That original post was supposed to say "All of the fastest EVO's and DSM's are still using built 2.0's."

 

no...

4g64 is the "model" of the block that Mitsubishi produces. The main difference between the 4g64 block and the 4g63 block is that the 4g64 is taller. If you put a 4g64 crank into a 4g63 block you get a 2.3 litter stroker. Now if you take the 4g63 crank and stick that into a 4g64 block you get a 2.1 destroker.

 

Do you people understand how these motors work?

A 4G64 has an 86.5mm bore and 100mm stroke

A 4G63 has an 85.0mm bore and 88mm stroke

The bore is dictated by the piston/block selection.

The stroke is dictated by the crank. The cranks are interchangeable between the two motors.

Stock 4G64:

An 86.5mm piston has a cross sectional area of ~5877mm^2, times 4 pistons is ~23508mm^2, times 100mm stroke is ~2350800mm^3 which is ~2.35L or 2.4L, voila!!!

Stock 4G63:

An 85mm piston has a cross sectional area of ~5675mm^2, times 4 pistons is ~22700mm^2, times an 88mm stroke is 1997600mm^3 which is 1.99L or 2.0L, magic, right!?

To STROKE a 4g63 you put a longer stroke crank in it. A 100mm crank from a 4G64.... do the math again.

4G63 STROKER:

An 85mm piston has a cross sectional area of ~5675mm^2, times 4 pistons is ~22700mm^2, times a new longer 100mm stroke is 2270000mm^3 which is 2.27L or 2.3L, amazing!!!

You CANNOT DEstroke a 4G63 because there is no shorter stroke crank readily available!

You CAN DEstroke a 4G64 with a 4G63 crank! Do the math again....

4G64 DEstroker:

An 86.5mm piston has a cross sectional area of ~5877mm^2, times 4 pistons is ~23508mm^2, times a SHORTER 88mm stroke is ~2068704mm^3 which is ~2.06L or 2.1L, incredible!!!

Why do this?? The destroker is essentially a 4G63 with a taller deck height (read: londer rods decrease rod angle creating less cylinder side loads = higher RPM tolerance) and punched out 1.5mm for a bit more displacement.

Geometry is fun!!!

- Steve

 

^^^^^^

much smarter than me

 

Is it possible to add oil squirters to the 4g64 block, that is all that keeps me from doing this.

 

In agreement with that smarter than me too.

 

Yes, it is...

 

Haha, yeah thanks for your help, that's really exactly what i was looking for minus the sarcasm.

It would have been a WAY better post if you left all the degrading comments out...

For 1, well simply that isn't what you said, and if you had we wouldn't have given you a hard time.

For 2, WHO CARES, why would you post something like that in a guys excited 2.1L build up? Just to be rude?

For 3, he never said he wants the fastest Evo or DSM, he just wants his dam motor to rev high.

 

You're right, my appologies, but watching people go back and forth over something that seems very simple to me, gets frustrating/annoying.

Hey, maybe I'll get banned for it?

 

Sure hope not, knowledge and willingness to share it like you often do is hard to come by around here.

 

No hard feelings, I may come across like a d1ck on here, but most of the members who actually know me would tell you otherwise.

 

What's interesting about the 2.1L vs. a 2.0L aside from the nominal 5% increase in displacement is the fact that the 2.1L uses the same 88 mm stroke with a longer rod, which would theoretically improve the potential for high rpm efficiency. This option is perhaps best suited for those who intend to wring lots of rpm out of it for the purposes of being able to stay in 4th gear for dragstrip racing with a big turbo and enough power to run 125+ mph traps. This setup would make good use of head porting, long duration cams, and an aftermarket intake manifold with shorter runners, all of which will be most helpful toward maintaining the flattest possible torque curve in the upper rpm ranges, which directly increases high rpm hp.

Rod/Stroke ratio comparison:

4G64 w/ 4G63 crank - 2.1L - 1.77
4G63 - 2.0L - 1.71
4G63 w/ 4G64 crank - 2.3L - 1.5

In contrast, the small rod/stroke ratio of the popular 2.3L stroker will give the greatest mechanical efficiency at low and midrange rpm, which makes it best suited for street action and road racing, where transient response and a wide powerband are most useful.

 

Curt Brown is running one of our 2.1 destroked motors we built for him.. you will see.. we have ran one on our AWD dsm and it took 10k like a champ!

anyone email me if you are interested mas@slowboyracing.com

mark
SBR

 

We also di the head.. its even running std size valves.. 10.59 on a stock turbo isnt telling what a 35r plus is going to make? next to curt, they arent too many 35r cars running that time, let alone on a stock turbo!
Mark
SBR

 

you know what would go great with my motor? a free SBR turbo kit j/k I love the kit you guys are offering. When I am done with the head I will definatly give you a call.