Alternate engines

[BipDBo]

I think that the Subaru boxer engine is an excellent application. It has a high power density and low center of gravity. It's also very smooth and durable.

I'm digressing, though, into one of my favorite pasttimes, daydreaming. I'm wondering what else may fit into the back of an 818. I know it will never fit an LS7, but I know that there are probably some options other than the boxer. I imagine that the high mpg version will use a transverse mounted inline 4 cylinder, so I'm thinking it may be able to use all kinds of transverse mounted engines. I'm thinking a lightweight motorcycle engne like the one on the new Kawasaki ZX-14R.
http://www.autoblog.com/2011/10/11/kawasaki-shows-off-2012-zx-14r-calls-it-worlds-fastest-acceler/
They aren't saying what power it will have, but I'm guessing it will be well north of 200 hp. The engine and the gearbox combined would probably be a bit lighter then the boxer setup. The only catch is no reverse gear. That problem could be solved with a foot hole in the floorboards.

Anyone else have a crazy idea?

[adesilva]

From what we know so far the high mpg versions of the 818 are being designed for either a volkswagon tdi engine or a ford eco boost. the tdi is i believe 140hp but around 240 torque .. that much torque on a car thats 1800 pounds could still give us a very quick car. The golf TDI is 29XX pounds and 0-60 is 8.2 seconds ... I wonder how much quicker the 818 would be with the same setup... considering its basically half the weight. The only thing I am not sure of is how modifiable the tdis are but then again if your going that route your in it for the mpg anyway. I dont think it would be out of the realm of possibility that this could be a car that could go 0-60 in about 6-6.5 seconds considering a little more than 1000 pound difference.

[Evan78]

Regarding the Kawasaki motor, using the trans might result in durability issues. There's probably lots of data among the sandrail community, but the only project I've followed using a bike engine in a car is the MotoIQ Miatabusa (http://www.motoiq.com/magazine_articles/articletype/categoryview/categoryid/116/project-mazda-miatabusa.aspx). The Miata is heavier than the 818, and its a different engine/trans, but they're relatively close.

4G63 or 4B11 from Mitsubishi would be pretty great.

Chevy LS motors have been crammed into just about everything, is it a definite no-go already? I'm not familiar with the dimensional difference between an LS/G50 compared to the planned Subaru setup.

[StatGSR]

There are plenty of hot transverse engines out there (as far as I'm concerned) and it would be great to see a car that at least has the extra space to fit a bunch of them in even if it didn't come as a bolt in option. I'm sure Honda fans would love the 818 with a K-series (or even B/D/H series) and I'm sure there are Nissan fans that would love to shove a SR20DET in one.

I'm very curious about how well the chassis will be able to accept other engine choices that were essentially outside of the design scope.

I for one know I'm here because the likely hood of me ever getting my hands on a first gen elise that i could swap a honda motor into was slim to nil and I am a much bigger fan of a car with a body than an Atom replica. And on top of all that this will be by far the cheapest option out of all of them.

[adesilva]

Using a 4G63 would be awesome. It would make sense too considering the rivalry between the STI and EVO. I have had an evo and a wrx and both were great cars.

[thebeerbaron]

I just watched the Top Gear episode where VW built a one-off Golf with a twin-turbo W12 out of a Bentley (http://www.topgear.com/uk/videos/golf-gti-w12) stuffed in the back seat.

That'd be sweet...

[PhyrraM]

If the intent from early on was to use transverse motors, why would FFR choose the uniquely packaged Subaru as the base/donor vehicle? Civics, Eclipses, Camrys, Sentras, Focus, Cobalt, Fusion, Accord, Malibu, Sonata, (should I go on?), etc..... are more common than common sense and cheap(er) to boot.

I, personally, am drawn to the 818 BECAUSE it uses the Subaru drivetrain. Swapping in anything but a flat longitudinally mounted motor defeats many of the advantages of choosing a Subaru as the base donor.

I guess it's more of a theortical question for Dave, but I think that the 818 could cost even less than the ($10K kit + $5K donor = $15K completed) goal if it was based on a F/F transverse car to begin with.

I do feel that everyone should be able to modify and put any drivetrain into thier project that thier personal skill level (or wallet) allows, I simply question whether a Subaru was the best choice - IF multiple powerplants was a goal from the start.

Obviously, mine will be turbo Subaru powered. :D

[thebeerbaron]

One of the big selling points of the 818 is the single-donor concept. To put the engine in the back, the rear hubs need to be powered. So the single-donor would have had to have been mid-engined already (not too many of those), or AWD. Aside from the Lancer, what hot AWD cars are there out there other than Subaru?

In short - I think the boxer was a happy accident, not a selection point. Transverse twin-turbo W12s make just as much sense ;)

[PhyrraM]

One of the big selling points of the 818 is the single-donor concept. To put the engine in the back, the rear hubs need to be powered. So the single-donor would have had to have been mid-engined already (not too many of those), or AWD. Aside from the Lancer, what hot AWD cars are there out there other than Subaru?

In short - I think the boxer was a happy accident, not a selection point. Transverse twin-turbo W12s make just as much sense ;)

I thought about that aspect, but - (again a *guess*) - FFR could put any FWD hub/knuckle/OEM CV shaft combo from the donor in the rear of the car and use cheap, off-the-shelf Mustang II front spindles as part of the kit. I bet the cost would be close to a wash vs. the current cost of a hybrid front/rear Subaru CV shaft plus whatever the cost is of something to hold the front hubs together when the OEM CV shaft is removed and the strut-to-upper control arm adapter.

