yupididit wrote: I'm pretty sure the Toyota V8 before the 1uz was a 2.5 to 3 liter v8.
Knew it!
2.6, 3.0, 3.4, and 4.0 versions. They were the predecessor to the 1UZ. I knew a guy who had a 3.0 he was going to use in a project that never took off.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_V_engine
Well in this day and age of 3D printers and backyard foundries, who will be the first to find a small 4 cylinder that has the right features to use an off the shelf V8 crankshaft to make a small 32 valve frankenV8?
Ford makes a 1.5 Ecoboost that has (3.780) 96mm bore spacing. The 3.9 liter V8 in the Lincoln LS has a bore spacing of 3.858" (98mm)
https://fordperformanceracingparts.com/download/tipspdf/enginedimensions.pdf
Funny that the old 1.6 liter Kent has the same bore spacing of the 4 cylinder Duratec engines...
Trackmouse wrote: 1uzfe. DOHC. Small for DOHC. 4.0L. And total weight is 475.
Iron 302s weighed less than that, IIRC they were 450lb.
Never underestimate the lightweight ability of an extremely low deck height pushrod engine made by a company out to save every gram of iron possible.
RossD wrote: Well in this day and age of 3D printers and backyard foundries, who will be the first to find a small 4 cylinder that has the right features to use an off the shelf V8 crankshaft to make a small 32 valve frankenV8? Ford makes a 1.5 Ecoboost that has (3.780) 96mm bore spacing. The 3.9 liter V8 in the Lincoln LS has a bore spacing of 3.858" (98mm) https://fordperformanceracingparts.com/download/tipspdf/enginedimensions.pdf Funny that the old 1.6 liter Kent has the same bore spacing of the 4 cylinder Duratec engines...
Audi 3.6 V8s had the same 88mm bore center as the fours. You could interchange the right side head with a 16v.
The 4.2 V8 had the bore centers expanded to 92mm, but the heads kept the 88mm bore center. Goofiest thing ever, but a neat bit of trivia I kick out when people say the LS headed SBF will never work because the bore centers are .0005 different or whatever.
Changing tack a bit, what are the physically smallest and lightest weight production car V8s? I'm guessing the physically smallest could be a push rod and the lightest I assume is an all alloy unit hence I think they could be different.
I think that one engine suits both - light and small. Have a look:
http://www.holeshot-racing.co.uk/index.php/engines/h1-v8-busa
Only 200 lbs. and "Available in naturally aspirated 2800cc (400hp), 2900cc (450hp), 3000cc (500hp) and 2800cc twin turbocharged versions in 3 stages of 600hp, 800hp, 1000hp."
Pricy though.
I'd rather build one by splicing a pair of 400 bhp Ecotec 2.0 engines onto a common crank for 800 bhp in a compact light package.
Alfa also did some small V8's.
The Alfa Montreal utilized a quad cam 2.6 V8:
I think somebody else already referenced the Alfa 33 Stradale. That used a 2.0 V8. The 2.6 in the Montreal was derived from that 2.0 V8 as used in the Stradale and the Tipo 33 racer.
A bit more common. BMW M60B30 3.0L V8, not super small physically though as it's the same block as the 4.0L. Bore in the 3.0 of 84 mm (3.3 in) and a stroke of 67.6 mm (2.7 in). Used in the E34 5 series
Adrian_Thompson wrote: A bit more common. BMW M60B30 3.0L V8, not super small physically though as it's the same block as the 4.0L. Bore in the 3.0 of 84 mm (3.3 in) and a stroke of 67.6 mm (2.7 in). Used in the E34 5 series
M60 is an awesome motor, my '95 540i had 276k on the clock when I sold it and ran quite strong
Let's not for get the Olds/Buick/Rover V8. I mean how many other production blocks have been used in F1 other than that and the BMW M12 using the M10 block
Repco Brabham F1 engine using Rover block with short throw crank and DOHC heads instead of pushrods
Old Rover 3.5
Daimler 2.5L V8
Hemi head design based on the Triumph motorcycle head. Dry weight supposedly 419 lb less flywheel and accessories
In reply to dean1484:
North/South drivetrain availability?
Didn't Porsche have a 2.0 liter six? BMW 2.0 liter six?
Adrian_Thompson wrote: Let's not for get the Olds/Buick/Rover V8.
The Ford V8 was lighter, and the Buick V8 (ahem) was 215ci while Fords started life at 221.
92dxman wrote: Didn't Porsche have a 2.0 liter six? BMW 2.0 liter six?
BMW put the M20B20 (a 2.0 straight six) in some euro-market E21s and E28s. Dunno about Porsche stuff as it's outside of my pay grade.
Porsche's flat six started at 2.0 liters and grew to 2.7 (2.8 for racing). The 3.0 liter was a new crankcase and made of aluminum; the earlier ones were magnesium. One turbo racecar was built with a 1.425 liter engine just cuz Porsche dominance.
Knurled wrote:Adrian_Thompson wrote: Let's not for get the Olds/Buick/Rover V8.The Ford V8 was lighter, and the Buick V8 (ahem) was 215ci while Fords started life at 221.
I'm seeing figures around 310-320lb's for the Rover long block and 460+ lb's for SBF's. No doubt the Ford is light for it's size, but I think the ROver is lighter. flat head Ford's seem to be over 500lb's
Burrito wrote:92dxman wrote: Didn't Porsche have a 2.0 liter six? BMW 2.0 liter six?BMW put the M20B20 (a 2.0 straight six) in some euro-market E21s and E28s. Dunno about Porsche stuff as it's outside of my pay grade.
BMW used a 2.0 Six right up through the e36.. abet only in Europe and Canada. It's 150hp was not worth the effort over the 140hp 1.9.. except in smoothness
Adrian_Thompson wrote: A bit more common. BMW M60B30 3.0L V8, not super small physically though as it's the same block as the 4.0L. Bore in the 3.0 of 84 mm (3.3 in) and a stroke of 67.6 mm (2.7 in). Used in the E34 5 series
I have a few of these laying around due to everyone swapping to a B40. You can get them, normally for free-$100.
The B30 is not a power house (218hp/215tq). The valves and intake mani are smaller than the B40. Interestingly, they share the same cam profiles and cam timing.
A tune + B40 intake wakes these little guys up to 95 M3 (S50B30 US) levels.
If I remember correctly, they are in the 470-480lb range.
You'll need to log in to post.
