Lightest and smallest way to 400 reliable hp.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

That's pretty typical, and I won't claim that it's not the easiest option, especially if you're starting with a 4 cylinder that didn't come from the factory with a turbo. As you said, LS is the answer for engine swaps for a reason. But I think it's occurring less frequently all the time as manufacturers improve turbo tech and tuning. If you start with a modern 4 cyl that comes from the factory with a turbo, you can get better numbers than some v8s with minimal upgrades.

This is a 2.3 Ecoboost with an intake, intercooler and tune:

And this is a Coyote 5.0 with a 93 octane tune:

The tuned 2.3 has very similar torque numbers throughout the powerband to the tuned Coyote (and blows away the stock 5.0) and has a higher peak number to boot. I don't have the desire to calculate the area under the curve, but they look to me like the 2.3 probably comes out slightly ahead.

  The 4 cylinder is down on hp, but I chalk most of that up to the difference in displacement, and the EcoBoost looks like it actually produces more hp than the Coyote until you get about 4600rpm and higher.

The E-rod LS is a terrific package, and if you need full emissions compliance and a warranty then it's probably the answer for now but I think the small displacement crowd is gaining all the time, and is definitely a viable option for your average GRMer.

Zzw30 chassis mr2 with a boosted 2zzge is the answer, 400 horse is not hard to do reliably and neither is 2000lbs wet. If by package, we mean the whole car......

D2W said:

Driven5 said:

Regarding DOHC I4 (1.8L) vs OHV V8 (6.2L) physical size:

For 400+hp, I know which I'd rather have.  The problem with I4 size is that they still need a place to hang the intake manifold, exhaust manifold, and starter/accessories that is almost entirely outside the envelope of the engine itself.  The V8 shape largely allows these things to be placed within its recesses.  Not to mention that OHV architecture is naturally much more physically compact than OHC, even if at the expense of some (overrated) volumetric efficiency.  The only dimensional advantage I can think of for a turbocharged DOHC V6 vs a pushrod V8 is in the length department.

Wow, that's a very telling photo. I wonder what the true weight difference is between those two engines fully loaded.

That photo is a little bit deceptive though since the 4 cylinder has a full accessory drive/coolant hoses/etc and the LS is just a long block. Removing the accessories from that 4 cyl would be a more fair comparison.

The accessories aren't any wider than intake or exhaust manifolds on the Miata engine. 

And I doubt they are much wider on the LSx, so it's still a good visual representation.

Depends on the accessory package you install. The CTS-V one we use doesn't increase the width or height of the motor. The coolant lines stay inside that height and width as well, so it's a very legitimate comparison.

The four cylinder is sitting lower in the picture, so the difference in height between the two engines is not as large as it appears.

Couldn't find a BP model, but this is a Saturn LL0 and a LS overlayed

STM317 said:

In reply to Keith Tanner :

That's pretty typical, and I won't claim that it's not the easiest option, especially if you're starting with a 4 cylinder that didn't come from the factory with a turbo. As you said, LS is the answer for engine swaps for a reason. But I think it's occurring less frequently all the time as manufacturers improve turbo tech and tuning. If you start with a modern 4 cyl that comes from the factory with a turbo, you can get better numbers than some v8s with minimal upgrades.

Modern is the key here, because that Miata engine DID come from the factory with a turbo - both the 1.6 and 1.8 versions did. GRM seems to take about 15 years before an engine becomes a viable option for swaps (as opposed to tuning a car that already came with said engine). So we're not in the modern turbo era yet.

We're dealing with a much smaller displacement differential with the 2.3 vs 5.0. Good examples, though. And again, you definitely want to look at the shape of the graph as opposed to just peak numbers - which was the point of my original post, followed by reasons. With the two Ford engines, there would be a definite difference in feel based on the shape of those torque curves.

Bobzilla said:

In reply to yupididit :

incorrect. ThetaII in the Gen Coupay is same block. But it won't be cheap because they used cheap internals.

Actually, you're incorrect.

"Similar" block but not as well made. But, is it the same bolt pattern? Dont think so. And the Gen coupe 2.0 6spd manual trans is can hardly handle the power it already has. 

I know that the ford guys had a 200hp version of the 1.0 ecoboost

Just to answer the title question with no other consideration is probably money. A more exotic small boosted race engine but then longevity if not reliability goes down and cost goes up. It's not fair to compare a new Porsche turbo because I mean it's a Porsche. It has very high end technically advanced parts and turbos. Quite expensive to try and replicate that on your turbo 4 and it's still a flat 6 which isn't exactly small is it?

The LSx engine is like the absolute epitome of power band. A turbo 4 cylinder can make 400 hp in its own right but you have to be at the top of your racing game keeping it above 6000 rpm all the time to be quick. The LS1 does not care, it will Pull you back into the seat practically in 6th gear at 1500 rpm. Not to mention 400+ hp out of the box with 100k+ mile reliability like a regular car warranty.

Trackmouse said:

In reply to JBasham :

Dude, 75-100 lbs is YUGE off the nose of a car. I moved a 40lb battery to the passenger rear footwell and it was significant, yo!

Thanks for the moral support, but unfortunately most of the weight difference stems from the two transmissions, which is pretty much low down and central on the car.