EDIT: Forget about the cost of adapting brakes if swapping front hubs/khuckles to the rear. Another point for Subaru or AWD car based.

My personal (again) *guess* is that Jim did the groundwork and selected the Subaru for various performance/layout/world-car reasons and then Dave walks past and says "Oh, by the way......Diesel......EcoBoost.......", then Jim groaned and started twitching. OK, maybe not EXACTLY like that, but it made me chuckle.

[3000gttom]

i wander if a 6g72 could fit... the engine from a 3000gt, they can put up enormous numbers with the right mods. they were transverse mounted and the lower end ones had fwd trannies that would be perfect for a mid endine layout

[Fast818]

Audi V6 and V8 TDI with manual trans or DSG trans from the front of the 4wd system.

52085209521052115212

[Twinspool]

i wander if a 6g72 could fit... the engine from a 3000gt, they can put up enormous numbers with the right mods. they were transverse mounted and the lower end ones had fwd trannies that would be perfect for a mid endine layout

Only if you add provisions for oars and a rudder.

[3000gttom]

hahaha, its not that big... in fact the fwd trannies are quite small and from the spyshots it looks like theres gunna be a lot of engine bay room to work with, besides, doesnt an 800hp 818 sound like fun

[16g-95gsx]

You do realize how terrible of an idea the 6g72 would be right? A 4g63 would give you just as much power potential, and far far less weight. 4b11 would work but it's price is astronomical still and they are rare, which means parts cost is very high.

I don't see why the donor car's powerplant? A simple fwd setup with custom drive axles (still using subaru uprights) would solve the issue just fine? SR20, K20, 4g63, Ecotec, etc etc etc etc. There are basically a ton of fantastic engine platforms out there, and assuming FFR leaves room back there for a custom engine setup I don't see any harm. I certainly can see why they would design for the subaru engine and only that engine, but for those of us who like to modify things I don't see any harm.

[3000gttom]

a 4g63 is only about 100-150lb lighter than a 6g72, but the 6g72 has a much better torque curve for for driving on the street and having big power potential, its just an idea but you can easily get a dohc 3s for 1-2k these days and tt converting can get you to 300whp for pretty cheap, not to mention its built for a 3800lb car, so it would be much more reliable when put in a 1800-2000lb car,,,dsm's are almost never reliable

[Ks2]

the 6g72 is getting near 20 years old and the 4g63 isnt terribly reliable (aleast from my experience)

considering how easy 350-400hp is to hit with a ej257... there are plenty of wrecked ones around or blown motors begging to be rebuilt (or if you are loaded get a cosworth) it is easy to tune, simple turbo system and simple vacuum lines, parts are everywhere and can be swapped in many cases from many other models, and can be had for a good price (they also still make OEM replacements for just about everything) new aftermarket parts are coming out all the time and finally it all comes back to the world car issue, how many are still driving around in Europe? or japan? they don't keep used cars around as long as we do in the states

my .02 (man a cosworth built ej257 would be badass in this...)

[BipDBo]

If the intent from early on was to use transverse motors, why would FFR choose the uniquely packaged Subaru as the base/donor vehicle? Civics, Eclipses, Camrys, Sentras, Focus, Cobalt, Fusion, Accord, Malibu, Sonata, (should I go on?), etc..... are more common than common sense and cheap(er) to boot.

I, personally, am drawn to the 818 BECAUSE it uses the Subaru drivetrain. Swapping in anything but a flat longitudinally mounted motor defeats many of the advantages of choosing a Subaru as the base donor.

I guess it's more of a theortical question for Dave, but I think that the 818 could cost even less than the ($10K kit + $5K donor = $15K completed) goal if it was based on a F/F transverse car to begin with.

I do feel that everyone should be able to modify and put any drivetrain into thier project that thier personal skill level (or wallet) allows, I simply question whether a Subaru was the best choice - IF multiple powerplants was a goal from the start.

Obviously, mine will be turbo Subaru powered. :D

Subaru was chosen because there are very few possible cars that could be a single donor and of those, I'm sure that Subaru was he best combination of price, availability and performance. They could have gone with a FWD donor like a Focus, but it would require more parts to either be fabicated by FFR or taken from a 2nd donor. So you're right, this is mostly just a theoretical "what if?" thread meant only for amusement while we wait for Dave's next update. Who knows though, maybe someone will squeeze in a 230 lb, 470 hp supercharged Hartney V8.

The migh mpg version, I think will be the most interesting because it will encourage the most innovation. It will probably also be a 2 donor version with all o the supension and steering bits coming from a Subaru and the engine and transmission coming from almost anything. This will really open up the possibilities. With a cheap starter kit, high schools, universities, and back yard engineers will be probably building these things not just as standard diesels, but hybrids, EVs, etc. People will probably find ways to drive it off of electricity, restaurant grease, wood, starw, compost, fairy farts, whatever. I think this kit would make a great basis for a university efficiency competition. With a pre-built kit, a smaller team with less resources could compete because they focus most of their energy on the drivetrain. They could even have a division that allows changes to the body to incorporate the aspect of aerodynamics.

I'd personnally like to see a through the road hybrid, with a smaller, lightweight engine driving the rear wheels and an EV with regenerative braking on the front wheels.

