Hey EvoM,
Like we all do, I have been slowly planning out options for my next engine build. A good friend is building a 2.4L right now and I really like the idea. However, I was wondering if anyone has experimented with stoking a 4g64? I know that there isn't much room for boring in these motors, however, has anyone tried out a 102mm crank?

I wouldn't use a Brian Crower setup obviously, but something like this is what I had in mind:
http://www.extremepsi.com/store/prod...roductid=21106

I found a few old threads on this with little information so I figured I'd start a new one to see if there have been any developments/tests since.

Thanks!

 

There is one thread of someone using the Brian crowed kit with success but I have not seen another thread with a different set-up. My only concerned is being limited to a low rpm because I like to drag my car once in awhile. But what a great street set-up that would be.

 

I'll have to see if I can find that thread. My car is purely a street car, so I'm especially interested in this 2.6L idea.

 

I would like to see some more info on this as well!!!

 

I am very interested in this as my car will always be a street car.

I read through the below and they seem to be saying the same thing I was thinking, with the increased displacement you wont need to rev as high and you should be able to spool a medium sized turbo faster. However I do understand the counter argument in that this motor will run out of "breath" at the top, I am just not looking to (or is my wallet) REV a motor to 10000 RPM.

http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/stro...g64-block.html

I read through the below and there are a few comments from Brian Crower, as well as some dyno and drive by videos on youtube by a guy called Mr. Alex.

http://www.thegalantcenter.org/showthread.php?t=25446

Until I see some more recent testing I think I will hold off.

 

Thanks for that information. I just read through both links.

It is obvious that one wouldn't be able to rev the car out as high, however, it must not be thought of as a handicap. It's a trade off. Because of the stroke/rod ratio of the bigger motor, you are reaching the piston speed you would reach in a 2.0L at 9k at 5-6k in the 2.6L. Thus, I almost like to think of it as the sacrifice between camshaft profiles. If you go with a 280 adv. duration, you're going to lose low end, but gain top end. This is just the opposite. Because the piston speed is faster at a lower RPM you're making your usable powerband from 2K-7K, rather than 4K-8K.

 

Hey budday,

This is for a friend's car?

Something to consider; piston speeds on that 106mm crank @ 8000rpm would be the same as a 88mm crank (evo 2.0) at ~9650rpm. Which by deduction, based on my 2.3, would put 7500rpm as the max recommended rpm. Just something to consider. You also would want some monstrous cams and probably headwork and an intake manifold.

I'd probably go with something a little more simple and personally wouldn't go with a crank over 100mm.....


EDIT: I pulled up this thread and posted my response and left it up for a minute. Looks like your post covered everything I was going to say.

 

I found some more...

Below is the thread on Mr. Alex's build along with some more recent shots of the car and videos. It seems the above forums were correct about the the REV of this motor as he is shifting around 7000 RPM's.

http://www.lancerregister.com/showthread.php?t=228486
http://www.lancerregister.com/showthread.php?t=391178

I want to see some more testing!

 

Hey man,
This is for the future of my car. I like to plan ahead a bit

Thank you for the technical information. I just posted the concepts of it all, but having the specific info. on RPMs is nice. I sort of wanted to use this thread as a center for information regarding the 2.6L. The more I think about, the more I am agreeing with you about just using a 100mm crank and using longer rods.

 

eh 2.6. you should go with a destroked 4g64 to a 2.3!

 

Would be one hell of a torque monster. My 2.4 is torquie enough. And destroking a 2.4 block with the 2.0 crank is a 2.1L. High reving with a little bump in torque over the 2.0. You get descent RPMs out of a 2.4 with gobs of torque, I have taken mine to 7700 in 4th at the end of the 1/4 mile.

 

That's good to know. I have this weird obsession with torque. When I hit the wall I want to go all the way through it . But seriously. I agree with everything everyone is saying, however, I am the kind of guy who wouldn't mind only revving to 7K. We shall see, I suppose. I'll definitely be waiting to see more results from that 2.6L kit.

 

To my understanding the 2.6L 4G64 is an unreliable setup. I had some good links bookmarked last year on this. I'll try to dig them up for you.

 

I would appreciate that. I'm trying to research this as much as I can, as it'd be a hefty purchase for it to prove unreliable.