Modern 4 cylinder 4wd powertrains

[IH Man]

Fuck sake. Go back to pushing snow with your cronies using worn out, outdated drivetrains because you're afraid of wires and let the people living in 2024 continue on with this thread about modern drivetrains that use wires, vvt/vvl, possibly DI and a dozen other things you clearly don't want to understand. Nothing wrong with liking older simpler stuff, but you just clearly don't belong in this thread.

I’m pretty confident that I have a better understanding of that stuff than you do. Are you a mechanic? Were you ever? Are you schooled and trained? Or do you work a day job and play on the weekends, beating off to magazine articles and learning how things work by reading? I’m betting you’ve never even diagnosed a driveability problem on even a vehicle made in the last 10 years with any kind of modern diagnostic tools. So fuck off junior. When you’ve built a couple hundred engines and transmissions you can rant. Until then you’re just another weekend warrior who likes to dream about being a mechanic.

If you want to participate, maybe go read through @AgitatedPancake 's posts and threads.

Nice way to welcome a new guy. How about letting me get to know people instead of pounding away at keys with your soft hands? I go research and read as I deem necessary. Otherwise, I’m happy to take my time learning who’s who. Fucking millennials. You’re all the same.

If you don't have actual information regarding something designed and/or built in the past decade, please feel free to read along and learn something. But stop telling those of us that understand and want to use modern engines that we need to use outdated stuff.

I’ve built and worked on so many things you can’t comprehend. I also know where tech crosses reliability. I’m not opposed to new tech or complex tech in the right application. Just because you lack experience, but like to dream like a lot of other guys, doesn’t give you any real clout when it comes to having good all around knowledge base. Like so many people in a particular hobby, you might know a lot about one thing, but don’t even know what else exists beyond that. Or can recognize where reliability, availability and application all cross.

You want to talk like a civilized man, or just continue to be a little prick? I don’t care either way. I’m fine with telling you to go fuck yourself if you can’t tone it down a bit.

 

[Bebop]

I’m fine with telling you to go fuck yourself if you can’t tone it down a bit.

We're glad you joined 2 weeks ago to tell us to go fuck off.

 

[Nvr-enough]

I'll be a prick because we're not soft here. It's a hard-core offroad forum. You learn about people here by reading their posts, not clogging up their threads.

I'm a fucking Motorsports Mechanic for a living. Call me when you have hopped the wall at daytona to fix a drivablity concern on lamborghini V10 during the 24 Hours of Daytona.

Last week I was rebuilding an Audi GT3 gearbox and this week I was paid to go shake-down a Class 10 race rig with guess what, a fucking modern DI Ecotec.

Keep running your mouth around here you old bitch.

 

[AgitatedPancake]

. IH Man, please take a chill pill. You've had more combative replies than informational ones.



Alright anyways, back to engines.

Found some cool brochures on the 2.3 Ecoboost, 2.5 Duratec, and 3.7 Cyclone (even though it's not as relevant). Even though these aren't tech heavy, still cool references.

https://www.fordcomponentsalesllc.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/FCS_2.3L_Ecoboost_web_FNL.pdf

https://www.ford.co.uk/content/dam/...ication-details-data-sheets/25-duratec-np.pdf

https://www.ford.co.uk/content/dam/...tion-details-data-sheets/37-v6-cyclone-np.pdf


So far I've got to admit, the full 2.5 Ecotec, 8L45E + tcase stack from the 2015+ colorados/canyons is looking pretty slick. It looks like it might be interchangeable with the 2.0 from the caddy and chevy cars, but I don't (yet) see the value in stepping to the smaller engine from a different vehicle.

I like the Duratec and Ecoboost stuff too, so I'm still gathering information there

 

[Nvr-enough]

. IH Man, please take a chill pill. You've had more combative replies than informational ones.


So far I've got to admit, the full 2.5 Ecotec, 8L45E + tcase stack from the 2015+ colorados/canyons is looking pretty slick. It looks like it might be interchangeable with the 2.0 from the caddy and chevy cars, but I don't (yet) see the value in stepping to the smaller engine from a different vehicle.

Sorry to go off on the tangent here AP.


Honestly I didn't realize that they did a 2.5 ecotec in the Colorado. Off to go learn more, check pricing, inspect packaging against the caddy version, etc.

 

[AgitatedPancake]

Sorry to go off on the tangent here AP.


Honestly I didn't realize that they did a 2.5 ecotec in the Colorado. Off to go learn more, check pricing, inspect packaging against the caddy version, etc.

Nah you're good, I appreciate that you're willing to share worthwhile information openly without people having to extract it from you through excessive banter.

It looks like the 2.5 is a "3rd gen" ecotec, code LCV. About ~200hp and 190 ft lbs in essentially all of the applications from waht I'm seeing.

