43 replies to this topic

[TheRealVXed]

Side exit exhaust and a rear exit exhaust could be possible no? Although I am not sure why there is so much concren over that particular aspect? My old saxo had the exhaust down the front of the engine and then running underneath to get to the back (not really a comparison though!! )

Edited by VXed, 29 July 2011 - 11:02 AM.

[Ground Effect]

I think what slindborg is saying (besides the RV8 bashing ) is that a N/A V configuration engine should have a crossed over from bank to bank manifolds (like on a gt40 for example) for proper exhaust scavenging and thats not easy to do in a transverse setup with a small space. So probley best to not waste your time doing a transverse V8 in a VX and buy a car that can take a LS (if thats what you must have) in a longitudinal position and do it propley. I agree with him tbh but money dictates what you finally chose to do, personally id use an early buick V8 just to annoy slindborg Sam.

[slindborg]

I think what slindborg is saying (besides the RV8 bashing ) is that a N/A V configuration engine should have a crossed over from bank to bank manifolds (like on a gt40 for example) for proper exhaust scavenging and thats not easy to do in a transverse setup with a small space.

So probley best to not waste your time doing a transverse V8 in a VX and buy a car that can take a LS (if thats what you must have) in a longitudinal position and do it propley.

I agree with him tbh but money dictates what you finally chose to do, personally id use an early buick V8 just to annoy slindborg

Sam.

The RV8 was a great engine for CAT ageing in dyno cells cheap, flowed a stack of hot air and would run for weeks and weeks on end at full load.... but for anything other than an MGB they bite all imho of course.

I reckon it would cost more in faff with good manifolds and mounts to transverse a V8 in the VX platform than it would to mod the chassis/new spaceframe back end to take a longy.

[LMP1]

An ex-vx with longitudinal mounted the h1v8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRnvt9Pl240


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yleL6mqgF1Q&feature=channel_video_title

[LMP1]

[LMP1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhFQ64my2N0&NR=1

who wants it?

Edited by Psychopathis, 30 July 2011 - 01:43 PM.

[Rosssco]

Talking Longditudinal, dependant on the length of the LSx engine, you might get away without a chassis / bodywork stretch at all - look at the pics below for a possible gearbox candidate. An Audi V8 being running with a VEMS ems and a twist of low boost (non charge cooled) would match an LSx engine for grunt, and wouldn't cost the earth (relatively speaking)... Sorry, going off course there, you're aiming for transverse.

Edited by Rosssco, 30 July 2011 - 04:07 PM.

[Korkey]

This is in NO WAY a criticism of someones project.

It a chance for me to be educated.



I have to say that I do admire off the wall projects.

I am a complete Chevrolet fan and have fitted them to quite a few vehicles over the past 30 years.



However the reasons to fit one into the VX220 need to be explored.

What is the end goal of the exercise?



To elaborate.

I have a TVR Tuscan Speed Six with a sbc and TKO 600 gearbox in its chassis, along with a multitude of other components which are required to make all this work as it should.

This car has taken me 6 years to truly perfect. There is so much more to transplants than just the engine gear box instillation part of it.

The upshot and where I am today with it is this, in brief.

An engine which produces 530 Bhp on an ENGINE dyno, a Land & Sea dyno & a Super Flow engine dyno, so no "Bull" there then.

The power to weight ratio is 442Bhp / Ton (English ton )

A thunderously fast car with outrageous performance which sadly only returns 15Mpg.





The power to weight ratio of a typical LS @ 400BHp would give the VX220 Turbo the following.

930Kg = 2046Lbs = 0.930 English Tons.......... = PWR of 430Bhp/Ton



Now a stage 4 Turbo VX220 let us say @ 300 Bhp and 2046Lbs gives a power to weight ratio of 322Bhp/ Ton



To match the V8 we would need to see a power figure of 400Bhp.

This is achievable form the 2.0Lt engine........of course with considerable work.



BUT....... would we really need to see 400BHp from the 2.0Lt? As is not the Chevrolet engine heavier?

