Mix matching the 2.3 W/ the 2.4 LD9

[DOHC_tuner]

Well I have seen lots of forums and info in how the 2.4 Twin Cam can benefit from the 2.3 Quad 4 from the most known mod the secret cams. Iam posting this thread to ask more questions on how to do it and what else can be done, and to give an insight for those that want 2 learn how to mod their inline 4 to beat those lil v-techs Hopefully it becomes a sticky as this thread evolves with adequate info to support the mods. Please add some if you know others.

Alot of the info is not mine so i will not be taking credit for it, it is info mostly from jbody since they know a lot about the 2.3 and 2.4 engines. I just want to transfer the info to let Alero owners know that Aleros are not slow worthless family cars Please enjoy the research and add as you wish.

(source:wikipedia.com)
The LD9 Twin Cam was a 2.4 L Quad 4 variant with balance shafts, debuting in 1996. Bore was decreased from 92 mm to 90 mm and stroke increased from 85 mm to 94 mm for better torque, and power was increased to 150 hp (112 kW). This engine received a minor update halfway through the 1999 model year that eliminated the EGR, increased the compression ratio from 9.5:1 to 9.7:1, and switched from low impedance fuel injectors to high impedance.

Applications:

1996-2001 Chevrolet Cavalier Z24
1996-2001 Pontiac Sunfire GT
1996-2001 Pontiac Grand Am
1996-1998 Oldsmobile Achieva
1999-2001 Oldsmobile Alero
1997-1999 Chevrolet Malibu

The High-Output 2.3 L LG0 version produced 180 hp (134 kW) from 1990 to 1992, and 175 hp (130 kW) in 1993 and 1994. Major changes included a higher volume intake manifold, and more aggressive camshafts.

Applications:

1990-1991 Oldsmobile 442
1990-1993 Chevrolet Beretta GTZ, 180 hp (134 kW)
1994 Chevrolet Beretta Z26, 170 hp (127 kW)
1989-1994 Pontiac Grand Am
1990-1991 Pontiac Grand Prix
1989-1991 Oldsmobile Cutlass Calais and Supreme
1992-1994 Oldsmobile Achieva SC

For 1995, a balance shaft-equipped version of the 2.3 L version was produced. A clever arrangement ensured a constant load on the shafts: The crank drove one shaft, which drives the second, which drives the oil pump. However, the shafts spun at twice the engine rpm, forcing the redline to be reduced from 6800 to 6500 rpm. Output was 150 hp and 150 ft·lb. This was the only Quad 4 family engine produced in 1995. This was known as a transitional year for the engine family.

Applications:

1995 Pontiac Sunfire
1995 Chevrolet Cavalier
1995 Pontiac Grand Am
1995 Oldsmobile Achieva

The W41 version was the highest-output Quad 4 at 190 hp (142 kW) in 1991 and 1992, and 185 hp (138 kW) in 1993. The additional 10hp came from longer duration cams and a different PROM.

Applications:

1991 Oldsmobile 442
1992-1993 Oldsmobile Achieva SCX




Here are some of the mods that anyone with the 2.4 Twin cam can install from a 2.3 concerning some modifications:

1. 2.3 Cams [Better Lift]
I recommend replacing the camshaft lobes and port N' polishing the head for good flow.
(source:jbody.org)1995 Cam Specs
200 degrees @ .050" with .360" lift for the intake
200 degrees @ .050" with .360" lift for the exhaust
LD2 (1990+) Cam Specs
200 degrees @ .050" with .375" lift for the intake
200 degrees @ .050" with .375" lift for the exhaust

24574239 Intake camshaft for LG0(95 2.3DOHC)
22545390 Exhaust cam for LD2(Pre-95 2.3DOHC)

(source:jbody.org from forum http://www.j-body.org/forums/read.ph...82822&t=382822

2. 2.3 oil pump
"QUOTE ge_forcez22 QUOTE"reason to get this swap is if you ever want to run safely above 5800rpm
when GM designed the engine and the 2000-2002 GM s/c kit, on the engine dyno the engine started loosing oil pressure with a stock pump. The reason being was the smaller 2.4 (compaired to the 2.3) spins too fast and cavitates (aerates, foams) the oil and cause air to flow with the oil.

