Tell us: “Horrible engines” that really aren’t that horrible

Colin
By Colin Wood
Nov 11, 2022 | Engine swap, engine, Discussion

Photograph Courtesy VW

Some engines–like the LS V8 and the Honda K-Series–seem to get all the love because of their strong aftermarket support and their availability in the salvage yards.

But when it comes to engines that are said to be finicky, hard to modify or even unreliable, is all the bad press really true, or are there a few diamonds in the rough out there?

Join Free Join our community to easily find more Engine swap, engine and Discussion news.
More like this
Comments
View comments on the GRM forums
Colin Wood
Colin Wood Associate Editor
11/11/22 11:21 a.m.

Is this a thinly-veiled attempt to discover ideas for uncommon engine swaps? Perhaps.

Curtis73 (Forum Supporter)
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/11/22 11:27 a.m.
Colin Wood said:

Is this a thinly-veiled attempt to discover ideas for uncommon engine swaps? Perhaps.

Either way, I approve.  Paddle on, Colin

Curtis73 (Forum Supporter)
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/11/22 11:30 a.m.

Pretty much any diesel gets a rep worse than it actually is.  That's good for me because it keeps them from being more expensive than they already are.

wae
wae PowerDork
11/11/22 11:32 a.m.
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:

Pretty much any diesel gets a rep worse than it actually is.  That's good for me because it keeps them from being more expensive than they already are.

I will fight to the death to keep the OM642's reputation as low as possible.

Maybe it's only because mine have been the 2v versions, but I hear a lot of dissatisfaction with the Triton motors.  They've been awesome for me, though.

Mr_Asa
Mr_Asa GRM+ Memberand UltimaDork
11/11/22 11:37 a.m.

200-250ci Ford I6

Braze/TIG some injector bungs on the integral intake, throw boost at it, grin.

maschinenbau
maschinenbau GRM+ Memberand UberDork
11/11/22 11:54 a.m.

Iron Duke. Horribly slow, yes, but reliable.

Run_Away
Run_Away Dork
11/11/22 11:56 a.m.

I've always wondered about the Oldmobile Aurora 4.0L V8. Apparently it was used as a basis for an Indy Car engine or something? Related to the Northstar?

Off to google.

 

EDIT: Wiki sez

The Aurora came standard with Oldsmobile's 4.0 L (244 cu in) L47 V8 engine, a DOHC engine based on Cadillac's 4.6 L Northstar V8. The Northstar engine and 4T80-E had been exclusive to Cadillac prior to the Aurora. The L47 put out 250 hp (186 kW) at 5600 rpm and 260 lb⋅ft (353 N⋅m) torque at 4400 rpm.[7] The Aurora used a four-speed automatic transmission with driver selectable "normal" and "power" shift modes. A highly modified 650 hp (485 kW) version of this engine was used by General Motors racing division initially for Indy Racing League and IMSA competition starting in 1995 with the GM-supported Aurora GTS-1 racing program, then was later used in the Cadillac Northstar LMP program in 2000. Both engines retained the 4.0 L capacity, but the Northstar LMP version was twin-turbocharged.[8]

Apparently it was also used in the Shelby Series 1 car.

 

 

I'm assuming it's not easy to adapt to RWD or something. Also plenty of engines that are great in factory form,  but lack aftermarket support or require lots of parts to be turned up much which kills it's popularity before it can get started. If you have an engine that makes 250hp stock, and has the head flow and bottom end to support 600hp but the bean counters gave it pencil thin rods then it's not going to become huge. Or even just saddling the engines with a non-enthusiast platform to begin with. Like the Nelsons and the Atlas engines, overlooked because of it's size/oil pan and Trailblazer surroundings, among others.

Javelin
Javelin GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/11/22 12:01 p.m.

The Porsche M96. Do the IMS once and actually ring it out and it will last forever.  Same thing with Mazda rotaries, if you actually drive it like it's meant to they last. If you let it sit all the time and baby it, they break. 

Moral of the story is buy high mileage sports cars. 

clshore
clshore Reader
11/11/22 12:07 p.m.

I'm attempting to swap a mildly popular FWD motor into a RWD platform.
Honda L15B7 into a Spitfire/GT6.

Light, compact, powerful, plentiful, and loads of aftermarket stuff to X2 the stock HP.

Not really a 'Horrible Engine' when used in Civics and such, but as a RWD swap candidate, has drawbacks.

No RWD transmission, the closest I found was a bellhousing used to convert to a
propeller belt drive for use on light aircraft, which even if I found one, would still need
an adaptor to the transmission itself.
And what to do about standalone engine management?

But I figured out how to fit a Getrag gearbox from a BMW 323i with an adaptor ring.
And there are Hondata boxes that can run the motor standalone, as in the aero application.
See this link:  Viking 195 Turbo Engine — Viking & Valkyrie Power (vikingaircraftengines.com)

I'll admit to have been eying the Toyota GR16 3 cylinder motor, but good luck finding one of those.
(bring the BIG wallet)

Colin Wood
Colin Wood Associate Editor
11/11/22 12:10 p.m.

In reply to Javelin :

If what we learned from our Porsche Boxster S project car, fixing the IMS issue isn't nearly as scary as many would make it out to be.

madmrak351
madmrak351 Reader
11/11/22 12:10 p.m.

 Failure to respect timing belt/chain maintenance intervals has resulted in a bad reputation for many overhead cam engines. On the chain driven varieties over extended or forgotten oil changes are often the root cause of early demise. I often wonder if this is the case with the dohc GM 2.2/2.4 engines. In the junk yards I see a lot of these that have expired due to timing chain failures. 

Colin Wood
Colin Wood Associate Editor
11/11/22 12:13 p.m.

In reply to clshore :

I always thought the L15 deserved more love, but that's mostly because my daily is a GK5 Honda Fit.

Best of luck on your project (and make sure you share it over on Builds and Project Cars if you haven't already).

NickD
NickD MegaDork
11/11/22 12:20 p.m.

GM 2.8L/3.1L in FWD applications. Yeah, they weren't very great in RWD applications, like S-10 Blazers, but in a FWD they were a pretty rugged engine. Not powerful or thrilling, but they'd go a long time. My father's '89 Cutlass Ciera cracked off 250k miles with just a set of intake gaskets. Growing up we also had them in a '95 Cutlass Supreme and a '95 Buick Century and several Corsicas, and the engines were always hale and healthy up until the end of the cars.

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/11/22 12:26 p.m.

The most obvious is the Atlas 4.2    Chevy Trailblaze/ GMC Envoy/Buick ?  Calvin Nelson made 824 horsepower  on a stock bottom end one right  from  the Junkyard. 
    Right from the Junkyard  not opened up at all they handle  20 pounds of boost. ( 30 pounds sent a con rod on vacation out the side of the block)    junkyard price is about $ 4-600

      The Jaguar predecessor of the Atlas is very similar except the con rods  and crankshaft are forged not Sintered Iron like the GM.  But unlike the Atlas engine you don't have to highly modify the oil pan to get it to work in the typical FWD car. 
 junkyard of the Jaguar version is $2-400 

   Anyplace you can put an inline 6 in you can fit Jaguar's V12  in. It's a lot more narrow than  a V8  or 90 degree V6. Plus the spark plugs are on top.  It comes in both carb version and EFI. With and without distributor.  So if you are a Luddite like me you can run one wire to the coil and not have to use anything else. 
     

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/11/22 12:30 p.m.
madmrak351 said:

 Failure to respect timing belt/chain maintenance intervals has resulted in a bad reputation for many overhead cam engines. On the chain driven varieties over extended or forgotten oil changes are often the root cause of early demise. I often wonder if this is the case with the dohc GM 2.2/2.4 engines. In the junk yards I see a lot of these that have expired due to timing chain failures. 

Not just OHC engines.  Run low oil,  fail to change it regularly,  any chain driven camshaft will prematurely  fail.  Chevy,  Ford, etc.  

wvumtnbkr
wvumtnbkr GRM+ Memberand PowerDork
11/11/22 12:33 p.m.
NickD said:

GM 2.8L/3.1L in FWD applications. Yeah, they weren't very great in RWD applications, like S-10 Blazers, but in a FWD they were a pretty rugged engine. Not powerful or thrilling, but they'd go a long time. My father's '89 Cutlass Ciera cracked off 250k miles with just a set of intake gaskets. Growing up we also had them in a '95 Cutlass Supreme and a '95 Buick Century and several Corsicas, and the engines were always hale and healthy up until the end of the cars.

All of the 60 degree v6 engines.

 

The later ones are not that hard to swap.  They are built like a brick E36 M3house.  They can make decent power with some mods.  I plan to add a Chinese spooly Boi on the one in my rx8.

maschinenbau
maschinenbau GRM+ Memberand UberDork
11/11/22 12:35 p.m.
frenchyd said:

     The Jaguar predecessor of the Atlas     

False. Source required for a BS claim like that. 

Also, no one says the 4.2 is a "horrible engine". Trailblazers/Enovys have a pretty decent reputation, other than typical 2000's GM plastics and the 4l60e.

NickD
NickD MegaDork
11/11/22 12:38 p.m.
maschinenbau said:
frenchyd said:

     The Jaguar predecessor of the Atlas     

False. Source required for a BS claim like that. 

Also, no one says the 4.2 is a "horrible engine". Trailblazers/Enovys have a pretty decent reputation, other than typical 2000's GM plastics and the 4l60e.

The Atlas does kind of suck to work on, but a lot of that is a result of being in the Trailblazer/Envoy. Those are a E36 M3box of a vehicle, but it's not really the engine's fault, it's every other aspect of the platform. Ever changed a steering gear in one of those? Yikes. Or the front axle through the oil pan.

obsolete
obsolete GRM+ Memberand HalfDork
11/11/22 12:41 p.m.
wvumtnbkr said:
NickD said:

GM 2.8L/3.1L in FWD applications. Yeah, they weren't very great in RWD applications, like S-10 Blazers, but in a FWD they were a pretty rugged engine. Not powerful or thrilling, but they'd go a long time. My father's '89 Cutlass Ciera cracked off 250k miles with just a set of intake gaskets. Growing up we also had them in a '95 Cutlass Supreme and a '95 Buick Century and several Corsicas, and the engines were always hale and healthy up until the end of the cars.

All of the 60 degree v6 engines.

 

The later ones are not that hard to swap.  They are built like a brick E36 M3house.  They can make decent power with some mods.  I plan to add a Chinese spooly Boi on the one in my rx8.

+1. Ours ran like a train in Lemons. The canted-valve heads are cool. They just don't sound good.

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/11/22 12:44 p.m.
maschinenbau said:
frenchyd said:

     The Jaguar predecessor of the Atlas     

False. Source required for a BS claim like that. 

Also, no one says the 4.2 is a "horrible engine". Trailblazers/Enovys have a pretty decent reputation, other than typical 2000's GM plastics and the 4l60e.

Check your Wikipedia.  Atlas came out in 2002. Jaguar came out in 1980's ( 88 I think)   About the time GM was doing due diligence on buying Jaguar.  However they were beat out by Ford who already had an aluminum in line 6 with 4 valves per cylinder  

  Who said the Atlas  4.2 was Horrible?   I owned an early one And loved it.   If you read what I wrote I also mentioned the Nelson's  getting 824 horsepower from a junkyard one with 165,000 miles on it.  
 

Mr_Asa
Mr_Asa GRM+ Memberand UltimaDork
11/11/22 12:48 p.m.
frenchyd said:
maschinenbau said:
frenchyd said:

     The Jaguar predecessor of the Atlas     

False. Source required for a BS claim like that. 

Also, no one says the 4.2 is a "horrible engine". Trailblazers/Enovys have a pretty decent reputation, other than typical 2000's GM plastics and the 4l60e.

Check your Wikipedia.  Atlas came out in 2002. Jaguar came out in 1980's ( 88 I think)   About the time GM was doing due diligence on buying Jaguar.  However they were beat out by Ford who already had an aluminum in line 6 with 4 valves per cylinder  

  Who said the Atlas  4.2 was Horrible?   I owned an early one And loved it.   If you read what I wrote I also mentioned the Nelson's  getting 824 horsepower from a junkyard one with 165,000 miles on it.  
 

Your argument is the same as saying that I was named after someone born before me, just because my parents knew that person.  There is no evidence that those two things are linked.

Stop putting out your opinions as fact and you'll stop getting a lot of vitriol.

madmrak351
madmrak351 Reader
11/11/22 12:49 p.m.

In reply to frenchyd :

Agreed. However the longer the chain length the sooner  the problem seems to manifest itself .

Appleseed
Appleseed MegaDork
11/11/22 12:51 p.m.

LT1. Optispark failures are wildly overblown. I got 192,000 out of one without cracking the seal. Still running when I junked the car. Overshadowed by the original mouse motor and the LSx engines.

RacetruckRon
RacetruckRon GRM+ Memberand Dork
11/11/22 12:54 p.m.

In reply to frenchyd :

Quit cluttering another good thread with your oral diarrhea.  Just about everyone on this forum knows what the Nelson's have done with the Atlas platform because we either follow their builds or we've seen you E36 M3post that tidbit of information in every single engine thread in the last 6 months.

clshore
clshore Reader
11/11/22 12:54 p.m.

In reply to maschinenbau :

Wasn't it used in Midget Racing for awhile?

Pete. (l33t FS)
Pete. (l33t FS) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/11/22 12:56 p.m.
Mr_Asa said:

200-250ci Ford I6

Braze/TIG some injector bungs on the integral intake, throw boost at it, grin.

Injector bungs?  Carburetor flanges.

Apparently a set of SUs on stubs brazed to the integral manifold was enough to double the power of a 170.

MadScientistMatt
MadScientistMatt UltimaDork
11/11/22 12:59 p.m.

Mazda's KL series V6. Not so much a bad reputation as no reputation; it's been pretty much forgotten. But they cranked out a respectable 200 hp in KL-ZE trim in the '90s with a Honda-like redline, and I've seen some pretty wicked homebrew turbo setups.

Mr_Asa
Mr_Asa GRM+ Memberand UltimaDork
11/11/22 12:59 p.m.
Pete. (l33t FS) said:
Mr_Asa said:

200-250ci Ford I6

Braze/TIG some injector bungs on the integral intake, throw boost at it, grin.

Injector bungs?  Carburetor flanges.

Apparently a set of SUs on stubs brazed to the integral manifold was enough to double the power of a 170.

Or cut the log off, mill it flat, bolt on an adapter plate and run 6 Mikunis.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other. 

californiamilleghia
californiamilleghia UltraDork
11/11/22 1:10 p.m.

Corvair  motors never got any love , 

stupid fan belt setup and bad pushrod tube seals  gave them a bad rep , 

but a 1965  corvair with the 4 carb 140hp motor is a nice ride.

 

AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter)
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand UberDork
11/11/22 1:13 p.m.
Mr_Asa said:
frenchyd said:
maschinenbau said:
frenchyd said:

     The Jaguar predecessor of the Atlas     

False. Source required for a BS claim like that. 

Also, no one says the 4.2 is a "horrible engine". Trailblazers/Enovys have a pretty decent reputation, other than typical 2000's GM plastics and the 4l60e.

Check your Wikipedia.  Atlas came out in 2002. Jaguar came out in 1980's ( 88 I think)   About the time GM was doing due diligence on buying Jaguar.  However they were beat out by Ford who already had an aluminum in line 6 with 4 valves per cylinder  

  Who said the Atlas  4.2 was Horrible?   I owned an early one And loved it.   If you read what I wrote I also mentioned the Nelson's  getting 824 horsepower from a junkyard one with 165,000 miles on it.  
 

Your argument is the same as saying that I was named after someone born before me, just because my parents knew that person.  There is no evidence that those two things are linked.

Stop putting out your opinions as fact and you'll stop getting a lot of vitriol.

It's an opinion thread if I'm reading the title correctly.  His opinion was also backed by fact.  I don't get all the dislike in this case.

Mr_Asa
Mr_Asa GRM+ Memberand UltimaDork
11/11/22 1:16 p.m.

In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :

Please point to anyplace on the internet, except for a frenchy post, where it says that the Atlas motor was designed around the Jag motor?

"Backed by fact" my hairy butt.

 

Edit: also, the Atlas engine program started in the mid-90s.  Nowhere near when GM was doing anything with Jag.

Frenchy is wrong.

Ranger50
Ranger50 MegaDork
11/11/22 1:29 p.m.

2.4 dodges.

Horrible wrappers, "horrible" wiring/esu's, horribly maintained, ad nauseum...

Way robust architecture with decent flowing heads, can be made boostable to the moon for very little dollar outlay, etc.

Much maligned. Would use in other things provided I had a transmission for it.

SEADave
SEADave Dork
11/11/22 1:37 p.m.
wvumtnbkr said:
NickD said:

GM 2.8L/3.1L in FWD applications. Yeah, they weren't very great in RWD applications, like S-10 Blazers, but in a FWD they were a pretty rugged engine. Not powerful or thrilling, but they'd go a long time. My father's '89 Cutlass Ciera cracked off 250k miles with just a set of intake gaskets. Growing up we also had them in a '95 Cutlass Supreme and a '95 Buick Century and several Corsicas, and the engines were always hale and healthy up until the end of the cars.

All of the 60 degree v6 engines.

 

The later ones are not that hard to swap.  They are built like a brick E36 M3house.  They can make decent power with some mods.  I plan to add a Chinese spooly Boi on the one in my rx8.

I have a 3.4L 60 degree V6 in my MGB.  Lots of people crap in this engine, why didn't you do a V8 or a 3800 or some other engine?  But that 3.4 is more than enough power for an MGB and it literally just drops right in.   Like none/zero/zip sheet metal work, stock firewall, stock radiator, etc.   

I believe that one of the companies that make the conversion kits used to do the swap in a day at MG car shows as a demo.   It's still basically an MGB, just with 300% the horsepower (versus a stock rubber bumper B).  

clshore
clshore Reader
11/11/22 2:04 p.m.

In reply to MadScientistMatt :

And they make a wonderful sound ....

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/11/22 2:20 p.m.
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:
Mr_Asa said:
frenchyd said:
maschinenbau said:
frenchyd said:

     The Jaguar predecessor of the Atlas     

False. Source required for a BS claim like that. 

Also, no one says the 4.2 is a "horrible engine". Trailblazers/Enovys have a pretty decent reputation, other than typical 2000's GM plastics and the 4l60e.

Check your Wikipedia.  Atlas came out in 2002. Jaguar came out in 1980's ( 88 I think)   About the time GM was doing due diligence on buying Jaguar.  However they were beat out by Ford who already had an aluminum in line 6 with 4 valves per cylinder  

  Who said the Atlas  4.2 was Horrible?   I owned an early one And loved it.   If you read what I wrote I also mentioned the Nelson's  getting 824 horsepower from a junkyard one with 165,000 miles on it.  
 

Your argument is the same as saying that I was named after someone born before me, just because my parents knew that person.  There is no evidence that those two things are linked.

Stop putting out your opinions as fact and you'll stop getting a lot of vitriol.

It's an opinion thread if I'm reading the title correctly.  His opinion was also backed by fact.  I don't get all the dislike in this case.

  Thank you.  Some people just gotta hate.  If they looked at the facts they might modify their vitriol.  
  Besides, the Jaguar is less expensive, extremely reliable. And doesn't need major oil pan work or an Uber expensive aftermarket oil pan to fit in a RWD car. 
    Did I read where the engine in question was going in a Spitfire?   If so didn't the spitfire get a 6 cylinder engine?  Or was that only the TR 6? 

billstewartx
billstewartx Reader
11/11/22 2:21 p.m.
frenchyd said:

The most obvious is the Atlas 4.2    Chevy Trailblaze/ GMC Envoy/Buick ?  Calvin Nelson made 824 horsepower  on a stock bottom end one right  from  the Junkyard. 
    Right from the Junkyard  not opened up at all they handle  20 pounds of boost. ( 30 pounds sent a con rod on vacation out the side of the block)    junkyard price is about $ 4-600

      The Jaguar predecessor of the Atlas is very similar except the con rods  and crankshaft are forged not Sintered Iron like the GM.  But unlike the Atlas engine you don't have to highly modify the oil pan to get it to work in the typical FWD car. 
 junkyard of the Jaguar version is $2-400 

   Anyplace you can put an inline 6 in you can fit Jaguar's V12  in. It's a lot more narrow than  a V8  or 90 degree V6. Plus the spark plugs are on top.  It comes in both carb version and EFI. With and without distributor.  So if you are a Luddite like me you can run one wire to the coil and not have to use anything else. 
     

Jag V12 for the Win

Mr_Asa
Mr_Asa GRM+ Memberand UltimaDork
11/11/22 2:30 p.m.

In reply to frenchyd :

You have no facts, you silly silly man.

The Atlas program started in '95

Doing due diligence on a company does not entitle you to rip off the design from the company you are looking at acquiring, that is called theft.

Nothing you have said is a fact.  Deal with it.

ProDarwin
ProDarwin MegaDork
11/11/22 2:31 p.m.

I still have love for the Saturn LL0, even though by modern standards its pretty terrible.

Compact, light, cheap, robust.  Will run until the end of time if you keep oil in it.

 

 

bobzilla
bobzilla MegaDork
11/11/22 2:34 p.m.
Ranger50 said:

2.4 dodges.

Horrible wrappers, "horrible" wiring/esu's, horribly maintained, ad nauseum...

Way robust architecture with decent flowing heads, can be made boostable to the moon for very little dollar outlay, etc.

Much maligned. Would use in other things provided I had a transmission for it.

Was that the "world engine" they went in with Hyundai and Mitsu to design? That led to the Theta's, 4B11's and the ChryCo 2.4 Turbo engines. Hyundai and Mitsu both stuck to the 2.0T, but I think they missed the boat on a 2.4T version. The 2.0T made 270-300 in stock form. 

bobzilla
bobzilla MegaDork
11/11/22 2:36 p.m.
ProDarwin said:

I still have love for the Saturn LL0, even though by modern standards its pretty terrible.

Compact, light, cheap, robust.  Will run until the end of time if you keep oil in it.

 

 

Hit the googles to find that the LL0 is now a 1.2L Turbo engine and was really confused because they came out way after the Saturn brand was gone. Then I realzed GM repurposed the engine code. That was the 1.9 DOHC? Those were fun and durable little engines.

ProDarwin
ProDarwin MegaDork
11/11/22 2:37 p.m.
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter)
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/11/22 2:37 p.m.
wae said:
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:

Pretty much any diesel gets a rep worse than it actually is.  That's good for me because it keeps them from being more expensive than they already are.

I will fight to the death to keep the OM642's reputation as low as possible.

Maybe it's only because mine have been the 2v versions, but I hear a lot of dissatisfaction with the Triton motors.  They've been awesome for me, though.

It's a shame the OM606 has a good rep, because it's my favorite.  I'm also a fan (don't laugh) of the Olds 350 diesel.  They got such a terrible street cred because the head bolts were crap, and the TSB told mechanics to just replace the head gasket and re-use the old bolts.  If you ditch the bolts and redrill for 1/2" studs, it was suddenly quite reliable.  A guy I knew had one in an S10 pushing about 25psi into it and making 650 ft-lbs of torque.  Last I heard, it was still running.

Peabody
Peabody MegaDork
11/11/22 2:41 p.m.

I think the latest thread on the Iron Duke was the first time I've ever heard them referred to as horrible. I appreciated mine for what they were. 
 

How about the Quad4? There was a lot of hate for them in the day, and there were shops that wouldn't even touch them. 

MadScientistMatt
MadScientistMatt UltimaDork
11/11/22 2:45 p.m.
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said: I'm also a fan (don't laugh) of the Olds 350 diesel.  They got such a terrible street cred because the head bolts were crap, and the TSB told mechanics to just replace the head gasket and re-use the old bolts.  If you ditch the bolts and redrill for 1/2" studs, it was suddenly quite reliable.  A guy I knew had one in an S10 pushing about 25psi into it and making 650 ft-lbs of torque.  Last I heard, it was still running.

That may win this thread for best build quality to reputation ratio.

ShawnG
ShawnG MegaDork
11/11/22 2:54 p.m.

Chevy 267 V8.

The horrible, smaller, weaker sbc.

Good because ANYTHING that bolts in place of it is an upgrade.

MotorsportsGordon
MotorsportsGordon Dork
11/11/22 2:59 p.m.
Run_Away said:

I've always wondered about the Oldmobile Aurora 4.0L V8. Apparently it was used as a basis for an Indy Car engine or something? Related to the Northstar?

Off to google.

 

EDIT: Wiki sez

The Aurora came standard with Oldsmobile's 4.0 L (244 cu in) L47 V8 engine, a DOHC engine based on Cadillac's 4.6 L Northstar V8. The Northstar engine and 4T80-E had been exclusive to Cadillac prior to the Aurora. The L47 put out 250 hp (186 kW) at 5600 rpm and 260 lb⋅ft (353 N⋅m) torque at 4400 rpm.[7] The Aurora used a four-speed automatic transmission with driver selectable "normal" and "power" shift modes. A highly modified 650 hp (485 kW) version of this engine was used by General Motors racing division initially for Indy Racing League and IMSA competition starting in 1995 with the GM-supported Aurora GTS-1 racing program, then was later used in the Cadillac Northstar LMP program in 2000. Both engines retained the 4.0 L capacity, but the Northstar LMP version was twin-turbocharged.[8]

Apparently it was also used in the Shelby Series 1 car.

 

 

I'm assuming it's not easy to adapt to RWD or something. Also plenty of engines that are great in factory form,  but lack aftermarket support or require lots of parts to be turned up much which kills it's popularity before it can get started. If you have an engine that makes 250hp stock, and has the head flow and bottom end to support 600hp but the bean counters gave it pencil thin rods then it's not going to become huge. Or even just saddling the engines with a non-enthusiast platform to begin with. Like the Nelsons and the Atlas engines, overlooked because of it's size/oil pan and Trailblazer surroundings, among others.

Won in both imsa gts and wsc. Won both the Daytona 24 hours and 12 hours of Sebring.

MotorsportsGordon
MotorsportsGordon Dork
11/11/22 3:06 p.m.
frenchyd said:

This post has received too many downvotes to be displayed.

Show/hide post

 

maschinenbau said:
frenchyd said:

     The Jaguar predecessor of the Atlas     

False. Source required for a BS claim like that. 

Also, no one says the 4.2 is a "horrible engine". Trailblazers/Enovys have a pretty decent reputation, other than typical 2000's GM plastics and the 4l60e.

Check your Wikipedia.  Atlas came out in 2002. Jaguar came out in 1980's ( 88 I think)   About the time GM was doing due diligence on buying Jaguar.  However they were beat out by Ford who already had an aluminum in line 6 with 4 valves per cylinder  

  Who said the Atlas  4.2 was Horrible?   I owned an early one And loved it.   If you read what I wrote I also mentioned the Nelson's  getting 824 horsepower from a junkyard one with 165,000 miles on it.  
 

 

Gm wasn't beat by Ford in buying Jag they looked at it and realized there wasn't anything worth buying at Jaguar just a huge money pit.

bobzilla
bobzilla MegaDork
11/11/22 3:10 p.m.

In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :

Back in the days of forums the old 6.2/6.5 GM diesel boards there were guys building reliable D-max power level 350 and 6.2/6.5 TD. ARP studs were the key and for the 350 diesel the later blocks. The early blocks weren't cast well IIRC. But a later block, ARP studs, good gaskets and they'd take 30psi all day. 

We had 3 different 6.2L NA Diesels and they were great. 20mpg in a lifted 'burb with 3.73 or 4.10 1-ton axles and hauled at least 1500lbs of concrete mix in the cargo area. 

bobzilla
bobzilla MegaDork
11/11/22 3:10 p.m.
MotorsportsGordon said:
frenchyd said:

This post has received too many downvotes to be displayed.

Show/hide post

 

maschinenbau said:
frenchyd said:

     The Jaguar predecessor of the Atlas     

False. Source required for a BS claim like that. 

Also, no one says the 4.2 is a "horrible engine". Trailblazers/Enovys have a pretty decent reputation, other than typical 2000's GM plastics and the 4l60e.

Check your Wikipedia.  Atlas came out in 2002. Jaguar came out in 1980's ( 88 I think)   About the time GM was doing due diligence on buying Jaguar.  However they were beat out by Ford who already had an aluminum in line 6 with 4 valves per cylinder  

  Who said the Atlas  4.2 was Horrible?   I owned an early one And loved it.   If you read what I wrote I also mentioned the Nelson's  getting 824 horsepower from a junkyard one with 165,000 miles on it.  
 

 

Gm wasn't beat by Ford in buying Jag they looked at it and realized there wasn't anything worth buying at Jaguar just a huge money pit.

I want to argue this but you're right. 

Curtis73 (Forum Supporter)
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/11/22 3:14 p.m.

In reply to bobzilla :

I still miss both my 6.2L and my 6.5L.  One of Detroit's best.  I had a 6.2L in a step van that refused to die.  I think I sold it with 520k on it.

bobzilla
bobzilla MegaDork
11/11/22 3:16 p.m.
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to bobzilla :

I still miss both my 6.2L and my 6.5L.  One of Detroit's best.  I had a 6.2L in a step van that refused to die.  I think I sold it with 520k on it.

They were not fast but good gracious they would run. We did end up at one point with an 83 1-on dually flat bed with a 13 leaf pack, TH400 and 4.56 gears. That one was actually quick and would light the duals up from a roll but 68mph was flat out. 

MotorsportsGordon
MotorsportsGordon Dork
11/11/22 3:27 p.m.
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to bobzilla :

I still miss both my 6.2L and my 6.5L.  One of Detroit's best.  I had a 6.2L in a step van that refused to die.  I think I sold it with 520k on it.

Motorweek loved their diesel suburban. Ofcourse they loved it even more with a banks turbo

NickD
NickD MegaDork
11/11/22 3:30 p.m.
Appleseed said:

LT1. Optispark failures are wildly overblown. I got 192,000 out of one without cracking the seal. Still running when I junked the car. Overshadowed by the original mouse motor and the LSx engines.

I will defend the LT1 to the death. It was a better engine than the small block Chevy it replaced. The Optispark resulted in more accurate ignition timing and the reverse-cooling let it get away with higher compression. The LT1/LT4 was a pretty hot piece. The problem was, it was so short-lived that it never really got a chance to catch on with users and the aftermarket, and the LS motor was even better. And remember, when it came out, the LS motor was pretty maligned at first ("Nobody makes intake manifolds", "Headers lose power", "The cylinder walls are too thin and you can't bore them", "They only have 4 bolts per cylinder, you can't keep a head gasket in them with power adders", "The electronics are too advanced". Seriously, read a Hot Rod Magazine circa 2000 and people hated the LS1. The LT1 never got a chance to get outside that phase.

MotorsportsGordon
MotorsportsGordon Dork
11/11/22 3:32 p.m.
NickD said:
Appleseed said:

LT1. Optispark failures are wildly overblown. I got 192,000 out of one without cracking the seal. Still running when I junked the car. Overshadowed by the original mouse motor and the LSx engines.

I will defend the LT1 to the death. It was a better engine than the small block Chevy it replaced. The Optispark resulted in more accurate ignition timing and the reverse-cooling let it get away with higher compression. The LT1/LT4 was a pretty hot piece. The problem was, it was so short-lived that it never really got a chance to catch on with users and the aftermarket, and the LS motor was even better. And remember, when it came out, the LS motor was pretty maligned at first ("Nobody makes intake manifolds", "Headers lose power", "The cylinder walls are too thin and you can't bore them", "They only have 4 bolts per cylinder, you can't keep a head gasket in them with power adders", "The electronics are too advanced". Seriously, read a Hot Rod Magazine circa 2000 and people hated the LS1. The LT1 never got a chance to get outside that phase.

The lt1 also brought the world the very popular vortec heads

Noddaz
Noddaz GRM+ Memberand PowerDork
11/11/22 3:37 p.m.

I can't comprehend what I read.  Never mind.

The "standard" Briggs & Stratton single cylinder engine  that ran all kinds of junk for years and was probably outdated 5 years after the first one was built.

A 401 CJ
A 401 CJ GRM+ Memberand SuperDork
11/11/22 3:51 p.m.

As long as we're doing diesels, I vote IH VT365 in Ford 6.0 Powerstroke guise.  Anything that can possibly go wrong with it has been documented to the moon and back.  They're a known quantity.  What it takes to make them live is a trail that was blazed long ago.  Yet some people to this day will not touch one.

Datsun310Guy
Datsun310Guy MegaDork
11/11/22 3:52 p.m.

Datsun A engine - 65hp? Ate head gaskets? No real power but they lived from 1967 to 2009.  Shoot, our forklift at work had one.  

Now I had 2 cars and really enjoyed them so I'm now bashing too much but on paper they weren't cool engines stock.

Hopefully I don't run into that 50 year 1200 racer.........

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_A_engine

Curtis73 (Forum Supporter)
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/11/22 3:53 p.m.

In reply to A 401 CJ :

It's also the go-to block for performance builds in the "stroke" world

Curtis73 (Forum Supporter)
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/11/22 3:56 p.m.
MotorsportsGordon said:
NickD said:
Appleseed said:

LT1. Optispark failures are wildly overblown. I got 192,000 out of one without cracking the seal. Still running when I junked the car. Overshadowed by the original mouse motor and the LSx engines.

I will defend the LT1 to the death. It was a better engine than the small block Chevy it replaced. The Optispark resulted in more accurate ignition timing and the reverse-cooling let it get away with higher compression. The LT1/LT4 was a pretty hot piece. The problem was, it was so short-lived that it never really got a chance to catch on with users and the aftermarket, and the LS motor was even better. And remember, when it came out, the LS motor was pretty maligned at first ("Nobody makes intake manifolds", "Headers lose power", "The cylinder walls are too thin and you can't bore them", "They only have 4 bolts per cylinder, you can't keep a head gasket in them with power adders", "The electronics are too advanced". Seriously, read a Hot Rod Magazine circa 2000 and people hated the LS1. The LT1 never got a chance to get outside that phase.

The lt1 also brought the world the very popular vortec heads

I always chuckled at the Caprice/Impala guys clamoring to get some of the aluminum LT1 heads because powaaar.  I hated to break it to them that the aluminum head had a slightly larger version of the L98 TPI intake port while it was the iron head that birthed the Vortec port design.  The only reason the F-body had 15 more hp was the cam.

Curtis73 (Forum Supporter)
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/11/22 4:00 p.m.

VWs 1.9L TDI like the ALH had a bad reputation even before dieselgate.  Slow and boring.  But they can take some pretty hefty boost.

GeddesB
GeddesB Reader
11/11/22 4:08 p.m.

In reply to Ranger50 :

Is this the PT Cruiser/Neon motor that you speak of?  Be aware they also put this motor in Jeeps 2004ish.  Available with a manual and crappy dual mass flywheel. 

 

buzzboy
buzzboy SuperDork
11/11/22 4:44 p.m.

In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :

In years after the ALH a lot of the VW diesels have gotten bad reps for small fixable things. BEW/BRM/BHW eat cams if you use the wrong oil. BHW has balance shafts that can do typical balance shaft things. But it's a tune away from 170hp/305ftlbs in a 450lbs package.

I would love a "built" 350 diesel. I don't want to do the work, but I'd love to buy one ready to drop in to something. And they take standard SBC flywheels/clutches/transmissions, right?

The 6.2/6.5 would be okay too. My old boss knew the common issues, and snagged them cheap on craigslist all the time with rattly balancers. He had nine 3/4 ton 'burbs at one point.

759NRNG
759NRNG PowerDork
11/11/22 4:51 p.m.
Run_Away said:

I've always wondered about the Oldmobile Aurora 4.0L V8. Apparently it was used as a basis for an Indy Car engine or something? Related to the Northstar?

Off to google.

 

EDIT: Wiki sez

The Aurora came standard with Oldsmobile's 4.0 L (244 cu in) L47 V8 engine, a DOHC engine based on Cadillac's 4.6 L Northstar V8. The Northstar engine and 4T80-E had been exclusive to Cadillac prior to the Aurora. The L47 put out 250 hp (186 kW) at 5600 rpm and 260 lb⋅ft (353 N⋅m) torque at 4400 rpm.[7] The Aurora used a four-speed automatic transmission with driver selectable "normal" and "power" shift modes. A highly modified 650 hp (485 kW) version of this engine was used by General Motors racing division initially for Indy Racing League and IMSA competition starting in 1995 with the GM-supported Aurora GTS-1 racing program, then was later used in the Cadillac Northstar LMP program in 2000. Both engines retained the 4.0 L capacity, but the Northstar LMP version was twin-turbocharged.[8]

Apparently it was also used in the Shelby Series 1 car.

