Just curious as to what the "power potential vs cost" comparison would be between an ECO, 3400, 3800 swaps... I know the 3800 is quite a bit more fabricating than the other two but didn't know if there was a dramatic power difference between that motor and the other two....
Think about this, the swap to a 3800 gets you 200 hp and the SC model around 240 and the Ecotec with an SC is 205hp with the option to use a smaller pulley and larger injectors to get you 240hp without the weight of the 3800 motor. Also the fuel efficiency is better.
I will admit, the 3800 series II motor does sound pretty mean though.
I would just turbo the 2.2 Ecotec and exceed the SC 2.2 and the SC 3.8
My wife's 2003 Ecotec 2.2 liter Sunfire:
* 2 1/4 inch turbo muffler
* 2 1/4 piping to a 2 1/2 inch resonator
* 2 1/4 inch catalytic converter
* 2 1/2 inch down-pipe
* a match ported 4:2:1 RK Sports 'clone' header
* an AEM true cold air intake NOPI edition
* 8 gauge ground wire kit
* Toyz front strut brace
* Vibrant rear strut brace
* and Russell stainless steel brake lines all around.
What year car? If it is a 2000+ i would do an eco swap and turbo it, but if it was 96-99 i would swap the 3400 and turbo that.
Tinkles
2003 Cavalier 1SV
Bagged and Blown
Its a 2001.....but I'm kinda wanting to go with a SC...I might be stupid and stubborn but something about the SC sound attracts me more than a turbo... I was just wondering if I was completely stupid and stubborn for strongly considering the 3800 SC swap over an ECO swap and getting the SC for that...
You'll def make more power out of the L67(3800 S/C) than a SC eco, but the eco will be cheaper and easier.
Tinkles
2003 Cavalier 1SV
Bagged and Blown
Mike85220 wrote:Think about this, the swap to a 3800 gets you 200 hp and the SC model around 240 and the Ecotec with an SC is 205hp with the option to use a smaller pulley and larger injectors to get you 240hp without the weight of the 3800 motor. Also the fuel efficiency is better.
I will admit, the 3800 series II motor does sound pretty mean though.
I would just turbo the 2.2 Ecotec and exceed the SC 2.2 and the SC 3.8
why don't you hump your eco. you do everything you say to the eco to the 3800 it will own the eco not to mention you forgot about our good friend torque eco is 150 stock and the 3800 SC is 280 you got some catching up to do there HP isn't everything, as for your fuel effciency comment i was getting 550km to a tank on my 97 2.4 my 3800SC cav gets 480 to a tank and thats me beating on it if i'm nice to it i would be better but i'm very seldomly nice to it these days yes the engines heavier but the car its trying to move weighs next to nothing
but i will say this, if you want
Power - 3800
Cost - 3400 or ECO
Power vs Cost i would say ECO
JBO since July 30, 2001
Here's a couple points to consider. Is your only goal to do a cheap swap with a SC? What's you end goal on HP?
Those two questions will answer your question on what to use.
If you answered "I just want a cheap swap with a SC", the answer is a junk yard Eco with so used SC parts. You should come out spending $1k or less. Don't know the other two swapped engines can say that with the needed fab work. The Eco drops in.
If you answered "I want to eventually make 600+hp the Eco turbo is the only one in this group that will do it. And do it cheaper than the 3800SC at 400.
Thanks for the info....definately have some things to think about and still am trying to find out if the Ram Air hood will fit with all of those options. I would love to have more power but I also am not planning on going too crazy... I would be ok with about 300 hp (I know the joy would only be temporary) and as far as cost is concerned...I'm not really worried either way since unless something really drastic happens...I'm holding on to this car until I'm not around....long term project since time/money for mods is scarce most of the time.
Basically...right now my biggest issue is that I really want to get a functional ram air hood and if that eliminates any of those engine options then that makes things easier.
Why do you want a "functional" hood. There is no carb under the hood to need to throw cold air into. On our cars (and most modern cars) it's only for looks and grabbing a wad of air to slow you down
Vitamin E (AKA Eddie) wrote:Why do you want a "functional" hood. There is no carb under the hood to need to throw cold air into. On our cars (and most modern cars) it's only for looks and grabbing a wad of air to slow you down
why does camron have a functional cowl induction hood?
also look at the ls1 camaro's with the ram air hood. they dont have carbs either.... but your right they were pointless for the f-body cars too...
I took it as he was trying to get a hood that the scoop had an actual hole punched in it vs the way they come filled in. Just because the hole is in it doesn't make it functional. The cars you mentioned, their's are functional because they have a cup or box/scopp of some sort hooked to or pressed against that hole in the hood.
ram air is ram air. doesnt matter what its ramming it into, if he wants to ram air into the engine bay, that will cool the motor because of airflow, probably slow him down due to drag but still will cool the motor...
if he wants ram air then let him have it...