And would the Chevrolet although more fuel efficient than my sbc, still be a lot worse on its Mpg figure than the tuned 2.0Lt engine?

As for the weight distribution and resale value of such a creation over a very high spec 2.0Lt, well what do you think?

The next factor is the outright cost of such a project compared to the cost of the highly tuned 2.0Lt project.

I hope to be able to tell you the cost of the 2.0Lt project as time goes by.



Please do be assured that I do not intend any disrespect whatsoever here. I am just doing what Engineers do, asking questions.



I am happy to be shown to be wrong about my observations. That is what education is all about.



Korkey.



ps. Furthermore I have a very large 900 sq feet, fully equiped 3 bay new workshop at my home with plenty of outside secure parking on my grounds and would maybe like to get involved withis project if space is still needed. So feel free to e-mail me.

[Ausbuilt]

This is in NO WAY a criticism of someones project.

It a chance for me to be educated.



I have to say that I do admire off the wall projects.

I am a complete Chevrolet fan and have fitted them to quite a few vehicles over the past 30 years.



However the reasons to fit one into the VX220 need to be explored.

What is the end goal of the exercise?



To elaborate.

I have a TVR Tuscan Speed Six with a sbc and TKO 600 gearbox in its chassis, along with a multitude of other components which are required to make all this work as it should.

This car has taken me 6 years to truly perfect. There is so much more to transplants than just the engine gear box instillation part of it.

The upshot and where I am today with it is this, in brief.

An engine which produces 530 Bhp on an ENGINE dyno, a Land & Sea dyno & a Super Flow engine dyno, so no "Bull" there then.

The power to weight ratio is 442Bhp / Ton (English ton )

A thunderously fast car with outrageous performance which sadly only returns 15Mpg.





The power to weight ratio of a typical LS @ 400BHp would give the VX220 Turbo the following.

930Kg = 2046Lbs = 0.930 English Tons.......... = PWR of 430Bhp/Ton



Now a stage 4 Turbo VX220 let us say @ 300 Bhp and 2046Lbs gives a power to weight ratio of 322Bhp/ Ton



To match the V8 we would need to see a power figure of 400Bhp.

This is achievable form the 2.0Lt engine........of course with considerable work.



BUT....... would we really need to see 400BHp from the 2.0Lt? As is not the Chevrolet engine heavier?

And would the Chevrolet although more fuel efficient than my sbc, still be a lot worse on its Mpg figure than the tuned 2.0Lt engine?

As for the weight distribution and resale value of such a creation over a very high spec 2.0Lt, well what do you think?

The next factor is the outright cost of such a project compared to the cost of the highly tuned 2.0Lt project.

I hope to be able to tell you the cost of the 2.0Lt project as time goes by.



Please do be assured that I do not intend any disrespect whatsoever here. I am just doing what Engineers do, asking questions.



I am happy to be shown to be wrong about my observations. That is what education is all about.



Korkey.



ps. Furthermore I have a very large 900 sq feet, fully equiped 3 bay new workshop at my home with plenty of outside secure parking on my grounds and would maybe like to get involved withis project if space is still needed. So feel free to e-mail me.

My first reason for the LS engine swap- ENGINE NOTE... I admit it... flat out, I LOVE the sound of a V8 (and no, not the sound of a flat plane- i've owned a v8 esprit before, and friends have had fezzas... the sound is loud, but doesn't excite me.. I love the BASS rumble of "proper" vibrating v8s)

My car is actually an exige S (supercharged toyota motor); but the rear subframe is the same as the VX220, but the rear bodywork is more conducive to a v8 swap...

I know there are a number of twin charged cars around developing 400+ horsepower, and a few turbo conversions doing the same.... but they still sound crap to me, and they are NOT cheap to develop...

