Saturn Sky Forum banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
155 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm hoping there will be aftermarket turbochargers for the 2.4 liter. I would hate to sell my Sky for the RL and i'm not going to wait any longer. If the 2.0 engine puts out (265?)HP shouldn't a 2.4 turbo engine put out around 25% more power?
How many PSI is the RL. I would rather have a turbocharged 2.4 than 2.0 anyday.

Any thoughts on this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
from what i've read / heard the 10:5 to 1 compression of the 2.4L makes turbo'ing / supercharging unlikely

you can do some nice stuff with other ecotecs but the sky has the only north to south mounted ecotec that i know of..so i not sure if I built my own 2.0 liter I dunno if the motormounts would work

will the sky redline's 2.0 bolt in the same as the standard sky's 2.4? who knows?

It would be really nice if other ecotec's would fit in the standard sky cus you can get 260hp and plenty more out of them but if the motor mounts dont match up I"m not gonna try to make it fit

we'll just have to wait and see but i dont think we'll be able to squeeze much more hp out of the 2.4....engine swaps seem the only option to get the standard sky anywhere near redlines hp
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
92 Posts
This will greatly depend on many factors.

Question number 1.. will the Red continue to use the MASS air flow sensor w/out a MAP sensor? Somehow the Red will need to determine the Manifold Pressure to adjust boost pressure as most modern boosted cars do. This would mean the ECU for the Red would need to be completely designed to accept more input/output devices.

Question 2.. will we be able to get our stock ECU to read positive manifold pressure properly w/out the user of a "Black Box??" I turbo'd a 2.0 DOHC na eclipse with a Hann racing kit. The thing was a monster, but impossible to diagnos problems because of the black box. Principally speaking it tricks the ecu into thinking it never has positive manifold pressure and keeps it at approx 0 manifold pressure. The major problem with this is that A/F ratio and Timing needs to adjust depending on boost levels, and doing this doesn't allow that to happen correctly.

Question 3.. how much are you willing to spend. SAFELY you may be able to push 3-6 psi in this car depending on what the internals are made of, but you have to understand that when these aftermarket manufactures "test" their products, it's generally less than 10,000 miles. I don't know about you, but I would hope to have my car run for more than that. I threw a crank bearing after 17,000 on my NT engine, which required another 4,500 dollars worth of engine internals and shop labor. So in short expect to spend 4,000 for the kit, 5,000 for a good built engine, 600 for a new clutch, 1600 for a brake upgrade, and whatever kinda rubber your throwing in the back because it will be more than the stockers can handle.

Question 4.. how addicted are you to speed? Once you get done spending over 10,000 for the above.. well now you can put more boost on the car..and the old 6 lbs of boost can be bumped up to 18 w/the right compression ratio.. which means now u need new injectors, fuel rail, exhaust, fuel pump.... and the neverending spiral of financial pitfall begins.... :thumbs:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Yes There will be turbo kits for the 2.4L.
No it does not make 25% more power. If you rebuild the engine you could get more though, Realisticly it is closer to 10% more power. But the RL will be able to achieve more in stock form.
The RL will run 20psi just like the GXP The 2.4L can hadle about 9psi, but should run less for reliability.

"will the sky redline's 2.0 bolt in the same as the standard sky's 2.4?"

Most likely yes, they since they are both GEN 2 Ecotec blocks

" dont think we'll be able to squeeze much more hp out of the 2.4"
How about 250whp
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
231 Posts
wakebord99 said:
This will greatly depend on many factors.

Question number 1.. will the Red continue to use the MASS air flow sensor w/out a MAP sensor? Somehow the Red will need to determine the Manifold Pressure to adjust boost pressure as most modern boosted cars do. This would mean the ECU for the Red would need to be completely designed to accept more input/output devices.
A lot of turbo set-ups rely on a MAF and not a MAP. The amount of air that flows through the MAF corresponds to the boost.
Question 2.. will we be able to get our stock ECU to read positive manifold pressure properly w/out the user of a "Black Box??" I turbo'd a 2.0 DOHC na eclipse with a Hann racing kit. The thing was a monster, but impossible to diagnos problems because of the black box. Principally speaking it tricks the ecu into thinking it never has positive manifold pressure and keeps it at approx 0 manifold pressure. The major problem with this is that A/F ratio and Timing needs to adjust depending on boost levels, and doing this doesn't allow that to happen correctly.
It's not an issue of making the ECU see positive manifold pressure. A MAF outputs a voltage to the ECU that corresponds to the amount of air flowing through it. When you modify the amount of air coming into the system you need to re-scale how the MAF voltage corresponds to the fuel tables. If you have software that can reprogram the stock ECU then you don't need a piggyback computer.

