some one please make me stop

OK, in my ever present search for the "next" project... I have decided that it must be RWD. It must have a ton of options for driveline/suspension/etc. It must also be domestic. Since I'd like it to be a manual at some point in it's life, starting with one seems smart.

Enter newest find: 2002 Blazer 2dr, 2wd V6 5-spd. Now, all my research on this leads me to believe that hte 2wd manual trucks came factory with the 8.5" rear, rear discs and G80. Wheelbase is 100.7" (CAM legal), it's wider than it is tall (64" tall, 68" wide) making is SCCA legal in stock form right off the bat. Because it's a V6 manual, it already makes OK power so an engine swap isn't necessary right off the bat. Some quick bolt ons and cheap tune (because GM) should get me in the 200hp range easily allowing me to spend money on suspension, wheels and tires.

Here's the kicker.... IT's in the southwest so no rust and is priced under $3k with 95k miles. I guess my biggest question is: how do I convince the wife I just have to have this and we should go see her parents at thanksgiving and drive this home?

I thought those blazers made 200 hp factory... 4.3 vortec right?

As far as the wife, going to see her parents should be an easy ask.

1. Suggest going to see her parents.
2. "Whoops, honey, I bought a truck."
3. ??
4. Profit

In reply to Robbie:

Should be 180hp/245tq at the crank.

190/250 is what the internets tell us. Intake, exhaust and tune should put the thing into 200+ crank power and make it decent..... until it blows up. Then a cammed 4.8 would get stuffed into it making 300+ crank.

Here's what is even funnier to me.... in late 2001, early 2002 before we bought my first Hyundai I was driving a 2000 Sonoma 4-banger. I went and test drove this exact trim level truck (2wd, 4.3/5spd) to trade in. They were $19k at the time and that was just too rich for us at the time and a couple months later we traded that sonoma on te Elantra and I started down the Korean path.

BTW: I should know better than to ask you people to not enable me further.

I'll be looking for the build thread Thanksgiving weekend. I Have an affinity for S-trucks, but I don't have any anymore, so yours will keep me entertained.

In reply to Bobzilla:

This would be CAM-C, correct? Google says the lightest '02 Blazer was just over 3600lbs, so I'm guessing this one is in that ballpark, meaning you should be able to hit the 3200lb minimum weight pretty easily.

Here's my question though: what does this platform offer that others(e.g. F-body, Mustang, GTO, etc.) don't? Short wheelbase, yes, but at the cost of a higher CoG. So a.) How competitive can this be vs. the competition, and b.) how much does that matter to you?

Doing my best to stop you here.

Bobzilla wrote: it's wider than it is tall (64" tall, 68" wide) making is SCCA legal in stock form right off the bat. Because it's a V6 manual, it already makes OK power so an engine swap isn't necessary right off the bat.

Are you talking about rollover rules? They are based on average track width and height.

2002 blazer avg track: 56.15 at the widest
2002 blazer height: 64.6 at the lowest

So, its not even close. It needs a LOT of lowering and extra track width in order to be competitive.

Bobzilla, is you follow the local SCCA crowd. A guy in Indiana is selling his CAM C mustang right now for 6 grand. All done.

I think you'd struggle to do much with a blazer. And the 4.3 is shoehorned in so tightly it is a true misery to work on. I'm also not sold on the performance potential of the S-10 chassis. Even with all the horsepowers and tons of trick suspension work they just aren't very fast at events I've attended.

Wrong generation, but inspirational, nonetheless

It's interesting how you thought "manual capable, RWD, domestic and with a good aftermarket" and ended up with "S-10 Blazer." It's interesting, you'd have to lower it and change the offset by at least 8.5" to be autocrossable. The lowest Belltech kit is 5" lower, so that still means you have to move the average track out by 3.5". Not impossible, but will require some crazy widebody work.

I have received mixed information on the 8.5" axle being in S-trucks. Some say that its only the ZR2 that got them, others say that after a certain year they all did... only way to know is look at it. Round cover its an 8.5. Oval cover, 7.5. Maybe ask the seller to snap a photo of it?

The 7.5 will actually take as much power as you throw at it in the blazer because it will just light up the tires. But get traction on a 1-2 shift and it will blow the carrier right out the cover.

In reply to KyAllroad:

I know Dave quite well. Drive. That car more than a few times. While it's a great car it's just the wrong engine, chassis and missing pushrods. I'm never going to be the fast guy. I know that. I mean the SooperKia has made me look like a hero but even with a crazy cheater pax I just can't keep up with the big dogs. I'm ok with that.

What I'm ready for is a new fun project that will allow me to stuff a 4.8 into it at some point and still be a fun driver. I need something practical-ish that passes the wife's approval. Because, if she hates it no matter how much I love it it'll suck.

In reply to curtis73:

From the the code lists the manual trans blazers got rear disc and the 8.5. The auto got the 7.5 and drums. I might still have the inkaws go look at it and send me a pick of the RPO codes.

In reply to G_Body_Man:

The 2wd is 68" wide and 64" tall. At least by the original specs. That is legal. Lower it 3/4 (which I would anyway) and it's well within specs.

I always kind of considered that vehicle to be capable, reliable, and utterly E36 M3ty.

I'm just not seeing it--other than looks maybe.

Bobzilla wrote: In reply to G_Body_Man: The 2wd is 68" wide and 64" tall. At least by the original specs. That is legal. Lower it 3/4 (which I would anyway) and it's well within specs.

It's width is 68--but you need its track width.

As The Pro and mtn stated above the rule is not BODY width/height ratio but rather TRACK width/height ratio.

Stop

In response to the thread title- has that ever happened here?

paranoid_android74 wrote: In response to the thread title- has that ever happened here?

Why in the world would we stop you.

We like reading about stupid E36 M3 as much as we like doing stupid E36 M3.

Misery loves company.

You must stop. Now.

There, that oughta do it.

The idea that the blazer can't be legal to autox is hilarious. They are the same dimensions as the s10's, down to the track width and those have been autox'ing in stock classes for years.

The idea would be a set of 17x9 with 275/45 and a minimum of a 3/4 drop. That woukd be lower than the extremes and pushing the wheels out another 2" from anything ever offered. The shorter tire, 4" drop and extra 2" per side in track width puts us well into the safe zone.

Also, a set of zr2 flares and even crazier wheels wouldn't be out of the question down the road.

Regardless, SWMBO is not completely on board with this idea yet.

But for anyone interested her is the truck: http://tucson.craigslist.org/ctd/5843732026.html

Increased wheel width != increased track width. You need to move the center of the wheel outboard.

I don't find it hilarious at all. I do find it interesting that regions are allowing the S10 to run in stock classes. The S10 is listed in ST* and Prepared classes though.

Just look at the list of excluded cars in 2016:

Dodge Caliber (non-SRT) Fiat 500 (non-Abarth) (2012-17) Ford Fiesta (non-ST) (2011-17) GEO Tracker Jeep CJ series MINI Countryman Nissan Juke Suzuki Samurai Suzuki Sidekick Scion iQ Scion xB (2004-06)

Hell, there are plenty of incidents of legal cars, with far more favorably height vs track, going up on 2 wheels or rolling over.

There are two versions of that 4.3, a z code and a w code. One is 160 one is 190hp.