I don't know guys, I wouldn't @!#$ on the ECO's parade, it's a good little motor.
Love the trash talk though, haha, some of you guys make me laugh with the drag racing threats. haha. No matter how fast you think you are there's always someone out there thats faster.
Winner will always be the one with the most time and $$. The rest (engine choice, ect) means very little, put very large turbo (s) on and they will move. simple HP = airflow.
Having said that, I wouldn't ever swap an ECO for a pushrod V6 (and I have the pushrod thing figured out, some would say) I'd stick with the aluminum block / head 4 banger.
For the average Joe on here, bolt on a turbo if you want to go fast, and then if you still want to go faster SELL YOUR J-BODY and get a real car.
11.92 @ 122.69 MPH Rotrex Blower / Intercooled / Water-Meth / 100% Daily Driver / 381 WHP
I like how my second response was ignored. . . .
marsman wrote:I don't know guys, I wouldn't @!#$ on the ECO's parade, it's a good little motor.
.
Oh... IDN, So far after 3 years in the business we have replaced 17 engines under warranty or power train warranty....... and there are by FAR more L36/L67's out there........
Everything from broken timing chains to dropping cylinder liners... timing chain oilrs failing( there is a tec bulletin about that one.)......oil pump gear cracking...
Ask Wrenchmonkey... I call him about every time we get one in... (ya know, rub it in, as he has one)
Chris
'02 Z-24 Supercharged
13.7 @102.45 MPH Third Place, 2007 GMSC Bash SOLD AS OF 01MAR08
Alright, #%$^ on the Eco's parade all you want then.
GM's best V6's have neutral balanced flywheels and aluminum heads though.
he he he
11.92 @ 122.69 MPH Rotrex Blower / Intercooled / Water-Meth / 100% Daily Driver / 381 WHP
what is the point in this thread? its kinda like the one's that want to know how many miles you have. or how honda owners talk @!#$. and so on....
it's a @!#$ fest.
South park all over again on the biggest piece of @!#$ out of their a$$es.
I saw this part yesterday:
Rodimus Prime wrote:................. 2000s thinking > 1980s thinking
Then I saw this:
Rodimus Prime wrote:Um yes it does, GM's new 1.4T motor makes 140HP, Cavalier 2.2 Ecos make that with less torque also, not to mention the 1.4 offers far superior fuel mileage and emissions, go back even further in history you have 2.4s only making 150, go back to the 80s and you have 2.5 Iron Dukes making 90HP. This is an ongoing trend that engines are getting smaller and power isn't really going down in most cases its going up.
But yeah, speaking of going back to the 80's. You mean like.... using a small engine and putting a turbocharger on it to increase it's power to a level meeting or exceding engines available other vehicles on the market.
Yup, sounds like 2000s thinking is starting to be the same as 1980's thinking.
But either way Rodimus, I think it's time to back out of this thread, and just let it die. A number of people have proved you wrong on a number of points. The penis swinging is getting out of control. The thing about challenging people to a race on the internet, especially for a show that's nearly a year away and miles away from home for either involved, is stupid.
The bottom line is that people can do whatever they want to their car. And nobody really gives a rats ass what you think about it. Especially when you're not capable of putting up a decent, fact based argument of why not to, or at least give someone enough realistic insight to change their mind.
I don't even know why this thread got started in the first place. I mean, I realize that there's pretty much a daily thread from some noob talking about a 3800 swap and how they're planning on doing this swap. Hell, people see I have a 3400 and I get a ton of PM's all the time. Then these people find out that there's actually some effort involved in getting the swap done, and we know how people enjoy laziness in todays world. So then about 99% of those people change their mind and and decide they're going to do an ECO swap instead. And on to the laziness thing again, because about 90% of those people don't even do a swap, and I'd guess that half if not more of those people just get a different car altogether. The rest just throw mods on what they have.
I mean seriously, if you're going to waste your efforts on making a silly post. At least make it a good silly post. Like way back in the day when you filled your car up with Livewire.
www.gmscf.com
I didn't read the whole thing, but the one thing I just don't get is how someone who, as far as I know, has never swapped ANY engine, in ANY car, at ANY time (correct me if I am wrong, of course), feels they have the knowledge on the subject to question ANYONE who has, and their reasons for doing so.
**there is only one true love in my life... and my girlfriend has learned to live with it**
proven wrong ? hardly
1989 Turbo Trans Am #82, 2007 Cobalt SS G85
Rodimus Prime wrote:Well I don't see purposely spending more money to make less power as any type of "thinking". "Realistically" a 2.4 barely makes to 100k miles without blowing a head gasket, water pump or rod bearing, or some other type of failure much less under boost.
That is not true I have WAY over that, sure my motor was built at about 30,000km, but still my head gasket is perfectly fine, but then again there are some of us that would be willing to say eco not that great of a motor, EVERY motor has its down-side, the eco is just 4 cylinder version of the 350, cheap, alot of plug and play parts, little imagination needed to build, gas mileage is not necessarily true seeing as how I get better mileage then most cobalts and eco cavs, now if you go part for part with eco and the LD9 you will see its a drivers race, as long as when you change simular parts into both engines, sure the eco is lighter, but lighter doesn't always mean better, look at the 1/4 mile sticky there are LD9s that are running with the ecos, the biggest different in times are due to us LD9 guys needing to use imagination to build our cars so a little longer to do thos numbers, we all know if the LG0 and the LD9 had the same after-market support as the eco, you would not be able to say too much about them, sure you CAN make more HP with the eco, BUT you also have the support and there are also a hell of alot more out there due to gm putting them in alot of platforms, research is your key........in other words ONLY good thing about eco is more after-market support......doesn't mean better
"As I lay rubber down the street, I pray for traction I can keep, but if I spin and begin to slide, please dear God protect my ride." -Amen
Rodimus Prime wrote:proven wrong ? hardly
On what point? You say that the L67 is pointless because its more expensive than an eco swap, then there are guys who have done the swap for as little as instead of your posted 10k. Then you claim an LNF swap would be cheaper than an L67 swap. I STILL want to know your price break down list for that one. If this is that important to you why did you go Harrop anyway? For the price of the supercharger you could of invested into a good turbo set up pushing hp levels much higher and probably cheaper than you did. (This is like the same argument but between styles of power adders you used instead of which engine)
When it comes to power you claim for the money they could of modded the ecotec, that is if you already had it most swaps are from 2.2OHV cars. Then if you did and you invested the money from the swap on the eco you would be faster, true to start. But what the L67 swap gives you is potential over the ecotec, displacement on which to boost off of. Displacement will always net more power with the same mods. Also, that added weight of the L67 does become a moot point when it doesn't crack at higher hp levels.
Proven wrong? More like decimated from 10 pages of posting.
Matt never said an LNF swap would be cheaper. He said it'd be a cool swap...
LE61T PTE6262 Powered
Harrops are 1500 bucks now, your not finding any turbo worth buying for that price
1989 Turbo Trans Am #82, 2007 Cobalt SS G85
I disagree matt for $1500 you can get some really ncie garret GT series turbos or Turbonetics turbos...
LE61T PTE6262 Powered
Rodimus Prime wrote:Harrops are 1500 bucks now, your not finding any turbo worth buying for that price
i begged to differ...
Borg Warner S256
capable of 400+ whp, and i purchased mine for $450......again, you're not really looking to knowledgeable right about now.
Hey Rod, I'll race you but every time you beat me I get to drink a beer.
Rodimus Prime wrote:Harrops are 1500 bucks now, your not finding any turbo worth buying for that price
My "kit" cost 300 bucks......
and it was for a "no suport" W41...
Chris
'02 Z-24 Supercharged
13.7 @102.45 MPH Third Place, 2007 GMSC Bash SOLD AS OF 01MAR08
Rodimus Prime wrote:Harrops are 1500 bucks now, your not finding any turbo worth buying for that price
wait... what? arent about 100% of the turboed cars on this site powered by turbo's that cost LESS than that?
you know... those cars that have like 150-200whp more than you?
PFFT secret cams?! pm me if you want a real upgrade.
Are you REALLY defending the Harrop when you yourself said that you could NOT achieve your power goals with the Harrop and that you decided you wanted to turbo. Do you REALLY need me to dig up the thread, because I will.
if your doing an entire turbo kit for less than 1500 bucks, you shouldnt be doing one, not everyone likes their car to look like a hack job either, generally nicer looking items are more pricey and the harrop is a good looking piece
1989 Turbo Trans Am #82, 2007 Cobalt SS G85
My power goal has always been 300-350whp, so my last dyno was 1.2hp off, whooptie do, I can get over 35mpg highway also, id like to increase the handling, breaking and audio, beyond that to me its finished.
1989 Turbo Trans Am #82, 2007 Cobalt SS G85
Rodimus Prime wrote:if your doing an entire turbo kit for less than 1500 bucks, you shouldnt be doing one, not everyone likes their car to look like a hack job either, generally nicer looking items are more pricey and the harrop is a good looking piece
Race my 95 POS?
Chris
'02 Z-24 Supercharged
13.7 @102.45 MPH Third Place, 2007 GMSC Bash SOLD AS OF 01MAR08
