2.3L vs 2.4L - Page 3

TheBlizzard · 03-16-2006

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

TheBlizzard · 03-16-2006

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.

niterydr · 03-16-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBlizzard

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.

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.

CDeutsch · 03-16-2006

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.

CDeutsch · 03-16-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by niterydr

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.

LMAO. They should turn that into some type of slogan. I can only take 3Si.org in small doses, but the board is so huge it only comes in mega-size doses.

sleepydsm · 03-16-2006

Tis is a lot of interesting information! I almost want to start over with a stock dsm, and make a built tranny and engine my first mods. you could maybe tool around in that car while you collect everything for you large turbo.

Super Bleeder!! · 03-17-2006

rst95eclipse · 03-17-2006

Care to explain?

niterydr · 03-17-2006

No point to rev a dsm that high. The transmission don't keep up, and they stop making power at high horsepower.

At-Least-It's-An-Evo · 03-17-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by niterydr

No point to rev a dsm that high...and they stop making power at high horsepower.

Not necessarily true. You know with the right headwork and turbo/setup, it will make power to redline. Examples: Brent and Shep.

**JET** · 03-17-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by niterydr

they stop making power at high horsepower.

Huh? Then u maxed something out. Upgrade the restriction, rinse and repeat. Just like any car. There will always be bottle necks.

Jakey · 03-17-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by niterydr

they stop making power at high horsepower.

Please explain.

TheBlizzard · 03-17-2006

The trannys will shift at high RPMs even stock. They just have to be in perfect working order and you have to be a good driver. Shep was shifting his setup at 10k plus on the same tranny he sells to his customers. Actually his tranny was underbuilt compared to some with an example being JETS tranny, its built up more than Shep old one. Now that he runs a dogbox its a mute point. But it can be done. The reason you see people shredding shit about 8500 is because the tranny isn't in perfect working order when they are doing it and or they don't know how to shift properly and they end up breaking shift forks.

As far as the power comment. That should be self explanitory. Jet covered that one.

**Goat Blower** · 03-17-2006

For a drag car, I'm convinced the 2.1L is the way to go. Marco doesn't seem to think so after testing a few though. For a street/strip car like mine, the 2.4 can't be beat. If I ever get the time and money, I do have another DSM engine idea, but that's another thread altogether.

I wish Dart would make some thick-walled blocks like they do for Honduhs, than the possibilities would be endless.

**Shane@DBPerformance** · 03-17-2006

It's easier to get the tranny to shift at high RPMs then to get it to handle the torque of the 2.4l though.

niterydr · 03-17-2006

By "stop making horsepower" they begin to bottleneck compared to other heads (aka honda's for example). I ment high rpm, not high horsepower. Latenight typo, I'd go edit it, but since I was quoted by 3 people it wasn't worth it. The 2.1 is a great idea for a motor. I love all the theorists in here.
Cher-
Brent=not a dsm transmission
Shep=Not a "dsm" transmission. We know his dsm based transmissions are hardcore, but now he is on a dogbox. I am sure he switched that up because he was bored.
I know they make power up top. The power isn't hard, but making it work as a CAR, not a motor, is the fun part. I think we all know how that works

.

Justin- I agree everything has bottlenecks, but if I were going to go through the trouble of a smaller displacement motor to make up for it in rev's, I would have to go to 9500rpm + and I would want a serious power band up there. The headwork/turbowork/transmission required is beyond the budget of 99.99% of the dsmer's. IMHO its just not worth it to do it "right". Unless you have some no holds bar setup, it isn't worth wasting the cash.

Jakey- See post for Justin.
Steve-Just hardblock it if you are really worried about it. Remember, it is a drag car

.
Craig- I understand about shep's trannies. They are great units and work awesome. The only problem with going the 2.1 vs the 2.4 is the costs involved. It is just not cost effective, in my honest opinion, to go the 2.1 route.

Shane-I totally agree. Laggy turbo's own for that problem.

At-Least-It's-An-Evo · 03-18-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by niterydr

Cher-
Brent=not a dsm transmission
Shep=Not a "dsm" transmission. We know his dsm based transmissions are hardcore, but now he is on a dogbox. I am sure he switched that up because he was bored.
I know they make power up top. The power isn't hard, but making it work as a CAR, not a motor, is the fun part. I think we all know how that works

.

I had nothing to say about Shep and Brent having DSM trannies or not. Shep did not have a dogbox in previous years. It was a built DSM tranny.

I was clearly responding to it not making power up top... yes it can and they are perfect examples. But you already agreed to others saying so.

**JET** · 03-21-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by niterydr

By "stop making horsepower" they begin to bottleneck compared to other heads (aka honda's for example). I ment high rpm, not high horsepower. Latenight typo, I'd go edit it, but since I was quoted by 3 people it wasn't worth it. The 2.1 is a great idea for a motor. I love all the theorists in here.

Justin- I agree everything has bottlenecks, but if I were going to go through the trouble of a smaller displacement motor to make up for it in rev's, I would have to go to 9500rpm + and I would want a serious power band up there. The headwork/turbowork/transmission required is beyond the budget of 99.99% of the dsmer's. IMHO its just not worth it to do it "right". Unless you have some no holds bar setup, it isn't worth wasting the cash.

What are you considering "high horsepower"? Just because you want a powerband like that doesn't mean others do. You are just a theorist too, Swanny.

I agree that you have to make the engine work in the car. I know of someone else looking at making big HP in a car that is notorious for killing drivetrains. Pot, meet kettle.

niterydr · 03-21-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by JET

What are you considering "high horsepower"? Just because you want a powerband like that doesn't mean others do. You are just a theorist too, Swanny.

I agree that you have to make the engine work in the car. I know of someone else looking at making big HP in a car that is notorious for killing drivetrains. Pot, meet kettle.

I meant rpm, not horsepower. The dsm's just seem to "drop off" around 8k compared to other cars that have powerbands that keep climbing. For the record, I consider big power 700+hp.

I am a theorist, that is true. Everyone in this industry is. In defense of being a kettle... I am however making a go of my "drivetrain killing monster" to disprove theories. Everything in the world will shit out drivetrain when you try to double or triple the factory setup. Weak drivetrain? I have transfer case issues, and those are currently being resolved (or so we hope). The prototype transfercase come back this summer.
I was just saying, that I wouldn't do that setup. After weighing all the pro's and con's, it isn't worth it IMHO. Just my professional opinion on this subject, take it or leave it. But maybe I've never researched it??

96 Gsx Awd · 03-18-2006

i would go 2.4 for sure