How much of a diffence is there between the 2 motors? Any major differences or pretty close to the same cept the egr valve?
well for starters the 95 is not a 2.4 its a 2.3
the engine code is LD2 and the 96 - 02 engine code is LD9
LD2 wrote:For 1995 only, a balance shaft-equipped version of the 2.3 L version was produced. A clever arrangement ensured a constant load on the shafts: the crank drove one shaft, which drives the second, which then drives the oil pump. The shafts spun at twice the engine RPM, forcing the redline to be reduced from 6800 to 6500 RPM. Output was 150 hp (112 kW) and 150 lb·ft (203 N·m). This was the only Quad 4 produced in 1995.
This was known as a transitional year for the engine family.
LD9 wrote:The LD9 Twin Cam was a 2.4 L (146 cu in) Quad 4 variant with balance shafts, and a redesigned cylinder head which debuted in 1996. Bore was decreased from 92 mm (3.6 in) to 90 mm (3.5 in) and stroke increased from 85 mm (3.3 in) to 94 mm (3.7 in) for better torque. Power came in at 150 horsepower (110 kW).[4] This engine received a minor update halfway through the 1999 model year that eliminated the EGR, increased the compression ratio from 9.5:1 to 9.7:1, and switched from low impedance fuel injectors to high impedance.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edited Tuesday, March 02, 2010 8:46 PM
Also not mentioned is that the 2 engines have different intake and exhaust manifolds as well as the manual trans 2.3s lacks the cam sensor. The 2.3 intake manifold can be made to fit the 2.4 with some modification.
he said 2.4s not 2.3 and 2.4s
brodycog wrote:he said 2.4s not 2.3 and 2.4s
there was not a 2.4 in a 95 z24.. it did not exist
see my quote
Speedline02 wrote:LD2 wrote:For 1995 only, a balance shaft-equipped version of the 2.3 L version was produced. A clever arrangement ensured a constant load on the shafts: the crank drove one shaft, which drives the second, which then drives the oil pump. The shafts spun at twice the engine RPM, forcing the redline to be reduced from 6800 to 6500 RPM. Output was 150 hp (112 kW) and 150 lb·ft (203 N·m). This was the only Quad 4 produced in 1995.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edited Wednesday, March 03, 2010 3:49 AM
GME Chat User: Speedline02 wrote:brodycog wrote:he said 2.4s not 2.3 and 2.4s
there was not a 2.4 in a 95 z24.. it did not exist
see my quote Speedline02 wrote:LD2 wrote:For 1995 only, a balance shaft-equipped version of the 2.3 L version was produced. A clever arrangement ensured a constant load on the shafts: the crank drove one shaft, which drives the second, which then drives the oil pump. The shafts spun at twice the engine RPM, forcing the redline to be reduced from 6800 to 6500 RPM. Output was 150 hp (112 kW) and 150 lb·ft (203 N·m). This was the only Quad 4 produced in 1995.
ok sorry i didnt read the whole thing..
however entrapped if you meant the 96 and 99 i believe the 96-98 have dished pistons and a pent in the combustion chambers in the head. the 99+ have no pent but flat top pistons. the 96-98 have 9.5-1 cr the 99+ supposedly have 9.7-1. 99+ have a different size crank sensor. but as far as i know you can use either motor in whichever year car as long as you modify the crank position sensor. other then that the i think their basically the same.
crank position sensor remained the same from 96 - 02, the knock changed midyear 99.
if you have a 99, you need to find out if you have the originial or the second edition engine. All the differences mentioned above changed midyear 99.
also the midyear 99+ had removed the EGR, on the 96 - midyear 99, if you outright remove the EGR you will throw a code, you'll need to bypass it.
we have yet to see a 99 like the 96-98 style. its a myth.
its either 96-98, or 99-02.
z yaaaa wrote:we have yet to see a 99 like the 96-98 style. its a myth.
its either 96-98, or 99-02.
I have worked on a couple.
ive seen a few also... 99 was just a weird year for the J platform period...
my bad i meant knok sensor
damn you clyde.. your always the exception to the rule on EVERYTHING.
until i see a 99 with dished pistons and the old style knock sensor with an EGR ill continue to believe they dont exist.
Sorry about that I found out after I posted 2.4 that it had the 2.3. I'm looking to swap my 99 which I don't think is a 99 because it took a 2000 clutch. I bought the 99 second hand from a kid that put money into it then destroyed it. I'm looking at the 95 because it has been parked for atleast 2 year maybe more. and needs a motor which In my case I need a body for my parts. Just because I'm tired of dealing with alignment issues, rusty unibody and it being unpainted. lol from first glance running down the road about 55. It appears to have good paint, and body. I didn't bother going and checking it at first because I wasn't sure if it would be for sale or not and hate getting my hopes up. I'm going to check the unibody on it this saturday after work and if it is good I'm gonna be buying on the spot. They hardly want anything for it. So if I can swap my motor tranny suspension parts rims tires and if need be computer and some of the wiring over to this car and have a nice clean J finally for extremely cheap. I'm doing it haha. That was why i asked the differences between the motors as I knew there would be some just didn't realize the 2 different motors till I posted this question
if the 2.3 is still good. i'd keep that motor, just swap your transmission over. if you have the Getrag, regardless of what you end up doing, you'll need to weld the trans mounts for the transmission to the chassis
the car needs a motor. Not sure what is wrong with the 2.3 entirely. how much of a challenge is it getting the tranny mounts right? is it both mounts needed or only one? and would the car still be worth getting? Not sure if it is auto or 5 spd yet. the tranny on my car has maybe 20K or 30K on it as as i bought it remanu
Speedline02 (GME Chat!!) wrote:if the 2.3 is still good. i'd keep that motor, just swap your transmission over. if you have the Getrag, regardless of what you end up doing, you'll need to weld the trans mounts for the transmission to the chassis
or he could just get the NVG getrag and not even mess with the mounts
Entrapped Fury (aka Spence) wrote:the car needs a motor. Not sure what is wrong with the 2.3 entirely. how much of a challenge is it getting the tranny mounts right? is it both mounts needed or only one? and would the car still be worth getting? Not sure if it is auto or 5 spd yet. the tranny on my car has maybe 20K or 30K on it as as i bought it remanu
http://www.j-body.org/forums/read.php?f=41&i=38360&t=36216&p=1
theres the how to for the swap
welp looked at the body today and its junk. the body is completely shot on it. So so much for that lol