You get more oil for superior pressure so get synthetic to help



Parts Needed

2.3L Pump:
Crank Gear for the pump:
Windage Tray: 22536409
Baffle Stud: 22542521 x2
Baffle Bolt: 22540299 x2
Oil Pick Assembly: 22539133
Brace: 24570677
Bolt To Screen: 11516802 x2
Nut For Brace: 22535081 x2
Bolt Flange Head: 11516061 x2
Oil Pump Bolts To Block: 14050422 x2
Locator Pins For Pump: 22531530 x2
Melling oil pump # M-136 Autozone $109.99

You will have to modify the crank and the block so for step by step instructions follow the jbody link given above.

3. 2.6L Storker

2.3 block + 2.4 crank = 2.6 stroker
I cant remember but 250HP N/A or something. Quote me if iam wrong which i think i am.

Info from the forum http://www.j-body.org/forums/read.ph...57816&t=257816 and http://www.j-body.org/forums/read.ph...7&t=371397&p=1

Its a lot of work but worth the while once complete, but just follow the link on the build up.

4.
5.
6.
Please add if you know any more

[2fst4u]

you had pictures of the 2.3 HO intake manifold swap, but you didn't list that. also, the larger throttle body that came stock on the HO's

[Oldsman]

http://www.aleromod.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14296

http://www.quad4forums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=694

http://www.quad4forums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=636

[DOHC_tuner]

OH yeah I completely forgot about the 2.3 Intake manifold. Just slipped my mind considering I see it on 2.4's alot. Well yeah thankz 2fst4u,

so that makes

4. 2.3 INTAKE MANIFOLD
(you can install the manifold via an adapter flange or simply find a 2.4 flange to weld on, or also modify the bot holes to fit as many have done. Great mod for the 2.4 and makes the engine look better.

[DOHC_tuner]

Another performance part for the 2.4l you could add is a a/c delete pulley.
GM bypass pulley 2.4L p/n # 24574519
CATEGORY: Water Pump Pulley
GM LIST: $70.29
OUR PRICE: $41.67
DESCRIPTION: PULLEY

You wont be able to run the ac no more so have them windows down

[[ion] C2]

My air's broke, and I don't really intend to fix it. How much of a gain would using an A/C delete pulley bring?

[spyhunter]

Originally Posted by [ion] C2

My air's broke, and I don't really intend to fix it. How much of a gain would using an A/C delete pulley bring?

Very little. The delete pulley spins a lot easier so you can claim gains from less drag on the crank. The real gains is when you remove everything having to do w/ the a/c. That's a nice little bit of weight loss.

[2fst4u]

^going off of what spy said, there's a clutch inside the a/c that allows it to spin freely when it's turned off. so, you won't see any horsepower increase, only weight loss, like he said.

[[ion] C2]

That's what I figured, weight loss, maybe quicker belt turning. Thanks.

[DOHC_tuner]

another performance for high HP motors is a 086 secret head swap

[DOHC_tuner]

One way to regain some 15 HP from the LD9 engine is to remove the balance shaft. Yet this is an easy decision for the common racing folk v.s. the everyday comfort driver. Performance > Comfort or Performance < Comfort.
source:wikipedia.com

The Quad 4 (called Twin Cam after 1995) was a DOHC straight-4 automobile engine produced by General Motors' Oldsmobile division. It was a modern engine for the time, but was criticized for roughness. Balance shafts were added in 1995, also known as a transitional year from the quad 4 to the renamed TWIN CAM variant, in 1996 2.4 (LD9) the complete engine makeover was accomplished. The name is derived from the engine's four cylinders and four valve per cylinder layout. There was a single overhead camshaft variant that was produced for a brief time. The Quad 4 used an iron block and an aluminum head.

The Quad 4 debuted in 1987 and was replaced after 2001 by the Ecotec. Quad 4 engines were produced at GM's Delta Engine Plant (Plant 5) in Delta Township, Michigan. In recent years, it has gained a minor following in hot rodding circles as a period style engine (which looks like a 1930's Offenhauser twin cam unit).


