shuttlegoose

iTrader: (17)

What about the 2.4 long rod?

Broham

iTrader: (10)

map stage 2 2.4 is priced perfectly and has proven 1053whp

RockmanX

iTrader: (78)

so far from what i know and see the lr version can only rev higher. So far you you are not going to make more power then a std2.4 im probaly set my revs to either 7800 or 8000. Remeber there is a nice price difference in the two 3200 to 5800 for those revs broham you can build a 2.4 cheaper

JohnBradley

iTrader: (30)

I think the LR2.4 is also less vibey actually. If you have standard mounts and not something thats really stiff in the car (I prefer stock actually) there is definitely something the LR improves geometry wise that decreases vibration.

Our standard 2.4 to LR2.4 is actually 4600 to 5400. Difference is of course the rods, custom pistons vs off the shelf, and block clearancing. It is complete also, just add cylinder head.

3gEclipseTurbo

iTrader: (12)

If the rx-7 is reving to 9+ every gear execpt the gear it traps in which is still in the 8-8.5k range iirc. And it has been doing this for over a year besides the head gasket problems but thats because its making over 1000whp and the head is a evo6. Whats the point of the LR2.4l? I see aaron said it doesnt vibrate as much but performance wise?

batty200

iTrader: (3)

A long rod 2.4 has a better rod/stroke ratio and lighter pistons which helps with rpm. I would do a LR 2.4L. It is a badass motor that will do whatever you want.

RockmanX

iTrader: (78)

bingo but i believe std built 2.4 will get the job done. I suppose if you have the
extra cash unless you are looking for a altenative to ams 2.3RR

batty200

iTrader: (3)

An ER LR 2.4 is about 2K less than an AMS 2.3RR. It also uses standard parts that are less expensive to replace if something bad would happen. Standard crank is one thing. The pistons are already made just vary dish on a std stroker piston and your there. rods are usually not damaged during most failures of built motors and they can be resized so thats a good investment. Also the ER shorty is complete, just bolt on whatever head and rock. I also dont like that AMS uses the turned down balance shafts.

RockmanX

iTrader: (78)

if i ever wanted to upgrade then I would do a LR2.4 but right now i just dont see the point in it right now unless you do one from jump street and the 2.4 is just now getting popular getting a head of steam

OMEGA PHX

iTrader: (11)

The std 2.4 FTW!!! That car is going to be fun.

RockmanX

iTrader: (78)

BLKCarbonEVO

iTrader: (2)

LR2.4 FTW. You will be fine with a std 2.4 since you will not be pushing the limits or doing anything crazy. I love my LR2.4 and so far I'll never look back to a 2.0

Mikey

RockmanX

iTrader: (78)

displacement yes please

JohnBradley

iTrader: (30)

I think its funny about the 2.4. This reminds me of late 90s early 2000s when the DSMers started with 2.4s. These have been popular for a long time, just not as popular with the Evo community.

LR 2.4 does a have a piston that is 40g lighter and can be carved down further if wanted. A standard rod 2.4 piston is kind of portly, especially at 9k.

Aaron

tlohman

iTrader: (3)

Lots of good info. I've been having the same debate lately.