 

 

I'm assuming it's not easy to adapt to RWD or something. Also plenty of engines that are great in factory form,  but lack aftermarket support or require lots of parts to be turned up much which kills it's popularity before it can get started. If you have an engine that makes 250hp stock, and has the head flow and bottom end to support 600hp but the bean counters gave it pencil thin rods then it's not going to become huge. Or even just saddling the engines with a non-enthusiast platform to begin with. Like the Nelsons and the Atlas engines, overlooked because of it's size/oil pan and Trailblazer surroundings, among others.

I'd have another 4.0 Aurora in a heartbeat.....walked quite a few 5.0 stangs and Bro dawgs on 89 getting low twenties around town

759NRNG
759NRNG PowerDork
11/11/22 4:56 p.m.

Oh oh oh and I get my LB7/ZF6spd back next week after head gaskets, turbo rebuild, water pump/radiator, motor mounts...........OHY 

ProDarwin
ProDarwin MegaDork
11/11/22 4:57 p.m.

Here is one that isn't necessarily horrible, just forgotten:  G4JS 2.4L found in garbage appliances from Hyundai and Mitsubishi.

 

Someone slapped a big turbo on this guy and made 500whp on stock internals.

2004 Hyundai Sonata Sleeper Makes Over 500 HP on Near-Stock Internals

 

ProDarwin
ProDarwin MegaDork
11/11/22 5:00 p.m.

Another one that gets little respect:  The VG30DE.  DOHC 3.0 found in the 300zx '90-96 cars.  It only makes around 220hp from the factory, but it will handle buckets of boost.  The stock internal record for VG30 guys is one of these and its >700whp IIRC.

RacetruckRon
RacetruckRon GRM+ Memberand Dork
11/11/22 5:01 p.m.

In reply to ProDarwin :

Kinda forgot about these. That was the Evo style Sirius block and the head casting was identical to Evo 8-9.

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/11/22 5:01 p.m.
MotorsportsGordon said:
frenchyd said:

This post has received too many downvotes to be displayed.

Show/hide post

 

maschinenbau said:
frenchyd said:

     The Jaguar predecessor of the Atlas     

False. Source required for a BS claim like that. 

Also, no one says the 4.2 is a "horrible engine". Trailblazers/Enovys have a pretty decent reputation, other than typical 2000's GM plastics and the 4l60e.

Check your Wikipedia.  Atlas came out in 2002. Jaguar came out in 1980's ( 88 I think)   About the time GM was doing due diligence on buying Jaguar.  However they were beat out by Ford who already had an aluminum in line 6 with 4 valves per cylinder  

  Who said the Atlas  4.2 was Horrible?   I owned an early one And loved it.   If you read what I wrote I also mentioned the Nelson's  getting 824 horsepower from a junkyard one with 165,000 miles on it.  
 

 

Gm wasn't beat by Ford in buying Jag they looked at it and realized there wasn't anything worth buying at Jaguar just a huge money pit.

You are absolutely right. A fair amount of what Jaguar had at the time was bought 2nd hand from defunct manufacturers before WW2.   
         Jaguar had bought the old Spitfire ( airplane ) factory from WW 2  ( for 1£) that had made terrible body panels in 1 corner of the massive plant. Then turned it around until they were making high quality bodies.   
    Prior to Peter Egan taking over Jaguar was heading down hill under BMCH  to the tune of something like 40 million Pounds a year in the hole.  

 A great year was annual production of 10,000 cars/ year. Under Peter Egan  it went up to 40,000  annually. But had a reputation well worth the money Ford paid for it.  
  PS. The reason Ford and GM were interested in Jaguar had little or nothing to do with manufacturing facilities and everything to do with Jaguars reputation.  
     At the Time GM and Ford both were trapped selling tarted up Fords and Chevies for not that much more than a Ford or a Chevy.   While Jaguar could sell its cars for many multiples of a Ford or Chevy. 
       However once Ford bought Jaguar instead of listening to the people who built the cars that sold for so much they ran it like a division of Ford.  
     When Ford was going through the downturn, to weather the financial  storm Ford  resold Jaguar without receiving the benefit they purchased it for. 

Ranger50
Ranger50 MegaDork
11/11/22 6:48 p.m.
GeddesB said:

In reply to Ranger50 :

Is this the PT Cruiser/Neon motor that you speak of?  Be aware they also put this motor in Jeeps 2004ish.  Available with a manual and crappy dual mass flywheel. 

 

PT Cruisers, Sebring convertibles and sedans, caravans, liberty's, wranglers, etc....

Sebring coupes were lengthened eclipse's, so they got Mitsubishi 2.4/3.0's....

Growl_R
Growl_R New Reader
11/11/22 6:56 p.m.

How 'bout Volkswagen's VR6 and it's W8, 12 and 16 variants? 

Used in VW, Audi, Porsche, Bentley, and Bugatti

Compact, can make power and SOUND AWESOME!

VR6 Short Block -12V - Engine Rebuild Services

 

Pete. (l33t FS)
Pete. (l33t FS) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/11/22 7:06 p.m.
bobzilla said:
ProDarwin said:

I still have love for the Saturn LL0, even though by modern standards its pretty terrible.

Compact, light, cheap, robust.  Will run until the end of time if you keep oil in it.

 

 

Hit the googles to find that the LL0 is now a 1.2L Turbo engine and was really confused because they came out way after the Saturn brand was gone. Then I realzed GM repurposed the engine code. That was the 1.9 DOHC? Those were fun and durable little engines.

As long as you kept oil in them, which was easier said than done.  Did a lot of rering jobs at Saturn on cars with relatively low miles.

I saw a few guys at the dealership had engines stashed away that looked like they wrapped the chain around the crank sprocket and spit it out the side through a self-generated window. 

Still kinda would like to have a '95 SL2 in that midnight blue kind of color.  Early body with late interior, best of both worlds.

maschinenbau
maschinenbau GRM+ Memberand UberDork
11/11/22 7:35 p.m.
ProDarwin said:

Here is one that isn't necessarily horrible, just forgotten:  G4JS 2.4L found in garbage appliances from Hyundai and Mitsubishi.

 

Someone slapped a big turbo on this guy and made 500whp on stock internals.

2004 Hyundai Sonata Sleeper Makes Over 500 HP on Near-Stock Internals

 

One of my weirdest coworkers is doing an incredibly clean but esoteric Hyundai G4CS DOHC swap and turbo build in his...get this...2nd gen Sonata 5-speed. I love the Korean/DSM licensed stuff.

buzzboy
buzzboy SuperDork
11/11/22 7:43 p.m.

That's the continuation of the Mitsubishi 4G64. Nice to see them getting love along side the venerable 4G63.

AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter)
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand UberDork
11/11/22 8:31 p.m.
Mr_Asa said:

In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :

Please point to anyplace on the internet, except for a frenchy post, where it says that the Atlas motor was designed around the Jag motor?

"Backed by fact" my hairy butt.

 

Edit: also, the Atlas engine program started in the mid-90s.  Nowhere near when GM was doing anything with Jag.

Frenchy is wrong.

That's not the fact I referred to.  He stated someone did X with the Atlas 4.2 so it's pretty good.  
 

I'm also not interested in your hairy butt.  Thanks for bringing it into the conversation though.

Heck someone could argue GM copied Ford when they made the LS since they finally went away from Siamese exhaust and intake ports too.  Are you gonna get upset by that too?  
 

All IC engine improvements are just variations on things others have done and tried.  
 

Engine that gets derided a lot but is actually quite good:  SBF.  It's not as powerful as other V8s, but it is light, compact, tough and torquey. 
 

Go find me something cool I will buy with all this extra energy instead!  

 

codrus (Forum Supporter)
codrus (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand PowerDork
11/11/22 9:21 p.m.
bobzilla said:
MotorsportsGordon said:

Gm wasn't beat by Ford in buying Jag they looked at it and realized there wasn't anything worth buying at Jaguar just a huge money pit.

I want to argue this but you're right. 

My favorite part about the Ford acquisition of Jag is that supposedly at one point the CEO was reviewing the list of highest paid Ford employees and said "Who the hell is Edmund Irvine?" :)

 

Tom1200
Tom1200 UberDork
11/11/22 11:59 p.m.
Datsun310Guy said:

Datsun A engine - 65hp? Ate head gaskets? No real power but they lived from 1967 to 2009.  Shoot, our forklift at work had one.  

Now I had 2 cars and really enjoyed them so I'm now bashing too much but on paper they weren't cool engines stock.

Hopefully I don't run into that 50 year 1200 racer.........

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_A_engine

Too late.......and they do not eat head gaskets. You have to severely overheat them to do that.

All of the machines shops I've used over the years made comments about how stout the blocks are.

Also the stock bottom ends can be revved to 8600 rpm all long.

Yes, yes I am a fan of them. LOL

Tom1200
Tom1200 UberDork
11/12/22 12:04 a.m.

Two strokes; people who've never ran or tuned one act like they will sieze if you even look at them funny.

They are lighter, make more power and are easier to service than four strokes. 

yupididit
yupididit GRM+ Memberand UltimaDork
11/12/22 7:58 a.m.
maschinenbau said:
ProDarwin said:

Here is one that isn't necessarily horrible, just forgotten:  G4JS 2.4L found in garbage appliances from Hyundai and Mitsubishi.

 

Someone slapped a big turbo on this guy and made 500whp on stock internals.

2004 Hyundai Sonata Sleeper Makes Over 500 HP on Near-Stock Internals

 

One of my weirdest coworkers is doing an incredibly clean but esoteric Hyundai G4CS DOHC swap and turbo build in his...get this...2nd gen Sonata 5-speed. I love the Korean/DSM licensed stuff.

 

I put a g4cs in my Galant Vr4 to replace the 4g63 I had in it. Easy displacement but I had it destroked with longer rods. Was a great setup until a hurricane floated the car away while I was in Afghanistan crying

Scotty Con Queso
Scotty Con Queso SuperDork
11/12/22 8:30 a.m.

While it's been somewhat discussed, no one has mentioned the 4g63. The whole crankwalk thing was blown way out of proportion.

80s tech that still kicks ass today. 

lnlogauge
lnlogauge HalfDork
11/12/22 9:09 a.m.

In reply to Scotty Con Queso :

I think anything called a "common issue", cannot be called blown out of proportion. 4g63 was an amazing little motor, with a pretty significant issue. You can have both. 

Pete. (l33t FS)
Pete. (l33t FS) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/12/22 9:39 a.m.

I am a little surprised that any 4G63s lived long enough to have bearing issues given that they had a tendency to break timing belts before 50k.  Or get improperly serviced and lose the belt a week after replacement.

 

Mopar 2.4s also had thrust bearing issues, to the point that there was a dealer service kit.  I've done a few, including one that needed the block repaired.

ShawnG
ShawnG MegaDork
11/12/22 10:23 a.m.
Tom1200 said:

Two strokes; people who've never ran or tuned one act like they will sieze if you even look at them funny.

They are lighter, make more power and are easier to service than four strokes. 

Bad crank seals don't make a 4-stroke run like garbage, they just drip a little. 

4-strokes also don't stink, sound awful or have a power curve like a light switch.

Appleseed
Appleseed MegaDork
11/12/22 10:33 a.m.

In reply to ShawnG :

4 strokes just stink different,  2 stokes sound awesome with a pipe, and you circumvent the peaky power by running it WFO all-the-time. laugh

Curtis73 (Forum Supporter)
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/12/22 10:39 a.m.
Growl_R said:

How 'bout Volkswagen's VR6 and it's W8, 12 and 16 variants? 

Used in VW, Audi, Porsche, Bentley, and Bugatti

Compact, can make power and SOUND AWESOME!

VR6 Short Block -12V - Engine Rebuild Services

 

Sell me on this.  If I pick up the AE70 Corolla I'm hoping for, I'll be looking for something that fits where a 4-banger was and makes lots of gooder power.  I just know nothing about them.

Datsun310Guy
Datsun310Guy MegaDork
11/12/22 10:41 a.m.

In reply to Tom1200 :

I'm a big fan of these cars - don't get me wrong.  

Our  '79 210 and '80 310GX both needed head gaskets.  I guess back then 80-90,000 miles wasn't really "eating head gaskets".  

