I have just spent the last 5 hours, browsing, searching, reading, and taking notes as to all the mods you can do to a Cavalier. From engine
swaps, to v-8's, from 2.2 , 2.3HO, 2.4 Twin cam, 3.1V-6, cobalt 2.2SC, TC...etc, etc, etc..

Im overloaded as far as ideas go.. What I want to do, is build a new engine for my 2000 Z-24 over the winter, I have close to 100,000 Miles on it,
and i think its time to 'git a new engine' Due to the plethora of modifications that can be done to these engines, I find myself undicided on directions to go with this. I want to keep it out of the TC, SC area.. and go with what I learned when I was building up V-8's Bore, Stroke, Cams,
Displacement....

What would you suggest as far as a "blueprint" for a 210-240hp, 'naturaly aspirated' (i think thats what its called) 2.4 twin cam engine.. Heres
where I sit so far..as far as Ideas go..

Start with a 2.4 Block.. Bored 10 over (maby fifteen, 20? , I don't know the cyl wall thickness and you can understand i dont want to go into the water galleries) sleeves? dunno?

Stock crank, with 95mm stroke.. Flat top pistions

I want to shave .05 thou, off of the head, and give it a proper valve job, as well as a P&P ..Match it up to the 2.3L (LG0) Intake Mani. (machining
welding, whatever it takes, that manifold is going to look like it "CAME" with that engine (LD9)

I think I will stay with the stock fuel injectors... but fuel regulator will be changed to an adjustible, allong with the the entire fuel system,
beginning to end.. (braided 3/8 pressure line, SS fittings, you know what I mean)

Cams..
kinda shooting for aggressive, looking at the exhaust cams off of a W41 quad 4
and the intake.. I forget.. I think Its the LG0 intake cam.. though I might be wrong..

with cast heads, you could give the valves a heavier valve spring, workes good with aggressive/RV cams, (cast steel vs cast alum) does that apply to THESE heads aswell.. or is that just simply impossible?

I know some aluminum heads have a brass, or nickle valve seat..... allowing a heavier valve spring, and reducing, if not eliminating the chance of the valve beating the port bigger..due to stronger return spring sets... I dont know if its the same for the LD9 head..or are they standard, and Its
just been up for too long

Under-drive pully system perhaps....

Improved grounding (engine, to chassis.. battery, to computer..)

Aftermarket hedder, with medium-flow cat and proformance muffler. (single out.. same place)

And quite likely a whole smoot of obd2 programming.. and benchtesting...

Also I want to see about perhaps throwing in a beefier torque converter.. before I bolt the whole thing back together.. but I dont know much about auto trans..


"The beatings will continue untill morale improves"

My eyes hurt..

another option as far as the head is concerned would be an 086 head...



2007 GM Tuner Bash...HELL YEA
PA,MD,NJ,DE,NY and all states north caravan

save your $money$

If you have the money and the will to do it, you can make a 2.6L Quad 4 that will make the power you want.

You can bore the cylinder .040 over.

Other than work the 2.4 head, use a 2.3 086 head. It will flow more than your 2.4 head, have better springs and bigger valves.

If you want 210+hp, you need bigger injectors. Just an AFPR won't do it.

Witch W41 exhaust cams you want to use? W41 218°? W41 226°? W41 224°?

The 2.3 springs are good enough for any street cams.




Gilles
2.3 Ho

Not to be a stckler Gilles, but if he were to do the 2.6L stroker, there would be no reason at all to use either of the 2.4L heads.

if you ever find a 086 head that is from a 2.4, it as been modify.

The 086 head is from the 2.3. The 2.6 IS a 2.3 except for the crank.



Gilles
2.3 Ho

I had an idea of creating a quad-4 engine, with 2.8L displacement (huge, and gangley, I know) but then I could "jokingly" call it a Z-28..

some serious compression changes, I imagine.. with a gawd-awful cam.. would sound like a beast, and probably take some of the drivability
out of the car (ability to do long trips, I imagine, etc)

To agree with mfk-223 on the injectors.. I kind knew it was going to come to that.. pricy little b-tards...

I think I am going to look into that 2.3L head, the 086. I think I know where I can get one for cheap too.. un molested..

One question.. I see that there is a major difference between the two heads..

cheers

A set of W41 Hot grind 2 (.430" and 224°) give a nice idle. The low end is gone but good enough for city driving and the top end is crazy. Also, I run 12:1 compression with those cams.



Gilles
2.3 Ho

Quote:

One question.. I see that there is a major difference between the two heads..

I don't see where the question is, but... yeah, the differences for the 086 head are as follows:
the location of the water gallies...
the recessed area of the head has a wider bore...
valves are larger and the springs are stiffer.

Besides drilling and boring out some holes for the water passages and using a head gasket with a larger fire ring (I believe that is what it is called), everything bolts up to an LD9 perfectly.