[3000gttom]

the 6g72 is getting near 20 years old and the 4g63 isnt terribly reliable (aleast from my experience)

considering how easy 350-400hp is to hit with a ej257... there are plenty of wrecked ones around or blown motors begging to be rebuilt (or if you are loaded get a cosworth) it is easy to tune, simple turbo system and simple vacuum lines, parts are everywhere and can be swapped in many cases from many other models, and can be had for a good price (they also still make OEM replacements for just about everything) new aftermarket parts are coming out all the time and finally it all comes back to the world car issue, how many are still driving around in Europe? or japan? they don't keep used cars around as long as we do in the states

my .02 (man a cosworth built ej257 would be badass in this...)

i agree, ej motors are definately the best option for an 818, all the fabrication involved in putting a different powerplant would just not be worth it,

I still wonder if subaru have any flat six motors that would work, i just feel like turbo'd 4bangers have a strange powerband for street driving and since the 818 is so much lighter when the turbos kick in the effect will be even more amplified

[PhyrraM]

I still wonder if subaru have any flat six motors that would work, i just feel like turbo'd 4bangers have a strange powerband for street driving and since the 818 is so much lighter when the turbos kick in the effect will be even more amplified

Think in reverse. The lightweight of the 818 will make the off-boost part of the powerband feel, well....less off-boost. And when it does kick in....Gone!

There are H6s in Subarus line up that will likely fit with minor mods. The 95" wheelbase is more than adequate and the prototype chassis looks roomy enough. Likely worst case? Relocate a few frame members and the gas tank.

[StatGSR]

I still wonder if subaru have any flat six motors that would work, i just feel like turbo'd 4bangers have a strange powerband for street driving and since the 818 is so much lighter when the turbos kick in the effect will be even more amplified

I know I'm still hopeful the ez30 will be able to sqeeze in there.

[Twinspool]

i just feel like turbo'd 4bangers have a strange powerband for street driving and since the 818 is so much lighter when the turbos kick in the effect will be even more amplified

What are you basing these feelings on? A 1985 Dodge Omni?

[305mouse]

What's nice about this project is with how the oem TD04 turbo will compliment the weight of the 818. The 2.0, for those of us using a 02-05 WRX donor, will have better response and the lag won't be as noticable. This turbo would be at full spool by 3K if not earlier with some nice porting. Obviously, in the words of Jeremy Clarkson, we all want "more power". For those of us, we can make this what we want it to be. Be it a built motor, TDI, Ford eco, other powerplant or even hoping the ez30 could be shoehorned. There seem to be already a bunch of options being considered from people. I'm excited to see what people do to make their car unique for them. I however, will stick with the single donor. It'll still get great mileage due to the weight and go like crazy.

[adesilva]

The WRX is about 1200-1400 pounds more than the 818 and on average people seem to get 18-22 city and 25-29 highway (based off some forum results i looked up) so being over a ton less in weight I do not see why we wouldnt be able to get a few mpg better.

Being a turbo engine you can pretty much change your mileage depending on your mood. Being a small 2.0 motor if you arent really going into boost you should get pretty good mileage.

[305mouse]

You do realize a ton is 2,000 pounds. Sorry, I'm not trying to be a dick. I'll tell you with spirited driving and a small VF turbo with an EWG, I average 19mpg.

[3000gttom]

no personal experience but ive seen many forum posts of people with high hp 4 cyl turbo builds that get a lot of turbo lag, idk for sure but hopefully someone with experience will chime in, im a fan of more displacement that's all, and if i build a car from the ground up id prefer to have a 6 cyl over a 4cyl motor... just throwin out ideas

[fiaroadster]

Audi V6 and V8 TDI with manual trans or DSG trans from the front of the 4wd system.

52085209521052115212
What kind of car is pictured here?

[Steve91T]

no personal experience but ive seen many forum posts of people with high hp 4 cyl turbo builds that get a lot of turbo lag, idk for sure but hopefully someone with experience will chime in, im a fan of more displacement that's all, and if i build a car from the ground up id prefer to have a 6 cyl over a 4cyl motor... just throwin out ideas

You have to look at the bigger picture. If someone is building a drag car, they don't care about lag, so they throw a huge turbo on it, some NOS, and a staging system to spool the turbo before they launch. Road racers, or street cars are going to use a smaller, less laggy turbo. Sure it'll make less top end power, but you can still make really good numbers (especially for an 1800 lb car), and have very little lag. Turbo technology has come a long way.

In the turbo diesel world, same thing. People build their trucks to make 1000 hp, for drag racing or sled pulling. They have tons of lag, but they don't care. Street driven trucks can still make really good numbers with a very quick spooling turbo (or turbo's).

These guys just floor it and wait for the turbo...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmkvsojD2sI

[Niburu]

if I had the money - peripheral ported 20B
in the end I'm just a diehard rotard

[16g-95gsx]

100-150lbs makes an enormous difference, you're dealing with almost a 10% weight increase for virtually no gain. You can get the same performance from a 4g63, the record books prove that. Not bashing the 6g72 just saying you need to think about weight as one of the biggest influences on this car, and unnecessarily adding significant weight would be foolish.