I follow all your posts on your 1200 - keep it running.  
 

 

ShawnG
ShawnG MegaDork
11/12/22 10:48 a.m.

The old Toyota K series 4-cylinder was a lot like Datsuns A-series. 

Great little screamer once you let them breathe better and get the compression up. 9k rpm on stock innards was never a problem. 

buzzboy
buzzboy SuperDork
11/12/22 10:48 a.m.

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

A friend had a 2G GSX with a thrust bearing so bad it would stall when you hit the clutch. Not saying they all had that issue, but we sure hear about the squeaky wheel.

Caperix
Caperix Reader
11/12/22 10:55 a.m.

Direct injection could fix alot of 2 stroke issues.  I think it was rotax that built a di 2 stroke that made good power & passed modern emissions.  If they are not missfiring every other revolution until they "get on the pipe" they should not be as peaky either.

Datsun310Guy
Datsun310Guy MegaDork
11/12/22 10:55 a.m.

Some Datsun A engine love for you'all

Pete. (l33t FS)
Pete. (l33t FS) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/12/22 10:56 a.m.
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:
Growl_R said:

How 'bout Volkswagen's VR6 and it's W8, 12 and 16 variants? 

Used in VW, Audi, Porsche, Bentley, and Bugatti

Compact, can make power and SOUND AWESOME!

VR6 Short Block -12V - Engine Rebuild Services

 

Sell me on this.  If I pick up the AE70 Corolla I'm hoping for, I'll be looking for something that fits where a 4-banger was and makes lots of gooder power.  I just know nothing about them.

The biggest issue with them IMO is the cooling system.  Look at that water jacket design.  A lot of volume and high volume means poor velocity which means dead areas which means poor cooling system efficiency.  And half of the exhaust ports are super long so you get the same problems that you get with a Flathead Ford.

As one VWAG enthusiast put it, they make for good drag engines but not anything where you want to lean on it for a long time.

 

IMO an 07K five cylinder is a better option.  It fits where a four fits because they stuffed half the timing chain in the bellhousing and the other half over the transmission, like the VR6.  Equal length ports, a much better combustion chamber design.  They also bolt in anywhere a VW four fits because it shares the bellhousing pattern and IIRC the flywheel pattern (except for the turbo models which had 8 bolts).

Personal preference says a five sounds better than a six, too smiley

Downsides are that you are on your own for a longitudinal friendly intake manifold, there is no place to mount a motor mount on the left side except for the oil filter pad which means the mount has to incorporate fluid lines, and most of then had dual plane accessory drive so you kinda need the A/C compressor if you want to drive the water pump.  THAT can be fixed with an electric pump, at least, and it looks like the BMW pump is fairly swappable as the thermostat assembly bolts to it and it defaults to full speed if it does not get a PWM signal.

Peabody
Peabody MegaDork
11/12/22 11:08 a.m.

In reply to ShawnG :

As was the Mitsubishi Saturn. I put a lot of hard laps on 4G32's at decent RPM and you couldn't hurt them

Pete. (l33t FS)
Pete. (l33t FS) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/12/22 11:10 a.m.
Caperix said:

Direct injection could fix alot of 2 stroke issues.  I think it was rotax that built a di 2 stroke that made good power & passed modern emissions.  If they are not missfiring every other revolution until they "get on the pipe" they should not be as peaky either.

There was a company, Orbital I think, that developed direct injection 20-odd years ago for the purpose of making two-strokes emissions friendly.  They had a 2 liter inline six in a BMW 3 series test car that was supposedly very nice to drive.  Sounded like a little V12 from reports, too smiley

One of the downsides of 2 strokes is they can be a bit narrow-ranged in the RPM/load plane, and another is that they don't much like high speed/closed throttle.  Both issues which could be circumvented by their use as an EV/series hybrid range extender instead of driving the wheels directly.

Which also brings me to what Audi (which owns NSU) and Mazda are planning with Wankels.

MotorsportsGordon
MotorsportsGordon Dork
11/12/22 11:20 a.m.
Caperix said:

Direct injection could fix alot of 2 stroke issues.  I think it was rotax that built a di 2 stroke that made good power & passed modern emissions.  If they are not missfiring every other revolution until they "get on the pipe" they should not be as peaky either.

Rotax is part of brp which also owns evinrude which produced 2 stroke outboard boat engines that met modern emissions reps.

Scotty Con Queso
Scotty Con Queso SuperDork
11/12/22 11:46 a.m.

In reply to lnlogauge :

The 4g63 crankwalk issue was related to some 95-97 7-bolt blocks. The early 6-bolts/7-bolts and the later 98-99 7-bolts had next to zero issues with crankwalk. What I'm getting at is when you mention a 4g63, the mouth-breathers usually start saying "haha crankwalk those motors suck!!!!haha". 

Scotty Con Queso
Scotty Con Queso SuperDork
11/12/22 11:47 a.m.

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

You're not wrong on timing belts. While easy enough to properly time a 4g63, there is a very specific way to tension the belt. So much so that most people did it wrong and lunched the valve train. 

Pete. (l33t FS)
Pete. (l33t FS) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/12/22 12:15 p.m.
Scotty Con Queso said:

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

You're not wrong on timing belts. While easy enough to properly time a 4g63, there is a very specific way to tension the belt. So much so that most people did it wrong and lunched the valve train. 

Where I used to work when those were common, getting it wrong was so common that Corporate issued a memo that all 4G63 timing belts were to be done by ONE person, who was the roving tech for all 17 locations.

He was friends with one of the Buschurs (who apprently used to work for the company) and he called them to chat about 4G63s, and they said that when they did a timing belt they would drop the whole drivetrain out so they could do it without a fenderwell in the way.

IIRC the issue was that there was a cammed idler pulley to adjust AND a hydraulic tensioner, and you had to get the cammed pulley just right for the hydraulic tensioner to be in a certain range.  So you needed three hands, a vernier, and the body was exactly in the way.

 

I recall a couple cases where a tech went out on a road test for an alignment or something and the timing belt broke.

GIRTHQUAKE
GIRTHQUAKE SuperDork
11/12/22 12:20 p.m.

Pontiac Sprint 6 is an engine I've been wanting to find and mess with, but nobody makes parts for them- so each Delorean I6 when it dies, it's parts are transplanted into other pontiacs to keep them alive. I heard people claim that the belts snap, even though they were even rated for engine life in the late 60s.

Maybe the Olds/Buick Quad 4? That engine was a serious competitor to the 4A-GE and Honda D/B series, just undone by classic GM internal warring.

 

Pete. (l33t FS)
Pete. (l33t FS) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/12/22 12:26 p.m.

In reply to GIRTHQUAKE :

The Quad 4 HO made the same power from the same displacement as the contemporary M3.  Sadly they were put in N bodies, which were stretched J bodies which were "not invented here" bastardizations of the Opel Kadett.

and now I want a Quad 4 in a Pontiac LeMans.

Unfortunately they were not equipped with balance shafts and the engine was GM's lesson in not using a sheetmetal timing cover on a chain fed DOHC if you want good NVH.  The 2.4 gained balance shafts, which helped immensely, and it gained head bolts twice as long which helped head gasket life too.

People say the Ecotec was a SAAB design, but when I see one I see a Quad 4 with its problems removed.  Same block layout, even drove the power steering pump from a camshaft on models with hydraulic power steering.

te72
te72 HalfDork
11/12/22 1:40 p.m.
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:
Growl_R said:

How 'bout Volkswagen's VR6 and it's W8, 12 and 16 variants? 

Used in VW, Audi, Porsche, Bentley, and Bugatti

Compact, can make power and SOUND AWESOME!

Sell me on this.  If I pick up the AE70 Corolla I'm hoping for, I'll be looking for something that fits where a 4-banger was and makes lots of gooder power.  I just know nothing about them.

Much as an E70 with extra cylinders would be fun, my inclination as a fellow (former) E70 owner would be to put one of these engines in it:

 

5-valve 4AGE from an AE111, because they sound awesome and make 160hp out of the gate, with a bit more on the table if you want. Plus, factory ITB's. Did I mention the awesome sound? They sound awesome. Likely my favorite 4-cylinder sound ever. Something about Yamaha makes good sounds. They should make instruments and audio equipment, they clearly know what they're doing! =P

 

3SGE Beams, if you wanna keep it in the family but want an easy 200+hp.

 

K20/K24 if you wanna drop a few lbs, add displacement, and make Formual Atlantic power without FA maintenance.

Peabody
Peabody MegaDork
11/12/22 1:45 p.m.

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

That's exactly what the eco is.  Love the Quad4. The NVH just adds to the charm

Tom1200
Tom1200 UberDork
11/12/22 3:12 p.m.

In reply to Datsun310Guy :

more A-series love. As for the head gaskets at 90K that's probably 60-70s technology limits. My A15 came form a 210 that had about 145k on it. It was still running.

Tom1200
Tom1200 UberDork
11/12/22 3:25 p.m.
ShawnG said:

Bad crank seals don't make a 4-stroke run like garbage, they just drip a little. 

4-strokes also don't stink, sound awful or have a power curve like a light switch.

So in 45 years of owning and racing two strokes I've only had two do this.

The first one was a result of letting the bike sit and it took all of 2hrs to repair. The runway idle is the dead give away.

The second one was the motor in my F500; the bottom end had been untouched for 10 years. It had 13 races & 80 auto crosses on it.

As for stinking Castrol R smells great.

As for sounding awful Yamaha RDs & TZs sound great as do Kawasaki triples. 500cc GP bikes were other worldly.

Finally as to the light switch powerband; you need to ride a KTM 300 or Honda CR500. Snowmobile engines also have tons of torque. 

Peabody
Peabody MegaDork
11/12/22 3:39 p.m.
ShawnG said:
Tom1200 said:

Two strokes; people who've never ran or tuned one act like they will sieze if you even look at them funny.

They are lighter, make more power and are easier to service than four strokes. 

Bad crank seals don't make a 4-stroke run like garbage, they just drip a little. 

4-strokes also don't stink, sound awful or have a power curve like a light switch.

Bad valves will make a 4 stroke run like garbage, if you can get it to start.  Ask a Honda owner.  I've run 2 stroke oil in my generator that has no smoke and no smell. I had to double check that I actually put oil on the gas. And 2 strokes don't inherently have a narrow power band, quite the opposite. They can be made smoother and easier to ride than a 4 stroke. And I've never had a crank seal go bad, and I've owned a lot of 2 strokes. From an amateur racer's perspective I would say the modern 4 strokes are squarely in the horrible category 

triumph7
triumph7 HalfDork
11/12/22 4:16 p.m.

In reply to Peabody :

I had a crank seal go bad on the Kaw 440 in the Fmod.  A bad crank seal does two things.  Because the intake charge is pulled in by the compression stroke of the piston if the seal is bad the low pressure is canceled out by the high pressure from the other cylinder.  For the same reason, if you are running a pulse type fuel pump you get no fuel.  And, yes, it was a pain in the a$$ to find!

Edit:  The bad seal doesn't make it run like garbage, it makes it not run at all! 

Tom1200
Tom1200 UberDork
11/12/22 4:22 p.m.

In reply to triumph7 :

The high EGTs and idle give it away.

The other bonus is 2-strokes are light.  

triumph7
triumph7 HalfDork
11/12/22 4:34 p.m.

Nobody mentioned the 2.0 from the TR7?  Up to the point where the corrosion simulates a failed head gasket and ultimately welds the head to the block they aren't horrid... much.

triumph7
triumph7 HalfDork
11/12/22 4:36 p.m.
Tom1200 said:

In reply to triumph7 :

The high EGTs and idle give it away.

The other bonus is 2-strokes are light.  

I never got high EGTs but it got to be a real pain to start

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/12/22 4:36 p.m.

In reply to Tom1200 :

I too love the smell of Castrol R.  

Tom1200
Tom1200 UberDork
11/12/22 7:49 p.m.
triumph7 said:
Tom1200 said:

In reply to triumph7 :

The high EGTs and idle give it away.

The other bonus is 2-strokes are light.  

I never got high EGTs but it got to be a real pain to start

Typically once they start losing compression they do become a bear to get started.

Pete. (l33t FS)
Pete. (l33t FS) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/12/22 7:57 p.m.

