Modern 4 cylinder 4wd powertrains

[AgitatedPancake]

I didn't want to muck up the Ultimate 4400 thread or the v6 thread, but I'm curious about modern 4 cylinder engine options and their reputation. In particular, I'm curious about the true 4wd longitudinal configs, where you could take the entire powertrain and drop it into a non racecar project without transmission or transfer case adapters. Let's call "modern", stuff with at least port injection, but not necessarily direct injection (not opposed either).

Off the top of my head there are (edited list for more context):

Toyota - Tacoma, 4runner
2.7 2TR and 3RZ

Chevy - Colorado/Canyon, AWD Caddilac
Ecotec LTG - 2.0 Turbo in AWD/RWD caddy and camaro
Ecotec LCV - 2.5 NA from Canyon/Colorado
Atlas 4 cyl?

Ford - Ranger/Bronco
2.0 Ecoboost - General specs - Ford 2.0L Ecoboost Specs, Features, Performance & Reviews | Ford Component Sales LLC
2.3 Ecoboost - General specs + brochure - Ford 2.3L Ecoboost Specs, Features, Performance & Reviews | Ford Component Sales LLC
2.5 (Duratec?) - General specs + brochure - Ford 2.5L I-4 Specs, Features, Performance & Reviews | Ford Component Sales LLC
Also - https://www.ford.co.uk/content/dam/...ication-details-data-sheets/25-duratec-np.pdf



1) What else is there, I know I'm missing a good few
2) If you have experience with one of the platforms, what are your thoughts?
3) How good are the transmissions that come paired with them?
4) Availability/price, what can you get your hands on conveniently and a reasonable price?
5) How easy is it to standalone them?
6) I assume most transfer cases are two speed, are any of them fancy like having a limited slip AWD mode?
7) Does the oiling work at all angles?

At some point I have a build in mind with the idea to take a complete powertrain (engine, transmission, tcase) and just drop the whole thing in as one convenient package. Not a moon buggy that needs a hyper compact setup, and not a race car that needs absurd power, convenience is a high priority. Capable of 250-350hp on the stock long block ideally, but not necessary.




Just for added context, the V6 thread:

What's the Most Popular V6 Engine for Light Weight Crawlers Currently?

And the ultimate 4400 thread which dabbles on engines of various sizes throughout (posts around 2,500-2,800 have some engine talk sprinkled in)

Future of KOH 4400 chassis/car development?

And here's a good 4 cylinder thread I forgot about before starting this one, oops!

Modern 4 cylinder swap options

 

[IH Man]

If you’re looking for a 4 cylinder that makes 250-350hp, that’s going to really narrow down your options. Can’t think of any at all.

In V6 you’ll have options, but you’ll have to go pretty new.

Only T- case I can think of available in AWD mode is some of the late 90’s early 2k Oldsmobile Bravada’s. I don’t remember which NP case they had but AWD was an option. So was whatever was in the 90’s Astro vans in AWD. Might have been the same t-case.

Know what would be a good setup? A power train from a 20-teen Canyon/Colorado with the I4 Duramax. Only 181hp but 369lb-ft of torque.

 

[PAE]

4BT is one of my favorites, mainly as its mechanical injection, choice for EMP resistance.


As I understand it 4bt/6bt use an SAE bellhousing.

 

[Sluggy]

The gm ecotechs are big with lots of people

 

[AgitatedPancake]

If you’re looking for a 4 cylinder that makes 250-350hp, that’s going to really narrow down your options. Can’t think of any at all.

In V6 you’ll have options, but you’ll have to go pretty new.

Only T- case I can think of available in AWD mode is some of the late 90’s early 2k Oldsmobile Bravada’s. I don’t remember which NP case they had but AWD was an option. So was whatever was in the 90’s Astro vans in AWD. Might have been the same t-case.

Know what would be a good setup? A power train from a 20-teen Canyon/Colorado with the I4 Duramax. Only 181hp but 369lb-ft of torque.

The 250-350 is just a ballpark that the platform is good for with a factory long block (say adding boost or something along those lines, without having to open the engine up), so its factory form being around 200 would be completely acceptable if the platform is solid.

I've looked at V6s time and time again, but most of them just don't provide enough benefit. Their packaging requirements are closer to that of a V8 than an I4, and they don't usually seem to weigh all that much less than their V8 counterparts. There are definitely some exceptions, but I4s are appealing in ways that V6s can't be.

The NP242 tcases from years past are appealing for having both an open center diff option and a locked center diff option, but nowadays I know some fancy cases have integrated torsen center differentials along with the locked option, which would be excellent.

I4 duramax wasn't something I had considered, what's the deal on those things?



Cool AWD transfer case thread:

All Wheel Drive Transfer Case Tech

 

[AgitatedPancake]

4BT is one of my favorites, mainly as its mechanical injection, choice for EMP resistance.

