Would you guys consider putting a 4 cylinder in your ride?

Which leads me to another question, 20-30 years from now will the cut off still be 1964?

 

Obviously not everything on here is traditional. Things that would be considered very nontraditional would be a 4 banger in a truck, turbo, nitrous,billet anything, EFI, ECM.........

 

You'll have to ask Ryan what it will be on this site, but my guess is YES it will still be '64.

 

That doesn't mean you get it. It's one of those "If you have to ask" deals.

 

Yup. Considering a 2.0 Ecotec turbo setup like in a Colbalt SS (270 hp bone stock) into something just to be different. They can make 300-325 hp without even picking up a wrench. Would be cool in a '47 Anglia woodie!

 

I wouldn't hesitate to use a 4 banger in something lightweight like a fenderless Model T or A. Years ago when we lived in Louisville, there was a guy who lived out around Middletown who had a '28-'29 fenderless Model A coupe on stock A frame with a 20R Toyota engine, 5 speed manual trans, Toyota pickup rear end, and a '40 Ford front end with split wishbones. Car was simple and utterly reliable, and he didn't have any trouble keeping up with traffic.

 

Yea a 4bt cummins. But that's my only 4 cylinder choice

 

there has been a 2.3 in this and its been a 2.3 since 2004.Although i did just change it this year to a fresher 2.3 while the other tired 2.3 gets hopped up...

 

I really hope so.

 

I get it that the original title asked a simple question, "would you consider..?"
But because this thread took a life of its own i'll give you "too heavy for a 4 banger" guys a little data.
I own a O/T '70 VW pick up, which trust me is veeeery heavy, and almost as big as an Effie, the thing has a 1.6 carbed gas engine, i think 40hp? but aint sure, and trust me it might def. not be powerful, but i more than often used it to carry heavy stuff and it always did it no problem. oh, and it even had cracked valve seats and fucked up internals.
4 cyl can and will power an effie.
Is it traditional? No. Will it sound as good as a V8? no. i can go on for a few lines here.
The point is, the title should have been difrent, but i think some people is just speakin out of the perception that a 4 cyl must have half the power of a 8 cyl. Not true.

 

As far as the Question, "Would you guys consider putting a 4 cylinder in your ride?" It was just that, and some guys say yes and some say no. I personally don't think it is a "traditional" hot rod, but I do think it falls into the line of a "Custom".

After thinking last night, post 64 era stuff belongs as POPS said in a muscle car street car topic.

The word hotrod gets thrown around pretty loosly a lot. You take the noun hotrod which is as pops described, "Anything built pre 64 using pre 64 parts like it would've and could've been done then" which is traditional.

Then there is the verbage "hotrod" which unfortunately gets misconstrude with any type of souped up car/engine. I've had a bunch of people ask me about my truck "Oh so youre gonna hotrod it up?" That's where the traditional part gets lost.

And then you have the word Custom.........which to me is just that, any old car customized to the owners liking. Do you guys agree with that? Is that where a lot of the non-traditional stuff here on the hamb falls?

I'm a new guy, new to the whole "hotrod" scene. Always loved old cars, always worked on my own vehicles, WILL NEVER OWN A RICER........PERIOD. But I haven't been exposed to it like a lot of you guys have, so I'm learning.

And I'm not trying to offend or question any one/thing that this site is setup for. It's just that looking at the different "rides" shown on here leaves me with some confusion.

 

No. Aside from the wonky look of an engine like that in a vintage truck, seems to me that motor would be way too stressed trying to pull the weight (it is a truck, after all, used to haul things occasionally?) and will likely break in short order. Long-term reliability trumps the "be different" factor for me.

 

Martin, i think youre on the right track.
Just dont worry too much about other people's opinion and go your own route.
if you are fond on tradition, and enjoy the history of this lifestyle/hobby im sure you'll find your own way to honor it.
There are no rules, look at Japan and what they build. The whole point is learnin from the past, not straight copy and paste from it.

On a note. I seem to remember that as long as the hood stays shut, it dont really matter whats under it in a custom.....