Here's a basic overview on it: https://gmauthority.com/blog/gm/gm-engines/lcv/

Then just in the last year or two looks like it was replaced with the LKW version, which now includes VVL. Interesting enough, it looks like this is the platform that Saleen chose for their new(er?) S1 car, with 450hp and 400 ft lbs according to wiki: GM Ecotec engine - Wikipedia

Looks like CBM supports it as well. Interestingly enough, they have an optional "SCORE/SNORE/MORE Race Engine Seal" package, so this is used in a desert spec class as well? Now that's a super interesting point

CBM MOTORSPORTS™ 2.5L LCV ECOTEC

 

[Bebop]

Looks like CBM supports it as well. Interestingly enough, they have an optional "SCORE/SNORE/MORE Race Engine Seal" package, so this is used in a desert spec class as well? Now that's a super interesting point

CBM MOTORSPORTS™ 2.5L LCV ECOTEC

Yes, that's one of the spec engines par of the Class10.

That said, they are sealed IE you're paying extra money for something identical to a factory take off at a junkyard. That is just to make it race legal.

 

[AgitatedPancake]

Yes, that's one of the spec engines par of the Class10.

That said, they are sealed IE you're paying extra money for something identical to a factory take off at a junkyard. That is just to make it race legal.

Yeah I figured it was just a spec class sealing and not necessarily performance related. Which is cool though, seeing it used in harsh applications like that makes me feel good about its overall durability/reputation, and might mean there's a decent amount of discussion out there

 

[Nvr-enough]

Ahhh okay, it's N/A. Yes, that's same engine as new class 10 spec engine. As of a couple days ago, I can tell you they make a new class 10 boogie through the desert

For 10 spec they are just a 'stock' build and sealed by the manufacturer. They seem pretty stout.

 

[AgitatedPancake]

Ahhh okay, it's N/A. Yes, that's same engine as new class 10 spec engine. As of a couple days ago, I can tell you they make a new class 10 boogie through the desert

For 10 spec they are just a 'stock' build and sealed by the manufacturer. They seem pretty stout.

Yeah NA in stock form. Sweet recent reference too haha. Unfortunately initial googling doesn't have a lot of information about people boosting them (just for the sake of future proofing the application). I wonder if it's the 11.3:1 compression ratio, though DI solves some of the high compression + boost woes doesn't it?

Hmm.

 

[Bebop]

Yeah NA in stock form. Sweet recent reference too haha. Unfortunately initial googling doesn't have a lot of information about people boosting them (just for the sake of future proofing the application). I wonder if it's the 11.3:1 compression ratio, though DI solves some of the high compression + boost woes doesn't it?

Yeah.

But at this level, fuel is your main driver.
If you want to run it on shitty pump gas from Cali you're going ahead of problems.
E85 or better is required.

 

[AgitatedPancake]

Yeah.

But at this level, fuel is your main driver.
If you want to run it on shitty pump gas from Cali you're going ahead of problems.
E85 or better is required.

Solid note, pump gas is a must for my own intended application. The penalty of not being able to get gas at any random gas station is too high.

 

[Bebop]

It's not that hard to drop compression by changing pistons either, but at this point I'd use a more common port EFI version of the ecotec to boost it.

 

[Sean]

I never said fuel injection was bad, or not reliable. But VVT with a VGT turbo and direct injection is problematic. Comes with its own set of issues. Required diagnostic equipment, knowledge and expensive parts. I’m not suggesting a carb motor. Not in the least. Just pointing out that the more electronic (computer) controlled components you add in, the more complex the system and the likelihood of problems on the trail increases. Sensor fails. Wires get ripped off. Or just the time it takes to rewrite the PCM programming for the application.

When I said “come on”, you seem to think that a knowledge base and reference to equipment isn’t logical or necessary. But it’s what any good builder uses as a tool to gauge how to build something new. Just because you base a build off what other people have done, doesn’t mean that there isn’t someone out there who pioneers the ideas.

You said you preferred carbureted for the simplicity (and there's nothing wrong with that)...I'm saying for many of the use cases here, that doesn't work very well (i.e., not reliable on big waterfalls/obstacles).

I made no comments other than what you can quote directly....so please don't read more into what I said than what's there.

 

[IH Man]

I'll be a prick because we're not soft here. It's a hard-core offroad forum. You learn about people here by reading their posts, not clogging up their threads.

I'm a fucking Motorsports Mechanic for a living. Call me when you have hopped the wall at daytona to fix a drivablity concern on lamborghini V10 during the 24 Hours of Daytona.

Last week I was rebuilding an Audi GT3 gearbox and this week I was paid to go shake-down a Class 10 race rig with guess what, a fucking modern DI Ecotec.

Keep running your mouth around here you old bitch.

