which car to build up more?

[c2xejk]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ondonti he used to charge 550 for "stage 1" no idea for his current design. I dont know how he could charge so little. I know he is trying to find someone to weld the exhaust ports so that part of his design isnt done yet till it can be made "for real" He can test stuff on the bench with clay but needs welding on the exhaust side for actual use.

I recently found a guy to do welding, but I need to get a set of heads over to him to discuss what areas he can get and pricing. Welding the exhaust side should bring some nice gains. The stock port exit is too big... Not to mention the funky port shape...

With what I want to do to the E-port the flow won't gain much but velocities will be much better and that is more important for the engine making good power.

[Benjy]

If you decide you want to sell the daytona as it sits hit me I would love to have it. Now in my opinon the daytona is way cooler but i'm baised towards anything mopar so i'm the wrong guy to ask maybe since it's a gm vs chrysler deal you could poll some diehard ford guys just an idea!

[TimTona]

sure ill sell the daytona as it sits for $4700 although that sounds high i already have close to $7,000 in aftermarket parts,paint, and audio/visual. but the funny thing is i posted this same question on my gm forum and they all said to build the dodge too lol so i guess its settled

[menace2society]

What did you pay for the paint job? Just curious

[The Pope]

I would buy a 2.4 DOHC stratus engine and a set or rods and pistons for an SRT 4. Use a cam adapter to run the distributer and use 92' wire harness from a 2.5 turbo. Or just get the whole donar 2.5 turbo and drop it in. Don't make it hard on yourself.

[DaytOmni]

+1 for the Pope. Not that boosted 3.0's aren't cool, Just easier/more reliable with a 2.4

[Ondonti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaytOmni +1 for the Pope. Not that boosted 3.0's aren't cool, Just easier/more reliable with a 2.4

I would disagree on that one.

My motor broke plugs before hurting itself and still ran on all cylinders. lol. 2.4L would have lifted the head even with arp's or broken something with much less abuse.

Pretty hard to argue that four 600cc cylinders are going to put up with more abuse then six 500cc cylinders, not to mention that smaller combustion chamber size will burn better.

A full 2.4L swap aint free. Its gonna cost more the the car bluebooks so lets not pretend this is part of a 1000 dollar budget build. We already have budget parameters in this thread if people actually read it.
If you want to argue that the 2.4 with a little extra spent will put out great numbers, so will a 600 dollar investment in 3.0 forged pistons. And again, put up with more abuse.

[The Pope]

the reason you can run more HP on a 2.4 stock block than even a V8 block is the mains. The V6 has 4 mains, 2 pistons between 2 mains. The 2.4 has 5 mains, 1 piston between 2 mains. Then comes construction. The 2.4 has siemese cylinders vs open cylinders in a unbraced V block.

It is OK to love the V6 but use a good reason. Next your going to tell me all 6 intake ports flow more than the 4 on the DOHC head? The V6 just has more CID than a 2.4 and will spool more turbo on the street. Still too much BS to do one right.

[mopar3.0]

i can get all my tig dlone for free if i knew were it was needed

[Ondonti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Pope the reason you can run more HP on a 2.4 stock block than even a V8 block is the mains. The V6 has 4 mains, 2 pistons between 2 mains. The 2.4 has 5 mains, 1 piston between 2 mains. Then comes construction. The 2.4 has siemese cylinders vs open cylinders in a unbraced V block. It is OK to love the V6 but use a good reason. Next your going to tell me all 6 intake ports flow more than the 4 on the DOHC head? The V6 just has more CID than a 2.4 and will spool more turbo on the street. Still too much BS to do one right.

Um, really? I guess anything but a 2.4L is too hard to figure out. Pretty difficult to install some forged pistons, just like you would use in a 2.4L, and use stock everything else and have it handle 700whp right? Just because you cant figure that out doesnt mean its "a lot of bs"


You point about mains would be valid if the block was strong enough to stand up to some abuse
oops.

a non srt 2.4 block is crap, and the 2.4L block, it just wont hold what the 6g72 will sweetum's

Whens the last time a 2.4L did 1800hp on a stock crank? lol. Oh, wait, with only 4 mains thats impossible right?
*blush* I better call the fire department for that one.

