DTSFab.com (Desert, Trail and Sand)

Automotive Powered Off Road (AKA: Buggys, Jeeps, Trucks, Etc,Etc. ) => Motor and Drivetrain => Topic started by: jsbm on August 20, 2009, 03:46:42 PM

Title: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: jsbm on August 20, 2009, 03:46:42 PM
I have seen several people suggest using these engines and their trannies and feeding them into an irs rear like a mazda or t-bird. I know I would need to make the tranny a true posi to make this work. My question is has any one done this or is it an off the wall idea?
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: Islander on August 20, 2009, 05:51:47 PM
Are you planning 2 or 4WD?
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: fabr on August 20, 2009, 06:57:49 PM
Hell,we're all off the wall here!  bounce gg:
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: jsbm on August 21, 2009, 05:56:48 AM
It will be 2WD.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: chrishallett83 on August 22, 2009, 02:54:25 AM
A lot of guys make bastardised mongrel motors out of different Honda bits and pieces - a 2.4 litre bottom end out of a CRV mixed with the VTec head from an S2000 makes a wicked four cylinder that, once set up and tuned nicely, can crank out 260-280 horsepower all day long naturally aspirated. Plus they're fairly compact and nice and lightweight.

Problem is, seeing as it's a VTec, you'll have to start wearing sideways baseball caps and saying 'yo' and 'brah' a lot. You'll also need to install at least 7 subwoofers in your buggy.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: SPEC on August 22, 2009, 06:04:50 AM
A lot of guys make bastardised mongrel motors out of different Honda bits and pieces - a 2.4 litre bottom end out of a CRV mixed with the VTec head from an S2000 makes a wicked four cylinder that, once set up and tuned nicely, can crank out 260-280 horsepower all day long naturally aspirated. Plus they're fairly compact and nice and lightweight.

Problem is, seeing as it's a VTec, you'll have to start wearing sideways baseball caps and saying 'yo' and 'brah' a lot. You'll also need to install at least 7 subwoofers in your buggy.



 LMAO

BBBWWWWAAAAAA   HA HA HA HA
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: Voodoochikin04 on August 22, 2009, 09:12:36 AM
thats awesome...lol   brought tears to my eyes.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: SPEC on August 22, 2009, 09:15:27 AM
I'm liken Chris more every day
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: jsbm on August 22, 2009, 09:47:13 AM
 :t
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: LiveWire on August 24, 2009, 01:08:47 PM
Seeing as how a Honda has the output at the opposite end of the engine compared to the Mazda or T-Bird, I think the Ecotech would be easier to do.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: jsbm on August 24, 2009, 01:31:20 PM
I was just using these engines and trannies as an example. I know hondas run the opposite way. For that matter I could go with something like a GM 3800 V6 and it's tanny. I was just wondering if anyone has tried this or is it a lost cause.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: fabr on August 24, 2009, 01:40:06 PM
I'm liken Chris more every day
Man love?
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: LiveWire on August 24, 2009, 02:19:58 PM
If I was mounting it that direction, I would probably lean toward a V6 since it would be shorter front to back. A nice one to look into is a Duratec V6. It is aluminum DOHC, 24 valve. They were in quite a few cars so you can find them in the junk yard cheap.

Dodge Intrepid V6s have been used before since you can use the transaxle in them too. They are a T-drive like a VW.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: chrishallett83 on August 24, 2009, 03:26:59 PM
Mitsubishi 6A13. A 2.5 litre EFI V6 out of a 1520kg car that could do 0-60 in about 6 seconds flat, so in a 850-900kg buggy/rail, it should go like a cat shot in the bum.

Came in two common versions, SOHC or DOHC 24 valve. Forget about the SOHC, it's boring. The DOHC comes with two turbos, and was available in the Mitsubishi Galant/Legnum VR-4. This model cranked out 276hp and 268 ft/lb torque - plenty of go for a 2000 lb rail. As with pretty much all recent Jap EFI turbo engines, a boost up and retune (with supporting ancillaries if you go high enough with the boost) can have very positive effects on the numbers you get out of it.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: jsbm on August 24, 2009, 04:17:16 PM
You guys are only liking Chris cuz he gets all the girls cuz he's got all those speakers. ;D By the way I have a son that will turn 16 in 2 weeks and know all about having all those speakers in a car.

On a serious note is this idea feasible or will it cause more problems than it's worth.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: chrishallett83 on August 24, 2009, 04:51:05 PM
Well for both the motors I suggested, they are from transverse mountings in AWD cars. But all you really need to do is fit a RWD sump from the same engine family (or have one welded up out of 2mm sheet steel if that option fizzles out), and mate'em up to a transaxle of your choice. If there is no aftermarket adapter readily available, find someone who knows how to figure that stuff out (I daresay there are a good few blokes who can help you with that here ;D ), and maybe get someone who's good with a mill to machine it up from a billet of 6062. I'm sure there are a good few blokes here who could help you out with that, too.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: jsbm on August 24, 2009, 05:28:28 PM
Chris you are missing the point. I am talk about using the engine and the stock tranny locking up the diff in the stock tanny and turning it side ways and running it into another diff.

You do have some good ideas though.  bb:
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: chrishallett83 on August 25, 2009, 02:41:00 AM
If that's the case, then we'll just have to find you an all-alloy RWD V6 motor with good power then, won't we? Or mid-mount?

For instance, the Honda C32B, out of this thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_NSX
There's gotta be one at a wreckers somewhere...
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: LiveWire on August 25, 2009, 05:33:52 AM
I did not understand you were thinking to run the transaxle and then another diff. I think that would be a lot of gear reduction for anything other than a rock crawler. I think it would be quite heavy. There will be the issue of the FWD drive shafts being offset to one side of the engine and the IRS diff being centered.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: jsbm on August 25, 2009, 05:57:58 AM
I thought the same thing about the reduction as well, but according to the gear calculator I used(http://www.angelfire.com/fl/procrastination/rear.html (http://www.angelfire.com/fl/procrastination/rear.html)) as long as I stay with something like 2.73-3.08 in the irs it should work. I may be missing something but when I compared the ratios of the FWD trans to the ones on that site which are RWD there was not that much difference between ratios of any of the gears.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: LiveWire on August 25, 2009, 02:30:18 PM
Did you also include the final drive reduction in the FWD transaxle?
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: jsbm on August 25, 2009, 04:08:04 PM
Is there a calculator that will allow me to do this or a formula? Sorry guys I am too tired to look for one.

These are the ratios I used.

Final Drive    1       2        3        4         5         R
3.94          3.58    2.02    1.35   0.98   0.69  3.31
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: LiveWire on August 26, 2009, 06:53:46 AM
You multiply all stages. So 3.94x0.69x2.73
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: jsbm on August 26, 2009, 01:32:21 PM
So that gives me a new final of 7.42 in fifth gear. Not so good unless I want to drag race for 50 feet or pull stumps. Any way around this or is this the deal breaker.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: LiveWire on August 27, 2009, 08:06:52 AM
You can fudge it a bit based on that if the car original had 24" tires and you run 31s then you'll gain a bit of speed back. You don't need or be able to attain the same top speed of the original car. But you're still going to be geared too low with that setup.

With the engine mounted in a typical RWD fashion, I would just use a RWD setup. There are a bunch of Fords with the 8.8 IRS setup and you can get at least 4.10 gears for an 8.8. You really don't even need to start with an IRS rear end. My brother narrows rear ends for pulling tractors. His V8 powered one has a Ford 9". He just did an S-10 rear end for an 1100 bike engine powered one. The guy had a narrowed Chevette rear end in it that blew out. It's possible to narrow a rear end up so it is just the pig and the output flanges. The 930 CV pattern can be put into the flanges and use spacer rings for clearance. By using a more common rear end and narrowing it, it provides more options for gears.

My brother's tractor runs a power glide with no tail shaft housing and a splined coupler to the rear end making it a very short drivetrain. I have told him he should build a 4 seat rail with the same setup.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: jsbm on August 27, 2009, 02:49:30 PM
Was my math correct with your formula? I mean my new final drive or am I missing something. With the #'s you put in there that gives me 7.42, is this my new final and do I use this in the calculator as my final with the trannies original ratios?
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: Engineer on August 27, 2009, 04:38:31 PM
What exactly is the layout of the car you are proposing?  Front engine rear drive?  If you are trying to do rear or mid engine with rear drive, the length of any setup is to long IMO.  There are cars built that way but they are longer drag race type cars and not as manuverable, and not well suited for topping dunes, etc.  I also don't know what terrain your targeting.

In the drag race world, a super common setup is any motor coupled to a powerglide 2 speed that has no tail shaft just an adapter, then a splined coupler is used between the tranny and the solid mounted 3rd member.  This setup is about as short as you can get with an OE tranny and rearend setup, but is still two long IMO for an agile car.  I would estimate it is 30" from the front of the tranny to the axle centerline.  Fabr could give us the actual number. Hint Hint.

IMO either of the motors you mentioned would work well with an 091 bus tranny, Adapters would be readily available for either.  Then you would have a common and very upgradeable transaxle while keeping the car proportions very well in line.

After rereading some of your posts, I may be way out of line with the direction of my response, but physical packaging was always the downfall of any nontraditional drivetrain ideas that I came up with.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: fabr on August 27, 2009, 07:54:54 PM
What exactly is the layout of the car you are proposing?  Front engine rear drive?  If you are trying to do rear or mid engine with rear drive, the length of any setup is to long IMO.  There are cars built that way but they are longer drag race type cars and not as manuverable, and not well suited for topping dunes, etc.  I also don't know what terrain your targeting.

In the drag race world, a super common setup is any motor coupled to a powerglide 2 speed that has no tail shaft just an adapter, then a splined coupler is used between the tranny and the solid mounted 3rd member.  This setup is about as short as you can get with an OE tranny and rearend setup, but is still two long IMO for an agile car.  I would estimate it is 30" from the front of the tranny to the axle centerline.  Fabr could give us the actual number. Hint Hint.

IMO either of the motors you mentioned would work well with an 091 bus tranny, Adapters would be readily available for either.  Then you would have a common and very upgradeable transaxle while keeping the car proportions very well in line.

After rereading some of your posts, I may be way out of line with the direction of my response, but physical packaging was always the downfall of any nontraditional drivetrain ideas that I came up with.
I have several of those setups sitting around.If you want I'll measure one tomorrow. They are commonly called a PG Shortie. Put kevlar frictions in and you have a bullet proof PG. No need to spend big bux either. All you need is a good  full manual valve body such as a TCI,a GOOD converter,a KILLER cooler and you have it. Get any auto tranny hot and it's all over.Still too long overall for your need tho. I'd estimate approx 22" lng tho. Let me know if you want the measurement.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: jsbm on August 28, 2009, 05:31:56 AM
I want to take the engine and tranny from a fwd car, lock up the diff turn it sideways and feed an irs with the stock tranny. With this setup I don't think the length would be too long, but as Livewire pointed out gearing will be an issue.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: fabr on August 28, 2009, 05:45:59 AM
The width will suck also.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: Nutz4sand on August 28, 2009, 11:31:22 AM
The width will suck also.

How so? Flanges off any common IRS diff are no wider than a typical VW tranny?
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: Voodoochikin04 on August 28, 2009, 07:38:50 PM
i dont understand why you woudnt just mount in normally and use the axles to your wheels? why do you want to tunr it sideways and run to another diff? whats the point? whats the advantage, orther than working for a logging company? lol jk..   it seems like way more work, worse end results...  why?
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: Nutz4sand on August 28, 2009, 08:50:53 PM
i dont understand why you woudnt just mount in normally and use the axles to your wheels? why do you want to tunr it sideways and run to another diff? whats the point? whats the advantage, orther than working for a logging company? lol jk..   it seems like way more work, worse end results...  why?

Not worse end results. And not really that much more work.

Mounting a typical front drive engine like it sits in the car from the factory means one shaft will be way shorter (Unless its one of those bigger Audis that still use the center diff with equal shafts). Not a big deal on a street car with 4-5 inchs of travel. Plus the gearing is rarely deep enough. Now if you went like Chain drive rails you could tailoer the ratio easily to your needs. Those chains are longer and massive and I have not heard of them having ANY chain issues.

http://www.chaindriverail.com/indexcon.htm (http://www.chaindriverail.com/indexcon.htm)

http://www.sandrocket.com/ (http://www.sandrocket.com/)

If you look at Sand rockets they use an IRS rear end out of a Jaguar fed by a front mounted V-8 engine and automatic transmission. Makes for a pretty nice sand machine (Not sure how they do on other terrains) One could also use the rear end out of late model ThunderBirds or Vettes and others.

Now if you take a typical decent running light weight front drive assembly and tranny and turn it sideways you simply run power off it to a IRS rear end for a setup that could have the motor in the front like a Sand Rocket or it could be hovering right on top of the IRS like a Midengine VW rail is. Not quite as short but dang close.

The issue may be the ratio but with a front transaxle geared for tiny tires the typical 3.08 ratio in an IRS rear would be a benefit I feel. Plus no doubt there are higher ratios already in IRS rear ends if a person looked. I do not see this as anywhere NEAR a rock crawler ratio. Nor a log hauler....  ;)

When I first thought of this it was looking at a VW Rabbit. Decent spirit and a tranny that could shift like greased lighting. But the tires on the front were TINY. To get them to turn 1300 Padla Tracs would NEED a 3 to 1 type ratio.

Plus the rabbit would run 100 MPH like nothing. Unless your running Baja you realitically are not going to be needing to go over maybe 65-70 tops and since most off roading involves hills (and steep hills if your like me and have my kind of fun) the ratio will be decently suited with large sand tires or small truck 4x4 tires if you are a hardpack runner. 

Plus if you could use an automatic tranny (providing its mounting would not starve the tranny pickup for oil (or the motor for that reason) due to the different forces imposed on it) you would NEVER miss a shift. An Automatic in a light car is always fun if the motors got a lil pep.

 
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: Voodoochikin04 on August 28, 2009, 09:20:28 PM
he said it came out to like a 7.4 or something.. that is insane!!!  log hauler....
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: Engineer on August 28, 2009, 09:32:47 PM
he said it came out to like a 7.4 or something.. that is insane!!!  log hauler....

Depends on the tire size.  With some 31" tires you could still have a 85 mph top end, and lots of grunt.

How far is the crankshaft usually offset from the axle centerline?  I am thinking its around 8-10"?  So the motor would be that far off of the centerline of the car.  Not bad really.  And with the double reduction some of the auto trannies that wouldn't last a day direct drive to the wheels, might end up being reliable.  You would have very little converter slip with that kind of reduction. IMO.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: HeavyDSL on September 24, 2009, 07:27:36 PM
Take a peek :o at a Dodge Neon SRT4. 5 speed manual, equal length half-shafts, limited slip diff (2004-2005), and available at wreckers/Ebay. With bolt on :'s, 400 WHP is achievable!  :)
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: LiveWire on September 28, 2009, 10:25:51 AM
Take a peek :o at a Dodge Neon SRT4. 5 speed manual, equal length half-shafts, limited slip diff (2004-2005), and available at wreckers/Ebay. With bolt on :'s, 400 WHP is achievable!  :)

Equal length because they add an intermediate shaft so it has two short half shafts.
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: Voodoochikin04 on September 28, 2009, 04:45:32 PM
not to mention expsensive as hell and rare... not a whole lot of wrecked srt4's
Title: Re: Ecotec or Vtec
Post by: LiveWire on September 29, 2009, 09:26:20 AM
I would think 400whp includes changing the turbo. It would seem cheaper to start with the base engine and have less expensive take off parts.
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal