MonteCarloSS.com
MonteCarloSS.com

CELEBRATING 20 YEARS!

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
#1015246 - 11/04/14 07:25 PM 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID)  
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,141
MAP Offline
15+ Year
MAP  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,141
Yuma, AZ
Hi Folks,

This has to qualify as the little engine that could. Probably weighs less than half of what an NA V-8 would weigh with the same output:

http://articles.sae.org/13626/

Bump these two liters up to three, with the same relative boost (=> 675 HP) and I know I'd be a happy camper.

Best,
MAP

#1015315 - 11/06/14 03:39 AM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,055
Hunter79764 Offline
Member
Hunter79764  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,055
Grand Prairie, Tx
Quite a bit of gumption out of a small package... electric turbos sounds like something off of eBay, but the way they utilize it with the conventional turbos really makes sense.


Shawn

'85 MC with budget 5.3L swap, TH350 with stock 2.14 rear end
It ain't much off the line, but it's nice on the highway
#1015338 - 11/06/14 08:08 PM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,141
MAP Offline
15+ Year
MAP  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,141
Yuma, AZ
Indeed. I wonder how this motor does for low-speed BSFC's in a light throttle condition, or close to the same, potential for good highway cruising economy.

Best,
MAP

#1015436 - 11/08/14 03:37 PM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,570
spacemanspif Offline
15+ Year
spacemanspif  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,570
Sewell, NJ
Well it says it delivers a linear torque curve so I assume it won't act like your typical "tuner" 4cyl that has no power until the boost comes up and jumps 150hp in half a second. Every time I see new car commercials advertising power the new engine makes, I'm amazed at how much more they are making than our 305 came with. If someone wanted to DD a monte and get great MPG I think a new 4cyl swap would be something to consider. I'm not sure how our cars stack up in the aerodynamic comparison but many of the "small" cars these days are tipping the scales at weights close to, or over the 3,800lbs our cars weigh.



Of course, a good external sound system would be required that sounds like a v8 so that you don't lose any respect from the v8 crowd lol


-Mike

F-body bucket seats, camaro console, carb'd 5.3/4L80E swap

Fastest time to date: 13.390 @ 102.42
Best r/t: 0.007 I got lucky smile

Killed a few cones too

#1015444 - 11/08/14 07:51 PM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 4,852
Buick Runner Offline
10+ Year
Buick Runner  Offline
10+ Year
Member

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 4,852
Dharma station 1 the Hydra
But it is also a much more complex setup using 3 turbos, you can't really compare a forced induction motor to a n/a motor, it is like oranges to apples. Back in the day 180 - 200 HP out of a 305 was a big improvement over 140 HP out of 350s from the late 70s. Everything becomes outdated sooner or later.

Most modern 4 bangers are transverse designed for FWD and would probably cost more to install one into a RWD G body than even a LS swap for marginally better MPGs. Or you could try converting a G body to FWD to be different.

Modern cars have much better aerodynamics than G bodies, again G bodies had decent aerodynamics for their time but are now outdated. As the G body platform becomes increasingly more outdated, it will also become more of a handicap for those seeking to keep up with current stasndards. The big compaines have the money to out R&D the aftermarket and hotrodders nor are they limited to reusing aging car platforms.

It's still cool Volvo is getting that much power out of that little motor but most of us probably will never be able to afford a car with that motor, not until it becomes outdated anyway. Plus that motor would twist up a thin gauge, mild steel car body like G bodies without reinforcements. Stress levels rise much more quickly with forced induction motors over N/A, this may be why the GNs seem to have more body damage issues than other G bodies with high HP. That motor is intended to go in a unibody car with high strength steel construction with a beefed up drivetrain to take the stress. Mild steel is heavy, soft, and weak compared to HSS, though the latter is more difficult to weld.

Lastly we don't really know how linear the torque curve is without seeing a graph of it. I don't doubt it has a better curve than most single turbo 4 bangers. However their idea of linear may be different from ours, which is why seeing a graph would be nice.


SBC powered 1987 Regal with TES headers, ZZ4 intake, ZZ4 PROM chip, mini starter, THM2004R, 2500 stall converter, 2040 cam, CCC system, and 3.73 posi rear.

2008 ex NPS P71 Crown Victoria, cop motor, cop shocks, cop brakes, and Jmod.

