Torque is the biggest gain

 

well i'm building the engine to get it ready for turbo. i don't want to pull one from a junkyard and drop it in. i want it done right the first time. oh and to answer your question das about my return; i have a daughter that i'm claiming on my tax return so i'm lookin at around 5 to 6 grand back

 

I know that is true, I'm even thinking of using a 2.4 bottum end for my next build up. But I think money is better spent for time vs gain on a stock swap unless you allready have the engine out. But to take a perfectly running 2.0 out and swap for s tock 2.4 doesn't make a whole lot of sence.

 

its not going to be stock. i'm gonna bore out the block, rebalance the crankshaft, complete port and polished cylinder head with oversized valves. titanium valve springs and retainers and comp cam #14. getting the engine ready for turbo

 

are you talking about the 2.0 or 2.4

i didnt think they made bigger valves for 2.0

 

the 2.0DOHC and the 2.4 are the same head except 2001 and newer models. and they do have oversized valves. my engine build is a 2.4

 

so you guys are saying the 2.4 is a waste of time if its stock?? i plan on keeping it Na for now till i get more money but for now when i get it in ill get all the bolt ons and stuff but i wont have money for the cams... just headers and and Mopar Perform Comp and all the other stuff i need..

but i need to know if it its worth it or should i just stick with the 2.0?? cuz i looked up the 2.4 and it sounds ausome 150 hp and 155-65 lbs torque sounds good to me that quite a bit more then what I have now

 

im coming from both sides i own a 2.4 stratus (now stripped for racing on the weekends) and i own a 2.0 neon...the swap is good for one thing only...if you plan on going all n/a then the 2.4 is the way to go...but if you want a turbo then go with a 2.0...honestly there both good...but the 2.4 will react better all n/a then the 2.0

if you want to turboa 2.4 just get the srt-4 engine(less money in the long run).

 

The fastest neons in the world are 2.4.

This is from the .org the top 4 are N/A 2.4's (and to get on this list they have to post time slips or a vidio)

Local / Street All Motor:

1. JeffB#2 / 95 ACR Sedan / 12.313 / 111.51
2. superneon13 / 1G ??? / 13.700 / 97.99
3. MtOliverAuto / 98 Coupe / 13.800 / 99.710
4. UptownSport / 1G ??? / 13.888 / 97.92
5. Infil / 95 Sedan / 13.958 / 96.99
6. Nodestiny / 1G ??? / 14.255 / 96.28
7. TomZ / 95 ACR Coupe / 14.366 / 94.57
8. chipdogg / 96 Coupe / 14.448 / 96.49
9. 98sport2_4 / 98 Coupe / 15.111 / 89.49
10. j0n / 2004 SXT / 15.743 / 87.11
11. 99dohcneon / 99 coupe / 15.7608 / 86.42
12. Armstrong57 / 97 ?? / 15.8059 / 88.75
13. Outkaster / 95 Sedan / 16.0078 / 85.73
14. INVUJerry / 06 SXT / 16.341 / 85.66
15. dundoot / 03 ?? / 16.396 / 86.43

and this was how Jeff B's time slip read.

JeffB#2
Jeff Ball
1995 ACR sedan
All motor 2.4 swap
May 20, 2007
R/T - .060
60' - 1.803
330' - 5.128
1/8 - 7.947
MPH - 87.07
1000' - 10.367
1/4 - 12.419
MPH - 109.50

freaking insane. now this is the best of the year for turbo car.

nosdneon
Pam
Turbo, TNT
(Date?)
R/T: .001
60': 1.799
330: 4.767
1/8: 7.150
MPH: 101.82
1000: 9.220
1/4: 10.963
MPH: 129.34

Now look at the 60 foot times.
N/A 2.4 was just 4/1000 slower and thats against a 10 second turboed, and nos'ed . neon. N/A has insane throttle response just like a razor blade you open that tb and your gone. Now I know that the turbo car beat the N/A in the long run but thats not bad for a N/A car..

 

thats what i mean a 2.4 n/a with a hell of a good job done is pretty damn fast