Now this is giving me a headache!

Build the 2.4L or keep working on the custom turbo kit. I have every piece for turbo kit minus IC piping and various fittings. I also have a 2.4L (bare).

I'm thinking if I can still get the piston/rod/pin combo for $60 or less monday or tuesday I will just go that route and save for a turbo kit next fall. (I would have to sell my current to pay for misc 2.4L prep)

What is the pt cruiser piston compression, 7.8:1?

I suppose I would be at 175hp and 175tq for hopefully under $1100. That would be good for hopefully low 15 second times which puts me around what most street cars run. Come turbo time I could probably boost 10 psi easy right away.

Well I'm doing one or the other this spring, what would you do first? I know this has been asked before but with all this new 2.4L info I might as well ask again

------------------------------------------------
98 ESi
95 GS

I too, am curious of this route. If the funds come together for the parts, I'll hunt down a 2.4 block. It's getting close to rebuild time on my engine and I already have the turbo kit and stuff. This would almost be the ultimate cheap route for lots of boost.

Shit is all apart. Typical...

175fwhp off 7.8:1???? Did you mean w/ boost and that compression or n/a and that compression?

Because if you are talking 7.8:1 on n/a car your going to be around 70-80 fwhp.

Brian

Removed balance shafts, udp, 2.0head and ecu, intake, exhaust...

4% loss on 190hp is roughly 8hp. Another 4% is roughly 7 more.

This is where I got my numbers, maybe I am waaay off.

------------------------------------------------
98 ESi
95 GS

Oh no I’m not saying your wrong or anything. I was just thinking those are good HP #'s for 7.8:1 compression. I have 8:6:1 and when I blew an IC pipe and was creating 0psi my car was SLOW! Way slower than stock. So, I was just thinking 7.8:1 would be even slower.

Shit if you can produce 175fwhp on 7.8:1 N/A sign me up! Just add boost.

But to answer your question I say build the motor first.

Brian

Also, either the GT cruiser internals or the 2.5L internals work? What is the difference. I've heard the 2.5L has had over 30psi put on them and they held up. How much are those?

I know alain has some of this on asog but the forum wasn't working for me earlier.

------------------------------------------------
98 ESi
95 GS

I plan on doing both eventually. There is a PT cruiser with an HRC kit pushing 10psi who laid down 250whp and 330lb ft of torque, thats pretty impressive. I do have just one concern with the 2.4 however, in order to make it fit we have to remove the balance shafts right? But what kind of oil pan are we supposed to use? We need one designed like ours to clear the crossmember but according to the neon boys are pan wont bolt up to the block.

Toney
'97 RS 5 Speed (totaled)
15.4606@88.42 Mph
96 Toyota Celica GT
88 Toyota Supra NA-T (w/ sports package)
Got Boost?? Hell yeah I-6 turbo powah baby!

Just use the 2.4L pan. Our's isn't deep enough I believe.

------------------------------------------------
98 ESi
95 GS

i can't decide on either the 2.2 or 2.4...so i'm just going to wait for the 3.0 by Gary.....mmmmmm.. that'll be a MONSTER!

Matt
a.k.a. bustrblue1
R.I.P '95 Eclipse GS
intake, exhaust, push button starter, painted interior, custom short shifter, and one shiny car!
http://www.cardomain.com/member_pages/view_page.pl?page_id=230275
^ shows what happened to my baby

If I had the money I would definately go the stroked 2.0 instead of 2.4L for sure.

------------------------------------------------
98 ESi
95 GS

The stock 2.4L oil pan isn't going to fit. From what I've been told it won't clear the center support. I heard you have to fabricate a new pan or modify the existing (or make it so the center support sits lower ... bad idea). Jeff, you know my vote is still for the turbo kit.

-"Easy Mac"
05 Mazda RX-8 (RR8 #88)
99 Eclipse RS 398whp & 372lb-ft

Come on Jeff, just boost that bic!!!

Brynden

Yeah, the 2.0L pan doesn’t fit. I remember someone here saying that it did. I’m doing the 2.4L swap right now, and I am at a stand still because I trying to decide how to make the 2.4L fit. According to the neon forum, we got two choices either notch the oil pan or make a custom cross member.

I think you should get both, if you engine is run ok, buy a turbo kit first. Then when you engine blows, go 2.4L. If your engine is dead, like mine , go with the 2.4L first.

------------------------------

>I plan on doing both eventually. There is a PT cruiser with
>an HRC kit pushing 10psi who laid down 250whp and 330lb ft
>of torque, thats pretty impressive. I do have just one
>concern with the 2.4 however, in order to make it fit we
>have to remove the balance shafts right? But what kind of
>oil pan are we supposed to use? We need one designed like
>ours to clear the crossmember but according to the neon boys
>are pan wont bolt up to the block.


250/330, have an eclipse pushing that and damn! up until recently i've never seen import cars really pushing a lot more torque then HP

turbo8u: "jiggle jiggle then vroom vroom pshhhh"
-Mike Pruett
2gnt member# 976
MOPAR Stage 2
SRTForums.com member #37 (Yeah, I signed up when it first came out, and ended up getting one, cool huh?)
"The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his."
- General George Patton (1885-1945)

I just got my GT Cruiser 2.4 turbo pistons and rods today
according to BStockum the compression is 8.2:1 on the new turbo engine

here's the pictures of my parts
http://www.asog.net/schoeby/alain/

they are not 2.5 internals like the "experts" were saying they would be but brand new parts and designs

Pistons is domed with teflon coating on the skirts
rods is much bigger than stock, still powdered metal cast and not forged
The oil squirting system that will squirt oil on the underside of the pistons to cool them is part of the rods and should work in any applcation as long as GT cruiser rod bearing is installed

Big drawback: Chrysler came up with a non-interference design which is good if you know anyone who blew a timming belt in the past BUT there are no valve pockets on the pistons, so if you want to deck and shave plus big cam you will need to have those pistons machined properly and since there's no pocket to start with it will cost more at the machine shop because they will have to figure everything out

On the other hand they should work with the 2.0 cam even with a light shaving of the head to bring compression back to 8.5:1
I will not be afraid to push up to 20 psi on those parts with stock rings too

Alain

one of the 2.4 true pionners

How much did you pay for those Alain?