Never argue with an idiot.
They will just drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
#1015446 - 11/08/14 08:25 PM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 155
kwkenuf85 Offline
Member
kwkenuf85  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 155
Coopersville, MI
Sounds kind of like the vision I have for a '62 Nova. I would like to swap in an EcoTec, put one small turbo to help reduce "lag", and one large turbo to continue the boost when the smaller turbo runs out of steam. I have read builds on these Eco's making 500hp reliably with boost. Using the small turbo to boost overall efficiency of the motor at cruise rpm's should allow it to achieve quite respectful mpg's.


85 Monte Carlo SS
My first car...
Time for the attention it deserves...
#1015486 - 11/09/14 08:06 AM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,608
BuzzLOL Offline
Member
BuzzLOL  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,608
Toledo, Ohio
. turbocharger + nearly stock LS1 5.3L (~327") = 1,000 HP

http://www.hotrod.com/how-to/engine/1412-horsepower-1000hp-327ci-chevrolet


'86 Monte LS (total'd Fall '2013), '87 GTA TransAm TPI350 TH700-R4, '85 Fiero 5-speed, '75 MG Midget Buick Alum.V8 BW 5-speed manual, '77 Pontiac Astre Formula wagon 5-speed posi, '78 F150 4WD 351"M ==> 400" C6, '79 Caddy Seville Olds EFI 350" TH400, 19' Slickcraft 425HP 351W MerCruiser I/O
#1015489 - 11/09/14 12:48 PM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: BuzzLOL]  
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 519
Fireball69 Offline
Member
Fireball69  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 519
Old Town,FL.
Now that's it Buzz.


88 SS silver/gray T-Top
Reinventing the wheel and busting internet myths one project and one post at a time.
#1015500 - 11/09/14 04:53 PM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 4,852
Buick Runner Offline
10+ Year
Buick Runner  Offline
10+ Year
Member

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 4,852
Dharma station 1 the Hydra
GM also built 1,000 HP Ecotecs, but I think they are really radical engines only good for racing.

Turbos can make small weak engine much more powerful, just look at the Buick 3.8, in N/A form just a wimpy 110 HP, with a intercooled turbo system along with EFI made 250 HP, more than double the power.

So it isn't surprising that a fancy tri-turbo setup makes so much power. Probably will see quad-turbo setups next.

Last edited by Buick Runner; 11/09/14 04:59 PM.

SBC powered 1987 Regal with TES headers, ZZ4 intake, ZZ4 PROM chip, mini starter, THM2004R, 2500 stall converter, 2040 cam, CCC system, and 3.73 posi rear.

2008 ex NPS P71 Crown Victoria, cop motor, cop shocks, cop brakes, and Jmod.

Never argue with an idiot.
They will just drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
#1015501 - 11/09/14 05:16 PM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 805
AkronAero Offline
10+ Year
AkronAero  Offline
10+ Year
Member

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 805
Akron OH
In the 80's, the F1 1.5 litre turbo 4-cylinders ran 1800 HP in qualifier laps and once they established position (if they survived the qualifiers) were detuned to 1200 HP for the rest of the race. FIA cut out turbos in 1989 due to the excessive and unmanageable power (and cost) of this pathway. And we all need to have rev-limiters on our Montes set for 18,000 RPM and hit 0-60 in 1.7 seconds? The current route to on-demand power with balanced fuel usage and weight (small turbo and now with auxiliary electric motors) has really defined what its all about. Thanks for the links and the reminder that that is way too much power for me - LOL!

#1015539 - 11/10/14 12:29 PM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: AkronAero]  
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,608
BuzzLOL Offline
Member
BuzzLOL  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,608
Toledo, Ohio
Originally Posted By: AkronAero
(small turbo and now with auxiliary electric motors)


. Way back in 1960's could buy a gas turbine powered centrifugal supercharger for your V8... to prevent parasitic drag on the engine... maybe a Li-ion battery powered electric supercharger next... I was amazed by how much power these battery-powered RC model offshore boats have now:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJm_JlHNLes
.


'86 Monte LS (total'd Fall '2013), '87 GTA TransAm TPI350 TH700-R4, '85 Fiero 5-speed, '75 MG Midget Buick Alum.V8 BW 5-speed manual, '77 Pontiac Astre Formula wagon 5-speed posi, '78 F150 4WD 351"M ==> 400" C6, '79 Caddy Seville Olds EFI 350" TH400, 19' Slickcraft 425HP 351W MerCruiser I/O
#1015576 - 11/10/14 11:04 PM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,141
MAP Offline
15+ Year
MAP  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,141
Yuma, AZ
One of the reasons why this intrigues me so much, is that MCSS's need all the help they can get to lighten the front end of the car. At 225hp/liter, the Volvo motor certainly has high specific power output, but if motor weight goes in proportion to displacement (as it usually does, at least approximately,) then power/motor weight might be very impressive too, although clearly a turbo system with an intercooler adds significant weight over the same motor NA.

