i was reading a car magizine the other day, and there was this article about some race car or whatever that gm built that had a ecotec that was pumped out to 900horsepower?! can this really been done? i always wondered about if the ecotec had huge tuning potential.

i was reading a car magizine the other day, and there was this article about some race car or whatever that gm built that had a ecotec that was pumped out to 900horsepower?! can this really been done? i always wondered about if the ecotec had huge tuning potential.

Some one will ansewr better then me but heres what I know.

That 900hp-1000hp uses a few stock parts but not too many. Other parts you can order from GM I believe. Of course don't think you can do this to your street car--the transmisson/transaxle could never handle the power.

I have driven an eco-tec and many Honda Civics. Due to the larger displacement the eco-tec has alot more torque. It is a very smooth engine and sounds pretty good. I'd say Honda is still the King of making the smoothest, best sounding 4cly but the eco-tec is so damn could that you'd never buy the Honda for that reason.

http://www.year2032.com/ecotec.htm\

Well actually they didnt change a whole lot. I plan to push this engine to around 300 Horse. Thats not bad conisidering the first problems arise at 283 hp.

I have direct experience with 2.2 eco (5sp Cav LS Sport) and 2.0 -iVTEC (base RSX). The ecotec is a nice upgrade over the 2.4 DOHC from 2000 Z24. The eco lacks some bottom torque of the 2.4 but revs a lot freer and overall is more refined. However the 2.0 VTEC is (IMO) a completely different pedigree of motor. It sings with incredible balance and smoothness, like every moving part is mirror polished and super tight tolerances....

Anyway, I do feel GM has a very competitive engine in the ecotec and as I said, it really is a big step forward. My impression is the 2.0 SS will be big time fun and sprint to redline quite impressively. More than that it seems GM is really serious about this power plant and if they give it the support of small blocks in past it will be a dominant motor.

Zoom-zoom!

http://www.year2032.com/ecotec.htm\

Well actually they didnt change a whole lot. I plan to push this engine to around 300 Horse. Thats not bad conisidering the first problems arise at 283 hp.


what problems arise at 283hp?

^^^^ I believe 283 is when you start to break the stock internals....i.e. rods etc....
This is for the 2.2. The 2.0 comes "built" from the factory and should be capable of performing under much higher power levels.....

what problems arise at 283hp?


All the rods shattered at the same time basically according to the article. The bottom has a nice table that show the hp and the needed upgrades to the block.

All the rods shattered at the same time basically according to the article. The bottom has a nice table that show the hp and the needed upgrades to the block.

Yeah, that is exactly what I read about it too.

And this 2.0L S/C will be my second ecotec engine. I loved the 2.2L engine and was very surprised (as were my friends) at its power and potential.

a completely stock 2.2L is good for 250hp....a stock 2.0L is good for about 400hp...a stock 2.2L with new rods and pistons, head gasket and cam gears is good for approx 250-400 400-600hp can be had with either engine using a sleeved block in the 2.2L and a mildly ported head and upgraded valvetrain for both engines....600+hp is where you need to start replacing , blocks, and upgrade lower end hardware including but not limited to large main girdle studs, the stock oil pan and wetsump oiling system has and can support up to 1000hp, the factory crank will easily support 500hp.

:lol: just sick what can be done to small displacement motors. :cool:

well its just new technologies and the way they started building engines.
I have to say the quality of the engines is increasing, bu the body quality is getting crappier (thin as paper) :(

well its just new technologies and the way they started building engines.
I have to say the quality of the engines is increasing, bu the body quality is getting crappier (thin as paper) :(


I would have to argue that. Panel gaps are extremely tight and the over all fit and finsh is was up from previous years. But yeah I guess they would dent easier then the boats from the 70's

I would have to argue that. Panel gaps are extremely tight and the over all fit and finsh is was up from previous years. But yeah I guess they would dent easier then the boats from the 70's
yeah, thats what i was refering too, like the old muscle cars.