That's cool. At least a few people are knowledgeable here.
From what I read, too many are just hobbyists, but like to pretend they know a lot.
I didn't jump in the thread to get harassed. I don't mind banter, but some guys are just pricks to be pricks to a new guy.
I'm sure our experience varies. I didn't work in motorsports. My experience lies in a different area than yours, but just because I worked on 1 million dollar pieces of equipment and not million dollar race cars doesn't mean my knowledge is less valid. Just different. Not everyone can spend that much money on toys.

 

[IH Man]

You said you preferred carbureted for the simplicity

No, I didn't. Nowhere. I said that when it comes to some small equipment I have, we have more problems with reliability with the fuel injected stuff and don't with the carbureted counterparts. I actually much prefer the fuel injected machines. They burn far less fuel, make more power and torque and are far better to operate. Point being: sometime the tech lowers reliability. Sometimes. Like the machine I had that was always having emission issues. It just so happened to be made at a transitional time when they were just figuring that stuff out. It didn't turn out reliable, and a new engine was built and subsequently a new model, which has thus proven more reliable.

 

[IH Man]

IH Man, please take a chill pill. You've had more combative replies than informational ones.

Because guys want to be dick heads. I wasn't arguing with anyone and got jumped on. I wasn't even the one who brought up the 4bt, but got told to quit talking about it. I DIDN'T BRING IT UP. I mentioned the I4 Duramax, not the 4bt. Which is still the engine I'd be looking into, because I prefer diesels.

 

[IowaOffRoad]

Making all of 60 HP

So what? Just making the point that you can run a carb off road with success.

Haven't seen a lot of success with anything carb'd out here....admittedly, your area may be different.

Run plenty of very steep/off camber stuff. I suppose if you are changing thousands of feet of altitude while running a trail it may be worse. 90% of wheeling rigs were carb’d for the first 50 years of the hobby so I don’t think it’s impossible.

 

[AgitatedPancake]

Because guys want to be dick heads. I wasn't arguing with anyone and got jumped on. I wasn't even the one who brought up the 4bt, but got told to quit talking about it. I DIDN'T BRING IT UP. I mentioned the I4 Duramax, not the 4bt. Which is still the engine I'd be looking into, because I prefer diesels.

People are getting irritated because we want to talk about modern 4 cylinder engines. We've been talking about Duratecs, Ecotecs, Ecoboosts, Toyota engines etc and you haven't been interested in sharing a peep of knowledge/information about any of them. Instead, focused on the one 4bt comment which we agreed was irrelevant on the first page.

I'm just trying to maintain the direction of this thread, while you seem intent on derailing it. Please man.

It's not that hard to drop compression by changing pistons either, but at this point I'd use a more common port EFI version of the ecotec to boost it.

They definitely seem like a far more explored platform for sure. They don't quite fit my ideal set of goals of coming in a longitudinal drivetrain with tcase that I could use as a complete unit, but I also understand I may not end up being able to have my cake and eat it too.

 

[Bebop]

They definitely seem like a far more explored platform for sure. They don't quite fit my ideal set of goals of coming in a longitudinal drivetrain with tcase that I could use as a complete unit, but I also understand I may not end up being able to have my cake and eat it too.

What about the LTG from the CTS Caddys and Camaros ? Turbocharged and DI from the factory.

edit: You would have to adapt a TCase at the end of the tranny but that's pretty easy to do since there was some AWD versions already :

New 2014-2015 Cadillac CTS ATS 2.0L AWD 6L45 Automatic Transmission w/ Converter | eBay

This is a New OEM Cadillac Automatic Transmission Assembly for the 2014-2015 Cadillac CTS and ATS with 2.0L AWD option. 2014-2015 Cadillac ATS 2.0 AWD Transmission w/ out extra cooling capacity. 2014-2015 Cadillac CTS 2.0 AWD Transmission w/ out extra cooling capacity.

www.ebay.com

 

[AgitatedPancake]

What about the LTG from the CTS Caddys and Camaros ? Turbocharged and DI from the factory.

You would have to adapt a TCase at the end of the tranny but that's pretty easy to do.

That one is definitely on the short list. My eyes obviously wandered over to the 2.5 version just because it was higher displacement and came with the right tcase, but I'd definitely circle back to the smaller displacement turbo engine if the platform is more future proof

 

[IH Man]

People are getting irritated because we want to talk about modern 4 cylinder engines. We've been talking about Duratecs, Ecotecs, Ecoboosts, Toyota engines etc and you haven't been interested in sharing a peep of knowledge/information about any of them. Instead, focused on the one 4bt comment which we agreed was irrelevant on the first page.

I'm just trying to maintain the direction of this thread, while you seem intent on derailing it. Please man.

Again.... Other than discussing with the people who were talking 4bt's, I didn't mention them.

Once again, on the second post of the thread I mentioned the I4 Duramax. Is that out now? It's your thread, would you prefer to stay with gasoline?

