No turbo is spoiling that fast unless they had compounds or something, that almost sounds like it was supercharged. 4banger would probably need 15+ psi at 2k rpm to make that much torque
@@tkc2406non of the info ive read said it was making 500ft lbs at 1800rpms. It does say at 1800 it is making deisel like torque. Its an industrial engine so i would imagine max rpm is super low and would use a tiny tiny turbo.
I disagree to a point. Any over head cam 4 cylinder is piss easy I personally hate pushrod 4 and 6 engines becuse you can't tell if the pushrod is in the lifter cup. I had a 3.9 xf come in from another shop that couldn't get it running played with it called my dad over and he knew exactly what it was they bent every single pushrod and punched a hole in the head. Had to get a new head weld the water jackets cause they all corrode get all new pushrods and lifters then re assemble in the car and fuck around for days to get the bustard to run
I think he meant 500 ft/lbs was "with a turbo" not "especially with a turbo" as he stated. That would still be stout output with extremely high BMEP numbers.
It's pretty much impossible at this point to get 500ftlb out of an NA 3.6L. Hell, even the ls7, which this is half of, doesn't make 500ftlb. Realistically, you're looking at 260-270 based on other engines around 3.6L
@@johndc2998 it means brake mean effective pressure. It's an engineering measure of the pressure inside a cylinder. It's better described as Torque/L relative to stresses on internal components. It's a great way to see how efficient an engine is regardless of number of cylinders or displacement. Edit: I said Hp instead of Torque
To be fair, the numbers that were advertised were super vague. I don't think blueprint themselves meant 500ftlb na, it read more like "boost ready up to 500ftlb" iirc.
Mustang 2.3l ecoboost i4 made 310/350 stock. Tune and intercooler made 350/425. And you dont gotta worry about the ticking timebomb of a factory LS7 head
Toyota Hilux. 2.8L turbo diesel i4. Can make up to 550Nm in some trims. That's an actual work truck, too bad your companies loby to not allow normal sized trucks because of emissions (per size), while the massive dangerous tanks that polute way more are perfectly fine.
Blueprint sells a Ford headed version through their industrial brand, Origin engines. Quoting the brochure, it's also 3.6L, has 9.5:1 compression, four bolt mains, a hydraulic roller cam, and a cast crank. I'd love to stick one in a Model A pickup with a 6 speed.
The 3.6 that they're talking about is a modified version of that from blueprint, yes. They slapped one together for a show (pri?) One yea, and people went nuts for it. They claim they do plan on putting it into production some day.
Those rating are with a turbo i too was shocked at those torque and horsepower numbers until further research i found out thats with a turbo not naturally aspirated.
There is a 3.7l i4 that is aluminum block. (Its basically half of a big block 460) uses a 460 head and has a gm bellhousing built by mercruiser. Could be a monster
I have a 2013 ford focus and its been in the shop more than I've been able to drive it, if i could throw this in with a matching transmission it would be fucking insane
I think GM DID take a lot from this project, if not publicly. You know why? Go look at the L3B. 2.7L - MASSIVE for a 4 cylinder. Turbo. 430 lb-ft of torque at 3000RPM? 360+ at 2000?!? Scale that up to a 3.6L turbo, and all of a sudden the numbers actually do start making sense. Because they're getting diesel torque (on trash 87 octane gas, no less) using diesel manufacturing tricks for every piece of the engine. So a performance version of the 2.7L, bored and stroked...who knows? This engine may never be made, but if you built an L3B to its highest potential, it would be NUTS.
The Colorado now that I think about it is probably more reliable than the 24 Tacoma with the Iforce already blown transmissions not to mention the outrageous price ,no major issues so far on the L3B there are some rare issues with the turbo , overheating but that was addressed by Chevy ,the only real problem is the electronics I heard ,hope Toyota brings back a naturally aspirated v6 for the taco
I like the I4 idea for the simplicity of plopping a stock style head on. But what i really like is when i saw the Ls12, because all i thought is "weld the other parts of that block together and make a V4
With such large, heavy pistons the vibration is going to be horrible without balancer shafts. You can't just chop a V8 in half and expect it to work well.