My guess is that with 450hp, this 4-cylinder motor is likelier to be longitudinally-mounted rather than transversely, because transverse mounting (for FWD,) would be severely challenged to get this much power to the ground without turning the front tires into enormous billows of smoke.

The third electrically-driven TC in the Volvo motor suggests that the motor has good low-end output.

If Volvo somehow mounts this motor transversely, then I woudln't be shocked if the entire drivetrain could be made to fit behind the rear seat of an MCSS. Then, we turn the original engine bay into a trunk. Imagine the benefits of a rear-heavy chassis for handling as well as traction!

Best,
MAP

#1015589 - 11/11/14 01:26 AM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 4,852
Buick Runner Offline
10+ Year
Buick Runner  Offline
10+ Year
Member

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 4,852
Dharma station 1 the Hydra
The base XC90s are FWD while the higher option XC90s are AWD. Looking up pictures of these SUVs, it seems they all have transverse mounted engines, even the former 4.4L V8 option was transverse mounted. If they can mount a V8 transverse, they can probably do the same with a tri-turbo 4 banger. Longitudinally-mounted engines are less common place, and transverse mount is the new norm in engine designs. Makes me wonder if someday all they will make will be transverse FWD motors. I don't even know if anyone still makes a longitudinally-mounted, RWD 4 cylinder for cars or trucks.



I am sure a transverse, rear mounted tri-turbo 4 banger would be quite effective in a MC but it would be such a radical built that it would be beyound the scope of most gearheads. Probably looking at a custom frame.

Last edited by Buick Runner; 11/11/14 01:37 AM.

SBC powered 1987 Regal with TES headers, ZZ4 intake, ZZ4 PROM chip, mini starter, THM2004R, 2500 stall converter, 2040 cam, CCC system, and 3.73 posi rear.

2008 ex NPS P71 Crown Victoria, cop motor, cop shocks, cop brakes, and Jmod.

Never argue with an idiot.
They will just drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
#1015600 - 11/11/14 02:57 AM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,608
BuzzLOL Offline
Member
BuzzLOL  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,608
Toledo, Ohio
. They already made transverse mounted rear engined Montes... they were called a Fieros and Reattas... mine is fun...

. Longitudinal mounting in front, while looking more conventional under the hood, added complexity, wear-prone drive chains, 90-degree angling of power, less efficient hypoid gearing, and weight...


'86 Monte LS (total'd Fall '2013), '87 GTA TransAm TPI350 TH700-R4, '85 Fiero 5-speed, '75 MG Midget Buick Alum.V8 BW 5-speed manual, '77 Pontiac Astre Formula wagon 5-speed posi, '78 F150 4WD 351"M ==> 400" C6, '79 Caddy Seville Olds EFI 350" TH400, 19' Slickcraft 425HP 351W MerCruiser I/O
#1015655 - 11/12/14 12:45 AM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,141
MAP Offline
15+ Year
MAP  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,141
Yuma, AZ
Great points!

Buick - interesting. With the high COM of the XC90, I'm doubly surprised it's FWD. Maybe they limit engine output in the bottom two transmission ratios or so, to keep from excessive tire frying?

But back to an MCSS, I'd like to see something closer to 600-ish hp before I'd be willing to go through the enormous trouble of mounting the drivetrain in the trunk (closely related question: how/where to mount gas tank? Under rear seat?)

Buzz, your last post reminded me - and I just saw it in your signature too, that you have an '85 Fiero (done up to '88 suspension standards?) But just curious your driving impressions compared/contrasted to an MCSS, as much as this can be isolated to a drastically different weight distribution?

Thanks,
MAP

#1015661 - 11/12/14 01:41 AM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,570
spacemanspif Offline
15+ Year
spacemanspif  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,570
Sewell, NJ
Depending on motor mount design and location, a custom made bellhousing could be all that is needed to drop an engine in front of a T56. Seems that they make adapters to put just about anything in front of one of those and the companies are willing to make custom ones which is the more important factor. Even if mounts are too wacky, a front motor plate might be easier to fabricate. Of course, many new engines have the starter mounted in/on the trans so that could be the piece that ruins the whole plan, but I think it's still worth considering before immediately scraping the idea.
Wiring and computer tuning also add to the process but I'm just discussing getting the engine mounted in the car with a full drivetrain.


