Project Pro-Fueling instead of Pro-Touring...
 

Is it possible? Could there be interest in seeing who can build the coolest retro-fitted old detroit steel that can blister the pavement, pull G's in the twisties, stop on a dime, yet pass every gas station in site?

I think it would be super cool. I would love to start with a old Chevy II, super lighten the chassis/body weight. Go ultra high tech carbon fiber, etc. Massive wheels on light weight rims...etc. Then, go with some interesting highway gears in the back, od trans of course, and drop in some kind of 4 banger with all kinds of trick stuff.

The goal would be to run a low 13 in street trim and get 20+ city 30+ highway or better.

Do you think this would catch on???????

I have been trying to convince Radrambler to seize the moment by locating a freakmode four banger with turbo or blower for his ultra light weight ride.

You never know...could be the next big thing.

I'm sure people have been thinking about it. The Ecotec motor has proven itself to have A LOT of potential - 4 cylinders, 1,000hp and weighing in at only 350 lbs.

GM Produces a 1,000 hp Ecotec motor

4 cylinder?
 

yes me and chris(69myway) have talked about what engine would make some fun power and be different but lightweight.save gas.......a quad four with a turbo is a lightweight package that can put out about 300-350 hp(id like more) on a stock computer controlled setup..(ive seen it in a z24 cavalier). ive been researching different options via the internet.....trying to find a engine combo that will keep nose weight down make enough power to be fun and not take a NASA engineer to make work . my car is very light... so it wont take tons of power to make it fun ...the car is different so why not check out "different engine types"..still ls1 seem to be the thing to go with ...

who knows?
radrambler

Good tune on an LS1 in a camaro with a 6spd will do over 30mpg on the fwy. Just have to lean it out a bit under super light loads and go easy.

I hope I never witness a 4 banger in any muscle car.

i dig the idea, if it was done right it would be more daily driver friendly on the wallet..... but just make sure you figure out a way to make it sound kewl. no loud fart can exhausts :D

Gas isn't THAT expensive that I would give up the V8... as mentioned, with a LT1 or LS1 and a 6-speed, upper 20s to 30mpg is easily achieved.

If I had to choose a non V8, I'd go with a 3.8 or 4.3 GM V6 and add a turbo or 2. :unibrow:

I also like the idea as far as fuel efficiency is concerned, but I totally agree with race-rodz,just please don't make it sound like; see above quote... :eek:

"there's no fuel economy in hot rodding" (using my best Tom Hanks voice)

I'm building a twin turbo aluminum v6 (weighs about 225lbs) hoping to get in the 20's with big stuff 3

Block - 61lbs
Heads - 31lbs
Crank - 49lbs
Intake - 7lbs

total so far 148lbs

should be well under 300lbs with the turbo's and Serp set up

A 4 cyl in a muscle car is so on the edge of not being a muscle car. But I guess if nobody dared to be different, we would all drive factory cars and convince each other who has the better wax job.

That brings up an interesting thought... what's better - a 2JZ motor in a Nova or a bad ass BBC stuffed into a Supra?

If the euro guys can afford to drive American V8 muscle then so can I. I'm not looking to see who gets the best mileage anytime soon. If i have to go to the middle east to get my own oil, i'll do it do drive good ol' American Muscle :yes:

well here is my take on that.... stuffing the newer technology powerplant into the "old" car is in a way making it "smart fast"....but the bbc into the supra is more like the "brute force and ignorance" method, its makes the car "stupid fast".

yes both cars end up faster if done right, but by putting the bbc in the supra, its not really "bettering" the car, the way it is when you throw new technology at the early nova.

i say throw more "new" technology at the supra to make it scary fast.....then use it for the donor into the 1500lb lighter car :D ...then part the rest of the supra out on ebay to fund the endless supply of 14" m&s whitewall sleeper tires :unibrow:

Well, I'm all about updating american Muscle, I just thought it was an interesting take or view. :D I won't be ditching my small block anytime soon.

You know though...when PRO-STREET was all the rage, the thought of putting big front tires and large front brakes and a/c on your classic steel was unheard of. We do things now that are 180 degrees from the good old classic hot rod days. Just putting fuel injection and a computer into your 60s vintage stock is beyond radical from the thinking of 20 years ago.

I think this could really fly. Just because the cubes are smaller doesn't mean the car has to be slower. Granted the LS1 is light and capable for high mpg, but I would think a turbo 4 might have some other areas of interest.

I put a 22 gallon fuel tank in my 69 Camaro and added the LS1 with heavy cam/head work and 3.5 gears. She is getting 23 mpg with issues on my tcc not staying locked. It has 25 or more waiting to be tapped. If I had a wicked four tightly tuned that would only sip fuel at lower RPM it is possible to see 35 mpg on the highway with a range of over 600 miles per tank.

How cool would that be if it would still lay down a high 12 and blow some cold a/c.

It is a challenge, but I think it could be done.

input
 

hey guys

im NOT saying that ive decided to put a 4 banger in the rambler .im exploring all options... research...yes chris and i talked about different combos. i have no problems putting somthing lighter that makes great power... hell id like to find out what the supra 6 turbo engine is lbs. vs small block chevy with aluminum heads...like i said i havent made any plans yet .. just though id share the fact im researching other option......my car is light someone asked how much it weighs.....i believe it will come in around 2500 lbs or less.car was 2600 lbs stock.i have removed alot of weight from the front end.my whole suspension is as light .total weight is probably less than my old steering box . im just thinking if i could save about another 100 plus pounds off the front end and get some good power it may be worth the research.im also using other lighter parts= my bumpers and seats are alot lighter.ever grabbed an old bench seat?takes two people to lift it.so ive chunked some weight..THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE CAR IS TURN KEY GO ANYWHERE AND IT BE REAL FUN TO DRIVE.DRIVEABILITY IS IMPORTANT...IM NOT TRAILERING THIS CAR .IT IS GOING TO BE DRIVEN!!!! ANYWAY...NO MOTOR HAS BEEN CHOOSEN...NO WAY IN HELL WILL THIS CAR HAVE A "FART CAN EXHAUST"
SCOTT THANKS FOR THE LINKS TO THE OTHER "DIFFERENT" COMBOS...
THANKS FOR YOUR INPUT GUYS...
STAY TUNED..
RADRAMBLER

I'm with Scott on not ditching the small block or the big block for that matter. I'm all for technology (eg...pro-touring movement) however, I think if you go for the 4 banger turbo stuff it might get a little to close to the big muffler sticking out the back with the rear spoiler and graphics and aaaaa....well (ok this is where you punch me in the stomach) rice??

No offense it just what comes to mind. Go for it…prove me wrong. Different is good. :)

Strangely, I had a dream last week about putting a big, sequentially turbo'd straight-6 in my car in lieu of the V8. I woke up sweating, but it got me scratching my head about the possibility of this sort of thing catching on in the future.

I think TA Performance is making a alu. Buick 3.8 v6 built for a turbo. To add more choices to the mix.

Well- I'm not selling my of V8 cars, but my 68 Firebird is getting a turbo'd Voretch 4200. I'm looking at a finished weight of around 2750-2800 lbs, with the bigger wheels & tires. The car started out as a Sprint (OHC-6), so this just seemed to be the next step.

Why not, right?

How about a Northstar? All aluminum, small displacement, V8 torque, good looking....Definitely not a "run-of-the-mill" mill.

http://www.chrfab.com/

Remember that 400-plus reliable HP from 4 cylinders can get expensive and may require a steep learning curve.