Considering stroker, looking for feedback

**Halon** · 06-23-2009

For the past month or so, I've been considering pulling the block this winter and going with a stroker setup.

First I'll try to explain my reasoning behind this. What I like is the fact that I will spool the turbo quicker. How much quicker I'm not sure, but quicker spool is good in my eyes as this car is 99% street driven. So the powerband starting sooner is a plus in that aspect. Also, I'm only currently revving to 8k. I usually only rev 2nd to 7500 because any higher and the tranny just doesn't like to shift as well. So I'm already not revving over 8k, and don't really plan on it because the tranny just doesn't like it much higher than that, and from what I gather a stroker setup should be able to hold 7500-8k fairly well still. So I'll be able to rev to around the same RPM, yet pickup some RPM on the bottom end due to quicker spool.

So that's why I'm considering doing this.

I've been reading up more about this, and it looks like there's quite a few cranks out there right now, from various shops/companies. I'm trying to keep it simple and cost effective, so I'm leaning towards just slapping a standard 2.4 G4CS crank into my current 2.0 block. I'm not interested in putting a 2.4 block in the car. My current block is bored 20 over. I'd want the block re-bored more due to 1 cylinder wall not being 'perfect'. So I'm looking at pistons 30 - 40 over. Right now leaning towards the Mahle's as they are what I run now and I've been happy with them. I plan to continue using my current Eagle rods.

So that is what I'm considering at the moment. What I'd like to hear is others opinions on advantages/disadvantages of going with a stroker on my current setup. Couple things are that I plan to keep the 272 cams. I may benefit from larger cams, but I need to take this one step at a time. So I'll still be on HKS 272's, a JMF Race SMIM, a stock 1GNT TB, 2.5" IC piping... I want to keep all that the same. Now with a stroker I'll be flowing a bit more air, so my concern is that I'll be choking it since I'm still running 2.5 piping and a 60mm TB. The cams could be larger too, but I only have Crower valvetrain components, so I don't want to start jumping into FP's 3,3x stroker cams when my valvetrain might not be suited for those. So I plan to keep the 272's for awhile. Plus I like the car to idle somewhat controllably, and these allow the car to still idle decently. I still have stock size valves. I guess I just want to make sure that if I go 2.3, I'm not going to see a loss in power because I find out that I'm choking it out. Maybe all my stuff is working great on a 2.0, but if I go stroker, I find out the rest of my setup just doesn't support the extra flow.

So, please if anyone has some good insight, please share as I'm already looking to start acquiring the new parts I'll need to build the stroker this winter if I decide to do so.

Thanks in advance, sorry for the long read

**Goat Blower** · 06-23-2009

I don't remember much about the 2.3 setup, but I don't think you can use your Eagle rods unless you have a really short piston, 2.4's use stock length rods. Personally, I would sell your engine complete and start from scratch with a 2.4, there's no dinking around with clearancing the block and you get that extra .1 liter of displacement. If I had the time and cared anymore, I'd probably look at more displacement than the 2.4 even. There's no replacement for displacement, especially with boost.

**Halon** · 06-23-2009

Yes it does use standard rods. The piston pin is raised on the piston itself. So standard rods, with a special piston.

I don't want to use the 2.4 block. I want to keep the 4g63 block for my own reasons.

Your extra .1 comes from a larger bore, which I could just do to my block if I really wanted that extra .1 (I believe I'd need around a 60 overbore to be at 2.4) so I'll already be close at a 40 overbore.

Anyhow, I've already got all that research out of the way, and am fine with all that.

What I'm really conserned about, and wanting feedback on, is if going 2.3 is going to actually hurt me because maybe my supporting mods aren't going to flow enough, and actually going to choke the stroker setup. I do not want to change anything else. So I'll still be on a 1Gnt TB, 2.5" IC piping, and 272 cams. Maybe not ideal for a stroker, but will I still be right at the same power level, or will I actually lose power because these simply can't support the extra displacement and will juust be choking it?

**Shane@DBPerformance** · 06-23-2009

Just do it. I had HKS 272s on my 2.4l. A bigger TB and i/c piping might help some, but ppl have made 800+ on 2.5" piping and stock 1G TB. Hondas make 600+ on 60mm TBs all the time. The big questions are does your turbo have more in it, how big is your exhaust, and how restrictive is your FMIC(flow often matters more than cooling on high boost cars). exhaust, FMIC, turbo or cams are often the problem when you hit a HP wall. You could do better than the 272s, but whatever. Take your current powerband and shift it to the left 500rpms, thats your worst case scenario, more power downlow but power will start dropping at an early RPM. If everything can keep up with the 2.3l, then you make 40-50whp more at the same boost.

**Shane@DBPerformance** · 06-23-2009

Here is one of my customer cars with a 2.4 stroker. He does have some FP cams, but it's 2.5" i/c piping, 1G TB, unported 2G head, stock 2G TB elbow, 3" off the shelf Apexi downpipe/cat-back. It's a real GT35R with the .82 A/R exhaust housing, no .63 or superchoker Mitsu bolt-on housing. It runs on E85 with some really low ignition timing because the owner doesn't know much about cars and likes to do 150mph highway pulls in 90 degree heat against anything he can find. Back when it was on pump gas making around 400awhp, we switched from HKS 272s to the FPs and really didn't see much difference on that fuel/power level.

We can get over the usual 450-460awhp on a single pump on E85 because of the boost it runs. More boost/fuel pressure, the earlier the pump maxes out. We stopped at that power level because of fuel running out though.