To the good Mr. Tanner's point about the shape of the torque curve -- I am tracking an E36 this summer that I have swapped to a Ford 302/5.0 H.O. with a mild cam and intake.  All-in max horsepower arrives about the same place on the rev band and about the same quantity.  But the Ford gets there with about 300 foot-pounds all along the way vs. about 200 for the M3 motor, and it makes the car a different experience.  (Add a simple top end kit to the Ford, and the horsepower also steps up to the 100+ differential over the M3 figures.)

z31maniac said:

oldopelguy said:

Ecoboost v6

 

How does a twin turbo V6 = light and/or compact?

An all aluminum v-6 has to weigh less and be more compact than the v-8s being pushed in the thread, doesn't it?  And since the engine makes 400 hp in stock form, without any weird tune or whatnot, it's going to be more reliable than something tweaked to the edge of it's life.  I guess I put the emphasis on the reliable part and not on the lightest and smallest.

oldopelguy said:

An all aluminum v-6 has to weigh less and be more compact than the v-8s being pushed in the thread, doesn't it?

You'd think so, wouldn't you?  Sadly, DOHC adds a lot of physical size over OHV/pushrods.  The only dimension necessarily smaller is the length.  And while the all-aluminum DOHC V6's are generally lighter than even the all-aluminum block pushrod V8's, it's not by as much as you'd expect,  Turbos, and their associated extra plumbing, also cut into that weight difference.

http://www.synergypower.co.nz

If I could afford one and didn't mind the service intervals, I would absolutely have one... the 2.4L V8 is the perfect track motor for the FR-S and bolts right to stock transmission with adapter plate. Drops a lot of weight and actually lowers the CG even more over the stock boxer motor...

https://youtu.be/gjTF2AduoXg

All else being equal - a V6 will be slightly shorter (by whatever the cylinder spacing is), slightly narrower and taller than a V8 of equivalent technology. That's assuming DOHC vs DOHC or OHC vs OHC, aluminum vs aluminum, etc. That's also assuming a 90 degree V8 vs a 60 degree V6, as would be expected. It will not be 3/4 the weight of the V8 as both engines will still need accessories and oil pumps, but the V6 should be lighter to some extent.

In reality, there's one very popular modern OHC V8 and a bunch of modern DOHC V6s, which skews things a bit.

In reply to Vracer111 :

Kawasaki version of the Busa V8, nice

These threads should say in  the OP,  "other than the LSx". It's literally The Answer in regards to "what motor can....?".  

JBasham said:

Trackmouse said:

In reply to JBasham :

Dude, 75-100 lbs is YUGE off the nose of a car. I moved a 40lb battery to the passenger rear footwell and it was significant, yo!

Thanks for the moral support, but unfortunately most of the weight difference stems from the two transmissions, which is pretty much low down and central on the car.

To the good Mr. Tanner's point about the shape of the torque curve -- I am tracking an E36 this summer that I have swapped to a Ford 302/5.0 H.O. with a mild cam and intake.  All-in max horsepower arrives about the same place on the rev band and about the same quantity.  But the Ford gets there with about 300 foot-pounds all along the way vs. about 200 for the M3 motor, and it makes the car a different experience.  (Add a simple top end kit to the Ford, and the horsepower also steps up to the 100+ differential over the M3 figures.)

Did you use the e36v8 guys simple kit with the forward facing headers or? I have heard this is a somewhat simple swap (I know likely different thread material)

This is a good read.  I haven't picked an engine for the Amazon yet (at least, not one I'm committed to...).  I'm limited to a I4 because the engine bay is short and I refuse to shorten control arms, so there are some good options here.  I don't need 400hp, but who said anything about need?

oldopelguy said:

z31maniac said:

oldopelguy said:

Ecoboost v6

 

How does a twin turbo V6 = light and/or compact?

An all aluminum v-6 has to weigh less and be more compact than the v-8s being pushed in the thread, doesn't it?  And since the engine makes 400 hp in stock form, without any weird tune or whatnot, it's going to be more reliable than something tweaked to the edge of it's life.  I guess I put the emphasis on the reliable part and not on the lightest and smallest.

As mentioned below your post, add in the two turbos, water/oil lines to it, the charge piping and the intercooler, etc. I suspect there probably isn't much of a weight difference..........while also adding many more failure points vs a naturally aspirated V8.

How about the latest EJ25 from the STi? The new version with the better pistons should not have much trouble making 400 reliable HP. It would be the shortest in both height and length, but probably the widest. It's also a very light engine. 

Sometimes it's easiest to run up the middle.

A VQ30/35/37 weighs about 330 lbs and makes 250-340 hp stock. Add five pounds of plumbing and a ten-pound nitrous oxide tank and you'll hit the power target.

I would have sworn the VQ was heavier than that.

It's not that heavy but it is very wide and low on torque. You'll be around 300 WHP and 250 Ft' LB. Without forced induction, you'll never be over 400 whp and you'll be wider and taller than the LS series. 

My g37 dynoed at 281 WHP and 250 TQ stock. My LS3 miata with a stock long block and factory intake was over 400 whp from 4300 RPM on. It just has swap headers and and a nice exhaust. This is on the same Dyno on the same day so pretty like for like comparison.

This is still no contest. 

Its looking like the LS is again the winner.

Of all the combinations I like the 4.8 crank LS2.  little screamer.