2.0 EcoTec in a GBody?

[motorholmes]

OK someone find a dyno from a 1994 Chevy 454 SS ppickup, and we'll compare that to the dyno I posted earlier. People keep talking about high-revving peaky 4 cylinders.. Did you not see the dyno #'s? And that's over 200lb ft all the way across.. The Torque number is on the RIGHT side of the page, not the left.

I'm not trying to defend 4 cylinder engines, hell I don't even own one. But talking a bunch of crap that is not true about a guy's idea kinda gets me riled up.

The Ecotec is NOT a Honda S-2000 engine!

It does not have a peaky power band!

It does not require a 6-speed transmission!

 

[drogg1]

This cracks me up ... I guarantee that new Regal would rape more than half of the V8 Gbody's on this site :lol: And it weighs justas much and more than most of our GBody's :lol:

Please think about what the word rape actually means before using it. And I don't think comparing the new regal to a stock V8 gbody is the subject of the thread. As I understood it, it was more talking about if swapping a ecotec into a gbody would be a cool/worth it mod. Thus, I don't think its competition would be a stock gbody V8, but more one that has actually had the same amount of mods price wise that swapping an ecotec in would cost.

 

[Clone TIE Pilot]

OK someone find a dyno from a 1994 Chevy 454 SS ppickup, and we'll compare that to the dyno I posted earlier. People keep talking about high-revving peaky 4 cylinders.. Did you not see the dyno #'s? And that's over 200lb ft all the way across.. The Torque number is on the RIGHT side of the page, not the left.

I'm not trying to defend 4 cylinder engines, hell I don't even own one. But talking a bunch of crap that is not true about a guy's idea kinda gets me riled up.

The Ecotec is NOT a Honda S-2000 engine!

It does not have a peaky power band!

It does not require a 6-speed transmission!

Power and torque curves for a stock LG4 (low output) 305 with headers.

Even lower power V8s can make more torque with a more even curve that a smaller displacement, turbo motor that has higher HP. If you think Ecotechs are better than most V8s, then swap one into your Gbody and compare it to other G bodies with V8s. While no one here has claimed ecotechs are bad engines, just some inherent cons with small, high speed motors.

Also for someone who claims they aren't defending 4 bangers, you sure as heck are fighting hard to defend them and putting down n/a V8s at the same time. No one has been talking a bunch of crap either, it's just you trying to pull an Appeal to ridicule logical fallacy while also trying to pretend being a white knight for the OP. As Drogg1 pointed out, this whole Ecotech vs stock 80s V8s tangent is just a Red herring that you created.

The real point of this thread is do we think swapping a ecotech into a Gbody is cool/worthwhile? Many of us think no. Clearly you disagree which is fine, but hijacking a thread and using fallacy tricks isn't.

 

[jrm81bu]

I have defended it. I also don't think it's cool. I also wouldn't do it myself. I just don't agree that it doesn't make enough power to work.

I also find it odd that you graph above has the LG4 making more power than the L69. I don't think that graph is right. The LG4 was rated around 155hp. Ya it has headers but they aren't worth 40+ horsepower.

 

[RITTER]

This cracks me up ... I guarantee that new Regal would rape more than half of the V8 Gbody's on this site :lol: And it weighs justas much and more than most of our GBody's :lol:

Please think about what the word rape actually means before using it. And I don't think comparing the new regal to a stock V8 gbody is the subject of the thread. As I understood it, it was more talking about if swapping a ecotec into a gbody would be a cool/worth it mod. Thus, I don't think its competition would be a stock gbody V8, but more one that has actually had the same amount of mods price wise that swapping an ecotec in would cost.

Sorry if the word "rape" offended you in any way.

I am simply stating that the EcoTech would move a Gbody just as good and better than most of our factory V8's do :wink:

 

[Clone TIE Pilot]

I have defended it. I also don't think it's cool. I also wouldn't do it myself. I just don't agree that it doesn't make enough power to work.

I also find it odd that you graph above has the LG4 making more power than the L69. I don't think that graph is right. The LG4 was rated around 155hp. Ya it has headers but they aren't worth 40+ horsepower.

305s are very under rated engines, all I know is that the test mule had headers, maybe long tube? The headers were hooked up to 3-inch dual pipes feeding Flowmaster mufflers. I am sure an L69 with that exhaust would pump out more power, they say L69s are really 240 HP engines choked down to 190 by the factory exhaust. Alot of magazines rated stock MCSSs at 16.0 in the 1/4, but there are bone stock MCSSs in good shape that have gone as low as 15.43 with zero mods to the whole car.