I mean the highly successful 2 decade 4.3 v6 would like to have a talk about modifying an engine to be a smaller variant of itself. Also I believe there is a 7 L 4 cylinder high end boat engine. It may still be in pre-production or failed by now but it was going to have some crazy power numbers. The 4bt Cummins is a 3.9 L 4cyl and they made na engines as well so a modern 4 L 4 cyl would be nice for the midsized trucks they have now so people could actually have space to work without pulling a cab
@@shakehandswithdanger7882 the reason we don't see many big 4s like a Cummins is that they are too easy to work on. Less planned obsolescence is less profit
@@calebz1448 look at the crankshaft of the 4.3, the connecting rods are offset to mimic the balance of a straight 6, a drastic improvement. If they just chopped off 2 cylinders it would have had horrific balance
@@calebz1448 clearly the OEM are designing engines to barely survive the warranty period, but big high revving I4s are fighting physics. If I recall, the low revving 3.9 Cummins has big counterbalancing shafts and longer connecting rods to mitigate balance issues.
There's a good handful of aftermarket Ford heads that outflow LS7 heads. Put the same turbo and setup on, I'm sure you're getting similar numbers. It would definitely make a neat truck engine.
If I remember right Blueprint engines are the one that made it. And as of when I was looking 6 months ago it still wasn't available Edit: with some quick research I found out it is not available in this configuration. But this is based off Origin Engines 3.6L. this just has a ls head.
I'd love that setup in a 90s 4x4 geo tracker with the stock 5 speed. Just tune it 2000~hp and a nice clean torque curve. Boom a daily beater that would do almost everything.
This is one of those things that seems really cool and promising on paper but developing this engine to actually perform and deliver would be a vastly different story. Most parts would need to be highly modified or custom one off parts for it to work. It would be so much easier, cheaper and more reliable to just run a turbo K24 with appropriate gearing for the power band or a turbo LS platform.
Nobody mentioned the SD 4 banger built for the isma fiero. It was a 4.0L 4 cyl that was so aggressive it shook the bolts loose out of the frame. 510hp 516 tourqe N/A Unrestricted
Digging into the classic parts bin. I see what looks like a 60s-70s 250 water pump, an old small block harmonic balancer, and it looks like that block may accept a distributor if you take out the cam sensor. Also reminiscent of the Iron Duke by the looks of it.
A 3.6 4 banger would sound absolutely nasty in a good way. Could only imagine the sweet music that thing would make at like 7k rpm and im not even a chevy or muscle car guy. I love 4 bangers and v6’s
There is something nice about a torquey 4 banger. They are just reliable and do exactly what you need. Makes it so comfortable to drive with a manual. I can’t replace my 4cyl 2.6l Isuzu rodeo as the easiest manual to drive on steep roads. My Corolla on paper has 170hp and the rodeo has 110hp when new. The Corolla struggles especially on some hills while the rodeo feels like it’s in its domain.
Believe i 'member a featured ride in car craft magazine around 2002 that had a 32 ford truck with a turbo 3.7l 4 cylinder marine engine in it....guy wanted something different. Made crazy torque
They're not achieving those numbers without forced induction, and even then, I don't believe the numbers are anything close to exact. It's all hypothetical.
@HenrikHolmesson thats not what im referring to. When you have a light rotating assembly spinning a 10k rpm it may make 600hp but for a split socond at high rpm. This engine in particular will producr high horsepower at low rpm and sustaiin it through the powerband to max rpm. This is what wins and makes reliability
@@jimholesaw6597 It's not rocket science, and people have understood what it takes to make a giant displacement engine that produces big, lazy horsepower and torque numbers for decades and decades... but there are several reasons why engines like this aren't in mass production for passenger cars, and never will be.
@@jimholesaw6597 an inlane 4 engine has a massive defect of design. Balance. No 4 cyl engine can go above 3.0L without having massive balancing issues infact nearing 3.0L engines already have to use counter balances and crap just so it can reach 6K revolutions, so this weird 4 cyl engine probably is limited at 2k revolutions or somewhere over there while being dynoed.
I heard that inline 4s over 3 liters with a 180° crank start to get pretty bad secondary vibration and cant rev without vibrating themselves apart. Heard that from the people that built the porsche 944, largest 4 cyl put in a car at 3 liters using 2 balance shafts to try to limit vibration
Look at the gear drive cam. Look at the abandoned distributor drive. No reluctor ring. No cross bolted mains. It’s a bored / stroked 3litre Iron duke With an ls7 head. Any body diy this yet?