As for reliability, I don't know what EJ's you guys are dealing with, but I see these things die constantly. I can't tell you the amount of spun bearings that I've seen. I almost worry about the oiling within this car if it is able to pull sustained g's. The EJ was chosen because it comes from a single donor and is plentiful, period. I don't believe the engine from the standpoint of ultimate performance, is ideal. It may be 80% of what the best option would be, but it isn't the best option IMO. Easiest, but not best.


a 4g63 is only about 100-150lb lighter than a 6g72, but the 6g72 has a much better torque curve for for driving on the street and having big power potential, its just an idea but you can easily get a dohc 3s for 1-2k these days and tt converting can get you to 300whp for pretty cheap, not to mention its built for a 3800lb car, so it would be much more reliable when put in a 1800-2000lb car,,,dsm's are almost never reliable

[16g-95gsx]

300-400whp and this car will be a monster. Now imagine what turbo is necessary to achieve that? Almost stock-like turbos are pulling that number off on 2.0L's. Throw a 6cyl in there and you do nothing but add weight or what will likely be unusable bottom end torque. NA 6cyl, sure I can see that, but turbo 6 just seems like a waste.


no personal experience but ive seen many forum posts of people with high hp 4 cyl turbo builds that get a lot of turbo lag, idk for sure but hopefully someone with experience will chime in, im a fan of more displacement that's all, and if i build a car from the ground up id prefer to have a 6 cyl over a 4cyl motor... just throwin out ideas

[Oppenheimer]

The EJ was chosen because it comes from a single donor and is plentiful, period. I don't believe the engine from the standpoint of ultimate performance, is ideal. It may be 80% of what the best option would be, but it isn't the best option IMO. Easiest, but not best.

Just curious, you've mentioned similar several times here. Just wondering what engine you would think is ideal for a car like the 818?

[Oppenheimer]

The migh mpg version...will probably also be a 2 donor version with all o the supension and steering bits coming from a Subaru and the engine and transmission coming from almost anything.

Correct, Dave has confirmed this.


I think this kit would make a great basis for a university efficiency competition. With a pre-built kit, a smaller team with less resources could compete because they focus most of their energy on the drivetrain. They could even have a division that allows changes to the body to incorporate the aspect of aerodynamics.

Cool idea. Combine the Green Grand Prix (that an FFR GTM TDi recently won) with the Challenge Series concept. A Challenge series that is all about best mileage with performance. Its all the same chassis (FFR 818 mpg version), but you can pick your own drivetrain. It could be about balance of performance and economy.

[3000gttom]

the more i look into things, the more the ej's look like the best option

[BipDBo]

the more i look into things, the more the ej's look like the best option

They're definately the best option, at least giving the best bang for the buck. Subaru's engines will soon get even better with a partnership with Toyota that gets them the use of Toyota's direct injection system. They'll be just as powerful, but smaller in displacement and likely lighter and more efficient.

Here's what Motor Trend has to say about the future of Subaru's bower's:
http://www.motortrend.com/future/future_vehicles/1107_subaru_wrx_to_go_its_own_way/
"Our source also revealed what is going on in the bowels of Subaru's R&D. On the short list for the WRX’s powerplant is a turbocharged 1.6-liter boxer pumping as much as 270 hp, and a twin-charger system involving a supercharger is being tested as well. The car’s body is rumored to be a little bigger than a Toyota Yaris, while its tread width is said to expand significantly. As for the STI, we are told that the flagship will also employ the WRX’s 1.6-liter boxer turbo, but that the engine will be reworked to generate upwards of 300 hp for motorsport competitiveness."

[Evan78]

no personal experience but ive seen many forum posts of people with high hp 4 cyl turbo builds that get a lot of turbo lag, idk for sure but hopefully someone with experience will chime in, im a fan of more displacement that's all, and if i build a car from the ground up id prefer to have a 6 cyl over a 4cyl motor... just throwin out ideasLag is a fact of life of owning a turbo. Unless you have very low power goals and want to run a very small turbo like some VW's that reach peak boost at something like 1500-2000rpms. If you want bigger numbers, you need a bigger turbo, which is going to spool later. BUT, you can still have a nice, wide power band, you just have to decide where you want it. Stock turbo Subarus usually are best in the 3500-6500 rpm range. My numbers are rough, but its in that ballpark.

I've owned 3 turbo Subarus; one 2.0L, and two 2.5L. I much prefer the 2.5's, but the 2.0 was still plenty fun and had a nice powerband. There's nothing "weird" about it to me.

[16g-95gsx]

Just curious, you've mentioned similar several times here. Just wondering what engine you would think is ideal for a car like the 818?

To be honest I'm not entirely sure. I believe the K20's have very advanced cylinder head flow, low torque but high rev capability which is likely to be more ideal on a platform like this, very low total weight (adding the trans into the picture you probably will see a 30-40lb drop in total compared to EJ20 and converted 5spd), but lets be honest they sound like crap :) and *can* be more expensive than a simple EJ20TT. I think for an aluminum engine the EJ is likely heavier than most, and the trans even when converted to 2wd seems like it will weigh in around 100lbs, which is again on the heavier side.

If I'm lucky I'll get to weigh an entire EJ257 longblock with accessories this evening from a friends car who blew it (again I havent been too fond of the oiling system in these EJ's). We'll see what I come up with. One good thing I like about the EJ25 is that it increases displacement through bore sizing, not stroke. I feel like torque, while fun, will be very hard to put to good use in a car like this. A moderately powered car will be incredibly fast, but too much torque will likely make it tail happy. The EJ20TT seems like the best bang for the buck in terms of turbo'd EJ's.

