When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Actually it’s factually correct. Peak HP is where you would want the engine RPM to be held at because the more aggressive gearing to hold the engine at the higher RPM where peak HP is produced more than compensates for the reduced engine torque. So even though engine torque would be less, wheel torque would be higher, and that’s what matters.
Should be asking 'Which one is less slow?'
You're probably around 17-18ish seconds for a quarter mile with either trans. May as well time it with a calendar.
I bet I could outrun my neighbor’s 1996 Mustang V6 if I had a manual trans. For that matter, I may be able to outrun it with my auto.
think you could beat my 267,000 mile pt cruiser if you had a manual trans? lol..
Is your PT Cruiser the turbo version? If it’s the 2.0 NA, I think I could beat it with my auto. If it’s the 2.4, maybe not. I have A 2.4 in my Stratus, and that’s a good engine. It has good power throughout the RPM range, and it is durable AF.
Just think how fast your bench race could have been if you drove a reliable 2008 Civic SI
But if he drove a 08 civic SI he would have to find something else to ask questions about. And then he would start tampering with it and ruin it much like most Si's, ludes, and s2000s were ruined.
No turbo. Base model. They're all 2.4's in the USA though.
I could have sworn I saw a PT Cruiser with a 2.0, I guess not though. You’d probably outrun my Civic with an auto though. Like I said, those 2.4 engines are very good IMO.
I could have sworn I saw a PT Cruiser with a 2.0, I guess not though. You’d probably outrun my Civic with an auto though. Like I said, those 2.4 engines are very good IMO.
US market all PT's were 2.4L engines. I don't consider the 2.4 to be very good. The first 6 years of production had bad head gasket issues. Ever change a water pump, t-belt, or head gasket in 1? It wasn't the best Chrysler ever made but it certainly wasn't the worst even in that same time period. 150 hp from a 2.4L is far from high output and is on par with the honda F engines which were vastly superior in durability. The 2.4 has a large potential for improvement but stock form it is an absolute dog of an engine. I think the nopi teams were getting 1200+ hp from a stroked 2.7L version of the 2.4
On a more interesting note originally the 2.0 twin cam engine that is directly related to the 2.4 was intended to be a 200 hp 8K redline monster. It would have been an engine that was designed to compete with the b18 Honda/Acura engines. But the accounting department specified that the 2.0 dual had to be available with an automatic and have a 100K service interval on the t-belt service. These 2 changes required lighter valve springs and less aggressive cam profiles, so 150ish HP instead of the easy 180-200 that was possible with proper setup.
US market all PT's were 2.4L engines. I don't consider the 2.4 to be very good. The first 6 years of production had bad head gasket issues. Ever change a water pump, t-belt, or head gasket in 1? It wasn't the best Chrysler ever made but it certainly wasn't the worst even in that same time period. 150 hp from a 2.4L is far from high output and is on par with the honda F engines which were vastly superior in durability. The 2.4 has a large potential for improvement but stock form it is an absolute dog of an engine. I think the nopi teams were getting 1200+ hp from a stroked 2.7L version of the 2.4
On a more interesting note originally the 2.0 twin cam engine that is directly related to the 2.4 was intended to be a 200 hp 8K redline monster. It would have been an engine that was designed to compete with the b18 Honda/Acura engines. But the accounting department specified that the 2.0 dual had to be available with an automatic and have a 100K service interval on the t-belt service. These 2 changes required lighter valve springs and less aggressive cam profiles, so 150ish HP instead of the easy 180-200 that was possible with proper setup.
Interesting, thanks for the info. I didn’t think that changing the timing belt and water pump on mine was that hard. Maybe there’s more room to work on it when it’s in a Stratus. Also, I think that the engine has more than adequate power throughout the whole RPM range.
But IMO, the best thing about the 2.4 is it’s durability. The engine in my Stratus took YEARS of abuse and neglect from the previous owner, but came back to life and ran like new after a tune up, timing belt kit, some new wiring that was melted, a new coil and a few other minor parts. The previous owner literally ran it so hot that it melted wiring and plastic parts, and it had almost no oil or coolant in it because it had a leaking lower rad hose and a bad oil pan gasket. When I got on the highway to take it home after I bought it, The oil light came on and it pegged the temp gauge. But it made it home just fine after filling the oil and putting water in the radiator. When I pulled the oil pan to change the gasket, there was about 1 inch of sludge at the bottom of the pan from lack of maintenance. But despite all that abuse, it had 180 PSI of compression on all cylinders when I tested it, and it ran great until a careless friend severely overheated it and completely ruined the engine.
