To stroke or not to stroke
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?...7302897&type=3
like that? lol.
That's the highest displacement / rod ratio 2.2 you can get. That one uses a 4g64 block though.
This is what I built myself and i have enough $ to build whatever I want:
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?...7302897&type=3
The crank in my engine is the same part # in the 2.3RPM. I weigh'ed mine and its 28.1lb after balancing.
I personally went with a 2.4 because torque and response is what really makes these cars fun, but at the same time its more dangerous and with a bigger turbo like a 6266 on up, they become dangerous and you limit yourself where you can and cant get into boost. so in that regard sometimes smaller displacement is better.
like that? lol.
That's the highest displacement / rod ratio 2.2 you can get. That one uses a 4g64 block though.
This is what I built myself and i have enough $ to build whatever I want:
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?...7302897&type=3
The crank in my engine is the same part # in the 2.3RPM. I weigh'ed mine and its 28.1lb after balancing.
I personally went with a 2.4 because torque and response is what really makes these cars fun, but at the same time its more dangerous and with a bigger turbo like a 6266 on up, they become dangerous and you limit yourself where you can and cant get into boost. so in that regard sometimes smaller displacement is better.
When I tuned a bunch of 2.0L's last year at the Buschur shootout 2 of them had 6466 setups.
Then I tuned a 2.4LR 6466 setup. The 2.4LR car felt 1000x faster due to all the torque it was producing. at around 33psi it made 770whp.
I dont know what you're trying to do, but if you build a high HP 2.3/2.4 you have to get 4.11 FD to actually drag it safely if making a lot of power and producing high traps.
If its a street car and you don't plan on dragging then 2.3/2.4. If you plan on dragging and don't want to change out the trans or do anything with the trans then 2.0L
2.0L is a lot safer to drive on the street with a large turbo ill tell you that much. the bigger displacement setups with larger turbos get very dangerous from all the torque produced.
For people that have good core 4g63 blocks, 2.3 i would personally say no questions asked.
2.4/2.4LR/2.2 whatever combo with 4g64 are decent options for people who destroyed their 4g63 block.
You can make: 2.0L 2.1L 2.2L 2.3L and 2.4L there are others but they are dumb and not worth mentioning.
Then I tuned a 2.4LR 6466 setup. The 2.4LR car felt 1000x faster due to all the torque it was producing. at around 33psi it made 770whp.
I dont know what you're trying to do, but if you build a high HP 2.3/2.4 you have to get 4.11 FD to actually drag it safely if making a lot of power and producing high traps.
If its a street car and you don't plan on dragging then 2.3/2.4. If you plan on dragging and don't want to change out the trans or do anything with the trans then 2.0L
2.0L is a lot safer to drive on the street with a large turbo ill tell you that much. the bigger displacement setups with larger turbos get very dangerous from all the torque produced.
For people that have good core 4g63 blocks, 2.3 i would personally say no questions asked.
2.4/2.4LR/2.2 whatever combo with 4g64 are decent options for people who destroyed their 4g63 block.
You can make: 2.0L 2.1L 2.2L 2.3L and 2.4L there are others but they are dumb and not worth mentioning.
Seriously?!?! 
770whp and 637wtq on a stock Tranny and TC... WoW. How many miles were on the car before you went the 2.3 route and how many now?? I knew the QM 8 leg was a bad girl but WHOA. That's a crap load of tq on a stock TC bro.
All of that said I guess I should be pretty confident in this Jacks Stage 2 TC that I've acquired to run with my 2.3L... the ACT HD 6 puck might have to go though.
770whp and 637wtq on a stock Tranny and TC... WoW. How many miles were on the car before you went the 2.3 route and how many now?? I knew the QM 8 leg was a bad girl but WHOA. That's a crap load of tq on a stock TC bro. All of that said I guess I should be pretty confident in this Jacks Stage 2 TC that I've acquired to run with my 2.3L... the ACT HD 6 puck might have to go though.
The Buschur 2.3rpm is a BAMF
Last edited by b16a95eg; Feb 13, 2014 at 05:04 PM.
