Driv200

iTrader: (1)

WOW! You guys are giving me some homework. Thanks for posting up your thoughts and experiences with your set ups.

So, start with a 4g64 block....and there might be some benefit in a 2.2, but less longevity?

Then do a shorter crank...94mm or 88mm... with long rods and billet crank. Sounds interesting.

What about the compression differences in a road race application? 9 or 10:1 and why?

EVO8LTW

iTrader: (41)

If I wanted to build a high end track Evo (or especially have one built for me), was more interested in the finished product than the journey, and didn’t have the engineering knowledge to figure it all out myself, I think I’d start by calling up the shops building the leading time attack cars and negotiate a fee for them to help me design/build my dream car. Some of the best insights may not be transparent or come for free. It only takes one weak link in a race car to spoil the finished product.

Ayoustin

iTrader: (2)

Don't know what you're looking to spend on an engine but also keep in mind that 4G64's don't come with oil squirters so that would have to be added which adds even more expense. For simplicity sake a 63 block makes things a lot easier. I don't think you'd be missing much going down to a 2.2L 4G63.

LetsGetThisDone

iTrader: (1)

4g63 block gets 94mm crank and 153mm rod (can also use a 150mm rod). Makes a 2.15L+ depeing on bore size.
4g64 block get 94mm crank and 159mm rod (could also use a 156mm rod). Makes a 2.23L+ depending on bore size.


I would stick with 9:1 compression. Easier to keep the head on it. And the higher compression is barely a 2-3% increase in power.

Driv200

iTrader: (1)

It's just time for me to fix the ridiculous blow bye I have been dealing with. If it's just a simple ring replacement, I am out of the woods. But if I have a cylinder down, then I am looking for the right shop and the right build. Budget is important, but 2nd to doing it right.

This thread is making progress for me. Still have silly questions for you technicians.

* Will do a 4g63 2.2 with 9:1 compression

* Is the 153mm rod a long rod? Is this better for more power?

* Is the 88mm crank more durable than 94mm? Does Billet hold up as well?

Dallas J

iTrader: (1)

The 153mm isnt a standard rod length. Its typically 150, 156, 162. Its steps of 6mm which also match the 6mm block height diff and the 6mm radius of 88 to 100mm crank. Doing the 94mm crank means either the piston or the rod has to do an odd 3mm offset and right now the only one off the shelf is a 3mm offset (higher) piston from Manley.

With the manley piston, you can use a standard 156mm rod for a 4G64 block or 150mm rod in a 4G63 block.

There are custom 159mm rods if you want to wait but I don't like how that moves to a 6mm offset piston which moves the hole up through the oil scraper ring. On my 2.2 I have the 94mm K1 billet crank, 156mm manley h-beams, 3mm offset 9:1 manley pistons.

kaj

iTrader: (60)

*taking notes.

clifhanger87

iTrader: (4)

longer rod = better rod length to stroke ratio, which makes for less sidewall slap in the pistons. which typically equates to better engine longevity/durability

billet cranks i think are the only ones that are significantly stronger than stock. seems like i've seen a lot of guys have problems with the "forged" cranks.

LetsGetThisDone

iTrader: (1)

ER has 153mm Carillo's. And they just did a set of custom Wiseco pistons for me for a 4g63 with 94mm crank and 150mm rods. Since all their pistons are custom for higher power builds, it was the same price as any of their other pistons. Which would be the same compression height for a 4g64 with 94mm crank and 156mm rods (what you just built).


4g63 94/153 or 4g64 94/159 use the same piston as a 4g63 100/150 (2.3L), so you're really only sourcing the rod.


I wouldn't use manley anything.

jheff

I dont have the experience that you guys have

but from my own digging around and learning, I plan on going 4g64 94/159 with a stroker style piston. I have not confirmed with CP Carillo but I believe that there are off the shelf pistons that would fit, if they are the 2.4 LR stroker style. I did some calculations to try to ballpark the CR, but I would need to CC a 4g64 port matched head to get more accurate numbers

The 64 does have a bore of 86.5 mm stock so the 2.3L pistons for the 4g63 would not work. And CP only sells 64 pistons with a size of 87 mm.

They do have specific pistons for a 94/156 4g63 with a 9.0 CR P#SC7243.
There are pistons that are off the shelf for a 100/156 4g64, which i think would work with a 94/162 combo. (the 162 rod with the 94 crank should have a better R/S to stock but i feel that the wrist pin is moved up too high).

I have mostly spent time looking at CP parts because thats what I intend on using. I believe there is an off the shelf solution but i dont know if it is a perfect 9.0-10.0 CR but somewhere in between.

I hope I have added some useful information.

LetsGetThisDone

iTrader: (1)

You buy wiseco 4g63 stroker pistons that are .060", .080" or .100" over size for the 4g63. .060" over size is 86.5mm bore. .080" would be 87, and so on.

Ayoustin

iTrader: (2)

Yup, .020" = .50mm

Anyone ever used radial gas ported pistons in a 4G?

Dallas J

iTrader: (1)

lol, theyre all pretty much made in the same factory in taiwan or china unless its a legit US manufacturer.

Good to know of the ER stock. When I was asking I didn't get the info I needed from them on what options so I just ordered what was available knowing my machinist lives and breathes this stuff and would object to anything dumb

MinusPrevious

iTrader: (3)

Regarding the Manley cranks. The RS Motors group have failed more than a few of those cranks. (fractured in the journals)

Dallas J

iTrader: (1)

Oh yeah, def dont run a manley cast crank. But really all the cast cranks are pretty garbage. Though I dont recall if they had a cast or billet crank (I want to say they broke the billet). I went with K1 billet crank, was told by many its solid. Im also only pushing 500hp and for AX, so less stress than high power TT/TA