I don’t think very many engines (including the Honda F series that you say is so much more durable) would tolerate that much abuse and still keep going.
Last edited by D17VTECPOWER; 10-30-2018 at 11:42 AM.
Interesting, thanks for the info. I didn’t think that changing the timing belt and water pump on mine was that hard. Maybe there’s more room to work on it when it’s in a Stratus. Also, I think that the engine has more than adequate power throughout the whole RPM range.
But IMO, the best thing about the 2.4 is it’s durability. The engine in my Stratus took YEARS of abuse and neglect from the previous owner, but came back to life and ran like new after a tune up, timing belt kit, some new wiring that was melted, a new coil and a few other minor parts. The previous owner literally ran it so hot that it melted wiring and plastic parts, and it had almost no oil or coolant in it because it had a leaking lower rad hose and a bad oil pan gasket. When I got on the highway to take it home after I bought it, The oil light came on and it pegged the temp gauge. But it made it home just fine after filling the oil and putting water in the radiator. When I pulled the oil pan to change the gasket, there was about 1 inch of sludge at the bottom of the pan from lack of maintenance. But despite all that abuse, it had 180 PSI of compression on all cylinders when I tested it, and it ran great until a careless friend severely overheated it and completely ruined the engine.
I don’t think very many engines (including the Honda F series that you say is so much more durable) would tolerate that much abuse and still keep going.
Sounds like it had a lot of issues...……
List the problems an engine may have in a simple column. Start checking off things if it is a common issue on that engine. examples would be
Make a list of everything you can think of that a engine can have go wrong with an engine. How many of those issues affect that series of engine. If none are common on the engine series then it is a good engine. Just from my quick and dirty list the Chrysler 2.4 suffers from both electronics and head gasket issues. I don't recall it being prone to sludging or burning oil. My list would rule out D series honda engines due to head gaskets and K series engines due to timing chain issues and oil consumption issues in some generations of the engines. None of the issues on my list are common on the F engines. Main issue they have is they start to leak oil when they get a LOT of miles or age.
Make a list of everything you can think of that a engine can have go wrong with an engine. How many of those issues affect that series of engine. If none are common on the engine series then it is a good engine. Just from my quick and dirty list the Chrysler 2.4 suffers from both electronics and head gasket issues. I don't recall it being prone to sludging or burning oil. My list would rule out D series honda engines due to head gaskets and K series engines due to timing chain issues and oil consumption issues in some generations of the engines. None of the issues on my list are common on the F engines. Main issue they have is they start to leak oil when they get a LOT of miles or age.
I agree that the D series engines are junk. IMO the B and F series engines were pretty reliable though. I have heard about head gasket issues with the 2.4, but I have not personally experienced that problem. Not to say it can’t happen. And the only electrical problems mine had was caused by a melted cam sensor, as well as some melted engine wiring and plastic parts. All caused by the previous owner overheating it.
I agree that the D series engines are junk. IMO the B and F series engines were pretty reliable though. I have heard about head gasket issues with the 2.4, but I have not personally experienced that problem. Not to say it can’t happen. And the only electrical problems mine had was caused by a melted cam sensor, as well as some melted engine wiring and plastic parts. All caused by the previous owner overheating it.
I didn't say the D engine is junk. Just that it has issues which keep me from calling it great.
The Honda B engine also has very common important problems as well. They were prone to valve issues. Either the valves stretched or the seat recessed. The end result is that if the valves are not adjusted properly and regularly they end up with burnt valves and misfire problems. That is a common thing on the B20 CRV engine which is by far the most common of the B engines.
Engine electrical wiring on Chrysler engines that melt is not limited to overheated engines. The insulation they used on the wiring doesn't survive normal engine bay temperatures. It has been an on going issue on their engines for 20+ years and was still a problem at least as recently as 2013. I had to change out an valley wire harness on a 2013 jeep G Cherokee for this issue, all the insulation had turned flaky and crumbled off allowing wires to short together. That style of short can potentially destroy an engine computer. I would call that a serious problem.