[3000gttom]

i like the idea of a higher revving engine. maybe factory five will rework the subaru engine a little like they did with the gtm gen2

[16g-95gsx]

Why not just rework it yourself? Doesn't take much at all when you have the engine out of the car. High revving doesnt work too well without larger turbos or higher overlap cams. Advanced cam controls such as what the K20 or 4b11 have make it feasible, otherwise you wind up running out of steam too soon. Don't the modern suby's have variable cam technology as well?

[Ks2]

i like the idea of a higher revving engine. maybe factory five will rework the subaru engine a little like they did with the gtm gen2

look for the 2.0l ej207 version 7 and 8 from japanese STI's circa 02-03ish, they rev to 8500 thereabouts i have one in my wrx and it is a blast to 8k, uses the same wiring harness (give or take a few re-pins) that the ej205 of the same year, needs a tune for crappy US fuels

[Steve91T]

What about ditching the turbo for a blower? I know it would have less peak hp, but it would have tons of low end tq and a huge area under the curve.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wq_s0uQ-z0k&feature=relmfu

[StatGSR]

What about ditching the turbo for a blower? I know it would have less peak hp, but it would have tons of low end tq and a huge area under the curve.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wq_s0uQ-z0k&feature=relmfu

But the Raptor kit (which is the only commercial kit available for subaru engines) is a centrifugal S/C so it wont give you much if any more low end power, you would have to use a Roots/Twinscrew/or maybe a Rotrex to see any low end benefit but all of this would require quite a bit of custom fabrication (its been done before though).

Frankly i think a SCed ej22e would be a great little workhorse.

[16g-95gsx]

These small turbos provide huge area under the curve in the low end. I don't think you guys quite understand that. In an 1800lb or less car there is apt to be too much low end torque with small stockish turbos.

[SccrMan13]

I am trilled to hear about the 818. Before i was planning on doing a 33 with a coyote and still may. The subaru engine is a little underwhelming. Crappy fuel econ for the power given. If the plan is to put a tdi in it then why not also do a vw 2.0l turbo. I will be interested to see what kind of fuel econ the subaru engines can get with less weight and only driving two wheels. Anything around 30mpg hwy would be awesome.

[StatGSR]

btw, looks like Bullet Cars did come out with a Rotrex SC based kit recently.....

http://www.bulletcars.com/superchargers/subaru/sohc-2.0-litre-Flat-4-cylinder-impreza-supercharger-system.html

Haven't seen anything about this till now, but i am a huge fan of Rotrex SCs...

[SccrMan13]

I am surprised that nobody has mentioned a rotary engine

[StatGSR]

^ probably because it doesn't have a simple transmission to use... otherwise i agree that it would be a really fun engine for an 818 sized car NA or Boosted.

[Niburu]

I am surprised that nobody has mentioned a rotary engine


^ probably because it doesn't have a simple transmission to use... otherwise i agree that it would be a really fun engine for an 818 sized car NA or Boosted.

go back a page


if I had the money - peripheral ported 20B
in the end I'm just a diehard rotard

I believe you can fabricate an adapter plate to mount a rotary right to the Subaru transaxle.
I know Kennedy Engineery has them for VW transaxles http://kennedyenginc.com/OtherAdaptions.aspx
so it's not a big stretch to think it could be done.

[Twinspool]

You people worried about 'low-end' are amazing. If you have lag, you're in the wrong gear. Adding the parasitic loss off a blower is no improvement. My plan on dealing with the horrible laggy power band of the little 4 cylinder is to DRIVE it.

[Steve91T]

I'm not worried about low end, it was just a question.

But I will argue that there is no such thing as too much low end tq. More low end tq will allow a higher gear around a race track, which means less shifting, which means faster lap times.

Steve

[Twinspool]

I'm not worried about low end, it was just a question.

But I will argue that there is no such thing as too much low end tq. More low end tq will allow a higher gear around a race track, which means less shifting, which means faster lap times.

Steve

...Says the guy with a stroked SBC and a tweaked Powerstroke. :)
There's a lot of ways to go fast. Your example could be illustrated by pointing to the Audi R10 and it's 800+ lb-ft but I've personally watched the Penske Porsches slice and dice the mighty Audis with their <300 lb-ft at Laguna. The transaxle in the R10 is heavy because... wait for it... they make a metric @$$load of torque!
All this alternative engine talk is navel gazing unless you consider the total package. Trying to turn the EJ engines into something they aren't is a waste of time. It's a great powertrain, try it out before deciding it's not sufficient.

[SccrMan13]

I doubt there is space but a audi a4 2.0l with front track might have worked as far as the layout is concerned. I am kind of underwhelmed with the subaru engines. They seem to be relatively expensive to play with. The new focus st engine would be good fun.

[slopoke]

5308 ... this hammer should be big enough ... LOL

[thebeerbaron]

5308 ... this hammer should be big enough ... LOL

Which would lead to the question: which weighs more, your wallet or your 818? :)

[slopoke]

beer .. all that hardware and its still under 275 pounds .... w/1K hp there would certainly be no wallet of substance after that purchase ... LOL

[thebeerbaron]

beer .. all that hardware and its still under 275 pounds...

I'll believe it. Did not mean to suggest it was a heavy engine, simply that it would take cubic feet of dollars to pay for it... :)

[slopoke]

about 32K pounds sterling ... ( roughly 52K US )

[Nelff]

So is this custom or... which shop did it come from? I have a Griggs '96 Cobra (1G sideways) in need of some attention...

