Hi I was wondering if it was possible to purchase the new style oil pump pick-up relocation adapter for the 2.4 if so how much would it cost
I'm sorry I don't know what that means pm'd
Private message. The 'inbox' at the top of the page.
~2014 New Z under the knife, same heart different body~
______________________
WHITECAVY no more
2012 numbers - 4SPD AUTOMATIC!!
328 HP
306 TQ
ok yes i know the 2.3 oil pump is a melling 136 but what is the gm part number for it ???
The Melling is better than the GM pump...
Seriously? Google melling 136.... BAM!
The internet is an amazing tool.... learn to use it.
________________________________________.
Still not low enough for a signature.
Reallly? You can't find one... I can get them all day long at Advance Auto Parts...
does it need an adapter for the 2.4?
Just for the record, the 2.3L oil pump is NOT necessity unless your future calls for raising your redline over 6500 RPMS.
>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----
^^^Disregard that... wrong thread.
>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:Just for the record, the 2.3L oil pump is NOT necessity unless your future calls for raising your redline over 6500 RPMS.
tell that to the hundreds of thousands of
STOCK LD9's with a rod knocking....
It's hundred of thousand now?
When you figure out why it happens, you'll understand there are simpler solutions than what you're preaching.
>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----
lol of course it is.... how many posts on jbo over the years are about "hey im hearing this knocking sound in my 2.4...) how many are in junk yards with blown motors? all you hear about is how the LD9 blows rods. constantly.
and LOL @ "find out" (btw why just tease about it like you have some cocky secret or something) id rather just put the better pump setup on and call it good for the life of my engine.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Sunday, September 25, 2011 5:54 PM
-Z Yaaaa- wrote:lol of course it is.... how many posts on jbo over the years are about "hey im hearing this knocking sound in my 2.4...) how many are in junk yards with blown motors? all you hear about is how the LD9 blows rods. constantly
1. There have been roughly 25K+ registered members since the years I have been here. The amount through the year of any sort of "knocking sound" thread has been under 100 in all the years. At that low rate, you have a larger chance of fuel pump failures or battery failure than your devil's 2.4L pump.
2. It is a mechanical pump and like any component that it is in constant use, the likelihood of it giving up will be greater, just like a water pump or a alternator. Over time, things will fail...and today, in an era where cars are made to be disposable in 6-8 years time (usually traded in 3-4 years time), the youngest 2.4L is 10 years old today... basically it is on "borrowed time." In other words, they're OLD.
3. And now you have an insight and kept records of all the junk yards through out the world where the 2.4L was being sold; and figured out it was solely because of "blown rods?" How do you get the message, is it via a Batman style signal in the night sky, but instead of a bat, it says "Z yaaaa" when a 2.4L goes down?
-Z Yaaaa- wrote:and LOL @ "find out" (btw why just tease about it like you have some cocky secret or something) id rather just put the better pump setup on and call it good for the life of my engine
Tease? What tease? I said "you figure out why" because it is obvious that you haven't. You want to find out the answer... drag your mouse to the "SEARCH" and read what's the answer. Sorry, I do not spoon feed lazy folks and i have no idea how long you've been here, but if you've been here for more than a year, and is basic computer savvy, you can figure out how to use the search. BTW, have you ever found the folks with 2.3L pump and rod failure threads, like I told you in recently? Because I just found one of them again so far.
Now, if YOU have a preference to the 2.3L pump for X-reason. It is more than fine. The problem is when you try to sell your penis enlargement elixir as the resolution to the rod failure and give people half ass info to add extra expense/time/muscle on something that will not permanently fix the issue that they're looking for.
For the record, I do like 2.3L pump, and do think if you moderatly push the limits from what the GM engineers designed the LD9 engine to do, the pump will suffice. Personally, I would go dry sump, but now that's me giving my preference. But i'm also not preaching it will resolve any inherent design flaw when lack oil is present either.
>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----
When I rebuild the engine in my 98 to basically stock specs, I fully intend to swap to a 2.3 pump. The 2.4 pump is to small and spins at to high of an RPM for my preferance. I also hate the damn balance shafts and the tiny ass chain that drives them and in turn drives the oil pump.
