2.4 Ecotec

[NoSweat83]

Has anyone heard anything about this motor and what it is capibable of?

there is no such thing as a 2.4 Ecotec, other than possibly the new 2.4 engines in the new chevys and saturns, but didnt know they were ecotecs, maybe u mean ecotechs?

stop before you start looking like a noob.

there is a 2.4L ecotec 170hp or something... variable timing and alll those goodies... not in a production car yet.

Originally posted by wy3134@Aug 9 2004, 05:54 PM
there is no such thing as a 2.4 Ecotec, other than possibly the new 2.4 engines in the new chevys and saturns, but didnt know they were ecotecs, maybe u mean ecotechs?

Words of advice: LOOK before you leap.

I'm glad Spy got to ya b4 i did. He's alot nicer

170 hp and 17p ftlbs of tourwue as of now. IT has VVT and electronic throttle control. It will be available in teh Pontiac Solstice, G6 and the Chevy Cobalt and Saturn Ion in 2006. I hear it might get bumped in power by then to 180 hp 180 ftlbs. I'm sure It will be in other GM cars in the future as well.

I wouldn't think too much about the 2.4 ECOTEC. Apparently they're having some troubles with development of the engine, in what regard I don't know, but they've already dropped the Cobalt SS for the 2005 model year (or so I've read somewhere), which was supposed to have the 2.4L. For the first little while they're only building base model Cobalts and the Cobalt SS/SC, which is the supercharged Cobalt SS and comes with the 2.0L supercharged ECOTEC engine.

In any case, with an electronic throttle body and variable valve timing, as well as an all-new 32-bit ECU and all electronic sensors, as opposed to analog sensors, it's going to be quite a while before anybody figures out how to tune or develop parts for the 2.4L ECOTEC, let alone put it in another car.

Best bet for a built ECOTEC is the 2.0L supercharged GM crate engine; same engine used in the Cobalt SS/SC and the Ion Redline, making 205HP stock. Of course there are always other options like building your own engine and turbo kit, which is a more lengthy and sometimes costly option.

[springs fastest alero]

The gm power tour or whatever was at mopar mountain madness.
they had flyers on all the current and upcomming eco variations as well as the engine handbook for it.
here is a copy of the flyer. kinda hard to read tho

[FormulaNERD]

hmmm, why s/c the 2.0 eco when they have the 2.2 eco at their disposal? if anyone knows why, article or other, or just has an opinion, let me know.

well many S/C or turbo applications of engine see the engine being underbored so that It holds up better under the boost presure. That could be why they brought the S/C and turbo ecoteks in 2.0 liter form as opposed to 2.2 like the original eco.

Originally posted by FormulaNERD@Aug 11 2004, 06:47 PM
hmmm, why s/c the 2.0 eco when they have the 2.2 eco at their disposal? if anyone knows why, article or other, or just has an opinion, let me know.

they destroke it for longevity reasons. These are production motors, not tuner motors that a small shop makes. They have to be built to be able to last long enough. The 2.0L motors are able to sustain the pressures and stresses of boosted duty better than the 2.2 motors. They're still an ecotec, but think of it like the honda b-series, parts interchangeability like a mutherf***er... yeh..

[NoSweat83]

Trying to look into the future to see what is going to become of the 2.4 and I find this very interesting. I'm looking for more power and just wonder if building the 2.4 up is worth it compared to what will come out soon. Also how dependable will the 2.4 be when it is supercharged w/ a 50 shot of wet NX?

Exactly what spy said, ive been researching a turbo project for my car (ecotec engine) and for serious power (above say 350HP) the entire engine literally has to be rebuilt because its pretty weak. Most parts have to be upgraded around the 300hp mark, but the block itself has to be upgraded by around 400hp for longevity purposes, it will hold temporarily at higher HP but not over a long time period, which I dont think many of us could afford to keep replacing engines every couple months if you go to the track twice a month or more

They de-stroke the 2.2L ECOTEC's engine. The 2.2L ECO has a 94.6mm stroke, and an 86mm bore, which gives it a 2.2L displacement. They de-stroke this engine to 86mm, giving it a "square" bore-stroke ratio of 1:1 (an 86mm bore and stroke). This reduces stress on the cylinder walls. It's pretty simple physics if you think about it, and I don't want to give an explanation because it might not be entirely accurate, but the longer the stroke, the more stress is placed on the cylinder walls as the piston pushes down on the rod, or the crank pushes up on the rod.