 

The newer 2.5L (QR25DE) is as well, 89mm x 100mm. The one in my '06 Altima makes 175 hp and 180 lb-ft at only 4k rpm, pretty torquey for a 4-banger. Mine has a header to rid itself of the first catalyst (some of them had issues with the cat ruining the engine) and it has an interesting growl to it.

 

Don't forget Kustom with a K. As I understand it (and use it) a pre-64 car customised in the style of that era. More for aesthetics than speed. I'm sure that there will be somebody along shortly to correct me.
Paul

 

A banger in a lightweight car can be traditional. In a truck? Not so much. When the topic got to turbo,EFI,ECM bangers in anything, no, that's not traditional. Niether are diesel bangers.
"Hotrod" means different things to different people. The definition on this site is much more defined. There are other sites where the things you talked about are more fitting.
If you want to put a banger in your Effie by all means do it. Allot of people with allot of experience have given reasons why not to do it but you only need to suit yourself. You've mentioned the criteria for your power plant in this topic and others as being no 302 or 350, being able to beat a 4.6 Stang, fuel economy, cost to build and must last 100K miles. I think you need to step back and take a deep breath and decide which of those criteria are most important.

 

I'm personally against EFI, and ECM's. I want something I don't have to have a computer to adjust, and an aftermarket turbo'd 4 doesn't make sense from a cost perspective. However, I still don't think that a lightly modified 4 banger is a bad idea for a cruiser something not hauling or towing or racing. More of a grocery getter (It has more than enough go for this).

As far as beating the 4.6 my co-worker has that was discussed in a different thread, that's because he was throwing off on my thought of building a straight six 300. Had the whole holier than thou, Ive gotta cobra mustang blah blah attitude.

 

I (briefly) considered using an Olds Quad-4 for a bucket or an A roadster, but only because they look and sound kinda like an Offy indy motor.

The buy-in is cheap, but the bellhousing adapter and carb manifolds price them out of the market. SBC is cheaper all-in.

 

How about a 3.9 4cyl cummins.THAT would get great fuel economy,great torque and is easily packaged! If it were me that would it would get!

 

It took a bit of hunting to find the "Yamaha" logo on this one. Not traditional by a long shot, but with near 50 MPG, I can understand it.

 

is there really a Yamaha logo on that thing? and also, i didnt know yamaha made cars, or engine for cars for that matter....cause that IS NOT a bike engione....or is it???

 

Thats a bike engine ,Yamaha did make heads for Toyota 2TG Type engines .Very hard to obtain now.

 

Not that long a shot. I see what looks like four constant-vacuum carbs, and the ignition seems to be the way motorbike ignition has been since time immemorial. And the engine itself is an alloy twin-overhead-cam four like one might find in the better sort of light sports car in 1925. Only this one has a much shorter stroke and the gearbox in the crankcase.

It's a lovely choice for a light car. It's the route I'd go if I ever build an Austin Seven special.

 

^^^ but how in hell do you connect a torque tube to it? i doubt he's got chain driven rear wheels.

 

How fast do you have to spin that 4 banger to get 600 hp? Dan Gurney got 750 hp from a 221 small block Ford in 1963 but it had to turn 10 grand to do it. Numbers are one thing and real world driving is something totally different. If you want a zinged up 4 banger why put it in a truck? Bad combination in my opinion. Especially if the only reason is to see some old timers reactions (which you may take offense to anyway)

 

Two of them side by side.

 

You'd do an open drive shaft from the chain sprocket (the engine sits the other way around in the bike: the photo was taken from what is usually the front). The approach is used on Legends cars and on a lot of extremely light Lotus 7 clones, like this one:


There are production versions, like the Westfield SE Megabusa and this Canadian version. Do a search: you'll be surprised at what's being done out there.

 

I haven't done it but I have a friend that has one in his T bucket.

 

I have a 4 cyl in my 1952 Studebaker pickup, not very good for power but it is cheap to drive.

 

Never ever even considered a 4 cyl., and i never would.