Just because you pick out the worst v8 block there is and sayit cant hold what a 2.4L block will hold, lets not pretend that a 6g72 will not hold DOUBLE the HP without filling ;)

Whens the last time Daily driver 2.4L's were handling 300hp/liter with .100" overbores.
Thats how much swagger the 6g72 block has.
The block is so strong that the heads flex before a 100+ overbore block even feels a tickle.
Should be two 7 second 6g7x's next year with stock headbolts ;)

The most powerful 2.4L was known for puking its guts all over the track while Stephane drove past on a reliable 2.2 16v that didnt need a 200+ shot of spray to keep up.

[Ondonti]

Pope, you are a joke if you think this 2.4L bs is gonna fly based on zero facts.
We all know what Crawford and Cox's cars did, lets not forget the broken motors, and the fact that not even the most powerful 2.4L in existence backs up your "argument"

You are acting like the 3.0 is some sort of 1940's flat head v8 motor.

Its got a block vastly superior to a 2.4L in strength.

Please show me a 2.4L running a 100 overbore and 300hp/liter. please.
Show me a stock bore 2.4L running 1800hp. (thats 600hp/liter) please.

Next you are going to tell me something like "25% more displacement = 50% more power" lol.

then the fact that you can just drop a 3.8L mitsu block into a 3.0 car, bolt it up to the trans, and have a motor that can handle more power on a daily basis then the baddest 2.4L ever built could handle for a few passes at the track...........lol.
I'm sorry. Were you attempting to make a point or just bragging about something that has never happened?

If you want to brag about a 4 cylinder, why dont you pick one that can win?

[The Pope]

OK I will entertain this. Lets see a URL of a 7 second FWD 3.0 12v powered car. Hell I would like to see a 8 second 12v 3.0. Knowing so much about that engine you should be able to come up with many right?

[Ondonti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Pope OK I will entertain this. Lets see a URL of a 7 second FWD 3.0 12v powered car. Hell I would like to see a 8 second 12v 3.0. Knowing so much about that engine you should be able to come up with many right?

Huh?

What does FWD have to do with this? We are talking about engines.
Changing the subject to save face? You realize that the motors share everything transmission wise right? lol.

Why dont you man up to your bs?

[DaytOmni]

I am still not convinced that a MODEST 3.0 turbo is more RELIABLE than a MODEST 2.4 turbo (At the same boost level). Lets face it, No one here is daily driving a 3.0 on 15lbs of boost. If you are, please write me with your set-up.


I DO NOT think that the 3.0 is a bad basis for a project. I am MERELY suggesting the IDEA that due to lack of extensive aftermarket that it is not the most RELIABLE bang for the buck & repairs will mean more bench time.

(To save face, I'm also looking into a boosted 3.0 project).

[The Pope]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ondonti Huh? What does FWD have to do with this? We are talking about engines. Changing the subject to save face? You realize that the motors share everything transmission wise right? lol. Why dont you man up to your bs?

There is nothing for me to prove to you about a 2.4. They have been in the 7s for years. The Buick 3.8 12v has been in the 7s since the mid 80s. So here you come on bad mouthing the 2.4 in favor of the 3.0 from Japan. Then you talk about how fast they are and how much power they put out. I say OK, lets see the 7 second 12v 3.0s. If it is so great someone must have past up the POS 2.4 Crawford has right? Back to my origanal post. As of now thinking a 3.0 12v is capable of big power is opinion. Talking about a big power 2.4 is commen knowledge. And you call my post BS

Parts and tuning for a 2.4 are dirt cheap and plentiful. You can also build one for a fraction of the cost of a 400 WHP 3.0. Are you going to see a lot of carnage with a 2.4 on the net? Sure, thousands of people are building the engine and most are completely clueless. Compared to a hand full of people building the 12v 3.0. The 3.0 is an intresting and fun little project. But not for someone looking to make some power for $1,000.