Swank Force One wrote: Kia Sportage 2.0 dohc motor with pretty much the same transmissions. The Sportage trans might even handle it.
Tell me more about getting 350WHP from a sportage, I've been looking at building a 12.00 second or better crapcan drag car.
Please build a Sportage!
It'd really just be clutch, megasquirt, fuel, turbo. I wouldnt touch the motor for 350whp.
Swank Force One wrote: Please build a Sportage! It'd really just be clutch, megasquirt, fuel, turbo. I wouldnt touch the motor for 350whp.
that's AMAZING!
Imagine back in the day being able to take a moderate small block 200ish HP car and making it double the HP without changing any hard parts. Back in those days, double the stock output was full-on-high-idle-overheat-in-traffic stuff. Amazing how far we've come.
How about a b21ft or b23ft? Keep a tight rein on the tuning and run a stupid amount of boost.
You won't quite be at 350, but a peripheral port rotary can put out more than 300 and takes a hole saw, some JB weld and a carb.
Lot lighter than the rest of the stuff proposed and rotary engines win Lemons.
DaveEstey wrote: You won't quite be at 350, but a peripheral port rotary can put out more than 300 and takes a hole saw, some JB weld and a carb. Lot lighter than the rest of the stuff proposed and rotary engines win Lemons.
I was hoping someone would chime in with a rotary recipe.
Tell me more, what power level, etc...
300hp is loud.
My car is quiet but that's limiting my power a lot. I'm generally good with that since the car is a two seat traction problem. And I quit playing with peripheral ports because the fabrication to fun ratio wasn't where I wanted to be. Thus the bridge port engine(s). Less porting work, and you can bolt things on instead of enigneering and fabricating every little thing.
When I say engineering, I mean things like where to put the injectors, how best to make an airbox, what throttle body to use, etc. With the bridge, I just used the stock injector location and rail, grabbed a Holley manifold, used an old carb as a throttle body, and went driving.
But it's nowhere near 300hp, or 300whp, or 350whp, or whatever number.
When I WAS playing with peripheral ports, I went to a street port again and gained power. Exhaust is critical and an exhaust that the engine likes is not exactly an exhaust that anything else likes, for example the police, the track management, your ability to hear.
As far as the wrong direction spinning driveshaft on the Audi:
Turn the stick axle upside down. Boom done.
wvumtnbkr wrote: As far as the wrong direction spinning driveshaft on the Audi: Turn the stick axle upside down. Boom done.
I hope you aren't serious.
moparman76_69 wrote:wvumtnbkr wrote: As far as the wrong direction spinning driveshaft on the Audi: Turn the stick axle upside down. Boom done.I hope you aren't serious.
Well, a front axle from a 4WD would work just fine.
I think I am vetoeing the Audi thing, though. Sounds like the 2.4 won't make enough easily enough and the rotary will be too tame without boost, which is bad news. So we're back to a Lima, a F2T or the Kia thing or whatever a 3TC is? That's all?
Duratec 2.0/2.3L.
As long as you stay "conservative" on the tune, it will live. Just like using a NA Lima 2.3 in turbocharged form. Keep the timing light and overfueled and it will live just fine. Turn the wick up, run better fuel.
Chrysler 2.4 will make it too. Swap in the SRT4, rods and pistons, no need to rebalance either. Work on the bowls in the heads and a cam upgrade. Should be easy to make 350hp.
Mercruiser 3.7L? 
tuna55 wrote:moparman76_69 wrote:Well, a front axle from a 4WD would work just fine. I think I am vetoeing the Audi thing, though. Sounds like the 2.4 won't make enough easily enough and the rotary will be too tame without boost, which is bad news. So we're back to a Lima, a F2T or the Kia thing or whatever a 3TC is? That's all?wvumtnbkr wrote: As far as the wrong direction spinning driveshaft on the Audi: Turn the stick axle upside down. Boom done.I hope you aren't serious.
There's quite a few Toyota motors that will do it, but the problem is that almost all toyota 4 cylinders made in the last two decades are FWD, and i haven't really investigated RWD transmission use on them.
The real problem is the "light" requirement/want. Most of the motors we're talking about that will do it, will do it because they're stupidly overbuilt and bomb-proof. That ain't light. 
Almost any dual cam honda motor will do it, but FWD.
The Toyota 2zzge will do it, but FWD.
The Mitsubishi 4g63T will do it EASILY, but FWD.
It's very strange to me that Mazda of all companies has the most options.
http://speedwhore.weebly.com/4g63-rwd-conversion.html do it
Ranger50 wrote: Mercruiser 3.7L?
