Register now to get rid of these ads!

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

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by tlmartin84, Sep 7, 2011.

  1. dawford
    Joined: Apr 25, 2010
    Posts: 498

    dawford
    Member

    timartin84 askes the question "would you guys consider putting a 4 cilinder in your ride?"

    But then states that he is thinking about putting one in his full size pick up.

    Nothing wrong with that except that it really brings up 2 questions.

    I would have to think twice before I put a small displacement 4 cylinder engine in a heavy pick up truck.

    However that being said, I might try a Big Block 4 turbo charged engine in one just to see how it performed.

    For many years most Ford F-150 pickups were powered by engines that produced 250hp or less.

    When I mentiones a Big Block 4 I was thinking about the 470 Mercruiser which is about 1/2 of a Ford 460 V8.

    Don't ask me where the Mercruiser people got the 470 engine designation.
    This engine is listed as a Mercruiser 165, 170, 188,190 as well as by the 3.7 liter designation.

    Mercury Marine engineered this engine using their own 75 lb. die cast aluminum block, cam and crank. They used a Ford 460 head, pistons, rods and other various Ford bearings and flywheel parts to create a 224 ci (3.7 liter) 4 cylinder boat engine.

    In a Mercruiser configured inboard outdrive style of installation they produced 165 to 190 hp at 4600 to 4800 constant rpm max.

    With the conversion to a car configuration including an aluminum head and other slight modifications they will produce about 225 hp at 5500 to 6000 rpm using the Mercruiser 4 barrel manifold and Rochester Quadrajet that came on the 190 hp Mercruiser.

    The engine came with a 8.8 to 1 compression ratio which would lend it's self to Turbo charging.

    With a mild Turbo I am sure that they will produce a hefty 300 hp and gobs of tourque.

    Enough to propell a vintage f-100 or F150 pickup quite well.

    Another bonus of these engines is weight savings.

    The complete engine and a T-5 5 speed weigh about 365 lbs.

    The 300 to 400 lb weight savings over most V8 engines equals extra hp especially when installed in a light weight car where the power to weight ratio is good.

    As for the first question about putting a 4 cylinder in my ride, the answer is an emphatic YES.

    I like the idea of putting 4 cylinder engines in cars that came with them.

    I have several Model A Fords that will receive carburated 470s with about 225 hp and one 544 Volvo that will receive either the carburated or Turboed engine.

    Dick :) :) :)
     

    Attached Files:


  2. The question or answer to the question becomes this, will history change in 20 or 30 years.

    There will be foks in that time frame that want to remember the '70s and '80s etc, there already are and to them traditional is something different. it is there tradition.

    For those of us who are not plastic (to coin a phrase from the hippies) we are deeply involved in the roots of hot rodding or tradition if you will. This is not to say that we do not value or appreciate more modern things but we know beyond the shadow of a doubt that you cannot change the truth. The tradition of hot rodding or its roots will never change.


    To ask me on this forum if using a late model banger in your "traditional" hot rod or custom or parts hauler or whatever you want to call it is about as smart as asking if going to church in your underwear is a good idea. You no doubt would get lots of attention and would definately give the appearance of being different but it still would not be the traditional approach to going to church now would it.

    I personally don't think that either will bring you the type attention that you would like to have.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2011
  3. falconvan
    Joined: Apr 2, 2008
    Posts: 1,128

    falconvan
    Member
    from festus, Mo

    Sre, why not? It worked for Henry Ford.
     
  4. redlinetoys
    Joined: May 18, 2004
    Posts: 4,302

    redlinetoys
    Member
    from Midwest

    I haven't read the whole thread, but will add my two cents.

    Yep!
     
  5. rbpbob
    Joined: Jun 8, 2011
    Posts: 17

    rbpbob
    Member

    I actully was thinking this the other day on the way home from Bobs Big Boy ,I didnt drive my Big Block Blown 3 two Barrels @10 mpg if im lucky and thought why not build a light car 4 cyl make it look right except 4 for the motor, hey good gas milage, no heat issues and quiet .So I thought cool if you dont open the hood, but who cares its your car if you like it do it and even if you had a v8 someone is going to tell you "what you do that for ... I would of (insert word)" Ford, Chevy ,Stick Shift, auto overdrive, fuel ing...etc.For a steet driver do it .For a race car when yours Starts, idles, doesnt smoke them out and beats them they will stop laughing.and then they will put one in too.And like the one a couple up says no underwear ..will get attention in church....well I would look. bob

    O bye the way 220 hp,on top bottom two 685 hp and 1400 hp
     

    Attached Files:

  6. burnin53
    Joined: Mar 22, 2009
    Posts: 597

    burnin53
    Member
    from cuba,n.y.