I want to keep the transverse layout to not disturb the geometry, and despite the extra weight of the engine, the distribution doesn't change much owing to the transverse layout. relocating a lightweight (lithium) racing battery to the front, and using titanium for the exhaust, i think will keep the weight increase modest (in additioned to lightened accessory drive etc)

I;m from Australia, and there is considerable expertise in engine management on these engines- in fact, I plan to run a "factory" manual ECU sourced from an autorecycler (along with the engine), as these have been reprogramed easily for years now. I'm ditching the instruements for dakota digital gauges, that i like the look of:
http://www.dakotadig...prod/prd726.htm

An example of tuning:
http://www.oztracktuning.com/

I've previously done conversions, where I've mocked up the engine/gearbox and had firms like the one below make up the bellhousing/conversion plate:
http://www.rodshop.c...s/2wd_trans.htm
http://www.dellowcon...wAutomotive.pdf

dellows will make up a custom version if you provide a template and measurements. Of course I'm sure that there are local companies that do the same thing here in the UK.

My aim is to get the engine in the car, fitted to the GM 5speed from a VX220 turbo, with stronger axles/drive shafts, running a factory GM ECU and Dakota digital instruments.. then I'll worry about fine tuning the handling with some Ohlins dampers/springs.

[slindborg]

The battery is already up front in a vx

[Winstar]

My car is actually an exige S (supercharged toyota motor); but the rear subframe is the same as the VX220, but the rear bodywork is more conducive to a v8 swap...

I know there are a number of twin charged cars around developing 400+ horsepower, and a few turbo conversions doing the same.... but they still sound crap to me, and they are NOT cheap to develop...

Seems you've not really done any homework on the VX then as these levels of power are availble for a fraction of the price of that on the Exige due to the strenght of the original components.

Hell I reckon I could get 400bhp out of a VXT for less than your Titanium exhaust.

[14500rpm]

My car is actually an exige S (supercharged toyota motor); but the rear subframe is the same as the VX220, but the rear bodywork is more conducive to a v8 swap...

I know there are a number of twin charged cars around developing 400+ horsepower, and a few turbo conversions doing the same.... but they still sound crap to me, and they are NOT cheap to develop...

Seems you've not really done any homework on the VX then as these levels of power are availble for a fraction of the price of that on the Exige due to the strenght of the original components.

Hell I reckon I could get 400bhp out of a VXT for less than your Titanium exhaust.

It'd still sound shite though, I think that is part of the driving force behind the project.


I did briefly look at this (i.e. did some Googling) and thought the LS4 engine might be a go-er as its designed fro FWD and may attach to some varients of the F23 gearbox, unfortunately the LS4 is a bit of an old anchor, long stroke and lacking compared to the more normal LSx engines. I contributed to this thread which you might/might not have seen.

Edited by 14500rpm, 04 August 2011 - 01:40 PM.

[Ausbuilt]

My car is actually an exige S (supercharged toyota motor); but the rear subframe is the same as the VX220, but the rear bodywork is more conducive to a v8 swap...

I know there are a number of twin charged cars around developing 400+ horsepower, and a few turbo conversions doing the same.... but they still sound crap to me, and they are NOT cheap to develop...

Seems you've not really done any homework on the VX then as these levels of power are availble for a fraction of the price of that on the Exige due to the strenght of the original components.

Hell I reckon I could get 400bhp out of a VXT for less than your Titanium exhaust.

It'd still sound shite though, I think that is part of the driving force behind the project.


I did briefly look at this (i.e. did some Googling) and thought the LS4 engine might be a go-er as its designed fro FWD and may attach to some varients of the F23 gearbox, unfortunately the LS4 is a bit of an old anchor, long stroke and lacking compared to the more normal LSx engines. I contributed to this thread which you might/might not have seen.

you're right, the number 1 reason for me doing this is that i want the sound to match the looks of the car.... I've previously put an ls3 in a series 1 mx-5... bit of a sleeper apart from the sound! LOL

I love the vx220/lotus exige cars, but the sounds don't match the looks of the cars... I've had turbo 4s before (pulsar GTi-R AWD, turbo) turbo 6- supra, and a string of ford V8s; an e46M3, porsche flat 6 etc.. but my favourite sound is a V8... I also like the ability to light up the rear tires at will.... (['m in my 40s and I still like this!).