Shane's useless Tip-O-The-Week:

2G heads are the shit. Bigger isn't better(unless you are making 1000whp and reving to 10,500), even if jimbobz on DSMModifierz or some modding guide from 1999 says 1G has to better because it's bigger. How much power does a stock motor/head 2G DSM make with an Evo 3 16G, cams and E85?? The same as an Evo 8 with stock Evo 8 16G turbo, cams and E85, think about that... Evo intake ports are not bigger than 2G ports and they makes the madz powa.

There are downsides to the strokers though. Torque is nice, but it also shreds tranny gears and kills clutches. 8000RPMs ain't gonna be enough to get through the traps in 4th gear if you make some good power.

Super Bleeder!! · 06-24-2009

<-----------Another 2.4, 272, 2g head user

If you do use a g4cs crank GET IT CHECKED OUT! Inspect it and magnaflux it, if its good then polish it and toss it in.

Speedfreak · 06-24-2009

I'd say do it. I'm happy with my 2.4l and 272's etc etc.

95talonracer · 06-24-2009

I used a 6 bolt 2.0 block with a 2.4 crank in my 2.3 build. I ended up using my eagle rods and bought wiseco 2.3 pistons with i think it is 8.8 compression and I love it. I would say go ahead and do it. I have heard that some rods need clearancing of the block and some dont but I needed to clearance just a little on the block and part that bolts to the crank. I also have 2.5 piping, 1g nt tb but crower 414 cams on e85 and a scm6152rs with a maxed out 255 pump.

**Halon** · 06-24-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by Super Bleeder!!

<-----------Another 2.4, 272, 2g head user

If you do use a g4cs crank GET IT CHECKED OUT! Inspect it and magnaflux it, if its good then polish it and toss it in.

That's another good point. It seems like some of the cranks are nitrided and some aren't. I have already sourced a virgin G4CS crank that I'll be hopefully getting in a few weeks. No idea if it's hardened or not. When I get it, I plan on just bringing it to one of the shops, and letting them check it out as I don't really have the tools, or skillzz, to say if it's good or not.

I was considering one of those Eagle cranks, but I heard they are often a bit off, right out of the box. Not interested in throwing that kind of money on a brand new crank, just to have it need some machining on it from the get go.

Thanks for the input everyone. I think I'm going to go for it, and just slowly start acquiring parts. If anyone has any stroker pistons, that are atleast 30 over, for sale, let me know!

**Goat Blower** · 06-24-2009

As a point of reference, I didn't notice any power gain going from 2.5 to 3" IC piping and the 75mm TB at 31psi, maybe it would help turning the boost up a bit. It does look cool though.

turbotalon1g · 06-25-2009

31psi is low boost these days.
Bman, I have been looking into this and plan on doing the same once i get home, I believe tom revs his 2.3 to 8-8.5k, u have probably seen it, but there is the same thread about strokers on link.

**Halon** · 06-25-2009

I don't think I have, you have a link at all by chance?

1gGSX · 06-26-2009

I've got a set of eagle rods and wiseco pistons that are 20 over with about 300 miles on them.

Shotgun! · 06-26-2009

I'm not trying to be an ass, I just want to know. Why are you not thinking of using a 2.4 block? I ask mostly out of curiosity, but also because I see more deck height as a great thing.

**Halon** · 06-27-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1gGSX

I've got a set of eagle rods and wiseco pistons that are 20 over with about 300 miles on them.

Did you spin a bearing?

And I don't want a 2.4 block because I just want to keep the stock block the cars came with. Out of curiosity, what advantage does the taller deck height offer?

Super Bleeder!! · 06-27-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halon

And I don't want a 2.4 block because I just want to keep the stock block the cars came with. Out of curiosity, what advantage does the taller deck height offer?

Improved rod ratio, less cyl wall loading (scuffing) Rings and compression should last longer.

blackawdtsi · 06-27-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by Super Bleeder!!

Improved rod ratio, less cyl wall loading (scuffing) Rings and compression should last longer.

2.4s DO NOT have better rod ratio compared to a 2.3. They use a 100mm crank, just like a 2.3 and the rods are the exact same length (150mm) as a 2.3. However the 2.3 will have lighter pistons, so it's better for high rpms.

UNLESS you're using stroker pistons and longer rods in the 2.4.

blackawdtsi · 06-27-2009

I'd also like to add another fact.

The 2.4's aren't really 2.4's. They're 2.3's rounded up since they're 2380ccs and the 2.3's are only 2300. Meaning "2.4's" are 2.38 liters and the 2.3's are 2.3 liters.

**Halon** · 06-27-2009

As was mentioned, whether the 100mm crank is used in a 63 or 64 block, the rod ratio should be the same.

2.38 is 2.4 just like our 1.99's are 2.0's.

Anyhow, here is a nice little chart to use as a reference in regards to displacement. The pistons I'll more than likely be getting are 40 over (86.5mm) which when combined with the 100mm crank, show that I'm sitting closer to 2.35 (which does round to 2.4). So switching to a 4G64 block really won't net me .1L more. I can get that same 2.4 if I just bore it out further. The 4G64 is a 2.4 because it simply has a larger bore...

Again, I've done the research on the motor itself. What my question was, is this a good idea considering the rest of my setup. Just want to make sure that with the added displancement and airflow I'll be seeing, will I actually lose power or anything because I'm choking it. Maybe my setup works great on a 2.0, but add that extra bit of displacement, just want to make sure I'm going to kill my setup.

Thanks for all the feedback so far though, keep it coming! Right now I'm just trying to locate some pistons.

carltalon · 06-27-2009

Have you thought about going with a higher compression piston since you run E85?

Repost but great stroker info here http://www.kidzuku.com/StrokeOrNot.pdf