[slopoke]

it's a Hartley V8 with all the hardware from Holeshot Racing. The motors are made in southern Wisconsin and Holeshot Racing I believe is somewhere in the UK. Just type H1-v8 in your browser and google holeshot racing for the TT version

[BrandonDrums]

You do realize how terrible of an idea the 6g72 would be right? A 4g63 would give you just as much power potential, and far far less weight. 4b11 would work but it's price is astronomical still and they are rare, which means parts cost is very high.

I don't see why the donor car's powerplant? A simple fwd setup with custom drive axles (still using subaru uprights) would solve the issue just fine? SR20, K20, 4g63, Ecotec, etc etc etc etc. There are basically a ton of fantastic engine platforms out there, and assuming FFR leaves room back there for a custom engine setup I don't see any harm. I certainly can see why they would design for the subaru engine and only that engine, but for those of us who like to modify things I don't see any harm.

Yeah, most FWD traverse engine cars would work great for a mid-engine swap. To a certain extent, it makes more sense in terms of simplicity to use a traverse engine: No center diff to remove, you can re-use the donor shifter linkages etc.

However FWD cars don't have rear hubs with input spindles for drive axles. Thus, Subaru based kits make more sense, you get the input spindle on the rear wheels and don't have to worry about finding rear hubs that take the same axle or modifying existing axles to adapt them in length and spindle size with another model. Even when swapping Subaru transmissions with other Subaru transmissions between different Subaru models, that axle/spindle mating dance is one of the more painful challenges to overcome.

But if someone wanted a powerful, durable naturally aspirated 4 cylinder, there are many better donor options than Subaru drive trains and all of them are traverse FWD setups. N/A Subaru's have always lagged behind the industry in power and efficiency vs. the competition. Even the new Impreza had to sacrifice power to catch up to the fuel economy of everything else in it's class. Meanwhile Hyndai's 2.0T puts out more power than the current WRX and has better fuel economy than the base Impreza.

I think Dave said longer term he wanted this chassis to accept a wide range of donor powertrains. Since it's already being developed for TDI's or Ecoboosts, that opens up the options in terms of having room available, sounds like the space will be there. The challenge will be the axles, suspension linkages and hubs, getting them the right length and size to match up and having the proper clearances to put a drive axle through the suspension parts. I feel confident that FFR can work it all out though.

[16g-95gsx]

Considering DSS already makes custom drivetrain parts for FFR's other platforms I don't think it would be hard to get a set of custom axles done up using Subaru outter splines. Again, I understand it's more work, but this is what I enjoy doing so immediately my mind goes away from what I am directly given but rather what the end result CAN be.

[crackedcornish]

Yeah, most FWD traverse engine cars would work great for a mid-engine swap. To a certain extent, it makes more sense in terms of simplicity to use a traverse engine: No center diff to remove, you can re-use the donor shifter linkages etc.

However FWD cars don't have rear hubs with input spindles for drive axles. Thus, Subaru based kits make more sense, you get the input spindle on the rear wheels and don't have to worry about finding rear hubs that take the same axle or modifying existing axles to adapt them in length and spindle size with another model. Even when swapping Subaru transmissions with other Subaru transmissions between different Subaru models, that axle/spindle mating dance is one of the more painful challenges to overcome.

But if someone wanted a powerful, durable naturally aspirated 4 cylinder, there are many better donor options than Subaru drive trains and all of them are traverse FWD setups. N/A Subaru's have always lagged behind the industry in power and efficiency vs. the competition. Even the new Impreza had to sacrifice power to catch up to the fuel economy of everything else in it's class. Meanwhile Hyndai's 2.0T puts out more power than the current WRX and has better fuel economy than the base Impreza.

I think Dave said longer term he wanted this chassis to accept a wide range of donor powertrains. Since it's already being developed for TDI's or Ecoboosts, that opens up the options in terms of having room available, sounds like the space will be there. The challenge will be the axles, suspension linkages and hubs, getting them the right length and size to match up and having the proper clearances to put a drive axle through the suspension parts. I feel confident that FFR can work it all out though.

I think you mean "transverse"

[BrandonDrums]

I think you mean "transverse"

Ah yea, same difference. Traverse has the same definition "something that lies across" I always get them mixed up. At least I didn't say trans-gender.

[PhyrraM]

Even with the Subaru drivetrain, custom CV shafts or custom CV parts are going to be required.

The front shafts fit the transmission, but not the rear hubs. The rear shafts fit the hubs, but not the transmission.

[Nelff]

So I'm not getting why rear hubs from the Subi need to be used. For that matter almost any fwd engine/trans/spindle/brake system could be used as a whole unit. Just don't steer the hubs. Lock the toe using what ever method the designer wants. F5 is designing the suspension. I think they should add a link to fix the toe and use the big brakes from the front of the Subi on the rear. That way F5 can put huge brakes on the front. Win-win...

[crackedcornish]

So I'm not getting why rear hubs from the Subi need to be used. For that matter almost any fwd engine/trans/spindle/brake system could be used as a whole unit. Just don't steer the hubs. Lock the toe using what ever method the designer wants. F5 is designing the suspension. I think they should add a link to fix the toe and use the big brakes from the front of the Subi on the rear. That way F5 can put huge brakes on the front. Win-win...

isn't that what Pontiac did with the Fiero?

[thebeerbaron]

So I'm not getting why rear hubs from the Subi need to be used. For that matter almost any fwd engine/trans/spindle/brake system could be used as a whole unit. Just don't steer the hubs. Lock the toe using what ever method the designer wants. F5 is designing the suspension. I think they should add a link to fix the toe and use the big brakes from the front of the Subi on the rear. That way F5 can put huge brakes on the front. Win-win...

