Been driving the wife's truck a lot, since it's my winter vehicle. It's got the LR4 (4.8) and I just can't get over how smooth and strong this little mouse motor is. Being an 06 it was originally rated at 295hp/295tq and it really makes sweet noises and has a beautiful powerband.
So this got me day dreaming while sitting in afternoon traffic: What would be the perfect chassis to toss this engine into? The internet tells us that this engine is a cam, intake and tune away from 400hp and 7k rpms. Being small cubes it likes to spin and lacks some low end grunt you'd want in a larger vehicle. So I figure sub 3000lbs and rwd would be the requirements.
I keep thinking the RX8 would be perfect. Or an E30. Or a Fox mustang. What says the group?
I also once had the thought of a Catera.
FC RX7, E30s but nice ones are getting pricier, RX8s are basically becoming free, engine fits nicely in an Iroc camaro.
Biggest issue will be engine height with the truck intake, accessories and oil pan.
In reply to Andy Neuman :
If I was doing it, I'd run a Z06 intake. Car oil pans/pickups are cheap. accessories would probably be the limiting factor.
Since the obvious ones have been mentioned:
Mistubishi Starion.
A stalled TCI bucket T project.
A 2006 Sierra or Silverado 2 wheel drive, single cab short bed truck.
I keep thinking in a light car I'd be more concerned about getting one of the aluminum-block engines.
But I've been eyeing Jag XJ6s lately, and while that doesn't meet the lightweight criteria, the iron LR4 would still be hundreds of pounds lighter than what it replaces, and I suspect it would move with authority even if it didn't turn it into a rocketship.
Engine weights are so hard to get good info on; I dig that these guys just set the bare aluminum and iron blocks, with main caps, on a scale. 218 for iron, 109 for aluminum. 109 pounds in the nose of a light RACECAR is a lot; 109 pounds in a big cruiser... meh? Especially one that's having a 900(!? back to hearsay)-pound six pulled out...
In reply to John Welsh :
2 problems with that. A.) still too expensive and 2.) that 3.8 V6 sounds awesome. Oh, and heavy.
bobzilla said:
In reply to John Welsh :
2 problems with that. A.) still too expensive and 2.) that 3.8 V6 sounds awesome. Oh, and heavy.
Two quickly found asking under $4k and they both run. Find one with a cooked engine and likely cheaper.
https://pittsburgh.craigslist.org/cto/d/10-hyundai-genesis-coupe/6727487623.html
https://chicago.craigslist.org/wcl/cto/d/2010-hyundai-genesis-20-coupe/6729773293.html
Okay, notwithstanding the whole aluminum-preferable, there's an FC looking for a home right here on GRM, right now.
The Answer. An MX-5, er, Miata.
I still would love to stuff the 4.8 crank into a 6.0L block. then you get the 4" bore but the short stroke.
bobzilla said:
I still would love to stuff the 4.8 crank into a 6.0L block. then you get the 4" bore but the short stroke.
Torque comes from a long stroke. horsepower comes from a big bore. But the rest of the engine needs to support the potential or you’re just wasting things. To get the power out of a big bore the heads need to flow a lot more than stock. Same with manifolds coming and going.
Then the camshaft must make power at high RPM and the oiling system needs to be able to keep metal apart. Notice even the factory went to dry sump on the really serious power makers?
Ransom said:
But I've been eyeing Jag XJ6s lately, and while that doesn't meet the lightweight criteria, the iron LR4 would still be hundreds of pounds lighter than what it replaces, and I suspect it would move with authority even if it didn't turn it into a rocketship.
I reckon an XJS would be nicely motivated by one of these
3rd gen Camaro with the carbon fiber body panel catalog thrown at it. That or an s10.
D2W
HalfDork
11/1/18 12:40 p.m.
Chevy Luv is the obvious answer
The LR4 is such on overlooked motor and you can generally score them much cheaper than the 5.3.
LS motors fit in the S10 pretty darn well. Or a Ram 50 if you cut the firewall.
Volvo 242. Roomy, 4 wheel disc brakes, good solid chassis, and plenty of room for a v8. 2800 lbs curb weight. Tons of aftermarket support for suspension and chassis. Rally heritage. If you want double a arms up front go back to a 142 but there’s less room in the engine bay.
frenchyd said:
bobzilla said:
I still would love to stuff the 4.8 crank into a 6.0L block. then you get the 4" bore but the short stroke.
Torque comes from a long stroke. horsepower comes from a big bore. But the rest of the engine needs to support the potential or you’re just wasting things. To get the power out of a big bore the heads need to flow a lot more than stock. Same with manifolds coming and going.
Then the camshaft must make power at high RPM and the oiling system needs to be able to keep metal apart. Notice even the factory went to dry sump on the really serious power makers?
Depending on goals and year of 4.8 the stock heads could be more than adequate, later 4.8l used the same '243 head castings as the ls2. Even the 862 heads in the earlier LS aren't bad and I've heard you can stuff a larger valve in them. I assume anytime someone is swapping a 4.8 into something they swap cams at the same time because why not.
In reply to bobzilla :
and the motor should go in a 80's 380sl.
a LS swapped z32 is probably my first lottery win car purchase, all the looks of 'Japan's finest automotive era' with the power and reliability of a chevy v8. swap kits are pretty pricey for them though
I've thought that if you had a mid '80s TPI Corvette and a mid 2000s pickup with the 4.8, you could swap each one's engine into the other and improve both vehicles.
MadScientistMatt said:
I've thought that if you had a mid '80s TPI Corvette and a mid 2000s pickup with the 4.8, you could swap each one's engine into the other and improve both vehicles.
I have a mid 80's TPI Corvette and a mid 2000's pickup with a 4.8... The thought has crossed my mind.