@@marcusedwards6844absolutely... they tried. I recall a few 4cyl over 3L... but none that were in production very long. If you can design a connecting rod to eliminate the secondary balance issue...one could in theory make a 4cyl as large as you wanted.
It's not "based" on the LS. Same exact head off the 6.2 LS and the block is a modified version of the V8. I've seen testing of this engine, and it's a freaking Beast. For a 4 cylinder
@@user-br1up5vw4h the only way to make those numbers without boost is with volumetric efficiency, and the ford modulars are the only engines in the US with over a 100% volumetric efficiency stock, and at 5l they still bately hit that range. ls heads dont flow nearly as well, even with port work. this engine would make 350 MAYBE, and thats being generous, since thats near the same number the full 6.2 ls makes at that range
Well see my pick is the opposite: The k48: This is two 2.4L 4cyl K24A2 engines mated at the crank to make a 4.8L k48 v8 engine. This is currently being designed and will be built by this dude and his company. We already know the utterly insane hp/L output that makes the k-series so popular. Ok now let’s double the displacement lol… a lot of the existing aftermarket support for these engines would fit right in, as the heads (I believe) will be untouched (apart from the strength mods used by the aftermarket manufacturer) by the mating process and the crank/case will already be custom, not that you really needed to touch a k24 crank in the first place to achieve insane power.
340 HP 3.6L 4 Cylinder GAS Engine NOT Diesel like others comparing, which they then claim “With a Turbo” 500 lb-ft @ 1800 RPM. We will start with just NA numbers for benefit of doubt, @340 HP to Produce 500 lb-ft you would need a min 3571.4144 RPM. For the “With a Turbo” application your variable for NA to Turbo efficiency is 1.4-2.0 of total Liter, 3.6 L is 3600CC, we will use 2.0 as that is the highest value and easiest calculation, 3.6 x 2.0 = 7.2L or 7200CC for the Turbo to NA application, (so a 3.6L turbo is equivalent to a 7.2L NA) which with CC/Horsepower figures 1hp/15cc, equals 480 HP which to achieve 500 Ft-LB Torque you would need min 5041.9968 RPM. One Key element we are missing is how high can it rev because that will change some things. I’m no math athlete and may be missing a formula or made an error (always account for Murphy law) but the figures I got don’t add up to the claims. Also for the reverse if you had NA 340HP @1800RPM it would take 992 lb-ft to achieve those numbers, almost double, for the turbo application it’s almost 3 times @1400.5 lb-ft
Look how awesome the 4cyl ecotech motor was. For not a lot of money in modifications, u had 450-500whp all day long if not more dependent on how far u pushed it and built it. They were cheap speed
You missed out on the lnf in the cobalt ss and homo hot rod ss. A 2.0l with 3 bar map sensors, and 600 dollars in parts, e47 tune. 25pbs of boost, 350lb of torque. 300hp. Di, Ko4 dual scroll. Gms first direct injection engine and it was great. It was like America, the land of torque, made a tuner car based on those principles.
Turbomax 2.7 L 4 cylinder is a thing guys. adding a cold air intake pushes it to 360 hp and OVER 500 ft lb of torque 😂😂 all torque made at 1500 rpm. That’s why this motor was discontinued, THEY MADE IT BETTER
These little one off engines will really screw up your idea of production motors because the reason why prototypes like this look so good on paper is because the bean counters haven't gone through it to see what they think you don't need. It's the same reason performance cars almost always come with butter-soft materials holding it together from the factory. The engineers make something nice, the bean counters ruin it. It's also why companies won't ship crate engines to replace issues like the new tundra, because the bean counters know they only accounted for making a certain number of blocks and now they would need to go back to the casting company for a new line of blocks. Thus the mechanics get to do 30+ hour rebuilds on new trucks
Had a 01 S10 ZR2 bak in the day. This would make that thing the perfect little off-road machine. The 4.3 they had in it from the factory was way to front heavy.
500 ft/lbs from a four banger at 1,800 rpm? Don't get me wrong, 3.6L is big for an I4, but that kind of output is a pipe dream.
those numbers coming right from Blue Print. Wild numbers.
Those numbers are with a turbo.
