2.3L vs 2.4L
 

Which is better, and why? 6 bolt 2.3L stroker vs 6 bolt 2.4L (g4cs)

I am considering my car's future; I'd like a GT35R.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

A 2.3 looks like a stocker, as if anybody could actually tell anyways. Other than that, a 2.4 is easier to build, and gives you the extra .1L of displacement. Seems like a no-brainer to me. Either will spool most GT35R's easily.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

i like the 2.4Ls extra deck height. more deck height = increased rod ratio = less cylinder side loading = less wear.

not like it really matters, i don't think the avg lifespan of a 2.3/2.4 is 100k miles in built form. :)

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

The reason they don't last isn't because of them being a 2.3 or 2.4, its because usually they are pushing a shit load of HP. I bet if you put a 14b on it and ran 11psi with minimal mods it would last a long time.

I would definetly do a 2.4 though, cheaper, easier.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

A 2.4 is cheaper and easier, however I have no clue what it takes to mate a 1g or 2g head to a 2.4 block. A 6 bolt swap is well documented, which would give me a better piece of mind. I don't think a .1L difference would mean too much in spooling anything. You'd see it something like 150 RPM sooner, but that's what nitrous is for.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

A 2.4l will be no different than a 6 bolt swap except for the timing belt. All mounts are the same. You may have to tap the knock sensor hole, that should be the extent of it.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

So there is no huge performance gain from going to a 2.4 over a 2.3?

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

The 2.4 is easier, cheaper, and should be more reliable. Performance should be similar.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

The extra displacemet will give you a little more tourqe.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

I usually use a set of ARP headstuds. :D

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

The displacement advantage in a 2.4 is actually from the bigger bore (since they use the same crank). A bigger bore will affect HP more than torque, where the stroke affects torque more than HP. So, theoretically, the 2.4 will make slightly more HP and basically the same torque as a 2.3l.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

Don't you have to bore it out when you're doing a 2.3? I believe that a 2.3's bore is 88mm. Maybe you have it switched around. More torque than HP.

Well there's po-folk like me that doesn't have the cheese to get my hands on that hardware.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

LMAO!!!
Thats awesome.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

No, its a 88mm stroke for a 4g63.
It is a 100mm stroke for a 4g64.
The bore is 85mm on the 4g63.
The bore is 86.5mm on the 4g64. (thanks shane for the correction!)

The srt-4 stuff, just for fun:
101mm stroke w/ 87mm bore. They call it a "2.4" that revs to a blistering 6000rpm (factory redline).

Bore size=horsepower.
Stroke is usually related to reving capiblities, powerband, and torque.
The 4g64 crank in the 4g63 isn't worth it in my honest opinion. Just buy the correct block to begin with.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

what you are saying doesnt' make ANY sense. a 2.3 is composed of a standard run of the mill 4g63 block that comes in any dsm, and a 100mm crank out of the 4g64/g4cs motors. the stock bore on the 4g63 is 85mm, and that is the end of that. boring it out to 88mm would leave the sleeves MIGHTY thin, which isn't in your best interests.

for future reference the 2.4 blocks have a stock bore of 86.5mm.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

Alright, I don't understand here. So in order to make a 6 bolt 4g63 into a 2.3L, all you have to do is switch the cranks? No boring needed?

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

sigh.
You switch the cranks, thats the easy part.
Weisco makes shelf stock pistons for it.
You need to clearance the mains and the block for the crank to rotate.
It is not that "easy" if you have to ask about it, in all honesty.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

Could someone put a built 2.4L in a completely stock car with no ill effects?

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

No. The larger motor will consume more fuel. Your turbocharger will also hate life.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

there is a kid down here with a built 2.4L in a fwd 2g with the friggin t25 on it, haha. BOOST AT IDLE FTW!!

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

Are you serious?

WTF....

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

i am, sadly. the kid is a genius.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

I have heard of a few people doing that for breaking a motor in before but not for normal operation.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

Well let's add: 550s. Why would the turbo hate life? Just because there is more exhaust (volume and energy) that it might, in a sense, overwhelm the turbo?

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

Think of putting a T18 on a 4G63. It will hate life. Just trust us, hate life. I have always wondered about the "bigger block" folks that have the stock turbo or turbos. I had a domestic guy asking about how far you can take a DSM, so 2.3s and 2.4 came up. He got super excited about the easiness of it all. He then starts talking about how much power a 2.4 should make with a stock turbo. I explained that the engine is an accessory of the power source, which is the turbo. He turned red. There is a 3.5L 9b Stealth too.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

There is some wrong info in this thread.

The 4G63 bore is 85mm, while the 4G64 bore is 86.5mm, not 87mm.

The rod ratio of the 2.3l is not better than the 2.4l, it is the same. They use the same rod length and same stroke. The 2.3l just uses a condensed piston.