They need to be used because this is a low-cost single-donor car. The front hubs from the donor need to be used as well as the rears. Can't steer the rears, so those have to go in the back.

As far as brakes, my humble guess is that the WRX brakes will be overkill for most builds. I'm interested to see how FFR deals with the brake bias issue resulting from moving the brakes from a front-engined porker to a mid-engined flyweight, but bigger brakes is unlikely to be the answer.

There were hints at the Open House that a brake manufacturer (Wilwood?) might get involved. Not sure what that'll mean for the base kit, but it'll be interesting.

[Nelff]

What I was hearing from the previous posts was the stock rear hubs were going to be used in the rear of the 818 with fabrication of axles or.....

I really hope that this design is well thought out and done well. I wouldn't expect anything less than that from F5.

Having major companies involved is a huge plus. They know that if their products are used in the base kit they sell parts too. Wilwood, awesome. I'm guessing that's one of the reasons that Ford is providing engineering too. I'm sure that Ford would love to sell a drop in engine/trans/axle/hub package.

Just shows the power of doing good engineering and putting out a great product. Others want to hop on board.

[thebeerbaron]

What I was hearing from the previous posts was the stock rear hubs were going to be used in the rear of the 818 with fabrication of axles or.....

If you look at the chassis as displayed at the Open House, it's pretty clear that's exactly what they did. They just left out the axles :)



I'm guessing that's one of the reasons that Ford is providing engineering too. I'm sure that Ford would love to sell a drop in engine/trans/axle/hub package.

That's news to me. I know Dave has talked about putting a Ford gas-sipper in there at some point, but where did you read that Ford is providing engineering support?

[Admiral Doom]

Dave said that he was "working with Ford engineers" on the possibility of allowing a Direct Injection Ford motor in the 818

[StatGSR]

The EJ20TT seems like the best bang for the buck in terms of turbo'd EJ's.

well maybe after you convert it to single turbo.... in stock form i hear the VOD (Valley of Death) in the power band is quite horrible... maybe it wouldn't be so bad in something like the 818 though, but if you want to upgrade that engine the first thing you should do is ditch one of the turbos...

[crackedcornish]

They need to be used because this is a low-cost single-donor car. The front hubs from the donor need to be used as well as the rears. Can't steer the rears, so those have to go in the back.

As far as brakes, my humble guess is that the WRX brakes will be overkill for most builds. I'm interested to see how FFR deals with the brake bias issue resulting from moving the brakes from a front-engined porker to a mid-engined flyweight, but bigger brakes is unlikely to be the answer.

There were hints at the Open House that a brake manufacturer (Wilwood?) might get involved. Not sure what that'll mean for the base kit, but it'll be interesting.

can the rotors and calipers be swapped front to rear on a wrx?

[StatGSR]

^ you still want larger front brakes regardless of where the engine is.....

[StatGSR]

I'm interested to see how FFR deals with the brake bias issue resulting from moving the brakes from a front-engined porker to a mid-engined flyweight, but bigger brakes is unlikely to be the answer.



$40 adjustable prop valve?

[Nelff]

One of the things that Mustang guys used to do was take the front calipers and move them to the rear then, put bigger calipers on the front saving the purchase of rear calipers... I like having a proportioning valve on my car anyway. If Dave is talking to FRP Ford Racing Products engineers, they are the group that sells crate motors and the standalone harnesses to go with them. Good move on Dave and F5's part.

My 2cents, if there were Wilwood calipers peeking thru the wheel I would be happy!!!

[PhyrraM]

The Subaru brakes cannot be swapped front-to-rear.

My (educated) *guess* is that CV shaft conversion parts are cheaper than brake conversion parts, especially if FFR can get the volume up.

Yes, you still need larger brakes up front with mid-engined balance - however the F/R size ratio should be alot closer on the 818 than a stock Subaru. Maybe WRX rears and non-turbo Impreza fronts would be a good comprimise?

The closer you can get to "proper" balance without a proportioning valve, the better the brakes will feel (confidence and modulation) across the range from slow stop to emergency braking. ("proper" is not static and changes depending on intended usage, weight transfer, tire sizes, car balance, etc..)

A pressure limiting proportioning valve (the most common type) is usually set up for threshold braking. This allow proportionately more rear bias as brake pressure is decreased. Obviously this can get pretty funky in trailing throttle situations. This is one reason the Electronic Brake Force Distibution was widely accepted on performance cars early on, even on cars that eschewed full on Stability Control for a while.

[16g-95gsx]

well maybe after you convert it to single turbo.... in stock form i hear the VOD (Valley of Death) in the power band is quite horrible... maybe it wouldn't be so bad in something like the 818 though, but if you want to upgrade that engine the first thing you should do is ditch one of the turbos...

I feel a twin turbo setup on a 4 cyl is a horrid idea in the first place. I would plan to replace any of the overly heavy factory manifolds and turbo setup with aftermarket tubular components anyway.

[SccrMan13]

I for one would love to see the four banger from the new focus st as an option. I had been planning on building a hot rod with the new 5.0 which should get great fuel econ since it already does so well on the much heavier mustang, but the price point is much lower on this. I think part of me says that if i am gioing to spend that much time and money on a car i want it to be all new stuff.

[Gollum]

All this "turbo lag" and "lack of displacement" talk again... Sheesh.