Those things are fawking massive, especially when looking at their power levels. Not worried about EMP resistance, I'll let my vehicles fry in an EMP event and deal with the reprecussions.

The gm ecotechs are big with lots of people

I've heard about ecotechs a good bit over the years, but genuinely know nothing about them. Were they available in longitudinal powertrains? How different are they than the Atlas platform?

 

[slow600]

tdi? low power out of the box but decent tq stock, lots of power adding options.

 

[Sluggy]

They came in the solstice and and the sky for rear wheel drive. They take boost pretty well also.

 

[Ghetto Fab.]

Are you also considering car platforms? I have liked the idea of using an LTG GM engine. Its part of the ecotec family. I believe Randy Slawson had a few buggies with them in it. Turbo 4cyl with close to 300hp output. I'm sure with some tuning you could get it there. Came in cadilac RWD and AWD models longitudinally mounted, also camaros of the era. Came with the 6L45 trans behind it, little brother to the 6l90 trans. Pretty sure the AWD drive 6l45 trans has a 32 spline output, so it should be able to mate to things. I'm guessing the AWD t-case in those cars does not have a low range.

 

[Bebop]

Toyota Tacoma - 2.7?

FYI, that's the 2TR.
It's a 3RZ with VVT and a plastic manifold. Great engine !

 

[Ghetto Fab.]

The 250-350 is just a ballpark that the platform is good for with a factory long block (say adding boost or something along those lines, without having to open the engine up), so its factory form being around 200 would be completely acceptable if the platform is solid.

I've looked at V6s time and time again, but most of them just don't provide enough benefit. Their packaging requirements are closer to that of a V8 than an I4, and they don't usually seem to weigh all that much less than their V8 counterparts. There are definitely some exceptions, but I4s are appealing in ways that V6s can't be.

Its funny but I look at V6 and I4 motors the same but opposite. After looking at many 4cyl options, it seems that the intake manifolds on the one side and the exhaust on the other take up almost as much real estate as a 60deg V6 while putting out less power and weighing about the same amount. This goes for transverse or longitudinal mounting.

 

[AgitatedPancake]

tdi? low power out of the box but decent tq stock, lots of power adding options.

Don't hate TDIs, but at least for now I'm looking for entire longitudinal powertrain combos that can be dropped in. I'm leaning pretty heavily toward KISS for this, minimizing custom stuff

They came in the solstice and and the sky for rear wheel drive. They take boost pretty well also.

Hmm. the ideal takeout powertrain would have a tcase bolted on, but in the worst case - is the bellhousing pattern common?

Are you also considering car platforms? I have liked the idea of using an LTG GM engine. Its part of the ecotec family. I believe Randy Slawson had a few buggies with them in it. Turbo 4cyl with close to 300hp output. I'm sure with some tuning you could get it there. Came in cadilac RWD and AWD models longitudinally mounted, also camaros of the era. Came with the 6L45 trans behind it, little brother to the 6l90 trans. Pretty sure the AWD drive 6l45 trans has a 32 spline output, so it should be able to mate to things. I'm guessing the AWD t-case in those cars does not have a low range.

Car platforms weren't on my mind, but I don't see why not if they're longitudinal. Single speed tcase would be a detriment, but if it's a standard pattern and spline tcase, swapping that wouldn't veer from the KISS method too far. I'm intrigued

 

[AgitatedPancake]

Its funny but I look at V6 and I4 motors the same but opposite. After looking at many 4cyl options, it seems that the intake manifolds on the one side and the exhaust on the other take up almost as much real estate as a 60deg V6 while putting out less power and weighing about the same amount. This goes for transverse or longitudinal mounting.

Factory manifolds can definitely be bulky in some oem applications but space can be freed up with aftermarket options. It also depends on how each person values space for a specific build concept, whether saving length with a V6 for a short nose is important, or running a narrow chassis. But it's like when I look at the 4.3 vs the LS, dimensionally the same in every way except ~4.4" shorter (IIRC, whatever the bore spacing is). And the weight difference isn't drastic. The 4.4" may make or break some builds, but I think for most, squeezing the extra room out of the engine compartment is pretty reasonable. Then I looked at the 3.5 ecoboost because they're interesting, damn thing literally weighs as much as an LS. Then DOHC makes the heads pretty wide, though is it a 60 degree? Maybe it's not all that wide. You do save some room on the snout like you do with the 4.3 but just overall, there are some cool V6 engines, just harder to justify versus the overused (lol) LS platform for weight/dimension reasons.

 

[Ghetto Fab.]

