Ok I own a wrecked 97 sunfire with the 2.2 and now i have a 99 with the 2200.
My 97 was a little faster. My question is what all is different between the motors?
are the heads swappable? if so im gonna build the older head to put in my 99.
any info or suggestions?
I think if i remeber correctly the 2200 which is 98+ has roller rockers or lifters whatever you call them, but the 94-97 2.2 has a more aggressive cam but worse head design.
Which would mean keep the head from 99 on but use the cam from the 97. If thats correct and would work, but don't quote me on that.
Somebody else give me some help here, don't wanna have this person screw up cause of me
A head swap is not possible.
Pretty much everything was changed...
Reference:
http://www.ny-jbodies.org/library/engine/2.2/2.2history.htm
Engine Block:
Quote:
1994-‘95: There were two major changes made to the 2.2L block in 1994. The new "Generation II" engine came with a roller cam, so two of the cast supports that tied the inner and outer walls of the block together on the pushrod side were machined flat about .390" below the deck surface. They were then drilled and tapped for the bolts that held the two shallow plastic lifter guides.
Five more bolt bosses were also added on the block: two on the left and three on the right.
The two big ones on both sides were there for the RWD motor mounts that were needed because the 2.2L Chevy replaced the 2.5L Pontiac as the base engine for the S-10 pickups in ‘94.
Look for a 10215666, a 24575396 or a 10141927 casting. All of these later blocks can be used for the 1990-‘91 FWD cars as long as the three holes for the offset filter adapter are drilled (some are).
They can also be used for all of the 1992-‘93 FWD cars if you are willing to trade a late core for an early one.
1996: Chevy switched to sequential port fuel injection on the 2.2L in ‘96, so there is a large open hole with a small threaded one beside it on the passenger side for the cam position sensor that was used to sequence the fuel injectors correctly. The 1996 block, c/n 24574521, still had the shallow (0.390") mounting pads for the early lifter guides, but it can be used up through 1999 as long as the matching lifter guides are provided with the engine.
1997-‘99: The plastic lifter guide was much thicker in the middle beginning in 1997, so the mounting pads in the block were moved down 0.400".
They were now 0.790" below the deck surface. This block, c/n 24576035, also has one more small bolt boss on the passenger side, but we have never seen it drilled and tapped, so we have chosen to ignore it for now.
The location of the tang on the #3 main bearing was moved in ’98, too, so rebuilders will have to notch the block or grind off the tang on the earlier aftermarket bearings that are available so they will fit the block.
This casting can be used in a ‘96 car or truck as long as the correct lifter guides are installed in the engine.
Pistons:
Quote:
1994-‘97: The piston was modified again in 1994. The Mahle 2728 had a slightly smaller bowl (19.4 cc vs 21.8 cc) that increased the compression ratio for the new roller cam engine, and it weighed 16 grams less (312 grams vs 328 grams) which helped reduce NVH.
This revised, full round piston was replaced by an even lighter, slipper skirt design in late 1994 or early 1995.
1998-‘99: The 1998 piston had a smaller dish, only .075" deep, to go with the new heart-shaped chamber.
Cylinder Head:
Quote:
1994-’97: The same casting that was used in 1992-‘93 was used from 1994-’97, but it had two additional bolt holes drilled diagonally in the front of the head for the RWD water outlet housing and it had 7.0 mm valves. Look for a 10112391 head with an "S" on the end of the casting number. The "S" can stand for three different things, depending on where you look.
The "S" means "standard" on the S-10 pickups, according to the truck microfiche, because all of the truck heads came standard with 7.0 mm stems.
The "J" and "L" cars had a first and second design head from 1993-’97 according to the car microfiche, so the "S" indicates that the head is the "second design" version with 7.0 mm valve stems.
The "S" heads were used as replacements for any 1992-’97 vehicle, so the "S" also identifies the later 7.0 mm head as a "service" part according to GM.
Some of the second design heads were used as service replacements on 1992-’93 cars, so the car microfiche spells out the difference between the first and second design heads to make sure the customer gets the right valves when buying them over the counter.
