ok so ive been playing with this idea 2.8L v8 swap?

[Lunatic]

Take it from experience, of a Hayabusa powered race car. The FRS platform is much to heavy for that engine. Plus the up front cost for the engine, (Hartley's sell for $40,000) and the 20 grand for a good sequential tranny. I think this would be a waste of money.

[Levi]

IMO the GT86 is not a good base for any radical build or swap, that said, currently there are not many good bases on the market that can be had new: I'm thinking of MX-5 and Elise/Exige.


Now H1V8 swap in the Alfa 4C, that would be something.

[Jaden]

Originally Posted by Levi

IMO the GT86 is not a good base for any radical build or swap, that said, currently there are not many good bases on the market that can be had new: I'm thinking of MX-5 and Elise/Exige.


Now H1V8 swap in the Alfa 4C, that would be something.

You gonna give some reasoning for this or just gonna troll some more in a forum for a car you don't have???

Jaden

[mid_life_crisis]

The origins of this engine remind me of an engineering exercise some company did back in the seventies. They took a couple of air cooled Honda 900 motorcycle engines, bored them, tied them to a common crank, ran the results on alcohol and got 500 hp out of the resulting 2L V8, all without fancy electronics like we have now. Then they took it apart. Pity, it would have been killer on a drag bike.

[Levi]

Originally Posted by Jaden

You gonna give some reasoning for this or just gonna troll some more in a forum for a car you don't have???

Jaden

Sure. A mid-mounted engine gives more engine posibilities without impacting balance. GT86 is not mid-mounted, however takes advantage of boxer to get low CoG.

[Jaden]

Originally Posted by Levi

Sure. A mid-mounted engine gives more engine posibilities without impacting balance. GT86 is not mid-mounted, however takes advantage of boxer to get low CoG.

There you go, that wasn't all that hard was it?

i've designed and planned on building an aluminum reinforced, silk monocoque chassis using a built and quad (I mistyped that originally as a twin) turbo charged 327 in a midengined layout and registering it as a SCV in Cali to get around the stupid smog requirements.

The chevy small block 327 was first made in 1961, which means it wouldn't have to even have an egr valve in cali and it made 375 hp in n/a form with less than 11:1 compression in the 1963 corvette.

Jaden

[bfrank1972]

Mmmhh... Probably wasn't really anywhere near a true 375 crank hp. The older 'gross' ratings in the 60's were exaggerated - probably more like 250 - 275 crank hp (i.e. just north of 200 rwhp) for the early FI 327's. I think even the 'legendary' LS6 454 big block motors dyno just under 300 rwhp. Plenty of torque mind you....

[Jaden]

Originally Posted by bfrank1972

Mmmhh... Probably wasn't really anywhere near a true 375 crank hp. The older 'gross' ratings in the 60's were exaggerated - probably more like 250 - 275 crank hp (i.e. just north of 200 rwhp) for the early FI 327's. I think even the 'legendary' LS6 454 big block motors dyno just under 300 rwhp. Plenty of torque mind you....

a duplicate of the setup that got 365hp was recently tested to get 353 hp...so sorry, it was pretty damn close to being accurate. It sure as shit wasn't 100hp off lol...

http://www.superchevy.com/how-to/eng...62-horsepower/

check it out, they got 462 hp out of it N/A...

Jaden

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by Jaden

a duplicate of the setup that got 365hp was recently tested to get 353 hp...so sorry, it was pretty damn close to being accurate. It sure as shit wasn't 100hp off lol...

http://www.superchevy.com/how-to/eng...62-horsepower/

check it out, they got 462 hp out of it N/A...

Jaden

Ok you sorta got me there - as I was extrapolating crank numbers from dynojet numbers I've seen from the L76 (in person), nothing greater than 250 rwhp - impressive enough for a hot rod V8 back in the day, but not so much by modern V8 standards. But then again that's driving the original tranny, driveshaft, rear, accessories, etc. Super Chevy, on an engine dyno, with ideal situations might be able to squeeze a legit 350ish out of it, but I'm wary. Point was engine tech has come a long way since the good ole days. You might be better off finding a lightly used LS7 with aftermarket ported heads/cams if you really want to be practical about the whole thing. But who wants practical in this thread!