You should actually be able to run a 2.4l block on a stock car. The stock DSM air metering system is not based on volumetric efficiency, like a Honda or speed density car. It uses a MAS, which measures actual airflow into the motor. The MAS would read more airflow for the bigger displacement and the ECU would add more fuel on it's own.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

Whoops, 86.5mm that's right. I'll go fix that :o . I just always order atleast 87mm pistons, thats what I get for not looking it up and "remembering it".
You COULD run a 2.4L block in a stock car, and your right it would work just fine. That is the beauty of a MAS sensor.
But with the average dsmer, odds are they'll be doing "cheap/free mods" at the same time. The exhaust would probably be opened up, the intake would be opened up, and the boost would be bumped. Since all these "mods" tax the fuel system on a 2.0 car, it would be highly recommended to upgrade something in the system to handle the extra demand that the 2.4 requires.
Lets not get into how much that 14b will like life with the extra exhaust volume from the larger motor....

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

And besides that, a stock turbo will make 11, 15, 18 or whatever psi with either engine, it's only the wastegate that bleeds off more air with a bigger engine. As long as that's not restricted or over-run, the turbo could care less what engine is pushing it.

A few years back, a friend of mine made the infamous 2.7L DSM engine and ran it around with a 14b. He said it had no issues and went like a bat out of hell. I didn't see it personally, so it might or might have not been true. :p

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

Yeah it will just bleed off the extra boost, but remember this is a stock car. Honestly, I've never tested a oem car with a 4g64 shortblock on it. I would imagine the factory system might not keep up with the boost control.
I know alot of the smaller MHI turbo's seem to spin apart when you start upgrading flow. A few members on here have lost a variety of turbo's after switching motors, heads, cams, etc.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

I also can't see how the engine size is going to affect the turbos life. 11psi is 11psi no matter what engine its bolting to. The only way I could see it faily is from a lubrication standpoint. If it had way to much oil pressure or something else. I guess it could spool so fast it could surge and eventually fuck shit up as well.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

I can't think of anything that would keep you from dropping a 2.4 into a bone stock car. It's a 20% increase in displacement, but like Shane mentioned, the MAS easily can compensate for that much extra air flow. You'd just need bigger injectors if you wanted to run any boost.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

If the 2.4l made more exhaust, then it would make more boost. If the wastegate could regulate it at 11psi on both motors, then it should be fine on both motors. The wastegate on the 2.4l motor would just need to bypass more exhaust. Hell going from a 14B on a 2.0l to a 14B on a 2.4l is probably a smaller jump than when Mitsu went from the 14B on the 2.0l to the T25 on the 2.0l.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

The only thing that would effect the turbos well being is having a way to bleed of the exhaust gases. Yeah I suppose if the wastegate was too small it would creep like hell and run a shit ton of boost and then run lean ect. But if you had the proper boost control ie/wastegate/boost controller you should be just fine.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

11psi is not 11psi.
Ever heard of Shaft speed? Its been proven time and time again, you put to much air behind a tiny turbo, it will spin apart. But I guess, since I"ve only seen this first hand, in person, my experiences aren't valid. The point is the factory flapper (remember this is an oem car) can't handle the boost at higher load. Maybe it could handle it at factory boost, I've never tested it.
Why doesn't someone just swap one in and see how it does?

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

Fuck Shane we posted the same info at the same time. Weird.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

Your right to an extent, shaft speed could come into play. But we aren't talking about running max amount of boost the turbo will run all the time. We are talking about a low steady regulated amount of boost close to stock levels. People that blow small turbos like you are suggesting are usually maxing them out all the time and then yes they are going to go boom boom after awhile.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

Yes, those people are on dsmstyle :).
Like I have been saying, if the ECU/factory wastegate could control it, yes it could work. I am unsure if the factory could regulate it. It is a very interesting question, and if I had the time or the money to test it, I would. Because, I would like to know. However, I've never done it, and I've never given the okay to one of my customers to try it.
I consider a 46g4 a motor swap that needs "supporting mods", like a mod to begin with.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

Pretty much the reason you never see it is because who the fuck wants to build a race motor that can handle lots of boost and HP and then run a little turbo at stock boost. But we just love arguing about things that "could" happen. So just deal with it.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

Yeah I know, probably the thing I love the most on dsmstyle.
Its the only "dsm" board that is all about theory. The other board like this where the "professors" come out of the woodwork is 3si.org.....and that board is way to damm big to get in on alot of the stuff.

Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L
 

I broke in my 2.4 with cams on the stock T25 and stock injectors. I had DSMLink too but it worked fine without adjusting anything.

It ran normal, but it felt like it wasn't making the power it could which was probably due to the huge restriction in the exhaust (aka the T25).

I switched to a PTE 50 trim as soon as the motor proved it would hold together. :)