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:-Z Yaaaa- wrote:lol of course it is.... how many posts on jbo over the years are about "hey im hearing this knocking sound in my 2.4...) how many are in junk yards with blown motors? all you hear about is how the LD9 blows rods. constantly
1. There have been roughly 25K+ registered members since the years I have been here. The amount through the year of any sort of "knocking sound" thread has been under 100 in all the years. At that low rate, you have a larger chance of fuel pump failures or battery failure than your devil's 2.4L pump.
2. It is a mechanical pump and like any component that it is in constant use, the likelihood of it giving up will be greater, just like a water pump or a alternator. Over time, things will fail...and today, in an era where cars are made to be disposable in 6-8 years time (usually traded in 3-4 years time), the youngest 2.4L is 10 years old today... basically it is on "borrowed time." In other words, they're OLD.
3. And now you have an insight and kept records of all the junk yards through out the world where the 2.4L was being sold; and figured out it was solely because of "blown rods?" How do you get the message, is it via a Batman style signal in the night sky, but instead of a bat, it says "Z yaaaa" when a 2.4L goes down?
-Z Yaaaa- wrote:and LOL @ "find out" (btw why just tease about it like you have some cocky secret or something) id rather just put the better pump setup on and call it good for the life of my engine
Tease? What tease? I said "you figure out why" because it is obvious that you haven't. You want to find out the answer... drag your mouse to the "SEARCH" and read what's the answer. Sorry, I do not spoon feed lazy folks and i have no idea how long you've been here, but if you've been here for more than a year, and is basic computer savvy, you can figure out how to use the search. BTW, have you ever found the folks with 2.3L pump and rod failure threads, like I told you in recently? Because I just found one of them again so far.
Now, if YOU have a preference to the 2.3L pump for X-reason. It is more than fine. The problem is when you try to sell your penis enlargement elixir as the resolution to the rod failure and give people half ass info to add extra expense/time/muscle on something that will not permanently fix the issue that they're looking for.
For the record, I do like 2.3L pump, and do think if you moderatly push the limits from what the GM engineers designed the LD9 engine to do, the pump will suffice. Personally, I would go dry sump, but now that's me giving my preference. But i'm also not preaching it will resolve any inherent design flaw when lack oil is present either.
unsure if its because you never seem to be around here much any more or what but its not just these "borrowed" time LD9s that are blowing rod bearings. its been happening since 1996 on a frequent basis... gee, i wonder why? now, you say its because of a searchable issue thats supposidly "known" like its common knowledge or something.. so you claim. if this is true, why is it never talked about? why do 9 if not ten out of every 10 topics about the 2.3 pump swap or otherwise mention this "problem" in great detail? ive been here a long time... no maybe not as long as you but ive but my time in around here and i dont see any talk about that. now.. some have THEORIZED it
COULD be due to "something" like the third rod bearing being fed last. is this to what you are referring? if so... there is no proof of it being the issue. none that ive ever seen anyway...
you seem to be the only one talking about this "problem" that seems to supposedly be the end all, be all 100% issue as to why the 2.4's oiling issues occur is what i am getting at...
now, instead of a giant cock fight, how about we open our heads.. and work together to figure this out? instead of you just ramming "do the search" down my throat.. how about taking the time to actually explain urself and ur arguments here?
id be willing to fix the issue, or well.. at least TRY to.. but in the end, i am still going to go for the pump set-up that is not only LARGER, but lighter... as well as tried and true in the 2.3 swap.
as for the junkyards and threads rod knocking situation goes... well, just ask urself these questions... weather on here, quad4forums, or otherwise... how many threads do you see started about the 2.4 rod knock issue? how many threads to you see started about a 2.3 rod knock issue? and lastly... how many threads do you see started about a 2.3 pump swapped LD9 with a rod knock issue
*THAT WAS NOT.. I REPEAT.. WAS NOT CAUSED BY SOMETHING ENTIRELY IRRELEVANT TO THE 2.3 SWAP.
sorry but im not finding jack in the search about this known "issue".....
don't forget to add in the benefits of swapping to clevite 77 bearings.