No turbo is spoiling that fast unless they had compounds or something, that almost sounds like it was supercharged. 4banger would probably need 15+ psi at 2k rpm to make that much torque
@@tkc2406non of the info ive read said it was making 500ft lbs at 1800rpms. It does say at 1800 it is making deisel like torque. Its an industrial engine so i would imagine max rpm is super low and would use a tiny tiny turbo.
With its size it would be rpm limited
I’d toss it in my s2k so fast my debt wouldn’t even have a chance to realize what’s about to happen
Bad choice for an s2000 tbh... It's not gonna rev and it's gonna behave more like a diesel
That's a pushrod engine too so it'd be super easy to work on. Pushrod 4 cylinder is a mechanics Dream.
@@logandeboer1009
I disagree.
My Ford 2.3 Iron Duke in my 85 XR4TI & my L18B in my
73 Datsun 510 were the easiest engines I have ever touched.
My 4AGE 20v is easier to work on than any pushrod motor I’ve ever touched
I disagree to a point. Any over head cam 4 cylinder is piss easy I personally hate pushrod 4 and 6 engines becuse you can't tell if the pushrod is in the lifter cup. I had a 3.9 xf come in from another shop that couldn't get it running played with it called my dad over and he knew exactly what it was they bent every single pushrod and punched a hole in the head. Had to get a new head weld the water jackets cause they all corrode get all new pushrods and lifters then re assemble in the car and fuck around for days to get the bustard to run
@@Hashiriya086Toyota in the house
@@strang1124iron duke is a Chevy engine it was in the Pontiac fiero and few other cars including the early 4 cylinder Camaros
I think he meant 500 ft/lbs was "with a turbo" not "especially with a turbo" as he stated. That would still be stout output with extremely high BMEP numbers.
I assuming the fuel mileage and emissions are dog shit, but hey it should still be a crate motor.
It's pretty much impossible at this point to get 500ftlb out of an NA 3.6L. Hell, even the ls7, which this is half of, doesn't make 500ftlb. Realistically, you're looking at 260-270 based on other engines around 3.6L
Bmep?
@@johndc2998 it means brake mean effective pressure. It's an engineering measure of the pressure inside a cylinder. It's better described as Torque/L relative to stresses on internal components. It's a great way to see how efficient an engine is regardless of number of cylinders or displacement.
Edit: I said Hp instead of Torque
To be fair, the numbers that were advertised were super vague. I don't think blueprint themselves meant 500ftlb na, it read more like "boost ready up to 500ftlb" iirc.
i mean they have the 2.7liter turbo thats producing 400 ft lbs of torque for a couple years now
I have the 2.7 V6 in my F-150. Twin turbo. Thing rips
Mustang 2.3l ecoboost i4 made 310/350 stock. Tune and intercooler made 350/425. And you dont gotta worry about the ticking timebomb of a factory LS7 head
Bro the small truck possibilities are endless we could actually have a decently powerful small truck
Gmc canyon and chevy colorado. it already exists and outputs more than this “ls 4 cylinder” at a lower rpm heh (if you add an aftermarket CAI)
the new lineup can tow 9,500 pounds in a 2.7l 4
Toyota Hilux. 2.8L turbo diesel i4. Can make up to 550Nm in some trims.
That's an actual work truck, too bad your companies loby to not allow normal sized trucks because of emissions (per size), while the massive dangerous tanks that polute way more are perfectly fine.
Half a 6.2 LS in a 78 Vega or monza would be Nutz. 😂
You could put a whole 6.2l ls in a Vega.
@@theautumnwind2152right lol why half ass jt
I was thinking an Opel GT
Half of 6.2 is 3.1 not 3.6 bore or stroke must be different
@@249sAreHeavy
Absolutely. Or a 240-260-280Z
Blueprint sells a Ford headed version through their industrial brand, Origin engines. Quoting the brochure, it's also 3.6L, has 9.5:1 compression, four bolt mains, a hydraulic roller cam, and a cast crank. I'd love to stick one in a Model A pickup with a 6 speed.
The 3.6 that they're talking about is a modified version of that from blueprint, yes. They slapped one together for a show (pri?) One yea, and people went nuts for it. They claim they do plan on putting it into production some day.
Do you wanna know why that they sell a Ford cylinder head on one of these?It's because LS is patented off of a ford motor
@@vegahowell5813literally no one was asking nor gives a shlt. Does it get you excited saying that?
