Notices
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain Everything from engine management to the best clutch and flywheel.

2.0L 4G63 or 2.4L 4g64

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 4, 2010 | 10:24 AM
  #16  
shuttlegoose's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (17)
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
From: philadelphia
What about the 2.4 long rod?
Reply
Old Sep 4, 2010 | 10:33 AM
  #17  
Broham's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 820
Likes: 2
From: va
map stage 2 2.4 is priced perfectly and has proven 1053whp
Reply
Old Sep 4, 2010 | 10:48 AM
  #18  
RockmanX's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (78)
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 6,623
Likes: 4
From: Louisiana
Originally Posted by shuttlegoose
What about the 2.4 long rod?
so far from what i know and see the lr version can only rev higher. So far you you are not going to make more power then a std2.4 im probaly set my revs to either 7800 or 8000. Remeber there is a nice price difference in the two 3200 to 5800 for those revs broham you can build a 2.4 cheaper
Reply
Old Sep 4, 2010 | 11:28 AM
  #19  
JohnBradley's Avatar
Evolved Member
Shutterbug
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (30)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 11,406
Likes: 78
From: Northwest
I think the LR2.4 is also less vibey actually. If you have standard mounts and not something thats really stiff in the car (I prefer stock actually) there is definitely something the LR improves geometry wise that decreases vibration.

Our standard 2.4 to LR2.4 is actually 4600 to 5400. Difference is of course the rods, custom pistons vs off the shelf, and block clearancing. It is complete also, just add cylinder head.
Reply
Old Sep 4, 2010 | 02:42 PM
  #20  
3gEclipseTurbo's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,589
Likes: 0
From: ma
If the rx-7 is reving to 9+ every gear execpt the gear it traps in which is still in the 8-8.5k range iirc. And it has been doing this for over a year besides the head gasket problems but thats because its making over 1000whp and the head is a evo6. Whats the point of the LR2.4l? I see aaron said it doesnt vibrate as much but performance wise?
Reply
Old Sep 4, 2010 | 02:59 PM
  #21  
batty200's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,203
Likes: 5
A long rod 2.4 has a better rod/stroke ratio and lighter pistons which helps with rpm. I would do a LR 2.4L. It is a badass motor that will do whatever you want.
Reply
Old Sep 4, 2010 | 03:49 PM
  #22  
RockmanX's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (78)
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 6,623
Likes: 4
From: Louisiana
Originally Posted by batty200
A long rod 2.4 has a better rod/stroke ratio and lighter pistons which helps with rpm. I would do a LR 2.4L. It is a badass motor that will do whatever you want.
bingo but i believe std built 2.4 will get the job done. I suppose if you have the
extra cash unless you are looking for a altenative to ams 2.3RR
Reply
Old Sep 4, 2010 | 04:41 PM
  #23  
batty200's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,203
Likes: 5
Originally Posted by RockmanX
bingo but i believe std built 2.4 will get the job done. I suppose if you have the
extra cash unless you are looking for a altenative to ams 2.3RR
An ER LR 2.4 is about 2K less than an AMS 2.3RR. It also uses standard parts that are less expensive to replace if something bad would happen. Standard crank is one thing. The pistons are already made just vary dish on a std stroker piston and your there. rods are usually not damaged during most failures of built motors and they can be resized so thats a good investment. Also the ER shorty is complete, just bolt on whatever head and rock. I also dont like that AMS uses the turned down balance shafts.
Reply
Old Sep 5, 2010 | 09:43 AM
  #24  
RockmanX's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (78)
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 6,623
Likes: 4
From: Louisiana
if i ever wanted to upgrade then I would do a LR2.4 but right now i just dont see the point in it right now unless you do one from jump street and the 2.4 is just now getting popular getting a head of steam
Reply
Old Sep 5, 2010 | 10:06 AM
  #25  
OMEGA PHX's Avatar
Newbie
iTrader: (11)
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
From: PR
The std 2.4 FTW!!! That car is going to be fun.
Reply
Old Sep 5, 2010 | 10:31 AM
  #26  
RockmanX's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (78)
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 6,623
Likes: 4
From: Louisiana
Originally Posted by OMEGA PHX
The std 2.4 FTW!!! That car is going to be fun.
Reply
Old Sep 5, 2010 | 05:35 PM
  #27  
BLKCarbonEVO's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,463
Likes: 4
From: VaBeach, VA
LR2.4 FTW. You will be fine with a std 2.4 since you will not be pushing the limits or doing anything crazy. I love my LR2.4 and so far I'll never look back to a 2.0

Mikey
Reply
Old Sep 5, 2010 | 05:55 PM
  #28  
RockmanX's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (78)
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 6,623
Likes: 4
From: Louisiana
displacement yes please
Reply
Old Sep 5, 2010 | 07:48 PM
  #29  
JohnBradley's Avatar
Evolved Member
Shutterbug
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (30)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 11,406
Likes: 78
From: Northwest
I think its funny about the 2.4. This reminds me of late 90s early 2000s when the DSMers started with 2.4s. These have been popular for a long time, just not as popular with the Evo community.

LR 2.4 does a have a piston that is 40g lighter and can be carved down further if wanted. A standard rod 2.4 piston is kind of portly, especially at 9k.

Aaron
Reply
Old Sep 5, 2010 | 08:28 PM
  #30  
tlohman's Avatar
Newbie
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Lots of good info. I've been having the same debate lately.
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:47 AM.