In reply to triumph7 :

I am kind of surprised that Mercury Marine two-strokes run at all.  The one I played with was a V6 with a shared crankcase, and instead of a setup like I imagine your engine had, the bottoms of the cylinders were closed off except for a slot in the middle for the connecting rod to pass through. 

ToManyProjects
ToManyProjects New Reader
11/12/22 8:31 p.m.
Peabody said:

As was the Mitsubishi Saturn. I put a lot of hard laps on 4G32's at decent RPM and you couldn't hurt them

Surprisingly stout little motors. not a ton of power, but the ones I ran loved to be abused (anything but detonation under boost) I prefer the early pre-balance shaft motors

Curtis73 (Forum Supporter)
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/12/22 9:25 p.m.
te72 said:
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:
Growl_R said:

How 'bout Volkswagen's VR6 and it's W8, 12 and 16 variants? 

Used in VW, Audi, Porsche, Bentley, and Bugatti

Compact, can make power and SOUND AWESOME!

Sell me on this.  If I pick up the AE70 Corolla I'm hoping for, I'll be looking for something that fits where a 4-banger was and makes lots of gooder power.  I just know nothing about them.

Much as an E70 with extra cylinders would be fun, my inclination as a fellow (former) E70 owner would be to put one of these engines in it:

 

5-valve 4AGE from an AE111, because they sound awesome and make 160hp out of the gate, with a bit more on the table if you want. Plus, factory ITB's. Did I mention the awesome sound? They sound awesome. Likely my favorite 4-cylinder sound ever. Something about Yamaha makes good sounds. They should make instruments and audio equipment, they clearly know what they're doing! =P

 

3SGE Beams, if you wanna keep it in the family but want an easy 200+hp.

 

K20/K24 if you wanna drop a few lbs, add displacement, and make Formual Atlantic power without FA maintenance.

I know I need to get out of my own way, but I'm still stuck in my hot rodding history.  To me, making 200hp at 8000 rpms is a yawnfest, but making 500hp at 6000 rpm is my norm.  Of course, it takes a 700 lb V8 lump to do it.  I've driven some fast-straight-line cars, like a blown 502 making 1000+ hp, and I've driven some "quick" cars with 140 hp.  I'm still stuck in this world of combining bigger power with a light car.  I was hoping for at least a square 250hp, maybe a touch more.  Not so much that I'm pointed the wrong direction out of every corner when I get back on it, but high 12s would be nice in a straight line.

ShawnG
ShawnG MegaDork
11/12/22 11:57 p.m.

A snowmobile has a cvt, it runs the engine at peak power all the time so you don't notice the power curve.

I'm just unable to appreciate ring-a-ding stinkbikes properly. Sorry.

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/13/22 12:35 a.m.
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:
te72 said:
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:
Growl_R said:

How 'bout Volkswagen's VR6 and it's W8, 12 and 16 variants? 

Used in VW, Audi, Porsche, Bentley, and Bugatti

Compact, can make power and SOUND AWESOME!

Sell me on this.  If I pick up the AE70 Corolla I'm hoping for, I'll be looking for something that fits where a 4-banger was and makes lots of gooder power.  I just know nothing about them.

Much as an E70 with extra cylinders would be fun, my inclination as a fellow (former) E70 owner would be to put one of these engines in it:

 

5-valve 4AGE from an AE111, because they sound awesome and make 160hp out of the gate, with a bit more on the table if you want. Plus, factory ITB's. Did I mention the awesome sound? They sound awesome. Likely my favorite 4-cylinder sound ever. Something about Yamaha makes good sounds. They should make instruments and audio equipment, they clearly know what they're doing! =P

 

3SGE Beams, if you wanna keep it in the family but want an easy 200+hp.

 

K20/K24 if you wanna drop a few lbs, add displacement, and make Formual Atlantic power without FA maintenance.

I know I need to get out of my own way, but I'm still stuck in my hot rodding history.  To me, making 200hp at 8000 rpms is a yawnfest, but making 500hp at 6000 rpm is my norm.  Of course, it takes a 700 lb V8 lump to do it.  I've driven some fast-straight-line cars, like a blown 502 making 1000+ hp, and I've driven some "quick" cars with 140 hp.  I'm still stuck in this world of combining bigger power with a light car.  I was hoping for at least a square 250hp, maybe a touch more.  Not so much that I'm pointed the wrong direction out of every corner when I get back on it, but high 12s would be nice in a straight line.

Getting a "light car" is at least to me, something around 2500 pounds (+or - 200)  with 5-600 horsepower but a nice flat torque curve.  
    At my age a longer, wider car is nice and predictable compared to the short and narrow Car I used to race.    It reduces the places I can pass so some of the darting and weaving I used to do is gone.  But the power to weight should be better.  

Pete. (l33t FS)
Pete. (l33t FS) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/13/22 11:21 a.m.
triumph7 said:

Nobody mentioned the 2.0 from the TR7?  Up to the point where the corrosion simulates a failed head gasket and ultimately welds the head to the block they aren't horrid... much.

Were those the ones with one row of head bolts (studs?) angled so the head could be installed and removed as an assembly?  Have heard horror stories about that.

And the sixes that ran the cam directly in iron.  Not a good plan.  A friend was telling me about how his TR6 ground the cam bores so low that, after line boring for cam bearings, there was an air gap under the bearings.

Streetwiseguy
Streetwiseguy MegaDork
11/13/22 1:38 p.m.

I'm more entertained by "good" engines that I think are scrap.  Specifically, the BMW M42.  Timing chainsno, and I once bought three engines trying to find a crank with a thrust surface intact.

ShawnG
ShawnG MegaDork
11/13/22 2:04 p.m.

In reply to Streetwiseguy :

The amazing 383 unicorn of Chevy Fandom.

Somehow putting a 400 crank in a 350 is more wonderful than just building the damn 400 it came out of.

Ranger50
Ranger50 MegaDork
11/13/22 2:11 p.m.

In reply to ShawnG :

It saved on trying to find a uncracked 400 block plus the the way overblown overheating from the Siamese bores.

Tom1200
Tom1200 UberDork
11/13/22 3:37 p.m.
ShawnG said:

A snowmobile has a cvt, it runs the engine at peak power all the time so you don't notice the power curve.

I'm just unable to appreciate ring-a-ding stinkbikes properly. Sorry.

Two strokes are not for everyone.

As for the CVT yes it does help but snowmobile motors typical have larger twin cylinder motors that make power between 4-8K.  My little Datsun has to be spun to 8200 rpm and falls off severely below 6500 rpm.

Antihero
Antihero GRM+ Memberand PowerDork
11/13/22 4:07 p.m.
Tom1200 said:

In reply to Datsun310Guy :

more A-series love. As for the head gaskets at 90K that's probably 60-70s technology limits. My A15 came form a 210 that had about 145k on it. It was still running.

Didn't the A series come in the b210s?

 

My mom had 2 of those over the years, she ran it out of oil once and locked it up. When it cooled in the morning my dad refilled it with oil and it started right back up, she had it for years afterwards too

Antihero
Antihero GRM+ Memberand PowerDork
11/13/22 4:18 p.m.

The Ford FE engines aren't well thought of in some circles, specifically the truck 352/360/390 for some reason.

 

Sure they are heavy and not particularly powerful but they do great truck stuff IMO. My dad had many old Ford trucks when I was growing up and they were all reliable and very long lasting. One was many years past worn out and still ran when we pulled it. My dad had run straight 50w and STP Oil treatment in it for years by this point and it finally stopped showing any oil pressure, and not just at idle. I was about 13 when we pulled it but I remember the last few times we ran it that it was showing about 1 psi at highway speeds. It smoked like hell but it always started and ran, how the hell it didn't blow is beyond me.  Years later he told me he cracked open the engine and it was basically full of grease 

Pete. (l33t FS)
Pete. (l33t FS) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/13/22 4:19 p.m.

In reply to Ranger50 :

It isn't so much the siamese bores that are an issue, it is the 2.65 mains that take material away from the already-weak bottom end.

NashGTI
NashGTI New Reader
11/13/22 9:10 p.m.
Scotty Con Queso said:

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

You're not wrong on timing belts. While easy enough to properly time a 4g63, there is a very specific way to tension the belt. So much so that most people did it wrong and lunched the valve train. 

Back when I worked at a Hyundai dealer I used to always just call their version Sirius Junk.  The timing belt change mileage was 60k miles and you weren't going to make it to 70k.  The belts would just start shedding teeth and then the timing would jump and things ran into each other.

At the same time I saw one once drive to the shop with a misfire and a noise.  It had a rod bearing gone and had managed to still run with enough slop in that cylinder that it would hit the spark plug and close the gap.  But it still ran on the other three so there is that?

Also for what it's worth I always hated the Mitsu derived 3.o and 3.5 V6s. 

triumph7
triumph7 HalfDork
11/13/22 10:54 p.m.

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

Yep, that was them.  When the head warped it just locked onto those angled studs.  I tried to use my engine hoist to pull the head off and ended up lifting the front of the car.

Tom1200
Tom1200 UberDork
11/13/22 11:50 p.m.

In reply to Antihero :

Datsun/Nissan A-series were in 1200s, B210s, 210s and 310s they were manufactured from 1968 to 2007.

te72
te72 HalfDork
11/14/22 12:33 a.m.
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:
te72 said:

Much as an E70 with extra cylinders would be fun, my inclination as a fellow (former) E70 owner would be to put one of these engines in it:

 

5-valve 4AGE from an AE111, because they sound awesome and make 160hp out of the gate, with a bit more on the table if you want. Plus, factory ITB's. Did I mention the awesome sound? They sound awesome. Likely my favorite 4-cylinder sound ever. Something about Yamaha makes good sounds. They should make instruments and audio equipment, they clearly know what they're doing! =P

 

3SGE Beams, if you wanna keep it in the family but want an easy 200+hp.

 

K20/K24 if you wanna drop a few lbs, add displacement, and make Formual Atlantic power without FA maintenance.

I know I need to get out of my own way, but I'm still stuck in my hot rodding history.  To me, making 200hp at 8000 rpms is a yawnfest, but making 500hp at 6000 rpm is my norm.  Of course, it takes a 700 lb V8 lump to do it.  I've driven some fast-straight-line cars, like a blown 502 making 1000+ hp, and I've driven some "quick" cars with 140 hp.  I'm still stuck in this world of combining bigger power with a light car.  I was hoping for at least a square 250hp, maybe a touch more.  Not so much that I'm pointed the wrong direction out of every corner when I get back on it, but high 12s would be nice in a straight line.

If you're wanting power in a light package, K24 all day. Naturally aspirated 300hp isn't difficult. If you wanna spend some money, power is definitely an option. I'd be more focused on making sure the chassis is up to the task though. 200+ hp in a ~2000 lb car is a healthy balance. 300 would be a riot, particularly if you haven't added 500 unecessary pounds to the nose of the car, ruining the balance.

 

Paradise Racing should be on your list, from what I recall, if drag racing is your game. =)

Curtis73 (Forum Supporter)
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/14/22 11:37 a.m.
te72 said:

Paradise Racing should be on your list, from what I recall, if drag racing is your game. =)

Challenge is my primary game.  Cheap, fast, and turns hard.

gearheadE30
gearheadE30 Dork
11/14/22 1:00 p.m.
Streetwiseguy said:

I'm more entertained by "good" engines that I think are scrap.  Specifically, the BMW M42.  Timing chainsno, and I once bought three engines trying to find a crank with a thrust surface intact.

Yeah, the timing chains aren't the greatest, but I took one to 300k miles with 8 psi of boost and many track days. I only tore it down because I got overzealous with timing and melted pistons at IMS because super long straights on a hot day. Probably thanks to all the timing, it was keeping pace with a bolt-on S52 E30 track car on the straights. It's definitely not the best sounding engine in the world, though.

Mazdax605
Mazdax605 PowerDork
11/14/22 2:14 p.m.

I haven't read the whole thread, but I will say I rather love my 4G63T in my Chariot.  I remember when the DSM cars were new, and people E36 M3ting all over how unreliable they were (and Mitsubishi in general). Maybe that's true, but in my ownership of this car for 20 or so months I love love love this engine. More powerful that it deserves to be as a 2-litre 4 cylinder, and seems to like to rev even though it does run out of steam around 5k. Now I need to knock some wood before it blows up on me later today.

te72
te72 HalfDork
11/19/22 7:16 p.m.
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:
te72 said:

Paradise Racing should be on your list, from what I recall, if drag racing is your game. =)

Challenge is my primary game.  Cheap, fast, and turns hard.