Yea, but if they made our cars w/ that thick of sheet metal, they'd weigh 4000lbs, just like the old muscle cars. Then the Cobalt SS and SRT-4's would be running High 15's instead of low 14's. ;)

Yea, but if they made our cars w/ that thick of sheet metal, they'd weigh 4000lbs, just like the old muscle cars. Then the Cobalt SS and SRT-4's would be running High 15's instead of low 14's. ;)

lol 4000lbs and it wouldnt beat a 96' neon... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

a completely stock 2.2L is good for 250hp....a stock 2.0L is good for about 400hp...a stock 2.2L with new rods and pistons, head gasket and cam gears is good for approx 250-400 400-600hp can be had with either engine using a sleeved block in the 2.2L and a mildly ported head and upgraded valvetrain for both engines....600+hp is where you need to start replacing , blocks, and upgrade lower end hardware including but not limited to large main girdle studs, the stock oil pan and wetsump oiling system has and can support up to 1000hp, the factory crank will easily support 500hp.


That's awesome....the 2.4L from the cavaliers always had lousy internals....the bearings and the rods were way too weak...

That's awesome....the 2.4L from the cavaliers always had lousy internals....the bearings and the rods were way too weak...

Agreed. The Ecotec engine family is great - best combination of economy, power, refinement, and reliability.

The old Quad 4 engines are trash compared to the Ecotecs. They are so infamous for spinning the #3 crank bearing that guys don't even have to take apart the engine to double check. They were also loud, unrefined, inefficient (compared to Eco) and generally pretty crude engines. However, like the Eco, they did make good power and torque numbers.

well its just new technologies and the way they started building engines.
I have to say the quality of the engines is increasing, but the body quality is getting crappier (thin as paper)

As the other guys said, its all about weight savings and safety. Check out any new car, they are all build like that. In fact, Honda has decided to make their body panels even thinner and weaker on their new models :rolleyes: Apparently its in the name of "pedestrian safety" - so that if you hit someone, the hood and fenders crumple into the chassis, completely ruining the car. Now theres a genious idea to raise insurance premiums. Before you know it, cars will be so fragile that just touching them will cause panels to cave in and fall apart :lol: :rolleyes:

As the other guys said, its all about weight savings and safety. Check out any new car, they are all build like that. In fact, Honda has decided to make their body panels even thinner and weaker on their new models :rolleyes: Apparently its in the name of "pedestrian safety" - so that if you hit someone, the hood and fenders crumple into the chassis, completely ruining the car. Now theres a genious idea to raise insurance premiums. Before you know it, cars will be so fragile that just touching them will cause panels to cave in and fall apart :lol: :rolleyes:

Yep that's true. The other day, while I was shopping at Walgrees, there was an Olds Alero pulling out of the parking lot when a newer Civic came and ran into the Alero. The Civic's front bumper, on the passenger side, was completly pushed back, all crumpled up. But the Alero just had a medium size dent in its front driver quarter panel, and a few deep scracthes on the driver's side front bumper. It wasnt that bad of an accident, but I did feel bad for the Civic's owner, seeing since it still had the temp plates on it, I figured he had just got it.

I have a 56 chevy bel air with a 460 cid big block, four speed, and a nine inch and with me in it and a half tank of gas weighed only little over 3400 lbs. Hauls ass and the doors close like butter. My 06 SS 2.4L is a nice driving car also. It's peppy but does not haul ass.

i was reading a car magazine the other day, and there was this article about some race car or whatever that gm built that had a ecotec that was pumped out to 900horsepower?! can this really been done? i always wondered about if the ecotec had huge tuning potential.

These .pdf files are awesome!

http://www.gm.com/company/gmtunersource/html/race_shop_build_book.htm

That motor/trans is really amazing...

thje ecotec engine are bullitproof man!!! :cssNET: :cssNET: :cssNET: :cssNET: :cssNET:

someone was talkin bout needing to sleeve the block for 600 hp,the block and head (2.2) are good as is in the 1300hp drag car.

edit, im wrong nm

The ecotec can NeVa L0s3

the STOCK 2.2 ecotec can handle over 300 hp if tuned correctly

nope. I think you should but a srt-4 calibur instead