'65 Mustang fastback engine..

[Jay]

Likewise, rather than a Holden engine, I'd have put a Nissan Titan mill in that Skyline had I wanted a V8. Do believe there's a Z33 with that setup in the Formula D series.

The Holden LS1 (Chev...) in that R34 was cheap and has a lot of aftermarket, here in Australia we don't get the Titan or the V8 that it comes with and if we wanted one it would cost a fortune (compared to the LS1), plus as they said in the video they expected to blow it up and LS1's are on hand here all the time.

 

[YSSMAN]

They seem to throw the LS1/LS2/LS3 into just about anything and everything these days because its:

A) Cheap
B) Reliable
C) Easy-ish to work on

Thats why they stick it in damn near everything these days. From desert racers to prototype cars on the LeMans grid... It'll be there, and crank over every time.

 

[Jay]

Easy-ish to work on? You mean "very easy to work on"

 

[YSSMAN]

Pretty easy, depending on the application. This goes back to the packaging discussion on how GM crams them into their vehicles on occasion. Spark plugs on a 4th Gen F-Body, or really any of the trucks right now, is just terrible.

 

[niky]

To clear up my previous statement, japanese engines are good engines. When they go where they don't belong though, that's when they become ugly pieces of ****

Who decides where the engines "belong"? Chrysler uses engines stolenshared with Mitsubishi... Ford uses Mazda... and Volvo... engines, Lotus uses Toyota... (though some people switch them out for Honda K20s... more torque and better power potential)...

I don't get how the application turns the engine from gold to a piece of crud. I personally think that Clarkson's LS1-powered blender is the bee's knees. I still think the man himself is an idiot. but he's a loveable one.

----

Hmmm... twin turbo 13B in a Corvette? Hmmmm.... interesting. Stupid, but interesting. The only problem with that is that most Corvette engines have bigger power potential than the rotary, at less cost.

At least with the Skyline-powered Mustang, you have more power than stock and similar if not better power potential than the stock mill (of a 65 mustang). That, in a way, makes a twisted kind of sense. Swap up, not down.

Hmm... VQ35DE into a V6 Mustang? At least it'd sound better...

 

[Rotary Junkie]

VQs are the only V6s I find to sound good.

Now then, the RB might have more power potential than a 289, but if you spend just what a stock RB would cost you on said 289 you will have better power than the RB.

 

[Jay]

Pretty easy, depending on the application. This goes back to the packaging discussion on how GM crams them into their vehicles on occasion. Spark plugs on a 4th Gen F-Body, or really any of the trucks right now, is just terrible.

Well we are talking about the engines themselves, not so much about how GM Vehicles gives bad access. (plus I wasn't really thinking or something so minor as spark plugs when working on them)

 

[Cano]

How about a 2JZ-GTE?

in a 67 Camaro? ok.

http://www.teamspeed.com/forums/modern-muscle/5371-evs-custom-950-1-000bhp-camaro-56k-no.html

http://videos.streetfire.net/video/....htm?ref=5ac8bbed-7459-4810-b04a-9af000e9e642

and it is incredibly well done, in fact... but still something aches.

 

[YSSMAN]

Well we are talking about the engines themselves, not so much about how GM Vehicles gives bad access. (plus I wasn't really thinking or something so minor as spark plugs when working on them)

Oh yeah, in general, they're absolute sweethearts. Really, American V8s in general. Everything, for the most part, is "right there," and its not too difficult to change things out if you need to. I've seen Toyota and Nissan V8s sans their plastic covers, and peeked down in there... I've got no idea how the service techs get anything done.

It seems like any time someone builds a kit car or some one-off kind of prototype, they automatically go for the small-block. I'm sure that says something about how good of a setup it is. Only problem is that Ford has made a good move with their 5.0L program, and its only a matter of time before Chrysler actually gets their act together and puts out a good crate version of the (modern) HEMI, which they're kinda doing now.

Just something I've noticed in general, but GM really seems to whore our their engine programs for crate consumption. Last time I checked, they were still screwing together 3800 S/C V6s for the solo guys...

 

[McLaren]

To clear up my previous statement, japanese engines are good engines. When they go where they don't belong though, that's when they become ugly pieces of ****

That's still a stupid idea to have. You're basically condemning world re-known manufacturers....

 

[Rotary Junkie]

And?

 

[McLaren]

And?

Which makes his train of thought even more retarded....

 

[TheBigMan045]

To be fair the Japanese V8s do have a lot of grunt for their capacity, think 500hp+ running through a single holley carb (superstock rules) and they are cheaper than comparatable american V8s, one of my friends has a 1UZ powered Cressida another one is planning on doing a swap into a Hiace.

Dont get me wrong I do like american and aussie muscle but the japanese have the technology to make killer 8s too

 

[Rotary Junkie]

See, but here's the thing...

There is NO foreign engine capable of the same power-per-dollar as our V8s until you start going massively nutty, and even then... I bring this up because IF there was an engine that was cheaper to build power with than *insert any American car's available/easily fitted engine here*, then it would be worth it. I understand the guys who put SBCs into RX-7s. Rotaries are expensive as hell to make power with. I understand the guys who put SBCs into Mustangs somewhat less, but still understand the thinking.