In piston engine engineering, a balance shaft is an eccentric weighted shaft which offsets vibrations in engine designs that are not inherently balanced (for example, most four-cylinder engines). They were first invented by British engineer Frederick Lanchester in 1904

Four cylinder applications
Balance shafts are most common in inline four cylinder engines which, in cause of the asymmetry of their design, have an inherent second order vibration (vibrating at twice the engine RPM) which, contrary to popular belief, cannot be eliminated no matter how well the internal components are balanced. This vibration is generated because the movement of the connecting rods in an inline engine is not symmetrical throughout the crankshaft rotation; thus during a given period of crankshaft rotation, the descending and ascending pistons are not always completely opposed in their acceleration, giving rise to a net vertical inertial force twice in each revolution whose intensity increases quadratically with RPM, no matter how closely the components are matched for weight.[1]

The problem increases with larger engine displacement, since the only ways to achieve larger displacement are with a longer piston stroke, increasing the difference in acceleration, or by a larger bore, increasing the mass of the pistons; either way, the magnitude of the inertial vibration increases. For many years, two litres was viewed as the 'unofficial' displacement limit for a production inline four-cylinder engine with acceptable NVH characteristics. The development of the General Motors 2.3 litre Quad 4 engine in 1987, described as "rough as a cob" by one automotive reviewer, and its subsequent development into the more positively received 2.4 L version with balance shafts confirms the wisdom of this assessment.[citation needed]

The basic concept behind balance shafts has existed for nearly a century and is no longer patentable. Two balance shafts rotate in opposite directions at twice engine speed. Equally sized eccentric weights on these shafts are sized and phased so that the inertial reaction to their counter-rotation cancels out in the horizontal plane, but adds in the vertical plane, giving a net force equal to but 180 degrees out of phase with the undesired second-order vibration of the basic engine, thereby canceling it.

The actual implementation of the concept, however, is concrete enough to be patented. The basic problem presented by the concept is adequately supporting and lubricating a part rotating at twice engine speed at the higher RPMs where the second order vibration becomes unacceptable. Mitsubishi Motors pioneered the design in the modern era with its "Silent Shaft" Astron engines in 1975, with balance shafts located low on the side of the engine block and driven by chains from the oil pump, and they subsequently licensed the patent to Fiat, Saab and Porsche.[2]

Saab has further refined the balance shaft principle to overcome second harmonic sideways vibrations (due to the same basic asymmetry in engine design, but much smaller in magnitude) by locating the balance shafts with lateral symmetry but at different heights above the crankshaft, thereby introducing a torque which counteracts the sideways vibrations at double engine RPM, resulting in an exceptionally smooth B234 engine.

There is some debate as to how much power the twin balance shafts cost the engine. The basic figure given is usually around 15 hp (11 kW), but this may be excessive for pure friction losses. It is possible that this is a miscalculation derived from the common use of an inertial dynamometer, which calculates power from angular acceleration rather than actual measurement of steady state torque. The 15 hp (11 kW), then, includes both the actual frictional loss as well as the increase in angular inertia of the rapidly rotating shafts, which would not be a factor at steady speed. Nevertheless, some owners modify their engines by removing the balance shafts, both to reclaim some of this power and to reduce complexity and potential areas of breakage for high performance and racing use, as it is commonly (but falsely) believed that the smoothness provided by the balance shafts can be attained after their removal by careful balancing of the reciprocating components of the engine.

[DOHC_tuner]

One way to regain some 15 HP from the LD9 engine is to remove the balance shaft. Yet this is an easy decision for the common racing folk v.s. the everyday comfort driver. Performance > Comfort or Performance < Comfort.
source:wikipedia.com

The Quad 4 (called Twin Cam after 1995) was a DOHC straight-4 automobile engine produced by General Motors' Oldsmobile division. It was a modern engine for the time, but was criticized for roughness. Balance shafts were added in 1995, also known as a transitional year from the quad 4 to the renamed TWIN CAM variant, in 1996 2.4 (LD9) the complete engine makeover was accomplished. The name is derived from the engine's four cylinders and four valve per cylinder layout. There was a single overhead camshaft variant that was produced for a brief time. The Quad 4 used an iron block and an aluminum head.

The Quad 4 debuted in 1987 and was replaced after 2001 by the Ecotec. Quad 4 engines were produced at GM's Delta Engine Plant (Plant 5) in Delta Township, Michigan. In recent years, it has gained a minor following in hot rodding circles as a period style engine (which looks like a 1930's Offenhauser twin cam unit).


