I spoke to Gary Howell today. Mainly because I wanted to ask him how much his head kits are. RPMextreme sells reconditioned heads, but I dont like how they sell them with stock cams. We started talking about bottom end rebuilds, and I asked him about the 2.7L stroker for the Neon does he still make it. He said yes, but theyre thinking about redoing them because customers dont like the rpms it has. I think mainly he said that in his opinion, a stroker kit isnt worth the effort for the gain, and that youre limited to 6k redline. I mentioned to him what about using a big turbo, wont the extra displacement spool the trubo faster. He said yes, but at higher rpms, you would be overworking the turbo. Also, the stroker engine wont be as strong as 2.0L. Basically, I was interested in stroker engine for the added displacement, quicker spool time, higher boost levels, and added torque, but now I'm totally confused. At first I would think maybe he's biased because he mainly sells the 2.0 rebuilds and 2.2L, but he also can make the 2.7L, so now I'm not so sure. :o

Well, after all "no replacement for displacment" is pretty much true, so I cant see how a stroker motor would not be worth it. I think a 2.7L stroker is maybe too big for what most of our cars will be running turbo-wise etc. I think that you would be happier with either a 2.2 or 2.4L motor better.

When I ordered and recieved my 2.2L stroker, Gary was talking about the benefit of 10 more displacment.....10% more torque and 10% more hp. There is a benefit to a stroker motor, but the 2.7L may not be the best option right now, and from the sounds of it from Gary, can still be improved upon.

You're lumping together two stroker kits and assuming the same answer. The 2.7L stroker is based on the 2.4L, and is a brand new invention. So it could easily need some refinement. For putting a turbo on it? I wouldn't with the turbo you want the engine to be able to rev nice and high, the 2.7L is not going to be able to do this as well. The 2.0L or the 2.2L is going to rev pretty good. The 2.7L is going to be a more torque heavy engine, making more power down low not in the high rpms, if you have a turbo that want very high rpm to make it's pwer, the 2.7L is not for you. I would think of it as more of a NA engine, not really a turbo motor. Fo rthat I'd say stick with 2.0l, may 2.2L if you want some extra displacement or build up a 2.4L and boost that.

*note: some of this is assumption since I don't have an extreme amount of details on the 2.7L, being as new as it is, just some general assumptions based on my limited knowledge.



15.9 @ 86.7mph

Una Salus Victus.

Mods List:
http://highlander.dsmpower.com/sig.htm

Ok that clears things up a little better I think. But why VTengines and RPMextreme can go to 2.3/2.4L with the 4G63 and not the 420A? And not sure if its Widebodied or Motofool, but one of them has the 2.4L rebuild and is going turbo, so that was my idea to follow that method. I dont like the idea of low boosting a 420a; it doesnt seem worth it imo. So I only want to do it if I can go 15 - 20 psi on a 60 trim or 20G. Thanks

you can only bore the 420a so much till you get real close to the water jackets. It can be done , but I think only blackdog ? motors does it.

ok Gary says a good idea is turbo pistons and eagle extreme rods? He knocked Pauter rods and said theyre the same as OEM. I only asked cause on RPMextreme they add 100 bucks for it. So maybe now im leaning towards 2.2L. Dont think alot of mechanics around me will want to tackle the 2.4 swap anway.

in response to running 20psi on a 420a, you're incorrect in thinking you need this to run fast. The 420a is higher compression so each "pound" of boost you run gives you consequently more HP. At stage one levels (5psi) you're still not at the stock 4g63's 10-12, but as soon as you go stage 2 I"m pretty sure you'll smoke a stock 4g63 and give a modded one a run for its money....on a turbo that isn't working as hard and spools faster...

matt

^ yup.

The 4G63 has more clearance between the cylinders which is more room to bore, and depending bore to stroke ratio and the room available, etc... it's all about design on how much more you can bore and stroke it.

Hahn is running mid 11's on the 420A. and even a stage 1 should put up there running against a stock GS-T, of course assuming you can drive.



15.9 @ 86.7mph

Una Salus Victus.

