Jump to content

Fuel Efficient Motor Swap


Malykaii
 Share

Recommended Posts

So I'm planning on building a 1700lb little dd. It weighs less than a geo metro.

 

So I'm looking to swap in some sort of rwd stick shift econo box motor. Any ideas?

 

Most efficient motors are fwd with no tranny options to make it rwd for a reasonable budget. Best I got is a geo metro 1.0 or 1.3 bolted to a samurai tranny. I'm considering diesel, (Kubota industrial motors are a thing in Ford rangers and 4d55 is available in the us) but they all seem way too pricey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I'm planning on building a 1700lb little dd. It weighs less than a geo metro.

 

So I'm looking to swap in some sort of rwd stick shift econo box motor. Any ideas?

 

Most efficient motors are fwd with no tranny options to make it rwd for a reasonable budget. Best I got is a geo metro 1.0 or 1.3 bolted to a samurai tranny. I'm considering diesel, (Kubota industrial motors are a thing in Ford rangers and 4d55 is available in the us) but they all seem way too pricey.

i got a imported 4d56t for 2k

VW 1.9l tdi, with a passat awd trans? or if you can get the rwd trans for the vw rv from the vr6

 

most things will get good MPG in a light box lol, you could probably get away with a motor cycle engine.

vw 1.6 out of a bug too

 

An N/A 1.3 rotary maybe? I know they get good gas mileage.

 

not sure how you figure 18-20mpg good gas mileage? lol i had one

Edited by Skullzaflare
Link to comment
Share on other sites

D15 from a crx. Hands down the most efficient for gas mileage. No power, but will get 40-50 mpg in a crx..

 

For rwd motors id look into using any toyota four cylinder. Toyota has great engine design and efficiency. I get about 20-25 in my tacoma and i romp on it most of the time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

D15 from a crx. Hands down the most efficient for gas mileage. No power, but will get 40-50 mpg in a crx..

 

For rwd motors id look into using any toyota four cylinder. Toyota has great engine design and efficiency. I get about 20-25 in my tacoma and i romp on it most of the time

miatas get the same, and far easier to work on, timing belts can be done in 30 minutes etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True but a miata motor doesnt have any hp and torque. Getting a 22R or a 2rzfe toyota motor would not only last infinity miles it would have atleast some power.

 

The miata motor would also be the easiest to swap. Only real issue is fabing the reae transmission mount.

Edited by Turbo Cary
Link to comment
Share on other sites

True but a miata motor doesnt have any hp and torque. Getting a 22R or a 2rzfe toyota motor would not only last infinity miles it would have atleast some power.

 

The miata motor would also be the easiest to swap. Only real issue is fabing the reae transmission mount.

mount wouldnt be hard

miata motors are strong, but for a 1800lb car, i think the rpms would be more useful than the low end torque, since those are in trucks and need the low end to get moving

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sooooo if you want an efficient engine, just get something modern and put it in. basically whatever is the most up to date engine you can afford. anything with modern management, and twin widebands, and hopefully EGT and electronic timing control will efficiently burn fuel.

 

now, since the car is really light weight, you'll be fine with like a 1.3L or larger. if you put too big a motor in it, you're wasting fuel trying to move the internals of the motor, and you have that extra engine weight too. the extra displacement won't help you gain efficiency.

 

maybe a yaris swap or something similar from a modern sub-compact.

 

don't even waste time with anything prior to 1996

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got excited about the rotary idea. So they are considered somewhat fuel efficient and powerful for a very compact motor, I just read. If I was building a performance roadster, I'd be sold instantly.

 

I'd like,one of those vw or mitsu diesels, but they seam expensive. Blow a turbo, $500. Transfer pump $700. And parts are rare here. If I'm wrong, correct me please.

 

Ka24 and 22re motors are relatively fuel efficient when in a 3500lb vehicle. But for a car half the size, I think it's too much. Plus I'm not worried about power, I have a GT mustang for that. Just need a stop and go city car for manhattan traffic.

 

Honda motors spin counterclockwise, hence impossible for rwd. I can't think of a single econo Toyota motor that bolts up to a rwd trans, all ears if there is!

 

Miatas, oh them. If I wanted to put a miata motor into a compact roadster, I'd just buy the miata. They cost twice what My mustang cost, get the same mpg, yet make half the power despite being almost half the size. I don't understand why?

 

Solstice says 19mpg city, makes Spence since It's built for performance. Oh well,could have been fun.

 

Patra, what you list is exactly what I'm thinking. Something 2001ish as too new a design it will want inputs from abs sensors and the transmission to run right. Everything you list seams to only come in fwd cars that have no easily available rwd transmission counterpart.