-Mike

F-body bucket seats, camaro console, carb'd 5.3/4L80E swap

Fastest time to date: 13.390 @ 102.42
Best r/t: 0.007 I got lucky smile

Killed a few cones too

#1015676 - 11/12/14 06:27 AM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,608
BuzzLOL Offline
Member
BuzzLOL  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,608
Toledo, Ohio
Originally Posted By: MAP
Buzz, your last post reminded me - and I just saw it in your signature too, that you have an '85 Fiero (done up to '88 suspension standards?) But just curious your driving impressions compared/contrasted to an MCSS, as much as this can be isolated to a drastically different weight distribution? -MAP


. Fiero is stock... but, still, just get in the habit of barely slowing down for corners... it just seems to take corners with little fanfare... no front end plowing... no tail wagging... smooth ride for small car with engine weight at your butt... and quiet as you leave engine/drivetrain noise behind like in a VW Beatle... you should take one or something similar for a testdrive...


'86 Monte LS (total'd Fall '2013), '87 GTA TransAm TPI350 TH700-R4, '85 Fiero 5-speed, '75 MG Midget Buick Alum.V8 BW 5-speed manual, '77 Pontiac Astre Formula wagon 5-speed posi, '78 F150 4WD 351"M ==> 400" C6, '79 Caddy Seville Olds EFI 350" TH400, 19' Slickcraft 425HP 351W MerCruiser I/O
#1015703 - 11/12/14 09:12 PM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,141
MAP Offline
15+ Year
MAP  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,141
Yuma, AZ
Hi Folks,

Buzz: sounds like what I'd call a "point and shoot" car. Wonderful! let me guess: you couldn't corner in your MC at those Fiero speeds, right?

Some points from scanning the posts to date:

1. About twisting the car body: with a tranversely-mounted engine, the loads on the chassis are quite different. Body-twisting (at least about the car's longitudinal axis) should be a non-issue. About the Volvo XC90 and 450hp, in FWD vs. in AWD, I'd have to imagine it's slated for AWD. Curious how converting to RWD solves a host of issues, not the least of which being traction near WOT.

2. 500 hp from a Ford Eco-boost motor? Do you have more details Kwkenuf85?

3. I suspect in just a few years, we're going to be seeing many more motors of the same ilk as this Volvo unit, with small displacement and maybe up to two atmospheres of boost, with some clever kind of solution to the turbo-lag problem. This could supplant relatively heavy NA, big-displacement motors quickly.

The thought of pulling about 600 lb of weight off of the front axle of an MCSS, and adding something like 350lb (guess only) to the rear axle, is nearly irresistable. The gains in handling, traction, and acceleration should be near mind-boggling. Of course, an IRS would be an integral part of this package. Buzz, maybe it gets called a Monte Fiero SS (!)

Now, as usual, the pause comes from considering all the details. My guess is that a reasonable swap would mandate transplanting a whole engine/tranny/rear suspension into the rear of an MCSS: that is, essentially everything that would bolt to an FWD engine cradle, would have to grafted whole into the rear of an MCSS. I'm guessing that this would be almost a given since so much nowadays of how the engine/tranny talk to each other, along with torque management, would have to be tailored electronically to that exact combination. In other words, rather than the mechanical aspects from years of yore, the electronic challenges of the swap may dominate, and in order to minimize those, best to swap the whole enchilada.

But, in late 2014 at least, there really doesn't exist a donor platform that fits this hotrodding bill. I still think we're a few hundred hp shy, but the gap is closing quickly...

Best,
MAP

Last edited by MAP; 11/13/14 12:16 AM.
#1015741 - 11/13/14 09:11 AM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,608
BuzzLOL Offline
Member
BuzzLOL  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,608
Toledo, Ohio
. When you go to mid engine IRS with no driveshaft, yes, get rid of torque on body and lifting of right rear tire... test drive a Ford Pantera:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Tomaso_Pantera

. Also, just toss the whole Monte engine and transmission, add IRS with a 1960's Turbonique 1300 HP gas turbine setup, for much lighter weight, more power:

http://www.tunersgroup.com/tunerwire_live/turbonique.html
.


