I dont think its more vibration prone, at least not in any of the ones I have owned or tuned. The shorter rod cars are more vibey from what I have experienced. Fluidampr might help some issues, but if you have clutch drag thats not related to the motor.

 

Just want to confirm neither Buschur nor AWD will built a 2.4 anymore. I was deciding which way to go a month ago and they're not fans. Head gasket issues mostly. Went with a 2.3.

 

That and AWD is done with servicing cars period lol

 

Why?

I haven't had any issues with my head gasket but I don't drag race. I street drive my car mainly.

Also my original motor committed suicide so it was cheaper for me to go 2.4

If i had a good 2.0 I probably would've went 2.2/2,3 if for no other reason then I would've had a good core to start with.

Happy with my decision. Would do it over again if I had a chance to go back in time........actually I would've stopped at 420 on the BBK-Full and I would probably still have my blue car.

 

blew my head gasket. i am having it replaced with a cosworth and also had the head o-ringed. work is being done by vanquish in florida. im hoping that fixes any future issues with sealing. it was originally a MAPerformance motor but the previous owner had a lot of issues with it until it was rebuilt by evolution dynamics

 

So ultimately, what's the best motor for a drag racing scenario?

 

That's where I was a month ago, same turbo and WHP, and I still spun a rod bearing. Shop thinks cause was failing oil pump or otherwise oil related. So don't feel too bad, although losing a motor isn't nearly as bad as losing a car. You could still have had headaches with that setup down the road. I did.

 

From a pure drag racing standpoint, you can't really beat a 2.0. You get the powerband biased where you need it, which is up in the high rpm range. The 63 block also handles high boost abuse better. Also, this might seem trivial, but 2.0 cars are also easier to control on the launch. With less torque they don't blow away the tires quite as easily as a stroker does.

 

I suppose but during that time the car was relatively problem free. And i was a lot richer. LOL. Problems I have been having have not been due to power to be fair but I just cant shake that feeling that if I stopped Id be much happier.

 

Since when?

 

I dont agree. high rpm powerbands are what makes cars hard to launch and harder to shift clean.. launching at 4000rpm is worlds easier than launching at even 5000rpm. and waaaay easier on clutches. you cant have too much torque if you ask me. its far easier to shed some torque than trying to make it where its non existent.

ONLY time 2.0 makes better power is on very large turbos that need very high rpm to make power. at a range where long stroke cant stay together. other than that strokers kill 2.0 everywhere. most who go 2.3 from 2.0 NEVER go back. very hard to make up an extra 250cc somewhere.

 

I feel like there are machining issues or torque issues with the headgasket failures. Im running an OEM gasket with l19 studs. I retorqued them after the first heat cycle and have hit 45psi with no issues. My head and block are not o-ringed either. My boost is typically set to 36-39 depending on fuel and temperature etc... but has hit 45 multiple times.

 

I have a PTE 6466, so what would be my best option here?

 

Yeah, mine was problem free for 3+ years with that setup. And then it wasn't.

 

I would venture a guess that most shops that built motors are shooting for top power and drag racing, not solid street torque to pull out of corners.

My old talon is still alive with over 30k on the "build in my garage" 2.4l on an EvoIII 16g. Top boost it sees is 25-27psi, but mostly lives and races at 20-22psi. Its gone through one head gasket but other than that we haven't been able to break it.

If I were to build a motor for my Evo, I would go with a 2.2L for the sole sake of only raising my SM min weight by 60lbs. If it weren't for that pesky min weight Im trying to hit, the 2.4l was amazing to race with around pylons.