So I have been thinking again (Ya I know 
)
I have been on the prowl for either a 951 or a 944s2 with a bad motor that I can swap another one in to it. For the longest time I was thinking of LM4 power but that seems. . . well boring. I want to be different. 4 or 6 cylinder and all aluminum are two things I want but I Iron block motors are ok as long as they are not to heavy. 225 HP with equal amounts torque. Turbo is ok but NA would be preferred.
No $10,000 motors. Think Junkyard pricing here. Preferably pull something from a late model something and add MS and away we go. Even better if it can be pulled with the complete wiring harness and ECM and plug it in. Something that is reasonably common.
Yes I know there will be a lot of fab work. I am ok with that.
So if you were not going to do the typical V8 swap in to a 944 what would you put in there?
Subi motor? A Mazda / Ford V6? Since don't know Honda or Toyota motors all that well what do they offer? I don't think a strait 6 would fit but who knows.
Discuss. .. . . . . .
I have heard that Audi engines bolt in nicely.
e_pie
HalfDork
7/9/13 3:05 p.m.
pilotbraden wrote:
I have heard that Audi engines bolt in nicely.
A turbo 20V Audi would be neat.
nokincy
New Reader
7/9/13 3:10 p.m.
BMW M54 or M52 from a z3. Both are aluminum blocks, and both make the kind of power you want. My vote goes to the M52 because of the better power band, friendlier electronics, as well as more bolt ons.
Just have to make it fit. 
oldtin
UltraDork
7/9/13 3:10 p.m.
An S2 or turbo had a little better than 200 hp stock - turbo s with around 250. I love engine swaps, but why bother to replicate existing hp - buy a decent one and call it a day? For an alternative v8 how about a 1uzfe because 9,300 rpms? 300hp and can take more.
928 motor (there's actually more room in the 924/944 engine bay than the 928 bay)
The Audi 5-cylinder pattern was shared with some of their other motors, just need a 924 turbo bellhousing to start the swap.
http://youtu.be/I27WmAwNWNI
http://youtu.be/3iR2sSHdewE
oldtin wrote:
An S2 or turbo had a little better than 200 hp stock - turbo s with around 250. I love engine swaps, but why bother to replicate existing hp - buy a decent one and call it a day? For an alternative v8 how about a 1uzfe because 9,300 rpms? 300hp and can take more.
A good example of one of these (especially an s2) can be quite pricy. Where as rollers are relatively speaking cheap. Once the motor goes bad in these cars the price falls fast making them good platforms to start with and I really REALLY like the looks of these cars.
As for the HP numbers? Well because 225-250 HP is all I want. I want to keep it a "sports car" Adding a V8 makes it in to more of a muscle car. I have had 400 & 500 hp cars and yes they are fun but I want something more mild mannered. Something that is well behaved. Something that will not tax the rest of the car. I also like having room in the engine compartment to work on things. I want to be different. I want a project. How much fun is to tell your friends. Hay look what I plunked down a lot of $$$ for. (call me unimpressed) Versus, hay look what I engineered and built. I tend to go with the ladder.(and I am impressed by the ladder) Anyone with the $$$ can purchase something. Not everyone can build something.
The GM L52 straight 5 would fit your needs dead stock and as I recall, standalone on those is easy because the ECU is bolted to the motor. You might even get one with a decent, though truck geared, manual behind it.
There was a Toyota Corona wagon at PIR on Friday that had a Solstice GXP turbo-4 EcoTec swapped in that made lovely noises. I'd be intrigued by that.
A 928-motored 944/951 would be very interesting, as would the Audi 5-cylinder. A 13B turbo would be pretty kick butt as well. An S2000 swap would have a lot of character.
I think a V6 might be the "best" though. Maybe a 350Z swap? Mustang 3.7L, Genesis Coupe V6, and new Camaro V6 all come to mind.
A more GRM option would be a 3800 Series II from a 93-02 Camaro/Firebird with the attached T-5. Cheap as dirt, and really hard to kill. The OHV means it will actually be small in the engine bay, have a lower CG, and be easier to work on. They are already 200+ HP stock, and boost is just a junkyard GTP blower away. There's oodles of them running 13's in the F-Body N/A and deep into the 9's on boost (kissing cousin to the 3.8L Turbo Buick).
The whole shebang would probably weigh less than the original slant-4/torque tube/transaxle setup, too.
M030
Dork
7/9/13 5:27 p.m.
If you use an early 924 bell housing, Audi V6s can be made to fit. Why not a 2.7 twin turbo & boost the crap out of it?
Were it my project (and it isn't, so feel free to ignore me, of course!), I'd really want to keep the transaxle. That detail and weight distribution are such huge parts of that car to me that I'd feel I'd downgraded significantly if I had to switch to a normal transmission and differential.
That certainly would make the Porsche/Audi power options more compelling since there's less mayhem in connecting them to that drivetrain.
The nice part about the available information on the V8 swaps for the 944/951 means that the same basic techniques can be used to mate a donor bellhousing to the torque tube and the Audi transaxle. This keeps the weight balance and one of the unique features of the car.
The fact that the later corvettes use a similar solution tells you that it works and can work quite well.
