Fuel Efficient Motor Swap

[patra_is_here]

to the OP. why are you wasting time with these ridiculous requirements. just swap in any small FWD drivetrain from a honda or toyota . why this need to have a stick shift and RWD, and fuel efficiency, in a small displacement motor, for cheap . the constraints you've placed on the build are completely preventing you from your end goal, which is an efficient daily driver.

 

i OWN a 1.0 geo. its the biggest turd. yeah its like $25 every two weeks to fill up, but it's gutless, has throttle body injection, and idles for crap.

 

if you REALLY want something you can build, and is relatively simple, and RWD, either do the miata swap, or do a 4AG swap and learn how to modify fuel management to lower the fuel delivery to work with your light-weight chassis.

[Guest]

Maybe I missed it. But what car are you building? What are you doing to it to get it to a mere 1700lbs?

 

That's hell of a light car. I know guys who race original Mini Coopers with fiberglass one pice front clips, one light weight drivers seat and plexiglass glass windows. They tell me those little cars weigh in around 1700 lbs.

 

So you building a Geo Metro?

Edited February 6, 2015 by louswheel

[Skullzaflare]

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.

 

not sure where you base your fuel off, but i drove the toyota truck, a 2012, 2.7 dohc 4cyl, 2wd auto, averaged 16 in town, 22 highway. all stock

Edited February 6, 2015 by Skullzaflare

[patra_is_here]

the mileage is posted online. KBB, Edmunds, etc

[Skullzaflare]

the mileage is posted online. KBB, Edmunds, etc

they never seem to be accurate to real world results lol

[starquestJOE]

Swift gt motor with a samurai tranny

[jinx]

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?

Good luck finding a better option than the miata 1.8. 91-96 Escort GTs same motor. Cheap. Simple as it gets. 40+mpg no prob

Loaded with potential.... no less than sr20 or 4g63(just physically smaller)

[jinx]

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

buick v6 s are very popular simply because of their compactness. A real benefit is the instant tq from off idle.... much like a supercharged 2.0. Folks pick up complete running donors for $200 or less. Many get em free. They r plentiful

Full wt 2400 lb street rwd rollas go ez mid 13s with only early gen normally aspirated 3800.

Even the suprcharged version fits rollas. Turbo'd they're ridiculous. Dunno how big your underhood is.

I paid $200 for a running pontiac gtp (supercharged). I'm sure in a 1700 pound car it will provide insane acceleration and easily surpass 40mpg - on stock electronics. Lot more work. but it definitely has its merits.

http://www.rollaclub.com/board/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=8674

http://www.rollaclub.com/board/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=12698

[jinx]

Toyota 1.6? Sounds cool. Know what rwd tranny bolts up?

stock t50 5sp from the rolla gts will work fine with the 1700 wt

[ucw458]

Good luck finding a better option than the miata 1.8. 91-96 Escort GTs same motor. Cheap. Simple as it gets. 40+mpg no prob

Loaded with potential.... no less than sr20 or 4g63(just physically smaller)

 

Escorts with the 1.8 were rated for 24 mpg while escorts with the 1.9 cvh got 30+ mph. The 1.8 was rated at 127 hp the 1.9 was 88 hp. The GT was faster but the 1.9 moved enough to have some fun. If they both used the same trans then the 1.9 will bolt to the mazda rwd trans. The 1.9 in a 1700 lb car would be fun and do 40+ mpg. Not to mention cheap. Rebuilding a 1.9 with new pistons, sensors and everything else is around $300.

 

 

Add some junkyard 2.0 cvh parts to the 1.9 and you can bump the 88hp to 110hp.

