I recentlly just bought a 2.4 SS and was wondering if it's worth upgrading. My main question would be is it better then have gotten the 2.0 SS/SC and upgraded to make it faster or does anyone think that a 2.4 with the right mods will beat the 2.0 in the long run?

Also I've been looking at the differences between adding a supercharder or a turbo and trying to figure out where I'd have the most gains and right now I'm kinda thinking turbo. Kinda sucks cause I can't seem to really find any time strips for people that have tried one or the other rather people just statin that they think the turbo is faster and can probably keep up with the SRT4. (Really I wanna blow away all SRT4s since they look ugly but that's just my opinion).

 

I personally think a turbo set up is better in the long run. but i dont knock superchargers either. the instant boost is a nice thing..

and the fact if you supercharger breaks you can still drive lol. if you turbo breaks your screwed.

 

Unless you want to put some crazy **** on the 2.4, id go with the 2.0, easy to turn up the boost, you can even just do a supercharger swap on that if you'd like

 

buy the 2.4 like me and we'll use the 2.0's supercharger and make stage 2 power with under 8lb's boost

REBELAUTOWORX FTW

 

could always get the HAHN turbo kit.. put your car up to 300 hp...

 

ummmm.... thats not gonna happen. alot of srt's are running 11's...

i think turbo is your best bet. you will be able to take STOCK srt-4s with the hahn turbo. then you can make changes, and upgrades from there.

 

^^good point, but i kept up in 1st and 2nd gear with a heavily modded str4, until i miss shifted into third and he pulled on me like crazy

 

^^ uneducated post. since you already have the 2.4, there is no reason to sell it. they're good motors, and the possibilities are just now starting to open up. grab the turbo kit. then change your pistons and go with a larger turbo.

i dont think they're heavily modded until they go with a "big turbo" upgrade. (i think a 50 trim is the most popular)
all the mopar upgrades use the stock turbo.

i ran into a guy with a big turbo at englishtown, theres no way to hang with them in any gear using the M62

well, maybe with pistons, and a whole lot of nitrous... maybe

 

^^just a friendly reminder, Bigger IS Better

 

man how much power do those srt's have if they are hitting the 11's....?

 

around 400whp
and like 430+wtq.

no, they run 14.0 stock.

no, that guy had like 230whp or something like that in an auto 2.4 turbo

 

Srt4 are running 11? Is that stock? BTW who knows the hp on a stock SRT4? Also with the Han Turbo I looked at the results a little while ago and saw that he ran 13.7 or something, was that with 300hp? And if so, what kinda turbo/mods do I need to be looking at to get in the mid 12s?

 

srt4's do not run 11's stock

it is however, fairly cheap and easy to pull power out of their engines

 

idk what kind of power it would take to run mid 12s but i think i'm gonna be doing it with roughly 320whp on slicks.

 

Build up the 2.4L and turbo it. You'll be much happier.

 

yup. idk why the 2.4 guys think that they cant make 'em fast. i would have gotten the 2.4 if i could do it all over again.
having a 12 second auto cobalt would be the ****

 

If you alreafy have a 2.4, then why waste your money buying another car,get the turbo.

 

damn, you got alot of posts

i dont think he knew about the turbo kit. but, the 2.4 block has alot of potential, it's just getting a slow start, cause the ss s/c took priority for most vendors/aftermarket companies.

 

You asked: "My main question would be is it better then have gotten the 2.0 SS/SC and upgraded to make it faster or does anyone think that a 2.4 with the right mods will beat the 2.0 in the long run?"

Your whole question depends on how far you want to take your mods.
The stock 2.0 supercharged engine has many stronger Hi-Po parts that the others don't. It is factory built to reliably handle more power. Even the engine block is a special high-precision casting. I got to talk with the GM Goodwrench guys at a Lordstown meet last year and they told me the SS/SC engine block is specialty cast in Germany, where the whole engine is assembled. They also said that all the 1200HP drag cars were built with the 2.0 block. And obviously the 260HP turbo ECO is built on the 2.0.

So if you are shooting for outrageous power then the 2.0 might be a better start, but if you don't plan to exceed maybe 300 or so HP it might not make much difference.
I also think it may be cheaper in the long run to start with the 2.0 SS/SC if you don't need to go crazy. How much does a turbo/supercharger kit add to the price of the 2.4? And the added cost of an inter/after cooler, remap, etc? Then if you want serious power you'll have to start replacing engine internals that the 2.0 has stock.
For my car, I only plan to go stage 2, CAI, header and exhaust so for about $1500 bucks will have about 260 very reliable HP with the factory warranty and the engine should last for years.
Don't forget too, that the SC uses the Saab (stronger) transaxle. Again, I don't know how much power the regular tranny will handle but GM thinks the SC needs the better transaxle for reliability.

As far as turbo vs. super? This is the old argument. Ideally, a supercharger costs HP to drive that a turbo doesn't. I've heard that the 2.0 loses probably 20-30HP just turning the supercharger. That is one of the reasons why the turbo ECO is 260HP versus 205. But the supercharger seems to give more boost (more torque) at low RPM and that is what I love about my car. Every time I accelerate from a traffic light that low RPM torque pushes me back in the seat.
So I wouldn't trade my super for a turbo, but if you want max high-rpm HP then the turbo is a better bet.

I don't claim to be an expert, this is all just my opinion. Good luck whatever you do.

Randy
'05 yellow SS/SC

 

2.0L a better start?

More displacement, VVT > 2L LSJ

Just imagine if the LSJ had 2.4L's and VVT. It would have made 260-280 horsepower

 

LSJ head > 2.4 VVT head...

look at the 2.4 that was s/c'd with the eaton, what did he make? 225-235 i think. @ only 7.5pounds

you're post should've been like this^^

 

ss/sc goes for easily $4k more than the ss/na
sc the 2.4 and get stg2 power for $3k at the most
adding stg2 on ss/sc is about $600?
so its up to how much you wanna spend for how much power,
most ppl are getting rid of their sc on the ss/sc so now they're gonna spend what another $5k? to upgrade the sc to a bigger one or go with a turbo kit.

if you figure out the costs of doing this stuff, the 2.4 is cheaper by far to accomplish the safe power goals, mainly due to the different in motor/displacment/vvt, all that ****.

thats just my 2.cents

 

Hey dont want to see this turn into a bashing thread.Each car has its advantages and disadvantages.

 

but they all pull bitches

 

no no, im not bashing at all, sorry everyone if it came of like that
i was just trying to show the costs associated with it.
that way the guy who made this thread sorta gets a general idea of what is involved as much as money vs power and how far he/she wants to go with it