-Z Yaaaa- wrote:
unsure if its because you never seem to be around here much any more or what but its not just these "borrowed" time LD9s that are blowing rod bearings. its been happening since 1996 on a frequent basis... gee, i wonder why? now, you say its because of a searchable issue thats supposidly "known" like its common knowledge or something.. so you claim. if this is true, why is it never talked about? why do 9 if not ten out of every 10 topics about the 2.3 pump swap or otherwise mention this "problem" in great detail? ive been here a long time... no maybe not as long as you but ive but my time in around here and i dont see any talk about that. now.. some have THEORIZED it COULD be due to "something" like the third rod bearing being fed last. is this to what you are referring? if so... there is no proof of it being the issue. none that ive ever seen anyway...
you seem to be the only one talking about this "problem" that seems to supposedly be the end all, be all 100% issue as to why the 2.4's oiling issues occur is what i am getting at...
You say it has been happening since 1996 because it is a given that the 2.3L pump was retired by then... lol cute and very easy to say. It is not frequent either, like I said:
"It is a mechanical pump and like any component that it is in constant use, the likelihood of it giving up will be greater, just like a water pump or a alternator. Over time, things will fail...and today, in an era where cars are made to be disposable in 6-8 years time (usually traded in 3-4 years time), the youngest 2.4L is 10 years old today... basically it is on "borrowed time." In other words, they're OLD." What I said that is search-able is my answer to this problem and as to why this happens. I don't go around repeating to often because I'm not going be a broken record on this, as these issues have become known here on JBO for 7-8 years as these engines gets: OLD. Why it's not talked about, it was... back in the past, and a lot too. It just afterwards there are a small group that repeats a lie on something, and if you continue so, it becomes a virtual truth. In this case, the 2.3L pump removes rod failure. And the theory you speak about... nope even simpler than that. If you kick in your common sense as to why this happens and how these engines tends to be treated or work, you'll see the culprit. In fact the answer is found the last response I gave you. haha
Quote:
now, instead of a giant cock fight, how about we open our heads.. and work together to figure this out? instead of you just ramming "do the search" down my throat.. how about taking the time to actually explain urself and ur arguments here?
I agree with that... but there is a huge chance you'll just ram down on everyone's throats that the 2.3L pump is the solution. As if you get a cut on the sales of the 2.3L pump.
Quote:
id be willing to fix the issue, or well.. at least TRY to.. but in the end, i am still going to go for the pump set-up that is not only LARGER, but lighter... as well as tried and true in the 2.3 swap.
Then that's a matter of preference. Perfectly fine.
Quote:
as for the junkyards and threads rod knocking situation goes... well, just ask urself these questions... weather on here, quad4forums, or otherwise... how many threads do you see started about the 2.4 rod knock issue?
Not a lot. Especially relative to the millions of LD9s fabricated. You're looking at 0.0001% of the LD9 population. And again things will fail with age, time, and use.
Quote:
how many threads to you see started about a 2.3 rod knock issue?
Not a lot either. For one, in a 2.3L motor it's roughly 20 +/- years old, it is probably already recycled and used in as a can for your Mountain Dew. And two, the ones that ventured out to replace the 2.4L pump for 2.3L pump, is so minuscule, that you'll have a better chance of being hit with a meteor than be parked next to a LD9 car with the 2.3L pump, or find a GM with a 2.3L at your Home Depot, or stopped at a stop light. Catch my drift here?
But for sure there are two in the Maintenance section, one of which I was fortunate to have found.
Quote:
how many threads do you see started about a 2.3 pump swapped LD9 with a rod knock issue *THAT WAS NOT.. I REPEAT.. WAS NOT CAUSED BY SOMETHING ENTIRELY IRRELEVANT TO THE 2.3 SWAP.
Well, it is not going to happen because of the 2.3 pump, just like it is not going to be cause by the 2.4L pump either.
>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----
The gist. This is what I wrote recently to a member here on the LD9.
