In reply to pres589 (djronnebaum) :
OP is seeking 200 hp. That eliminates the Ford V4 by a vast margin.
In reply to pres589 (djronnebaum) :
OP is seeking 200 hp. That eliminates the Ford V4 by a vast margin.
TurnerX19 said:In reply to pres589 (djronnebaum) :
OP is seeking 200 hp. That eliminates the Ford V4 by a vast margin.
Unless you boost the wee out of it. A MegaSquirt-fueled, big turbo Taunus V4 would be hilarious, but I'm guessing highly unfeasible. The Motus LS-based motorcycle V4 would also be kind of cool and 160hp, but pricey.
NickD said:TurnerX19 said:In reply to pres589 (djronnebaum) :
OP is seeking 200 hp. That eliminates the Ford V4 by a vast margin.
Unless you boost the wee out of it. A MegaSquirt-fueled, big turbo Taunus V4 would be hilarious, but I'm guessing highly unfeasible. The Motus LS-based motorcycle V4 would also be kind of cool and 160hp, but pricey.
If you want a V4 and you're thinking motorcycle, no need to go with an obscure or custom engine. There are a boatload of options from the bike world. It's actually an interesting idea, and you're not going to bump into another front engine, rear drive Minis with a V4 and a redline in the five digit range. Although you'd probably still have a less effective vehicle than if you stuck the whole motorcycle drivetrain in the back.
There was a guy doing kits for a Rotrex supercharger install on Honda VFR800's that would generate maybe 150 crank HP. They sounded glorious. Even with the blower it was a very compact package. The problem I have with all that is the transmission and not having reverse. And I don't think this kit has been built for a while. I sort of like the idea of a turbo better anyway.
A 1.7 Taunus V4 with a pair of little turbos off each head would probably get to 200 crank HP with a lot of work but I don't know that the bottom end would hang together at that level of output. I'm guessing it wouldn't last long... the mains on those engines weren't so beefy. 150 hp seems kind of doable though. So yeah, do that.
Wow, this thread took off! I have so so many more ideas now, I can't decide what I want to do. Hahaha. I'll keep you guys updated once I get the mini, and start the project. A very dumb, addicted part of me wants three minis, one front engine, rwd, one front engine fwd (bike motor), and one mid engine rwd. I should just get all three, right? That seems smart.
I like the way that “reliable and simple” turned into a weird 1960’s V4 with a Megasquirt and twin turbos. You don’t get that clarity of thought everywhere.
I can't believe no one has suggested an RX7 13b Turbo. It's compact can easily make 200 plus HP and reliable if you don't overboost it and change the oil regularly. Properly cared for these can go 200k miles.
I'm going to propose a way out in left field drivetrain. As the Mini is very light why not keep the theme going. My thought is how about a Yamaha RX-1 snwomobile, while they are only 145 HP they also only weigh around 175lbs. You could either mount it in the back seat or under the hood. This might bring the weight of the car down to 1200-1300lb range.
Keith Tanner said:I like the way that “reliable and simple” turned into a weird 1960’s V4 with a Megasquirt and twin turbos. You don’t get that clarity of thought everywhere.
To be fair, I've had Saab Sonnetts on the brain lately.
NGTD said:EJ207 from Japan. The 2.0L are much more reliable than the 2.5L.
x2 on 2.0 reliability.
I had a bolt on and tune 2002 WRX that I beat the snot out of on a daily basis and the motor never needed anything other than routine maintenance. When I finally sold it at 184k miles, it ran excellent, was suprisingly fuel efficient (for what it is) and didn't burn or leak any noticeable amount of oil.
I'd probably still be driving it today if everything around that engine wasn't so prone to corrosion and 93 octane hadn't gone over $4/gallon...
The 2.5 (both NA and turbo) is a completely different story. In fact when I think of people I know that owned them for more than just a hot second, pretty much all except one (a guy that rarely ever takes his over 3k RPM) either had a long list of failures or one catastrophic one that turned them off of Subaru's for good.
FWIW, and not sure how engine related it was, but before I pulled the trigger on my 2002 I shopped it against a 2006 (both Wagons BTW). To me the 2002 was noticeably more fun to drive and at least felt quicker.
If you decide on the 2.0 and only need the engine, I'd highly suggest hunting for a cheap neglected/totaled/non-op (for reasons other than motor) automatic trans equipped 2002-2005 WRX. Hell, even a good condition running/driving auto WRX is cheap as they literally hold half the value of a same year/miles/condition 5 speed example. Pluck the motor/harness/ECU out of it and then part out the rest. Depending on what you spent on the car, you might come close to breaking even or potentially make a profit after your local Subaru enthusiasts quickly call dibs on just about any aftermarket performance goodies you don't need and all the WRX/RS specific goodies (bumpers/wheels/hood/suspension/seats/etc.) to outfit their lower end Imprezas or even Foresters. You just have to be okay with them vaping on your property when they arrive to cart the stuff away... 
In reply to TurnerX19 :
make it easy. pick up a torque tube and transaxle from a 944/968. Already setup for a front engine configuration
In reply to mad_machine :
I think though, that the tail of the transmission hangs too far aft for use in the Mini. I was going to recommend an Audi 016 or an Audi 012 but realized they'd probably stick out the trunk.
Put me down for 13B turbo. 185hp out of the box and easily tuned to just about any number of your choosing/spending
In reply to Tom1200 :
Rx1 motors is just an r1 motor with carbs, although they went to fi pretty quick. They do take boost great though. No issues making 250 on stock internals.
A boosted bike V4 with a driveshaft to the rear diff setup of your choosing would be an interesting option. It would be pretty much the polar opposite of your proposed drivetrain. It would be a slightly too small engine/trans designed for a 700lb setup instead of a engine designed for a 2800lb car with a transmission that will survive 600hp in a 3200lb car.
You'll need to log in to post.
