LocostUSA.com
http://locostusa.com/forums/

Summary of engine weights
http://locostusa.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=4299		 Page 12 of 14
Author:  phil [ August 26, 2016, 5:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Summary of engine weights
The chevy corvair weight is 220 lbs aircraft version, 332 bs with manual transmission according to GM techical data.

more:http://corvaircenter.com/phorum/read.php?1,258166
Author:  ajmacdon [ September 29, 2016, 9:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Summary of engine weights
I'm building a Stalker with a BMW N52 3.0 liter straight 6 (2006-2011 1, 3, 5, Z and X cars without turbo). I chose the engine due to its magnesium block, hollow cams and other weight saving technology. Internet folklore narrowed it down to between 305 and 320 lbs with basic dress which is pretty awesome for a 6 and WAY lighter than any other BMW engine. That's aluminum turbo 4 range. It's like BMW finally decided to worry about weight after years of TOTALLY ignoring it.

I weighed it with the starter, alternator, and electric water pump (stock). To be a runner it needs a flywheel (12lbs for a lightweight unit), intake (I'm doing ITB's), and a header. It weighs 311 lbs, quite happy with that.

They're pretty cheap too, this one with 80k miles was $1100 and there's a few hundred worth of stuff I won't use (cats, PS pump, AC compressor, etc) Megasquirt required, wading through modern BMW electronics is for the birds.

Image

Image

Image
Author:  Lonnie-S [ September 29, 2016, 9:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Summary of engine weights
@ajmacdon

That's a very interesting power plant. What kind of HP does it produce in stock BMW trim? Do you have a build log on this site?

Cheers,

Lonnie
Author:  ajmacdon [ September 29, 2016, 10:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Summary of engine weights
Lonnie-S wrote:
@ajmacdon

That's a very interesting power plant. What kind of HP does it produce in stock BMW trim? Do you have a build log on this site?

Cheers,

Lonnie


It makes between 210 and 270 HP in factory trim with about 6 different power ratings in between depending on model and year. The long blocks are all 100% the same including cams. There were two intake manifolds and about 5 different engine calibrations to make all the various HP numbers. Basically any N52B30 engine should be able to make 270 with the good intake and the right calibration.

I haven't started a build log on this site, I'll copy what I've got going on a smaller site over here.

Thanks,
Alex
Author:  KB58 [ September 29, 2016, 10:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Summary of engine weights
It's an "magnesium block" that's about 50% aluminum...
Author:  ajmacdon [ September 29, 2016, 10:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Summary of engine weights
KB58 wrote:
It's an "magnesium block" that's about 50% aluminum...


Here comes big chief no-fun :lol: Yes, it has co-cast aluminum liners/jugs/water jacket. Still, it's 22lbs lighter than the 100% aluminum block so definitely nothing to sneeze at. If we use this logic I believe a honda with cylinder liners is half cast iron as well, no? (I thought you had liners installed your motor, I might be totally wrong but you get my point.)

Alex
Author:  ajmacdon [ November 22, 2016, 11:50 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Summary of engine weights
ajmacdon wrote:
I'm building a Stalker with a BMW N52 3.0 liter straight 6 (2006-2011 1, 3, 5, Z and X cars without turbo). I chose the engine due to its magnesium block, hollow cams and other weight saving technology. Internet folklore narrowed it down to between 305 and 320 lbs with basic dress which is pretty awesome for a 6 and WAY lighter than any other BMW engine. That's aluminum turbo 4 range. It's like BMW finally decided to worry about weight after years of TOTALLY ignoring it.

I weighed it with the starter, alternator, and electric water pump (stock). To be a runner it needs a flywheel (12lbs for a lightweight unit), intake (I'm doing ITB's), and a header. It weighs 311 lbs, quite happy with that.

They're pretty cheap too, this one with 80k miles was $1100 and there's a few hundred worth of stuff I won't use (cats, PS pump, AC compressor, etc) Megasquirt required, wading through modern BMW electronics is for the birds.

Image

Image

Image


Nice surprise, I just found out when I pulled my oil pan that this engine was full of 6.5 quarts of oil (wow, that was a mess). That's about 12.3 lbs so I just sneak under the 300lb mark for a 'dry' engine. However, it shows how sensitive internet weights are, you never know exactly what you're looking at even with pictures.

Yes, I understand an engine needs oil to run but most of these 'bench racing' weight comparisons assume it's not in there.

Alex
Author:  rumbles [ November 22, 2016, 10:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Summary of engine weights
rumbles wrote:
This is a great thread!