If you are staying N/A and want to stick with the ld9, it is absolutely a waste of money to spend over $1k on a ported and polished head like the Eco and 2200 guys have to, when no ported ld9 head flows as well as the 086. Don't think that spending less money on the head means you are in any way cutting corners either. Just my 2 cents.

Overall... The stroked 2.3L would be the best choice. It would gain you more torque and probably put you closer to 250hp with radical cams like gilles and a tubular header.

Brian

I aplogize for the screwed up question.. I was a little rushed then...
onward..

I thought about an exhaust cam, (..getting back to Gilles question) I think Im going to go with the W41 224°..
its my best "seat of the pants" guess....without going into it... I think it was referred to a "hot grind"

I went a weighed the car, the other day... With 1/2 tank of fuel, and an otherwize empty trunk, I tipped the scales at 1326kgs.. (2900lbs)
which estimates the HP/KG ratio at about 10kg (22lb) per HP...lackluster..

especially when you have Mitsubishi Lancer (2005 es & oz edition) which has 120hp a curb weight of 1245kg (2744lb)

the "OZ" edition..

Honda with the Civic SI (plane jane)
197 horsepower at 7800 rpm and 139 lb.-ft. of torque at 6200 rpm. 8000rpm redline
2.0-liter, dual-overhead camshaft K20Z3 engine
1998cc, 86x86 (bore/stroke) 11.0:1 compression 16V i-vtec
2877lb at the curb

lord thundering jesus...

At near 3000lbs, I could use a 120 more horses, just to bring that HP/LB rate down some..
catch them Hondas..

hmmm...

94mm stroke, I wonder If that could be improved a little.. say 6mm

-cheers


..the beatings will continue, until morale improves...

The 224° W41 cams have .430" of lift.

The regualr W41 had .410" of list and 218° of duration.

The W41 .430" 224° are the Hot grind 2.

It would bring the powerband way too high for the 2.4 Ecm. Unless you do a really good tune with Hp tuner.

The 224° cams have a peak power around 7600rpm.



Gilles
2.3 Ho

Two things:

1. I Don't know why you mentioned the lancer when it has a power to weight ratio worse than your car
2. All 4 cylinder Hondas suffer low end... and peak power for a Honda is like a mountain whereas ours is more of a hill. Just because a car has more peak horsepower, doesn't make it automatically faster. Imagine a N/A 300hp Ford 5.0 vs a N/A 300hp 1.6L vtec Honda motor in another vehicle where the curb weight is the same. If you believe that the cars will finish at the same time and trap at the same speed... then you need to keep studying.

I have no qualm with Hondas, but that is just how it is. If you watch GT2 races, you will see it all the time where mustangs will annihilate porches on the straight aways. Even the all mighty 2jzgte in the Supra struggles to compete with blown big block chevys in drag racing.


to address the question about the torque converter... You can probably still find the Yank 3000 stall torque converter on eBay. Just make sure it says it fits the 4t40e.

If you do the 2.6L stroker (which...no offense...but, I doubt, since you seem to have a problem with shelling out cash for injectors which will cost you all of but a little less than $200), you have to use a 2.3L block, so you might as well swap to the nvg-t550. It is the indestructible 5-speed transmission which I believe is found in most if not all H.O. quads.

Brian

Mfk-223 wrote:If you have the money and the will to do it, you can make a 2.6L Quad 4 that will make the power you want.

I'm still waiting to see that one.

Oh yeah, one more thing...

Get a transmission cooler if you stick with the auto trans. Heat is the automatics worst enemy. For the kind of horsepower you want, I would go with something similar to mine. If you go larger, you will have to do some custom modification like adding spacers, because mine barely fits.

Hold on a sec, Brian

This build is strictly about making the most without going amok.

I have no quams about shelling out 15 maby 20K to build the ULTIMATE engine...Patronizing me about injectors is really...I mean come on..

You think that because this posting is in the NEWBIE forum, that I am a NOOB?


I am NEW to the Quad-4 Engines..but this aint my first rodeo, my friend

and .. I understand the quaint mustang over the honda example..anyone who studies how hp and torque are related based on engines internal dynamics could figure that one out, with no help.

Watching GT2 racing... if you have kids, then your babysitter, wife, girlfriend must really love you, to let you chill on the weekends and if you don't, get some, kids really can make a person calm down a bit..

