Jump to content


OMOC Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by lamchop77

  1. My info has been gleaned from guys who race, I’ve toyed around with a 2.0 cih motor and managed to get nearly 160bhp off a virtually standard ending with 40’s and a 234 Kent cam no other trick parts. Similar job on a 2.2, std pistons, bottom end, good head and cam, carbs and had a motor that was knocking on the door of 180bhp. Used to hold its own grassing against full race red tops on throttle bodies. I’m not going to say I’m an expert on this but what I’ve done on the cheap has worked and worked well. Some of the guys I’ve conversed with have serious engines revving 8500-9000 reliably with high power so they know their stuff. Hope you get the desired results, these old boat anchors are such a cool engine!!
  2. I’ve done quite a bit of research into this over the years but there is some dud information out there. 2.2 heads are pretty good the flow just needs working on with the exhaust port, I think it gets narrow around the valve guide area so it needs opening uP a bit in that area, fit 46/42 rec valves and the flow will increase more. The raised port design works well when you get the motors revving, think they were developed from the “Sweden heads” that were being done. I was in touch with a guy that had his heads tested on a flow bench, the results were basically a 2.2 std head basically flows the same as a fully ported 2.0. I can’t remember exactly but there is an issue with the 2.4 heads in that the port shape isn’t quite right….I can’t recall exactly and I think there was something to do with the exhaust valve temperature s getting Hogg with them as well . I went with the 2.2 head because of that fact. You definitely need to be using a big lift cam as well, around the 14mm mark minimum. If you’re not getting that just stick with the 2.0 clean the ports up a bit and use the 45mm inlet valves from the 2.4 head… they’ll need unshrouding as well in the combustion chamber. That should give you a bit of a pokey motor!! Hth Chris
  3. As Jessopia said it’s a no-no with hydraulic lifters. Definitely need solid lifters. With a 234 you will need to check valve to piston clearance, most of the time they’re ok but if the heads been skimmed it can get a little close. You should also be using the Kent valve springs and removing the rotacaps as well. If you don’t use the correct springs you’ll end up with valve bounce when it’s revving. Good cam though when it’s done right, you’ll need to get an adjustable fuel reg and get the pressure up a bit, with a bit of port cleaning up/bigger inlet valves and a decent exhaust you can see 150 bhp. HTH Chris
  4. Good spot that, they are a rare thing to come up. Pity there’s only 2 available.
  5. No probs mate, anytime. The Wossner piston design seems to be ok apart from the fact that the compression dome is actually the 2.0 combustion profile on the 2.4 piston so a bit of modification is needed to the head. The custom ones I had done were done through a guy that does alot of work on high power yank motors. The CIH has the same wedge design as the the Chevys. I had a lot of pics/info off the web/contacts that had large domes to get the comp ratio up which he said wouldn’t work (one of them was produced by Omega!!), there’s only so far you can go before it starts affecting flame propagation across the piston crown. Some of the designs had a recess across the dome to help combat this but he said it wouldn’t work so I went with his advice. The final design looked pretty much like the wossner ones and have an odd comp ratio of 11.89/1. One thing I would say is check the ring gap on the pistons, they tend to wear quite badly sometimes. If they have worn a bit you can get thicker rings from total seal rings. You can always fit a set if they are ok as well, use the split twin top ring type. That’s what I’ve got, guy told me he’d been involved with tuning some Hayabusa motors for a class 10 grasser. Everything had been done that was available to the motor so they were looking for a bit more to get the edge on the competition, ended up with another 10 bhp per motor just with a ring change so it’s worth considering. Hth Chris
  6. Snowy, been through all this years ago. I was struggling to find 2.2 pistons for the class 3 grasser engine I was running. At the time 2.2 pistons were 127.50 each. Looked at all the modification stuff with the Chevy pistons, valves etc, yeah some of the stuff looks and is cheap but then if you’re buying from summit basically take the price in dollars as if it was pounds and add a bit of shipping and you’ll not be far off the cost. Most of the pistons had circlip gudgeon pins and were different sizes so they needed opening out skimming to fit the piston and also needed a phosphor bronze ( I think ) bush manufacturing/inserting for each rod. Then the pistons will need modding for valve cutouts, maybe skimming to make sure the top of the piston doesn’t protrude too far from the top of the block. Basically it’s a minefield you’re walking into!!! On top of this you have to find someone to do the work as well……not many of those boys around, ann in d because everything is modded you’ll have no guarantees with it either. The easy way out of this is just to buy a set of forged pistons and a set of rods. I’m sure that cop pistons do some as well as the wossner ones, and I’m sure wiseco had some listed as well. Sure it’s a bit pricey but it’s quality stuff you’re buying and the bottom end will be