turboswede wrote: Um, are you arguing about this? Seriously? Dude, if you like LSJuan swaps, go for it. Thanks for sharing that you like LSJuan swaps, your opinion matters to us, greatly.
The irony of your belittling me expressing my opinion while you're expressing yours does not escape me.
dculberson wrote:turboswede wrote: Um, are you arguing about this? Seriously? Dude, if you like LSJuan swaps, go for it. Thanks for sharing that you like LSJuan swaps, your opinion matters to us, greatly.The irony of your belittling me expressing my opinion while you're expressing yours does not escape me.
Beautiful, isn't? Oh and you suck 
dculberson wrote:Type Q wrote: Because LS swaps are soooo played out.That is the dumbest reason to not do something in the history of dumb reasons. It's like not listening to Elvis because he's "played out." It's like not driving a Miata because it makes you gay. It's like not driving a P71 because it's an old person car. That reason is the antithesis of everything GRM. I'm not interested in impressing people, I'm interested in a fun fast car. "LS swaps are played out" = hellaflush. LS1 = hellafunctional.
For the record, the "played out" comment was a joke. I guess I picked the wrong emoticon to convey it. I don't seem to be making myself clear today.
After seeing Keith's Targa Miata in action, an LS swap is something I actually looked at for my Miata . Seeing in action means he drove by me at Laguna Seca like I was standing still. 
I'd look at non LS non ford 302 swaps because of cost/fitment/features LS don't have like the 2JFZ whatever it was thread a while back. The fact you can get ITB's on that lexus v8 was glorious and no one seems to have the ITBs for an LSX for example
turboswede wrote: Beautiful, isn't? Oh and you suck
I suck lots, but at least I have fun.
@TypeQ: sorry I misunderstood. There are people that think that way though, and to me that's like thinking a hammer is played out. It's a tool like any other, if it gets the job done it's a good tool. If not then it sucks worse than even I do.
You know what I like?
I like GM genIII/IV motors in just about anything, an Audi v8 in a Porsche Boxster(if I could make the stock dash and OBD work), a Volvo I5 swapped into a Ford Focus, a Subaru EJ engine and transmission swapped into a Saab 900 classic ( my current obsession), the Volt, a 1.8t swapped into an Audi 90, hellaflush, hellaunflush, skinnies and slicks, Miata subframes swapped into a Honda Civic, and any number of other ridiculous things that will never make any sense to anyone else.
All of these things are wasteful, heretical, irrational, complex, and unreliable, but I dont care. I spend ridiculous amounts of money on parts and tools, work on my projects, and enjoy every bit of it.
Can someone explain to me why the CANBUS is a huge issue in the 4.2 swap into the boxster and that's why it's not worth it, but apparently it's just fine in any number of other cars it's constantly being swapped into?
The Audi 90 comes to mind.
In reply to dculberson:
No worries. An LSx is a pretty big hammer. 
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: Can someone explain to me why the CANBUS is a huge issue in the 4.2 swap into the boxster and that's why it's not worth it, but apparently it's just fine in any number of other cars it's constantly being swapped into? The Audi 90 comes to mind.
Yeah, I don't really understand why it's impossible to wire an Audi engine to work with the Boxster while it's soooo easy to wire up an LS1.
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: Can someone explain to me why the CANBUS is a huge issue in the 4.2 swap into the boxster and that's why it's not worth it, but apparently it's just fine in any number of other cars it's constantly being swapped into? The Audi 90 comes to mind.
IDK I'm just going by my canbus experience on my bike....huge pain in the ass and I just don't see the point on a bike. I know that's a whole nother realm, but the bike is German, I have experience with both Porsches and Audis, and the thought of that marriage with the inclusion of canbus makes me want to cry like a baby in fear.
I'll give you a reason to do an Audi 4.2 instead of an LSX ... The 4.2 is something like 18" and change long from the harmonic balancer to the transmission mounting surface. The LSx is about 27". Couple that with Audi making one of the only longitudinal manual transaxles, and you have packaging possibilities that don't easily exist with the LSx.