In the case of the Lancer.. I was simply impressed with the ENGINEERING of the engine.. I could care less about beating the damned thing
off the line. The fact that it had .4 of a litre less, 10 hp less, and 20lb/ft of torque less then the 2.4 Twin Cam, but produced similar HP/Weight ratio.. when the difference in vehicle weight was not even 90kgs

That impressed me.. and thats where I think the LD9 engine could be improved...ever so slightly

Going by the NUMBERS,( boring , heads, P&P and Cam selection) this engine can produce (without Turbo, or TC) 250-300hp.. and still be drivable, get decent fuel economy, and be reliable.. If the person cant find sutible hardware to achieve what their looking for, then they lower the bar
230-280hp seems more attainable in this case..Sure you could push the envelope to 600HP.. NOS, Stage 3 turbo...
hell, why not run it on NITRO METHANE.. with direct port NOS injection...which would be fun for a summer, or so, untill you holed out the block..
and shot the works..out the window, with no winnings..not to mention started a couple of fires allong the streets, and pissed a few cops off..

regardless, moving on...

Changing transmissions would place the engine build, (including the tranny swap, under the dash inprovements, STD ECU, electrical additions
shift linkages etc etc) slightly over the price of the car. If I wanted to do this to a standard.. Im pretty sure I could find one, easily..

why even suggest such a thing? Hacking a STD tanny into an automatic vehicle, is probably one of the worst modificatins imaginable..
Its practical on muscle-cars, chevy trucks, and the like.. but when it comes to transversely mounted engines.. that kind of stuff should
be banned, all it does is show poor planning..

Plus In my opinion, retaining the origional tansmission would keep the VIN current.... I don't care if theres 5million of the damned things.. Im not going to drive a hack job.. theres a right way to do everything.. including a LD9 Build Up.

its going to look stock.. thats what I want..

In fact, I know someone who has a 1997 Cavalier z-22, with the W41 engine and tranny out of an Olds Achieva SCX...
clean loomed install, looks like it belongs in there.. and people believe him.. as far as theyre concerned, its the only 1997 2.3L HO Cavalier in existance.

moves pretty good..for half an eight...

Brian, I am still more than willing to talk engines and components with you.... just don't treat me like an idiot..



...the beatings will continue until morale improves...

Brian...

That cooler is a good idea...

You see... something else I never concidered, now thinking about it, I wonder why I didnt...
Too many TH350's, and 700R4's... the little 4T40E looks dinky..thats probably why...

later..

Predator wrote:

Mfk-223 wrote:If you have the money and the will to do it, you can make a 2.6L Quad 4 that will make the power you want.

I'm still waiting to see that one.

It as been done already.



Gilles
2.3 Ho

Sorry if the post sounded aggressive, cause it wasn't meant to. I was going to post a disclaimer saying just that, and I regret not doing so. Most of the time, I don't even think of what forum I am posting in anyways. As a matter of fact, I thought this was in the performance forum. I figured you were too used to the true hot rods (v-8's) that you might not know how our little 4 bangers roll.

I am not interested in dating anymore and I haven't actually sat through any more than 20 minutes of any given GT1/ GT2/ P2 race. The ones I do catch are usually the British ones the broadcast during weekdays.

The reason I suggested the transmission swap is because there never were any H.O. quads with the auto trans, and I don't know how well your transmission bell housing will bolt up. Manuals also weigh about 100lbs less and there is currently no LSD available for the 4t40e that I am aware of. I heard that Team Green was developing one, but I haven't heard much.

As far as 300 whp from a quad... I believe you would be the first. I'm sure if you could find a way to replace the timing chain and gears with a belt and pulley, that could probably give you the extra power (That is on top of the 2.6L stroker). You could also probably weld spacers to the cam towers to allow for a higher lift cam with a much less radical profile than the w41. Those are about the only two things that I could think of that have not been addressed before. The problem with doing that though would be all of the additional modifications need to make those work.

Brian

Oh yeah... this is the cooler I use Click

You need two 1/2" male to 3/8' barb fittings and about 4 feet of 3/8" transmission lines. I cut the existing return line hose and used 3/8" to 3/8" barb fittings to allow an easy install.

Not to mention the engineering...



Ahh that transmission swap....

I stumbled in on an engine/tranny swap in a tired '87 thunderbird turbo about 2 years ago.....yeah....

nightmare...

I think theyre still working on it, or given up by now..


Well the idea is, to retain the LD9 block (punched out) thus solving any transmission problems..
Match the W41 Head, to the LD9 block.. (shaved head, line up the water galleries etc)

P&P 086 head, intake manifold runners..and top it off with a set of "Gilles Secret Cams"
GM Proformance billet crankshaft stroke increase from 94mm to 100mm (modified pistions a definate)
or... GM Proformance Forged Crank.. 94mm to 98mm

The 100mm crank might not need the head shaved, because I predict a fairly high compression ratio (9.7:1-mid 10, 11:1) while retaining the
stock cc in the cumbustion chamber.

A stock LD9 engine has a displacement of 2399cc...modified 102mm bore (94mm .30over), and a 100mm stroke it yields 3268cc which
turns into 3.2L with.. no cam on earth that would keep up.. plus agreeing with Brian.. the "old skool" chain timing .. it would be noisy, and wear
like crazy....

unless you were to gear the timing.. 'nother ball of wax.. or change it from 1 to 2 seperate chains..