@@Mr.Thermistor7228😂😂😂 you LS fan boys always get upset when someone brings that up, because they're right
@@Mr.Thermistor7228Karen on my dude
Dude had me sold at just the words "LS based 4 cylinder"
340 hp out of a 4cylinder ls base, but with 4 more cylinders they only make about 320-340 ish…. The math ain’t mathing
higher compression maybe? and what octane. also a modified ls can make about double this na so it adds up
Because that's a 7.2 ls.. which makes 450 to 500 stock easy.
That's because they dyno'd it with boost...
It's because the 4 cyl was dynoed with turbo.
Boost yo
It is a production engine for industrial applications
My dream plane ( glassair 3)counts as industrial applications 😂😂
@@asaiyannamedgokublack The industrial version makes 104 hp and probably weighs well over 300 pounds.
Mercruiser has 3.75L 4cyl engines that use 429/460 BBF heads
Outboard engines get pricey fast @$50k per unit but the applications for a 500hp 4.6L Supercharged 60° v8 seem endless. 60° is super slim!
Katech Midget Engine LT based
2.7L 400HP NA
For reference, for n/a, it may achieve 320-330ftlb peak at 1.5lbft/ per cube if its very efficient. But 500 absolutely boosted.
So 99 percent of the v8s at the drag strip can't beat my 2.0 liter from 92 with a bolt on turbo. But your excited about half of that? 😂😂😂
LS this LS that everyone is so original man....
Those rating are with a turbo i too was shocked at those torque and horsepower numbers until further research i found out thats with a turbo not naturally aspirated.
It was "with a turbo" or rather guessing dyno numbers on a scenario that isnt actually around to be tested.
So it's massive, most likely low revving, and doesn't even make 100HP/L with boost. I'd rather take a K20.
There is a 3.7l i4 that is aluminum block. (Its basically half of a big block 460) uses a 460 head and has a gm bellhousing built by mercruiser. Could be a monster
Those numbers would equal a maintenance nightmare
I have a 2013 ford focus and its been in the shop more than I've been able to drive it, if i could throw this in with a matching transmission it would be fucking insane
I think GM DID take a lot from this project, if not publicly. You know why? Go look at the L3B. 2.7L - MASSIVE for a 4 cylinder. Turbo. 430 lb-ft of torque at 3000RPM? 360+ at 2000?!? Scale that up to a 3.6L turbo, and all of a sudden the numbers actually do start making sense. Because they're getting diesel torque (on trash 87 octane gas, no less) using diesel manufacturing tricks for every piece of the engine. So a performance version of the 2.7L, bored and stroked...who knows? This engine may never be made, but if you built an L3B to its highest potential, it would be NUTS.
The Colorado now that I think about it is probably more reliable than the 24 Tacoma with the Iforce already blown transmissions not to mention the outrageous price ,no major issues so far on the L3B there are some rare issues with the turbo , overheating but that was addressed by Chevy ,the only real problem is the electronics I heard ,hope Toyota brings back a naturally aspirated v6 for the taco
I really wanted this engine to hit the market too
I thought the Asian dude was in an astronaut suit of some sort for a sec
I like the I4 idea for the simplicity of plopping a stock style head on. But what i really like is when i saw the Ls12, because all i thought is "weld the other parts of that block together and make a V4
With such large, heavy pistons the vibration is going to be horrible without balancer shafts. You can't just chop a V8 in half and expect it to work well.
Agreed, there's a reason we don't see many big 4s
I mean the highly successful 2 decade 4.3 v6 would like to have a talk about modifying an engine to be a smaller variant of itself.
Also I believe there is a 7 L 4 cylinder high end boat engine. It may still be in pre-production or failed by now but it was going to have some crazy power numbers. The 4bt Cummins is a 3.9 L 4cyl and they made na engines as well so a modern 4 L 4 cyl would be nice for the midsized trucks they have now so people could actually have space to work without pulling a cab
@@shakehandswithdanger7882 the reason we don't see many big 4s like a Cummins is that they are too easy to work on. Less planned obsolescence is less profit
@@calebz1448 look at the crankshaft of the 4.3, the connecting rods are offset to mimic the balance of a straight 6, a drastic improvement. If they just chopped off 2 cylinders it would have had horrific balance
@@calebz1448 clearly the OEM are designing engines to barely survive the warranty period, but big high revving I4s are fighting physics. If I recall, the low revving 3.9 Cummins has big counterbalancing shafts and longer connecting rods to mitigate balance issues.
