.0 SS/SC parts will go onto the 2.4 motors. We don't need forged pistons for 300 -350 hp, the 2.4 has forged rods already. I have done Honda D-motors with 100k blocks on 10 psi making 250 from a 1.5 liter on stock old as crap pistons.
SO what if the 2.4 tranny is weak and if/when it dies we replace it with a SS/SC tranny. Some can be found in wrecks, some off ebay etc. We aren't saying the 2.4 doesn't have weak spots (tranny) we're saying its not as weak as what you may make it out to be just to justify buying the 2.0 SS/SC.
You don't need forged pistons for 350hp, but the 2.0 does? OK. You're pistons are weaker than the 2.0's and ours are only good to 350hp. GOOD POINT
Sure, you can put 2.0 parts on a 2.4, but shouldn't you have just bought the 2.0 in the first place?!
You're missing my point here. What's the point of buying a 2.4 to put 2.0 parts in it?
Originally Posted by BlackWinterDay
Your list is not complete... You forgot: Wiping the smirk off a 2.0L S/C owner's face... Priceless...
Funny, it's yet to be done. It should say "turbo'd 2.4 tieing a stage 2 SS/SC= priceless".
I'd love to see a 2.4 beat me.
Last edited by Bad06SS; May 11, 2006 at 05:55 PM.
Originally Posted by GTP
Well here you say that ONLY the 2.0 gets forged rods...just clarifying. And this can be done RIGHT for alot less than you are quoting.
I have no problem admitting a mistake. I didn't know they had the forged rods.
BUT, why mod a 2.4 to be just as fast as a 2.0?
Senior Member
Joined: 01-02-05
Posts: 833
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg, MB
2 things in your reply to YoAdrian... First, yes he spends 3k less now only to spend it later on an aftermarket supercharger kit. That's called the time value of money in economics. He has the money now to do with it as he pleases. Second, if boost > VVT, wouldn't boost + VVT > boost alone? I think what I'm feeling, as well as some of my fellow owners, is that we don't want to be limited. You guys have your supercharged 2.0L engines, and some stage kits. Where are you going to go from there? We have a lot of potential. Sure it may cost us, but we have options. Aren't you worried about hitting a wall and feeling bored? How much cash are you going to dump into upgrading that supercharger when you just can't get any more out of it? How will you ever increase the displacement of your engine, or engineer yourself some VVT?
Originally Posted by BlackWinterDay
2 things in your reply to YoAdrian... First, yes he spends 3k less now only to spend it later on an aftermarket supercharger kit. That's called the time value of money in economics. He has the money now to do with it as he pleases. Second, if boost > VVT, wouldn't boost + VVT > boost alone? I think what I'm feeling, as well as some of my fellow owners, is that we don't want to be limited. You guys have your supercharged 2.0L engines, and some stage kits. Where are you going to go from there? We have a lot of potential. Sure it may cost us, but we have options. Aren't you worried about hitting a wall and feeling bored? How much cash are you going to dump into upgrading that supercharger when you just can't get any more out of it? How will you ever increase the displacement of your engine, or engineer yourself some VVT?
Uh, yea buddy, hate to break it to you. WE HAVE JUST AS MANY OPTIONS AS YOU DO! Plus, we're already intercooled. If I wanted to swap to a turbo, I could. If I wanted to swap to a whipple, I could. Let's show some stats:
We reached the 12's with an untouched motor, no actual tuning, with minor mods. What's next? HP Tuners,Cams, ported head, water injection, 10:5 compression pistons, cai, header, 2.5" pulley, ported blower. Wow, just like that, almost 11's on stock blower!
We haven't even talked about swapping power adders, or increased displacement!
Why would I need VVT?
Senior Member
Joined: 01-02-05
Posts: 833
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg, MB
Originally Posted by Bad06SS
I have no problem admitting a mistake. I didn't know they had the forged rods.
BUT, why mod a 2.4 to be just as fast as a 2.0?
BUT, why mod a 2.4 to be just as fast as a 2.0?
Because we don't want it handed to us.
Because we like to build stuff and watch it blow up.
