04-29-2008, 05:00 PM
|
#1
|
GLS member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 1,226
|
2.2 vs 2.4 vs 3.4
who wins in a race off line all brand new? and also why? difference between all 3?
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 05:02 PM
|
#2
|
636 whp
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: AZ
Posts: 11,876
|
who cares
2.2/2.4L manual does
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 05:22 PM
|
#3
|
GX Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: nj
Posts: 233
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by [ion] C2
who cares
2.2/2.4L manual does
|
LOL
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 05:30 PM
|
#4
|
GL Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 608
|
3.4 bc it is a higher number.
But really if I was to guess, I would say 2.4 and only bc I have one.
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 05:30 PM
|
#5
|
Gone
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Lockport Ny
Posts: 19,244
|
stock vs stock vs stock....
i'm pretty sure the v6 does. for obvious reasons
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 05:38 PM
|
#6
|
GL Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 608
|
But its heavier... Idk. Someone needs to put this to the test. I got a 2.4 and a 2.2. The 2.4 is faster.
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 05:43 PM
|
#7
|
GLS member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 917
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by cherrington17
stock vs stock vs stock....
i'm pretty sure the v6 does. for obvious reasons
|
yeah, I know for sure a 2.4 would definitely beat a 2.2
and the v6 has a lot more power than both I4s, so I'm gonna go with the v6 also
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 05:44 PM
|
#8
|
636 whp
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: AZ
Posts: 11,876
|
3400:
- 170HP
- heavier
- automatic
2.2L
- 140HP
- much lighter
- manual
2.4L
- 150HP
- much lighter
- manual
Having a manual takes off like 0.8 sec from the quarter mile times, at least from results I've seen on j-body.
Last edited by [ion] C2 : 04-29-2008 at 05:47 PM.
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 05:45 PM
|
#9
|
New and Improved
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 3,074
|
on paper its v6 all the way
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 05:46 PM
|
#10
|
636 whp
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: AZ
Posts: 11,876
|
No... on paper it's manual I4 all the way.. on emotions it's the V6 because ITS BIGGER AND HAS MORE HP LOL IT MUST BE BETTER
and no one takes into consideration the higher weight and the fact that it's an AUTOMATIC. compared to the I4 manual, the I4 will WIN.
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 05:50 PM
|
#11
|
GX Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 59
|
if your talking just off the line, 2.4. but stock for stock i think the numbers i found awhile back were 15.9 (3.4) and 16.0 (2.4) in the quarter. but i think those were like test numbers off a brand new vehicle and its been a while since ive read it.
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 05:59 PM
|
#12
|
V.I.P. Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: northern wisconsin
Posts: 2,428
|
meh... i think you're giving the 2.4 too big of a wieght advantage... considering i'd peg the v6 at about 5o to 100 lbs heavier... my 2.4 wasn't slow for a grocery getter... but by no means was it fast... and my mom had the v6 and it was faster... and that's my story
Last edited by natedawg9640 : 04-29-2008 at 06:01 PM.
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 06:06 PM
|
#13
|
Gone
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Lockport Ny
Posts: 19,244
|
ok.. i'll resay mine...
stock vs stock vs stock ALL AUTOMATICS...
v6 should win.
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 06:07 PM
|
#14
|
636 whp
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: AZ
Posts: 11,876
|
So you took them to the track and actually compared the times, or are you simply relying on your "butt dyno" on how "fast" each car was?
If you guys really care about which engine/transmission combination is the quickest stock, go to the track and find out... but a manual will always be quicker than an automatic stock for stock. Since the V6 is automatic, and the I4 can be manual, the manual I4 will have weight advantages in that the engine is lighter, and the transmission is lighter. The V6 has a heavy automatic transmission, and it's bigger. Clearly the I4 manual and V6 auto will be close, but the I4 will win.
It's that easy.
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 06:12 PM
|
#15
|
GLS member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 1,226
|
i got the v6 my ex had the v6 grand am gt he sis had 2.4 alero beat both of us and she has 200 pounds on us her and her man were in the car i know that sounds dumb but 200 pounds does count i mean it literally destroyed our v6 i was amazed i thought bottom line was the hp difference but she proved us wrong and all were stock. idk wierd to me what in everyones opinions is the nicest motor in quality and design wise the 2.2?
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 07:02 PM
|
#16
|
636 whp
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: AZ
Posts: 11,876
|
ya the Eco
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 07:41 PM
|
#17
|
GX Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ
Posts: 52
|
The 2.4L 5-speed coupe (if driven well) should be the fastest stock Alero.
While the 3.4 has +20 hp and +45 tq, the 2.4 5-speed is ~100 lbs lighter plus less power is lost through the transmission. Also, you could launch the 2.4 5-speed more aggressively.
I'm sure the 3.4 has it in the high end, tho.
__________________
2001 2.4L GX 5 speed
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 08:00 PM
|
#18
|
Aleromod's most pointless thread starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Jersey (north and south are 2 diff. states)
Posts: 2,349
|
3.4 ftw.......my 3.4 can beat my 2.4 by more than 4 car lengths. here is the weight diffence
2001 2dr gl with 2.4 2997 lbs 150 hp 155ft-lbs
2001 2dr gls with 3.4 3060 lbs 170 hp 200ft-lbs
2004 2dr gl1 with 2.2 2950 lbs 140 hp 150ft-lbs
these numbers are all using edmunds.com
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by adam337
whats with all the useless threads lately?..
|
New project 1992 460 big block ford notchback mustang
Goal - Mid 11s all motor.
Last edited by 01silveralero : 04-29-2008 at 08:05 PM.
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 08:29 PM
|
#19
|
GLS member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Utica, Michigan
Posts: 2,227
|
i vote for 3.4 as well.... it'd be very close with a 2.4 manual but still...I just have to say no based on self-experience
__________________
2000 Chevrolet Malibu LS
2000 Oldsmobile Alero GL (sold)
|
|
|
04-29-2008, 09:53 PM
|
#20
|
GX Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 19
|
2.2 all the waye
even though it lacks power and size the 2.2 ecotec is the most dependable and longest lasting engine.
the v6 has problems galore and is infamous amongst gm mechanics for necessary power train repair post 75 thousand miles
the 2.4 like the 2.2 is small for the weight for the engine... but is worse because its design lacks the efficiency and durability of the 2.2
the 2.2 is fantastic.. other than the lack of power... its modern computer dependent system deletes the distributor cap problems, and only needs high grade oil changes.
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:27 PM.
|