Question 3.. how much are you willing to spend. SAFELY you may be able to push 3-6 psi in this car depending on what the internals are made of, but you have to understand that when these aftermarket manufactures "test" their products, it's generally less than 10,000 miles. I don't know about you, but I would hope to have my car run for more than that. I threw a crank bearing after 17,000 on my NT engine, which required another 4,500 dollars worth of engine internals and shop labor. So in short expect to spend 4,000 for the kit, 5,000 for a good built engine, 600 for a new clutch, 1600 for a brake upgrade, and whatever kinda rubber your throwing in the back because it will be more than the stockers can handle.
Stock internals should be good to about 8-9 psi. The higher compression will limit what you can safely pull off, but with a good tune you should be fine at those levels. A good built engine may cost you $5000, but if you take your brand new Ecotec at the time of delivery and have forged rods and pistons (lower compression) installed it will probably only run you $1200-2000 since you won't need all that machine work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
92 Posts
Mallard said:
A lot of turbo set-ups rely on a MAF and not a MAP. The amount of air that flows through the MAF corresponds to the boost.
It's not an issue of making the ECU see positive manifold pressure. A MAF outputs a voltage to the ECU that corresponds to the amount of air flowing through it. When you modify the amount of air coming into the system you need to re-scale how the MAF voltage corresponds to the fuel tables. If you have software that can reprogram the stock ECU then you don't need a piggyback computer..
There is a huge difference in the overall algorithm between a NA and boosted vehicle. Cars that are built as NA see positive manifold pressure or near 0 manifold pressure as if you let your foot off the gas, and will reduce fuel sent to the engine. To change this, you would basically need to be able to re-write the entire ECU's programing. I'm not saying it's impossible, just close to it. And deffinately not able to be done by an simple OBDII plug and play flash. Again I'm not saying it can't be done.. Just in my experience it's very difficult.

Mallard said:
Stock internals should be good to about 8-9 psi. The higher compression will limit what you can safely pull off, but with a good tune you should be fine at those levels. A good built engine may cost you $5000, but if you take your brand new Ecotec at the time of delivery and have forged rods and pistons (lower compression) installed it will probably only run you $1200-2000 since you won't need all that machine work.
What are the stock internals made of, forged steal? My experience with the 420A DOHC Mopar 2.0 lead me to understand that pushing any boost over 7 psi, with stock internals and stock bearings will degenerate the rotating assembly untill either the bearing wear and grind the crank, or a piston rod breaks. I have built 7 systems all running a stage 2 18g turbos at 7 psi of boost. All had stock internals with less than 50k on the engine. Stock compression was 9.6:1 (lower than the Sky's), and ever single one had failed within the next 15,000 miles.

And PLEASE... tell me where i can get a balanced and blueprinted rotating assembly for $1200 installed. I'll go there every day !! Crower Rods, JE pistons and piston rings w/a 8.5:1 comp, new bearings alone will run you almost $1,000. Throw 3-5 hours of good shop labor for blueprinting ontop of that at 250.00 per hour, and your atleast $2,000. Then you have to reinstall the entire assembly back into the block, another 3-5 hours of labor..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
750 Posts
this prompts me to ask

ok am I right in saying with a 2.4 the sidewalls would be weaker?? or is the 2.0 a totally different engine??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
wakebord99 said:
What are the stock internals made of, forged steal?

The connection rods are, everthing else is cast I think.....

Everything in the redline, will be forged if I'm not mistaken.

:EDIT: The pistons are still cast aluminum.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Sky4christ said:
ok am I right in saying with a 2.4 the sidewalls would be weaker?? or is the 2.0 a totally different engine??
Technically yes, Because the bore on the 2.4L is 2mm larger... But that difference is not a limiting factor for the 2.4L performance, even under boost.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
231 Posts
wakebord99 said:
There is a huge difference in the overall algorithm between a NA and boosted vehicle. Cars that are built as NA see positive manifold pressure or near 0 manifold pressure as if you let your foot off the gas, and will reduce fuel sent to the engine. To change this, you would basically need to be able to re-write the entire ECU's programing. I'm not saying it's impossible, just close to it. And deffinately not able to be done by an simple OBDII plug and play flash. Again I'm not saying it can't be done.. Just in my experience it's very difficult.
There are plenty of bolt-on turbo kits for n/a cars that function properly. Why would a MAF-based system even care about manifold pressure? It doesn't know what pressure is, just flow. Increasing the amount of fuel delivered with boost is done by re-scaling the MAF with the fuel tables. (MAF works on 1-5 volts. Re-scale the relationship between voltage and flow/fuel.) Just look at the people using HPTuners or LS1edit to tune turbo/supercharged/nitrous set-ups on LS1's. It is possible, and they accomplish it through re-flashing the stock ECU through the OBDII port.


