turbojew Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 It will be daily. Im trying to trade for modifyd's 64/63 combo motor to have as a back up incase i ever blow up the built motor in the GVR4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woody Posted February 16, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Why is a stroker version a bad idea for a daily? Please explain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasQuest Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Well a modded 4g63 isn't the best daily drivable motor to start with let alone one that's stroked out. I'f you were easy on it which nobody would be you could get by. I'm a big mitsubishi fan and I know these cars get a bad rap for not being reliable but to me when it comes to any car being a daily driver it makes more sense to me to have basic mods and not go crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akauf Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 156mm rods and rev to 8k 156mm rids and billet crank and rev to 8.5k all say Of course u can rev higher on occasion. more comparison from the Evo world: http://forums.evolutionm.net/evo-engine-turbo-drivetrain/594844-why-i-will-never-go-back-2-0l.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbojew Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 Thank you very much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woody Posted February 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 TexasQuest I was under the assumption and have experienced that the 2.0 DOHC was smoother and a better daily driver then the 2.6. Thus the 2.4 DOHC would still be nicer daily. I am talking about raw engines here, not supporting mods, as the bigger the turbo the worst it would be for a daily driver. akauf That link is awesome. Thats exactly what I have been needing to see to make up my mind about which motor to build. Now my only other problem is now I am starting to want to build my 2.6 instead of the 2.4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasQuest Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 Personally I've never owned a 4g63 but have friends that have had them in the past and I've tinkered with them. They do run a little smoother than our 4g54 and I can tell a difference in updated technology between the two engines. They are awesome little motors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akauf Posted February 18, 2012 Report Share Posted February 18, 2012 (edited) The 2.4 will out perform the 2.6. Displacement is only as good as the head it breaths through. An earlier torque onset from the 2.6 will be followed shortly by a massive drop. There are better cams, rods, tuning options, valveTrain, etc for the 4g6x a well set up 2.4 with accompanying bolt ons IS the end all be all in Mitsubishi 4 cylinders Edited March 6, 2012 by akauf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akauf Posted February 18, 2012 Report Share Posted February 18, 2012 Well, realistically speaking that is... If you have an endless budget there are other options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbojew Posted February 18, 2012 Report Share Posted February 18, 2012 2.4 Stroker but im looking for a nice 400 hp DD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akauf Posted March 6, 2012 Report Share Posted March 6, 2012 Yep already have adjustable cam gears so thats not a worry at all. bump from the dead to elaborate one thing I forgot to mention. When using the DOHC 4g64 timing belt you need to advance each cam gear by 3.75*... When using the 4g63 timing belt you retard each cam gear by 3.75*. Of course, time the came by the manufacturers specs but this will get you "zero'd out". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strang3majik Posted March 6, 2012 Report Share Posted March 6, 2012 (edited) projectzerog.com And longer stroke usually = more low end torque Edited March 6, 2012 by strang3majik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts