I was wondering how difficult it is to swap a 2.3 h.o. out of a 91 beretta gtz into a 97 cavalier z-24 (both 5 speeds). The z-24 has a rod threw the oil pan and i'm thinking of swapping the h.o. engine in it for a racecar. I have the whole donor beretta, it was my old racecar until the rr wheel bearing broke and sent me rolling. Will the motor mount and tranny mounts line up? should i swap all the wiring? shift cables?? Any help would be appreciated!!!
first , congrats on picking an awesome engine to swap in
the engine its self will will mount up the same just like the 2.4 did,..the tranny however you do not want to use..not that it wouldnt work but because it only had ONE mount , if you want an upgraded tranny i suggest looking for the 5speed tranny that was attached to the HOquads from 92-94...they will have both mounts you need, a better gear ratio, and u will be able to use your stock shifter cables and wiring.
asfar as wiring the engine, the quad will RUN on your factory pcm and wire harness..however i believe a re tune should be in order, especially since i think it will set the CEL due to the quad not having a cam sensor
^^ hit the nail right on the head.
welcome to 30 horsepower more..... instantly.
add a long tube header, full 3" exhaust, 60mm tb,CAI, and a dyno tune and welcome to 200+whp.
isn't the crank sensor between the two motors different?
-Trailblazer SS - not so custom 6.0L - custom intake - custom tune
- (1) 2.4L on an engine stand (1) blown trans (2) good quad trans (1) eco trans = party
SpyhunteR wrote:isn't the crank sensor between the two motors different?
Yes, the 87 Quad's had a different crank sensor location
Jason
99 Z24 Supercharged
157hp/171tq - NA
190hp/170tq @ 6psi
LG0/LD9 for Life
location is not an issue here...the cps may be in a different location, but so are the marks on the crank, trust me..it will not affect it at all.
as long as it plugs in it should work.
i dont remember the sensor itself being different...
Thanks for the info so far. The engine is out of the cav and the beretta will soon be drug out of a snow bank. I'm sure I'll have more questions for you guys then lol, I was thinking of switching the entire wiring from the beretta into the cavalier though, I don't know if that would make more sense than retuning? I don't know a lot about these cars cuz I raced a storm gsi for years before I got the beretta this year, I know the ecm on the beretta is under the dash and under the rf fender on the cav I believe. Idk what you guys would suggest on that. Also with the tranny I want to make it work if at all possible the ratio worked great on the track I race and I don't know if I'd be able to get a different one. Also wondering if the cv shafts on the cav will work... fuel lines, clutch... THANKS again for the info and more input would be great!
Hmmmm
It is plug and play... you will need to bend the PS pressure line some.
use the GTZ's trans.
Then the Generator.... One of two options,
A, buy a 1995 Z24 generator.
B. splice in the GTZ's pig tail Gen connector to your harness, the larger wire is not used. (this is a volt gauge wire.)
everything else is plug and play.
Use the Z24's ICM sensors and other little things like that.
Chris
'02 Z-24 Supercharged
13.7 @102.45 MPH Third Place, 2007 GMSC Bash SOLD AS OF 01MAR08
do NOT use the GTZ transmission.
it only has 1 mount, it will cause "engine twist"
and do not use the gtz wiring, however using the alternator pigtail is an easy route, as stated, use the atlernater pigtail or get a 95z24 alterntater that is plugnplay
other than that, make sure you use the ICM from the z24..its the little box under your idi cover
isnt the ECM on the beretta is up in the cowl area, not under the dash? at least thats where it is on my 95...
Forgot to mention that I race on a circle track and I only race ten lap feature so I don't need an alternator I just charge the battery, also don't need power steering. I may sound stupid here but whats an ICM sensor?
its not a sensor ICM = Ignition Control Module
and again its under your IDI cover on top of the motor.
I thought it was the 90's that had the one trans mount? My 92 was a driect swap in... GTZ rear mount, and a Z24 frt mount.
My GTZ's ECM was under the dash on the Pas. side...
You want that car or what Brad?
Clean 92 GTZ with Rocket parts ECM......
