Would you guys consider putting a 4 cylinder in your ride?

Amazing how narrow-minded some of the HAMB really is eh!

Yet they moan their arse off is somebody else doesn't like the way THEY'RE building their rod.

 

Who is being narrowminded? The original poster asked if I would consider putting a four-cylinder in my ride. My answer to that was no. I have a mid-50 effie panel van. It has a SBF. The original poster's question referred to a mid-50 Effie and that's a half ton truck not a lightweight roadster, and my opinion is (and bear in mind it is only my opinion) that bottom end torque is required so that a big old truck can accelerate its way out of trouble when Mr "safe as houses in my hermetically sealed, collapsible Euro box" does something really dumb whilst talking on his cellphone that puts your life and vehicle at risk whilst driving around town. My own personal experience with large underpowered 4 pot vehicles, and being wheelchair-bound I have been in a lot of them, is that they are slugs without enough grunt to pull out of a side Street speedily and safely enough in busy traffic.
Nobody is telling him how to, they are offering opinions that were asked for.

 

Kind of sounds like my dream "grocery getter" for the wife. '28 to '31 two door sedan. No chop, no channel, full fendered with a 2.3L/T5 combo from a Mustang.

 

Never, but that's just me......maybe in a Crosley.

 

I've got one in 30 coupe. We race Mod 4's with 2.3. They turn the track( 3/8 mile) at 16.7 the super stocks turn the same track at 17.0. The rules are limited and we dyno at 210 HP.I'm in the process of getting ready to build a Track T with a tube frame and a 2.3 with side draft carbs.
Steve

 

Not what I have now, No
but would i conciter building one thats 4 banger powered, sure

 

My sis had an early 90's Buick Skylark with a little quad 4 Olds engine in it and surprisingly it ran very well though the car was a little 2 dr and light. I seen a guy with a 3 window coupe that had one of these little gems in it and he happened to sell the mounts and stuff to retrofit one in a rod.

I don't know if is the same guy but the kit looks similar.
http://quad4rods.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=frontpage&Itemid=17


Has items for Quad4, Duratec, Ecotec and Zetec.

Lots of possibilities.

 

What reputation?

I agree that you really can't "beat" a V8 engine in an old car/truck, even if you can't beat it with some fancy-schmancy, fuel-injected, turbocharged little I4.

If you want an old truck, have an old truck and do it right. If you want good mileage and reliability, actually buy a Ranger.

As you can see, I'm not big on compromise.

 

I wouldn't put a 4 cyl. in your project. too heavy! I am however installing a Quad 4 in my '33. Really have no experience with the Q4 but plan to use an adapter from Quad 4 Rods w/T5. I actually was set on running a 4cyl T5 and the Quad 4 seemed to come my way. Hope I like it!!

Yes, I have lowered the the grille

 

Yeah.

*Thompson's blown 4-banger Pontiac.

 

"Would you guys consider putting a 4 cylinder in your ride?"

Yes, one is planned for the Morris Minor, in place of the one that is in there now. The car weighs less than 1800lbs, though. In something like an F100 the only four I'd consider would be an older diesel, something in the 240cu.in./4-litre-up range.

 

Sure, with the price of gas going up and up, we need to look for different ways to pursue our hobby and keep the cars on the road.

 

Seen this little jewel at the Frog Follies. Supercharged 6 mill.

 

why not Henry did originally - maybe you could get alot of hp but cant see getting good torque #'s maybe a little 23 track T for a small parts or beverage runner cant beat the good ol V-8 for good reliable balance of hp & torque - cant say never but not high on my list of priorities or my "bucket list".

 

I'm kinda surprised this thread is still going, lol. Previously I defended the 2.3T and T5 in a lighter weight car, and still do. My ride, personally, would have a flathead in it. That's what those trucks came with. Half the hp than the 2.3, yep. Cool factor, not even close.

This would be choice for a 4cyl in an A:

 

Turbos and
Fuel Injection are not so difficult. The 2.3 Turbo is a great starting platform.

http://www.turboford.org/index.shtml

http://www.turbotbird.com/

http://www.coolcats.net/

This has been posted before but I didn't see it above

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/06/curbside-classic-special-1959-edsel-“eco-boost”/

 

Super Chevy Magazine built a sbc powered '70 Monte Carlo that I think pulled down 30 or so mpg and ran respectable e.t.'s in the quarter. I think this was in the early eightie's,and I think they called it Project Econo-performer. We're talkin' about a two ton boat,should be no problem to do the same or better in a light-weight hot rod.

