I like engine swaps.....ones that make sense. You know, like a classic Mustang or Camaro with the latest engine Ford or GM have to offer. That looks cool and runs better, faster and more efficent than the older engine.

This was done I am guessing to pass time and maybe win a bet.

Not for me, but I can appreciate the hard work.

 

oh dear god what a mess!!

Sonicnofadz......what planet have you been on??. just explain to me one thing....if a push rod motor is so "low tech" than why has Chevrolet used this style of engine for over 50 years and sees no need to switch to a "hi tech" OHC engine when it comes to performance????
who in the world told you that a 32v ford cobra motor was in anyway better than a ls1??? why is that, cause it has a supercharger on it?? that makes it better?
push rod motors dont need to "REV"....they have Torque. <---look that one up cause i know you probably have never heard of the word.
72 and LT1 are right.....you can not argue the point that ls7/ls2/ls1 all make a ton more power than a 4g all while maintaining a similer fuel economy....why do you think that is???

the replacement for displacement comments were great. what do you think powers a 4.00sec alcohol dragster???? sure as hell aint a 3.6l v10 spinning at 14k rpms....its cubes..monster cubes with blower assist.

 

i give credit for originality. thats one engine swap i wouldve never seen coming but i think itd be cool to be able to say you were the first and maybe only ever to do it. but im also one of those kinds where if you tell me i cant do it i will hahah but props man

 

While I've owned two Fbodies in the past, I've also owned three 4G63 cars. The reason the Fbody gets similar fuel economy is because they have taller gearing and aren't driving all four wheels.

I love when people with domestics try to say Evos don't have torque. My car has a dyno tuned flash, full exhaust, and made within 3 torque on the same dyno than my friend's old 2002 C5 Z06 (405HP) did.

Do I have a ton of torque at 2000rpm? No, but who cares? That translates to like 150HP at that low RPM anyway. If I want to make 600 torque at what some consider idle, I'll buy a turbo diesel truck.

The funny thing about these comments are that the LSx engines LOVE to rev compared to the LT1, the Ford 302, and other small blocks of old. Heck, my friend's C5 Z06 LS6 had great torque everywhere, but its peak torque was at a stratospheric 4500rpm.

While I applaud these guys in Saudi Arabia trying something different, I think there are a ton of better cars to swap an LSx into. An RX-7, RX-8, 350Z, BMW 3 series, and even an S2000 come to mind. At least these cars are proper RWD cars. To get a modified Evo to hook up with a RWD conversion is going to be a challenge in the very least. The car was engineered to be FWD, and the compromises to make it RWD will render the car's value to nil. To make it a FAST RWD that will actually hook will be substantially more costly, making the value even lower. At that point, you have to ask yourself why in the heck you'd use this car as your canvas? Why take a balanced, great handling car with a very good engine and turn it into something that won't be worth half its original value nor will it have traction below 60mph?

I love the LSx series engines as much as the next enthusiast, but to me, there are a ton better choices for a new home to swap this motor than a FWD based four door four cylinder.

 

not trying to start an argument, and i dont know much about engines yet but what i DO know is that wikipedia.com is a skeptical source when it comes to online research and information. if youve ever taken a college level research/writing course you would know that its not a creditable source mainly due to the fact that ANYONE can type up and edit information on any topic on that website using any information they want. soo i couldnt help but laugh when i came across that in your post, knowing the back of my head that you were thinking you just "schooled him" with that line. just my two sense though

 

I'm assuming you are from some chevy forum that 72 linked this thread into. Torque is important, but power is also very important. Why is this? Power output dictates top speed, and top end acceleration. In a road racing situation an engine stays in the high RPM band where maximum power output matters greatly. High torque engines with low power output are GREAT for saving gas, and having really tall gears (less gear changes needed). Look at Diesel engines for instance (all torque). However, when it comes to racing, POWER is king. Engine REV CAPABILITY in my opinion is also very important. Push rod engines lack top end power and rev capability. Why use them? Why argue against OHC?! Its been mathematically proven that OHV makes less power than OHC. END OF STORY. No go back to your chevy forums.

 

I agree, however If you ask any educated person (mechanical engineers) about the OHC vs OHV argument, they will tell you that pushrods are for retards. Nuff said.

 

i wouldnt really know to be honest soo im not going to try and rebut you, thats why i stated i dont know much about engines yet...going to be taking auto classes in the fall semester...and i wasnt trying to start anything i just thought it was funny

 

bleh... not my cup of tea

 

I've spent 5 years in the engineering departments of UMD (college park). I've yet to speak to a mechanical engineer who thinks OHV is better than OHC. The fact of the matter is, OHC flows air FASTER than OHV (given the same engine block). This has been proven time and time again, yet people still seem to still think that Chevy's improvements on this primitive design make it "superior" to OHC, which is just silly. Any old technology can be improved upon, and Chevy has done a fantastic job doing just that. Some may argue that top fuel dragsters output insane amounts of power. That has nothing to do with OHC vs OHV. Yes top fuel drag competitions only use OHV engine setups (there are WAY more cheap OHV engines to choose from versus OHC V8 setups). You can make a V8 OHC just as powerful or more powerful than a OHV setup with the same displacement. Why? Because OHC FLOWS MORE. IT FLOWS MORE. Not only does it flow more, BUT IT CAN ALSO REV HIGHER.

Now can we stop arguing about this? OHC is simply better. There is no reason to argue against it. Honestly, do you think Chevy is right with choosing to hold onto the pushrod legacy? Why then, has the entire automotive industry switched to OHC? Hmmmm...probably because OHC IS BETTER.

 

Why would it flow more? A valve is a valve regardless of what's pushing it...you could argue engines with more than 2 valves flow more, which is easier to do with OHC...but it's not because of the location of the cams...

 

You forget that pushrods have massive torque instantly, that really helps, they also own the NHRA. I love the LSX motors and they are very very versatile.

 

wow...

 

Sorry, don't like it.

To each his own.

all what i can say SH*T Evo

 

who really ****ing cares which is better then which? the fact is these guys did a crazy motor swap (pretty bad *** one at that), and they could care less what anyone thinks.. THERE WILL ALWAYS BE PROS/CONS ABOUT EACH MOTOR.. YOU PEOPLE ARE COMPARING APPLES TO ORANGES.. if i could own one import it would have to be an Evo..but some of you guys/gals need to understand that an LSx platform is one of the best right now