Oh yeah i remember this, same thoughts, they need to release that.
Will it fit in a miata?
The 3.8 v6 is a great GM motor. Handles ton of boost and is dirt cheap to build
A 3.6L 4 cylinder is wild.
300hp 500fp Dude, you stick that thing in a miata or a Yugo
Anything really.
With all we know about LS engines this would be a good engine with day one mods .
I would put it in a 57-60 F-100 but with a Ford head. they already sale it for industrial use with the Ford head.
There's a good handful of aftermarket Ford heads that outflow LS7 heads. Put the same turbo and setup on, I'm sure you're getting similar numbers. It would definitely make a neat truck engine.
Look in a JDM guy but I can't deny that this would be a fucking beast
Blame the government regulations for robbing us of this beautiful beast
An ls7 v8 can't output 500ftlbs at 1,800rpm unless you add 15lb of boost. So that 4cyl would need 30psi to hit that number.
Anyone who thinks this is being sold please put link in response? Gm brought it to pri as a prototype but never put it into production
Gm wasnt the one who built it
If I remember right Blueprint engines are the one that made it. And as of when I was looking 6 months ago it still wasn't available
Edit: with some quick research I found out it is not available in this configuration. But this is based off Origin Engines 3.6L. this just has a ls head.
Someone else said they are used in industrial applications already
That bump steer and bump camber measurement setup is amazing, some serious Excel skills there as well.
so basically cut an LS in half, lmao
L3B is a 2.7 inline 4 making 400ish ft lbs at 1800 rpm. Not the same. Still pretty nuts.
I'd love that setup in a 90s 4x4 geo tracker with the stock 5 speed. Just tune it 2000~hp and a nice clean torque curve. Boom a daily beater that would do almost everything.
Golf is gonna be spicy
This originally started as an irrigation engine with a 302 head.
This is what the manufacturers want us to have. Probably is emissions. The turbo can help with the emissions.
That actually shows a resemblance to the old old 1.1 1.3 1.6 ford x-flow only from the outside mind
Never compare gas engines hp and torque to diesel engines Hp and torque. Two different power houses
It did happen and you can order it from blueprint. Just made for industrial use
What about the k8 v8 k series
tell me more...
K48 from Neutron Engines. Hot V design reusing as much OEM K series design as possible on a custom block
@@konigwheelsit's almost ready.
This is one of those things that seems really cool and promising on paper but developing this engine to actually perform and deliver would be a vastly different story. Most parts would need to be highly modified or custom one off parts for it to work. It would be so much easier, cheaper and more reliable to just run a turbo K24 with appropriate gearing for the power band or a turbo LS platform.
Nobody mentioned the SD 4 banger built for the isma fiero. It was a 4.0L 4 cyl that was so aggressive it shook the bolts loose out of the frame.
510hp 516 tourqe N/A
Unrestricted
Digging into the classic parts bin. I see what looks like a 60s-70s 250 water pump, an old small block harmonic balancer, and it looks like that block may accept a distributor if you take out the cam sensor. Also reminiscent of the Iron Duke by the looks of it.
Looks like a killer turbo diesel engine, a engine like this is something trucking factories would love to have in europe.
Hundred percent agree I have been asking where is this motor since it debuted. ??????????!!!!!!!
A 3.6 4 banger would sound absolutely nasty in a good way. Could only imagine the sweet music that thing would make at like 7k rpm and im not even a chevy or muscle car guy. I love 4 bangers and v6’s
There is something nice about a torquey 4 banger. They are just reliable and do exactly what you need. Makes it so comfortable to drive with a manual. I can’t replace my 4cyl 2.6l Isuzu rodeo as the easiest manual to drive on steep roads. My Corolla on paper has 170hp and the rodeo has 110hp when new. The Corolla struggles especially on some hills while the rodeo feels like it’s in its domain.
Believe i 'member a featured ride in car craft magazine around 2002 that had a 32 ford truck with a turbo 3.7l 4 cylinder marine engine in it....guy wanted something different. Made crazy torque
if it was a good idea, manufacturers with very smart engineers and multibillion dollar R&D budgets would’ve done it a long time ago.
K24 makes that power with a tune and even more with a turbo.
K series the world.
The architecture of the bottom end of that engine dates back to the early 60s.
Finally someone understands strong hp & tq numbers
They're not achieving those numbers without forced induction, and even then, I don't believe the numbers are anything close to exact. It's all hypothetical.
@HenrikHolmesson thats not what im referring to. When you have a light rotating assembly spinning a 10k rpm it may make 600hp but for a split socond at high rpm. This engine in particular will producr high horsepower at low rpm and sustaiin it through the powerband to max rpm. This is what wins and makes reliability
@@jimholesaw6597 It's not rocket science, and people have understood what it takes to make a giant displacement engine that produces big, lazy horsepower and torque numbers for decades and decades... but there are several reasons why engines like this aren't in mass production for passenger cars, and never will be.
@@jimholesaw6597 an inlane 4 engine has a massive defect of design. Balance. No 4 cyl engine can go above 3.0L without having massive balancing issues infact nearing 3.0L engines already have to use counter balances and crap just so it can reach 6K revolutions, so this weird 4 cyl engine probably is limited at 2k revolutions or somewhere over there while being dynoed.
@@marktrolic this is a lie.
I heard that inline 4s over 3 liters with a 180° crank start to get pretty bad secondary vibration and cant rev without vibrating themselves apart. Heard that from the people that built the porsche 944, largest 4 cyl put in a car at 3 liters using 2 balance shafts to try to limit vibration
Sounds like a mercruiser 3.7 4 cylinder used mostly bbf parts like the head and pistons
Look at the gear drive cam. Look at the abandoned distributor drive. No reluctor ring. No cross bolted mains.
It’s a bored / stroked 3litre Iron duke
With an ls7 head. Any body diy this yet?
I just need them to bring back the focus wagon in the US with this. Family and fun
THIS... we're all about this.
@@konigwheels is this an official account or just a fan?
That's more power than my 94 f150. 5.0 v8
I’d have to believe they are rating this engine at gross horsepower, not net.
Other comments said it's with a turbo
The secondary balancing on this has to rattle itself apart.
Not really rember Detroit had one and complimented the rattle with a balance shaft parallel to the cam. Diesel like type stuff.
@@marcusedwards6844 and it didn't work...Porche tried it too..
2.4 L is a big as you can with any reliability.
@@jpesicka it did work i had one running on the ground that's why I spoke on it ... idk much about Porsche yet but what I spoke on really happened.
@@marcusedwards6844absolutely... they tried.
I recall a few 4cyl over 3L... but none that were in production very long.
If you can design a connecting rod to eliminate the secondary balance issue...one could in theory make a 4cyl as large as you wanted.
3.6L LS based i6 is the dream
So their are specialty engines that are built like this that are based on production engines and that have also been around a lot longer
I saw one of these on marketplace not too long ago I guess I should of picked it up damn
With a turbo and direct injection, it would be even more likely to have have furious torque
There's no way a 3.6L 4 cylinder based on LS architecture makes 500 TQ at 1800 RPM NA. Not a snowballs chance in hell.
Hey, tell that to Blue Print, that's what they're claiming.
It's not "based" on the LS. Same exact head off the 6.2 LS and the block is a modified version of the V8. I've seen testing of this engine, and it's a freaking Beast. For a 4 cylinder
The LS doesn't even make 500 at any rpm how the hell is a half size version going to do that...
@@aktionp20with it being crazy crammed over, with ported heads and fuel injection.
@@user-br1up5vw4h the only way to make those numbers without boost is with volumetric efficiency, and the ford modulars are the only engines in the US with over a 100% volumetric efficiency stock, and at 5l they still bately hit that range. ls heads dont flow nearly as well, even with port work. this engine would make 350 MAYBE, and thats being generous, since thats near the same number the full 6.2 ls makes at that range
2.7 4cyl Turbo Silverado? 410 ft lbs torque feels good behind the wheel even if a little sluggish
Wtf why isn’t this a regular thing now lol
Well see my pick is the opposite:
The k48:
This is two 2.4L 4cyl K24A2 engines mated at the crank to make a 4.8L k48 v8 engine. This is currently being designed and will be built by this dude and his company. We already know the utterly insane hp/L output that makes the k-series so popular. Ok now let’s double the displacement lol… a lot of the existing aftermarket support for these engines would fit right in, as the heads (I believe) will be untouched (apart from the strength mods used by the aftermarket manufacturer) by the mating process and the crank/case will already be custom, not that you really needed to touch a k24 crank in the first place to achieve insane power.
