I'm wanting to do an engine swap in my chevette. I know alot of people have had or know somebody who's had a V6 chevette. The chevette motor is 300lbs and the 60*V6s aren't much more. I'll probably do a 3400 or a 2.9 wth 3400 heads. My question is can they still handel as good with a V6? I wouldn't think they would be longer so it doesn't seem like handeling would be worse.
mrdontplay wrote: My question is can they still handel as good with a V6?
Handling was never really the Chevettes strong point. With more HP you may gain the ability to "steer with the throttle"
I use chevette rack and spindels, brakes, ect on my dwarf car.
You need to tweek the geometery of stock but you should be able to make it work great.
check the bumpsteer!
44dwarf
Plan ahead. Get the engine and other heavy stuff as far back as possible, but be careful. Some mods to get the engine back could bump you into an AX class you might not want to be in, assuming that's what your ultimate plans are.
How about the 3800? More snap than the 60 degree motors and forced induction is an easy junkyard upgrade. The 1.6 Chevette motor is supposed to weigh 300 pounds, the 60 degree motors 350 pounds and the N/A 3800 Series II 392 pounds. The Series II is smaller than the Series I.
chevette is SLA front and solid rear, so you could call it a baby camaro, and every tuning method that works on a camaro suspension will work on a chevette. note i said method, not part.
Jensenman wrote: Plan ahead. Get the engine and other heavy stuff as far back as possible, but be careful. Some mods to get the engine back could bump you into an AX class you might not want to be in, assuming that's what your ultimate plans are. How about the 3800? More snap than the 60 degree motors and forced induction is an easy junkyard upgrade. The 1.6 Chevette motor is supposed to weigh 300 pounds, the 60 degree motors 350 pounds and the N/A 3800 Series II 392 pounds. The Series II is smaller than the Series I.
I'm more convered with just having fun that being faster around the course than other cars in my class. I thought about the 3800 but it's a 90* V6 so you have to modify the steering column.
I guess the question I should have asked is how will the V6 affect the weight distribution.
If the engine is far enough back, not much at all and in fact it can actually help. IIRC the front cylinder of the stock 1.6 hangs past the centerline of the front axle. On the V6, you'll now have roughly 2 cylinders with all the cast iron etc past that point meaning a more nose heavy distribution unless you take steps to move the engine further back. Of course, you can add ballast to the rear to level it out but that's a job best done with the car on a set of corner scales. Plus, some sanctioning bodies limit the amount and placement of ballast. This may or may not be important but it's something to consider.
Also, putting weight outside of the wheelbase can drastically alter the polar moment of inertia. Think of it like this: if you put a heavy engine over the front axle and then put an offsetting amount of ballast hanging out past the rear axle, this additional weight at both ends far from the center of the car will tend to make it spin out much more easily. Avoiding that by keeping weight within the wheelbase is called 'mass centralization' and it's as important in day to day driving as it is in high performance driving.
Here's something else to keep in mind: in just about every sanctioning body, cutting or denting the the firewall for engine clearance will move you into a class you may not want to be in. Example: in SCCA sticking the V6 in there without modifying the firewall should put you in SM (Street Modified) or Prepared (not Street Prepared). BTW, Prepared's rules allow for a LOT of modifications to the suspension etc.
If you cut the firewall, you have just moved your car to Modified and that's a whole different kettle of fish, like it includes the words 'suspension is free'. That means get really creative or bust out the wallet if you want to be competitive! In drag racing, I believe that moves you into the Altered class, a big money class! Again, this may not be important to you but it's something to consider before putting a lot of effort into it.
Also, about the 3800: if it interferes with the steering column maybe you can scoot the engine to the right an inch or two to clear. The beauty of this: doing so helps offset the drivers' weight. 
Just throwing this out there: Suzuki H25A or H27A All Aluminum V6. Found in the Grand Vitara, and First generation XL-7. 2.5 or 2.7L, All aluminum, DOHC 60 Degree. Weighs 315 lbs with a conversion kit to fit into an P51 Replica.
You'd save a bunch of weight over either GM V6, as well as move the weight back vs the stock 1.6L
The 2.7L Also puts out 180 hp and 180 ft-lbs of torque, while saving a chunk of weight. I don't know how much the trans weighs, but they did have a 6 speed manual and a slushbox on the Grand Vitaras.
Is this Grand Vitara motor found in the Chevy Tracker as well? If yes, then I think the Chevette would still qualify for Street Mod?
Edit: yes, the 2002 Tracker LT 2wd came with the 2.5L V6 but it appears that the Tracker V6 only came w/ an automatic.
I'm looking for something with more aftermarket support but if it wsn't for that the suzuki engine sounds like a good candidate
Hmmm...reading the rules gets aggravating....But they say NOTHING on the transmission, just the engine block. The H27A is, as far as I am aware, just a bored out 2.5L since they share the same stroke. I am curious to know if the head casting are different, and I am willing to guess that the Cams in the 2.7L are different.