Because turbos sound cool.
Because we like to do things the hard way.
Because we forgot to take our meds last night.
I dunno man, pick one
Originally Posted by BlackWinterDay
Because we can.
Because we don't want it handed to us.
Because we like to build stuff and watch it blow up.
Because turbos sound cool.
Because we like to do things the hard way.
Because we forgot to take our meds last night.
I dunno man, pick one
Because we don't want it handed to us.
Because we like to build stuff and watch it blow up.
Because turbos sound cool.
Because we like to do things the hard way.
Because we forgot to take our meds last night.
I dunno man, pick one
Whatever floats your boat man. What's "handed" to us?
Senior Member
Joined: 02-23-06
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta
Bad06SS:
1. Adding a supercharger or turbo to the 2.4 will make more power than a stock SS/SC.
3. There was NOT a polished version when I bought mine.
4. I average 28 mpg on daily driving and 35+ on the highway, I do not think that the SS/SC's are getting this much.
5. I do not drive on a track daily.
6. Refer to rebuttal # 1.
7. Boost plus VVT is better than just boost.
8. Calm down Jackass.
1. Adding a supercharger or turbo to the 2.4 will make more power than a stock SS/SC.
3. There was NOT a polished version when I bought mine.
4. I average 28 mpg on daily driving and 35+ on the highway, I do not think that the SS/SC's are getting this much.
5. I do not drive on a track daily.
6. Refer to rebuttal # 1.
7. Boost plus VVT is better than just boost.
8. Calm down Jackass.
Originally Posted by YoAdrian
Bad06SS:
1. Adding a supercharger or turbo to the 2.4 will make more power than a stock SS/SC.
3. There was NOT a polished version when I bought mine.
4. I average 28 mpg on daily driving and 35+ on the highway, I do not think that the SS/SC's are getting this much.
5. I do not drive on a track daily.
6. Refer to rebuttal # 1.
7. Boost plus VVT is better than just boost.
8. Calm down Jackass.
1. Adding a supercharger or turbo to the 2.4 will make more power than a stock SS/SC.
3. There was NOT a polished version when I bought mine.
4. I average 28 mpg on daily driving and 35+ on the highway, I do not think that the SS/SC's are getting this much.
5. I do not drive on a track daily.
6. Refer to rebuttal # 1.
7. Boost plus VVT is better than just boost.
8. Calm down Jackass.
1. Maybe. Higher compressions means you'll have to run less boost. You'll spend more because you have to upgrade stuff to support the power.
2. Wait, you can't count-where's number 2??!!
3. There is a polished version now.
4. I averaged 36+ mpg going to norwalk, believe it. I'm getting almost 30mpg around town.
5. Neither do I.
6. Refer to my number one.
7. Maybe if you can tune it correctly.
8. Learn to count.
Originally Posted by YoAdrian
"I know tons of people cannot read----2.4L owners ONLY!!"- Thread Starter
I didn't vote in the poll
Well, since family owns the dealership, I own several 2.4's
Senior Member
Joined: 01-05-06
Posts: 10,877
Likes: 2
From: East Brunswick, NJ
God...why are you guys arguing over pointless non sense? Just modify the vehicle to your liking. If one person likes another car, than they like that car...arguing about what's better or what doesn't make sense why someone would do something is useless and pointless.
Originally Posted by NJHK
God...why are you guys arguing over pointless non sense? Just modify the vehicle to your liking. If one person likes another car, than they like that car...arguing about what's better or what doesn't make sense why someone would do something is useless and pointless.
Thanks Dr. Phil.
I'm just trying to understand why someone would buy a 2.4 with plans to make it fast?
Originally Posted by YoAdrian
No problem man, 1 good point out of 8 is great!
Actually, here's your miscounting again, I'm 99%. I was only off on the forged rods. Everything else I've yet to be proven wrong on.
New Member
Joined: 07-01-05
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
From: New Jersey
Originally Posted by Bad06SS
Let's see, the fastest 2.0 runs 12.94, and the fastest 2.4 hasn't broke 14's? Yea, I can see why someone who wants to go fast would by the 2.4.