What I DON'T understand is removing a Ford, GM or Mopar small-block for something like an RB or JZ, because here, the RB and JZ are expensive to buy, expensive to build, require a good bit of adaptation to work in something like an older Camaro. Now then, if someone had a spare or free RB/JZ/whatever that already built more power than whatever they would be able to toss in, then the swap makes sense...

Otherwise, it's sacrilegious, idiotic, and pointless.

 

[McLaren]

What I DON'T understand is removing a Ford, GM or Mopar small-block for something like an RB or JZ, because here, the RB and JZ are expensive to buy, expensive to build, require a good bit of adaptation to work in something like an older Camaro. Now then, if someone had a spare or free RB/JZ/whatever that already built more power than whatever they would be able to toss in, then the swap makes sense...

Otherwise, it's sacrilegious, idiotic, and pointless.

Except that this could be different in other countries, or even the other way around.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

Right and in those countries it makes more sense.

 

[Tornado]

Am I the only one who immediately thought "Well, you could put a Small Block in it" after reading the initial post, then laughed to myself?

 

[bergauk]

Am I the only one who immediately thought "Well, you could put a Small Block in it" after reading the initial post, then laughed to myself?

I don't think you were. When I saw it, I thought "OH, how about a 289 HiPo? *clicks thread* oh.. TokyoDrift fanboy"

Speaking of the OP, has he really responded to anything since that post?

 

[YSSMAN]

I think we chased him out of here with our pro-V8 overtones.

 

[mustangGT90210]

That's still a stupid idea to have. You're basically condemning world re-known manufacturers....

I think I'm choosing the wrong words here.

Mustangs were designed with American V8s originally. Skylines were designed with Japanese V6's originally. Elises were designed with a Toyota I4 originally.

What I'm clearly failing to get through is that I find it wrong when you stray so far from what was originally in the car just to be "unique" or something.

 

[slidesquad#1]

Elises were designed with a Toyota I4 originally.

No they weren't.

 

[Tornado]

In fact, not even the current car was, if I remember correctly.

 

[niky]

I think I'm choosing the wrong words here.

Mustangs were designed with American V8s originally. Skylines were designed with Japanese V6's originally. Elises were designed with a Toyota I4 originally.

What I'm clearly failing to get through is that I find it wrong when you stray so far from what was originally in the car just to be "unique" or something.

No they weren't.

I wonder how hurt owners of K-series powered Elises would be at that statement...

Skylines weren't designed to take V6s. The original Skylines took I4s, and the R31 and up Skylines were designed for I6s (from 2.0 I6 to 3.0 I6). It's only the R35 GT-R (which is not a Skyline) and the current V35 Skyline (which has no GT-R) that have V6s.

Oh, not to mention the fact that Ford Mustangs were initially available with both I6s and V8s, and, up to now, there are V6 Mustangs... And this is disregarding the turbocharged I4 SVO...

----

There are no "sacrilegious" swaps. There's no "purity" in having the same brand name on all your parts, when big multinational corporations can put that brand name on whatever the heck they want. Many supposedly "stock" cars (as I've pointed out before) come with engines, electronics and various parts borrowed from other manufacturers.

There are only stupid swaps, in the case that the swapped in engine provides no performance benefits over the original engine... but the Skyline swap isn't one of those... it's just not a cost-effective swap.

---

I love frankensteins. It's a measure of how clever and insane the owner/swapper is... There isn't anything as American as wrenching on a car and shoving an insane engine into it... a practice that dates back to Shelby and the Cobra... and even further...

 

[mustangGT90210]

I know the Mustang had 6's and the 2.3T. I clearly have my facts wrong, I'm just going to shut up now

 

[Gil]

You could go with a 327 Chevy engine.
Still WRONG, but better than wasting a Skyline engine.
Hell Early 'Stangs came with a perfectly servicable I6 of 200CID
Made plenty of power, and would climb Beverly Hills at 60MPH without problem. With and auto tranny...

I know this because my dad had one.
I figure a bigger carb, exhaust and some gearing changes it would have been a lot of fun to drive.
Of course it had no power steering...

 

[niky]

Pish. Power steering is for wimps.

 

[Jay]

and the current V35 Skyline (which has no GT-R) that have V6s.

V36 is current, not V35

 

[niky]

V36 is current, not V35

Picky picky. All right... V35 and up!

 

[PARAGON GT]

You could go with a 327 Chevy engine.
Still WRONG, but better than wasting a Skyline engine.
Hell Early 'Stangs came with a perfectly servicable I6 of 200CID
Made plenty of power, and would climb Beverly Hills at 60MPH without problem. With and auto tranny...

I know this because my dad had one.
I figure a bigger carb, exhaust and some gearing changes it would have been a lot of fun to drive.
Of course it had no power steering...

Ugh, I know how that is. My '67 doesn't have power steering. Its not so bad when the car is rolling, but if you have to turn the wheel while the car is stopped . . . That takes a bit of grunt work.

That is definitely one of the things on the "to be added" list during the rebuild.

 

[TheBigMan045]

GT-R bits are expensive so are Supra bits, cause they are full of techno wizz bangery