Another thing to keep in mind too is that these days with computer tuning, it's easy for the car makers to retune their test examples for magazines into ringers.

 

[beermonkey9417]

305s are very under rated engines...

so are sbc 307's

...And I don't think comparing the new regal to a stock V8 gbody is the subject of the thread. As I understood it, it was more talking about if swapping a ecotec into a gbody would be a cool/worth it mod. Thus, I don't think its competition would be a stock gbody V8, but more one that has actually had the same amount of mods price wise that swapping an ecotec in would cost.

i agree with this^^ all tho...i think it would be kinda kewl to drive one of these ecoteck gbodys(malibu imo) and see what the difference in front end weight does for the balance of the car in corners. and then race said cars on a racetrack, like the topgear one or nurburgring... but thats like jay leno money to do that. maybe we should tell him about this... :idea:

 

[motorholmes]

and then race said cars on a racetrack, like the topgear one or nurburgring

They actually run these cars at your local autocross events in "Heavy Metal" category.

We didn't have any G-body cars at ours, but check out the '70 Nova and the '69 Chevelle at my photography website:

http://exposureeffect.com/album/race_day#ps-gal

You wouldn't believe how well those cars corner. Derek, the guy with the Chevelle, is currently putting a LS1 in place of the LT1 to get the weight reduced up front.

If you had a stripped down Malibu with a Ecotec and a full suspension it would really be a blast to run at the track

 

[jrm81bu]

I have defended it. I also don't think it's cool. I also wouldn't do it myself. I just don't agree that it doesn't make enough power to work.

I also find it odd that you graph above has the LG4 making more power than the L69. I don't think that graph is right. The LG4 was rated around 155hp. Ya it has headers but they aren't worth 40+ horsepower.

305s are very under rated engines, all I know is that the test mule had headers, maybe long tube? The headers were hooked up to 3-inch dual pipes feeding Flowmaster mufflers. I am sure an L69 with that exhaust would pump out more power, they say L69s are really 240 HP engines choked down to 190 by the factory exhaust. Alot of magazines rated stock MCSSs at 16.0 in the 1/4, but there are bone stock MCSSs in good shape that have gone as low as 15.43 with zero mods to the whole car.

Another thing to keep in mind too is that these days with computer tuning, it's easy for the car makers to retune their test examples for magazines into ringers.

Sorry, I still say it's a "happy" dyno at best. It's irrelevent though. You want to compare stock to stock so the "choked down" exhaust would still be on the car. Either that or for a comparison the ecotec would be allowed some mods too. Again either it really doesn't matter.

 

[Clone TIE Pilot]

I have defended it. I also don't think it's cool. I also wouldn't do it myself. I just don't agree that it doesn't make enough power to work.

I also find it odd that you graph above has the LG4 making more power than the L69. I don't think that graph is right. The LG4 was rated around 155hp. Ya it has headers but they aren't worth 40+ horsepower.

305s are very under rated engines, all I know is that the test mule had headers, maybe long tube? The headers were hooked up to 3-inch dual pipes feeding Flowmaster mufflers. I am sure an L69 with that exhaust would pump out more power, they say L69s are really 240 HP engines choked down to 190 by the factory exhaust. Alot of magazines rated stock MCSSs at 16.0 in the 1/4, but there are bone stock MCSSs in good shape that have gone as low as 15.43 with zero mods to the whole car.

Another thing to keep in mind too is that these days with computer tuning, it's easy for the car makers to retune their test examples for magazines into ringers.

Sorry, I still say it's a "happy" dyno at best. It's irrelevent though. You want to compare stock to stock so the "choked down" exhaust would still be on the car. Either that or for a comparison the ecotec would be allowed some mods too. Again either it really doesn't matter.

It's still cheaper to just redo the exhaust than swap in a whole new powertrain that makes about the same power only with more cost and complexity under more stress with not as good of a torque curve. As far as we know the Ecotech's dyno chart may be just a "happy" dyno as well. As I said, car makers often submit cars that have been retuned into ringers to the car mags for testing.

Also I was not trying to compare stock vs stock. Motorholmes suggested that the Ecotech has a better torque curve than most V8s, and I showed even low powered V8s still have a better torque curve than a high power 4 banger. It's a nice powerplant for small cars but not so good for larger cars like a Gbody. But this is one of those arguments that will keeping going around and around and I have better things to do with my time.