What really matters, though, is that the 10112391S is not a special head for certain applications as some rebuilders have believed. It actually fits all of the 1992-’97 FWD cars plus all of the 1994-’97 RWD applications, as long as the two diagonal holes are drilled in front of the head for the water outlet housing used on the RWD trucks.
Remember that the coolant crossover isn’t used anymore, so the holes don’t have to be drilled and tapped; and, they don’t have to be plugged if they are drilled and tapped.
1998-’99: There were several major changes made to the head in 1998. The combustion chambers were heart-shaped, the intake ports were squared-off and came to more of a point at the top, the exhaust ports were noticeably smaller (1.120") and the rocker pedestals were notched to hold the roller rockers in place. The crossover passage in the front was eliminated, and the EGR passage was revamped. It’s an all new casting (c/n 24575507) that was used up through 1999.
Gasket Differences:
Quote:
There have been two different head gaskets used on the 2.2L engine. All of the 1990-’97 FWD engines came with the same gasket that was originally used on the 1987-’89 aluminum-headed 2.0L engines.
The RWD engines used another head gasket that restricted the flow of coolant in the front and limited the flow between the cylinders. This gasket directs the majority of the coolant up into the back of the head so it flows forward and cools the entire head before it exits through the front-mounted water outlet.
Beginning in 1998, the FWD engines began using the same head gasket that had been used on the RWD engines since 1994.
This worked well because GM reversed the direction of the coolant in the FWD heads so it flowed in the same direction as it did in the RWD engines. They accomplished this by eliminating the water outlet on the back of the FWD head and installing a long "radiator inlet pipe" that went from the front of the head to the back of the engine where it was connected to the radiator.
Crank Castings:
Quote:
There have only been two crank castings used in the 2.2L engines, but one of them comes in two flavors, so it must be visually identified.
1990-‘95: These engines all used the 1237 casting.
1996-‘97: These engines came with the 4618 casting that is virtually identical to the earlier 1237. They are both interchangeable.
1998-‘99: These engines still used the 4618 casting, but the timing notches were advanced by about 0.450", so the later crank can’t be interchanged with either of the earlier ones.
It’s easy to tell the difference between the two 4618 cranks when you see them side by side.
With both cranks facing you and the keyways at 12 o’clock, note the location of the notch at the top of each reluctor wheel. If the right edge of the notch is about .500" to the left of the casting seam and located around 11 o’clock, it’s the early, retarded crank.
If the right edge of the notch is right next to the casting seam and nearly straight up at 12 o’clock, it’s the later, advanced crank that came out in 1998. Don’t mix them up, or you will have a comeback.
Hope this helped you out...
www.kronosperformance.com / 732-742-8837
There have been recent discussions as to what is swappable. Apparently, someone has put a 2200 (98+) head on an older 2.2L block, which was previously considered 'not possible'. The heads should bolt up to each block, but functionality is a different aspect. The are many differences in the cooling systems, as well as the valvetrain. I think everyone would agree that it would not be worth the effort...especially since you are thinking about using the older head on a newer engine. This would mean you would HAVE to use the older manifolds and fuel system, which is the biggest hurdle to overcome when trying to build the 97- engines. What you have right now is better, leave it to that. If you want some performance, check out jbodyperformance for a cam, and standard abrasives for info on porting your cylinder head.
Oh yeah, the older engines were rated with more torque I believe, but less horsepower, so probably an overall better powerband. That's why the older engine felt faster, but not enough to justify using the older parts.
fortune cookie say:
better a delay than a disaster.
The heads are swappable. There was a guy who was doing it in his 2nd gen, but the IM didn't physically fit past the firewall. Everything else would have worked fine. The tensioner/accessory bracket bolts up. IIRC, the power steering pump had different hose ends and would have needed custom hoses (although there is probably some other car that has a set that would work).
If I was you, I would pick up another 2200 head, since backdating to the 2.2 head is kind of pointless from a HP point of view.
I forgot to mention that the swap he was doing was a 2200 head on a 2.2 block, so it was the opposite of you.
eh just do what i'm doin. build a 2200 and swap the 2.2 OHV to 2200. everything. no hybrids.
I was a retard, and now I'm permanently banned.
if you were to swap a 2.2ohv to 2200 would yiu need a newwiring harness, or will everything match up?