'86 Monte LS (total'd Fall '2013), '87 GTA TransAm TPI350 TH700-R4, '85 Fiero 5-speed, '75 MG Midget Buick Alum.V8 BW 5-speed manual, '77 Pontiac Astre Formula wagon 5-speed posi, '78 F150 4WD 351"M ==> 400" C6, '79 Caddy Seville Olds EFI 350" TH400, 19' Slickcraft 425HP 351W MerCruiser I/O
#1015752 - 11/13/14 05:21 PM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 155
kwkenuf85 Offline
Member
kwkenuf85  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 155
Coopersville, MI
Originally Posted By: MAP
2. 500 hp from a Ford Eco-boost motor? Do you have more details Kwkenuf85?


It was actually the GM EcoTec motors, not Ford Eco-boost. As buickrunner eluded too, GM did some in-house builds making +1000hp with, I believe, a stock EcoTec bottom end. Obviously most likely not a street-friendly motor.

It has been a couple years since I was really looking at the 400-500hp builds, but I will see what I can re-dig up. It was on a Solstice forum, that much I remember. Some built an EcoTec around 500hp for a race car, but they said it would be perfectly streetable. I do remember them being $$$!

Speaking of Ford's Eco-Boost, the 3.5L V6 in the F-150's are rated at 365hp @ 5000 rpm and 420 lb/ft @ 2500 rpm. Would be really nice in the right platform, just not their truck, IMO.


85 Monte Carlo SS
My first car...
Time for the attention it deserves...
#1015757 - 11/13/14 09:10 PM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,141
MAP Offline
15+ Year
MAP  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,141
Yuma, AZ
Hi Buzz,

I've seen, but never driven/ridden in, a Pantera. A friend 2,600 mi away owns one. If I can't readily get into a Corvette, however, I doubt I'll squeeze into a Pantera. But certainly that car, like the Fiero, embodies the concept I have in mind.

Turbonique? Never heard of them - their (old) products look like a blast - and I fear literally a blast.

Hi kwkenuf,

Sorry about the GM/Ford mistake. Such digging might well prove interesting. About $$$, the way the prices of hotrodding items have been heading for the moon lately, I'm afraid it's all $$$.

Best,
MAP

#1015769 - 11/13/14 11:20 PM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 4,852
Buick Runner Offline
10+ Year
Buick Runner  Offline
10+ Year
Member

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 4,852
Dharma station 1 the Hydra
The rear frame rails, right behind the axle arches is the weakest part of the frame for up/down weight transfer causing flex/stresses there. Because of this the rear of G bodies flexes like a hinge during normal driving and why rear seat bracing is so vital. Pre 78 G bodies and all GPs have beside the rear seat brace also have reinforced rear trunk braces. Essentially it is a modification of the jack holder on the pass side, found on all G-Body's, with a secondary supporting brace tied into it, plus a mirror-image version used on the driver's side. These are spot welded to the top of the Quarter panels where the rain/water channel of the trunk seal is and on the bottoms they are spot welded to the Trunk "Drop-off" panel on both sides. The purpose is twofold. It was Pontiac's solution to take some stress off the rear framerails and keep the quarters and rear panel rigid... thus helping prevent the whole trunk area from "squish-flex"... ie. the trunk lid pushing downward and the quarters flexing outward... This leads to additional stress on all of the panels weld points and places additional downward stresses on the rear framerails, causing frame cracks. Most post 78 G bodies lack such bracing due to GM cost cutting.

This is why I think converting a G body to a rear engine car would require a complete new frame designed for that setup. Placing an entire drivetrain on the rear frame rails on a stock frame would most likely aggravate the rear frame flexing, maybe to the point of failure. Again because of the way these were built/designed, the rear section is "floppy" (as discussed all over this site and elsewhere numerous times).

Last edited by Buick Runner; 11/13/14 11:21 PM.

SBC powered 1987 Regal with TES headers, ZZ4 intake, ZZ4 PROM chip, mini starter, THM2004R, 2500 stall converter, 2040 cam, CCC system, and 3.73 posi rear.

2008 ex NPS P71 Crown Victoria, cop motor, cop shocks, cop brakes, and Jmod.

Never argue with an idiot.
They will just drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
#1015782 - 11/14/14 04:44 AM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,608
BuzzLOL Offline
Member
BuzzLOL  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,608
Toledo, Ohio
. The Ford EcoBoost V6 already makes huge torque and is rated for big towing, so bumping it to 500+ HP would prolly be easy... just a matter of raising the breathing/operating RPMs...

