Iron duke 172 bhp / 220 ft*lbs! (Page 3/5)
sanderson231 SEP 25, 10:43 PM
And my Quad 4 makes 180 HP stock. Interesting that someone spent a bunch of money to make a 172 HP from an iron duke. Basically a science experiment. Anybody that follows down that path is insane.

------------------
formerly known as sanderson
1984 Quad 4
1886 SE 2.8L
1988 4.9L Cadillac
1988 3800 Supercharged

BillS SEP 28, 12:24 PM

quote
Originally posted by sanderson231:

And my Quad 4 makes 180 HP stock. Interesting that someone spent a bunch of money to make a 172 HP from an iron duke. Basically a science experiment. Anybody that follows down that path is insane.




The Quad 4 is a far better engine and a good choice for swapping, although I understand they are getting harder to find.

The modern equivalent is the Ecotec - stock turbo LNF = 260 or 290 bhp stock, and the blocks are good for around 500 bhp (I run a conservative 375 bhp and get 30 mpg when not in boost).
sanderson231 SEP 28, 02:01 PM
Maybe this belongs in the mall but anyone who is interested in a Quad 4 can email me. I have a couple surplus

------------------
formerly known as sanderson
1984 Quad 4
1886 SE 2.8L
1988 4.9L Cadillac
1988 3800 Supercharged

lou_dias SEP 30, 09:01 AM

quote
Originally posted by BillS:


The Quad 4 is a far better engine and a good choice for swapping, although I understand they are getting harder to find.

The modern equivalent is the Ecotec - stock turbo LNF = 260 or 290 bhp stock, and the blocks are good for around 500 bhp (I run a conservative 375 bhp and get 30 mpg when not in boost).


That's not much different than me saying my 2.8 gets 40mph going downhill.
Last time I looked, the N/A ecotech does not make anywhere near 220 ft*lbs... Also, the dyno was not smooth. The graph looked real ugly to me. All they were playing with was timing. Next step would be fuel adjustments. I don't know the people involved in this rebuild but I don't doubt the eventual goal of 200bhp once everything is smoothened out.

@all

There seems to be a real hater mentality around here. It's almost like seeing a rebuild giving someone good performance that would have averted their swap pisses people off.
The general consensus with the stock engines seems to be to just swap'em out. In reality it's much easier to do rebuild with performance parts than to spend years on modifying wiring harnesses and creating all the other custom 1-off parts and [typically] years to do a swap.

The only reason I did my original 4.9 swap was because I could pay someone else to do it (Fiero Factory). I'd never waste the amount of time people do on 'swaps' so I appreciate people taking stock equipment and making it work better.
I've also seen people spend years on a swap only to complete it and then since it's a non-rebuilt engine, it fails shortly thereafter so not having any more patience it either sits for a long time [again] or gets sold. We do spend lots of time glorifying the few success stories with here though...and then bash rebuilds with like 'bro - when I'm done with my swap in 20 years it will make 4x more power than your 2.8!". Good for you.

I actually enjoy driving my cars.
La fiera OCT 01, 10:02 PM

quote
Originally posted by lou_dias:and then bash rebuilds with like 'bro - when I'm done with my swap in 20 years it will make 4x more power than your 2.8!".




sanderson231 OCT 02, 12:43 AM

quote
Originally posted by lou_dias:

The only reason I did my original 4.9 swap was because I could pay someone else to do it (Fiero Factory). I'd never waste the amount of time people do on 'swaps' so I appreciate people taking stock equipment and making it work better.




Since you have never apparently done a swap you have no appreciation how easy it is to swap a Quad 4 or even a 4.9L. I've done both. I started with a NOS Quad 4 and a 4.9L from a running car with 30,000 mile on it so they are both RELIABLE cars.
I'll bet more time and money was spent on this Iron Duke science experiment that I spent on either of my swaps. I'm not criticizing the people that did the Iron Duke build they had fun doing it. But once is enough.

If you want to play with a N/A 4 cylinder how about a bored out Quad 4 stroked to 2.6L with the 2.4L Twin Cam crank. With 11.0:1 compression that's good for 225 HP. The 086 head on the Quad 4 may be the best flowing heads GM has ever made right out of the box - no porting and polishing required. There is nothing that can be done to an Iron Duke head to make it flow like a Quad 4 head.

------------------
formerly known as sanderson
1984 Quad 4
1886 SE 2.8L
1988 4.9L Cadillac
1988 3800 Supercharged

Patrick OCT 02, 02:25 AM

quote
Originally posted by lou_dias:

That's not much different than me saying my 2.8 gets 40mph going downhill.



Lou, I really really hope you meant 40mpg.
lou_dias OCT 02, 09:05 PM

quote
Originally posted by Patrick:

Lou, I really really hope you meant 40mpg.



yeah always mix those acronyms up!
lou_dias OCT 02, 09:09 PM

quote
Originally posted by sanderson231:
Since you have never apparently done a swap you have no appreciation how easy it is to swap a Quad 4 or even a 4.9L. I've done both. I started with a NOS Quad 4 and a 4.9L from a running car with 30,000 mile on it so they are both RELIABLE cars.
I'll bet more time and money was spent on this Iron Duke science experiment that I spent on either of my swaps. I'm not criticizing the people that did the Iron Duke build they had fun doing it. But once is enough.

If you want to play with a N/A 4 cylinder how about a bored out Quad 4 stroked to 2.6L with the 2.4L Twin Cam crank. With 11.0:1 compression that's good for 225 HP. The 086 head on the Quad 4 may be the best flowing heads GM has ever made right out of the box - no porting and polishing required. There is nothing that can be done to an Iron Duke head to make it flow like a Quad 4 head.


It's not about appreciation but about bashing and trolling. That was the point of my post.
If I didn't appreciate swaps, I wouldn't have owned my 4.9/3100->3400/3800SC cars... I just can't be bothered with the process. That doesn't mean I don't appreciate them.
sanderson231 OCT 03, 02:28 AM
The point of your post was to promote modifying an Iron Duke rather than swapping to an engine with more potential. I you don't believe me go back and re-read what you wrote. Modifying an Iron Duke is just plain wrong.

------------------
formerly known as sanderson
1984 Quad 4
1886 SE 2.8L
1988 4.9L Cadillac
1988 3800 Supercharged