What are the stock internals made of, forged steal?
Yes. The rods are.

My experience with the 420A DOHC Mopar 2.0 lead me to understand that pushing any boost over 7 psi, with stock internals and stock bearings will degenerate the rotating assembly untill either the bearing wear and grind the crank, or a piston rod breaks. I have built 7 systems all running a stage 2 18g turbos at 7 psi of boost. All had stock internals with less than 50k on the engine. Stock compression was 9.6:1 (lower than the Sky's), and ever single one had failed within the next 15,000 miles.
Detonation is typically what kills motors, not the amount of pressure in the cylinder. Yes, you run a greater risk of detonation at higer boost levels with high compression, but it's not impossible. Timing needs to be pulled, higher octane gas needs to be used, etc.


And PLEASE... tell me where i can get a balanced and blueprinted rotating assembly for $1200 installed. I'll go there every day !! Crower Rods, JE pistons and piston rings w/a 8.5:1 comp, new bearings alone will run you almost $1,000. Throw 3-5 hours of good shop labor for blueprinting ontop of that at 250.00 per hour, and your atleast $2,000. Then you have to reinstall the entire assembly back into the block, another 3-5 hours of labor..
I didn't say a balanced/blueprinted rotating assembly for $1200. I said with a brand new motor you would not need the machine work you would require when rebuilding a used engine. On my old car (4 cylinder turbo) forged rods and pistons would run about $1200. Do some labor yourself and I don't think having a forged bottom end installed and running for around $2000 is out of the question.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
830 Posts
Check out the Sol Forum

Was reading the Turbo set that Hann jr is testing for the 2.4 L sol, 8 psi boost and 257 hp at the rear wheels, thay say the test show the 2.4 will hold up and have run it at higher psi but feel 8 is best...????
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
92 Posts
Well whoever is reading this "discussion" between Mallard and I now knows a thing or two more than they may have coming in..

Mallard said:
There are plenty of bolt-on turbo kits for n/a cars that function properly. Why would a MAF-based system even care about manifold pressure? It doesn't know what pressure is, just flow. Increasing the amount of fuel delivered with boost is done by re-scaling the MAF with the fuel tables. (MAF works on 1-5 volts. Re-scale the relationship between voltage and flow/fuel.) Just look at the people using HPTuners or LS1edit to tune turbo/supercharged/nitrous set-ups on LS1's. It is possible, and they accomplish it through re-flashing the stock ECU through the OBDII port..
Ok.. but what about when there is positive manifold pressure. Air doesn't move the same way through the MAF. There will be a constant pressure on the MAF sensor. I dunno perhaps i'm overthinking it as the majority of my experience is with MAP systems. If it works it works, and we're all the better for it. :thumbs:

Mallard said:
Detonation is typically what kills motors, not the amount of pressure in the cylinder. Yes, you run a greater risk of detonation at higer boost levels with high compression, but it's not impossible. Timing needs to be pulled, higher octane gas needs to be used, etc..
Correct !! It will also depend on how heat and fuel is distributed throughout the combustion chamber. If there are hot spots, or improper fuel mixture detonation is much more likely. And all it takes is 1 bad detonation to destroy your motor although usually it will survive. Again depends on how the rest of the internals can stand up to the added pressure.

Also, If a MAF system can't determine boost, how will it lower the timing as the boost comes up? Any good sytem requires this.. Also not the expert on the variable valve timing, but when buying a cam. The turbo and NA cams are completely different. Generally in a turbo the exhaust valves need to open for longer, and earlier (adjusting depending on boost levels). While the intake valves don't need to change all that much. All of this is exactly oposite in a NA vehicle. Long story short, for any turbo car to run properly it will need to know what the manifold pressure is. And it sounds like the MAF won't be able to do that.