Dropping the TT means you now have a Camaro/BMW/Mustang, etc. with a Porsche 944 body on it. Nothing wrong with that, but the amount of work required for either solution is similar for little to no gains.
In reply to turboswede:
While I generally agree with your premise, the TT & transaxle are just so berkeleying expensive. 
Maybe a C5 TT & transaxle swap to keep the weight/balance and have access to decent clutches for not $$$$$insane.
turboswede wrote:
The nice part about the available information on the V8 swaps for the 944/951 means that the same basic techniques can be used to mate a donor bellhousing to the torque tube and the Audi transaxle. This keeps the weight balance and one of the unique features of the car.
The fact that the later corvettes use a similar solution tells you that it works and can work quite well.
I'm confused (don't worry, that's my normal mode of operation); Audi transaxle? Is it that the 944 unit is Audi in origin? Or are they using a non-944-original Audi transaxle?
I'm going to go Google, but do you have any especially good links for V8-into-944 swaps that covers the bellhousing adaptation?
Muchas danke...
ransom wrote:
turboswede wrote:
The nice part about the available information on the V8 swaps for the 944/951 means that the same basic techniques can be used to mate a donor bellhousing to the torque tube and the Audi transaxle. This keeps the weight balance and one of the unique features of the car.
The fact that the later corvettes use a similar solution tells you that it works and can work quite well.
I'm confused (don't worry, that's my normal mode of operation); Audi transaxle? Is it that the 944 unit is Audi in origin? Or are they using a non-944-original Audi transaxle?
I'm going to go Google, but do you have any especially good links for V8-into-944 swaps that covers the bellhousing adaptation?
Muchas danke...
Ok, I'll keep this as brief as possible: the 924 was originally a VW project they paid Porsche to do for them. VW chickened out and built the Scirocco instead (not a bad decision, but it was a decision none the less). The 924 used a lot of VW and Audi parts under the skin (Reversed Rabbit front suspension, Audi motor, Audi 4-speed FWD transaxle, VW fuse box, etc.). So Porsche decided they needed to replace the 912 and 914 with a newer model to fit with their upcoming 928 replacement for the 911, so Porsche paid VW for the rights to the 924 project and produced it themselves.
At first they produced it pretty much as spec'd, then they switch the 4-speed Audi box for the 5-speed based on the 914/911 gearbox (the 915 box). Around this time they added the turbo option as well as the option for upgraded brakes. They took the 924 racing at LeMans and many of those improvements were baked into the 944 (the wider body work, the suspension improvements) along with the Porsche designed 2.5L motor, but they went back to the Audi FWD transaxle, only with a 5-speed and it is essentially the same from 81 to the last of the 944 series. This 5-speed is also essentially the same as the one used in many of the Audi sedans and wagons (differences in the bellhousing and gearing mostly)
The 944 GTP improvements eventually found their way to the S2 and the 968.
The 968 has so many changes to it that very little interchanges with the older cars, but underneath they are still very similar to original 924 and the 6-speed is based on the next generation of the Audi 5-speed, but it mounts differently.
Some odd data:
The Boxster uses an Audi transaxle as well.
The Audi 4-cylinder is based on a Mercedes design.
Porsche purposely designed the ports on the cylinder head for the 2.0L to make it impossible for the motor to make more power than the bottom rung 911. This is when the staged and staggered model lineup for Porsche really took off.
Btw, if you wanna see weird or "different" engine swaps, check out the 924board's Engine Swap forum:
http://www.924board.org/viewforum.php?f=2
There's an Audi inline 6 swap in progress.
A 1.8T swap.
A 951 powered 924S (beautiful work on that one)
Some different Chebby/Caddy swaps.
A rotary swap (Aussie rally car too!)
A diesel swap
Etc.
In reply to turboswede:
More fun facts: That 2.0L 924 motor was also the optional gas-miser engine in the AMC Spirit & Concord.
jstand
Reader
7/9/13 7:07 p.m.
Have the Cobalt SS engines come down enough in price?
205hp 4 cyl with forced induction could be fun and keep weight down.
On edit:
205hp naturally aspirated
260hp with turbo
fanfoy
HalfDork
7/9/13 7:18 p.m.
How about the Audi 4.2 V8 out of an A8? They look really wide, but they are cheap. There is one for sale right now locally for 1k and I've seen them cheaper.
Javelin wrote:
In reply to turboswede:
More fun facts: That 2.0L 924 motor was also the optional gas-miser engine in the AMC Spirit & Concord.
Yeah, Porsche was NOT happy about that and made sure there wasn't any Porsche part numbers on the block or head, etc. They also came with 2-bbl carbs which I've seen those intakes used on hacked up 924's
This motor was also used as a diesel in the VW LT van (think Sprinter or Postal truck).
Of course this wasn't the only time VAG motors found their way into Chrysler cars. The Omni/Horizons came with Rabbit 1.7L engines and transaxles in the early runs until the 2.2 was ready. It was a much nicer solutions than the pushrod Peugot 1.6 they were also using at the time (my family owned an example of both along with the later GLH, GLH-T and GLH-S models)