The new Ford 2.3 Ecoboost looks like a great motor for a build. It makes 350HP stock and can easily do 400HP with a few bolt-ons and a tune.

Does anyone know what the weight of the Ford 2.3 Ecoboost is?


From my research, on the internet, it looks like the Ford Ecoboost 2.3 is about 300lbs dressed. That's more that I would have guessed.
Author:  carguy123 [ November 23, 2016, 1:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Summary of engine weights
There's one easy deciding factor between the 2.3 and the Bimmer engine for most of us, is there an easy harness or way to use the Bimmer short of a megasquirt? There is an ecu and harness for the Ford engine.

I haven't looked at dunks or power specs, but from the fact there is even a comparison that must mean they are similar in power outputs.
Author:  ajmacdon [ November 23, 2016, 7:16 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Summary of engine weights
For me it was turbo -vs- non turbo. I just don't like a turbo in a small car like this. I have a turbo SR20 Nissan in my other car and it's tons fun but not a power curve that's friendly to a very organic driving experience.

Not advocating the Bimmer at all, it's not for most people, it was a really tight squeeze for this car and needs a dry sump. I also agree that if you want a pre-packaged engine management the BMW is NOT the way to go, lots of wires.

However, if you want near 300hp without forced induction or 9000 RPM there aren't a ton of lightweight options, this is one of them.

Alex
Author:  KB58 [ November 23, 2016, 3:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Summary of engine weights
ajmacdon wrote:
...Not advocating the Bimmer at all, it's not for most people, it was a really tight squeeze for this car and needs a dry sump. I also agree that if you want a pre-packaged engine management the BMW is NOT the way to go, lots of wires.


Big chief no-fun is right.
Author:  slappynuts [ December 29, 2016, 9:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Summary of engine weights
I know the pics are kinda crappy, but this is the 1.8t VW engine complete with manifolds,turbo, and alternator (no clutch).

Image
Author:  carguy123 [ December 30, 2016, 1:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Summary of engine weights
That's lighter than I've been led to believe it would be
Author:  slappynuts [ December 30, 2016, 5:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Summary of engine weights
carguy123 wrote:
That's lighter than I've been led to believe it would be


This engine has a very nice cast iron block and it is very compact lengthwise (just the right amount of bore spacing). When they design these blocks they do it for the long haul and use them worldwide. There are now also a couple of options for RWD transmissions.
Author:  Def [ January 17, 2017, 9:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Summary of engine weights
dm2play wrote:
Hmm so a sr20det weighs 490lbs + intercooler= 220-450 hp. Aluminum head chevy 400 - 500hp easy with a 5speed tremec weighs 500? Doesn't make the chevy seem so big comparing it that way. Of course you would need a heavier diff. That might change my plans. Just happen to have 1.


I thought I'd pipe in with some SR20DET information since I have quite a bit.

Here is an SR20DET bottom end with an SR20VE head (a tad bit heavier than a DET head due to the VVL stuff, but probably no more than 3-5 lbs). Engine has a Quest 120 A alternator (1.2 lbs heavier than stock), aluminum crank pulley, no upper intake manifold (4 lbs). No flywheel or clutch. Weight as seen is 254 lbs with some of the chain on there, so about 250 lbs in reality:

Image

Engine full up ready to go minus wiring harness (which is 5 lbs for the engine - from scratch harness). This has a 7.25" Tilton cerametallic twin disk, AP Racing flywheel (~8 lbs), stock SR20DET 5 speed, Quest alternator (120 A), VVL head, Full-Race twin scroll SR20VE manifold (~14 lbs), Borg Warner EFR 7163 T4 twin scroll IWG turbo, engine mounts, trans crossmember, and shifter. So as full up as it gets minus wiring harness (5 lbs). Weight as seen is 423 lbs:

Image

Image

A stock turbo manifold is ~9 lbs, or 5 lbs lighter, stock turbo is about the same weight, as the bigger EFR has an aluminum center housing. A stock flywheel and clutch is probably around 18-20 lbs heavier.

A belt driven PS pump with bracket and pulley is 7 lbs. I was using an EHPS from an Astra, but went to the belt driven pump later.

I'm not sure where the high 400 lb ranges I've seen, as even going with a heavy flywheel and PS pump, you're at around 450 lbs. Maybe with an AC compressor and bracket you can edge up near 480 lbs?

So that's what I've got. I used two bathroom scales that seemed to agreed +/- 1 lb in the 170 lb range, so I'll call the total weight +/- 3 lbs, but has a bit of wood and chain on it, so they're likely a bit high to reality.
Page 12 of 14 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/