Thread: 2.3L vs 2.4L
View Single Post
Old 03-16-2006   #27
niterydr
back in the saddle again
 
niterydr's Avatar
 
24 Hours Rally Champion! 3D Pacman white house edition Champion! 3D Racing - Track 2 Champion! ATV Winter Challenge Champion! Bloody Pingu Champion! WRX Racing 2 Champion!
Tournaments Won: 5

Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Elkhart Texas
Drives: 2015 Ram Quad Cab Hemi, 1999 FRC Corvette, 93 Stealth Turbo
Posts: 6,411
Send a message via AIM to niterydr
Re: 2.3L vs 2.4L

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecoli
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.
Whoops, 86.5mm that's right. I'll go fix that . 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....
__________________
My street car runs low 11's and my race car's personal best is a mid 11....
niterydr is offline   Reply With Quote