Jon
blade0604 wrote:i remember reading somewhere about a secret cam swap for the 98= 2200 ... i think it said something like u can swap a acam from the 2.2 into the 2200 ... well here is the link for yall ... can it work ? or has anyone tried it? http://www.ny-jbodies.org/library/engine/2200/2200camsecret.htm
negative. they need to take that off the ny-jbodies site...
fortune cookie say:
better a delay than a disaster.
red97cavy wrote:if you were to swap a 2.2ohv to 2200 would yiu need a newwiring harness, or will everything match up?
Jon
you would need the PCM from the 2200 and the harness from the PCM to the firewall. the actual engine harness is the same.
I was a retard, and now I'm permanently banned.
the 2200 seems to be more reliable though, so if I were you, I would swap to a built 2200 if performance is your final destination.
firewolf23 (Kevin) wrote:the 2200 seems to be more reliable though, so if I were you, I would swap to a built 2200 if performance is your final destination.
both of them are very reliabile. hell that is what they are designed and manufactured for. compare a LN2 cyl sleeves to an SOHC honda cyl sleeves. amazing difference in thinkness.
I was a retard, and now I'm permanently banned.
Ok thanks for the help everyone....If im right it was the 2.2 that had 5 more hp but the 2200 was made to have a little more torque. Anyways, I believe i will just continue my search for an ecotec. If all else fails i will build the 2200.
2200 head fit and works alot better than out gasket blowing 2.2. Our 2.2 block is shiot...so do the math
Ok so what i'm understanding is that some say the 2200 to a 2.2L older engine swap isn't a good idea or worth the cash. I've got a 95 2.2L in my cavaler right now, that we're considering boosting and one of the big hurdles i'm facing is redesign of the fuel rail to fit near the intake area. I've noticed that the 2200 in my wife's car, fits bigger injectors no problem, and we even built an adapter plate for an older supercharger i picked up at the junk yard. But the 2.2, has very little room to work with.
I guess my question on this matter is, can you run the older cam and block internals 95my on a 2200 head with the 1.7 rockers.
Also, anyone know if there is a DIY method of flowtesting IE: buildng a flowtester with a psi guage, airpump and maybe a sealed cap to put on the end of the cylinder head. I've got an abrasives kit, but without being able to flowtest my P&P it's really hard to get each cylinder locked in to exact flow tolerances.
Spotabee Racing wrote:red97cavy wrote:if you were to swap a 2.2ohv to 2200 would yiu need a newwiring harness, or will everything match up?
Jon
you would need the PCM from the 2200 and the harness from the PCM to the firewall. the actual engine harness is the same.
UHM...... if the engine harness was the same then he wouldnt need to go from the PCM to the firewall. It's all one harness dude.
C Smyth wrote:Ok so what i'm understanding is that some say the 2200 to a 2.2L older engine swap isn't a good idea or worth the cash. I've got a 95 2.2L in my cavaler right now, that we're considering boosting and one of the big hurdles i'm facing is redesign of the fuel rail to fit near the intake area. I've noticed that the 2200 in my wife's car, fits bigger injectors no problem, and we even built an adapter plate for an older supercharger i picked up at the junk yard. But the 2.2, has very little room to work with.
I guess my question on this matter is, can you run the older cam and block internals 95my on a 2200 head with the 1.7 rockers.
Also, anyone know if there is a DIY method of flowtesting IE: buildng a flowtester with a psi guage, airpump and maybe a sealed cap to put on the end of the cylinder head. I've got an abrasives kit, but without being able to flowtest my P&P it's really hard to get each cylinder locked in to exact flow tolerances.
I believe there is a difference in the camshaft position sensor.
Ok so if there is a difference in the camshaft position sensor, grab the new sensor then?
As for custom modifying parts, I'm totally into it. I rarely even buy bolt ons, they're not that much fun.
Maybe I could have worded that better. The difference is in the camshaft. I don't have the link handy but basically the portion of the cam that the sensor is seeing/reading is in a different position which causes a difference in timing. Um, did that make sense ?!
Yes it does make sense, on the 2200 though the cam is still in the block right? So technically shouldn't it be the the same timing as the 2.2, or does cam timing change for the 2200 head.
