1. I simpily quit listening because of the size to power ratio. A 3.1L pushrod terd in that Cavalier that drank as much gas as some V-8s and made a meer 140hp was unbelievable. My other friends N/A 300ZX has a 3.0L makes 222 hp and nearly that much torque

Nissan 3000cc V-6= 222hp
Chevy 3112cc V-6 = 140hp and around 172 lb-ft of torque

2. I am not ingnorant to the fact that hp is everything. I was just simply pointing out the fact that while comparing those engines in my head I became pre-occupied. If I was interested in just hp I would have bought a Si, If I was interested in just torque i would bought a dump truck.


Psuedo.....if you started going on spasticlly about the bullet ride you had, and you mentioned it had a 5.7L V-8 that produced 196hp, I would stop listening to what you had to say. Not because that is not enough power, just because that Juggernaut of an engine and that amount of power do not mix well in my stomach

Just out of curiosity, what is the BIGGEST factor of an engine?

 

Im definetely NOT a GM fan (I loathe them in fact) but.....they have made some damn good engines over the years. Starting with their new EcoTec. Although it aint the greatest, it does make decent power and generates good TQ numbers for daily street driviing AND meets new emmission laws. Which is exactly what it was desinged to do. Also, it aint all that bad when turbo'd either, as the Europeans know by the Vectra turbo.

Then there's the new 7.5L V12 that puts out 750hp. Now thats 100hp per litre boys and girlies-not too low tech i'd say. and the Northstar V8.

and lastly, the engine that I believe is the best engine that GM has ever produced. The Turbo Grand National engine. I've seen those things get upwards of 1000hp. of course the bill was more than I'll EVER make in a lifetime(kidding, but close thats for sure! )

Im sure others have favourites but those are the only ones that id say are worthy/ Oh and i think that theres one more that was sold in an Olds Achieva? it was a Hi-Output version of the 2.4L 4-banger? I read it had 190hp? anyone know for sure?

 

well the new Mazda 2.3 L Inline 4 will have 170 hp? With the 3.0L V6 puting out 215hp..... tq will be similar to the hp numbers, should be fun........

I don't like Cavalier's general way of assembling things and their reasoning. Not sure why, but my friend's interior just feels so cheap, and looks like it will fall apart or pop out of its place.

Unfortunately, the only way that I stay even with his 2001 Z24 is if he has an extra 150 pounds in his car.

 

z24 cavs are quick, but look at the resale a couple of years down the road and you have more room in the pro to enjoy

 

lol 105mph.... thats sad, lol ive been above that numerous times in my p5 (only in perfect conditions)

well me personally, i like gm cars..... but there isnt a single car that i could see in this catagory that gm makes that id ever buy....

and a side note, i can not stand cavaliers... quick story behind that, last girlfriend that i went out with had two of them (94, and then a 97 with oz racing wheels).... anyways i can not stand them for that reason alone.

 

Yeah, people ruin cars for me as well. My friend is obsessed with BMWs..... I was too...... I loved them, but now I can only enjoy the Z3 since that's the only one that he doesn't really like. Every time I talk to him he annoys me with them, ya know, goes too far so I don't think that I could ever drive one now haha

This girl drives a Civic as well..... ughhh, I hate silver Civic hatchbacks now........

 

The Quad4 (the motor in the Cav) used to be better before GM went on a quest to make it quieter by adding dual balance shafts and various other generally power-sucking mods. Early Quad4's put out 180 hp, and a couple of special-edition cars GM put out in the late 80's (the Olds Cutlass Quad 442 and Olds Achieva SCX) put out 190 hp. IMHO this is damn impressive for not having VTEC, it's better specific output than any stock Protege, and it's equal to the output of the E30 BMW M3 and Porsche 944S, both of which also have NA 2.4L fours.

The Olds Achieva SCX was also available in a racing-oriented special edition, which included a Quiafe LSD, stock. Too bad the quality of these cars sucked so bad

 

Just a quick story,
A bud of mine bought a 92 JDM B16a and it came with 160hp! wow! but it had 105 lbs/tq he said tq didn't matter, it was all about max hp I have yet to lose to any Z24 and I think I am pushing around 145 hp if that.. and im a SOHC 2.2L Non-Vtec

 

before i start, i just wanna say i own a 3.1 V6 Z24, which does make 140hp and 185 fpt and the Auto tranny is 3spd, not 4

For anyone who says they can beat the Z24 from 1990 on, stock for stock in their Protege, in a 1/4mile race is sadly mistaken, or raced an '87 300,000 mile, never had a tune-up or oil change, kinda car

Fact of the matter is stock for stock, you won't win. And 105 MPH is too slow? How fast do you run i'd like to know? I mean there's a 300+ HP/450+ FPT that only gets around 108MPH in the 1/4mile.

