Why do 2.4L's have such random failures?
Why do 2.4L's have such random failures?
Talking to a few shops has lead me to believe that the 2.4L built blocks tend to fail even tho they have a better rod ratio and should rev better. Amazingly enough the failures seem to be rather random and different for each block. Power/revs doesn't seem to be make a difference.
Some suspect that the 64 was never designed for boost hence everything sucks. Anyone have personal experience with this and what parts tend to fail?
I've just not seen many people getting more than say 20k miles out of them for DD use, or even getting a year or two out of them.
Some suspect that the 64 was never designed for boost hence everything sucks. Anyone have personal experience with this and what parts tend to fail?
I've just not seen many people getting more than say 20k miles out of them for DD use, or even getting a year or two out of them.
Last edited by Grimgrak; Aug 27, 2012 at 08:21 PM.
the blocks are fine.they are very similar and plenty of guys have been making big boost on them for years.the deck height is 6mm higher,the bore is 1.5mm bigger and the oil squirters need to be custom made since the 4g64 didn't come with them.literally they are the same.
i think maybe some shops just started building them without much R+D and some have failed,i believe some failures can be attributed to not machining oil squirters on the block and still trying run huge boost.they cool the pistons,high hp cars need that.
don't let the guys that say the 4G64 wasn't designed for boost build your motor.the block is basically identical.without a micrometer you might not tell them apart,if the 4g64 had squirters.
fwiw,comparing the 2.3 stroked 4G63 to the 2.4 the 4G64 motor should be more durable and reliable than the 2.3 for all pratical purposes,if you machine squirters on it of course.
i think maybe some shops just started building them without much R+D and some have failed,i believe some failures can be attributed to not machining oil squirters on the block and still trying run huge boost.they cool the pistons,high hp cars need that.
don't let the guys that say the 4G64 wasn't designed for boost build your motor.the block is basically identical.without a micrometer you might not tell them apart,if the 4g64 had squirters.
fwiw,comparing the 2.3 stroked 4G63 to the 2.4 the 4G64 motor should be more durable and reliable than the 2.3 for all pratical purposes,if you machine squirters on it of course.
Last edited by masonh; Aug 27, 2012 at 08:49 PM.
Newbie
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
From: Fayetteville, N.C.
Oil squirters have nothing to do with it, The 2 major flaws with the 4G64 are.
1- Very little space between the bores which make it harder to promote headgasket sealing.
2- The crankshafts tend to bend and break under high HP mostly at the number 4 journal.
The 2.4 is a great setup for a street car making 600 or less. It is not the choice you want to go with for a big turbo high HP drag car.
The 2.4 is a perfect match with the DBB FP Black.
1- Very little space between the bores which make it harder to promote headgasket sealing.
2- The crankshafts tend to bend and break under high HP mostly at the number 4 journal.
The 2.4 is a great setup for a street car making 600 or less. It is not the choice you want to go with for a big turbo high HP drag car.
The 2.4 is a perfect match with the DBB FP Black.
1- Very little space between the bores which make it harder to promote headgasket sealing.
2- The crankshafts tend to bend and break under high HP mostly at the number 4 journal.
2- The crankshafts tend to bend and break under high HP mostly at the number 4 journal.
like i said before when using the 100mm crank,the 4G64 will be at least as durable and probably more so.
why would a crank bend/break in the 4G64 and not the 4G63?do you have proof or evidence?
Newbie
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
From: Fayetteville, N.C.
It has to do with crank journal overlap. The 2.4 cranks have none, resulting in higher stresses across the journal. Couple that to the "right" angle machining of the rod journals amplified by the distance from the harmonic damper and you have a broken #4 rod journal.
[IMG]
[/IMG]
[IMG]
[/IMG]
Trending Topics
Oil squirters have nothing to do with it, The 2 major flaws with the 4G64 are.
1- Very little space between the bores which make it harder to promote headgasket sealing.
2- The crankshafts tend to bend and break under high HP mostly at the number 4 journal.