Chris
'02 Z-24 Supercharged
13.7 @102.45 MPH Third Place, 2007 GMSC Bash SOLD AS OF 01MAR08
why in the hell am i modding a 2.4 when i can swap this @!#$?.......maybe because a 2.4 with the HO cams and a 2.3 oil pump will be faster?
maybe.....
13.9 is the number to beat N/A with a 2.3 W41...
Chris
'02 Z-24 Supercharged
13.7 @102.45 MPH Third Place, 2007 GMSC Bash SOLD AS OF 01MAR08
Taetsch Z-24 wrote:maybe.....
13.9 is the number to beat N/A with a 2.3 W41...
Chris
isnt it 13.6 with a N/A 2.4 ?
I will be working on a 2.3 swap myself, just have to find the time and more importantly the funds. I may not be quite so N/A though, will be happy with 250 HP.
maxZ24 wrote:Taetsch Z-24 wrote:maybe.....
13.9 is the number to beat N/A with a 2.3 W41...
Chris
isnt it 13.6 with a N/A 2.4 ?
1/4 times and hp are two different things...perfect example is how my quad made more hp than pauls TC ...but paul runs a faster 1/4 than my quad
.
ive always liked to rely on the reasoning that the quad makes all its power on its own..where as the 2.4 needs quad parts to do it
hehehe
you are right, but still a 2.4 with quad parts is FASTER. screw hp numbers if the 1/4 time is better.
Karo's car, yes. a race car.
but if were going in to that... how about that what...550 HP 2.3 in a N car....
and are you going to spend that cash?
The ONLY thing the damn 2.4 has on it is the crank... put the crank in a 2.3.... now we're talking!
but the 2.4's head... my thumb is larger!
I'm just saying, bang for the buck, LG0\W41 is the way to fly.
And this is coming from a 2.4 guy remember....
Chris
'02 Z-24 Supercharged
13.7 @102.45 MPH Third Place, 2007 GMSC Bash SOLD AS OF 01MAR08
LOL i gotta chime in here...
obviously the LD9 head is superior to the quad's in terms of HO cams.
karo, paul, fetter, jmarks, skilz, clyde.... just look at all their results with the LD9 head with HO cams.
there really aint many 175whp all motor quads running around let alone 200+ ones.
todd has said it for years, maybe the quad head really isnt the hard on everyone makes it out to be.
i think were talking about a website that doesnt deal much in quad4s...and the one website that DOES deal in quads tends to not deal in dynos..so of the MANY people on there that im sure are close to 200whp (judging by time slips)
none of them every really dyno their car..so they dont make "our news" ....cavfan1 is a good example....runs 13s at near 100 mph...im sure his hp is up there, but his dyno showed a 130whp ...obviously not correct
Damn i wish i would have completed my 2.3...oh well maybe some day
The 086 does out flow an ld9 head significantly even when both are ported. The only problem with them is they crack.
jmarks82 wrote:Damn i wish i would have completed my 2.3...oh well maybe some day
The 086 does out flow an ld9 head significantly even when both are ported. The only problem with them is they crack.
yes but we do not know if flow is what makes these bastards run.
brandons beastly turbo motor did 551whp. the best beastly quad motor even with rocket parts over on Q4F made 556 whp.
so with an equally large turbo, PORTED 086 'god' head, HUMONGOUS .468 lift .252 duration crane cams, titanium rods, billet steel crankshaft and a whole slueth of other 2.3 goodies he made a whopping 5whp more.
and he was revving to 8000.
granted the power curve could have been much different but the thing most people tend to 'ohhh, ahhh' about is the peak power. and the bottom line is the LD9 got up there with the best Q4 and held its own.
and sure, it used quad 4 parts, but lets be realistic, that arugment is mute. the HO cams are WAYYYYY smaller than the cranes, and the 2.3 oil pump swap is more a reliability thing than a horsepower generator.
now... would i take a QUAD over an LD9? absolutely. any day of the week. however... i just think it needs to be said that the LD9 head isnt anything to dis-count. we need to listen to our forefathers here... obviously todd miller was on to something, he put together a 260whp ALL MOTOR LD9 over 6 years ago. and here we are over half a decade later still trying to catch up with that engine. and none of us are even close.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Friday, January 29, 2010 5:25 AM