[jinx]

1.8 dohc hwy was 31, 1.9 sohc was 38. Many actually see 40+ in stock 5spd 1.9s full wt scorts

Its another fine dirt cheap abundant platform with lots of options, that would rock in a 1700# hull

from bolt on junkyd turbos to reasonable cost 2.3 stroker twisting 500 ft-lbs tq....

for a compact motor, they can get interesting

[Skullzaflare]

Escorts with the 1.8 were rated for 24 mpg while escorts with the 1.9 cvh got 30+ mph. The 1.8 was rated at 127 hp the 1.9 was 88 hp. The GT was faster but the 1.9 moved enough to have some fun. If they both used the same trans then the 1.9 will bolt to the mazda rwd trans. The 1.9 in a 1700 lb car would be fun and do 40+ mpg. Not to mention cheap. Rebuilding a 1.9 with new pistons, sensors and everything else is around $300.

 

 

Add some junkyard 2.0 cvh parts to the 1.9 and you can bump the 88hp to 110hp.

different trans, and the 1.9s had all kinds of problems, great MPG from all the towing

[clow340]

If you like the suzuki engines get all the the ecu parts from a 1.3 16v metro/swift and use a 1.6 16v engine from a tracker/sidekick. Same engines, more stroke and WAY more power. Got in the 30's on long trips with 31's and a lift in my old 4dr sidekick.

[jinx]

different trans, and the 1.9s had all kinds of problems, great MPG from all the towing

yeah, but i wonder if thats user error. I've personally have had excellent service from both my 1.8 and 1.9 days. Perhaps inconsistent build quality. I got some of the lucky ones i guess

Never let em overheat, and run ext coolers on the auto. Simple fan sensor corrode cost ya.

If u check 1.9 mileage threads, 300k seem like nothing.... one over 700k, original drivetrain

wonder if towtrucks get that many miles

[ucw458]

The main 1.9 issue was valve seats. Other than that they were pretty good engines. Noisy but good. My last 1.9 threw a rod and that's when I said enough.

[Fuze]

So Malykaii, what about an NA SR20, plenty of trans options on that:

NA SR20 - usajdmengines.com

 

Maybe a 2.x liter BMW motor like what comes in the base model roadsters or 3 series? Not sure on the efficiency but they aren't bad.

 

A little spendy, but the drivetrain from the 2.0 Hyundai Genesis coupe is new, pretty efficient, and basically an EVO motor with RWD.

 

Tough to find much with both RWD and 35-ish MPG.

[twojayzeestarion]

Jz will do it

[Malykaii]

Nope, I didn't mention the car as I didn't want it to influence ideas. Triumph Spitfire, and the factory made it 1700lb for me. MG midget can hit 1500lb, but their suspension setup sucks.

 

Why these restrictions? Well manual because I hate autos so much. Rwd because the car is rwd and making it fwd would be a fabrication nightmare. Why cheap, cause I am and what if it gets hit one night when parked or stolen. No garage and in busy Brooklyn. Tell the insurance company it has a $2500 jdm motor and they'll just laugh and send a $900 check.

 

I would use the 1.3 distributorless geo motor over the 1.0 tbi.

 

4ag sounds promising. There's a 4afe version I see. Also the t50 tranny looks real easy to rebuild / freshen up.

 

1.9 ford sounds awesome. Quick Google doesn't give me a strait answer on rwd tranny options. I think I read miata trans won't work (which looks like a meh trans anyway) and some odd trans out of an old merkur would?

 

Bmw motor won't happen as only getrags bolt up and that company can go suck it.

 

2jz won't fit. I6 motors are too long.

 

I can't see how on older v6 gets 40mpg, but I'll look into the buick.

 

Thanks for the ideas gentlemen.

 

[ucw458]

1.9 ford sounds awesome. Quick Google doesn't give me a strait answer on rwd tranny options. I think I read miata trans won't work (which looks like a meh trans anyway) and some odd trans out of an old merkur would?

 

Here's some info I found.

 

http://www.locostusa.com/forums/viewtopic.php?start=0&t=610

[jinx]

4ag sounds promising. There's a 4afe version I see. Also the t50 tranny looks real easy to rebuild / freshen up.

not much point building a t50 geatbox, since good ones still in abundance cheap. I've given a few away over the years.

nice straight-foward one here http://www.britishv8.org/Triumph/LarryBreitkreitz.htm

 

I can't see how on older v6 gets 40mpg, but I'll look into the buick

supercharged 3800s get great mileage when tuned... that's in 3500 pound whales

A notmally aspirated 3800 with a tall diff ratio would pull 1700# hella strong.

