Alright, I guess I'll jsut go the fun rotue then and wait for Chevy to bring out the Camero (better not let me down). But I think I'm going to try for high acceleration without NOS usage which means I need a good supercharger.

It is hard to take a stock 2.0 SC and put it in the 2.4 or should I be looking at some aftermarket stuff?

(Hope my sig works)

 

its really not hard at all, Rebel is making a how-to for it this week

 

Nice I'll need to stay posted to check that out.

 

be easy power 2.0
major mods 2.4

 

well what kinda major mods would you need for the 2.4?

 

no, its easy. but going turbo would still be a better choice.

he dosent know anything about the 2.4.. dont listen to him.

the same drawbacks you'll find in the 2.0, are present in the 2.4

i.e. get some pistons, then boost the **** out of it, like i said earlier.

 

exactly what i was thinking

2.4 and 2.0 are very similar motors in design. they're not like the 2.2 which dropped a few options.

only thing is that 2.0 has a few more forged parts...

 

how ever much power you want

 

how much power do you want?

realistically you're gonna have to do internal work if you wanna go fast too

 

depends on how fast. 12 second passes wouldn't even require you to open the valve cover... on either motor.

now to go beyond that, weight reduction becomes your best friend.. and you still maintain alot of the stock reliability.

the only drawback of the 2.4 that i know of is that you do not get forged rods. (we all know our pistons suck *****)

you still get the forged crank, so if you got some pistons, i think you'd be ok w/ the stock rods up to like 350ish.

that being said, 350whp is plenty of power to bring you deep into the 12s and smoke corvettes(not the Z) do you really want your econo-box going faster than that? maybe, but then you should have just bought a different car all together, and you have powned yourself by getting a cobalt...

 

^^ see thats a good point and well made at that.

i would also like to remind everyone that when hahn did their turbo solstice, the tested the stock motor to 400whp

i beleive for us heat is the only issue we face under boost

 

If I'm not mistaken, the 2.0 still has many Hi-Po parts that the others don't. The crank and pistons are forged instead of cast. Stronger rods. The exhaust valves are sodium-filled to better handle high temps. There is an oil spray on the bottom of the pistons to cool them. And even the block is a special high-precision casting only done in Germany. Like I said in my previous post, the GM tech guys told me that the 1200HP drag cars start with the 2.0 engine.
Not to **** anyone off but the 2.0 is built from the bottom up as a high-performance engine, and the 2.2 and 2.4 are not. There is no doubt that you can make more HP with the stock 2.0 engine without making it grenade.

Second, when you boost the size (2.0 vs. 2.4) makes less difference. If you understand boost theory you know that when you hit 14.7 pounds boost (at sea level) you effectively double the displacement of an engine. IOW, at 14.7 pounds the 2.0 liter is burning as much fuel/air as a 4.0 liter engine. So when you do the math, you have to boost the 2.4 engine to 10 lbs. to get the same effective power (all else being equal) as what a stock 12 pound boost SC puts out. With the stage kits and aftermarket pulleys on the 2.0, there is no way the 2.4 could handle the kind of boost it would take to make them equal without replacing many internal parts. Guys are putting 16 lbs. and more into the 2.0 without failure, I can't imagine a 2.4 taking 20+ pounds of boost with stock internal parts.
This is not just my opinion, it is fact, go to BanksPower website to learn about boosting if you don't understand.

Randy
'05 Yellow SS/SC

 

fyi the 1000hp cobalt is a 2.2 block, check the gm buildbook

2.4 has features like under piston oil jets too... read up

 

^^^ i like this new guy. he just owned the **** out of onyx

AND, he's one of the few that knows the lsj is made by opel +rep

 

^^^word, on the displacemtnt theory, 2.4 see's less boost on same ss/sc pulley cuzs it takes more air n/a than the 2.0 does, also this also applies when say you've got a goal of 300whp,

the 2.0 might have to boost 20lbs while say the 2.4 maybe needs 14? im not sure the exact number right now im in a rush to go to work, this is because of the increased displacement and also the higher compression(not that great for boost) of the 2.4

 

very true, but, the blower still has to spin at the same speed, to produce the same cfm it does on the ss s/c... thus creating the same heat problem we've all been dealing with.

 

Yes I didn't know that the 2.4 has the oil spray. All my info is from 1-2 years ago when the LSJ was new and when I got to talk with the GM tech guys.

It all does boil down to what you want and how much it costs to get it. I was under the impression that it costs more for a good (reliable) super/turbo kit (and all that you need add with it) than what the S/C costs over the 2.4. It does look like a good turbo kit would give the 2.4 more power than a stock 2.0.

Personally I am glad that I got the 2.0. I am not interested in going for max power, like I said before, I just plan to stage 2 and do a CAI and header/exhaust. I'll get all the power I want with zero hassles. The engine will last forever and I'll be able to keep the full warranty. Don't forget the transaxle too, time will tell if the Saab will handle the power better long-term.

I am a scientist, the only things that matter to me are the facts. I am not bashing anyone. I know that there are plenty of guys with the 2.4 that are just as happy with theirs as I am with my car. Many think the 2.0 is worth the extra money and many do not. No one is right or wrong, it is all in what you want.

Randy
'05 Yellow SS/SC

 

im surprised no one has said it yet.

2.4 can make stage 2 power with a 4 grand aftermarket kit yup. its badass.

but wheres the warranty?

 

My friend has the 2.4 with the hahn turbo kit that he just installed last week, well anyways he dynoed it at 285 whp. He also has cams, nitros halo, and a few other things. So I would go for the 2.4 they have way more potential than the 2.0 with some money and work put into them.

 

I would stick with the 2.4 and build your own turbo setup. Spec out a turbo thats right for you. If you want a quick car @ 300whp, or a fast car @ 350whp. Then find a manifold, or have one made. You could probably buy the cast iron manifold alpine makes for the ecotec. Its a pretty nice log style manifold that will allow for a decently sized turbo to fit behind the engine. Then buy an intercooler and piping kit off ebay and start working on that. Buy hptuners and have someone local tune your car. Bam you got a reliable 300-350whp car. It really isnt that much work. You just have to know what your buying. You could probably build a full turbo setup for $2500 or less. If you need help picking stuff out, search around the forums or ask if you cant find your answers.

 

that really depends on how far you want to go. for medium power levels..
2.4>2.0

for higher power levels
2.4<2.0
because the 2.4 dosent come with forged rods, isn't designed for boost, and the head isnt nearly as strong

 

Im confused. According to this, at 14.7 pounds my 2.4 liter is burning as much fuel/air as a 4.8 liter engine, that seems better than 4.0. And also, isnt it better that it only takes 10 pounds of boost on the 2.4 to make the same power as 12 pounds of boost on the 2.0? Less boost = less strain on engine, right? So basically, according to what Ive been learning, it takes less to get more from a 2.4. And, using your math, if guys boost a 2.0 with 16 pounds, it would only take 13.3333333333333333333333 pounds for the 2.4 to have the same power. Your logic confuses me, but Im not bashing you in any way, I guess I just dont get how the 2.4 doesnt look better in your example

 

why are you guys comparing boost levels on a higher compression N/A motor.....to the boost on a lowered compression destroked motor?

its apples to oranges. and you look silly trying to argue which is better.

 

Maybe the very early ones, ie Ion Red Lines. Now they all come down the same line at the Tonawanda NY engine plant with the regular Ecotecs.

 

Im not arguing, I was just confused. Im not at all trying to start a fight, I just wanted to try to understand what he was saying