pretty bulletproof. All the weights are within a gram so it will be more balanced. Goin the modded route you’ll need to redo all the pistons and rods weight matching them. My setup was done because I couldn’t get the pistons anywhere and the cost of getting custom ones done was equivalent to buying six std ones……that was a no brainer!! I was using longer rods to change the rod ratio to help the engine rev harder as well so that was another reason for custom ones, but now you can get a long rod set of 2 litre pistons from wossner…..the 2.2 pistons are rare and and not really used so that added to my problems, everything was either 2.0 or 2.4. I’m going back 10/11 years now and the cost then was £785 for pistons/rings/pins and an MLS head gasket. Just so you know why the yanks do the mods apart from the cost of bits, one thing they were doing was taking 1.9 cranks having them welded, straightened after welding, reground offset for 85mm stroke and re heat treated( I think) for about 400 dollars. That’s why they can do what they were doing. Where the hell would you find someone to do that over here!!!! They just have better shops and are more set up for doing that kind of stuff Save the pennies, buy the pistons, avoid the hassle!!! 👍 Hth Chris
  7. Ref the oil pressure, you’ll probably find that the baseplate that holds the pump gears in place in the front cover will be worn/scored as will the housing and possibly the pump gears. Try removing the plate and cleaning up with wet and dry finishing on 500 grit and use wet. Obviously you’ll need something nice and flat to flat it on. Check if you have a gasket fitted or not and check the pump to cover clearance. If you use a gasket on a non gasket front cover you will get low oil pressure readings just like you are. If it’s still the same after all that you can add a few 6mm washers behind the spring for the pressure relief valve on the cover. This will just up the release pressure to open it slightly which may get rid of the light coming on if non of that works the pump gear are worn as well. I wouldn’t worry too much though, just attach a pressure gauge and get a reading. The CIH oil feed galleries are massive compared to other engines, they’re about 8-10mm in the block. If you had a pipe 10mm diameter with a pressure of 5lb say the oil would be everywhere…. I know because I had this problem and I ran with a gauge in the engine bay to monitor it but the pipe split where it was attached at the oil pump priming hole. It was everywhere. Make sure you are using a 20-50 classic grade of oil as well as that will also affect the pressure. Hth Chris
  8. Hi Mathew, Another alternative to look for is the 2.2 CIH from the Carlton (was it Omega for you guys!!) big improvement in torque and shares a similar head to the 2.4. They were/are rare in the uk but i'm sure they were more plentiful in Europe and fitted to more vehicles. I built one on a budget so it ran a 2.0 head with 46/41 valves, std pistons but pocketed, 244 cam, 48s, std distributor and a lightened and balanced bottom end and was putting out just shy of 180bhp but had loads of low down grunt. HTH Chris
  9. Sounds like it could just be leaning out. Definitely change the injector seals and resell the mounting plates. Have you checked all the induction pipe work after the throttle body? They can split especially at the flex points. It will make it feel flat as a pancake if it is! Hth Chris
  10. lamchop77


    Probably a recon at some time in its life. I have one that was a factory recon and it has 2.0s on the block.
  11. Been a while since I posted on here!!!! The 2.4.head is pretty much the same as the 2.2 head but the exhaust ports are bigger. The combustion chamber as said is bigger than the 2.0 and gives the 10% or so drop in compression. If you want to use it skim the head to raise the compression a bit and invest in Vernier timing gear as you will need to dial the cam back in after skimming, can’t remember exactly but I think 0.1mm skim is a 1 degree change in the position of the cam. The inlets are higher in the head but this gives a big increase in flow. Comes from early tuning of the “Sweden heads” I think. Basically a 2.2/2.4 head starts flow wise where a fully ported 2.0 stops so definitely worth using. You can use the 2.0 injection and manifold it just needs the dowel positions red rolling in the 2.0 plenum and a bit of port matching to fit. Guy I knew ran 2.0 injection on a standard 2.4 and got a 9bhp increase. 2.2/2.4 injection was geared for economy not power. Hth Chris
  12. Look on ca builder solutions, they should have something. HTH Chris
  13. Andy, Rebuilding is exactly the same as the 2.0 differences being the bearings for the big ends on the conrods don't have holes in them for the piston oil squirters (usually anyway, there are some 2.4s with the piston oil squirters!!!! Just check the conrod for a small hole on the top of the big end close to the bolt), but you can use the 2.0 bearings in the 2.4 conrods no problem. Pistons are the floating gudgeon pin type in the 2.4 so its jus a matter of assembling the piston, rod, gudgeon pin and fitting the c clips into the piston. Its a bit fiddly but you can do it carefully with a small screwdriver. Everything else is pretty much the same. HTH Chris