Mallard said:
I didn't say a balanced/blueprinted rotating assembly for $1200. I said with a brand new motor you would not need the machine work you would require when rebuilding a used engine. On my old car (4 cylinder turbo) forged rods and pistons would run about $1200. Do some labor yourself and I don't think having a forged bottom end installed and running for around $2000 is out of the question.
Never built an engine that wasn't balanced and blueprinted. Never knew anyone who didn't have this done. Let me know how that works out because i would imagine it would shake like no tommorrow, and the piston rings wouldn't stay seated for too long.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
92 Posts
seal9 said:
Was reading the Turbo set that Hann jr is testing for the 2.4 L sol, 8 psi boost and 257 hp at the rear wheels, thay say the test show the 2.4 will hold up and have run it at higher psi but feel 8 is best...????
Hahn Racecraft is excellent. The sales guys know their product like i've never seen, and they generally develop products specifically for an application. Also their turbos are if anything oversized allowing alot of room to grow. As my discussion with Mallard shows beware of the "Black Box". It's EVIL :mad:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
623 Posts
The 2.0 and the 2.4 use the same Gen Block, the 2.0 is mostly a shorter stroke (although the bore is a tad smaller). The 2.0 used Direct Injection as opposed to injecting into the Mainfold. From what I've been able to tell the 2.0 has both a MAP and a MAF sensor one for before the turbo and one after. The rumor is that the 2.0 engine is pushing 15 to 20 PSI stock. The internals are very similar to the 2.4. The main reason for not using the 2.4 was the high compression ratio, it would have been difficult to up the boost that much. Part of the reason the boost is so high is becasue of the direct injection, I think it has to do with valve timings and how since fuel doesn't rely on the valve they can control the opening an closing differently.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
DuSpinnst said:
The 2.0 and the 2.4 use the same Gen Block, the 2.0 is mostly a shorter stroke (although the bore is a tad smaller). The 2.0 used Direct Injection as opposed to injecting into the Mainfold. From what I've been able to tell the 2.0 has both a MAP and a MAF sensor one for before the turbo and one after. The rumor is that the 2.0 engine is pushing 15 to 20 PSI stock. The internals are very similar to the 2.4. The main reason for not using the 2.4 was the high compression ratio, it would have been difficult to up the boost that much. Part of the reason the boost is so high is becasue of the direct injection, I think it has to do with valve timings and how since fuel doesn't rely on the valve they can control the opening an closing differently.
the 2.0L does run 20lbs of boost, GM has said that. It also has a forged crank as opposed to cast in the 2.4L. The 2.4 could not take the power made from running 20psi through it. DI doesn't need high boost, they can run the high boost because DI is much more knock resistant than port injection. DI doesn't really have much to do with valve timing.... though I'm not sure which type of DI they are using.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
231 Posts
wakebord99 said:
Hahn Racecraft is excellent. The sales guys know their product like i've never seen, and they generally develop products specifically for an application. Also their turbos are if anything oversized allowing alot of room to grow. As my discussion with Mallard shows beware of the "Black Box". It's EVIL :mad:
If the 'black box' is what I think it is, then I had problems with it on my car too. I had a Split Second AFC on my car to help retune the a/f ratio. It uses an internal MAP sensor and programable fuel tables an it modifies the MAF voltage to add or subtract fuel at certain points. (They don't tune by using absolute fuel numbers. It's an addition or subtraction of what the stock ECU is doing.)

When it worked right my car ran great. But occassionally it would 'hiccup.' I eventually took it off.

With the ability to tune the stock ECU there should be no such issues.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
92 Posts
Mallard said:
If the 'black box' is what I think it is, then I had problems with it on my car too. I had a Split Second AFC on my car to help retune the a/f ratio. It uses an internal MAP sensor and programable fuel tables an it modifies the MAF voltage to add or subtract fuel at certain points. (They don't tune by using absolute fuel numbers. It's an addition or subtraction of what the stock ECU is doing.)

When it worked right my car ran great. But occassionally it would 'hiccup.' I eventually took it off.

With the ability to tune the stock ECU there should be no such issues.

I hope so, I love Turbos :thumbs:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
623 Posts
soslowgtp said:
the 2.0L does run 20lbs of boost, GM has said that. It also has a forged crank as opposed to cast in the 2.4L. The 2.4 could not take the power made from running 20psi through it. DI doesn't need high boost, they can run the high boost because DI is much more knock resistant than port injection. DI doesn't really have much to do with valve timing.... though I'm not sure which type of DI they are using.
I think the valve timing is why DI is less knock resistant and why they can run so much boost.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top