2.4 Turbo recomendaions

[turbo84voyager]

I am going to be assembling my 2.4 engine in the next few weeks and I am looking for some recommendations on what I should do about a turbo. My original plan was to build a log manifold and reuse my low mileage Turbonetics 46 trim hybrid from my 2.5 but I am a little concerned about the header cracking and fitment. Next I was thinking about buying either a ford T3 exhaust housing or a v-clamp housing ( If I can get one) for my turbo and use an aftermarket manifold. Another option I had was to use the turbofold I have but after taking a good look at it, it will need to be rebuilt or a new center section since it is sloppy. It dosent look like the impeller hit the housing but there is definitely excessive play. While looking into having that turbo rebuilt I came across the enforcer 1 from FM for the SRT. The engine is going in my van with an auto and I want a fun driver. Since it will have limited drag time, I don't want something that is going to be laggy around town. I am open for recommendations. A.J. had some great recommendations but they are out of my price range. I would like to do something for around a grand max at this time. As for the rest of the engine, the bottom end will have eagle rods, CP pistons, rotating assembly balanced, DCR pump, Head has 1mmOS valves, with stock cams. I will be using the plastic PT intake, Cam run distributor, Aeromotive 340 fuel pump, 40+ injectors ( for now until I need larger ones). The van has a Volvo cooler on it but I might change it to a NPR that I have. Thanks! Justin

[Ondonti]

If you actually want to spend near $1000 then there are some really nice modern mid frame turbos available.
Does that 46 trim have a small compressor housing on it or is it a real to4e or to4b etc?

Unfortunately the nicer responsive turbos in the range you want are more expensive then your budget. Nobody really cares about the HP range vs response level that you are looking for at a cheap price. Honestly 2.4L dohc turbo setups basically never resemble cars like people want to build here on any other platform. You have a higher reving engine, you have to forget 2000 rpm boost. Bogging down the 2.4 with a small turbo takes it out of its sweet spot. Lots of 2 valve motors keep up with 4 valve motors in the low revs and so the 4 valve gets wasted when you totally bias towards the low end.

[contraption22]

You consider the 2.4 a high revving engine?

Take into consideration this will be mated to an auto trans in a minivan for street duty. He's probably not going to be happy with the loose converter it would take to spool a large turbo.

[Ondonti]

If I was to compare a stock 8 valve n/a vs a stock 2.4L, YES. People here seem to compare heavily modified 8 valves without stock cams to stock 2.4's because they already own heavily modified 8 valves...and obviously don't like them. A comparison between 2 valve vs 4 valve cylinder heads in stock configurations on the same block would typically find the 2 valve and 4 valve heads comparable at low rpms with the 4 valve extending the powerband out ~1000-2000 more rpms. This is also because 4 valves tend to be even more held back in factory form so car buyers get that torque feeling they want but don't actually understand. 4 valve heads do not give you magical low end capability. You can't fix the things you hate about your 2 valve head down low with a 4 valve head. All you can do is match the same characteristics of your favorite 8 valve down low and have a slight gain up top. The moment you start modifying your 4 valve setup and removing the restrictions the manufacturer put in place, you will move the powerband to the right.

For around the town torque there is nothing to even be gained by going 2.4L and sticking with the same size turbo. 2.5L 8 valve will feel faster and more responsive in just about any form. It won't be faster at the track but if you want responsiveness and lag free, it won't matter.

[turbo84voyager]

The turbo has the small housing. I would expect the 2.4 to spool the turbo faster than the 8 valve motors. I would eventually like to upgrade to a larger turbo but I can't at this time. The engine was built up so I can do this later and not have to worry about the bottom end. The stock tdo4 is so tiny that I figured the 46 trim even though not the best for the 2.4 would have to be an improvement. I decided to use the 46 trim for now. I am going to weld a external wastegate flange on the header this way if I run into boost spike problems with the internal one like AJ has with his s60, I can use an external. I figure I can make a bracket to keep the internal permanently closed. What I meant by being streetable is don't want something that I have to rev up to four or five grand all the time. I have driven several 4G63's that were like this and I don't want something like that.

[contraption22]

If I was to compare a stock 8 valve n/a vs a stock 2.4L, YES. People here seem to compare heavily modified 8 valves without stock cams to stock 2.4's because they already own heavily modified 8 valves...and obviously don't like them. A comparison between 2 valve vs 4 valve cylinder heads in stock configurations on the same block would typically find the 2 valve and 4 valve heads comparable at low rpms with the 4 valve extending the powerband out ~1000-2000 more rpms. This is also because 4 valves tend to be even more held back in factory form so car buyers get that torque feeling they want but don't actually understand. 4 valve heads do not give you magical low end capability. You can't fix the things you hate about your 2 valve head down low with a 4 valve head. All you can do is match the same characteristics of your favorite 8 valve down low and have a slight gain up top. The moment you start modifying your 4 valve setup and removing the restrictions the manufacturer put in place, you will move the powerband to the right.

For around the town torque there is nothing to even be gained by going 2.4L and sticking with the same size turbo. 2.5L 8 valve will feel faster and more responsive in just about any form. It won't be faster at the track but if you want responsiveness and lag free, it won't matter.

You also want to pick a turbo that will make good power in an RPM that is easily sustainable for the engine. No sense choosing a turbo that works great at 4500-8000 rpms if the rods give up at 6800.

[turbo84voyager]

I don't understand ( could be wrong and not here to argue) how the 2.4 won't spool a turbo faster than an 8 valve because it is moving more air more efficently. For example if my one 2.5 doesnt really come alive until over 3 grand with the 46 trim, I would expect the 2.4 to spool the same turbo faster and make power at a lower rpm. Yes this turbo might choke the motor at a high rpm but not as much as the stock TD04. There are people running insanely large turbos on the 16 valve that you would not even think about running on an 8 valve. Plus I believe Brian S put out some rediiculious amout of low end torque with his Hybrid 2.5 motor so the 2.4 should be able to produce similar numbers. I am doing this swap becuse I was one of the unlucky ones that got the bad rings with their wiseco's and since i need to pull the 2.5 due to oil burning I want something different to play with. I would put it in my shadow with a stick but I have too much time into the body and everything else on it that I really dont want to mess with it.

[contraption22]

The ability to spool a turbo at low RPM is more of a factor of engine displacement than head flow. At higher RPM, as the 8v head starts to max out, cylinder head flow becomes more of a factor.