Which
Why
Advantages
Spank you
Which
Why
Advantages
Spank you
This will take a lot of explaining, but the choice depends on (here we go again) what you plan on doing with the car, i.e. what are your goals?
Here is a short answer for now, because the long answer will take a while, and I don’t feel like hashing it all out right this minute:
Whether or not you should go with a 2.4 is personal preference. You can max out the 3052 or 3065 or most other turbos of similar size with either engine. It just depends on if you want to rev past 8000 or not. If you like quick spoolup and lot of midrange torque go with the 2.4. If you aren’t concerned with spool time and you want high rpm power then stick with the 2.0.
Personally, I don’t really see a purpose for a 2.1, but again, I’ll get to that later.
Others feel free to chime in, I can see this turning into a heated debate
2.1 or 2.4 are my recommendations…
2.4 - Very low rod:stroke ratio which means it will not rev out like the 2.0 but you get gobs of torque down low. Magnus Motorsports makes a longer rod which gives you some more wiggle room but still nothing like the 2.0 or 2.1. The stock R:S ratio is somewhere along the lines of 1.4:1. With the Mangus you are talking around 1.5xx:1, IIRC.
Turbo spooling you get around 500rpms sooner spool with the 2.4L so imagine a 20G spooling like a 16G, etc…
With the torque and power moved so much sooner, you will be putting a lot more abuse on your transmission and clutch.
2.1 - Very good rod:stroke ratio. Somewhere along the lines of 1.7xx:1. That means when properly balanced, you can rev this pig out to 10k. It does grant you extra displacement and will cut down on spool, but nothing drastic like the 2.4. I was debating on going with this motor but it really doesn’t make sense for a street car.
2.0 - Simple proven design but no frills like the others. If you want something relaible tried and true, go with this motor. No guess work/patchwork on the assembly side.
2.3 - Almost as good as the 2.4L block. It has a very good reputation but doesn’t last long as the 2.4L because the rod angles are more aggressive. The block needs to be machined as well below the cylinders to allow for rod clearance.
Along with the engine to go with, you should also think about compression ratio. Guys are making good power on the DSM with lower boost and higher compression, sometimes as much as 10:1 will make great power you just have smaller tolerances for error for obvious reasons. The preferrable limit with non standalone tuning (AEM, etc) is probably going to be 8.5:1. That will give you maximum flexibility and knock prevention while still being able to get good numbers from moderate boost.
Again stated, What is your goal this needs to be answered first.
When is more displacement ever a bad thing? :gotme:
Goals - Reliability and fun, maybe 350WHP
Wouldn’t mind it to be not such a slug down low, but I thinkg 8.5:1 CR would fix things nicely.
on a 2.4L you can make 350whp pretty easily…
FP3052 + 2.4L + 22psi = full boost ~ 3000rpm
7.8:1 to 8.5:1 is not a huge jump. You aren’t going to see much of anything from .7 compression points.
I dunno man, I think I will
You’ve never driving with 7.8:1 with a bigish turbo - mainly because they were all stick cars, OOOOooo
Dude, you don’t get it…
8.5 with your exact same setup is not going to make any noticeable difference.
big block styles, and use a deck plate and longer rod so it doesnt stress the hell out of the cylinder walls
They don’t make deck plates for DSM’s… The cylinder walls are solid as a rock being they are cast iron and not aluminum. Thanks for playing.
yea, because i am sure its rocket surgery to have a machine shop make one.
and the cylinder walls are cast… great. sleeve them
sorry for thinking outside the box. go buy some bolt-ons
Yeah, all the DSM guys running 10’s and 9’s need to sleeve their blocks… :roll2:
Why incur all that extra cost for sleeving when it’s not needed. HELLO, NOT A HONDA, NOT NECESSARY!!
to get the extra deck height you meathead.
rev the piss out of it
not nessessasssesesssary 2.4l with like a 1.2 rs vs a 2.4 with a 1.6 (made up numbers)… big difference
as for it not fitting under the hood, get a cool hood like a mustang guy.
You can be head engineer on that project!! :tup: Go for it! Let me know how much more in thousands it costs for all that…
its not my money
lol
i wouldnt sacrafice r/s for a few extra cubes though.
Who says I’m sticking with the same turbo?
Yeah, I know I need tuning.
My point is you were bitching god knows how many times about going up hill in your current car. What 7.8:1 car have you ridden in/drove with a huge turbo besides your plauged POS?
that reminds me, i have your chip still in a package on my desk
Well, the 2.4 can get up to 1.5ish:1 with the Mangus long rods. It’s a good theory but way too costly IMO to make work because of all the parts that need to be fabricated from scratch.