    Ford did it with large cube,low rpm torque motors,not little,high rpm buzz bombs like most modern fours are today.
     
  7. a-fordable
    Joined: Jan 2, 2010
    Posts: 47

    a-fordable
    Member

    SO-would I, and make it FLY!
     
  8. jipp
    Joined: Jun 20, 2011
    Posts: 1,112

    jipp
    Member


    which to me seems more logical for a street engine.. since you not rapping the rpms up that high on the street usually.
    chris.
     
  9. dawford
    Joined: Apr 25, 2010
    Posts: 498

    dawford
    Member

    jipp,

    That is another advantage of the 470 Mercruiser.

    The 224 cu/in Big Block 4 uses 4.36" 460 Ford pistons that give them stump pulling torque.

    The complete engine is also void of complexity having only the necessities to work efficiently.

    This simplicity also makes them appear more traditional than the late model high rpm small displacement 4 cylinder engines found in modern cars.

    The 470 engines that I build could have been worked on by almost any shade tree mechanic back in 1930.

    Dick :) :) :)
     
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2012
  10. bonez
    Joined: Jul 16, 2007
    Posts: 3,487

    bonez
    Member
    from Slow lane

    of course, dunno why i didnt think of that....and that one in the picture you posted is super nice.

    There you have it! for all of you guys that think a 4 cyl would self destruct ina old truck!
     
  11. mramc1
    Joined: May 26, 2006
    Posts: 423

    mramc1
    Member

    I am building a '31 Model A sport coupe that will be powered by a 2.3L and T5. Everything else is going to be traditional on the car. '36 front end, '38 rearend, wide-5 wheels, bias-plys, something a kid would have had in 1947. The car is going to be full hooded, tall, and fenderless with the splash aprons left on. The 2.3L will be painted banger green. If I don't open the hood all you'll see thru the louvers is a flash of green. I am building the car to look traditional on the outside and get me 25 mpg as a daily. I already have a 283 in my '29 Model A truck that gets me 20 mpg that I drive daily now. My '46 Studebaker truck has a 120 hp AMC 258 in it that isn't fast, but has a lot of torque and gets down the road just fine at 70 mph. It gets about 15 mpg with a 727. My bottom line comes down to being frugal. I build what I can with the money I have. I can't afford a $3000 engine or else my Model A would be running the 341 Desoto Hemi I have. I drive my cars 40 miles round trip to and from work every day it's not snowing or raining so I do need to keep mileage in mind. I already spend $400 a month in gas so I'm excited to get the 2.3L going and see how it does. BTW, at a car show last month I saw a stock flat four banger '41 Ford pickup. It was different and cool. If a '41 Ford truck can motor down the road with a 40 hp banger why couldn't you build a F100 with a 150 hp 2.3L? Just set the rearend up to work with the T5. The 4 cyl T5 has a 4.03 first gear so taking off shouldn't be too hard. Obviously you're not going to be hauling around 1500 lbs of scrap in the truck, but I don't see why it wouldn't work out as an economical daily driver.

    Josh Quick
    Quick Speed Shop
     
  12. falconvan
    Joined: Apr 2, 2008
    Posts: 1,128

    falconvan
    Member
    from festus, Mo

    Some of those little high rpm buzzbombs make some pretty impressive power numbers.
     
  13. burnin53
    Joined: Mar 22, 2009
    Posts: 597

    burnin53
    Member
    from cuba,n.y.

    Yeah,some of them do.I agree.But I think he said he was kind of exploring the idea of putting one in a full size truck.I don't think many fours would have enough torque,especially if he ever wanted to use it like a real truck is meant to be used.Not to mention the fact that there would be nothing traditional about it.
     
  14. TwinTownTerror
    Joined: Dec 13, 2010
    Posts: 174

    TwinTownTerror
    Member
    from Minnesota

    An all steel Chevy S10 with a naturally aspirated 1000 cc (60 cubic inches) Suzuki crotch rocket engine went 140 mph at Bonneville this year. I was told the engine was bone stock by the owner. That thing was trick!!!
     
  15. dawford
    Joined: Apr 25, 2010
    Posts: 498

    dawford
    Member

    Martin,

    Since my last post about the 470 Mercruiser 4 cylinder boat engine conversion I have purchased a Buick 3.8 turbocharger setup with the intention of trying to get it to work with one of my 3.7 mercruiser 470s.

    In a Buick Grand National they got 200 hp out of a 125 hp naturally asperated engine.

    If I can get it to work properly on the 470 it should get about 300+ HP.

    That is about 1 hp per lb. and should push your pick up down the road quite nicely.

    With a world class Mustang T-5 5 speed and a 3.55 rear end it should also get relatively good mileage.

    Dick :) :) :)
     

    Attached Files:

  16. Oilcan Harry
    Joined: Mar 3, 2001
    Posts: 906

    Oilcan Harry
    Member
    from INDY

    I haven't, but I would in a light car. My buddy has a 27 T roadster project under construction, using a 20 R Toyota engine and trans out of a Celica. Life hassles have kind of halted progress right now but, it'll be neat when finished. If gas gets just stupidly expensive he'll still be able to cruise when others are parked.
     
  17. 40Tudor
    Joined: Jan 1, 2002
    Posts: 635

    40Tudor
    Member

    In a model T? Sure.


    [​IMG]

    In a truck? Maybe not...
     
  18. KUZTOM
    Joined: May 6, 2008
    Posts: 909

    KUZTOM
    Member



    Never ever even considered a Austin ,and i never would.;)
     
  19. I actually wanted to put oe in my Willys, but I could get the SBC for free and rebuilding a four costs more than my intire driveline, so V8 it is. The money I saved will more than offset the fuel costs. I do want to build a roadster with a four cyl someday.
     
  20. Iron duke in a pre 31 Chevrolet bucket would be cool.
     
  21. indyjps
    Joined: Feb 21, 2007
    Posts: 5,377

    indyjps
    Member

    for me cost comes into play. I guess thats why Im a SBC guy. I'd consider a 4 or 6 cyl if I could keep costs down, you typically run into buying adapters or specialty equipment that when totaled up could have gotten you a V8.
    theres only one car Im keeping forever, so I also consider resale on projects. not many people ante up the cash on a 4 or 6 cyl.

    If I had a 4 or 6 cyl fuel injected available at low cost, that would swap into a project without specialty equipment. sure, but it would be an off topic project and not a hot rod. Ive considered a jeep build from a totaled 4x4 colorado or trailblazer, cut the frame to size and use as much of it as possible, but why not get a totaled silverado? see where Im going. buddy of mine has a jeep body with a title. I have been looking for totaled 4x4 late models.

    I do have a Morris Minor spotted that would be a great 6 cyl swap, I guess this could work, but I dont know that I want to devote the project time to it, still a niche car and would be difficult to resell when I get my use out of it.
     
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2011
  22. FrozenMerc
    Joined: Sep 4, 2009
    Posts: 3,130

    FrozenMerc
    Member

    Of course I would run a 4, but Offy's can get quite expensive....
    [​IMG]
     
  23. rimwrecker
    Joined: Dec 17, 2010
    Posts: 11

    rimwrecker
    Member
    from santa cruz

    ya why not. hotrodding in my opinion, is all about having your own personal touches, making the car your own. if people dont like it, who cares, it wasnt built for them anyhow.
     
  24. swimeasy
    Joined: Oct 17, 2006
    Posts: 1,067

    swimeasy
    Member

    Light car-Yup!
     
  25. Torque-Tube
    Joined: Nov 9, 2008
    Posts: 146

    Torque-Tube
    Member

    I have a '63 Tempest (3100 lbs.) with a factory stock 4cyl, 4bbl, 4spd. (engine option (87-Z) 194.5 Cu.In.; H.P. 166 @ 4800; Torque, 215@ 2800; C.R.10.25. It cruises at 70mph/3000rpm, will spin it's skinny 15" tires (stock) and gives me 24mpg on the highway. (I've seen one of these run in the 10s without turbo, blower or nitrous.)
     
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2011
  26. segajeep
    Joined: Sep 13, 2011
    Posts: 62

    segajeep
    Member

    A Detroit 4-53 TA would push a big sled along like its nothing.
     
  27. DREW148BHP
    Joined: Oct 31, 2006
    Posts: 253

    DREW148BHP
    Member


    That is a lot of cash for a 4 popper when for a fraction you could have a junkyard big block almost doubling the HP.
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.