2.2L Vs. 2.4L
01-23-2008, 02:31 AM
#1
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: 06-11-07
Location: Az
Posts: 5,417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2.2L Vs. 2.4L
I've always wondered. What are the big differences between the 2.2L and the 2.4L besides displacement. Are the 2.4L internals stronger? Details please 
01-23-2008, 02:37 AM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: 08-28-07
Location: Middletown, NY
Posts: 3,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
01-23-2008, 04:49 AM
#3
the L61 uses a 10.0:1 compression ratio and is obviously .2 liters smaller. The LE5 has more displacement, uses a 10.4:1 compression ratio, and has a VVT head. Thats really it. I think the 2.4 uses either stronger pistons or stronger rods, but not both. I can't remember which tho.
01-23-2008, 05:07 AM
#4
Senior Member
the L61 uses a 10.0:1 compression ratio and is obviously .2 liters smaller. The LE5 has more displacement, uses a 10.4:1 compression ratio, and has a VVT head. Thats really it. I think the 2.4 uses either stronger pistons or stronger rods, but not both. I can't remember which tho.
01-23-2008, 05:25 AM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: 03-03-06
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 4,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The nitty gritty of it is not only the VVT and displacement but the longer stroke adding additional crank leverage for peak torque at a faster engine speed.
Along with VVT, the 2.4L also has slightly more aggressive cams, higher compression and a more aggressive timing map.
Engine management is vastly different.
GM is now listing somewhat conflicting information about the LE5 connecting rod limitations. LE5 internals were believed to be stronger as evident by GM's powertrain data on their website (forged connecting rods more specifically). However recently published GM Performance data indicates 2.4L connecting rod failure point as the same as the 2.2L which may indicate a misprint on the powertrain website.
Along with VVT, the 2.4L also has slightly more aggressive cams, higher compression and a more aggressive timing map.
Engine management is vastly different.
GM is now listing somewhat conflicting information about the LE5 connecting rod limitations. LE5 internals were believed to be stronger as evident by GM's powertrain data on their website (forged connecting rods more specifically). However recently published GM Performance data indicates 2.4L connecting rod failure point as the same as the 2.2L which may indicate a misprint on the powertrain website.
01-23-2008, 05:29 AM
#8
Original Hayden Fanatic
Platinum Member
01-23-2008, 05:35 AM
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: 03-03-06
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 4,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
01-23-2008, 05:45 AM
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: 12-19-05
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 9,704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Witt, you and your group (and they know who they are too) are just way too modest.
You guys have helped many of us far more than we would ever be able to repay! Well cept Area I can do what I can for him, and I know he's just one of the members of your brain trust!
I for one thank you!
You guys have helped many of us far more than we would ever be able to repay! Well cept Area I can do what I can for him, and I know he's just one of the members of your brain trust!
I for one thank you!
01-23-2008, 06:18 PM
#13
Intake and exhaust manifolds are different - bigger/better flow capability on 2.4.
TB on 2.2 is 60MM
TB on 2.4 is 68MM
Freer flowing exhaust system on 2.4 -- DP/cat-back
2.2 Auto Tranny has 3.63 final drive
2.4 Auto Tranny has 3.91 final drive
TB on 2.2 is 60MM
TB on 2.4 is 68MM
Freer flowing exhaust system on 2.4 -- DP/cat-back
2.2 Auto Tranny has 3.63 final drive
2.4 Auto Tranny has 3.91 final drive
01-25-2008, 04:49 AM
#18
The nitty gritty of it is not only the VVT and displacement but the longer stroke adding additional crank leverage for peak torque at a faster engine speed.
Along with VVT, the 2.4L also has slightly more aggressive cams, higher compression and a more aggressive timing map.
Engine management is vastly different.
Along with VVT, the 2.4L also has slightly more aggressive cams, higher compression and a more aggressive timing map.
Engine management is vastly different.
01-25-2008, 09:50 AM
#19
Junior Member
Join Date: 10-17-07
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
01-25-2008, 11:32 AM
#20
Click the link...http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en...tec/08_LE5.xls
I'm fighting the flu you'll have to forgive me a mistake or 2, its the meds.
01-25-2008, 12:11 PM
#21
Junior Member
Join Date: 10-17-07
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh wow thanks you! I went back and re-read the GM spec sheet for the 2.4 and your right. The crank is cast nodular iron, its the rods that are forged steel.
Click the link...http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en...tec/08_LE5.xls
I'm fighting the flu you'll have to forgive me a mistake or 2, its the meds.
Click the link...http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en...tec/08_LE5.xls
I'm fighting the flu you'll have to forgive me a mistake or 2, its the meds.
01-25-2008, 12:20 PM
#22
01-25-2008, 12:21 PM
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: 06-03-07
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 24,280
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
thats why i like u jack, first time i was on this forum i saw you where wrong on something and you maned up to it insted of calling the dude a jackass 
hope you get better from your flu!
hope you get better from your flu!
01-25-2008, 12:27 PM
#24
And seriously anyone, AND I DO MEAN ANYONE who can't admit to being wrong from time to time is a complete ass! The only person I know of in history to never be wrong died almost 2000 years ago, since then noone else has walked on water. Well not with out some stupid floaty shoes!
01-25-2008, 12:28 PM
#25
Junior Member
Join Date: 10-17-07
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Haha... no I was just clarifying before anyone else jumped in and took it the wrong way. Internet = overly sensitive.