I'm thinking the geo metro 1.3 from 2000 sounds close. Modern distributorless mpi setup getting 40 mpg, and poss cheap from the yards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

toyota 4ag 1.6L will move 1700 pounds smartly. Gets mid 30s hwy in 2400 lb corollas on old stock electronics... megasquirtd, further improves performance/mileage.

Miata 1.8 is compact like, but superior to a 4ag. No way they would drink gas like any 28-3000 pound mustang, 4, 6 or 8 cyl.

I posted a link to a full street turbo 1.8 miata that got high 30s hwy, and probably capable of touching high 9sec 1/4 mile!

Such would likely kill you in a 1700 rig tho :D . Point is, they can be setup to achieve whatever it is you're after

 

Gotta mention the 3800 buick v6. They get great mileage. are compact, nice and torquey. Just a slight tap on the throttle would press you in the seat in a 1700 pound rig. They bolt to rwd trannys in old chevy s10/blazer... or use the late 90s camaro/bird

Link to comment
Share on other sites

don't even waste time with anything prior to 1996

 

There are plenty of fuel efficient motors that are pre 1996. Those shouldn't be ruled out because they are cheap and plentiful. Modern tech doesn't always mean more efficient. For example, my 91 toyota truck with a 22re gets around 26 mph hwy. A new toyota truck gets 25 mpg hwy. They weigh about the same and the newer truck has a bit more HP but the mpg really hasn't changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To clear things up... I'm not looking to build some dream car. Many guys have a $10K toy in the garage and a $900 Camry for the commute. I like Camry simplicity/reliability, just think they are ugly and bland... Looking for a compromise and 35mpg+ seams reasonable. (Geo metros get 40, with the bigger optional motor)

 

I want simplicity... don't want to go crazy with abs sensors or speed inputs and all if I don't need to.

 

Miata...I was considering selling my mustang for a miata at one point and did the research. My GT officially gets 17/25 and realisticly it's 14/29. 01 miata officially is 23/28 and miata forum members confirm. For half the horse power and almost a third the torque in a car 800lb lighter, it's pretty meh. Plus to take time to put a miata motor into essentially a miata predessor is a waste when I can buy a miata. But then again 3500 for a 19yo car is not happening. I appreciate the advise guys, I just don't get it.

 

Lol Buick v6? I don't think it would even fit.

 

Toyota 1.6? Sounds cool. Know what rwd tranny bolts up? I'll research tomorrow.

Edited by Malykaii
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To clear things up... I'm not looking to build some dream car. Many guys have a $10K toy in the garage and a $900 Camry for the commute. I like Camry simplicity/reliability, just think they are ugly and bland... Looking for a compromise and 35mpg+ seams reasonable. (Geo metros get 40, with the bigger optional motor)

 

I want simplicity... don't want to go crazy with abs sensors or speed inputs and all if I don't need to.

 

Miata...I was considering selling my mustang for a miata at one point and did the research. My GT officially gets 17/25 and realisticly it's 14/29. 01 miata officially is 23/28 and miata forum members confirm. For half the horse power and almost a third the torque in a car 800lb lighter, it's pretty meh. Plus to take time to put a miata motor into essentially a miata predessor is a waste when I can buy a miata. But then again 3500 for a 19yo car is not happening. I appreciate the advise guys, I just don't get it.

 

Lol Buick v6? I don't think it would even fit.

 

Toyota 1.6? Sounds cool. Know what rwd tranny bolts up? I'll research tomorrow.

you basically eliminated everything

 

any "eco" motor you look at is going to be in a car roughly the same weight, meaning same mileage

my old turbo 1.6 got 35mpg playing all the time, could get better if not a lead foot

 

vw tdi is going to be your only bet if you are planning on a big leap above your 30mpg that your mustang gets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are plenty of fuel efficient motors that are pre 1996. Those shouldn't be ruled out because they are cheap and plentiful. Modern tech doesn't always mean more efficient. For example, my 91 toyota truck with a 22re gets around 26 mph hwy. A new toyota truck gets 25 mpg hwy. They weigh about the same and the newer truck has a bit more HP but the mpg really hasn't changed.

 

cool anecdote. again, why waste time with an engine that doesn't have obd2??

 

anyhow basemodel 91 toyota single cab is 2730LBS, basemodel 2010 toyota truck is 3250Lbs, and has massive 20 tires to spin, which lowers mileage, AND, its a 2.7

 

so, lets see. LARGER engine. MORE vehicle mass. MORE rotational mass. same gas mileage, therefore the NEW motor is a more efficient. it;s doing much more work for the same amount of fuel. the new truck is 19% heavier than the old truck.

 

you just proved that new engines and engine management is better. thanks buddy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...