Adding forced induction makes this problem much worse, as the added cylinder pressure obviously increases the force which pushes the piston against the cylinder wall. So to ensure long engine life and to help prevent cylinder distortion, they de-stroked the engine. See? Simple. :P

[springs fastest alero]

Originally posted by wy3134@Aug 11 2004, 02:02 PM
Exactly what spy said, ive been researching a turbo project for my car (ecotec engine) and for serious power (above say 350HP) the entire engine literally has to be rebuilt because its pretty weak. Most parts have to be upgraded around the 300hp mark, but the block itself has to be upgraded by around 400hp for longevity purposes, it will hold temporarily at higher HP but not over a long time period, which I dont think many of us could afford to keep replacing engines every couple months if you go to the track twice a month or more

lol weak???
300 hp from a 2.2L with no internals is insane.
most 4 cylinders break stuff way before getting close to that
weakest link is the rods. all four snapped arround 330 some hp in gm testing
but this was with nitrous which puts extremely high stress on the internals.
after that they made 450-500 before getting cylinder wall flex.
then they sleeved the block
the gm race eco's use stock blocks
highly modified but stock.

Could you please point me to that info about their testing or what I could find it under? Just would like to see results of their testing so maybe I dont have to spend more time than necessary researching my turbo project. Only results ive seen for the eco on performance is the cavy running the eco on the drags and there wasnt much info about it when i read up on its setup

Originally posted by springs fastest alero+Aug 12 2004, 03:25 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (springs fastest alero @ Aug 12 2004, 03:25 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-wy3134@Aug 11 2004, 02:02 PM
Exactly what spy said, ive been researching a turbo project for my car (ecotec engine) and for serious power (above say 350HP) the entire engine literally has to be rebuilt because its pretty weak. Most parts have to be upgraded around the 300hp mark, but the block itself has to be upgraded by around 400hp for longevity purposes, it will hold temporarily at higher HP but not over a long time period, which I dont think many of us could afford to keep replacing engines every couple months if you go to the track twice a month or more

lol weak???
300 hp from a 2.2L with no internals is insane.
most 4 cylinders break stuff way before getting close to that
weakest link is the rods. all four snapped arround 330 some hp in gm testing
but this was with nitrous which puts extremely high stress on the internals.
after that they made 450-500 before getting cylinder wall flex.
then they sleeved the block
the gm race eco's use stock blocks
highly modified but stock. [/b][/quote]
highly modified 2.0 head and the destroked stuff too... dont' forget that shiyet...

[springs fastest alero]

Originally posted by Spy@Aug 12 2004, 03:21 PM
]
highly modified 2.0 head and the destroked stuff too... dont' forget that shiyet...

head was just heavily ported witha copper gasket and o rings
and yeah I figured he knew it was the 2.0L crank

[springs fastest alero]

Originally posted by wy3134@Aug 12 2004, 01:56 PM
Could you please point me to that info about their testing or what I could find it under? Just would like to see results of their testing so maybe I dont have to spend more time than necessary researching my turbo project. Only results ive seen for the eco on performance is the cavy running the eco on the drags and there wasnt much info about it when i read up on its setup

get the ecotec hand book
has parts lists contact info and what they did for what gains.
has all the how to build stuff
the article where I seen that was in an old sport compact car.
title was somthing along the lines of GM has gone honda hunting

Originally posted by springs fastest alero+Aug 13 2004, 02:15 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (springs fastest alero @ Aug 13 2004, 02:15 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-wy3134@Aug 12 2004, 01:56 PM
Could you please point me to that info about their testing or what I could find it under? Just would like to see results of their testing so maybe I dont have to spend more time than necessary researching my turbo project. Only results ive seen for the eco on performance is the cavy running the eco on the drags and there wasnt much info about it when i read up on its setup

get the ecotec hand book
has parts lists contact info and what they did for what gains.
has all the how to build stuff
the article where I seen that was in an old sport compact car.
title was somthing along the lines of GM has gone honda hunting [/b][/quote]
:thumbsup: