| Offline | | The Silent Administrator |  | Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 3:32 pm Posts: 9526 Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada | | J1 was the Elantra, maybe that transfers over also. Elantras ran in that model from 92-94.5, and then wiring and ECU's started to change. Would help to see some pics of the parts and car. That being said, you have a 1.6L head, which should have small intake ports like an EVO3/2G head setup. If the block is stamped 4g63, then it should be a 4g63, 2.0L bottom end. You have 2.0L of displacement and a lower CC head, than the stock DSM 2.0L came with. So, assuming this motor with pistons that are identical in shape to a stock 90-94, will have 7.8-8.0:1 compression ratio. Do you know what pistons came to you and what compression ratio they are supposed to yield in a stock 90 or 91+ DSM motor/head combo? I assume the engine block has no oil squirters installed at the base near where the pistons stop on lower travel? I am not sure if the main caps are going to make a huge difference, but there is a reason they mated the main caps into a series of 3 versus 5, and that is for strength like webbing in a block. The more points of supporting intersection, the stronger something, inherently, is supposed to be. Not sure what head those Sonata's were supposed to come with, but being that 1.6 and 1.8L engine options came with 1.6L and 1.8L head respectively, should stand to reason that the head in your motor is not the original part designed for that car, from the factory. I could be barking up the wrong tree, but you never know what Hyundai was doing with all those spare Mitsu parts they were using in their engine bays. Mitsu floated Hyundai for quite some time, with Mitsu motors in Hyundai cars/trucks. I say grab a Cyclone intake manifold, epoxy the runners in the Cyclone to mate to the 1.6L head and you will have an intake matched set that will flow much like a 2G head; with a little work. Lancerman did just that, and made some crazy good numbers. Tons of research and trial and error went into it too. Anyways, I'm chatting your ear off and trying my best not to make any mistakes while writing this all down. Keep us posted. | |
Register 
Login 
Forum 
Gallery 
FAQ 
Here you can faintly see the 1.6 stamp on the side of the head. 
Some cleaning may be necessary to see what is stamped there but you should see "G4CR" crudely stamped onto that tag. Here is a list of the corresponding engine codes between Hyundai and Mitsubishi:http://www.4gtuner.com/topic/21041-hyun ... uivalants/ I doubt that it has the lower 7.8:1 compression that is seen in the turbo application 4g63. As the car would not have come from the factory with a turbocharger it likely has a compression ratio of 9:1. Having said that there is the remote possibility, as Flying Eagle said, that you have a strange combination between the head and block and could actually have a compression ratio that is not expected. The only absolute way to know is to see that engine code on the block, determine whether your intake runners are the large or small ports then check the volume on your combustion chamber. Ultimately the entire exercise is moot if you are returning the engine to the car from which it came and was operating in. If you are looking to use the engine in a performance application and will be utilizing equipment that allows you change fuel and timing parameters in combination with an air/fuel ratio monitoring device then knowing the exact engine configuration will help with the initial setup of your "tune" but will not be of much use there after. 
The exhaust ports are visually different, the top is the 1.6L. The 2.0 port looks a lot more uniform, however it may just look different because the 2.0 head is still dirty. 
The differences in HLAs between the two, 1.6 on top. 
Here's the HLAs taken off and the ports underneath. 
The combustion chamber on the 1.6L head is visually smaller as well. On the 2.0 head the gasket meets the edges of the combustion chamber all the way around. Here is a picture of the extra material between each chamber with a HG for comparison. 
Here is a view of the deck on each head, you can see the extra ports on the dirty 2.0 head. You can also see a slight difference in the shape of the 1.6 combustion chamber compared to the 2.0. 
A better side view of the head on the thermostat housing side. 
The last difference that I noticed was this, the 2.0 journal looks to have more material. 1.6 
Thanks guys really appreciate your input, not looking for any definite answers or anything like that. Just figure this could be an interesting topic, and sort of a way to introduce myself. All opinions are welcome if I wasted money because of my lack of knowledge the so be it, at least I learned something from it! 
A picture of the bay as it currently sits. 
And last my 20g compared to the 14b I pulled off. 