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:
Seriously, it all begins with a proper break-in when the engine was brand-new. You do that, and any engine will return the favor. That being said, on the 2.4L if you did a proper break-in, there is less of a chance of the engine eating the oil down the line. Do a proper maintenance with a reputable oil filter and oil and top off oil level and you're golden in the 2.4L.
What happens a lot, is people just put in 4qrts of oil (per GM) when it requires 4.5 qrts, then those same engines tends to sip oil and that inadequate 4.0 qrts become 3.7, 3.5, 3.2, 3.0, and so forth. Some do not check the oil level and down it goes. Some do not change the oil at 3K miles like GM's engineers design the engine to run with, so combine that with the downward oil level and then you hear the stories. And of course it is always the car's fault, never the owner(s).
Now being that these engine are not new any more, like all the engines in a J, I would be weary of buying from a unknown person. But that goes with out saying with every car that is used. Personally, I think it is a gamble unless the previous owner was grandpa and was responsible with the maintenance.
Now, I have a 2.4L and my engine does not drink oil, I use mostly 10W30 Pennzoil Synthetic & Delco filters. And i do check the oil every 3 weeks. Now the only time I saw the oil level went down on my car, I was using Royal Purple, needless to say that was it for that oil.
Lastly... on the MB/AMG 6.2L M156 V8 engines tend burn/drink oil like crazy and in short order the engine fails because of lack of lubrication. In the LD9's case, a rod will not feel right after no lube.
Also I can't find the thread(s) with the 2.3L and rod failure in the maintenance section either. Apologies on that, hopefully someone will find it, but being it goes against the grain here, it will probably never put to light again. lol
>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----
lol well, i looked in maint. and found zero threads in at least first two pages on a 2.3 pump swapped LD9 having rod knock issues... i did, however... find 3 threads on LD9s with knocking issues, though. nothing in them about being swapped. but.. you cant find the thread either so LOL i think were sol on this one...
in my findings though it seems that any 2.3 swapped LD9 with rod knocking issues has either been due to operator error, machinist error, or just plain flat out stupidity. three i cant think of off the top of my head right now... clyde, he has told me he had a bearing failure after the swap but it was due to him not putting one of the plugs in the block as needed. then there was i think jon d? had an issue with his but i believe that was due to the wrong bearing clearances or something? and lastly mark at oem built some guy with an alero a fully built LD9 with swap and the guy didnt put a proper plug on the oil pan for the turbo drain and it leaked all the oil out and it fried the entire engine.
-anything else ive honestly never heard of with problems associated with the 2.3 swap.
and i get what ur saying... its what most have always said, due the maintenance and it should...
SHOULD last. perfect examples of this ive seen has definitely got to be jay van, john higgins, and james martin (misnblu)... their cars have been around here for YEARS, been beat on and ridden to death and they are just fine.
its not that i really WANT to bash the 2.4 pump etc it just gets the short end of the stick in terms of why the LD9s always have issues. weather or not anybody has ever acctually PROVEN the pump to cause cavitation after 6500 i do not know but when you set the 2.3 pump next to the 2.4 and see that its physically larger, thats the one to go with for a performance build. ur right, its not a necessity, however... its a good peace of mind. and while building any performance engine you plan on beating the piss out of the more peace of mind you can gain the better.
me personally, i always checked the oil in my 98z after the rebuilt LD9 when in, kept it regularly changed and i put only 7500 miles on it but that 7500 miles i really rode her hard.. never had any issues. the real test is going to be when i put that engine in my other z24 and turbo it as well as daily drive it. if it actually lasts 50 or 75k that way with me keeping up on things then my opinion of the 2.4 pump will most definitely at least be swayed more towards the direction of it being somewhat useful.
however.. one has to wonder of all the horror stories told and heard of the LD9 rod knock issue, were they all because of lazy owners? i choose to think not.. mostly due to the amount of LD9s ive come across personally that have the exact same problem... rod knock.
ps... whats the deal man? i thought you had more than just "check ur oil you lazy bastids" up ur sleeve here... LOL