Mods List:
http://highlander.dsmpower.com/sig.htm

the problem exists here in the 2.4's 101mm stroke thats a huge stroke....

when u bore out the motor to 2.55 or 2.6 u need to stroke it to get more displacement out of the motor...

now if u were to just bore the motor out 120 or 140 over u could retain the 101mm stroke and have a much happier reving motor. (something i plan to do for the next motor)

on the fact of turbo being bad for the 2.7litre ina way yes ina another way no,

if u were to slap ona huge turbo it would be fine but it could only build power to about 6krpms that would kinda suck..

if u wanted to add a small turbo that spooled quickly and topped out just slightly past or at the redline it would probably work real well ina autox or road race type of setup...

on the fact of pauter rods i totally disagree with gary their the pauter x beam are much stronger and create less windage then chrower rods...

so back to the begining unles u know what your doing stay away from the 2.6 and above stroker kits.. especially if u want to turbo it cause it might hold up and it might not, the long stroke puts alot of stress on the wrist pins and bearings...

in essence a 2.0 or 2.2 will be more durable then a 2.6 and above because of the way they are built and will be easier to get power out of by revving it witha turbo...

Bill

The only rods Gary sells are the eagles. Or you can get the Eagle Extreme for a 100 bucks more. And pistons - JE
I guess you and the others have pretty much answered most of my questions on the 2.7L setup.
1Bill's 2.4L setup sounds damn impressive though.
How far behind will a 2.2L be from that (providing the other mods would be the same)
I like Siueclipse (James) Howell/hrc 20G setup too. 300 whp and 440hp

Oh and on a side note, I caught a red neon on Sat at the shootout doing a 11.4 pass. I showed it to this kid and he says he knows him. Its a 2.4L all motor.

kidevo u know im doing a turbo 2.4 motor right? all fully coated and machined with forged internals and fully balanced...

8.5:1

t04e 60 is mostlylikly what ill run...

bill should have his motor done by the weekend if he would ever work on it =P

Bill

Lol! Sometimes I think you and him are the same person! :D

And Widebodied; doesnt he also have the 2.4L?

I dont think Im going to think about the 2.7L setup anymore now.
maybe 2.2L is best for me.

ok since the 2.7 makes more power in the low rpm range y dont u do away with the a/c and p/s and put a supercharger on it...u can make alot more power in the low rpm range and still not have to rev past 6k ...just tought i would put in my 2 cents...u can have a custom setup made...try to contact some perfomance shops and see what they say about...such as rip...


<-Eclipse Racer->
cai,p&p tb,msd coil pack and 8.5mm wires,plat+4 plugs,header,high flow cat,dual dtm styl muffler,final gear mod,and shift kit

a 2.7L with a supercharger? That sounds unique.

especially since we don't have any superchargers for our car. :+

Hey guys,

I just thought I'd give you my thoughts on the 420A stroker.
first of all I see nothing wrong with building a 2.4, on the other hand, I was thinking about doing strokers untill I started doing the math. to start with the 420A rods are a little short in the first place, and when you stroke it, the rod/stroke ratio gets really out of hand. I might entertain the thought with at least a 5.9" rod, but there is now way that will work. The main problem I see is way too much side load on the pistons, and an engine that wants to pull itself apart. sorry but I can't put VT's name on something like that.
but don't be afraid to send me a 2.4 :)

Nick (the mad scientist)

Oh yeah a note on the pauter rods.
we built a honda engine with those (stock rods) you can check out the build in apr. and may. issues of honda tuning magazine.
1.9 liter 10,500 rpm 37lbs of boost on a T-72, and 805 horsepower
oh yeah the (stock rods) didn't break.

omghi2a10secondcar ^^^ what a fawkin beast...

im with vtcomp pauter x beams aer the shiznit...

eagle extreme rods vs pauter ill take the pauters and run =)



the 2.4 is definatly a stronger built motor then a 2.0 or 2.2 will be if your gonna push the power to it....

>but don't be afraid to send me a 2.4 :)
>
>Nick (the mad scientist)

Hey Nick, how about a 2.4L swap kit... }(



15.9 @ 86.7mph

Smooth idle? We don't need no stinking smooth idle.

Mods List:
http://highlander.dsmpower.com/sig.htm

were already working on the swap kit everything takes time though...

Bill

I don't think we are going to get in to that, I have more than enough work in parts and engines.

>>>He knocked Pauter rods and said theyre the same as OEM<<<

I think he's just saying that because he sells Eagles. Pauter are definately better than Eagles they are also thicker (and like twice the price ;))

i would have to agree ^^