2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4 - Page 2 - Performance Forum

Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.
Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Thursday, October 19, 2006 8:43 PM
Brian Whalen wrote:

Bad rap???... Are you sure we are talking about the same quad 4's?

I have never heard of a 2.4L TC ran in any real sanctioned events. The Quad 4 is one of the popular choices for building and racing midgets. With the exception of the lesser stroke, it dominates the 2.4L in every aspect.... Which is why my motor has more quad 4 parts on/ in it than 2.4L TC.


As in what the common joe thinks of the motor. Go talk to just about any GM tech and see what they say about the quad 4.



Click the banner to enter the best Quad4 & Twin Cam site on the internet.

Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Thursday, October 19, 2006 8:51 PM
Ok...I guess I can accept that.
Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Thursday, October 19, 2006 8:56 PM
most "regular" drivers didn't like the Quad for it's race breeding. Noisy, shakey, doesn't like sitting at idle.

We few who own them love them because of their quirks.





Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Friday, October 20, 2006 5:23 AM
Quote:

Go talk to just about any GM tech and see what they say about the quad 4.

GM tech here
me and almost every tech here are really fond of the quad4



Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Saturday, October 21, 2006 6:39 AM
MAN all the tec's by me think there all junk because of the damn SOHC



'02 Z-24 Supercharged
13.7 @102.45 MPH Third Place, 2007 GMSC Bash SOLD AS OF 01MAR08

Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Saturday, October 21, 2006 10:06 AM
Taetsch Z24 wrote:

MAN all the tec's by me think there all junk because of the damn SOHC


That is because the SOHC IS junk!

Note, I would take a 2.3 W41 or HO over any of the 2.4's I have owned. 2.4's HATE high rpms, its a mere fact, due to their stroke/bore and the oiling system. You run your 2.4 at high rpms for an extended period, its a good chance the bearings will go. Also, the most important thing to do with your 2.4 is to change/check your oil. Even at a quart low, its like playing with a loaded gun. Personally, I love the quad family, including the 2.4 and subtracting the SOHC, which I dont even think of as part of the quad family. The quads were never meant to be "smooth running" beauty machines. Well, they attempted to smooth it out some in 95-up with the balance shafts, but that is where they went wrong in my opinion. If they would have kept the 2.3 oiling system, the 2.4 would have been a GREAT motor. I have owned quite a few 2.4's, and I have built a 2.4, and driven many eco's, and not to start a war, but you couldnt give me an eco to swap inplace of my built 2.4. It just wouldnt happen. I hate the feel of it. They dont feel mean whatsoever, smooth as a baby all the way up till 7000, which i personally didnt like, no power untill 35-4000 which i didnt like. I am use to the low end grunt by the 2.4.

p.s. The 2.3's were never known as the "iron duke", wow, dont know where that came from. The Iron Duke was always and will always be the 2.5 4-tec. It got its name because anyone that knows anything about them or have owned one, they are pretty much IMPOSSIBLE to kill. Probably the most reliable 4-cyl GM has ever made. Nutless? Of course, at somethign like 92 hp and 130 ft/lbs of torque, shes not the performer some would like, but it will run forever. My dads business owns one, we use it as a backup truck if some1 needs to run and get something, and it gets an oil change once a year in the winter, and it is over 300,000 and she is still kickin. 3 tranny's, 1 motor.
Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Saturday, October 21, 2006 2:49 PM
I have a question, if the 2.4 crank is cross drilled will that help alleviate the problem if the 2.3 oil system is also used?


2000 Z24 5spd header & catback for now.
Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Sunday, October 22, 2006 10:52 AM
Dale Young wrote:

I have a question, if the 2.4 crank is cross drilled will that help alleviate the problem if the 2.3 oil system is also used?


Thats will most likly cause more problems and failures.



Click the banner to enter the best Quad4 & Twin Cam site on the internet.
Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Sunday, October 22, 2006 8:59 PM
Urweak what's your reasoning behind your statement, the objective of cros drilling the crank is to get more oil to the rods & mains so how will that cause more problems?


2000 Z24 5spd header & catback for now.
Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Sunday, October 22, 2006 9:14 PM
Dale Young wrote:

I have a question, if the 2.4 crank is cross drilled will that help alleviate the problem if the 2.3 oil system is also used?


I am confused... What problem are you talking about. The 2.3L pump swap alone fixes the oil pressure problem at higher rpm's. Maybe I overlooked something someone said...
Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Monday, October 23, 2006 5:45 AM
Brian earlier in the post someone was saying that the 2.4s spin bearings that's why I asked about cross drilling the crank, to get more oil to the rod & main bearings to prevent starvation and spun bearings.


2000 Z24 5spd header & catback for now.

Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Monday, October 23, 2006 8:20 AM
The 2.3 pump swap is TO PREVENT THAT PROBLEM. No need. You know, one or the other. You could do both but you kind of wasting money.



Gilles
2.3 Ho

Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Monday, October 23, 2006 3:55 PM
Fst Cavy wrote:

Taetsch Z24 wrote:

MAN all the tec's by me think there all junk because of the damn SOHC


That is because the SOHC IS junk!