Factory manifolds can definitely be bulky in some oem applications but space can be freed up with aftermarket options. It also depends on how each person values space for a specific build concept, whether saving length with a V6 for a short nose is important, or running a narrow chassis. But it's like when I look at the 4.3 vs the LS, dimensionally the same in every way except ~4.4" shorter (IIRC, whatever the bore spacing is). And the weight difference isn't drastic. The 4.4" may make or break some builds, but I think for most, squeezing the extra room out of the engine compartment is pretty reasonable. Then I looked at the 3.5 ecoboost because they're interesting, damn thing literally weighs as much as an LS. Then DOHC makes the heads pretty wide, though is it a 60 degree? Maybe it's not all that wide. You do save some room on the snout like you do with the 4.3 but just overall, there are some cool V6 engines, just harder to justify versus the overused (lol) LS platform for weight/dimension reasons.

Yes, its interesting. I did notice that there is a big difference with longitudinal mount motors vs transverse motors space wise. Obviously cars are only so wide so mounting a motor transverse really pushes the packaging envelope, whereas conventionally mounted drivetrains seem to have acres of space.

Correct the 4.3 v6 doesn't save much in space other than length. Moving to a 60deg v6 such as the 3.9 GM motor should save some. I know the honda v6 is only 22" wide. Oddly enough I measured a jeep pentastar v6 at only 19.5" long and also 22" wide, which is surprising since it is also DOHC. I bring up the pentastar as it was designed as a FWD v6, but Chrysler used it in everything, even pickups, so it can be had with a 4wd drivetrain.

 

['84 Bronco II]

Ford Ranger/Bronco - Ecoboost 2.7?

I think you mean 2.3L, the 2.7L is a V6.

The Ford Duratec/Mazda L-series are pretty solid and light. Naturally aspirated, they are available in 2.0L, 2.3L and 2.5L ranging from ~135-175 HP. The only naturally aspirated, longitudinal factory 4x4 offering was the 2001-2011 Rangers and came paired with a Mazda M5OD-R1 manual and a 4R55E or 5R55E automatic depending on the year.

Forced induction they came in either 2.0L or 2.3L and range from 250-350 HP from the factory. The only longitudinal factory 4x4 applications are the 2.3L in the Rangers and Broncos that are rated at 270-275 HP (87 Octane, you get a bit more on E85/Premium). They come with either the 7 speed MT550 manual (Bronco only) or 10R80 automatic.

 

[RTH]

has nobody heard about the Chevy L3B?

https://www.prestonhood.com/research/chevrolet-2-7l-turbomax-high-output-engine/

there's more out there for links but this was just a quick one i found. be interesting to see what or if any rigs start being built with this engine.

 

[AgitatedPancake]

I think you mean 2.3L, the 2.7L is a V6.

The Ford Duratec/Mazda L-series are pretty solid and light. Naturally aspirated, they are available in 2.0L, 2.3L and 2.5L ranging from ~135-175 HP. The only naturally aspirated, longitudinal factory 4x4 offering was the 2001-2011 Rangers and came paired with a Mazda M5OD-R1 manual and a 4R55E or 5R55E automatic depending on the year.

Forced induction they came in either 2.0L or 2.3L and range from 250-350 HP from the factory. The only longitudinal factory 4x4 applications are the 2.3L in the Rangers and Broncos that are rated at 270-275 HP (87 Octane, you get a bit more on E85/Premium). They come with either the 7 speed MT550 manual (Bronco only) or 10R80 automatic.

Thanks for the correction, noted in the OP. Great notes all around too, the ford engines seem pretty cool. The crawler manual is pretty rad, though I bet those will be somewhat unobtanium for a while. How's the reputation on the 10 speed? Also how are those automatics in the older Duratecs reliability wise?

has nobody heard about the Chevy L3B?

https://www.prestonhood.com/research/chevrolet-2-7l-turbomax-high-output-engine/

there's more out there for links but this was just a quick one i found. be interesting to see what or if any rigs start being built with this engine.

Wow, yep I had no idea about that. 420 ft lbs (358 on another site) at 1,500 RPMs out of a 2.7? And 310 HP at 5,600? Those numbers are wild, very diesel like as the link you shared notes. Started in 2019? Hmmm. Still probably too new to be readily available, but definitely looks like one to watch

https://gmauthority.com/blog/gm/gm-engines/l3b/

 

[IH Man]

As I understand it 4bt/6bt use an SAE bellhousing.

There are multiple bell housings for them.

 

[PAE]

Ok, same bolt pattern bellhousing not specifically the exact bellhousing.

They are all SAE bellhousings.

There are multiple bell housings for them.

 

[IH Man]

Were they available in longitudinal powertrains?

Doesn’t matter. GM bell housings are the same. Just bolt whatever trans up with the matching bell housing. Only two sizes. Small and large. I don’t know where the cut off is now, but it used to be the 3800 V6. That was the smallest motor with the large bell housing. Unless you find an old Iron Duke 4 cyl. Those were available with the big bell housing.

