Jump to content
Create New...

Recommended Posts

Posted

Are the improvments made to this engine specific to the Malibu or do all GM cars using this engine have the improvements too? Just wondering.

Posted

What improvements? I was under the impression that most of what made it seem more refined in the Malibu had to do with sound shielding and motor mounts...

Posted

I believe there were changes to the intake and exhaust, partly for emission reduction (by exhaust volume), but which result in a loss of power and higher fuel use (and hence higher emissions [per mile], but then no-one ever said regulations were about logic).

Posted

One of those "meet the new Malibu" articles detailed quieting of the induction noise of the 2.4 via intake modifications. No details as to application to other cars using this engine.

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

This is what they "could" have done...

ecotecdivvt24cr0.jpg

Almost like an E30 M3's S14 engine, accept it makes a little more power and it runs on Regular!

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

2.4l (LAU)? I've never heard of this motor.. I see the graph is dated 2009? Theoretically, when would one be able to order their Chev. Malibu with this motor? 213hp/180ft-lbs? That's about perfect for a family cruiser. Bet it gets great gas mileage to boot!

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
2.4l (LAU)? I've never heard of this motor.. I see the graph is dated 2009? Theoretically, when would one be able to order their Chev. Malibu with this motor? 213hp/180ft-lbs? That's about perfect for a family cruiser. Bet it gets great gas mileage to boot!

No, you won't be able to order one. This is FICTIONAL. But it is a realistic projection of what can be done with the 2.4 I4. What you do is throw in Direct Injection and Dual VVT. The 3.6 liter DI-VVT (LLT) in the CTS makes 304 hp and 273 lb-ft on Regular 87 with a 6400rpm power peak. A 2.4 liter (2/3 the displacement) should make roughly 203 hp and 182 lb-ft -- perhaps a little more given that I4s in general have less parasitic drag per cylinder than a V6 due to having half as many camshaft and a less complex camdrive. The Gen II Ecotec block (found on the 2.0 liter LNF and 2.4 liter LE5 engines) and its current internals winds out to 7000 rpm just fine (the LE5 2.4 in the base Solstice/Sky does just that). By using a set of camshafts, ports and runners biased for slightly higher RPM (by about 600 rpm) it should be plenty easy to make another 10hp. This may cost you some low end torque and perhaps a little peak torque. But I believe that be can match the port injected 2.4's low to mid range output while improving its top end dramatically. The graph reflects that. The power delivery is deliberately tuned to create the impression of an engine which wants to rev and is never out of breathe -- the power peaks at the redline and nowhere on the powercurve will the driver feel the power fade.

Regardless of the power or performance of the engine, this "never fade till you bounce of the rev limiter" feeling is quite alluring. Try driving an Audi RS4 and you'll experience such a powerplant.

Posted

Hopefully some good improvemetns will cone soon. It really needs a bit more power and ALL applications need to run on regular.

My 2.4L SS Cobalt needs premium...and I don't mind that---as long as I would get some good performance :(

I hate the auto/Ecotec combo---my engine feels like it cannot breathe, revs like it has a an anchor attached to it and drones like crazy.

My Dads Mazda 6 4cly with 5 speed auto--was enjoyable to drive (although it is slower)

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search