. The GM EcoTec all-aluminum 4 banger 2.2L DOHC 4-valves/cylinder direct injection engine already came lightly turbocharged in Pontiac Solstice/Saturn Sky/Opel GT/Daewoo G2X sports car to 290 netHP (~350 grossHP)...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac_Solstice
.


'86 Monte LS (total'd Fall '2013), '87 GTA TransAm TPI350 TH700-R4, '85 Fiero 5-speed, '75 MG Midget Buick Alum.V8 BW 5-speed manual, '77 Pontiac Astre Formula wagon 5-speed posi, '78 F150 4WD 351"M ==> 400" C6, '79 Caddy Seville Olds EFI 350" TH400, 19' Slickcraft 425HP 351W MerCruiser I/O
#1015822 - 11/14/14 09:02 PM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,141
MAP Offline
15+ Year
MAP  Offline
15+ Year
Member

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,141
Yuma, AZ
Hi Buick,

Those are great points, and I agree that the stock structure behind the rear seats would need re-engineering. But since the gas tank has to move and the floor "opened" as it is now in the engine compartment (while conversely creating a floor up front for the new trunk space,) this is all part of the recipe.

Since the existing frame and body, in my opinion, needs major stiffening and lightening even with the stock drivetrain, I don't think what we're proposing here pushes the envelope further to any significant extent, except that we need to transfer some of our stiffening/lightening attention from the front to the rear. I see this simply as an inherent part of the project, along with some rethinking of crash worthiness.

Buzz - if we're not far from 500hp now, I think we'll be knocking on the door of 600hp quite soon, and if not in the OEM realm for the immediate future, maybe in the aftermarket tuner realm first. But the potential "gotcha" there is beefing up the transmission to keep pace, and then keeping all the electronic control algorithms working as they should so we don't compromise reliability/longevity as so much of the aftermarket is wont to do.

Thanks,
MAP


Last edited by MAP; 11/14/14 11:41 PM.
#1015866 - 11/16/14 12:24 AM Re: 450 hp from 2 liters (122 CID) [Re: MAP]  
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 155
kwkenuf85 Offline
Member
kwkenuf85  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 155
Coopersville, MI
Hey MAP, no big deal. And then I go and post the Eco-Boost V6 #'s, when I should have been looking at the Eco-Boost I4 #'s. Which are 279hp @ 5300 and 291 lb-ft @ 4700 in the 2015 'Stang by the way.

I also find it interesting that the 2015 Mustang (I4 E-B) is only rated at 21/32 mpg. Now, to me, that sure is not a big step up from the 17/29 that the 460hp, direct injected, variable valve timed, 6.2L V8 LT1 in the 2015 Stingray is rated at. Give me the LT1 for my SS before any kind of boosted 4 or 6 cylinder engine of any brand.

Thanks for posting that Buzz! That is a forgotten fact about that motor being turbo'd from the factory. That is actually the motor I have had in mind all along for my swap into the Nova. And, the more I think about it and analyze it, the new LT1 sounds better and better for the reasons I stated above. The only reason I have thought about the GM EcoTec's is because of the weight. I don't know what the LT1 weigh's in at however. Good thing this swap is all in my dreams anyway!

edit: I was going to post something about the Eco-Boost F150's too. Yes they have the power of a V8, GM's specifically, but the mpg's are by no means there! You hook up a trailer to tow and your mpg's take a bigger hit than a comparable GM V8 truck. And unloaded mpg's are no better than a V8 either. This is all from my neighbor who lived with a Eco-Boost F150 for a year and went back to a Silverado. He "very much prefers" the V8 Silverado

Last edited by kwkenuf85; 11/16/14 12:28 AM.

85 Monte Carlo SS
My first car...
Time for the attention it deserves...
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Random Images
500/thumbs/DSCN3063.JPG
by mj86lsmonte
527/thumbs/88SS_Chop.jpg
by TPI Monte SS
500/thumbs/1006010303.jpg
by Ritttzz
500/thumbs/Aug09597.JPG
by ReSSurrected
500/thumbs/iphone_216.JPG
by Joe b.
Help MonteCarloSS.com


Recent Contributors
finallySS
Authorized Vendors
Tell them you saw it
on MonteCarloSS.com!


CustomMonteSSParts.com
Dixie Monte Carlo Depot
GSI Interiors
HRpartsNstuff
Mikes Montes
Savitske Classic & Custom
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0