Poll - would you be Interested in a 4g64 turbo manifold (13 votes)

I agree. Also, MAIN reason I went with whole motor swap to a 4g63t is because it is SMOG legal for me to do it that way and its a better setup. If I turbo the 4g64 I gotta take it all off to smog it so it was easier to go that route. But more props to you if I didnt have to worry about smog I would have just turbo'd the truck motor most likely.

We have smog here to and as long as you tune it right it will pass with a cat of course.sleeps I know you will still make torque with the 4g63 but it's not the same, Iam saying "lowend" torque this comes from our long run intake manifolds, that are not present on the 4g63's. I will not go with the 4g63 head swap but i will go with a 6g72tt swap I already have two complete motors sitting in my garage one a twin turbo jdm and one a unique jdm 2500cc v6 24 valve "Dohc" version of the 6g73. A dodge stealth tt had 300 ft lbs of torque @ 2500 rpm stock on very long intake runners I keep lots of extra parts for my stealth. dropped87mitsu I just pulled my turbo off the other day its so easy I would really consider doing the turbo swap on the 4g64 and removing it when you have to go do a smog test. When do you have to smog test, once a year? Takes all of one day to remove the turbo and install the stock exhaust big deal pull out your after market computer and install a stock one and their you go stock truck for one day a year.

I was reffering to the post that you said you wanted low end torque thats what you would not do the HEAD swap. The added torque comes from the .4 added displacment via stroke and bore not the SOHC and intake runners.

And I agree the low end is better on this engine then any DSM I have owned. But it dies quickly, and personally I would rather run a 4G63 because of the aftermarket and easability of parts. But as you say, enjoy being differnet.

sleeps the power will not die quickly if you trubo your 4g64 that's a fact. Yes longer runners do make more torque this is why the 4g64 makes more torque then hp stock if you put a short intake runner 6" on a stock 4g64 the opposite will be true. Yes their is aftermarket support for the 4g63 in the dsm body but not in the truck body just look at the thing's that are differnet no one makes a down pipe exhaust manifold combo the intake throttle body is on the wrong end the thermostat housing is in the fire wall the tranny dosen't bolt up to a 4g63 short width block you guy's have to do a lot more work then I ever had to. Remember I have a race truck that goes to lapping days almost every weekend 100km on the track is worth 2000km on the street(hard driving) 5000km(easy driving). The only problems I have right now with the truck is there is not enough weight in the backend and not enough steering angle to recover from over 80km/h drift's that's it. It starts, it gets the crap beat out of it and get's putaway wet. end of story

Not dogging on your setup one bit. They're both a custom setup/swap, either way there is custom work involved, I'd rather go with a motor that has tons of aftermarket support but its just my preference, not worried about the little bit of easy custom work to do. Only things that will not work on our trucks are pretty much down pipes, and intake and intercooler piping and such, big whoop those are easily made. I already have my 4g63t in and running so no point in me turbo'ing a stock motor, which IMO takes MORE work(I mean setting up motor, etc.. to be boosted) then swapping in an already turbo'd motor. And it(4g63t) bolts right up to any stock 5 or 4 speed KM132 from a 2.0l truck, transmissions are not a problem.

And yea I agree with sleeps that long runners are not the ONLY reason why a 4g64 has more torque. Come on that just sounds asinine, it has to do with the larger displacement mostly.

Anyways neither swap is better, it depends on your plans and also availability and what you start with also. I had a carbed engine to start with(2.0 first and now 2.6) and I wanted to go to fuel injection so I went with a new motor(4g63T) which was way easier(and CHEAPER) to get then a used 4g64. If I had a 2.4 to start with I probably would have turbo'd the stock motor like you.

Intake's have everything to do with how much torque you can make in a motor this is a fact. Let's look at the facts ok. My friend has two honda's known for not making much torque the first is a 2007 honda s2000 with a 2.2ltr high reving 4 cylinder 237 and a small 162 ft lbs @6500! of torque stock the second is a 2010 honda civic 4 door si 197 and a sad 139 ft lbs. of torque @6100! both have all the fancy vtec heads and all 16 valves and guess what else they both have incommon very short intake runners it's not asinine it's just science. Compared to our trucks 2.4 ltr displacement and 8 valves no vtec and 20 years older the 116hp and 140ft lbs of torque come on now think about it a little. Dropped87mitsu I looked at what you have done so far and it looks good the 4g63t swap it was the only logical choice for you. I would have done the same thing. I do like the idea of moving the motor mounts makes sense everybody should do it. when I told you to turbo 4g64, I didn't look at your posts to see how far you have gone on your build sorry about that. Make no mistake I like to see results not just a lot of talk. oh and one more thing toyota had a "no torque" problem in thier corolla 1.8 in the 1990's so this is how they fixed it it 's the same manifold that is on my corolla and yes it has lowend torque. for a 1.8 ltr it's pertty good 120 and 122 ft lbs.@4400

Im not saying the long runners are not good for more low end torque, this I know. You said thats the main reason you did not to a DOHC swap. And that alone is not going to get ride of your torque. Even the 4g64 in the galants with a dsm style intake manifold have better torque at lower end than the 2.0L 4g63.

But I understand where your going with this now, and I agree. Its the reason LSR mike cut his out and made a quick short runner intake manifold for better top end.

The power in my truck right now dies quickly, it will not rev out to 8k like the DOHC 63's will. Granted if its turboed it will be better, in many aspects. Its almost the same as the SR20's in Nissans, and if you ask notable Nissan engine builders, some will say stay with the KA 2.4's and boost them. Much better low end and overall usable power.

driftingd50, I agree, I just said its not the ONLY reason, yes it is a supporting factor but not the ONLY reason it has more torque.

I don't know if you got my PM as i am a noob to this forum, But are you still making manifolds?

I am going on a trip to germany in 2 weeks for 3 weeks after I come back I will start to do the first batch of manifolds I will start off with 10 to sell