 

The Model B Block four banger we have in the Old Crow does 160....Yeah I'd put a four cylinder in a car.

 

Dunno what the old crow is but I'll bet a dollar to a donut it ain't an F-1 Ford pickup.
Dave

 

I would love to have a VW turbo Diesel powered 1929 Ford coupe as a daily driver.

 

Yes,I would....and....Yes,I did.
This is my 26 style Track T. Harvested the complete powertrain from an '83 TurboCoupe.(2.3, T3 Garrett,ECM fuel system,T5 B/warner,Trac-loc rear)
165Hp stock,now has roller cam,big valves,tubing header,late intake,big injectors,etc..
Car is in the neighborhood of 1600-1800 #'s. Should be right peppy..Just weeks away from launch,after 8 long years..

 

Maybe in the trunk for traction in the winter.
"AND THE BOWTIE ROLLS ON"

 

Turbo's are actually very street friendly. I'm young and know of a lot of people who are doing turbo setups, whole different animal from your typical supercharger. I know an older gentleman who has a 5.0 mustang foxbody that he swapped a new 5.0 DOHC 2011 GT crate motor into and he is turbocharging it. In fact he could actually pick up a couple mpg's if he stays out of it. He did it just so the car would be street friendly but can still do well at the track.

But no I'm not a 4 cyl. guy. Turbo's are cool on later model stuff but sont really fit into the traditional hotrod category.

 

Yes, I did. Iron Duke in 50 Jeepster.

 

I didn't mean turbos aren't street friendly, I just meant an AFTERMARKET TURBO to make 600 hp from a 2.3L isn't economical to build.... You can buy a several barrels of gas for what you spend on that. Now if I could find an old 2.3 factory turbo then I'd look into it.

 

Someone please explain the term "traditional" to me...... to me a ricer is not traditional, period. However using an alternative energy source, different combinations, and setups is what to me is Traditional Hotrodding is all about. The pioneers of the true hotrods in the day were very NONTRADITIONAL in your alls terms on here, take Bobby Meeks for example who used methane for fuel, and tried nitrate. How bout the old guys who blew themselves up trying to make nitrate work? Highly nontraditional wouldn't you say?

Ask Meeks, Shelby, Edelbrock, Thompson what "traditional" hotrodding is??? My guess is it would be something like "whatever it takes to beat the competition". Be it in the salt flats or on a drag strip.

Now after my .02 cents, let me hear more about some diesel set ups???

Fuel mileage IS NOT my main concern. I want something that is street friendly when it comes to mpg (16 and up). And something unique. 90% of cars and trucks at show have two engines in them, 302's and 350's. Very popular, very good engines. However I think the same old same old is boring. Thats why right now I am looking towards one of the best truck engines ever built, the 300 six......

 

You asked what traditional is. Traditional means doing it the same way it was done in a certain time frame. As far as the HAMB goes,that means mid sixties or earlier.

Traditional does not mean doing it how they would have done it,if this,that or the other thing was readily available. Some guys on here would like to think that is traditional,but it's not. Things like EFI and such,for example. Would some guys have used it back then if it was available? Sure,but it wasn't available,so that makes it non-traditional.

Of course not everything on the HAMB is one hundred percent traditional,but that's what most of us here strive for.

 

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=44274

 

So then every car on here with an aftermarket part(excluding aftermarket stock reproductions) would not be considered traditional, am I correct? According to your definition if it has a modern intake, modern carb, headers, hiperf pistons, heads, nitrous, turbo or anything aftermarket, or parts from a vehicle be it an engine or suspension post 1964, it's considered NONTRADITIONAL?

Do those fall under the category of customs then?

 

FYI I have and did pay attention to this when I read it when i joined.

"The HAMB is dedicated to spreading the gospel of traditional hot rods and kustoms to hoodlums world wide. That’s right – TRADITIONAL."

So then do the "old car body's" with post 64 parts fall into the customs section of that quote?