The Top Mitsubishi Galant VR-4 Resource

Join the best E39A 1991-1992 Mitsubishi Galant VR-4 community and document your GVR4 journey.

  • Software Upgraded - Reset Your Password to Login
    In order to log in after the forum software change, you need to reset your password. If you don't have access to the email address you used to register your GVR4.org account, you won't be able to reset your password. In that case, follow the instructions here to regain access to the forum.

Why doesnt anyone make a stroker crank for a 2.4 motor, or do they?

thedsmguy

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
1,785
Location
Vancouver Washington
You can stroke a 2.0, but why not stroke a 2.4 and make it a 2.8 or 2.7 liter? I figured someone would have made this crank by now. Is it even possible?
 

fuel

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
2,165
Location
Toronto, ON, Canada
Given that the 4G64 is basically on the limits of how much the block can accommodate in terms of the throw on the crankshaft, I would say the 100mm stroke of the 4G64 is about as big as you would want to go. Let's also take into account that the bore sizing could not increase anywhere over 87mm due to how close the cylinders are placed together, and also the fact that the 4G64 has a less than ideal rod to stroke ratio too.

In short.. bad idea. To support 2.5L+ from a 4cyl engine you really would want a 90-95mm bore size and a much taller block deck height with longer rods.
 

mountaineerjeff

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 21, 2008
Messages
1,155
Location
west virginia
yep, beat me to it. as far as I know the 2.6l is as big as they go. my buddy streeted one with a 42r. the 2.6l spooled it like a 30r. also had enough displacement that you never actually had to go into boost.
 

Alex

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
61
Location
Alaska
OMG that just had to be one fun ride, any video's of that beast in action?
 

fuel

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
2,165
Location
Toronto, ON, Canada
Well I'll be damned, a 106mm crank /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif - that must shake itself to bits at high rpms, rod to stroke ratio must be well below 1.5:1. Still.. it would be nice to have seemingly instant torque on tap.

All the other large capacity 4-cyl petrol engines generally have a 'square' or even 'over-square' bore size - Toyota's 3RZ 2.7ltr is 95x95mm and the Porsche 944 S2 3.0ltr is 104x88mm (ie same stroke as a 2.0ltr 4G63). The shortlived 2.7ltr Porsche engine had an even shorter stroke of 78.9mm while retaining the huge 104mm bore. The Porsche engines also used balance shafts licensed from none other than Mitsubishi Motors.
 
Joined
May 30, 2011
Messages
7
Location
Pampanga, Philippines
Good Day! Can you help regarding lightening(knife edge like or the usual) & balancing of the crankshaft?
What would be the benefits of it? I have a 4g67 (1.8L) engine non-turbo. Can I also do regrinds for my cams? On what specs?
Thank you, for your help. EDDIE
 

fuel

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
2,165
Location
Toronto, ON, Canada
no point, just find a high comp 4G63 DOHC to put in the 4G67's place. It will be a direct bolt in and you would just need to swap over the AFM and ECU. You can spend money on making a 4G67 about as powerful as a stock standard 4G63.. may as well go 4G63 to begin with and spend money on the 4G63 instead.
 

cheekychimp

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2004
Messages
7,333
Location
East Sussex, U.K.
Agree, in fact depending on what you need or want from your existing car, just look for a GTi model with the engine already. I spent nearly £400 buying a Galant GLS with the same motor you have and decided it would cost me upwards of £1000 to do anything worthwhile with the car. I drove it for the summer during which time it paid for itself because a hire car would have cost me much more than the purchase price for a 6 week hire. Then I pulled a load of parts off it that would have cost me well over £100 to buy, sold the shell for £50 and bought a cracking GTi for £650.

Bottom line it cost me £500 to upgrade to a GTi instead of $1400 to build a car that would never have been as good.
 
Last edited:

johnnyRacer

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2005
Messages
776
Location
Tampa, FL.
Quoting raptorreed:
If you really wanted to...Brian Crower makes one, well a complete kit for only a low price of $3k.
BC 2.6 Stroker kit


Although this torque/monster seems like it will be an absolute blast to drive on the street. My only concerns would be 1) Can the harmonics of this extreme setup really be balanced out? 2) BC is only offering this in 7 bolt kits, why?:? What about the crankwalk issues? Lastly, this very is interesting to me because I've been hoarding a 7-bolt 4g64 wide block for some years now. If I had the cash this probably would make my SQ a hell of a street bruiser!
 

Jesus_Negros

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2012
Messages
2,344
Location
USA
The 2.6 will have a horrible rod ratio and bad harmonics on top of need a trans to support that type of torque. I think the 2.4 build is the most displacement we'll ever need.