In piston engine engineering, a balance shaft is an eccentric weighted shaft which offsets vibrations in engine designs that are not inherently balanced (for example, most four-cylinder engines). They were first invented by British engineer Frederick Lanchester in 1904

Four cylinder applications
Balance shafts are most common in inline four cylinder engines which, in cause of the asymmetry of their design, have an inherent second order vibration (vibrating at twice the engine RPM) which, contrary to popular belief, cannot be eliminated no matter how well the internal components are balanced. This vibration is generated because the movement of the connecting rods in an inline engine is not symmetrical throughout the crankshaft rotation; thus during a given period of crankshaft rotation, the descending and ascending pistons are not always completely opposed in their acceleration, giving rise to a net vertical inertial force twice in each revolution whose intensity increases quadratically with RPM, no matter how closely the components are matched for weight.[1]

The problem increases with larger engine displacement, since the only ways to achieve larger displacement are with a longer piston stroke, increasing the difference in acceleration, or by a larger bore, increasing the mass of the pistons; either way, the magnitude of the inertial vibration increases. For many years, two litres was viewed as the 'unofficial' displacement limit for a production inline four-cylinder engine with acceptable NVH characteristics. The development of the General Motors 2.3 litre Quad 4 engine in 1987, described as "rough as a cob" by one automotive reviewer, and its subsequent development into the more positively received 2.4 L version with balance shafts confirms the wisdom of this assessment.[citation needed]

The basic concept behind balance shafts has existed for nearly a century and is no longer patentable. Two balance shafts rotate in opposite directions at twice engine speed. Equally sized eccentric weights on these shafts are sized and phased so that the inertial reaction to their counter-rotation cancels out in the horizontal plane, but adds in the vertical plane, giving a net force equal to but 180 degrees out of phase with the undesired second-order vibration of the basic engine, thereby canceling it.

The actual implementation of the concept, however, is concrete enough to be patented. The basic problem presented by the concept is adequately supporting and lubricating a part rotating at twice engine speed at the higher RPMs where the second order vibration becomes unacceptable. Mitsubishi Motors pioneered the design in the modern era with its "Silent Shaft" Astron engines in 1975, with balance shafts located low on the side of the engine block and driven by chains from the oil pump, and they subsequently licensed the patent to Fiat, Saab and Porsche.[2]

Saab has further refined the balance shaft principle to overcome second harmonic sideways vibrations (due to the same basic asymmetry in engine design, but much smaller in magnitude) by locating the balance shafts with lateral symmetry but at different heights above the crankshaft, thereby introducing a torque which counteracts the sideways vibrations at double engine RPM, resulting in an exceptionally smooth B234 engine.

There is some debate as to how much power the twin balance shafts cost the engine. The basic figure given is usually around 15 hp (11 kW), but this may be excessive for pure friction losses. It is possible that this is a miscalculation derived from the common use of an inertial dynamometer, which calculates power from angular acceleration rather than actual measurement of steady state torque. The 15 hp (11 kW), then, includes both the actual frictional loss as well as the increase in angular inertia of the rapidly rotating shafts, which would not be a factor at steady speed. Nevertheless, some owners modify their engines by removing the balance shafts, both to reclaim some of this power and to reduce complexity and potential areas of breakage for high performance and racing use, as it is commonly (but falsely) believed that the smoothness provided by the balance shafts can be attained after their removal by careful balancing of the reciprocating components of the engine.

A couple cavys with the LD9 have done the delete on jbody.org

[DOHC_tuner]

(source: Jbody.org)
--- 086 Head Swap Parts List ---

- Maintainance Parts (While Your In There) -
BOSCH (09380) Spark Plug Wire Boot Set
ACDELCO 5K478 Serpentine Belt
CLOYES 95367 (9-5367) Timing Chain Guide
CLOYES 95365 (9-5365) Timing Chain Guide
CLOYES 95366 (9-5366) Timing Chain Guide
CLEVITE (CLE9390) Timing Chain
*BUY NEW TENTIONER* (Not on the list)


- Head Swap Parts -
FEL-PRO (HS9059PT) Cylinder Head Gasket Set
FEL-PRO (MS90559) Exhaust Manifold Gasket Set
FEL-PRO (MS90573) Intake Manifold Gasket Set
NGK (2685) Spark Plug
ARP (CC-0050) Head Stud Kit
Stock 2.3 HO Intake Manifold
Stock 2.3 Exhaust Manifold
Stock 2.3 086 Head (Modification Optional)
Cams (Secret Cam Swap)


- Management (DIYAutoTune.com) -
MegaSquirt-II (MS230-C) MegaSquirt-II Engine Management System w/PCB3 - Assembled Unit
MegaSquirt (MSHarness12) 12' MegaSquirt Wiring Harness (MS1 / MS2 Ready)
MegaSquirt (MPX4250AP) 2.5 Bar Map Sensor


- Extras -
B&M (BNM46054) FUEL PRESSURE GAUGE
B&M (45166) J-Body 95-99 B&M Racing Short Throw Shifter
TOOL (PBI648427) 648427 SPARK PLUG BOOT PLIERS
XTUNE (eBay) ALUMINUM OEM SIZE CRANK PULLEY
BOSCH (BOS3332) 3332 BOSCH PREMIUM OIL FILTER
COMETIC (H-2379SP1) HEAD GASKET FOR LD9 WITH 93MM BORE FOR 086 HEAD
GP SORENSON (GPS77919001) SENSOR AIR CHARGE TEMP
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total: 1,526.79 (Before the cost of the modified 086 head)

[TheMeaningOfLife]

So the 2.3L intake manifold from these cars

1990-1991 Oldsmobile 442
1990-1993 Chevrolet Beretta GTZ, 180 hp (134 kW)
1994 Chevrolet Beretta Z26, 170 hp (127 kW)
1989-1994 Pontiac Grand Am
1990-1991 Pontiac Grand Prix
1989-1991 Oldsmobile Cutlass Calais and Supreme
1992-1994 Oldsmobile Achieva SC

will bolt right up to my 2.4 with an adapter flange? What kind of gain am i looking at if that all i do? And what about all the sensors and stuff? Do those go right in? and if the throttle bodys in a completly differnt spot how does all the linkages and fuel delivery work?

[DOHC_tuner]

You can bolt it with the adapter flange or buy a 2.4 flange from mantapart.com and weld it on. To see best results with the swap I recommend you port n polish the head and even add the secret cams. Then add a cold air intake to the manifold and it you'll love what you have done. As far as the sensors, OLDSMAN post two links on the how to bolt it up on the 3rd post in this thread.

[spyhunter]

Originally Posted by TheMeaningOfLife

So the 2.3L intake manifold from these cars

1990-1991 Oldsmobile 442
1990-1993 Chevrolet Beretta GTZ, 180 hp (134 kW)
1994 Chevrolet Beretta Z26, 170 hp (127 kW)
1989-1994 Pontiac Grand Am
1990-1991 Pontiac Grand Prix
1989-1991 Oldsmobile Cutlass Calais and Supreme
1992-1994 Oldsmobile Achieva SC

will bolt right up to my 2.4 with an adapter flange? What kind of gain am i looking at if that all i do? And what about all the sensors and stuff? Do those go right in? and if the throttle bodys in a completly differnt spot how does all the linkages and fuel delivery work?

fuel delivery is exactly the same. It's a mod when done correctly will accentuate the top end performance. If you just do this and all you have is intake exhaust, you won't be very happy. It'll be more responsive, but you won't be moving the airflow to really make this modification shine. Headwork, cams, header, full exhaust, and a tune in my opinion are what really compliments and helps make the most out of this modification.

The sensors go to the throttle body just like before. You may or may not have to lengthen some of the wiring, the linkage will go on with some modification, it's not overly difficult you just have to use your head. The vacuum lines will need a little rearranging depending on the vacuum ports available on the manifold. You may also end up having to plug up some of the vacuum ports that you don't use. It's all dependant on the manifold you get, and who had it last.

[TheMeaningOfLife]

Alright, it dont seem to bad, but i definatly dont have the green to put in new cams do some head work, maybe headers maybe an exhaust, but beyond that it gets awful pricey.

[DOHC_tuner]

hey spyhunter thankz for the Quad 4 IDI Cover, I love it!!!!

[DOHC_tuner]

Check out this site

http://www.kitcarmag.com/techarticle...mbining_parts/

[TheMeaningOfLife]

It says the 2.3 intake flows just the same as the plastic 2.4l intake but weighs more.