I want this engine now they need to make something with it
Typically any I4 engine with a displacement over 3l has a lot of vibration and balancing issues,
I wonder if their eco diesels are based slightly off this I mean they take conventional oil long shot but maybe was a part of development
340 HP 3.6L 4 Cylinder GAS Engine NOT Diesel like others comparing, which they then claim “With a Turbo” 500 lb-ft @ 1800 RPM. We will start with just NA numbers for benefit of doubt, @340 HP to Produce 500 lb-ft you would need a min 3571.4144 RPM. For the “With a Turbo” application your variable for NA to Turbo efficiency is 1.4-2.0 of total Liter, 3.6 L is 3600CC, we will use 2.0 as that is the highest value and easiest calculation, 3.6 x 2.0 = 7.2L or 7200CC for the Turbo to NA application, (so a 3.6L turbo is equivalent to a 7.2L NA) which with CC/Horsepower figures 1hp/15cc, equals 480 HP which to achieve 500 Ft-LB Torque you would need min 5041.9968 RPM. One Key element we are missing is how high can it rev because that will change some things. I’m no math athlete and may be missing a formula or made an error (always account for Murphy law) but the figures I got don’t add up to the claims. Also for the reverse if you had NA 340HP @1800RPM it would take 992 lb-ft to achieve those numbers, almost double, for the turbo application it’s almost 3 times @1400.5 lb-ft
That's why Audi and Peugeot were big with their diesel cars at LeMans during the 2000s!
We have been rocking the Ford straight 4, 2.3 litre turbo engine for 45 years. It's a badass.
Lima.
Seen one making over 600 hp on factory block.
That'd be great for an airplane they need that kind of power in a small displacement
The 1/2 LS motor is vaporware, L3B is real and readily available.
I remember this. What a legend this engine would be
Who built this engine, Chevy?
They never built it because it wouldn't work.
Look how awesome the 4cyl ecotech motor was. For not a lot of money in modifications, u had 450-500whp all day long if not more dependent on how far u pushed it and built it. They were cheap speed
You missed out on the lnf in the cobalt ss and homo hot rod ss. A 2.0l with 3 bar map sensors, and 600 dollars in parts, e47 tune. 25pbs of boost, 350lb of torque. 300hp. Di, Ko4 dual scroll. Gms first direct injection engine and it was great. It was like America, the land of torque, made a tuner car based on those principles.
That shit would be wild Chevy need to release it
Imagine a full size LS7 in the back of a van and and that 3.6L LSI4 in the front.
Thats like a 4 cylinder american Barra engine
Why do Aussies complain about Yank Tanks when all of their utes roll over like a Reliant Robin?
So they basically cut a 7.4L LSX in haft, and that’s how a legend killer is created
Seen a 3.5 v6 get pushed to 650hp from 5 star tuning in a expedition
I would name the engine “K-series Killer”
Hows the cam/valves work???
Turbomax 2.7 L 4 cylinder is a thing guys. adding a cold air intake pushes it to 360 hp and OVER 500 ft lb of torque 😂😂 all torque made at 1500 rpm. That’s why this motor was discontinued, THEY MADE IT BETTER
Okay hear me out, 4 banger for the left rear tire and a 4banger for the right rear tire.
That rated power is WITH A TURBO. Don't get confused.
Vibration gonna be funny
These little one off engines will really screw up your idea of production motors because the reason why prototypes like this look so good on paper is because the bean counters haven't gone through it to see what they think you don't need.
It's the same reason performance cars almost always come with butter-soft materials holding it together from the factory. The engineers make something nice, the bean counters ruin it. It's also why companies won't ship crate engines to replace issues like the new tundra, because the bean counters know they only accounted for making a certain number of blocks and now they would need to go back to the casting company for a new line of blocks. Thus the mechanics get to do 30+ hour rebuilds on new trucks
Had a 01 S10 ZR2 bak in the day. This would make that thing the perfect little off-road machine. The 4.3 they had in it from the factory was way to front heavy.
Have you heard about the 2.7L turbomax in the Chevy trucks? 430 Torque , 310 Horsepower! They say it's pretty quick in a heavy truck.