What's new
By:
Filters

Modern 4 cylinder 4wd powertrains

bdkw1 said:
Newer VGT turbos do not have much if any lag. Reference the chevy above with 358ftlbs at 1500rpm.
Click to expand...
Yes, I’m familiar, but a NA may still be a better choice.

Also, it was a blanket statement. The 4BT was mentioned, which isn’t a VGT.

As I said, depends on intended use.
 
Nvr-enough said:
Oh and modern DI turbo engines have killer flat torque curves making peak torque sub- 2K rpm. So don't tell me that they don't make enough torque down low IH Man:homer::laughing:
Click to expand...
Calm down. I didn’t mention any specific engines. Several being discussed. I just made a blanket statement. Don’t get your panties in a bunch.
 
The Solstice/Sky had a couple of versions of the ecotec (one turboed) and available manual transmission. Think it was An AR5, which is an updated AX15. If wanting a manual I think the AR5 can be Frankensteined with AX15 output/extension housing to get 4x4 compatibility. Ecotec is fairly lightweight and compact, and are popular FWD circle track and auto cross car motors so a decent selection of performance parts. Reliable 250hp might be a stretch though…
 
IH Man said:
Calm down. I didn’t mention any specific engines. Several being discussed. I just made a blanket statement. Don’t get your panties in a bunch.
Click to expand...
Your blanket statement sucks in 2024 and you have added no real information to this thread, you're the one that got their panties in a bunch while called out.

Yes, 4 cylinder engines 15-20 years ago struggled down low. Modern engines with direct injection, twin scroll or VGT turbos and 6-10 speed transmissions have fixed those problems.


And holy fuck, stop talking about 4BTs in this thread. This is a thread about modern engine packages, not loud, heavy, under powered engines from the midevil times. I don't care if they're the last running engine on earth after WW3 breaks out, I won't be worried about fucking rock crawling when that happens. Fuck.:flipoff2:
 
Nvr-enough said:
Your blanket statement sucks in 2024 and you have added no real information to this thread, you're the one that got their panties in a bunch while called out.
Click to expand...
Cool as a cucumber over here.

And you better go back and read.

I’m not all that into desk jockeys ranting about modern engines. You haven’t really said anything interesting to me yet. Been at this game way longer than you’ve been alive junior.

Nvr-enough said:
Yes, 4 cylinder engines 15-20 years ago struggled down low. Modern engines with direct injection, twin scroll or VGT turbos and 6-10 speed transmissions have fixed those problems.
Click to expand...
Until you damage a wiring harness crawling over a rock. Or mice chew on it over the winter.


Nvr-enough said:
And holy fuck, stop talking about 4BTs in this thread.
Click to expand...
I didn’t bring them up.
 
bdkw1 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Man that 10R80 has impressive ratios from first gear 4.86 to .635 overdrive, I could honestly almost see skipping the low range with that spread, and the LT230 is always awesome.

Would you prefer the 2.5 Duratec over the 2.3 Ecoboost? The 2019+ ranger came with the 2.3 and the 10R80, and i could probably even get away with the tcase that it comes. Which means the full stack would meet all of my goals of taking a complete powertrain from a single vehicle. 2019 is pretty new to be readily available, but mebbe.

Nvr-enough said:
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.
Click to expand...

That one you and Ghetto mentioned sounds super interesting too, good addition. And the 8l45 looks like it was used in the colorados, so that tcase should (maybe?) bolt straight on to replace the AWD case. Those caddys look like they were around since ~2016 which makes them more available too, nice.
 
Last edited:
The LTG was also used in the camaro I think 16-20. Would obviously be a rwd trans.

Good catch on Canyon/Colorado using that trans.

8L45 has a 4.62 first and a .65 final ratio.

I've seen LTGs on carpart with ~75k miles for sub 1600 bucks. I'm sure could be found cheaper. The engine was also used in some econo-box cars, I think Malibu and regal. Their accessories/intake set up is different for transverse mount applications. Could be better or worse, but something to look at for packaging.



Edit-

According to this, shows 8L45 as a 32spline output shaft, confirming Ghetto Fab. 'S comment. Real easy to adapt the popular t-case options. Just need to figure out the adapter plate. Guess that would be the next step in this idea. :laughing:

1000023337.jpg
 
Last edited:
AgitatedPancake said:
Man that 10R80 has impressive ratios from first gear 4.86 to .635 overdrive, I could honestly almost see skipping the low range with that spread, and the LT230 is always awesome.

Would you prefer the 2.5 Duratec over the 2.3 Ecoboost? The 2019+ ranger came with the 2.3 and the 10R80, and i could probably even get away with the tcase that it comes. Which means the full stack would meet all of my goals of taking a complete powertrain from a single vehicle. 2019 is pretty new to be readily available, but mebbe.
Click to expand...
2.5, no replacement for displacement?

LT230 for the offset rear output. If your going solid axle rear, the offset pumpkin offers better clearance. Plus AWD which would be much easier on parts in the desert section.
 
IH Man said:
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.
Click to expand...

Turn up the boost on an FB25 and you'll be there real quick. :flipoff2:
 
Some good ideas in my old thread. I went duratec and was very suprised how much low end grunt it had.

irate4x4.com

Modern 4 cylinder swap options

Considering doing something different with my '62 ranchero and swapping in a 4 cylinder. I am not brand loyal and this thing is trashed enough that I won't feel bad ruining it. Would like: - ~200 HP - Capability of bolting to a 5 speed manual trans with factory parts - Capable of handling a...
irate4x4.com irate4x4.com
 
IH Man said:
f 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.
Click to expand...