A Challenge E70? K24 all day long my friend. The performance and style for the money is strong with this idea. =)

Tony Sestito
Tony Sestito UltimaDork
11/19/22 10:59 p.m.

Here's one (and I am not sure anyone mentioned this yet): The Chevrolet 305 V8. 

Yes, the 350/400 bolts in the same spot, but if you are looking for a small V8 that runs forever (and it will do so terribly) and takes lots of abuse, the 305 is game. I've had experience with a variety of 305's over the years, from the computer controlled carbureted ones to Tuned Port Injection examples in the F-body. They made OK power for the time, responded decently to bolt-ons, and made the right sounds. Have fun with them until they explode, IF they ever do! 

Some fun 305 stories:

-My friend had a 1985 C10 Custom Deluxe with a 305 that would not die. Odo had 250k+ on it, but it stopped working, and he estimated it must have had 275k on it at least. One day, we were heading on a junkyard run, and we blew a radiator hose. We were about 10 miles from the yard, and he decided to make a game out of it: would it make it to the junkyard with no coolant? Not only did it make it, but we grabbed a hose AND coolant from their community coolant trough there, dumped it in, and got home. The 305 was unfazed and could care less. He drove it for 2 years after that until the trans blew for a 2nd time. The day it got towed away, I gave it an adult beverage and it even ran off of that! 

-Same friend had a Monte Carlo with the LG4 305. On stock internals, he fed it a 150 shot of nitrous by accident a number of times (he thought it was a 75 shot) and got some enjoyment out of it for a few weeks until ring chunks came out the tail pipes. 

-I had a 1983 Z28 briefly, and it also had the LG4 305. I bought it as a former parts car, so stuff was missing. I cobbled together everything I needed to get it running, and right away it barked off. The kicker: it had the loudest rod knock I had ever heard! But it idled PERFECTLY beyond all comprehension. Aside from the worst engine sounds I've heard to this day, the thing ran great!

A 401 CJ
A 401 CJ GRM+ Memberand SuperDork
11/20/22 6:12 p.m.
Tony Sestito said:

Here's one (and I am not sure anyone mentioned this yet): The Chevrolet 305 V8. 

Yes, the 350/400 bolts in the same spot, but if you are looking for a small V8 that runs forever (and it will do so terribly) and takes lots of abuse, the 305 is game. I've had experience with a variety of 305's over the years, from the computer controlled carbureted ones to Tuned Port Injection examples in the F-body. They made OK power for the time, responded decently to bolt-ons, and made the right sounds. Have fun with them until they explode, IF they ever do! 

Some fun 305 stories:

-My friend had a 1985 C10 Custom Deluxe with a 305 that would not die. Odo had 250k+ on it, but it stopped working, and he estimated it must have had 275k on it at least. One day, we were heading on a junkyard run, and we blew a radiator hose. We were about 10 miles from the yard, and he decided to make a game out of it: would it make it to the junkyard with no coolant? Not only did it make it, but we grabbed a hose AND coolant from their community coolant trough there, dumped it in, and got home. The 305 was unfazed and could care less. He drove it for 2 years after that until the trans blew for a 2nd time. The day it got towed away, I gave it an adult beverage and it even ran off of that! 

-Same friend had a Monte Carlo with the LG4 305. On stock internals, he fed it a 150 shot of nitrous by accident a number of times (he thought it was a 75 shot) and got some enjoyment out of it for a few weeks until ring chunks came out the tail pipes. 

-I had a 1983 Z28 briefly, and it also had the LG4 305. I bought it as a former parts car, so stuff was missing. I cobbled together everything I needed to get it running, and right away it barked off. The kicker: it had the loudest rod knock I had ever heard! But it idled PERFECTLY beyond all comprehension. Aside from the worst engine sounds I've heard to this day, the thing ran great!

Fun 305 story:

In a Monza that weighed what? 28XX?  with the throttle response of a little Rochester Dual-jet, they would push you back into the seat FAR beyond what their 140 SAE net hp rating would suggest.  In fact, by early '80s standards when I had mine, you could even call them fast.

 

Streetwiseguy
Streetwiseguy MegaDork
11/20/22 7:42 p.m.

My 82 Camaro had the 145 hp 305.  I voided the warranty less than 3 months in with an Edelbrock Performer and a Comp 260h cam.  Still slow, but it would pull beyond 3600rpm.

rslifkin
rslifkin UberDork
11/21/22 8:49 a.m.

I don't think the 305 has ever been considered a bad engine, just a case of "why bother?" considering you could put a 350 or other more powerful (and not any heavier) engine anywhere a 305 can go. 

ProDarwin
ProDarwin MegaDork
11/21/22 9:13 a.m.

I think someone earlier in this thread asked about the inverse of this:  what engine is percieved as good, but actually horrible.

The #1 candidate in my experience is the Slant Six.  Has a reputation for being robust, but its pretty awful in practically every regard, and in my experience doesn't tolerate abuse/run any longer than most other engines.

rslifkin
rslifkin UberDork
11/21/22 9:25 a.m.
ProDarwin said:

I think someone earlier in this thread asked about the inverse of this:  what engine is percieved as good, but actually horrible.

The #1 candidate in my experience is the Slant Six.  Has a reputation for being robust, but its pretty awful in practically every regard, and in my experience doesn't tolerate abuse/run any longer than most other engines.

I'll add the Jeep 4.0 to that list.  It's supposedly bulletproof and has insane amounts of low end torque.  No.  Early versions are pretty durable, but nothing unusual.  Starting in 96 when they made changes, they break piston skirts occasaionally for no reason.  And then after the next round of changes in 99/2000, they randomly crack cylinder heads unprovoked. 

Power-wise, they're not particularly impressive, nor do they make a crazy amount of torque.  Looking at Grand Cherokees, any of the V8s that's ever been offered makes more torque by 1500 RPM (in some cases by 1000 RPM) than a 4.0 does at peak. 

At best, it's a perfectly average engine that was acceptable power for some of the lighter vehicles it was used in.  But it doesn't even come close to deserving the level of worship it receives. 

Appleseed
Appleseed MegaDork
11/21/22 11:02 a.m.

In reply to ProDarwin :

22R. I killed 2 within 4 months. Didn't abuse or race them. To be fair, this was 20 years after the last one was made, so they did have miles on them, but I wasn't impressed.

dannyp84
dannyp84 Reader
11/22/22 10:07 a.m.
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:
te72 said:
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:
Growl_R said:

How 'bout Volkswagen's VR6 and it's W8, 12 and 16 variants? 

Used in VW, Audi, Porsche, Bentley, and Bugatti

Compact, can make power and SOUND AWESOME!

Sell me on this.  If I pick up the AE70 Corolla I'm hoping for, I'll be looking for something that fits where a 4-banger was and makes lots of gooder power.  I just know nothing about them.

Much as an E70 with extra cylinders would be fun, my inclination as a fellow (former) E70 owner would be to put one of these engines in it:

 

5-valve 4AGE from an AE111, because they sound awesome and make 160hp out of the gate, with a bit more on the table if you want. Plus, factory ITB's. Did I mention the awesome sound? They sound awesome. Likely my favorite 4-cylinder sound ever. Something about Yamaha makes good sounds. They should make instruments and audio equipment, they clearly know what they're doing! =P

 

3SGE Beams, if you wanna keep it in the family but want an easy 200+hp.

 

K20/K24 if you wanna drop a few lbs, add displacement, and make Formual Atlantic power without FA maintenance.

I know I need to get out of my own way, but I'm still stuck in my hot rodding history.  To me, making 200hp at 8000 rpms is a yawnfest, but making 500hp at 6000 rpm is my norm.  Of course, it takes a 700 lb V8 lump to do it.  I've driven some fast-straight-line cars, like a blown 502 making 1000+ hp, and I've driven some "quick" cars with 140 hp.  I'm still stuck in this world of combining bigger power with a light car.  I was hoping for at least a square 250hp, maybe a touch more.  Not so much that I'm pointed the wrong direction out of every corner when I get back on it, but high 12s would be nice in a straight line.

If you want 240 hp n/a, the K24 is probably your best bet. The 3SGE is not a terribly common engine to source, and they go for around $3k now, and getting a 4age to 240 hp would require very deep pockets. K24s are available everywhere you look and have a pretty stout aftermarket, though you'd obviously be looking at doing some custom fab work to get the motor into the AE70, along with whatever rwd transmission you use.
You could also get a 13b to make that sort of power without boost, but it would likely be just a little less civilized in operation. The advantage here is that this swap has definitely been done ad nauseam so you'd have a blueprint to follow. I like keeping it all in the family though, so if I had an AE70 I'd go 3SGE with throttle bodies and maybe see if there's an E85 tune available for it..

Pete. (l33t FS)
Pete. (l33t FS) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/22/22 10:21 a.m.
ProDarwin said:

I think someone earlier in this thread asked about the inverse of this:  what engine is percieved as good, but actually horrible.

The #1 candidate in my experience is the Slant Six.  Has a reputation for being robust, but its pretty awful in practically every regard, and in my experience doesn't tolerate abuse/run any longer than most other engines.

I think LS1s are garbage given their ability to drop valves and explode bottom ends.

The whole world knows small block Chevys are garbage because there is a multi million dollar industry dedicated to fixing all of the flaws built into them when the whiz kids make a super cheap Kettering style V8 in the early 50s.

 

Toyota 2JZs are junk.  Well built junk but junk.  Bottom ends heavy as a Diesel so they can't rev, three different intake ports so they can't breathe.  All they are good for is throwing boost into like some dumb Diesel engine because they can't make power by spinning or breathing.  There is a good reason why one of the top Japanese tuners modded a Supra by first dumpstering the 2JZ to make room for something better.

TR7 (Forum Supporter)
TR7 (Forum Supporter) Reader
11/22/22 2:17 p.m.

I want to see more ford duratec/jag AJ30 action in rear wheel drive (with a manual please). Same with the VR6. For no other reason than I think they are cool engines. 

Peabody
Peabody MegaDork
11/22/22 2:52 p.m.

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

When this thread started I almost posted that somebody actually had the balls to call the small block Chev a piece of junk recently. I remember asking the manager of the machine shop I deal with about a particular engine, and if they ever see any. He said if that was an indicator, then the small block must be the worst engine ever made because they see more of  them than anything, and we laughed. Oh how we laughed.

There is a good reason why one of the top Japanese tuners modded a Supra by first dumpstering the 2JZ to make room for something better.

LS?

Pete. (l33t FS)
Pete. (l33t FS) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/22/22 3:01 p.m.

In reply to Peabody :

Nissan RB26.

For whatever reason, there seems to be a cultural mental block against engine swaps in Japan, so when I learned of this I was really surprised.

 

ProDarwin
ProDarwin MegaDork
11/22/22 3:11 p.m.

The 2JZ seems to have flaws, but it also is capable of producing an insane amount of power on a stock block.  I find it hard to classify as 'horrible'.  Same with the LS.

Funny the RB26 is mentioned above, didnt MotoIQ have an article about how their significant flaws?

 

I can't call a Subaru engine 'horrible', but damn their reliability record is bad.  Now that I have a BRZ I've paid more attention and it seems people that track them blow them up left and right. 

Oh well at least its easy to work on and a replacement can be found in any appliance.  berkeley, nevermind I'm thinking of a K series.

buzzboy
buzzboy SuperDork
11/22/22 10:18 p.m.
rslifkin said:

I'll add the Jeep 4.0 to that list...

I wonder if my XJ had a 5.2 if it would still get 22mpg though? I love my 1996 4.0, fully knowing it's a time bomb. But 190hp in a 3000lbs car was nothing to sneeze at in 1996.

YoursTruly
YoursTruly New Reader
11/23/22 8:19 a.m.

The Honda J-Series V6 is actually fantastic, but Honda won't put it in anything fun anymore. The closest they got was the Acura TL-S and TL SH-AWD.  HPD even sells a version to LMP and Baja teams called the HR35TT, which is  the same architecture as the J35 from an Odyssey minivan engine, but VTEC is deleted, rods/pistons are forged, the intake manifold is improved, and they bolt a turbo to each siamese exhaust port. 

rslifkin
rslifkin UberDork
11/23/22 8:24 a.m.
buzzboy said:
rslifkin said:

I'll add the Jeep 4.0 to that list...