Remember the old 2.8L 60* V6 can now be had as large a 3.9L as well.
Has anyone on here actually owned or driven a V6 chevette?
no, but I've driven a 2.7 vitara with a stick shift
I was pleasantly surprised.
I have owned a 2.8L Chevette and driven a 4.3L one. The 1979 2.8L had a complete OEM 1984 Camaro auto drivetrain in it with 13x6/13x8 wheels and BFGs. It was blisteringly fast and got mid 20's with a stupid 20 year old driving it.
The 4.3L car was a 1987 sedan with a stick out of an S10 and it wasn't set up very well. It would just anihilate the stock 155/80r13 tires...
Any thoughts on the old Lumina Z34 engine? It's DOHC and aluminum heads. Or the LX5 V6 from an 1999-2002 Intrigue or 2001-2002 Aurora, its based on the Olds Aurora V8 but wiki says they did more engineering than just lopping off two cylinders. Drive train out of a non V-model CTS with a 5 speed and V6 (rare combo)? And the V6 out of a Cadillac Catera, no one seems to care about that engine? MMmmm sexy dohc noises....
the dohc in the z34 is probably wider than you'd want. They also leak like a mofo. I'm personally not a fan. Can't tell you a lot about the shortstar, did you research tranny options there? I can't think of any. I also can't tell you about the CTS V6 except that the 5sp is a Getrag 260 like a BMW e30 (but with a different bell housing pattern obviously), but I can tell you the Catera 3.0 is a total pile of crap in every way.
start with a non vvt 3500. (04-05) they are as cheap as $300.makes as much hp as its 90* counterparts + the 3.4 DOHC, weighs 330 lbs minus alternator and ps pump. we ran one stock on a MPFI computr and it runs consistant 14.2's in a 3 speed automatic 3100 lb beretta. plus it shares dimensions with various sbc's so aftermarket rotating assembly bits are numerous.
<--60*v6 expert
John Brown wrote: I have owned a 2.8L Chevette and driven a 4.3L one. The 1979 2.8L had a complete OEM 1984 Camaro auto drivetrain in it with 13x6/13x8 wheels and BFGs. It was blisteringly fast and got mid 20's with a stupid 20 year old driving it. The 4.3L car was a 1987 sedan with a stick out of an S10 and it wasn't set up very well. It would just anihilate the stock 155/80r13 tires...
How did the 2.8 affect weight distribution???
Beerguy wrote: start with a non vvt 3500. (04-05) they are as cheap as $300.makes as much hp as its 90* counterparts + the 3.4 DOHC, weighs 330 lbs minus alternator and ps pump. we ran one stock on a MPFI computr and it runs consistant 14.2's in a 3 speed automatic 3100 lb beretta. plus it shares dimensions with various sbc's so aftermarket rotating assembly bits are numerous. <--60*v6 expert
Where are you scoring 3500s for $300? Sign me up for that list!
Bryce
Who needs aftermarket when you could ghetto fab on a turbo? :D
I just found someone how did a 2.7L swap into his Grand Vitara....and threw a turbo on it. He lists no mods to the internals (Pistols, rods, crank, or cams)...and he makes 413hp (according to his unverified claim)
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/338504/4
Hmmm.....tempted to ask him about that thing...
mrdontplay wrote:John Brown wrote: I have owned a 2.8L Chevette and driven a 4.3L one. The 1979 2.8L had a complete OEM 1984 Camaro auto drivetrain in it with 13x6/13x8 wheels and BFGs. It was blisteringly fast and got mid 20's with a stupid 20 year old driving it. The 4.3L car was a 1987 sedan with a stick out of an S10 and it wasn't set up very well. It would just anihilate the stock 155/80r13 tires...How did the 2.8 affect weight distribution???
When I had this car I was a drag guy and could care less about turning, so my intention was to build a car that spun the tires until the cows come home. Considering that the Chevette was an understeering pig to begin with it did not greatly affect that issue.
Remember that even if it the V6 is heavier it is shorter in both length and height (wider though). It effectively puts more mass lower and farther back in the chassis.
There was a guy that came out to our autocrosses in the mid '80s with an early ('77 or so) Chevette with a V6. Lowered, with widened steel wheels and autocross tires. All I remember was that it was blisteringly fast around the course.
It was essentially this car (same beige color) blacked out trim, lowerd over wide black steel wheels, and fast.
Too bad we didn't get teh UK versions to build from:
I pan on building an HSR replica some day...
The parts are available but I can't afford the shipping.
I know you didn't ask, but what about the 4 cylinder GM mini-trucks? An Ecotec 2.2 & a 5 speed manual trans shouldn't be a hard combo to find, right? I don't know how much power you're looking for but this seems like an easier fit than some of the other ideas here.
You'll need to log in to post.