These motors r not revvers, won't break a sweat and would "loaf" in their happy zone... delivering 40+ hwy

http://www.britishv8.org/MG/DonZeigler.htm

see this comment "With the 3.909:1 rear axle gear ratio, first gear is useless". Wrong gear. Wayyy off for 3800 tq in a lt wt

[Malykaii]

"Loaf" ...I never knew engines and bread had so much in common.

 

See reports of people getting 40mpg on the highway with the 3800. However it's less in the city, especially hardcore city. Like my ford 4.6 getting 29mph highway yet 13 city, as midtown manhattan traffic is far worst than whatever the epa considers a city. Plus seeing how it sits in the mg, it looks a bit big for that car. Cool engine and I'll keep it in mind for future swaps someday.

 

So the more budget fwd into rwd swaps I read through, I see how difficult it can be. With distributors on the back of heads now hitting the firewalls and misspositioned oil pans and pickup tubes, eh. So...

 

Looks like the Toyota A and Geo 1.3 are the best options as both exist in fwd and rwd form, making this swap easy. (Still need to research the Ford 1.9) Thanks so much gentlemen as I've never heard of the Toyota 4age before this thread. Just what I needed.

 

 

[Malykaii]

I'm also wasting my time researching motors and should be researching who owns the red 4age spitfire. I should just buy that thing as its perfect.

[Guest]

Nope, I didn't mention the car as I didn't want it to influence ideas. Triumph Spitfire, and the factory made it 1700lb for me. MG midget can hit 1500lb, but their suspension setup sucks.

 

Why these restrictions? Well manual because I hate autos so much. Rwd because the car is rwd and making it fwd would be a fabrication nightmare. Why cheap, cause I am and what if it gets hit one night when parked or stolen. No garage and in busy Brooklyn. Tell the insurance company it has a $2500 jdm motor and they'll just laugh and send a $900 check.

 

I would use the 1.3 distributorless geo motor over the 1.0 tbi.

 

4ag sounds promising. There's a 4afe version I see. Also the t50 tranny looks real easy to rebuild / freshen up.

 

1.9 ford sounds awesome. Quick Google doesn't give me a strait answer on rwd tranny options. I think I read miata trans won't work (which looks like a meh trans anyway) and some odd trans out of an old merkur would?

 

Bmw motor won't happen as only getrags bolt up and that company can go suck it.

 

2jz won't fit. I6 motors are too long.

 

I can't see how on older v6 gets 40mpg, but I'll look into the buick.

 

Thanks for the ideas gentlemen.

 

Call me crazy, but why not go with a Triumph engine?

 

If you want "modern" engine, just go with a Toyota Corolla twin cam? The RWD ones.

[4WStarion]

Spitfire eh, if its a US spec car why not remove all the pollution stuff to euro spec and it'll go better and use less fuel.

 

Can't believe you haven't heard of a 4age but even those no torque wonders will kill the stupid transverse spring rear end. It'll go like hell though. (who would use a transverse spring, oh wait lol but at least the poms stopped 40 years ago) You'll never stop it without good brake mods also.

 

Sr20de guzzle more than the turbo versions and no one would use a KA for anything but a work truck.

 

I'd tune the factory engine because the money you spend to fit a different engine/gearbox/diff/brakes would buy a heap of fuel.

[viper1355]

Just a suggestion, but really look into the cost of doing a swap on that car. I have a feeling you could mod the intake (or build one) to be mpi and run megasquirt for less than a swap will cost you. It would also probably be easier. The motor in the Spitfire isn't inherently inefficient, its just held back in the fuel economy department by the carb.

 

Another option would be a 750cc or so sportbike engine. Should be able to get one for the same cost as a car engine, and it will fit the character of the Spitfire much better. And it will beat the tar out of any car motor in fuel mileage.