So what's the deal with the little turbo 4s everyone is using. Let's say you wanted to toy with a little dd, taking the chassis out of it, what are the capabilites of these little motors, without doing crazy mods to them.
I'm talking about the GM turbo 1.4, the Ford Ecoboost like the 1.0 3, or whatever is in the FiST, the Dodge 1.4 and the Honda 1.5. What about the turbo in the new Sentra?
Can't speak for the others, but the Sentra 1.6 is a 2015+ Juke engine. '13-'14 Jukes have fundamentally the same engine, just some extra sensors and new turbo setup with an electronic wastegate.
Does the 1.0 Ecoboost have the head cracking issue?
The Dodge engine is actually the Fiat motor.
There are probably more turbos being offered now than there were in the Chrysler K inspired 80's/90's.
I'm intrigued by the Lincoln MKZ and Continental offering a twin turbo 3.0L putting out 400hp/400tq and torque vectoring awd.
There's a drivetrain looking for a proper sport chassis.
I have pondered what the 1.4 turbo in my Abarth would be like stuffed into my 1977 Fiat spider.
I always liked the idea of a bolt on cruze as a cheap runabout that got good fuel economy.
I know zzp made 160hp and 210ftlbs at the wheels with a cruE with what amounts to an intake exhaust and tune.
Didn't know what the others are making with mods
GM's 2.0LTG makes 275/295 and a controls pack can still be bought through Chevy. Manual options, and only minor differences from the Fwd/Rwd platforms from what I've heard
The problem with swapping these modern 3- and 4-cylinder turbo engines is engine management. They all have direct injection and all the electronics are integrated. Not sure how you can get them to run in a different chassis.
John Welsh said:There are probably more turbos being offered now than there were in the Chrysler K inspired 80's/90's.
I'm intrigued by the Lincoln MKZ and Continental offering a twin turbo 3.0L putting out 400hp/400tq and torque vectoring awd.
There's a drivetrain looking for a proper sport chassis.
"My daddy said, 'Son, you're gonna drive me to drinkin'"
Sport chassis, hell. That might be the luxosleeper I need when the S60R hits the crossover point of appreciation and desire for something different.
LanEvo said:The problem with swapping these modern 3- and 4-cylinder turbo engines is engine management. They all have direct injection and all the electronics are integrated. Not sure how you can get them to run in a different chassis.
Shortly after the RX-8 came out, somebody swapped one into an early SA22C chassis (a '78 RX-7). They basically crammed the RX-8 interior into the car - it had a narrowed RX-8 dashboard so that it could use the RX-8 cluster, HVAC, and general wiring harness.
The engine management in those cars is integrated. It looks at the door position to fully disengage any speed limiters, for example. (Not too many people drive with the door open, but you might have the door open on a chassis dyno)
I don't mean for swapping into another chassis, I'm talking about what kind of power can they make with a few bolt on parts and how the compare to each other.
I just said taking the chassis out of if because I didn't care about cruze vs FiST, I just cared about the motors themselves
In reply to Opti :
Then lets focus on what ECM is easily modified to match bolt ons. HPtuners does more than GM cars nowadays.
In reply to RossD :
The 1.4 turbo in the Cruze and others is apparently very tweakable. There's a thread on the HPT forum with someone who was experiementing with all of the different ways in which power is controlled, and IIRC he nearly doubled the stock power, which admittedly is rather low relative to other small-four turbos. (Within a couple horsepower of the naturally aspirated 1.8) The iterative process was fascinating - raise torque limits, datalog, find the next limitation, adjust that, make more power, find the next limit, etc.
Mind you, the 1.4t is port injected, not DI. It's a shame that GM hung so much stuff over the transmission, as it would be a neat little engine to stick in LBC or other sports car.
There are apparently also great gains to be had in tweaking the three cylinder Ecoboost in addition to the 1.6 in the FiST and others.
Hyundai 1.6 (Veloster, Elantra Sport etc.) is 201hp. Lots of torques too.
In reply to FSP_ZX2 :
BTR tune alone puts these little motors at 220 to the front wheels from the 180 they put down stock. Add in the supporting mods and you’re going to be pushing 250whp out of their 1.6. I understand that is about the limit with stock internals and turbo though. I also know they have rods and turbos to push them over 300whp.