 

[IH Man]

Ok, same bolt pattern bellhousing pattern not specifically the exact bellhousing.

They are all SAE bellhousings.

No, there are other bell housings than SAE.

SAE, Dodge, GM, might be one to a Ford. Not sure on Ford.

 

[IH Man]

I4 duramax wasn't something I had considered, what's the deal on those things?

As in?

 

[PAE]

I wasnt disputing that, just that 4bt and 6bt use a sae bolt pattern bellhousing.

No, there are other bell housings than SAE.

SAE, Dodge, GM, might be one to a Ford. Not sure on Ford.

 

[AgitatedPancake]

Doesn’t matter. GM bell housings are the same. Just bolt whatever trans up with the matching bell housing. Only two sizes. Small and large. I don’t know where the cut off is now, but it used to be the 3800 V6. That was the smallest motor with the large bell housing. Unless you find an old Iron Duke 4 cyl. Those were available with the big bell housing.

The reason a complete powertrain from one vehicle appeals is I can just grab an engine harness and computer at the same time. I can absolutely end up piecing it together and may end up going that route, But everything all in one go from one vehicle would be great.

As in?

The questions in the original post, just collecting more information about it like the rest of the platforms. Weight, reliability, quirks etc

 

[IH Man]

I wasnt disputing that, just that 4bt and 6bt use a sae bolt pattern bellhousing.

I’m not following you.

Both the 4 and 6BT don’t have a bell housing. They bolt on as a separate piece.

There are at least 3 that I know of for certain, probably more in aftermarket.

 

[bdkw1]

Turboed 2.5 duratec/10R80/LT230. Gut the low range, wide enough spread in the trans. AWD with a locking center diff. All readily available and bolt together.

 

[IH Man]

The reason a complete powertrain from one vehicle appeals is I can just grab an engine harness and computer at the same time. I can absolutely end up piecing it together and may end up going that route, But everything all in one go from one vehicle would be great.


The questions in the original post, just collecting more information about it like the rest of the platforms. Weight, reliability, quirks etc

I get you on the KISS thing as far as everything in a package, but if using GM components, switching trans might be NBD. I’d have to check, but like the 4T60 and 4L60 were basically the same thing in a different package. I’d have to check my books, but everything might plug in and work. Maybe some harness extensions necessary.

As far as the I4 Duramax, I haven’t done much with them. Just worked on one for the first time a couple weeks ago. Did a delete on it. It was easy. Seems like a good engine. I drove the truck around a bit. My brothers truck, so I’ll know how it does. So far so good. Bought it used. It’s not a 6.6, but it holds its own. Pretty impressive for a 4 banger.

 

[IH Man]

Turboed 2.5 duratec/10R80/LT230. Gut the low range, wide enough spread in the trans. AWD with a locking center diff. All readily available and bolt together.

Depending on intended use, a turbocharged engine may not be a good choice. They suffer in low rpm.

 

[bdkw1]

Depending on intended use, a turbocharged engine may not be a good choice. They suffer in low rpm.

Newer VGT turbos do not have much if any lag. Reference the chevy above with 358ftlbs at 1500rpm.

 

[Nvr-enough]

Are you also considering car platforms? I have liked the idea ofusing an LTG GM engine. Its part of the ecotec family. I believe Randy Slawson had a few buggies with them in it. Turbo 4cyl with close to 300hp output. I'm sure with some tuning you could get it there. Came in cadilac RWD and AWD models longitudinally mounted, also camaros of the era. Came with the 6L45 trans behind it, little brother to the 6l90 trans. Pretty sure the AWD drive 6l45 trans has a 32 spline output, so it should be able to mate to things. I'm guessing the AWD t-case in those cars does not have a low range.

The 2.0 ecotec (LTG) has my attention for a swap into my rig. Affordable buy-in From the Cadillac ATS it's 275hp/260tq. It was packaged with an 8L45 trans designed for transfercase for the AWD model. Should be easy to make a clocking plate to mate to a 'proper' tcase. In my case the turbo (exhaust outlet) is drivers side, which works well with my chevy D60/pass drop dana 300 set up.

Lots of guys doing ecotec stuff these days, 300hp+ from tune alone, not even getting into potential with aftermarket turbos, etc. My current drivetrain is a stock jeep 4.0/AW4 rated at 190hp/225tq.

8L45 gives a shitload of gearing options, so I think it should work well with a stock geared D300.


So for me the package gives a good bump in (bone stock) power, much smaller engine (front to rear at least) helping weight distribution, should be much lighter being aluminum engine than a heavy 4.0, twice as many gears in the trans, ecotec has a lot of aftermarket support, etc.