For being cheap inside, well, i owned a 3rd gen before my current car, and well, yes very cheap

Now, my Uncle is a Parts Manager for Mazda where i live and he's done nothing but talk the Protege5 up........ which is why i'll own one As soon as my Focus is payed off (5yrs) unfortunately..... styling of the Pro5 is VERY nice, and to be honest, my family has owned alot of Mazda's and there very hard to beat in anything, style, reliabilty, HP/TQ to weight ratio and class........ So i'm a Z24 owner saying------ Z24's are faster stock for stock, but i'd rather have a Pro5 (or any other Mazda that matter, like the MX6's alot tho)...... so yeah, thats my rant........ oh and GM said the most reliable/best engine they ever built was the 3.1/2.8..... and the new 3.1 (called 3100) puts out 175hp

 

I think Ive heard about enough.
I cant believe you guys are dissing the z24 so much.
In reading everyones opinion on the subject, it amazes me how ignorant you guys are on the subject of speed, cars and tuning in general.
A Protege beat a z24, thats funny.
Mind you, Im not flaming in any way and didnt come here on this board to rant on the goodness of the Chevy Cavalier, just wanted to feed you guys some facts that may surprise you.
What do you guys run in the 1/4??
If you run mid 15's, then your beating the z24's, at least the stock ones. Modified are a different story.
The older 3.1 and 2.8 liter z24's were appropriate for the era they were in.
Take for example the 1986 z24 ( I own one and am restoring). They made about 140 hp with 165 lb ft of torque in 1986. Lets look at the 280z in that same era and the Corvette. The 280z made no more than 180-200 hp for the turbo model and the vette was only rated at no more than 225 hp. Hmmmm
Consider that the 24 was at the top of the class in its day and had the respect of the other manufacturers as a fast car, in its day. By todays standards the old Countachs, Porsche 911 turbo's and many other exotics would be beat by a slightly modified sport compact of today.
I go to the track quite often and see what Im up against and beat most if not all Hondas with the basic mods, Toyota Celicas, Mitsu Eclipses (3rd gens) and many more.
How is it that the lowly z24 can do this.
Have any of you been to the track to see what other cars can do?
You must have never seen the mid 13's z24 running in Ohio, mid 14's all motor running in Canada and WE ARE GETTING FASTER AND FASTER so make no mistakes about it, we are in this hard and heavy.
Ive owned a Honda and was the most reliable car Ive owned, cant say that about the z24 I now have, but the speed and fun is what makes up for the little idiosyncrosies the car may have.
I have respect for all cars and know a lot of cars and have memberships on a lot of car boards, so Im not ignorant of what each manufacturer can do.
Please, slack up on the dissing of the Cavaliers.
You know its funny, on all the j-body boards I hang out on, Ive never once have seen anyone there diss the Protoge once. Once.!!!!
Please be easy with this rebuttal, I like this place and if its alright with you ppl, would like to stay and be welcomed.
I havent come here to spread lies, just a little truth to what Ive seen and heard here.
Good luck in your cars and happy modding. We all have one thing in common and thats to enjoy our cars and get the maximum fun for the dollar.
Misnblu

 

Ive seen those at the track and they dont run faster that 15.5 in the 1/4, stock with good driver. Most Ive seen with the engine you describe run about 16.1-16.3, so how can they be fast.
Unless you have heavily modified this motor, youll never get out of the high 15's.
Hate to burst your bubble on that one, Ive seen what they can do and Im not impressed. Dont get me wrong, Im not dissing, just stating first hand experience at the track, not the couch dyno.
Hondas are not the end all to cars, remember that. Notice how I didnt diss the Protege?
Damn, now I must get the flame retardent jacket, I see it coming.
Misnblu

 

Heres the link to the JBO on your thread. I havent read it yet so you may have more coming here to defend the lowly z24.
Heres the thread
Good luck to everyone on this matter.
Misnblu

 

********NOTE: LONG POST, PLEASE READ SLOWLY**********

Like Misnblu, I'm not here to start trouble, just to clarify a few things (yup, I'm bored and got nothing better to do...). I've seen a few ignorant comments regarding Z24s and performance in general. Here's a couple of things I felt I should point out.

