2.0 EcoTec in a GBody?
- Thread starter jdracer13
- Start date
- Status
i woulds like to see a ecotec in something more in the lines of like a vega or an other small gm car or truck. an s10 with that would prolly fly. id rock one inna sc2 saturn if i could afford it...
Did any of you guys catch the video of iirc motor trend comparing the 87 Buick GN to the new turbo Buick?
the old Buick really killed the new one in 0-60, 1/4 mile times, the only thing the new Buick was good at was the slalom course and top speed.
this new Buick is still not a new gm design, it was never designed in the states its another product of Australia's Holden or the offshoot Vauxhall for England. Hell we didn't even get the real good one in the states, the Insignia VXR, this one makes our turbo buick here seem very tame and cheap.
http://www.vauxhall.co.uk/microsite/vxr/cars/insignia/specifications/safety/index.shtml
the old Buick really killed the new one in 0-60, 1/4 mile times, the only thing the new Buick was good at was the slalom course and top speed.
this new Buick is still not a new gm design, it was never designed in the states its another product of Australia's Holden or the offshoot Vauxhall for England. Hell we didn't even get the real good one in the states, the Insignia VXR, this one makes our turbo buick here seem very tame and cheap.
http://www.vauxhall.co.uk/microsite/vxr/cars/insignia/specifications/safety/index.shtml
The hp to liter comment is about the efficiency of power to size. A 455 at 550hp is roughly 7.5L and has about 73 hp per liter. That's all, these new motors are way more efficient at making HP. I am not favoring one side or the other. I have a 358 Bowtie for my cutlass. This was just an idea. I think it will be cool if someone takes one of the DI 3.6 and hooks up a T3/T4 to it. It will be like the GN motor. The 2.0 would be a good motor to build on, that would be quick, that won't make gobs of torque but enough to to get it moving.
I think the point about the hp/liter was more about the fact that does it realistically matter if you were to do the swap. Even though the Ecotec engine may be more efficient than a 455, it will take more money and effort to swap in the ecotec and be as fast than it will for the 455.
if the technology used in the 2.0 ecotec motor was used in say a 5.0 size motor, @ 135 hp per liter, that 675 hp v8! now to me thats a sh*t load. but im thinking that there not gonna let the general public use that, it would prolly be used for big money racing.
"It will still be better than what the majority of these cars originally came with. Nobody even measures power output at that low of an rpm range but with a torque peak at 2400 it will have enough power even lower."
Not off boost.(torque) Less torque down low to get you moving. However as mentioned with 6 gears to help get you to and keep you in the torque range & later HP range it would help a lot. On boost yea 295 at 2,400 is good but on boost fuel economy is no better than a large V8. Factory's do measure torque down that low but most aftermarket dynos are not set up for that because they are set up for the higher stall larger cammed motors that they work with.
"The 2.0 would be a good motor to build on, that would be quick, that won't make gobs of torque but enough to to get it moving."
Yes it would in a light car. Like 78MC said the GN & new Regal were compared and the superior torque of the GN dominated all the acceleration tests. The GN unlike the new Regal despite having a four speed instead of a 6 still could still easily be driven with traffic off boost. You know naturally aspirated the ecoboost still has yet to match the 190 HP version Quad four and its been gone since 02.
Not off boost.(torque) Less torque down low to get you moving. However as mentioned with 6 gears to help get you to and keep you in the torque range & later HP range it would help a lot. On boost yea 295 at 2,400 is good but on boost fuel economy is no better than a large V8. Factory's do measure torque down that low but most aftermarket dynos are not set up for that because they are set up for the higher stall larger cammed motors that they work with.
"The 2.0 would be a good motor to build on, that would be quick, that won't make gobs of torque but enough to to get it moving."
Yes it would in a light car. Like 78MC said the GN & new Regal were compared and the superior torque of the GN dominated all the acceleration tests. The GN unlike the new Regal despite having a four speed instead of a 6 still could still easily be driven with traffic off boost. You know naturally aspirated the ecoboost still has yet to match the 190 HP version Quad four and its been gone since 02.
There is a guy on Pro-Touring.com that took a 60's chevelle (possibly 4door), and updated its suspension and brakes.
He also put a manual trans + single turbo 2.2L Ecotec from the earlier cavaliers. Design intent was to have a daily driver, in a classic body, but its a chevelle so it couldnt skimp on the power either.
He was very conservative with his goals, the final output is probably not very different from today's regal GS. Was still in progress when i saw it last, maybe someone can post a link to it.
He also put a manual trans + single turbo 2.2L Ecotec from the earlier cavaliers. Design intent was to have a daily driver, in a classic body, but its a chevelle so it couldnt skimp on the power either.
He was very conservative with his goals, the final output is probably not very different from today's regal GS. Was still in progress when i saw it last, maybe someone can post a link to it.
All things equal you lose some efficiency to size. Exact replica of an engine only in a larger scale still loses efficiency due to more pumping loses and more mass to move. So theoretically the ideal is to pick the ideal sized engine for the efficiency that you can accomplish per its size for the size weight etc of the vehical and intended use.
- Status
Similar threads