FYI:

Quote:


Using an 88mm (stock 2.0L) crankshaft:
85mm bore = 1997cc
85.5mm bore = 2021
86mm bore = 2045
86.5mm bore = 2068
87mm bore = 2092
87.5mm bore = 2116
88mm bore = 2141
Rod Ratios: stock piston and 150mm rod = 1.70
stroker piston and 156mm rod = 1.77
stroker piston, 2.4 block, 162mm rod = 1.84





For a 92mm Magnus crankshaft:
85mm bore = 2088cc
85.5mm bore = 2113
86mm bore = 2138
86.5mm bore = 2163
87mm bore = 2188
87.5mm bore = 2213
88mm bore = 2238
Rod Ratios: stock piston, 148mm rod = 1.61
stroker piston, 154mm rod = 1.67
stroker piston, 2.4 block, 160mm rod = 1.74





For a 94mm Eagle crankshaft:
85mm bore = 2134cc
85.5mm bore = 2159
86mm bore = 2184
86.5mm bore = 2209
87mm bore = 2235
87.5mm bore = 2261
88mm bore = 2287
Rod Ratios: stock piston, 147mm rod = 1.56
stroker piston, 153mm rod = 1.63
stroker piston, 2.4 block, 159mm rod = 1.69





For a 97mm Crower crankshaft:
85mm bore = 2202cc
85.5mm bore = 2228
86mm bore = 2254
86.5mm bore = 2280
87mm bore = 2306
87.5mm bore = 2333
88mm bore = 2360
Rod Ratios: stock piston, 145.5mm rod = 1.5
stroker piston, 151.5mm rod = 1.56
stroker piston, 2.4 block, 157.5mm rod = 1.62





For a 100mm (stock 2.4L) crankshaft:
85mm bore = 2270cc
85.5mm bore = 2296
86mm bore = 2323
86.5mm bore = 2350
87mm bore = 2378
87.5mm bore = 2405
88mm bore = 2433
Rod Ratios: stock pistons, 144mm rod = 1.44
stroker pistons, 150mm rod = 1.50
stroker pistons, 2.4 block, 156mm rod = 1.56





For a 102mm Crower crankshaft:
85mm bore = 2315cc
85.5mm bore = 2342
86mm bore = 2370
86.5mm bore = 2397
87mm bore = 2425
87.5mm bore = 2453
88mm bore = 2481
Rod Ratios: stock piston, 143mm rod = 1.40
stroker piston, 149mm rod = 1.46
stroker piston, 2.4 block, 155mm rod = 1.52





For a 106mm Crower crankshaft:
Crower states the 106mm crank must be used in a 2.4L block, stock 2.4L bore is 86.5mm.
85mm bore = n/a
85.5mm bore = n/a
86mm bore = n/a
86.5mm bore = 2491cc
87mm bore = 2520
87.5mm bore = 2549
88mm bore = 2579
Rod Ratios: stock piston, 2.4 block, 147mm rod = 1.39
stroker piston, 2.4 block, 153mm rod = 1.44

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Leon_R

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2011
Messages
214
Location
Chelmsford, MA
Here is how I look at it: "2.3/2.4" motors make more torque, but same power as 2.0's. When it comes to going fast, all you care about is power, so these engines do not make you any faster. On the other side, your drivetrain only sees torque (not power), so if you want to make it last, you build/tune your engine to make low torgue but keeking it into high revs. That strategy, keeps you with 2.0 motors...
 

thedsmguy

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
1,785
Location
Vancouver Washington
What would putting a 2.0 crank in a 1.6 block do? They have smaller pistons, maybe it would rev like a son of a biatch? Make great power and keep the torque lower? Sweet for a fwd swap into a mirage/colt (where the 4g61 came from in first place)
 

Jesus_Negros

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2012
Messages
2,344
Location
USA
Quoting thedsmguy:
What would putting a 2.0 crank in a 1.6 block do? They have smaller pistons, maybe it would rev like a son of a biatch? Make great power and keep the torque lower? Sweet for a fwd swap into a mirage/colt (where the 4g61 came from in first place)



If the 2.0 crank is larger than the 1.6 then you are stroking it thus increasing its stroke so it'll behave like a normal stroker. A reg 2.0 4g63t soundds like a better idea.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Leon_R

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2011
Messages
214
Location
Chelmsford, MA
Seriously! You have one he'll of an engine in 2.0...
 
Support Vendors who Support the GVR-4 Community
Boosted Fabrication ECM Tuning ExtremePSI Fuel Injector Clinic Jacks Transmissions JNZ Tuning Kiggly Racing Morrison Fabrications RixRacing RockAuto RTM Racing STM Tuned

Recent Forum Posts

Top