Vq Swap
 

Hey guys! Just curious, but has anybody seen/done a VQ swap on this platform? I’m interested in seeing the results if anybody has. Also, I know it’s not a very common swap, but why is that? (Without getting bashed on) I am just curious, what engine swaps should I be looking at rather than the VQ? Other than the LS or 2J or K swap, what other swaps are out there? Thanks in advance for any replies:cheers:

I think it's just because there are far better v6 engines out there.

K swap on my opinion is the best swap. LS is cool but I would rather put an i4 because that's how it should've come from the factory

I don't know of many better V6s in a NA application than the VQs.:iono: Only QV swap I'm aware of is the VQ37 MCA car. There have been some 2GR Toyota swaps made.

https://engineswapdepot.com/wp-conte...04-620x465.jpg

Sorry, I meant to say that there are better 6 cylinder engines, rather than specifically the V orientation.
Most everyone who is going to spend money on a swap isn't going to want to put a v into a car- inline is far preferred.

Same reason why if you go onto a Honda forum, nobody is going to be swapping boxer engines into their cars. Could you? Yeah. Should you? No...

I discovered that 1320 made UEL headers for various Honda engines and people actually bought them.

How to make your Honda run like crap 101..

I think the advantage of the swap is that it is already connected to a CD009, which is typically used on many high hp builds, so there is one less element that requires customized adapters. That and some people might want a NA higher displacement engine, but they may not want the LS, whether that is for being unique, keeping things JDM, packaging, cost, or for engine characteristics.

Honda boys swap J series motors all the time. The boxer would require a RWD conversion, which could be done with a K-motor too, so the boxer isn't required. I'm sure if the EJ/FA was more capable, just as cheap, and the K motors weren't as capable as they are, and RWD conversions were common place, then boxer swaps would be done, assuming packaging that wide of a motor wouldn't be prohibitive. I think if the J series motors could also rev just as high as a k motor and wasn't much heavier and was just as cheap, accessible and well supported in the aftermarket community then they would be a more popular choice.

If someone is doing a swap then they likely want decent gains for their investment, so this means doing a high displacement V8 or a smaller displacement turbocharged motor. It is a situation where turbocharging a V6 is more expensive than a straight six, and the extra weight of a V6 over an I6, and the extra weight of a twin turbo setup over a single turbo, negates the benefits of having a shorter motor that is less nose heavy. Most will just choose the cheap and capable turbocharged k24, even if it does have less displacement and two less pistons; it can handle it, traction might down low might be limited anyways and boost is cheap to add. The other factor is that the LS exists, which is the same size or smaller than a V6, and the 2JZ exists, which is also a beast. If those motors didn't exist then NA V6s would be a much more common swap because of packaging and weight.

If someone wants to do a NA build then the VQ would be a good choice.

I'd say they are not common for the same reason as the Coyote. Height and width will make it a tough fit.

The VQ/VR is a 60 degree motor, and the Coyote is a giant 90 degree motor. Width is less of a problem, but height is tight in a similar way to probably the Edelbrock SC on a FA20.

https://engineswapdepot.com/?p=12660

https://engineswapdepot.com/wp-conte...VQ37-V6-08.jpg

https://images.hgmsites.net/lrg/stre...00562755_l.jpg

Interesting, they are not that heavy either.

VQ/VR are tall motors. The MCA had to run a dry sump to fit it under the hood same with the VR in that 86 photo. One of the reasons they aren't as popular in the S-chassis community despite the HP to cost ratio is that they are tall and don't fit under the hoods.lol

Did they have to run a dry sump, or was it part of the plan for a track build regardless, or was it only necessary because of the position they went with, or was it chosen because a custom oil pan wasn't going to be cheaper or easier? I know the article here says they used a dry sump to make it fit, but was it actually necessary?

https://engineswapdepot.com/?p=12660

For reference, here are the dimensions of the VQ35/37 motor (add more height for the intake manifold):

https://farm5.static.flickr.com/4045...83aa8aa7_o.jpg
https://forums.nissansportz.com/uplo...1226838433.jpg
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/00...g?v=1539292573

For comparison, here are the dimensions of the LS3 and LS1, which is a very compact motor, but has been swapped in the 86:

https://www.crateenginedepot.com/Ass...es/ls3_dim.jpg
https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/c...t+and+Side.png


LS3 vs VQ in a 350Z. The extra height is mostly the intake manifold/TB, so the motor would be higher in the 86, but the main engine would be about the same height as a LS:

https://my350z.com/forum/attachments...p-img_7943.jpg
https://my350z.com/forum/attachments...p-img_8055.jpg


LS2 engine height vs FA20 w/ Edelbrock SC, and the Edelbrock can't accommodate that strut bar. Meaning, the LS is lower, but the VQ might be no higher than a FA20 with a supercharger:

https://www.speednik.com/wp-content/...baru-BRZ-2.jpg
https://www.turnology.com/image/2015...4_06-34-46.jpg


Z empty engine bay and front subframe:

http://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/my350z.c...682fbd4e38.jpg
http://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/my350z.c...0912c909aa.jpg


86 empty engine bay and front subframe:

https://abload.de/img/dsc_22444ljxq.jpg
https://vorshlag.smugmug.com/Project..._DSC3055-L.jpg

Dimensions on this motor are really close to the LFX. It should fit but not saying you wouldn't have to cut a hole in the hood as the VQ manifold looks a lot taller than what I have. I stole the picture posted above, motor, trans and exhaust from the side as it's a good shot. Front sump pan on that motor would be a good starting point but the rear where it bolts to trans will probably need work. Top of motor sticks pretty far back in relationship to the transmission. The question is will it clear the sway bar?? This was a pretty big issue in my build.

Yeah, they look similar, as they are both DOHC 60 degree V6s. It would be cool if GM made a V6 engine with a LS architecture for weight and packaging, but the 90 degree V6 is problematic.

I posted the empty engine bays of the 86 and Z to show how similar they look in terms of the subframe/crossmember and position of the steering rack and front sway bar. The oil pan on the LS motor looks like it would have more interference issues than the oil pan on the VQ. In fact, you can see the custom oil pan in the Z for the LS3 swap, so if people made the LS fit in the 86 and a LFX then I could imagine they could make the VQ fit.

It is obvious that the LS is better at packaging a larger displacement engine. The smaller heads permit a smaller package, and the 90 degree design allows the intake manifold and TB to sit lower between the heads. I don't know how the aftermarket support for the VQ compares to that of the LS (it is likely less), but if someone wanted something different, they might be able to justify a VQ swap over a LS if they wanted a higher revving motor that might be cheaper up front for a VQ mated to a CD009.

The article also mentions and shows the front cross member had to lower 1.9in to get it to fit..Because its too tall otherwise for the engine bay.