Its a Manley Turbo Tuff Billet Super Light Weight crank. At one time it must of been exclusive, but it is a public part now.
I had mine balanced and we shaved some weight off of it in the process.
Its really responsive with this crank as you would imagine. even with heavy wiseco hd pistons & turbo tuff rods.
heres how it revs on my car http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...PDsByJcM#t=357
I'm in the same boat as you and have been going back and forth between a 2.0, 2.2, and a 2.3L. From what I have collected and researched my conclusions thus far are:
2.0L= Lag depending on turbo, Rev 9k+, but increased longevity (which is what I want)
2.2L= Much less turbo lag, Rev 9k+, but decrease in longevity of motor (which is a bummer)
2.3L= Much less turbo lag, Rev 8k max, but increased longevity (the rev range kills for highway pulls...)
2.4L= I am also looking into this from ER since they have a 4G63 based 2.4L. If you look up Akash and ER on YouTube you will see what a monster this car is.
Someone correct me if I am wrong but I have gotten this information from MANY owners themselves who have had these motors or have them currently. I autocross/road-race occasionally so that is also a factor in my book.
2.0L= Lag depending on turbo, Rev 9k+, but increased longevity (which is what I want)
2.2L= Much less turbo lag, Rev 9k+, but decrease in longevity of motor (which is a bummer)
2.3L= Much less turbo lag, Rev 8k max, but increased longevity (the rev range kills for highway pulls...)
2.4L= I am also looking into this from ER since they have a 4G63 based 2.4L. If you look up Akash and ER on YouTube you will see what a monster this car is.
Someone correct me if I am wrong but I have gotten this information from MANY owners themselves who have had these motors or have them currently. I autocross/road-race occasionally so that is also a factor in my book.
I do love my 2.2 6466 setup! Car is a monster!
Just a little update......finally got a chance to asses the damage. Pulled the oil pan off last night and it was full of metal shavings and pieces of my rod as expected. The oil pan has a hole in the rear, the block has a hole in the front. The piston is still sitting inside of cylinder #4. Looks like a dog chewed on it along with what's left of the rod lol. Will post some pics later when I get a chance
OP: i am in same boat as you. i chose to do a 2.3.
i bought a manley 100mm billet crank #190120B. ill beusing my 4g63 block, i think 4g64 is a hassle for an evo 9 @tscomp, is the 7lb difference from the Ultra Light weight going to keep me from revving to 9k with this?
i bought a manley 100mm billet crank #190120B. ill beusing my 4g63 block, i think 4g64 is a hassle for an evo 9 @tscomp, is the 7lb difference from the Ultra Light weight going to keep me from revving to 9k with this?
the LW crank will not be a stiff as the standard version. as such it is less likely to hold the pistons and rods in place at high rpm.
The Straight beam lightweight turbo tuff rods manley has seem to be just as strong as the regular design, yet the regular is heavier + has more material on it.
I don't know a lot about billet steel, but i am confident in the cranks ability to stay together.
The car has 113k on them right now, stock rear end too, I dragged it a bunch on my first built 2.0 when it made close to the same torque just later in the powerband. It's an open diff though which I'm sure saves it since it doesn't hook as well as it could. I've had to re-do the synchronizers in the trans a couple times though (Those brass ones if that's the correct name for them) miss a shift and it eats those quick, but with NLTS and a better front motor mount I don't miss much anymore. I'll never go back to a 2.0 unless I totally gut it and turn it into a strict drag car.
The Buschur 2.3rpm is a BAMF
The Buschur 2.3rpm is a BAMF
I have 6K miles on my standard 2.4l and I love it. It made 515whp at 23psi with stock intake manifold and throttle body on a 6262. I am doing a 4.11 to allow me to trap higher and get better gas mileage on the highway. The response is great and a powerband that rocks. I wanted to try a DBB FP Green and with the new housing with external wastegate I think it would be a badass. However since I have a T3 I an sure a smaller DBB turbo would probably work just as well like a 3076R or 5858 and easily swap into my setup. Bigger displacement rocks.