The 2.4 is a great setup for a street car making 600 or less. It is not the choice you want to go with for a big turbo high HP drag car.
The 2.4 is a perfect match with the DBB FP Black.
1- Very little space between the bores which make it harder to promote headgasket sealing.
2- The crankshafts tend to bend and break under high HP mostly at the number 4 journal.
The 2.4 is a great setup for a street car making 600 or less. It is not the choice you want to go with for a big turbo high HP drag car.
The 2.4 is a perfect match with the DBB FP Black.
the "2.4 crank" has nothing to do with a 4G64 having too thin walls.
what you are saying is that the 100mm cranks are no good right?so all the 2.3 strokers out there putting up huge numbers should be breaking at any moment now?
what you are saying is that the 100mm cranks are no good right?so all the 2.3 strokers out there putting up huge numbers should be breaking at any moment now?
bader,don't start worrying about your 2.4 again.this guy has no clue what he is taking about.
first he said the blocks are no good,but now he's saying it's the 100mm cranks,and they have been tested and proven for years and years.he has stopped complaing about the blocks and moved to the cranks,but he still thinks it's the block he's talking about.
on top of that i don't use OEM cranks when trying to make 800+ whp.i use billet 100mm cranks and they won't break.i don't like the design of the stock EVO cranks in any size really.i don't like how the radius is undercut as much as it is.i know they seem to hold up well,but just saying.
by the way bader,tell your machinist of choice to add oil squirters,it's cheap insurance and if you are going for big numbers or high power you will need the extra cooling ability.i promise you they won't hurt your motor.
first he said the blocks are no good,but now he's saying it's the 100mm cranks,and they have been tested and proven for years and years.he has stopped complaing about the blocks and moved to the cranks,but he still thinks it's the block he's talking about.
on top of that i don't use OEM cranks when trying to make 800+ whp.i use billet 100mm cranks and they won't break.i don't like the design of the stock EVO cranks in any size really.i don't like how the radius is undercut as much as it is.i know they seem to hold up well,but just saying.
by the way bader,tell your machinist of choice to add oil squirters,it's cheap insurance and if you are going for big numbers or high power you will need the extra cooling ability.i promise you they won't hurt your motor.
but back on track
go with 6266 or 6466 and you will have best of both worlds.decent spool and gobs of tourque.
seriously though,don't worry about the 4G64,like i said before it is eerily similar to the 4G63.
seriously though,don't worry about the 4G64,like i said before it is eerily similar to the 4G63.
Newbie
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
From: Fayetteville, N.C.
bader,don't start worrying about your 2.4 again.this guy has no clue what he is taking about.
first he said the blocks are no good,but now he's saying it's the 100mm cranks,and they have been tested and proven for years and years.he has stopped complaing about the blocks and moved to the cranks,but he still thinks it's the block he's talking about.
on top of that i don't use OEM cranks when trying to make 800+ whp.i use billet 100mm cranks and they won't break.i don't like the design of the stock EVO cranks in any size really.i don't like how the radius is undercut as much as it is.i know they seem to hold up well,but just saying.
by the way bader,tell your machinist of choice to add oil squirters,it's cheap insurance and if you are going for big numbers or high power you will need the extra cooling ability.i promise you they won't hurt your motor.
first he said the blocks are no good,but now he's saying it's the 100mm cranks,and they have been tested and proven for years and years.he has stopped complaing about the blocks and moved to the cranks,but he still thinks it's the block he's talking about.
on top of that i don't use OEM cranks when trying to make 800+ whp.i use billet 100mm cranks and they won't break.i don't like the design of the stock EVO cranks in any size really.i don't like how the radius is undercut as much as it is.i know they seem to hold up well,but just saying.
by the way bader,tell your machinist of choice to add oil squirters,it's cheap insurance and if you are going for big numbers or high power you will need the extra cooling ability.i promise you they won't hurt your motor.
You can argue all you want but i know what i have seen and i doubt Lucas English would argue with it and ER builds more 2.4's than anyone here.