-
Help Support Hardline Crawlers :
Samurai engine decision
- Thread starter MarcW
- Start date
SysWillys said:Just get a early 90's RX7 Twin Turbo Wenkel and be done with it already....Not enough torque to break the Yota axles but plenty of power (300+)....PLUS you can set it in there with out a cherry picker.....:redneck:
They have no torque, and are HOT. Plus they are a 2 stroke, so they dont last.
How about a 22re, w56 and a 5.0 geared toy case. Driveline issues solved.
Blueleader
Well-Known Member
Any chance you could fit a Subaru motor in there? A 2.5 out of an STI would be sweet! Even a 2.5 out of an older RS would be pretty cool. I would think a flat 4 would keep your center of gravity a little lower. Adapting it to a usable tranny might be tough, though.
Subie motor is too wide, the valve covers hit both sides of the inner fender wells, and then your steering is f'd.
For 4cyl.
Suzuki 1.6 for an easy swap. 2.0 for more power. If you want a reliable swap daily driver type rig, those would be my choice.
Moto261 has a cool idea with the Ecotec, lightweight, powerful and gonna get real plentiful in the wrecking yards here pretty quick as GM continues to use them in their little cars.
Ford 2.3, great engine, but is way too heavy, as much as some V6s.
For V6
A 60 deg engine is far easier to fit in a Sami engine bay than a 90 deg engine. Look toward the 2.8, 2.9, 4.0 Ford V-6s. Not too heavy, 60 deg block and real plentiful in the wrecking yards. Power ratings here.
For a 90 deg V6, how about the Ford 3.0, 3.2 Duratec. All aluminum and excellent power to weight ratio. HP levels start at 200 hp up to 240 hp. The sand buggy guys are really loving these.
For 4cyl.
Suzuki 1.6 for an easy swap. 2.0 for more power. If you want a reliable swap daily driver type rig, those would be my choice.
Moto261 has a cool idea with the Ecotec, lightweight, powerful and gonna get real plentiful in the wrecking yards here pretty quick as GM continues to use them in their little cars.
Ford 2.3, great engine, but is way too heavy, as much as some V6s.
For V6
A 60 deg engine is far easier to fit in a Sami engine bay than a 90 deg engine. Look toward the 2.8, 2.9, 4.0 Ford V-6s. Not too heavy, 60 deg block and real plentiful in the wrecking yards. Power ratings here.
For a 90 deg V6, how about the Ford 3.0, 3.2 Duratec. All aluminum and excellent power to weight ratio. HP levels start at 200 hp up to 240 hp. The sand buggy guys are really loving these.
Bunk said:
I know...I was just thinkin of smeething rediculous to throw out to Marcs request......Somethin as quick as his 4.0 Cherokee..Except in Sami clothing
Although......GM put out a 240HP supercharged 3800 V6 in the Pontiacs for a while? :stirpot: They also put out a turbo'd 4.3 V6 in teh Syclone/Typhoon?? :stirpot:
stompinjab1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2006
- Messages
- 384
moto261 said:
You are flamed. You get twice the hp and torque. How is that not worth the 100 or so pounds. I don't care how much gear you put behind a 1.3 or 1.6 it's still not enough motor.
moto261 said:
In your comp buggy that you had , I think it was way under powered. My old blue sami had more power than that and it was a 20r w56 4.7 to 1 and 5.29s. I dont beleive that the 1.6 has more torque and hp than a 2.4 liter toyota.
All bs aside. Lets realize this is going in a rig thats very under construction, need lockers/gears in the axles, Full suspension reworking, drivelines and major tube work. Throwing a 6 grand engine at it wont get him anywhere. i say let the true suzi guru's work it so it will be done and wheeling before my buggy does a burnout.
thatz fine but that was geared way different then the buggy yea it had 2 cases but 4.10 in the diffs and the last time we went wheeling it was low on tranny fluid (more like empty) so i dont see how you can say that it was under powered do to the gearing isues (and the way it was set up it had lots of balls) just watch some video
Brian H said:
PORTER
Well-Known Member
Dan, dont take this the wrong way. But after wheeling with you that day I can say without a shadow of a dought your rig was a total dog. Even with 2 cases, this is your typical 4 cylinder. They make no power, so you have to gear them to all hell to make them wheelable especially when bound up in the rocks. I had a 1.6, dual cases with all the goodies, and yes it was a dog. Remember guys there is no replacement for displacement. Again Dan, your rig worked good, your a good driver, but it definately needed more HP/Torque.moto261 said:
stompinjab1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2006
- Messages
- 384
moto261 said:
Not in my own stuff but I did drive the crap out of Porters 1.6 dual cases 4.7 5.29 gears 36s and it had NO! and I mean NO! wheel speed or torque. Yet my old sami with duals 4.7 4.38 gears and 40s would hang with my buddys in there v6 and v8 rigs.
will be working on that but still going to run a 4 banger :flipoff:
PORTER said:Dan, dont take this the wrong way. But after wheeling with you that day I can say without a shadow of a dought your rig was a total dog. Even with 2 cases, this is your typical 4 cylinder. They make no power, so you have to gear them to all hell to make them wheelable especially when bound up in the rocks. I had a 1.6, dual cases with all the goodies, and yes it was a dog. Remember guys there is no replacement for displacement. Again Dan, your rig worked good, your a good driver, but it definately needed more HP/Torque.