STOCK STI in 6th gear, doing 65mph on the highway, will reach min boost (1psi) almost instantly, and will climb to peak boost before you can even check the gauge to watch it.

Do turbo engines have "turbo lag"? Yes. But I've said this a million times already, they don't make any less power under the curve when compared to NA counterparts, as can be seen in dyno, after dyno, after dyno. The more power you ask it to make with extra PSI, the more ON/OFF the power will become. Asking a 2.5 liter engine to make 700hp will never look like getting a 7 liter NA engine to 700hp. That doesn't mean it can't be FASTER on the track. It's just about a SYSTEM configuration.

In the end, the 818 will get out of it's own way even at 35mph in top gear. It's just simply physics and I've seen the real worlds results to back it up. A 2.5L turbocharged motor in a 1800 pound vehicle will have ZERO issues being a very pleasant street car, even at 400+ whp. In fact, I've driven a 600+hp 3 liter 2500 pound vehicle that was probably the MOST streetable car in that power to weight range I've ever been in. I'd gladly give the keys to that car to my wife, or even grandma. A well setup SYSTEM when it comes to a turbocharged vehicle will still be so responsive that someone like your wife will never want to put the pedal to the metal. It's simply TOO responsive still. Same as how a big V8 makes someone ginger with the throttle, a high HP turbo engine isn't much different, especially if the displacement is still decent for the weight of the vehicle.

To those questioning if the 818 is "right" with the scoobie engine, just wait until there's videos posted of them complete. I won't be surprised to see people putting down low 3 sec 0-60 times within the first few builds, and doing so with very little aftermarket parts.

[jkf]

A Saab "H" motor from a C900 would probably fit pretty easy...

[SccrMan13]

Saab engines would be great fun

[StatGSR]

A Saab "H" motor from a C900 would probably fit pretty easy...

is that the one that uses the transmission as an oil pan??? :p:D

[thebeerbaron]

I think the potential of an air-cooled two-stroke twin has been vastly underestimated...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xsoyuAceVM

[jkf]

is that the one that uses the transmission as an oil pan??? :p:D

Kinda sorta, but not really-the tranny is under the motor, but the gears are separated from the crank by the tranny casting, which is also the engine sump. I think there was a Lambo where the gears & engines shared the same oil bath?

The driveshafts exit the tranny low and right at the back of the engine, so if there is enough room for the engine between the hubs and the firewall on the 818 frame, you could probably have a rumble seat! :cool:
(It would be better weight distribution than the boxer too...)

[onyx_riddle]

I don't want to be "that guy". But honestly, I've seen maybe 3 subarus in my life. I gotta be honest here... If the engine bay can accompany a fiero trans then I suspect that I will have a very unique v8 dream car.. I don't usually knock a design but in northeast Arkansas, you do not buy subaru's for 5k.

:(

[Steve91T]

I don't want to be "that guy". But honestly, I've seen maybe 3 subarus in my life. I gotta be honest here... If the engine bay can accompany a fiero trans then I suspect that I will have a very unique v8 dream car.. I don't usually knock a design but in northeast Arkansas, you do not buy subaru's for 5k.

:(

Why not?

[onyx_riddle]

I think the nearest dealer is a few hours away, maybe. I've never actually seen a wrx. They just don't sell here. I've been an avid Craigslist junkie for years and I've not seen any remotely near here. And when one does POP up in Tennessee or beyond, it certainly won't be on the good side of $8k.. I won't be able to buy this thing till its actually been out for a few months anyway but this is a concern I'm afraid may limit my possibilities.

Edit: I think more patience is in order. Even if I have to eBay the parts I think 5k could be a low albeit realistic estimate. I retract my previous negativity

[Etos]

So here's a crazy idea, an opposing pistons engine. You get your cake and eat it too. All the power and fuel economy. Ecomotors is designing them for military use. Maybe if FFR got in contact and tried to work something out that would be great.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buX89nlww2E

Little video explaining a little bit. There's alot to opposing pistons and it's a great design.

[StatGSR]

^ yea those are neat and all, but i would never want one in any car until it was actually production ready and properly tested. let alone an 818, not when there are literally 100s of other great options...

[Gollum]

I think the nearest dealer is a few hours away, maybe. I've never actually seen a wrx. They just don't sell here. I've been an avid Craigslist junkie for years and I've not seen any remotely near here. And when one does POP up in Tennessee or beyond, it certainly won't be on the good side of $8k.. I won't be able to buy this thing till its actually been out for a few months anyway but this is a concern I'm afraid may limit my possibilities.

Edit: I think more patience is in order. Even if I have to eBay the parts I think 5k could be a low albeit realistic estimate. I retract my previous negativity

Worst case scenario, you take a short day long road trip. I don't foresee any reason we all can't find a running, drivable donor for around 6k and easily sell off 1k worth of extra parts (body panels, lights, interior, ec). For me, finding those killer deals worth driving to is half the fun of projects.

[bromikl]

Worst case scenario, you take a short day long road trip. I don't foresee any reason we all can't find a running, drivable donor for around 6k and easily sell off 1k worth of extra parts (body panels, lights, interior, ec). For me, finding those killer deals worth driving to is half the fun of projects.

Or one could make friends with the local used auto dealer. It would be easy to pick out what you want at the auction. You might even go along for the trip. A car that would never sell on the lot is the one you'd want to take apart. Even better - if Subies are really so undesirable in your area, no one else will be bidding on your car.