Blows my mind thinking about 250whpout if a 1.6l turbo 4. Hell 20 years ago we were struggling to get 250whp our of a 5.7l V8 on stock parts.
In reply to bobzilla :
30 years ago?
I thought the big deal about the LS1 F-bodies (which came out a bit over 21 years ago) was that they would put down 290-300 horsepower at the wheels, sometimes more, straight off the showroom floor. Made the Mustangs look ridiculous.
Knurled. said:LanEvo said:The problem with swapping these modern 3- and 4-cylinder turbo engines is engine management. They all have direct injection and all the electronics are integrated. Not sure how you can get them to run in a different chassis.
Shortly after the RX-8 came out, somebody swapped one into an early SA22C chassis (a '78 RX-7). They basically crammed the RX-8 interior into the car - it had a narrowed RX-8 dashboard so that it could use the RX-8 cluster, HVAC, and general wiring harness.
The engine management in those cars is integrated. It looks at the door position to fully disengage any speed limiters, for example. (Not too many people drive with the door open, but you might have the door open on a chassis dyno)
You make it sounds so easy,.... :)
In reply to Knurled. :
Thanks for making me feel old berkeleyer!
Hyundai 1.6l Turbo was an awesome engine, bone stock 6mt was about 180 wheel hp.
Move up a little to a 1.8 or 2.0 ea888 vw engine and you can put down 400hp reliably
I would just say avoid the 1.4s unless they have some specific advantage (besides power) that you need. All the 1.6s make tons more power and the 2.0s are in another league. I wouldn't be happy with going through the trouble of a motor swap to end up with the power the 1.4s can easily make, unless the car was <2000lb.
classicJackets said:GM's 2.0LTG makes 275/295 and a controls pack can still be bought through Chevy. Manual options, and only minor differences from the Fwd/Rwd platforms from what I've heard
Mmmm, I love the LTG. Driven it in a number of different platforms, and it's smooth and punchy and sounds good. Haven't seen any issues out of them either. Probably one of my favorite newer engines.
People are apparently getting Fiesta ST levels of power out of 1.4 RS Sonics just with tuning.
Knurled. said:In reply to RossD :
The 1.4 turbo in the Cruze and others is apparently very tweakable. There's a thread on the HPT forum with someone who was experiementing with all of the different ways in which power is controlled, and IIRC he nearly doubled the stock power, which admittedly is rather low relative to other small-four turbos. (Within a couple horsepower of the naturally aspirated 1.8) The iterative process was fascinating - raise torque limits, datalog, find the next limitation, adjust that, make more power, find the next limit, etc.
Mind you, the 1.4t is port injected, not DI. It's a shame that GM hung so much stuff over the transmission, as it would be a neat little engine to stick in LBC or other sports car.
There are apparently also great gains to be had in tweaking the three cylinder Ecoboost in addition to the 1.6 in the FiST and others.
Note the 2016 and up Cruze 1.4t is DI, not port injected. They do respond well to tuning, from what I have read. Maybe later on when the warranty runs out, I might see how my 2018 Cruze does with tuning. If I was swapping a LBC, I would probably go with the larger 2.0t engine. Same amount of work, but with more power.
In reply to 81cpcamaro :
But the 1.4 is TINY. The footprint is amazingly small. Next time I have to replace the valve cover on one because the internal PCV system failed, I'll get measurements of the general footprint. (Should take less than a week...)
This is important when dealing with older chassis. I remember the thread about what modern engines might swap into old Opel Kadetts, and IIRC it looked like the Suzuki 3-cylinder might fit okay, but possibly not the 4 cylinder version. The 1.1l four was about the size of the Suzuki 1.0, you see, and with an engine that small they were not particularly concerned about efficient packaging.
I have a 1979 Ford Fiesta and I have looked at the 1.6L Ecoboost engine and with some work I think it could fit. I'd try to swap the whole subframe and part of the suspension. But that's a few years down the road. Other projects are higher on the to do list.
You'll need to log in to post.
