To Stroke or Not to Stroke
156mm rod with 94mm crank is how we do our motors. The main thing will be what rods you want. Steel rods are the only way you can do the 2.2 in a 4g63 unless you are running well over 10:1 compression. The 4G64 gives us enough compression height back that you can run aluminum. Your idea is not outrageous and works well either way.
.82 A/r seems to work really well on mine, and if I was going to do anything i would go to the 1.06 single from here (assuming you are not doing a twin scroll). The LR2.4 is less vibey than the 2.3s tend to be but they are still not what I would class as smooth. The 2.2 seems to be the limit on that, mine was very smooth.
By the time you do a LR2.4 you are still about the same money as the GSC 2.2 which is a very nice kit. Speed costs money, how fast do you wanna go?
aaron
.82 A/r seems to work really well on mine, and if I was going to do anything i would go to the 1.06 single from here (assuming you are not doing a twin scroll). The LR2.4 is less vibey than the 2.3s tend to be but they are still not what I would class as smooth. The 2.2 seems to be the limit on that, mine was very smooth.
By the time you do a LR2.4 you are still about the same money as the GSC 2.2 which is a very nice kit. Speed costs money, how fast do you wanna go?
aaron
As I'm trying to decide on my rebuild, this has been great info/reading. I'm kinda stuck on that whole 1.7 rod ratio thing and was looking at the GSC 2.2, but that thing is baller status. I noticed the LR2.4 has a ratio of 1.56 and was wondering about this combination...
Does the 2.4LR or any LR stroker motor have less NVH than a "normal" 2.3 stroker?
I'm no engine builder by any means, so please comment on this suggestion...
156mm rods with a 94mm crank...not sure which block would be used... That would give the ratio of 1.65. Is that a doable combo, impossible, or just stupid?
Also another question...would a 6262,6265, or a 3586 with the largest A/R be too much for a 2.4LR, ie, running out of revs before the turbo is maxed?
This will all be on E85 by the by.
Does the 2.4LR or any LR stroker motor have less NVH than a "normal" 2.3 stroker?
I'm no engine builder by any means, so please comment on this suggestion...
156mm rods with a 94mm crank...not sure which block would be used... That would give the ratio of 1.65. Is that a doable combo, impossible, or just stupid?
Also another question...would a 6262,6265, or a 3586 with the largest A/R be too much for a 2.4LR, ie, running out of revs before the turbo is maxed?
This will all be on E85 by the by.
156mm rod with 94mm crank is how we do our motors. The main thing will be what rods you want. Steel rods are the only way you can do the 2.2 in a 4g63 unless you are running well over 10:1 compression. The 4G64 gives us enough compression height back that you can run aluminum. Your idea is not outrageous and works well either way.
.82 A/r seems to work really well on mine, and if I was going to do anything i would go to the 1.06 single from here (assuming you are not doing a twin scroll). The LR2.4 is less vibey than the 2.3s tend to be but they are still not what I would class as smooth. The 2.2 seems to be the limit on that, mine was very smooth.
By the time you do a LR2.4 you are still about the same money as the GSC 2.2 which is a very nice kit. Speed costs money, how fast do you wanna go?
aaron
.82 A/r seems to work really well on mine, and if I was going to do anything i would go to the 1.06 single from here (assuming you are not doing a twin scroll). The LR2.4 is less vibey than the 2.3s tend to be but they are still not what I would class as smooth. The 2.2 seems to be the limit on that, mine was very smooth.
By the time you do a LR2.4 you are still about the same money as the GSC 2.2 which is a very nice kit. Speed costs money, how fast do you wanna go?
aaron
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
fastspoolingsx
For Sale/WTB - Engine / Drivetrain / Power
0
Jul 12, 2017 08:34 PM