Kevin
The old:


The new:

>How much did you pay for those Alain?


how about $37.03 for a piston/rod assembly ...

Alain

one of the 2.4 true pionners

This makes NO sense to me, from the dealership here (dodge), my pistons, rod ,pin assembly is almost $150 each! So Alain, if I were to purchase a set of those, have my engine bored to fit, they would work fine in our car?

Kevin
The old:


The new:

>This makes NO sense to me, from the dealership here (dodge),
>my pistons, rod ,pin assembly is almost $150 each! So Alain,
>if I were to purchase a set of those, have my engine bored
>to fit, they would work fine in our car?

they will never work on the 2.0L engine
they are made for the 2.4 chrysler engine
Th only you could make them work on the 2.0L would be with 100% custom made rods and the price would be just horrible in the 4 figures

Alain

one of the 2.4 true pionners

How do you feel about the 2.0 head on the 2.4 block w/ those new pistons. I read a nice article about how the pistons come up 0.300" shy of the top of the deck. Would that be in a traditional 2.4 block or the new GT Crusier block? It sounds close, but I think it will work. Also people can use a different HG to raise compression instead of headwork.

Shit is all apart. Typical...

>How do you feel about the 2.0 head on the 2.4 block w/ those
>new pistons. I read a nice article about how the pistons
>come up 0.300" shy of the top of the deck. Would that be in
>a traditional 2.4 block or the new GT Crusier block? It
>sounds close, but I think it will work. Also people can use
>a different HG to raise compression instead of headwork.

They should stay at the same height on both block
Will they work with a our head right now I don't know
our cams have more lift than the 2.4 cams
We should check with the neon crews what is the stock DOHC cam lift and if someone tried a straight 2.4 with a stock neon DOHC head on it
It they did and it worked without some machining on the stock piston than I'll be confident that I will not have to machine a small valve pocket on mine

Also one of my concern since yesterday night is the following
we will have to put those pistons in reverse than the GT Cruiser ones to keep the right profile for how our combustion chamber works
We could do it by installng them flipped at the crankshaft side
But look at the base where the oil entrance of the squirter is inside the rod rings, the shape of the entrance is related to the rotational side of the crankshaft by flipping the rod we will probably loose the added feature of the oil squirting, the oil will not be able to enter into the hole
To keep that feature we would have to split the piston from the rod, flip it and put it on again instead of just reversing the whole assembly

Alain

one of the 2.4 true pionners

jeff u said you were turboed and in mid 13s on anti-rice.....

correct me if I'm wrong but, by removing the piston, rotating it, and putting it back on, you are essentially just flipping the whole rod assembly on the crankshaft. Is there an offset angle on the wrist pin for sure on these rod/pistons? If not, there's a good chance that they CAN be flipped. Also I didn't see any notch or something to indicate "front" of piston. Did I miss it? Usually that would indicate to builders that there IS a notch for reason and to make sure that the piston is installed in that direction. I just noticed too, that if we do have seperate pistons from rods, why not spend another couple bucks and get 2.5 rods?

Shit is all apart. Typical...

Do the motor first Jeff. As more info of the 2.4L and the new Srt-4 come available I think you will have some different options as far as boosting go. (maybe a stock manifold and turbo that will bolt on??)

>correct me if I'm wrong but, by removing the piston,
>rotating it, and putting it back on, you are essentially
>just flipping the whole rod assembly on the crankshaft.


Look at the base of the turbo rod



you see the oil squirter hole and if you look carefully inside the ring you could see a little small slot that's the entrance of the oil
now by just flipping the whole rod/piston assembly the entrance of the oil which is like a 45 degres angle inside will endup in the wrong rotational side


> Also I didn't see any notch or something to
>indicate "front" of piston. Did I miss it?

as you know he dome is offset on one side of the piston surface and not centered possibly for a better exhaust output that's why I want to put them accordingly inside the "reversed head" 2.4 for our car
but I also want the oil squirting for maximum cooling

>I just noticed too, that if we do have seperate
>pistons from rods, why not spend another couple bucks and
>get 2.5 rods?

You could if you want more strenght, you would need to modify them or buy Bob Stockum rods
But going that route get the 2.5 pistons the cash to spend would endup the same
The Gt Cruiser rod/piston assy are already rated at 14 psi by Chrysler on the 2.4 turbo engine, giving the usual margin of safety that detroit likes to put that's why I can say that they widthstand 20 psi easily

Alain

one of the 2.4 true pionners

the 2.4L swap is supposed to be just as much if not more then stock GSTs it should have about 230 HP the way bill and I talked about it... but the internals are no way able to to handle boost from the 2.4 you WILL have to do the internals to boost... you can do an all motor and keep the same internals no problem

Boca Raton, Florida
95 Eclipse GS- sold
99 Eclipse GSX- 386awhp
98 Eclipse GS- sold
92 Prelude