Yes I like this idea and have researched it before, but I am not sure. Parts are hard to come by (the ones that aren't just a 460) - and not a lot is known about the crank's longevity and RPM range. Neat though, I'll keep it in mind.
1.5 Alpha with a very large turbo? I'ts very small, compact and not heavy. You'll need megasquirt for sure. The engine is retard chimp strong and is relatively low compression stock. Puerto Rican's have been making them 600+whp for a while for drag use.
Will it make 350whp in stock form? (I genuinely don't know.)
Will it make 350whp in stock form? (I genuinely don't know.)
Anyways... here's some F2T goodness. Stock 200k mile motor, only a 2.5" downpipe, megasquirt, T4 50trim pushing a bunch of boost. I'd expect even more power doing a similar setup but with a Holset HX35 instead, 3" downpipe, and some B2000 valve springs. (I'd expect massive power gains with the valve springs up top)
And the bore of mndsm's 235k mile abused and disgusting F2T Challenge motor.
My 205k mile original unopened motor propelling my twice totaled 205k mile MX6 GT from 30-100mph in 8 seconds on low boost. (Only 14psi, using a MKiii Supra CT26) We're talking LESS than 300whp in this video. I can tell you that the car turns downright horrifying in the 22-24psi area. 2600lb car, almost 300lbs between driver and passenger in the video.
http://youtu.be/i8Pgea50SsE
Swank Force One wrote: (I'd expect massive power gains with the valve springs up top)
Yeah dude, last time I saw a graph like that it was because of a crappy carb. When the carb was swapped, the curve kept climbing to 7k and it made 70hp more than it did at 5k. That graph falls off FAST leading me to agree with your valvespring theory. Exhaust maybe, too. OK, this is hard to overlook. nearly 500 ft lbs and easily past 350 hp. I am not sure I like the idea of B2000 springs, though, anything aftermarket?
tuna55 wrote:Swank Force One wrote: (I'd expect massive power gains with the valve springs up top)Yeah dude, last time I saw a graph like that it was because of a crappy carb. When the carb was swapped, the curve kept climbing to 7k and it made 70hp more than it did at 5k. That graph falls off FAST leading me to agree with your valvespring theory. Exhaust maybe, too. OK, this is hard to overlook. nearly 500 ft lbs and easily past 350 hp. I am not sure I like the idea of B2000 springs, though, anything aftermarket?
The B2000 valve springs are dual springs, and pretty much free from a junkyard.
Aftermarket springs come from Australia and are about $150. On a Challenge budget, i'd absolutely just use the B2000 springs. Get 'em new from Rockauto if used springs bug you, you only need 12.
And yes... nearly 500ftlbs at 3800rpms. 
(BTW, added more stuff to my previous post.)
In reply to Swank Force One: Dude, do you have to 'win' with every thread about this?
I'm going to change my signature to the same as yours.
Don't change the signature until you've tried it.
tuna55 wrote: That's sounds neat, too. Are the tranny and bell hard to come by?
MA5s run about $300-$400 for a used one in good shape. Third-gen Supra guys like them because they can replace an R154, which are getting scarce and expensive. Aside from that, no one seems to have stumbled on to the fact that they are really tough and really versatile.
The Canyon/Colorado and Solstice/Sky variants differ in shifter location (trucks have it further back) and gear ratios (the roadsters have a slightly closer spread between 3-4). Other than that, they're the same.
Good God, I think that I may have to start looking for an F2 motor. You guys are really making my whole SHO motor look like a silly idea. They are great motors but weigh twice what these puppies do and are freaking HUGE. I will TRY to put it in my engine bay but if it doesn't slide right in then I am switching to a Mazda (or Dodge if psteav has any say) for boosty good time fun!
(I am SHOCKED by the dyno above. E36 M3 Ben, that looks like a damn big block.)
Also, I have a w58 sitting on the garage floor and a Jeep Bell Housing (AX15, R154, etc...) that I was planning on using in my 4runner for a Buick 3800 swap if anyone needs one or the other. Sadly, these two won't mate up or I would be using them to put something together.
Is the F2 really a decent substitute for an FT2? FT2 comes to the party with nearly a point less compression, I think the exhaust valves are Inconel or some other wonder-metal, aren't the pistons forged with oil squirters? They use the same camshaft so I'm sure that a purpose ground turbo cam would be nice, although it's hard to argue with the torque curve on an F2T.
These things get pretty respectable gas mileage as well! And they rev like they don't like revving...
Another motor that should do this thing pretty decently on the cheap would be a KA24 + turbo, yes?
You'll need to log in to post.