I wonder if my XJ had a 5.2 if it would still get 22mpg though? I love my 1996 4.0, fully knowing it's a time bomb. But 190hp in a 3000lbs car was nothing to sneeze at in 1996.

The XJ was probably the best application for the 4.0.  It was the lightest vehicle they used it in by a good margin.  TJs, ZJs, and WJs are all a lot heavier, so the MPG difference for 4.0 vs V8 is a lot smaller.  And the 4.0 isn't a great performer in any of them (particularly the ZJ/WJ).  I don't really get why they didn't offer the 5.2 in the TJ, considering it's not significantly heavier than a 4.0. The worse gas mileage in the V8 ZJs is partly because they geared them slightly shorter than the 4.0s.  If they'd put the V8 in an XJ with tall enough gearing, it would still have done well on the highway. 

My complaints with the 4.0 are mostly centered around the coil pack ones with the 0331 head.  The piston skirts are only an occasional issue, but it's something like 20 - 30% of all 0331 heads will crack without ever being overheated.  And they crack on the top side, so they puke coolant directly into the oil, meaning it's often not noticed until the bearings are trashed. 

buzzboy
buzzboy SuperDork
11/23/22 11:13 a.m.

I've already got 3.07 gears. Maybe I could go lower with a 5.2! Funny that my Jeep is geared to do 160+

I've heard nothing good about the coil pack engines. Dizzys are archaic but at least cheap and easy to work on and diagnose. Plus my engine was replaced at 220k, so I figure my piston skirts are good for a bit longer.

VictoryMike18
VictoryMike18 New Reader
11/23/22 5:48 p.m.

I'll nominate the Audi 2.8L 12v SOHC V6.

Common arguments why it's terrible: Leaks oil from everywhere, makes mediocre power, unmodifiable, but at least they're reliable...

I'm pretty heavily into this engine and can counterpoint virtually everything.  My argument though is that they are actually a good engine that got a self-defeating rep.   The 12v was also book-ended by the highly-successful 20v turbo Inline 5 cylinder, and then by the very tuner-friendly 20v turbo Inline 4 cylinder.   The aftermarket barely touched this engine and most modifications were self-developed by enthusiasts.

Now, it doesn't help that most versions have an un-modifiable Hitachi ECU which is a killer to serious mods.  But a lot of power can be gained with porting the intake and smoothing the airflow through it's rather convoluted intake system.

It also doesn't help that it's a high(ish) compression engine that requires 91 Octane, and The ECU will pull timing aggressively if any knock is detected.

Lastly, the PCV system is over-complicated and clogs easily, which leads to crankcase leaks.  Add an easily clogged EGR port and slightly complex vacuum system, and it's very easy for the intake tract to develop post-MAF leaks that make it sluggish and run poorly.  But the killer is that it will continue to run when neglected, so people just keep them going and complain that they have no power...

" />

 

 

bentwrench
bentwrench UltraDork
11/25/22 6:57 p.m.

In reply to MadScientistMatt :

Is this the same motor as the Ford duratec v6?

Pete. (l33t FS)
Pete. (l33t FS) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/25/22 7:06 p.m.

In reply to VictoryMike18 :

Audi was very proud of how compact and smooth the V6 was.

What is amusing is that it is literally just a V6 version of the same architecture as the watercooled four.  Most hardparts interchange, and IIRC they had 7mm valve stems which are a flow upgrade for the older fours. (Also shared with the VR6)

The 2.8s were anvils.  The 2.7t was a V6 version of the 1.8t and was great if a bit cramped to work on.

The 3.0l AVK can eat a bowl of phalli because of the cylinder head design, and the cam sprocket bolts that back off in service and take out the $1200 camshaft solenoid/cam seal bracket and then a lot tiny yet expensive sodium filled valves when they stop being dull flycutters and start being locking devices.

Not the bolts that hold the units to the cams, the ones that hold the sprockets to the hubs.  There are five or six per sprocket on the inside face.

Volvo has three per sprocket, same size, on the outside where they are accessible, and they do not back off.

MadScientistMatt
MadScientistMatt UltimaDork
11/26/22 6:23 a.m.
bentwrench said:

In reply to MadScientistMatt :

Is this the same motor as the Ford duratec v6?

No, it's the other 2.5 liter 60 degree V6 that showed up in early 1990s Ford products. Does seem like a strange amount of duplicated effort, but the Duratec V6 was from Ford of Europe. The Duratec four was a Mazda design. So, lots of potential for confusion.

Pete. (l33t FS)
Pete. (l33t FS) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/26/22 8:00 a.m.

In reply to MadScientistMatt :

They are all Duratec sixes.  The old 2.5 from the Contour, the DOHC V6 from the Taurus...

 

Completely different engine family but they are called Duratecs.

Growl_R
Growl_R New Reader
11/29/22 9:06 p.m.

In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :

That was the whole point of VW's development of the narrow angle V - it fits transverse in the same space as an inline 4

VW received several engineering awards for its development  (they also invented the dual clutch transmission, BTW)

Pete. (l33t FS)
Pete. (l33t FS) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/29/22 9:40 p.m.

In reply to Growl_R :

Knowing how the DSG works, I am curious what the control mechanism was like in the 80s.

Audi ran a DSG in a few events in the S1 E2 rally car.  There's video of Röhrl at the 1985 RAC where you can tell he is in an "automatic" - he does not lift to shift to create that incredible K29 compressor surge, he just goes and goes.  Apparently you used a foot clutch to move from a stop, and then a hand lever to shift the car.

Video should start at 3:36.  Compare Mikkola (I think) in the traditional manual trans, then Röhrl in the DSG right after.

 

Röhrl didn't want to be there, he didn't like that the RAC was a "blind" rally, but he was there to test the new gearbox.

The prototype mid engined car had this transmission too.  So did some Porsche 962s I guess.

te72
te72 HalfDork
12/26/22 2:32 a.m.
Pete. (l33t FS) said:

In reply to Peabody :

Nissan RB26.

For whatever reason, there seems to be a cultural mental block against engine swaps in Japan, so when I learned of this I was really surprised.

 

For whatever reason in this case, it helps to have an understanding of Nagata-san, and the impact the original, old school GT-R had on him. It's actually a cool story. The engine swap wasn't done because they couldn't make the power with the 2jz, Nagata just really, really liked GT-R's, and doing unusual things in general with cars. =)

 

He also built a Mk4 with a 1GZ-FE later on, that is rather famous. If I recall, that very car ended up in Florida a few years back.

 

As to your comments about the 2jz design in general, having been around these things for years, you're partially correct. They do take to boost quite well, though modern quick spooling turbos did eventually find a weak point in the stock rods, when engines were pushed to 600+ ft-lbs before around 3500 rpm, stock rods have a tendency to bend... Doesn't seem to be an issue with 1jz's, which have a shorter rod. In fact, I can't say I've ever seen a bent 1jz rod, they're stout little things.

 

Now, in stock form, you're right, they're not too thrilled to rev, but that's basically a built head away from a 9k+ engine. Downside, at least to guys like me who favor throttle response, is that to carry an engine that far, the turbo has to be able to keep up without getting in the way. This is why you frequently see ridiculously large turbos on these engines. Not my style, but... there's a place for them, and they do make a good noise. =)

Curtis73 (Forum Supporter)
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
12/26/22 10:36 a.m.

I often get a little emotionally erect when I see a Caddy 500.  Good aftermarket performance stuff that isn't too expensive, only weighs a little more than a SBC, super easy to swap, and high nickel castings mean they last forever (but shouldn't really spend much time above 6000)

Most people assume they're heave and expensive, but they're no more expensive to build than a BBC, but they have 50 more cubes and weigh closer to a SBC.

alfadriver
alfadriver GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
12/26/22 10:48 a.m.
MadScientistMatt said:
bentwrench said:

In reply to MadScientistMatt :

Is this the same motor as the Ford duratec v6?

No, it's the other 2.5 liter 60 degree V6 that showed up in early 1990s Ford products. Does seem like a strange amount of duplicated effort, but the Duratec V6 was from Ford of Europe. The Duratec four was a Mazda design. So, lots of potential for confusion.

Really late to this party, but there may have been a lot of "duplicated" engines, but that's because the older one had some issues.... (edit) just thought of another thing- Ford may have seen that Mazda could not make enough V6's for their plans- so we developed our own.  

The "early" 90's 2.5l V6 was the one that powered the second gen Probe, which was the Mazda V6- same family that was the 1.8l V6.  As that one was going into the Ford production line, the 2.5l "modular" or "duratec" was being developed- which was originally a contract job with Porsche Engineering.  Pretty clever engine, and much of the design carried over into the 3.0lV6.  Those two engines were in the Contour/Mystique/Mondeo for the 2.5 and the Taurus (mostly) and first gen Escape for the v6. (edit)- I have no idea why Porsche was part of the original V6 design- that was just before I started when they were done.    

But I've posted many times that the next Duratec, which was also the MZR, I4 was NOT a Mazda design, it was very much a co-design.  I'd have to look back, but I seem to remember the first US application of that motor was the Ranger pick up.  That family was a 1.8/2.0/ and 2.3 originally, later expanded to 2.5.  And was made all over the world- Spain, Mexico, and Japan mostly.  And in far more Ford products than Mazda.

Not sure which one of those started the "horrible but good" family.   I thought all of them were good engines- although the Duratec V6 had a flaw that made it hard to be really clean.  The Duratec/MZR engine was pretty awesome- powerful, light, and clean.

Schmidlap
Schmidlap Dork
12/26/22 1:04 p.m.

In reply to alfadriver :

The only horrible thing about the V6 Duratec was that the alternator only lasted 2 to 3 years, at least in the Cougars, which were missing some shielding compared to the Contours, and changing the alternator required taking apart the passenger side suspension to remove it, but to remove the bolts on the alternator you had to go in from the driver's side wheelwell with several feet of extensions and multiple swivel joints. If the car saw any road salt at all, the job became an even bigger PITA. Other than that, I loved that engine. 

Also, Porsche Engineering Services (a wholly owned subsidiary of Porsche AG) was involved in the original design of the V6, Ford used them instead of using someone like Roush or one of the other contract engineering services. It was simply a manpower issue at the time, at least that's the story I got from a former coworker who was involved with the original design. He also said that a big reason why Ford developed the Duratec V6 was because the Mazda V6 block was limited to 2.5L and they wanted 3L for the Taurus. 

Appleseed
Appleseed MegaDork
12/26/22 2:12 p.m.

In reply to alfadriver :

The 2.5s run dry in sustained right (or is left hand) turns. At least in Contours.

spitfirebill
spitfirebill MegaDork
12/26/22 2:31 p.m.
triumph7 said:

Nobody mentioned the 2.0 from the TR7?  Up to the point where the corrosion simulates a failed head gasket and ultimately welds the head to the block they aren't horrid... much.

Yea, and the Stag engine is two siamesed TR7 engines.  Well, I guess they deserve their bad reputation.  

Pete. (l33t FS)
Pete. (l33t FS) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
12/26/22 2:36 p.m.
Appleseed said:

In reply to alfadriver :

The 2.5s run dry in sustained right (or is left hand) turns. At least in Contours.

So like a 944 or 928 then?

alfadriver
alfadriver GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
12/26/22 3:42 p.m.
Appleseed said:

In reply to alfadriver :

The 2.5s run dry in sustained right (or is left hand) turns. At least in Contours.

Vehicle dynamics testing has changed a lot since that would have happened....  

alfadriver
alfadriver GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
12/26/22 3:45 p.m.

In reply to Schmidlap :

So the alternator problem isn't an engine problem, but a crappy design of an alternator by what would end up being a crappy Visteon design.

As for Porsche's involvement- that makes sense- when I was hired, there were some pretty large incoming classes of engineers.  And many of the teams that were on the 3.0l V6 development were pretty darned young (more than one of those small teams ended up in VP positions, which is interesting to me).

Appleseed
Appleseed MegaDork
12/26/22 6:25 p.m.

In reply to alfadriver :

In fairness,  the engine is fine, the oil pick up is what's bad in that particular case. I tried in vain to get my brother to do the 3.0 big block swap after he nuked his 2.5, but to no avail .

Our Preferred Partners
Z4XO1qMGqCJ1DVf8VJor0KamAW6bOBygJ5QQNbDRVtQ6Qg5Z6ozEunNSAKHM3ksA