I don't for a minute think that LS swaps are played out, but in some cases there might be a better solution.
In reply to 16vCorey:
I have only done swaps into pre can bus vehicles so that is the limit of my technical know-how. I honestly dont know how to get the dash, engine management, and body management to work together on an engine swapped can bus vehicle. I wish I knew how to make this happen, but I dont.
Maybe some of the VAG people on here can share some hints, knowledge, and unobfuscation...
16vCorey wrote:92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: Can someone explain to me why the CANBUS is a huge issue in the 4.2 swap into the boxster and that's why it's not worth it, but apparently it's just fine in any number of other cars it's constantly being swapped into? The Audi 90 comes to mind.Yeah, I don't really understand why it's impossible to wire an Audi engine to work with the Boxster while it's soooo easy to wire up an LS1.
Because the GM computer is in several million vehicles and was hacked years and years ago. It is completely programmable. The wiring is also heavily documented and requires very few wires interfacing with the subject vehicle.
But that's the point... it's not like the 4.2 swap in general is uncharted territory. The Audi community has been doing it for years.
Or is this an issue with the Boxster and not the motor? I'm not "up" on the latest stupid technology i have no use for.
The motor, transmission, and all the mechanical bits are good to go. My issue is with the Porsche end of the project. The immobilizer, cluster, and etc are a tough nut to crack.
Supposedly it is possible to hack the Bosch KTS 500 or a laptop to run the PST2 software to interrogate every control module in the vehicle including the DME, but I have no direct knowledge of that. Also many of the systems such as the instrument cluster, immobilizer, and etc that you would need to access to make a swap work are supposedly protected by security codes. I dont have access to those codes without an "in" at a Porsche dealer. And thats in addition to paying for an under the table copy of the eye wateringly priced PST2 software.
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: But that's the point... it's not like the 4.2 swap in general is uncharted territory. The Audi community has been doing it for years. Or is this an issue with the Boxster and not the motor? I'm not "up" on the latest stupid technology i have no use for.
Huh, that's not something I was aware of. I would guess if someone has hacked the Audi computer or at least learned to spoof the signals needed then the Audi side shouldn't be all that bad. Other than the Audi stuff you only need to worry about gauges, fuel pumps, cooling fans, ABS, etc... Sounds reasonably do-able by someone with a good knowledge of the Porsche systems.
I'm also surprised nobody has said "Just put it on megasquirt" yet. That seems infinitely easier than messing around with all the stock stuff.
I believe the Audi guys like to use VEMs or something.
i'd be curious if there may be an issue in state inspections that require an OBD2 scan and since both the donor and the recipient would be OBD2 you could need at least one car's fully functioning DME/bus system?
the audi 90 and lotus esprit arent subject to the scan issue obviously.
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: I'm also surprised nobody has said "Just put it on megasquirt" yet. That seems infinitely easier than messing around with all the stock stuff. I believe the Audi guys like to use VEMs or something.
The 4.2 is a complex engine -- variable cams, variable intake manifold geometry, factory wideband sensors, per-cylinder knock sensors, drive-by-wire throttle with a "torque request" throttle map, direct injection in later versions, etc. Yes, you could simplify everything and run it off a megasquirt, but you'd lose a lot of the power and drivability that comes from the factory ECU doing it. You'd also lose the ability to make the factory Boxster dashboard work.
turboswede wrote: A 944 bellhousing:
Look like someone pooped in said bellhousing.
Zombie thread of my interests
There's a reason no one has ITB's on an LS.
It would be a step backwards from a good aftermarket intake or even a stock intake.
In reply to bentwrench:
I wouldn't go so far as to agree with you on that. The large plenum intake is going to give you different power profile than ITBs.
So apparently turning the 4.2L V8 into a stand alone is one step closer...
Audi 4.2L ABZ V8 MANUAL CONVERSION & PERFORMANCE CHIP
You'll need to log in to post.