I'll ask again: What is the intended use? You crawling? Racing? Trail riding? Hills/climbs/desert? What kind of build are you after? High HP, but do you need off-idle low end too? Or is speed a concern?

 

[Bebop]

That one is definitely on the short list. My eyes obviously wandered over to the 2.5 version just because it was higher displacement and came with the right tcase, but I'd definitely circle back to the smaller displacement turbo engine if the platform is more future proof

Worst case you could probably look into swapping the long block if you really need more power. But I am not sure you would, Slawson has been using them in his Bomber Trail cars and is very happy with them.

 

[Nvr-enough]

What about the LTG from the CTS Caddys and Camaros ? Turbocharged and DI from the factory.

edit: You would have to adapt a TCase at the end of the tranny but that's pretty easy to do since there was some AWD versions already

Read my first post in this thread

Thats 99% sure the direction I'm going to give a shot at for a modern 'light' powerful drivetrain when it's time to yank the tired 4.0 from my jeep.

That said looking into the future/longterm, I do believe the LTG ended production around 2020. So long term it may not be the choice for AP for a potential production type vehicle.

 

[Bebop]

Read my first post in this thread

Thats 99% sure the direction I'm going to give a shot at for a modern 'light' powerful drivetrain when it's time to yank the tired 4.0 from my jeep.

I'm taking credit for your work, shut up

 

[IH Man]

What about the LTG from the CTS Caddys and Camaros

That came in the GMC Terrain AWD too..... There's the whole package deal.

 

[Sean]

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.

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 leaving this here then.

 

['84 Bronco II]

I don't understand how this is a reoccurring question.
Just make an adapter plate.

That's how people all over the world in all different types of motorsports are doing.

Or build a custom bellhousing :

I am aware you can adapt anything with enough effort, skill, and money, but there are more issues than simply adapting a bellhousing for a lot of odd ball combos. vetteboy79 's build comes to mind. There are starter issues, flywheel/flexplate and clutch/torque converter issues, and other adapting issues that come up, especially when using engines from transverse applications where the coolant outlet might be coming out of the back of the engine. For your average trail wheeler, unless there's a COTS adapter solution, they probably aren't going to design and fabricate their own adapter solutions.

Given two equally enticing engine options, you'd probably rather go with the one you can simply bolt a desirable drivetrain to instead of the other that would require a custom bellhousing and flywheel/flexplate setup.

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.

Why don't you do everyone a favor and just stay the fuck out of this thread since you obviously have nothing to contribute and don't have the slightest grasp of hardcore four wheeling

You went from 250-350HP 4cylinders don't exist to they are too new and complicated for you to understand in one post when you got called out Heavy ass diesels have no place in hardcore wheelers so please stop talking about dinosaur 4BTs that weigh as much as an all-iron big block V8 that would run circles around it.

Turbo charged over head cam 4 cylinders with electronic multi-port fuel injection have been around for over 40 years you fucking luddite. Ford managed to get 205 HP and 248 Ft.Lbs out of the 2.3L Lima in 1985. You bitch that gas 4 Cylinders are too complicated, but then praise the 2.8L Duramax?

I’m not suggesting a carb motor. Not in the least. Just pointing out that the more electronic (computer) controlled components you add in, the more complex the system and the likelihood of problems on the trail increases. Sensor fails. Wires get ripped off. Or just the time it takes to rewrite the PCM programming for the application.

I have spent way more time dicking with carbed vehicles running like shit on the trail than I have anything with fuel injection. Mind you my current wheeler is carbed. I have never had to fuck with a JK or JL running like shit on the trail

 

[IH Man]

Why don't you do everyone a favor and just stay the fuck out of this thread since you obviously have nothing to contribute and don't have the slightest grasp of hardcore four wheeling

How about you fuck off?

You went from 250-350HP 4cylinders don't exist to they are too new and complicated for you to understand in one post when you got called out

No, they aren't too complicated for me to understand you fuck hole. I just don't care for all the additional bullshit you have to deal with in keeping them going.

 

[Bebop]

I am aware you can adapt anything with enough effort, skill, and money, but there are more issues than simply adapting a bellhousing for a lot of odd ball combos. vetteboy79 's build comes to mind. There are starter issues, flywheel/flexplate and clutch/torque converter issues, and other adapting issues that come up, especially when using engines from transverse applications where the coolant outlet might be coming out of the back of the engine. For your average trail wheeler, unless there's a COTS adapter solution, they probably aren't going to design and fabricate their own adapter solutions.

Given two equally enticing engine options, you'd probably rather go with the one you can simply bolt a desirable drivetrain to instead of the other that would require a custom bellhousing and flywheel/flexplate setup.

Well yeah, but we're talking about using complex engines, I assumed that we could figure out the adaption of said engine too.