An engine making 100 HP/liter of displacement isn't always better than an engine making 50 HP/L. Why? Simple, there's no replacement for displacement A perfect example is my prehistoric pushrod 3.1L V6. Sure, it only has 140 HP, but it also has 185 lb-ft of torque and it's built to last. The engine would seem slow and obsolete to the untrained eye, only producing approximately 45 HP/L. Does it mean that you'd crush it in a race with your modern 4 cylinder engine that makes something like 65 HP/L? Lets see, a 3 speed (yes, 3 not 4) auto 3.1L Z24 runs mid to low 16s stock, and high 15s for a 5 speed with a competent driver. Those numbers are based on high mileage engines, they may have been a tic quicker years ago when they were new. Based on what I've seen around here, 5 speed manual proteges run mid to high 16s stock depending on the driver. Now think of how slow your protege would be with a 3 speed automatic. (well, I guess it would be a 4 speed) That's where your lack of torque is gonna bite you. If you've never had a torquey engine like the 3.1, you probably don't quite know what I'm talking about. But I'm sure some of you do.

The same can be said for the 2.4L twin cam like Misnblu's. Why do you think a 150 HP Z24 is almost as quick as a 180 HP Celica GTS? Because the Celica GTS only makes 130 lb-ft of torque, and not until 6800 RPM! The 155 ft-lbs of torque produced by the 2.4 with an impressive torque curve is almost enough to erase the 30 HP advantage of the Celica.

I guess all that just goes to say that I would rather own a 3.8 liter engine that has 200 HP than a 2.2 making the same power. Why? Because you're gonna get a whole lot more torque out of the 3.8, and torque is what makes a difference. Having a high HP/liter ratio only serves as bragging rights for the engineers who designed the engine, it will give you absoloutely nothing in the real world. Horsepower sells cars, but torque makes them go. Don't forget that next time you pull up beside an old beat up V6.

 

The celebrity i believe did use the 2.8/3.1 engine, but it's heavier than the Z24 GM used the 2.8/3.1 in ALOT of their cars....... posibilities for these things are endless there was even a turbo 3.1 ('89-'90 Grand Prix TGP, a swap done here turboz24.com). It's very easy pull alot of power from these things....... and the 3spd auto, isn't all THAT much slower than the 5spd The only downside to the 2.8/3.1 is that the top end has NOTHING...... of course the 2.8/3.1 was built for daily driving so all the power is where it needs to be for that, nice torque will help you pass and the hp is decent aswell, and most of it is found between the 1800rpm and 4500rpm range, doesn't take long to get in the power band........ and a nice cam will solve the top end issue all together....

and the stock auto sunfire was likely a 2.2 w/3spd auto, very sluggish

and the stock 3rd gen Z24 dyno between 125- 135 whp (2.3 and 2.4's) nobody, atleast not taht i've seen, has dynoed a 2.2 Eco as of yet

 

One of the guys on the JBO had his ecotech dyno'd and pulled 135whp with it. Thats not bad and the potential is there to make 450 whp with that engine, now thats good news.
Thanks Gro Harlem for the nice reply, no we arent trying to start a flame war, just trying to educate everyone that the Cavaliers can be quick and the misconception by the import world still doesnt believe this.
3lz24, your comments couldnt have been better and thanks for the mature way of going about the thread.
Like I said, Im all into learning and have always like the Protoge cars. They have always intrigued me by their style and good looks, even wanting to own one at one time.
Mazda is a company that doesnt play around in the performance arena and I am surprised that the aftermarket hasnt jumped on the bandwagon for you guys driving the Protoge's and Mx3's.
On the subject of more hp for the high displacement of 2.4 liters, yes you are right. GM hasnt really done their homework and are always the ones to catch up a little too late.
With the advent of the 2.2 ecotec motor, the pendulum is now swinging the other way and that can be thanked to Bob Lutz.
GM finally has someone at the helm with some ballz to say, this isnt enough.
You will shortly see the revolution at GM with a whole new horde of cars in the making. High hp, great handling and world beater cars are coming, many reverting to rwd as opposed to the fwd drivetrains.
Ive said this many times, we are in a musclecar era (right now) that ppl just dont see. This is even bigger than the 60's and early 70's musclecar era. We are just blinded by the lack of hindsight of the matter.
These are good times for all car makers.
Misnblu