First post. Got my 2LT a week ago at the Chevy Tent Sale in Denver (helps being a car salesman). I have a custom-built turbo that T.E.C. -a local shop, now out of business- built for my old 3400 Grand Am. T3/4, just can't remember the specs (think the a/r was .60). I never got around to installation so now I'm pondering it's impact on my 2.4L. Specifically, what would happen to my tranny beyond 4-5psi. I'm not worried about minimal boost because that will only compensate for the altitude. Going into the 10 range has me worried. Also, I did some research and found a site detailing a 750hp 2.2L Ecotec (http://www.year2032.com/ecotec.htm). While that may be a dream, hopefully they built the 2.4 as strong as the 2.2- given the stock internals lasted up to 283hp.

Knowing more about the turbo would probably help you out. I purchased this about four years ago when I knew SOMETHING about turbocharging. If there is any way to find out the specs just by looking at the turbo, let me know.

Nice forum, btw. :thumb:

http://myspace-384.vo.llnwd.net/00736/48/33/736793384_l.jpg
Taken with my phone outside the tent sale at Mile High Stadium.

:welcome: I am clueless when it comes to turbo's. Hopefully there should be someone who will be able to help answer your questions. Good luck.

I would be most concerned about getting the computer programed right. Especially with the VVT on the 2.4.

T3/04E is a more accurate description of my turbo. I searched the forum before posting anything and read up on the possibility of an ECU chip. That is, as soon as the code is broken. How could I get it programmed right without a replacement?

Ther is no "chip" for the HHR's ECU. Your only hope right now is a stand-alone programmer - but no one has anything for the HHR yet. We are working with a couple of vedors right now to try and bring something to market.

If you don't mind sending your ECU out (be without your HHR for a while), Tune Time Performance (a supporting vendor here), can reflash it for you.

See: http://www.tunetimeperformance.com/

or you could use a SAFC II to get the air fuel right.

Thanks for the info. I'll have to see how long it will take to reflash the ECU. And I'd jump on an S-AFC if shift points weren't a problem. Still keep it in mind, though.

I read the article and found it amazing that the 2.2 produced 350 HP at only 2 pounds of boost. Any small turbo could do that, and imagine what it would do for a 2.4. Keep in mind that 310 HP in our 3100 pound car would be 10 pounds per horsepower, which is very fast.

Again, I keep wondering why all the attention goes to the 2.2 and 2.0 engines?

Again, I keep wondering why all the attention goes to the 2.2 and 2.0 engines?

Because the 2.4 is new to the Ecotec family. The 2006 model year is the first time Chevy has used the 2.4 Ecotec. The 2.2 and 2.0 have been around for a while.

My bad. I thought the 2.4 had been around for a while.

iF YOU WANT THE REAL ANSWERS...
Get the GM SPORT COMPACT PERFORMANCE BUILD BOOK part # 88958646!!!!
Avail. at some dealers,go to chevy perf.web site for nearest loc.

I work for a company the sell Toyota Landcruiser parts, and when TRD came out with their supercharger, they did no extra timing of fuel change. We took it to a place in Culver City that had a 4 wheel dino and with a new fuel pressure regulator, and a constant flow fuel pump, they added a UNI-chip which is a pigiback computer and we picked up 70hp to the wheel.

I'll bump the thread for a second:
I found my turbo and brought it to the dealership. Going to be talking to one of the service guys soon about having it installed. My spec sheet says "TA34/T04E 57 trim/76 trim .63 A/R". It's a pretty big turbo. The real challenge will be finding a place to mount it. If this is feasible (and if anyone is interested), I should have my cost information and, hopefully, an installation guide by next week. Still shooting for at least 300hp eventually, but I'll settle for whatever I can before modifying the internals (reflashing aside). Not like I have really have a choice.

Rear mount turbo, is the only way to go. In my opinion, because of the firewall being so close to the engine already. Also if HPtuners ever finish there tuning software for the 2.4 and 2.2 it will be great. With their software you can program every aspect of your ecm. :) They have great support for the J-Body community, and the cobalt’s. I know they have been working on it, but I have not heard a response back from the founder yet. :( Here is their web site. (http://www.hptuners.com/)
I guess we will have to wait and see.
Also I would highly recommend increasing the line pressure of the transmission if you want it to live longer than a year, might also need a transmission cooler, because of the added heat of the increased line pressure and added force on the transmission.
Also
I read the article and found it amazing that the 2.2 produced 350 HP at only 2 pounds of boost. Any small turbo could do that, and imagine what it would do for a 2.4. Keep in mind that 310 HP in our 3100 pound car would be 10 pounds per horsepower, which is very fast.
Again, I keep wondering why all the attention goes to the 2.2 and 2.0 engines?
Maybe at 12 pounds of boost. I know that at 2 lb of boost on 2.2 ecotec they normal will barly see 200 if they are lucky and VERY well tuned. As I come to see the 2.4 responses better and easier to a tune in a NA form, instead of force induction.

Rear mount turbo, is the only way to go. In my opinion, because of the firewall being so close to the engine already. Also if HPtuners ever finish there tuning software for the 2.4 and 2.2 it will be great. With their software you can program every aspect of your ecm. :) They have great support for the J-Body community, and the cobalt’s. I know they have been working on it, but I have not heard a response back from the founder yet. :( Here is their web site. (http://www.hptuners.com/)
I guess we will have to wait and see.
Also I would highly recommend increasing the line pressure of the transmission if you want it to live longer than a year, might also need a transmission cooler, because of the added heat of the increased line pressure and added force on the transmission.
Also

Maybe at 12 pounds of boost. I know that at 2 lb of boost on 2.2 ecotec they normal will barly see 200 if they are lucky and VERY well tuned. As I come to see the 2.4 responses better and easier to a tune in a NA form, instead of force induction.

Rear mount is a good option if you dont mind not being able to run on a race track. I heard form our local track guru that NHRA is goona not allow Rear Mount Turbo for 07.

Rear mount is a good option if you dont mind not being able to run on a race track. I heard form our local track guru that NHRA is goona not allow Rear Mount Turbo for 07.

WHAT! :eek:
That makes no sence to me. I bet that will piss of a few people at the track that I race with!

WHAT! :eek:
That makes no sence to me. I bet that will piss of a few people at the track that I race with!
Well i was told there are track saftey issues with the turbo mounted back there, namley the long oil feed and return lines theat tend to fail. He did say that STS makes a good kit , but there are a lot of people maiking their own rear mounts and theat is where the problem lies, i guess. I was gonna STS my 93 camaro, but i think a 150 shot of spray my do the trick instead.