The Chrysler 2.0/2.4 head gasket issues applied to ALL engines made from the start of production in 1994 to around 2000/01. Some owners had to have their head gaskets replaced multiple times in that time period. That is a long time to continue making a flawed head gasket.
Honestly any time the cylinder head has to come off of an engine it makes me question the quality of the engine. If it is common for those engines to need a head pulled, then I don't consider that engine to be a great engine.
I didn't say the D engine is junk. Just that it has issues which keep me from calling it great.
The Honda B engine also has very common important problems as well. They were prone to valve issues. Either the valves stretched or the seat recessed. The end result is that if the valves are not adjusted properly and regularly they end up with burnt valves and misfire problems. That is a common thing on the B20 CRV engine which is by far the most common of the B engines.
Engine electrical wiring on Chrysler engines that melt is not limited to overheated engines. The insulation they used on the wiring doesn't survive normal engine bay temperatures. It has been an on going issue on their engines for 20+ years and was still a problem at least as recently as 2013. I had to change out an valley wire harness on a 2013 jeep G Cherokee for this issue, all the insulation had turned flaky and crumbled off allowing wires to short together. That style of short can potentially destroy an engine computer. I would call that a serious problem.
The Chrysler 2.0/2.4 head gasket issues applied to ALL engines made from the start of production in 1994 to around 2000/01. Some owners had to have their head gaskets replaced multiple times in that time period. That is a long time to continue making a flawed head gasket.
Honestly any time the cylinder head has to come off of an engine it makes me question the quality of the engine. If it is common for those engines to need a head pulled, then I don't consider that engine to be a great engine.
I never meant to say that every single 2.4 ever made was problem free, I can only speak from my experience, which is that the engine is powerful, reliable, and durable. Just my experience with that engine.
I'm pretty sure most all-aluminum engines built in the 90's and early 2000's had head gasket issues compared to prior-to steel engines. The D-series was most likely one of the better four cylinder engines compared to American and European engines in the same era. Still see a lot of 6th and 7th gens on the road today.
So I am wondering if there would be any problems with an ELD bypass. I don’t like the operation of the ELD because it drains my battery since it’s an AGM. I also don’t like that the performance of my accessories noticeably suffers from the lower voltage. So I am wondering if it would be bad for anything to just unplug the ELD so the alternator stays in high output mode all the time. As far as I know, besides maybe losing a fraction of a percent on gas mileage, it’s not harmful to keep the alternator in high output mode constantly. Am I correct? Thanks.
I heard that it’s like a 5 HP gain from idle to redline.
5hp? I doubt that while traveling in a straight line. The pump more or less freewheels when there's no hydraulic load, it simply circulates the fluid in a loop.
It might take 5hp when you have the steering cranked and held at full lock forcing the pump to build maximum pressure, but that's pretty damn brief.
I'll suggest you first cut your power steering belt off and find out exactly how much performance you gain before making any real decisions about converting
5hp? I doubt that while traveling in a straight line. The pump more or less freewheels when there's no hydraulic load, it simply circulates the fluid in a loop.
It might take 5hp when you have the steering cranked and held at full lock forcing the pump to build maximum pressure, but that's pretty damn brief.
I'll suggest you first cut your power steering belt off and find out exactly how much performance you gain before making any real decisions about converting
So the pump doesn’t build any pressure while cruising? I thought it was always creating pressure. If it’s not building any pressure unless the wheel is turned it’s probably not even using 1 HP.
i was working on these turds. they about eight cars on the team at any given time, they all have power steering. if they could get an extra 5hp deleting it, they would.
Hell, study up on any simple hydraulic system.
Most will be designed so the pump doesn't generate pressure until there's a demand for it. Hydraulic control valves bypass fluid flow at rest.
Hell, study up on any simple hydraulic system.
Most will be designed so the pump doesn't generate pressure until there's a demand for it. Hydraulic control valves bypass fluid flow at rest.
If that’s the case I would think it wouldn’t even take 1 HP to run the pump.
10-30-2018