This would probably require some thourough top end engineering, like was suggested.. make the caps and saddles taller..

Using the lesser stroke crank, ( remember punched out 94mm block .30 over = 102mm bore) only to 98mm, would still require the
cam mounting to be changed.. in order to get 269cc more air into the cylender.. using the hot grind duration... the valves ned to be open wider.. and
longer..

otherwize you would be starving the Cyl.. defeating the purpose of punching it out in the first place..

A supercharger would fill that nicely..

arg..

SO..

I figure.. Im going to scratch my head some more.. and go to bed..

I believe I have hardcore evidence that Gilles is on the right track with the 2.6L, because as I am learning, theres only so far you can go with
this design..

my brain hurts...

g-nite..

ps.. "DIRECTED TO NEW VIEWERS OF THIS THREAD".....I dont know if my calculations are correct, Im going by what I know.. if you find anything wrong with these figures.. instead of bashing me all to hell, can ya just tell me where I went wrong? Thanks..

The recessed area on the 086 where the valves are seated has a smaller volume than the ld9 head, which will already raise compression to about 11.4 on stock size pistons. If you check my registry, a 9:1 CR piston will lower that to about 10.5.

What do you mean by "punched out", are you referring to an overbore? I don't know if 0.300" overbore is even possible on the ld9. Of course you would have to sleeve the block for just about anything over 0.040" but I really don't know if 0.300" is even physically reasonable.

With the 100mm stroke in an ld9, you would either need 3mm shorter rods or have pistons made with the wrist pin located 3mm higher in the piston, or else you will hit the head. I already asked a little while back about the shorter rods (for a different purpose), and the problem with that is it will provide a larger force on the walls of the cylinder, eventually ovaling out the cylinder making your project rendered useless. Pushing the wrist pin 6mm up and increasing the lengths of the rods by 3mm would probably be the best choice.

As long as you could find a way to seal the timing chain housing or the oil passages in it, you could probably just have small billet aluminum pulleys with thick and deep enough grooves to ensure that the belt doesn't slip out of the timed position, mount a tensioner between them (bolted through the timing chain housing) and get the appropriate size diameter crank pulley to ensure the cams stay timed correctly. Again...possible... but still highly improbable.

I really don't mean to disway your excitement for building a monster N/A quad, but these are as of right now...pipe dreams. I really can't even imagine what a 3.3L 4 cylinder would sound like.

Also remember that all of this has to be custom...and I don't mean custom as in aftermarket...I mean custom as in "custom machined." Personally I don't think the effort and money required is worth the price of bragging rights, unless you plan to put the motor in something like a fiero later on (or anything RWD).


I say just stick with your original plan of making mid 200's whp and do the 2.6L conversion. It has already been done and those who have done it would probably be glad to provide help when you need it. I am through posting here, so if you have any questions, feel free to email me.

Best of luck with your build bro.

Brian

Getting a good cam for a beast like that would be possible. Mantapart sell cams that have .475" of list IIRC and 252° of duration. But it's a bad company to buy from.

0.300" over? The wall are now thick enough to take a bore that big. There would be no wall left.

The 2.4 crank is pretty much the biggest stroke you can get withoput having trouble. A company before you tried and failed.

The only safe way I see in this project would be to modify the block to have the crank sitting higher in the block and getting shorter rods to reduce the pull. Then you may be able to get more stroke out of it.

If you saw an aftermarket crank for the LD9 post a link cause I've never seen one. I know it exist for the 2.3 but not the 2.4.

The 086 head has a 48CC combustion chamber witch bring the compression to 11.4:1 like brian said.

Go with a 2.6L and you can get alot of power out of it. Karo's slowfire had 250whp in N/A form with only a 2.4.



Gilles
2.3 Ho

Mfk-223 wrote:

Predator wrote:

Mfk-223 wrote:If you have the money and the will to do it, you can make a 2.6L Quad 4 that will make the power you want.

I'm still waiting to see that one.

It as been done already.

Really? Know where I can find vids, pics?

TheRaceShop sell it.

Mantapart sell it.

Scott88 here as one.

Hotbug is building one.

I have the instruction to build one.

Speedracer is looking to build one.



Gilles
2.3 Ho

Very good..

Dont worry about my diswayment complications Brian.. I was really tired when I wrote that up... Realizing that I f-up the calculations between
metric and imperial conversions have a large part in those fun, but lofty goals..

I know.. I looked at it after and thought.... "no way, a 3.2L quad 4?......how could I be the only person to do this, theres like 1.5 million of these
engines around.. naww... )

and I was right...

Im gonna *re* crunch the numbers.. and perhaps I can figure something out...thats more practical..

3.2L HA.. I kill me..


...the beatings will continue until morale improves...