i know this may sound crazy but does anyone make high compression parts for this engine or what. its like where ever i look its all about turbo. why not make a stroker the block is bad ass it can handle it. It is sad to see that no one shares my enthusiasm about N/A motors. i say bump the 2.4L compression up to about 11.0-1 use 93 octane, use the stainless oversized valves and dual valve springs, Flash the ECU and maby go with little bit bigger injectors then call it a day.
Or if you want to go really crazy like what im thinking of, take the 2.2L out of the S2000 and drop that in there. woot more power and torque N/A from the factory. Its worth a shot right
i know this may sound crazy but does anyone make high compression parts for this engine or what. its like where ever i look its all about turbo. why not make a stroker the block is bad ass it can handle it. It is sad to see that no one shares my enthusiasm about N/A motors. i say bump the 2.4L compression up to about 11.0-1 use 93 octane, use the stainless oversized valves and dual valve springs, Flash the ECU and maby go with little bit bigger injectors then call it a day.
Or if you want to go really crazy like what im thinking of, take the 2.2L out of the S2000 and drop that in there. woot more power and torque N/A from the factory. Its worth a shot right
I think people share your passion for N/A motors but the cost would far exceed that of simply turbo charging the car to the same out put. Also if you really want some crazy N/A power why don't you get a LS2 Corvette from Mallet or Performance Autowerks.
The 2.4L is already a stroker motor. It's a stroked 2.0 or 2.2L. I think the best N/A build would de-stroke the 2.4L to a big bore 2.1-2.2L so you could run it at high rpm's.
if the compression ratio is 10.4:1 then how come the hp is so bad. this 2.4 should be at least in the 220hp range if the compression ratio is that high. Lets think about this using the S2000 2.0L 240hp 11.0:1 compression. Smaller displacement making 120hp per liter. why cant the eco tec put out any where near that number with the 2.4 with almost a simaler compression
if the compression ratio is 10.4:1 then how come the hp is so bad. this 2.4 should be at least in the 220hp range if the compression ratio is that high. Lets think about this using the S2000 2.0L 240hp 11.0:1 compression. Smaller displacement making 120hp per liter. why cant the eco tec put out any where near that number with the 2.4 with almost a simaler compression
The Honda motor get that HP rating because it revs so high. It makes 237 Crank HP at 8000RPM. But it has a really crappy torque curve. The car doen't make acceptable power until after VTEC kicks in at about 6000RPM. It also doesn't have the long stroke that our Ecotecs have with the 2.4. we have a low-end to mid range motor. The honda motor is High RPM power.
__________________ Randy Carter - Product Manager www.DDMWorks.com
06 Classic Cool: DDMp62 supercharger #0.5b
so your saying if the ecotec has an 11.0:1 compression and revs higher it will turn those numbers
HP = [Torque*RPM]/5252
RPM is a direct influence on power. The higher you can spin your engine, the greater potential for power, provided you can flow enough air for that given RPM. That's how sport bikes, Formula 1 cars, etc. can make so much power with a small displacement. They rev like crazy.
RPM is a direct influence on power. The higher you can spin your engine, the greater potential for power, provided you can flow enough air for that given RPM. That's how sport bikes, Formula 1 cars, etc. can make so much power with a small displacement. They rev like crazy.
The problem is that the 2.4 is a long stroke motor. The Piston speeds at 6500RPM are approching longevity/safety limits. I have it on very good authority that 7k is the most you would want to turn the 2.4 in it's current configuration. Also, there are flow issues at higher RPMs with this engine. Look at all the dyno sheets and see how quickly torque falls off after 5500 rpm, it's a flow thing!
__________________ Randy Carter - Product Manager www.DDMWorks.com
06 Classic Cool: DDMp62 supercharger #0.5b
The problem is that the 2.4 is a long stroke motor. The Piston speeds at 6500RPM are approching longevity/safety limits. I have it on very good authority that 7k is the most you would want to turn the 2.4 in it's current configuration. Also, there are flow issues at higher RPMs with this engine. Look at all the dyno sheets and see how quickly torque falls off after 5500 rpm, it's a flow thing!
Yeah, but you could de-stroke it using a forged crank from a 2.0L or a 2.2L....
Yeah, but you could de-stroke it using a forged crank from a 2.0L or a 2.2L....
wait you can really do that in these engines??? so is it safe to say that you need a good port and polish and over sized valves to take care of the issue. after that the RPM's and power will come out
wait you can really do that in these engines??? so is it safe to say that you need a good port and polish and over sized valves to take care of the issue. after that the RPM's and power will come out
The Ecotec is a rather modular motor. The LE5 (2.4) and LNF(2.0T) have similar bottom ends. The Pistons would need to be swap to get rid of the DI Piston shape and increase the compression. The Head will need some serious work on flow. and the cams will need to be changed a bit. I i think it could be done...someone has to try it
__________________ Randy Carter - Product Manager www.DDMWorks.com
06 Classic Cool: DDMp62 supercharger #0.5b
It is a flow limitation, but there was another thread where somone vowed they were flowing the head. Which never happened of course, and probably never will, but that is the data we need.
Additionally the cams are typical GM conservative. Like look at GMs 275 Horse port fuel 3.6 V6, and take a look at The VQ 3.5 The VQ can go up to 304 horse. It has variable lift, AND the duration is like 250, as opposed to Gms 218/222 crap.
That's one way to do it, but if I were building a N/A engine for all out RPM, I would want the best bore:stroke ratio possible. The LNF and LSJ are square engines which would be good. But if you took a 2.4L block and a 2.0L crank you would have a 2.1L engine with a bore:stroke ratio of 1.02 (over-square). Now, only if the head could support the flow to run that high of an RPM...