[Jaden]

Originally Posted by bfrank1972

Ok you sorta got me there - as I was extrapolating crank numbers from dynojet numbers I've seen from the L76 (in person), nothing greater than 250 rwhp - impressive enough for a hot rod V8 back in the day, but not so much by modern V8 standards. But then again that's driving the original tranny, driveshaft, rear, accessories, etc. Super Chevy, on an engine dyno, with ideal situations might be able to squeeze a legit 350ish out of it, but I'm wary. Point was engine tech has come a long way since the good ole days. You might be better off finding a lightly used LS7 with aftermarket ported heads/cams if you really want to be practical about the whole thing. But who wants practical in this thread!

I cannot do in Cali what I want to do with a modern engine.

The whole point of using the 327 was to register the vehicle as an SCV(specially created vehicle) where it is either registered for the model year of the car it most closely resembles, in the case of say a repro 67 mustang or shelby cobra, or the first year of issue of the engine used.

It's the register's choice which.

I would be using it in a custom designed and fabbed monocoque chassis so it would resemble nothing which means for smog purposes it would be registered based on the first year intro of the engine.

I cannot do what I want to do using a new engine in Cali.

Also, you have to remember that most of the engines that you've seen dyno'd are probably approaching 50 years old and who knows what's been done to them in the interim.

Jaden

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by Jaden

I cannot do in Cali what I want to do with a modern engine.

The whole point of using the 327 was to register the vehicle as an SCV(specially created vehicle) where it is either registered for the model year of the car it most closely resembles, in the case of say a repro 67 mustang or shelby cobra, or the first year of issue of the engine used.

It's the register's choice which.

I would be using it in a custom designed and fabbed monocoque chassis so it would resemble nothing which means for smog purposes it would be registered based on the first year intro of the engine.

I cannot do what I want to do using a new engine in Cali.

Also, you have to remember that most of the engines that you've seen dyno'd are probably approaching 50 years old and who knows what's been done to them in the interim.

Jaden

Ahh indeed I missed the point of Cali restrictions - that's sort of a bummer, although you can have a lot of fun building a souped up older SBC just the same

[Poodles]

Originally Posted by Levi

Sure. A mid-mounted engine gives more engine posibilities without impacting balance. GT86 is not mid-mounted, however takes advantage of boxer to get low CoG.

Accept this isn't true and packaging is far harder in mid-mount applications.


Of course you can just stretch the car to fit the engine and then try to pass the car off as your own... Venom GT anyone?

[mid_life_crisis]

Originally Posted by Jaden

There you go, that wasn't all that hard was it?

i've designed and planned on building an aluminum reinforced, silk monocoque chassis using a built and quad (I mistyped that originally as a twin) turbo charged 327 in a midengined layout and registering it as a SCV in Cali to get around the stupid smog requirements.

The chevy small block 327 was first made in 1961, which means it wouldn't have to even have an egr valve in cali and it made 375 hp in n/a form with less than 11:1 compression in the 1963 corvette.

Jaden

You could also go with a 302. They revved forever and with the right factory parts (tubular headers, dual carb crossram manifold) made 400 hp. First year was 68 or 69 if I recall correctly so no emissions problems there either.
I always wanted to see someone twin turbo a crossram manifold just to see it done.


Edit: If you're really into building engines, you could cheat. The 302 was built using a 327 block and the crank from a 283. It is a de-stroked 327. If you started with a 327 block from the early 60's, you could register it that way and no one would know the difference.

[Jaden]

Originally Posted by mid_life_crisis

You could also go with a 302. They revved forever and with the right factory parts (tubular headers, dual carb crossram manifold) made 400 hp. First year was 68 or 69 if I recall correctly so no emissions problems there either.
I always wanted to see someone twin turbo a crossram manifold just to see it done.


Edit: If you're really into building engines, you could cheat. The 302 was built using a 327 block and the crank from a 283. It is a de-stroked 327. If you started with a 327 block from the early 60's, you could register it that way and no one would know the difference.

Hell, the 327 was known for high revving, a destroked 327 should be super high revving.

Yeah I guess I could look at that...that might work out after all.

We'll see what I end up doing in what order...I'd like to get a stripped twin and a crashed '14 camaro ss and do a complete drivetrain swap and add an e'force as well, so we'll see...

But if I build my custom car first, then I could just do the swap on my current FRS....hmmm

planning to do, planning to do....

Jaden