S-10 trying to have it both ways!

[Tahoe_Hybrid]

Originally Posted by pashiner

yeah, I ran into that thread before. It's rather impressive what can be done with gearing! I don't have any plans to take things that far, because I'm also interested in my ability to climb rather steep grades while loaded, and drive on the interstate for an hour with a canoe on top, but if I could eek out 30 mpg from a daily drivable 350 powered s10, I'll have exceeded my goals.

what I like about this approach is that I can build a drivetrain, and amass the parts needed to complete the swap while I'm still driving the truck, and then just borrow a car for a week, take off work, and complete the install without a major life disruption.

E assist mod it will add power without changing much

[freebeard]

ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/gms-eassist-34290

ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/controller-mods-build-e-assist-altermotor-35003

[Tahoe_Hybrid]

Originally Posted by freebeard

ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/gms-eassist-34290

ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/controller-mods-build-e-assist-altermotor-35003

i'm interested because i got a free space were the A/C goes on the engine ( it has Eletronic A/C)

plus if i got the lithium battery pack i'll have 40 spare NiMH cells .... i know they are spent but can be still useful

[freebeard]

The diesel Dasher I just sold was a good candidate, with a slant four with the alterantor underneath. The big hurdle was the serpentine belt and idler arm.

OP -- As I understand the engine options, it's I4, boxer 4 else V8?

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

When it comes to turbocharging a port-injection engine, it's also worth remind they may need a richer AFR to prevent knock, even when an intercooler is also used. Is the injection on your truck a continuous-flow type? Maybe if you do a rebuild and add the turbo in the same process, switching to a sequential fuel injection may be a reasonable choice and overcome any fuel-economy penalty from an enriched AFR.

Originally Posted by pashiner

there's a subaru 2.2...probably gonna be the same low torque problem as my chevy 2.2, but they do love forced induction! plus it could be built while I drive around with my leaky chevy 2.2...hmmm. clutch and adapter plate could be interesting to source.

I would rather adapt some other engine into a Subaru than adapting a Subaru engine into anything else. I used to love Subaru until my father got an Impreza.

[pashiner]

The e-assist Is an interesting option, but as a GM dealer tech, I'm not exactly impressed with the factory e-assist alternator/motor currently on the market. Seems a bit undersized to have much effect, but I'm no engineer.

As for engine options, yeah those three, plus some AMC inline sixes, and a 500 inch Cadillac big block are the ones currently taking up space in my garage.

I'd be open to other options if somebody has a REALLY good idea lol!

A guy at work is pushing me toward a small diesel, but with diesel fuel currently a dollar a gallon more than gasoline in my area, I feel as though I'd spend as much or more at the gas pump.

My existing 2.2 I-4 is a sequential port injection motor, if that matters to anyone. It really does fit well under the hood and is a breeze to service. That was the main reason I bought it back when gas was cheap.

[Isaac Zachary]

It can be hard to make a more powerful engine more fuel efficient. An ICE tends to be most efficient at higher loads at lower RPMs. So you throw in a big block and you're allways running at very low loads unless you hypermile and pulse and glide everywhere you go.

A forced induction engine will usually need to have a lower compression ratio that will also lower its fuel efficiency, not to mention when you hit the throttle it will need to enrich. Or you need to buy premium, or all of the above.

One solution is go with the smaller engine with forced induction and use water injection so you don't need to lower the compression ratio or premium fuel or have a highly enriched mix at higher loads. But be aware that if the water injection fails, bye bye engine.

You can also run and engine at a "higher load" so to speak with a well designed EGR system. Cooling the exhaust gas seems to help this even more.

[pashiner]

with any boosted application I'd strongly consider water/meth injection. depending on the pcm and water/meth injection controller, timing can be retarded from a low water sensor the same way a knock sensor signal can trigger a timing retard event.
Speaking of water/meth injection, I've been wanting to experiment with it in a high compression n/a application, triggered by the drop in manifold vacuum when the throttle opens far enough to need accel enrichment.
timing could be very aggressive.

I'm not trying to set the world on fire with this s10 build though...just have a strong running, durable, efficient truck that I can really pile the miles on.
Not something to set records or win races with.

[Isaac Zachary]

Longevity, Power, Efficiency.

Pick two?

Water (and meth) are a risk. With enough combustion pressure no amount of ignition timing will save the engine if it fails. Add too much water and hydrolock the engine and break things. Even if it works correctly, water isn't a good lubricant and can cause cylinder wall wear.

Diesel fuel is more expensive, but there's seemingly no limit to compression ratios and boost pressures in a Diesel in comparison to a gasoline engine. My diesel had a 23:1 compression ratio and I got 50mpg in that old 1985 car.

[pashiner]

I thought it was understood that I'm not planning to push this thing to the outer limits.
I realize that you can take anything to an illogical extreme and blow a motor up. That's not what the discussion is about though.

longevity, power and efficiency are not some "pick any two" mutually exclusive paradox. it's a balance, and I'm trying to tilt that balance just a little. My truck's motor is in the autumn of it's life, and I'm trying to make a smart decision about the next step based on what I have available to me.

clearly, the chevy 2.2 was a commercial success, and isn't bad by any means. It gets acceptable gas mileage, and has a lot going for it...just not bottom end torque.
The only two ways to tilt that balance are going to be either extract more torque from the 2.2 liters I'm working with, or get some more displacement.
obviously turbocharging a 2.2 creates more wear than not doing it, but the benefit is less weight, fewer parts to swap, and an overall cheaper, easier project. It needs rebuilt anyway, so things can be done to improve wear characteristics in a turbo application. oil squirters, forged pistons, floating wrist pins, improved oiling, and roller valvetrain upgrades come to mind.

The 5.7 swap certainly has durability going for it, as well as world class parts availability...there isn't much you can't get for a small block chevy. Obviously it's a winner on the power front. There will be some additional expense in sourcing a transmission and swap kit. I'm ok with that. there will also be a considerable weight penalty, which should not be overlooked. Based on what I've seen done from the factory by General Motors, especially with regard to the fullsize granny wagons of the 90's, I think maintaining or even improving my efficiency is not out of the question with intelligent tuning and gear ratio selection.

The question I'm trying to answer is how does the idea of a low boost turbo 2.2 build stack up against the 5.7 swap in terms of real numbers?

Is there really any significant mpg benefit to be gained by choosing one approach over another? Please keep in mind the intended use...mixed driving, loaded most of the time.