Note, I would take a 2.3 W41 or HO over any of the 2.4's I have owned. 2.4's HATE high rpms, its a mere fact, due to their stroke/bore and the oiling system. You run your 2.4 at high rpms for an extended period, its a good chance the bearings will go. Also, the most important thing to do with your 2.4 is to change/check your oil. Even at a quart low, its like playing with a loaded gun. Personally, I love the quad family, including the 2.4 and subtracting the SOHC, which I dont even think of as part of the quad family. The quads were never meant to be "smooth running" beauty machines. Well, they attempted to smooth it out some in 95-up with the balance shafts, but that is where they went wrong in my opinion. If they would have kept the 2.3 oiling system, the 2.4 would have been a GREAT motor. I have owned quite a few 2.4's, and I have built a 2.4, and driven many eco's, and not to start a war, but you couldnt give me an eco to swap inplace of my built 2.4. It just wouldnt happen. I hate the feel of it. They dont feel mean whatsoever, smooth as a baby all the way up till 7000, which i personally didnt like, no power untill 35-4000 which i didnt like. I am use to the low end grunt by the 2.4.

p.s. The 2.3's were never known as the "iron duke", wow, dont know where that came from. The Iron Duke was always and will always be the 2.5 4-tec. It got its name because anyone that knows anything about them or have owned one, they are pretty much IMPOSSIBLE to kill. Probably the most reliable 4-cyl GM has ever made. Nutless? Of course, at somethign like 92 hp and 130 ft/lbs of torque, shes not the performer some would like, but it will run forever. My dads business owns one, we use it as a backup truck if some1 needs to run and get something, and it gets an oil change once a year in the winter, and it is over 300,000 and she is still kickin. 3 tranny's, 1 motor.



you sir never rode in a 2.4 with a 2.3 oil pump and 2.3 LO cams then?


Brians car LOVES high rpm's walks the dog @!#$ out my my GTZ 2.3 HO


'02 Z-24 Supercharged
13.7 @102.45 MPH Third Place, 2007 GMSC Bash SOLD AS OF 01MAR08

Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Monday, October 23, 2006 9:05 PM
Hahaha, brians car is a LITTLE more than just a stock 2.4. I am sure it was balanced, lots of oiling mods, and cams to make it pull in the high rpm band. I was talking about a stock 2.4 my friend.
Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Monday, October 23, 2006 9:06 PM
the cams are what brought the HP up top IMO...not to mention the head has been opened up....personally...I love the way a 2.3 HO/W41 drives compared to a 2.4 in stock form.....but brian's car is getting to be more 2.3 then 2.4...namely in the top end where the 2.3 just kicks the 2.4's ass in efficiency



Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Tuesday, October 24, 2006 3:05 AM
I like the 2.4 bottom end but it's useless against the Ho. My old Ho (now W41) would rip my cavy appart. The Ho has a bit less torque on the bottom end (between 130 and 135lbs at the wheels) but will easily go by on second gear.

For city driving tough, the W41/Ho are fun to drive. They are smooth and easy. The 2.4 is peppy in city driving.


Gilles
2.3 Ho

Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Tuesday, October 24, 2006 9:21 AM
Mfk-223 wrote:

I like the 2.4 bottom end but it's useless against the Ho. My old Ho (now W41) would rip my cavy appart.


more like W43 with those hot grinds there Gilles...lol.
Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Tuesday, October 24, 2006 12:17 PM
I guess you are right. The Lgo was the W40, the Ho with the first set of bigger cams was the W41 and I'm two step higher so yeah, W43



Gilles
2.3 Ho

Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Tuesday, October 24, 2006 3:46 PM
Quad 4 block + 2.4L crank = 2.5 strocker right ?
Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Tuesday, October 24, 2006 4:38 PM
Fst Cavy wrote:

Hahaha, brians car is a LITTLE more than just a stock 2.4. I am sure it was balanced, lots of oiling mods, and cams to make it pull in the high rpm band. I was talking about a stock 2.4 my friend.


LO cams, LGO oil pump and a little head work... my GTZ has a LOT better flowing head and biger cams.

and he still out reved me. with 18" rims. and i have stock 97 Z-24 rims.


'02 Z-24 Supercharged
13.7 @102.45 MPH Third Place, 2007 GMSC Bash SOLD AS OF 01MAR08

Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Thursday, April 27, 2017 5:37 PM
My 97 z24 has over 260k miles on it. Just picked it up, clean southern car....no rust ANYWHERE! Plan on a rebuild here soon w/new bearing, rings and gaskets, putting in performance cams, widening the oil ports in the block and head, better oil pump/water pump, flat top pistons and a performance timing chain/cam gears. As it is now it doesnt leak any oil nor does it burn any. You would think looking under the hood it was a year old. It pulls real hard, i took it up a few hills where my old 94 accord i had to downshiftbto 4th gear just to maintain speed, this car in 5th still gains speed. Good ol domestic torque.

Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Tuesday, July 25, 2017 4:55 AM
99, and 00-02 blocks had less core shift and better oiling. It would be cheaper just to get a new block, and adapt the knock sensor. If you use the 97 head you would also get a small bump in compression.





Re: 2.4Ltwin cam/ quad 4
Thursday, July 27, 2017 8:52 PM
the blocks are basically the same depending upon year and casting numbers..
the crank rods head set and bore size are the main differences in the two.
also GM made the switch from the double roller timing chain to a single link style chain.
the balance shaft oiling system is more than likely the most notable difference in between the two..
Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.

 

Start New Topic Advanced Search