Is the Ecotec 4 clyn. engine the LT1 of the early 2000's?
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 1,911
From: Southern California (SoCal)
Is the Ecotec 4 clyn. engine the LT1 of the early 2000's?
The LT1 (and the LS1 to a lesser degree) was by far GM's performance engine of the 1990's with a host of aftermarket mods and etc.
Im wondering if Gm's Ecotec 4 banger is going to be the engine of choice for the aftermarket and tuners for the next 10 years. unfortunately GM's v8 vehicles (except for trucks) are way too expensive for the new crop of hotrodders and they will most likely buy and tune GM's line of sub-$20,000 cars and the majority of those vehicles will be sporting Ecotec engines.
Here's a new picture of a 200+HP turbo-charged Saturn Ion Quad-Coupe sporting a modified Ecotec engine @ http://www.twistecproducts.com/ion/sema_ion2.jpg
What do you think?
Gm is getting 1000HP out of an Ecotec without it self-destructing http://www.thecarconnection.com/inde...&sid=247&n=158 (old news but interesting)
quote from the article:
"O’Blenes, who oversaw the development of the racing Ecotec, sees a little bit of history repeating itself. “Since 1955, the small-block Chevy has proven its versatility, durability and performance potential. The Ecotec engine has all the basic mechanical components to repeat that feat.”
Im wondering if Gm's Ecotec 4 banger is going to be the engine of choice for the aftermarket and tuners for the next 10 years. unfortunately GM's v8 vehicles (except for trucks) are way too expensive for the new crop of hotrodders and they will most likely buy and tune GM's line of sub-$20,000 cars and the majority of those vehicles will be sporting Ecotec engines.
Here's a new picture of a 200+HP turbo-charged Saturn Ion Quad-Coupe sporting a modified Ecotec engine @ http://www.twistecproducts.com/ion/sema_ion2.jpg
What do you think?
Gm is getting 1000HP out of an Ecotec without it self-destructing http://www.thecarconnection.com/inde...&sid=247&n=158 (old news but interesting)
quote from the article:
"O’Blenes, who oversaw the development of the racing Ecotec, sees a little bit of history repeating itself. “Since 1955, the small-block Chevy has proven its versatility, durability and performance potential. The Ecotec engine has all the basic mechanical components to repeat that feat.”
Last edited by johnsocal; Nov 18, 2002 at 10:39 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
I wouldn't call the Ecotech the LT or LS1 engines on the decade. The "L" engines were performers out of the box, without needing to resort to aftermarket tricks. But I will give you this, the Ecotech may become the chevy "small block" of today.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,597
From: oshawa,ontario,canada
Originally posted by guionM
I wouldn't call the Ecotech the LT or LS1 engines on the decade. The "L" engines were performers out of the box, without needing to resort to aftermarket tricks. But I will give you this, the Ecotech may become the chevy "small block" of today.
I wouldn't call the Ecotech the LT or LS1 engines on the decade. The "L" engines were performers out of the box, without needing to resort to aftermarket tricks. But I will give you this, the Ecotech may become the chevy "small block" of today.
Banned
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,954
Originally posted by guionM
But I will give you this, the Ecotech may become the chevy "small block" of today.
But I will give you this, the Ecotech may become the chevy "small block" of today.
The bad thing about the Ecotec 2.2 is that its a long stroke design - it will never be much of a revver I'm afraid. We'll see a supercharger long before we'll see a 8000rpm redline.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,597
From: oshawa,ontario,canada
Originally posted by redzed
Try the "Pinto" of the 21st century. The Ford Pinto's 4-cylinder was actually a decent enough Ford of Europe design. It morphed into the turbocharged 16v engine that made the Sierra and Escort Cosworths great. Oddly enought, the high performance versions survived long after the design was superceded in more humdrum applications.
The bad thing about the Ecotec 2.2 is that its a long stroke design - it will never be much of a revver I'm afraid. We'll see a supercharger long before we'll see a 8000rpm redline.
Try the "Pinto" of the 21st century. The Ford Pinto's 4-cylinder was actually a decent enough Ford of Europe design. It morphed into the turbocharged 16v engine that made the Sierra and Escort Cosworths great. Oddly enought, the high performance versions survived long after the design was superceded in more humdrum applications.
The bad thing about the Ecotec 2.2 is that its a long stroke design - it will never be much of a revver I'm afraid. We'll see a supercharger long before we'll see a 8000rpm redline.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,698
From: USA
Originally posted by redzed
Try the "Pinto" of the 21st century. The Ford Pinto's 4-cylinder was actually a decent enough Ford of Europe design. It morphed into the turbocharged 16v engine that made the Sierra and Escort Cosworths great. Oddly enought, the high performance versions survived long after the design was superceded in more humdrum applications.
The bad thing about the Ecotec 2.2 is that its a long stroke design - it will never be much of a revver I'm afraid. We'll see a supercharger long before we'll see a 8000rpm redline.
Try the "Pinto" of the 21st century. The Ford Pinto's 4-cylinder was actually a decent enough Ford of Europe design. It morphed into the turbocharged 16v engine that made the Sierra and Escort Cosworths great. Oddly enought, the high performance versions survived long after the design was superceded in more humdrum applications.
The bad thing about the Ecotec 2.2 is that its a long stroke design - it will never be much of a revver I'm afraid. We'll see a supercharger long before we'll see a 8000rpm redline.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
dbusch22
Forced Induction
6
Oct 31, 2016 11:09 AM
chevroletfreak
LT1 Based Engine Tech
202
Jul 4, 2005 05:00 PM