Have you been living under a rock for the last 10 years? :homer:

Several have already been pointed out that even meet the OP's requirements of being readily available and coming in factory longitudinal mounted 4x4 configurations.

Literally every 2.0L and 2.3L Ecoboost that Ford has put in tons of stuff is in the 250-350HP range.

The Chevy 2.7L in the Silverados and new Colorado/Canyon is also an interesting option. I am really curious how it stacks up in size and weight.

Not available in factory 4x4 or longitudinal mounting configurations, but the Mazda Skyactiv engines that replaced the Duratec/L-series in Mazdas over 10 years ago looks pretty interesting. The naturally aspirated versions make a touch more power than the equivalent Duratecs and the turbo 2.5L is pretty common in non-high performance applications, so maybe cheaper and easier to source than a 2.3L Ecoboost. I would be curious to know whether they are any lighter than their Duratec/L-series/Ecoboost counterparts.

The Ecoboost version of the Ford Sigma 1.6L from the Fiesta ST is also interesting, and I wonder how much smaller and lighter it is than the Duratec-based Ecoboost. It comes with 180HP and a temporary nearly 200HP overboost rating from the factory. Probably wouldn't be too hard to get 250HP out of one, but I have no idea on how hard it would be to adapt to a desirable 4x4 transmission.
 
'84 Bronco II said:
Have you been living under a rock for the last 10 years? :homer:
Click to expand...
I’m not a big fan of “new tech”, especially in custom built vehicles. It’s fine if you beat off to little motors with a lot of internal parts. I prefer stuff with less parts and less electronics. Simple = reliable and easy to repair. So, no I don’t read Car and Driver and geek out to all the new stuff. I also quit being a mechanic full time ten years ago, so I’m not as up on it as I used to be. I still work on all of my equipment, and now and again for others. All that plus, I much prefer diesel, which is why I brought up the I4 Duramax.

For my stuff I prefer things simpler. I just bought a 1986 International S1954 with a mechanical DT466. Why? No emissions. No electronics. Incredibly reliable and won’t have break downs. I have a Duramax 3500 that’s been deleted. I just traded off a tractor that had regenerative emissions. One reason being it would demand a parked regen right in the middle of needing it. My newer personal Suburban (220k miles) has given me more issues than my old 99 Honda CR-V with 330,000 miles on it. The small engine equipment I run that is fuel injected gives far more problems than their carbureted counterparts.

So….. like I said. If you beat off to new tech with a lot of wires, sensors, internal actuators and lots of failures… that’s fine by me. I’ll look at the older more reliable stuff.
 
Just as a note, when I say I quit being a mechanic “full time”, I mean I closed my shop in early 2015. Then went and managed two mechanic shop for a big fleet company. I did that for about 18 months and quit. Corporate shops suck. Went back to farming for a while. Started another business is 2022.
 
skimmed thru this thread so I probably missed it. Why not a 3rz? 180 horse from the factory. Came in a lot of tacomas and four runners. I’ve got one in the basement we are going to swap my sons 22re and manual to 3rz and auto that bolts right up and slap to toy tcase behind it.
 
IH Man said:
The small engine equipment I run that is fuel injected gives far more problems than their carbureted counterparts.
Click to expand...
Are you running on 'pane if they are gasoline? Just wondering how you're dealing with offcamber/steep climbs/descents.
 
rockdog57 said:
skimmed thru this thread so I probably missed it. Why not a 3rz? 180 horse from the factory. Came in a lot of tacomas and four runners. I’ve got one in the basement we are going to swap my sons 22re and manual to 3rz and auto that bolts right up and slap to toy tcase behind it.
Click to expand...

My first thought was also 3RZ, but that's a 20+ year old engine at this point. It's getting pretty hard to find good 3RZ drivetrains to build and swap.

But the newer little brother, the 2TR-FE, is definitely 250whp capable with a turbo...
 
Not that I'm a fan of anything from Fiat/Chrysler, but how do the turbo-4 Jeep engines hold up? A Wrangler power train would be an easy swap into a buggy.
 
What about Sabrau 4cylinder engine they used to make 350+hp in the WRX Rally cars. Plus, you have the mass lower to the ground for added stability.
 
rockdog57 said:
skimmed thru this thread so I probably missed it. Why not a 3rz? 180 horse from the factory. Came in a lot of tacomas and four runners. I’ve got one in the basement we are going to swap my sons 22re and manual to 3rz and auto that bolts right up and slap to toy tcase behind it.
Click to expand...
Heavy and somewhat antiquated were the reasons I dismissed it. Drivetrain compatibility are its redeeming factors though
 
I never thought a four cylinder debate would get sooo heated:laughing:
If you can find the parts, a supercharged ecotec is a hard package to beat. But it needs to be pieced together. An RZ setup with yota cases is also a good package, but falls short of the HP goals in stock form, unless equipped with a TRD blower.
 
Sean said:
Are you running on 'pane if they are gasoline? Just wondering how you're dealing with offcamber/steep climbs/descents.
Click to expand...
I’ve got a 20R with a 390 Holley. Off road needle/seat and a vent crossover tube. Runs rich once in a while but hasn’t ever been undrivable on any grade. I’ve started it in its side.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Back Refresh