  14. General, If your using super plus it should be roughly what 4 star was, so std timing should be ok. IIRC static timing is 12 deg and then with revs advances up to about 30 ish. I did get a good piece of advice off a guy years ago. He said listen to the starter motor as the engine is cranking over, if it sounds like its kicking back change the timing so that it sounds like itsits cranking freely. Your timing should be spot on then. Mine was 12 1/4 deg when i did it this way. Every engine is different so you have to listen to whether its happy or not. Just as an example i have a highly tuned CIH and i awas going to have a custom cam ground up so i took measurements every 10 deg of where the piston was in the bore so that max lift and timing could be determined. The readings for the piston on the way up were different to on the way down, and by a few mm. The reason.......the crank is offset in the block, only a touch but its probably on max tolerance. So you can time your engine to where the piston should be as designed but it could be 2-3 mm away from that position in reality. Hence listening to the engine is alwaya good indicator. HTH Chris
  15. Nope, all the std 2.0CIH/1.8OHC Manta flywheels i have seen all have the recess on them (approx 2.5mm) . I have a redtop flywheel as well for the larger clutch and that is the same. HTH Chris
  16. Well I used to use ATF as the gearbox guy i used to use recommended it!! Thing is he was wrong!! So thats me posting duff info. The firm i used aren't what they used to be as the old guy who ran it retired. Through other various sources its come to light that ATF doesn't have certain anti wear additives that the older 5 speed boxes need, saying that the boxes i have run on ATF are still fine and dandy. Basically go with he 75-90 GL5 oil as Rutts has said to be safe. I switched to using the Lucas stuff. HTH Chris
  17. Personally I'd go with the mod to the combustion chamber, it really isn't a lot to take off. I have been told that the risse headgaskets aren't really up to scratch and can fail after a few thousand miles. Elrington, paten or an MLS gasket are best. Also if you are increasing the gasket thickness you will be changing the cam timing. If your going to go the thicker gasket route go with MLS or better still copper headgasket.
  18. It might, but 20 mins and a die grinder to smooth the edge of the combustion chambers works a treat!!!
  19. Yeah get em put back on!! Couple of things I'll comment on. If your going the 2.4 route get the aftermarket pistons. The Mahle ones are just not up to the job if your going to push the engine at all, same thing for the 2.2 pistons. My experience with them is that the ring landings crack and also that the ring recesses go over size which causes ring chatter which can crack them. If you do go the Wossner route be aware that the dome for raising the compression is actually the profile of the 2.0 head combustion chamber and not the 2.2/2.4 head. If you use the pistons with a std 2.2/2.4 head the dome will contact the edge of the combustion chamber on the head. It's only about 1mm or so but you will need to mod the head to clear this. Hth Chris
  20. The basic problem for the 2.4 is the crappy rod ratio, 1.58, this coupled with a shorter skirted piston causes the piston to wobble at the top of the bore. On the 2.4s I have its only the top 10mm of the bore that was worn, the rest was perfect. On e thing to note is that there is a 90 thou offset of the gudgeon pin to one side, the thrust side, which i assume was done to try and counter the piston wobble problem and gain higher mileage from the motors. I'm pretty sure that all aftermarket pistons have the gudgeon pin centred as its better for power, etc. The Wossner pistons have an anti wear coating on the skirts which should help matters. Also because the pistons are higher quality forged items the piston to wall clearance is tighter so there is less room for wobble to start.......wel thats my take on it!!!! Basically if your running a 2.4 budget for a future rebuild. I'm building a 2.5 but i've also gone a different route with a "long rod" 2.3 . This gives a rod ratio of 1.73 which is close to the ideal 1.75 figure thats banded about. This longer stroke engine should give more mid range and top end power and be really free revving. There could be a a small loss in low end torque but because i'm upping the capacity it should balance things out, it also will reduce side loadings on the piston and therefore wear on the bores so should last longer.
  21. Paisley Freight as mentioned but the stuff will need packing and copies of yourpaperwork will need to be on as well.
  22. Agree Mantadoc, plus the 2.0 is a much simpler system and you can use a 2.0 modded distributor if you want a decent cam in. Std 2.2 dizzy has no advance/retard inside, it was all done electronically via a little black box!
  23. It does but i would use a modded 2.0 unit. Guy i used to know use a 2.2 with injection for oval racing. He had his own rolling road so could play around with settings/etc. He reckoned using the 2.0 injection bit gained about 7 bhp over the 2.2 setup. You have to remember the 2.2 was setup as an economy engine, not a power motor! HTH Chris
  24. Get some Bilt Hamber Deox C, blank off all pipe exits/sender unit/etc apart from the filler neck. Fill it with the Deox C mixture and leave it for 24 hours. That will sort any rust in the tank and will also show up any leak points. Did it with the tank in my moggy minor and had no probs with it. HTH Chris
  25. I very much doubt a 9J wheel will fit a std arch!! I think your pushing it at 7.5J, i've seen 15" x 7J in std arches but i think they had the lips rolled back on them.
  • Create New...