It looks do-able, its not my only car so i'm not scared of tearing it apart! LOL

[alanoo]

Toyota Elise/Exige subframe is NOT the same as VX220

[Ausbuilt]

Toyota Elise/Exige subframe is NOT the same as VX220

it does look the same... and if its not the same, then it would bolt to the aluminium chasis- it IS the same..

I would lay money that the subframe is the same apart from the engine/gearbox mounts..

http://www.vx220.org...showtopic=84387

as stated by McLarenboss (and from my own visual of the two)

Edited by Ausbuilt, 04 August 2011 - 08:56 PM.

[carpmart]

What part of London are you? I could spare you the space at my place (time dependent of course) but I'm just near J12 on the M1

[alanoo]

Toyota Elise/Exige subframe is NOT the same as VX220

it does look the same... and if its not the same, then it would bolt to the aluminium chasis- it IS the same..

I would lay money that the subframe is the same apart from the engine/gearbox mounts..

http://www.vx220.org...showtopic=84387

as stated by McLarenboss (and from my own visual of the two)

Yep it bolts on to the chassis as the chassis is identical
but the subframe is definitely not the same, Toyota one is almost 2 cm larger

[Rosssco]

Can't add comment on how different the sub-frames are, but they are at least slightly different, if you compare the VX to the Yota-engined (in a previous life) Elise. It does look like the adjoining structural section is at least sloped back towards the rear of the car, where as the VX is vertical (I think)...

http://www.lotustalk...-2x-fun-102052/

Edited by Rosssco, 05 August 2011 - 07:33 AM.

[Ausbuilt]

What part of London are you?

I could spare you the space at my place (time dependent of course) but I'm just near J12 on the M1

i'm in SW1, i was hoping for something in London, but.... at the current rate J12 might be the closest! LOL Not sure which is closer- surrey or J12.. better get googlemaps out...

Are you actually interested in converting your VX?

[Ausbuilt]

This is in NO WAY a criticism of someones project.

It a chance for me to be educated.



I have to say that I do admire off the wall projects.

I am a complete Chevrolet fan and have fitted them to quite a few vehicles over the past 30 years.



However the reasons to fit one into the VX220 need to be explored.

What is the end goal of the exercise?



To elaborate.

I have a TVR Tuscan Speed Six with a sbc and TKO 600 gearbox in its chassis, along with a multitude of other components which are required to make all this work as it should.

This car has taken me 6 years to truly perfect. There is so much more to transplants than just the engine gear box instillation part of it.

The upshot and where I am today with it is this, in brief.

An engine which produces 530 Bhp on an ENGINE dyno, a Land & Sea dyno & a Super Flow engine dyno, so no "Bull" there then.

The power to weight ratio is 442Bhp / Ton (English ton )

A thunderously fast car with outrageous performance which sadly only returns 15Mpg.





The power to weight ratio of a typical LS @ 400BHp would give the VX220 Turbo the following.

930Kg = 2046Lbs = 0.930 English Tons.......... = PWR of 430Bhp/Ton



Now a stage 4 Turbo VX220 let us say @ 300 Bhp and 2046Lbs gives a power to weight ratio of 322Bhp/ Ton



To match the V8 we would need to see a power figure of 400Bhp.

This is achievable form the 2.0Lt engine........of course with considerable work.



BUT....... would we really need to see 400BHp from the 2.0Lt? As is not the Chevrolet engine heavier?

And would the Chevrolet although more fuel efficient than my sbc, still be a lot worse on its Mpg figure than the tuned 2.0Lt engine?

As for the weight distribution and resale value of such a creation over a very high spec 2.0Lt, well what do you think?

The next factor is the outright cost of such a project compared to the cost of the highly tuned 2.0Lt project.

I hope to be able to tell you the cost of the 2.0Lt project as time goes by.



Please do be assured that I do not intend any disrespect whatsoever here. I am just doing what Engineers do, asking questions.



I am happy to be shown to be wrong about my observations. That is what education is all about.



Korkey.



ps. Furthermore I have a very large 900 sq feet, fully equiped 3 bay new workshop at my home with plenty of outside secure parking on my grounds and would maybe like to get involved withis project if space is still needed. So feel free to e-mail me.

you've been emailed..