ZUKIWORLD Online | Suzuki 4x4 Editorial and Forum
ZUKIWORLD Discussion Forum => Suzuki 4x4 Forum => Topic started by: Samurai47 on June 27, 2007, 04:37:16 PM
-
I was just wondering which would be better the 1.6, 2.0, or the 1.9 turbo diesel for mud boggin. I was also wanting to know if anybody had any experience with the AAPA Sumo 2 1.3 and if its any good.
-
Have you given the Mazda Rotory a thought? A turbo rotory would be fun slinging some mud, you wouldn't have to worry about a red line either. >:D
-
Between the 1.6 and the 2.0, the 2.0 takes it I'd have to say. More power and torque.
The 1.9 turbodiesel would be interesting though. Gobs of torque so you can run big tires without having to regear.
-
I would look at 4.3 chevy v6 to get the tires turning!
-
got a sammy on 33s with 4.3 chevy locked front and rear if you want it
-
Im trying to keep it a 4 cylinder mainly just to brag to my uncle that i can beat his v8 ford, im also trying to keep it as simple as possible. I'm lookin into a built 1.6 16 valve right now. Thanks for yalls imput, I was just hoping somebody else bogged their sammy with a 4 cylinder. By the way how much you want for that v6 samurai and what kinda axles are under it?
-
sammy axles and not sure on the price but thinking of selling if your serious email me at bubba2243|removethispart|@hotmail.com
-
One thing to remember is that 3/4 small block is way heavy over the front end. Not to mention the tranny weight.
If you want to stay with an inline 4, go with the 1.6l 16v, or maybe a DOHC 1.3l from a Swift.
And as the saying goes...... How much $$$$$$$$$$$ do you have to play with??
And don't bust my :-X :-X's, I just lumped the sayings together.
-
Im trying to keep it a 4 cylinder mainly just to brag to my uncle that i can beat his v8 ford, im also trying to keep it as simple as possible. I'm lookin into a built 1.6 16 valve right now. Thanks for yalls imput, I was just hoping somebody else bogged their sammy with a 4 cylinder. By the way how much you want for that v6 samurai and what kinda axles are under it?
I entered a mud-bogg competition years ago in my red samurai that at the time had 32" TSL/SX, 5 inch lift, GRS2, lockers, and a 1.6 8-valve hopped up a bit. Because of the light weight which made for a great power to weight ratio, I was able to win against several v8 powered jeeps, early broncos, and tlcs sporting 33-37" tires. Don't underestimate the advantage of a light weight vehicle. Also make the bottom as smooth as possible and remember you'll have more diff clearance with a 30" tall tire than a AMC20 equipped jeep with 33" of tire plus off-set diff which can be a huge advantage if the course has a ridge in the middle of ruts....
Hope that helps...
-Eric
-
Stay away from the diesel.The diesel doesn't rev enough and doesn't develope power fast enough.A diesel would be good for trails and rock but not mud or snow.
-
I was hoping to be able to rely on the weight difference. Anyway thanks for all the info and suggestions, I was actually really wanting to do that diesel swap but most of what i go to are muddy as hell. Thanks alot guys.
-
Has any one thought about a Rover/buick v8 all aluminum 318 lbs full dress thats only like 50 or 60 lbs hevier and thier only 1.5" longer if you don't count the cluch fan on the rover motor!and .75" wider both in full dress. but shhhhh. don't tell any one but that is my backup plan if the turbo 8v i built, wont pull my little camp trailer.
-
Excellent thought!!I have an all aluminum 260 ci small block chevy I have been thinking about shoving in something little,but the engine you have would rock!
-
a rover v8 is a whole lot heavier then the tracker 1.6 which I can lift by myself
-
Hi Samurai47 it's just a thought and I have not done the swap but did do some reasurch on the rover motor.
1) I do not know how much the zuki 1.3/1.6 weighs, I do know that the rover motor 3.5 and buick 215 acording to Wikipedia, and Kennedy enginiring they wiegh 318,lbs
2) The buick came in gm "A" Body cars 1961-1964 at some point gm sold the rights to land rover they then were avalible in the range rover models from 1985-1996 in the forms of 3.5L, 3.9L, and the 4.2L
3) The Range Rover automatic is 4spd 1st gear =2.48:1 od= 0.728:1 and low range = 3.244:1
4)both out puts on tcase on right side
5) range rover electonics incuding ecu are prone to fail and other or after market ECU's are advisable
6) IT HAS BEEN DONE!! GOOGLE "rover v8 swap samurai" I found picks of this swap in the UK
That is all of my resuch on the subject as I am still playing with a turbo tracker motor! Cheers!
-
Hi Samurai47 it's just a thought and I have not done the swap but did do some reasurch on the rover motor.
1) I do not know how much the zuki 1.3/1.6 weighs, I do know that the rover motor 3.5 and buick 215 acording to Wikipedia, and Kennedy enginiring they wiegh 318,lbs
2) The buick came in gm "A" Body cars 1961-1964 at some point gm sold the rights to land rover they then were avalible in the range rover models from 1985-1996 in the forms of 3.5L, 3.9L, and the 4.2L
3) The Range Rover automatic is 4spd 1st gear =2.48:1 od= 0.728:1 and low range = 3.244:1
4)both out puts on tcase on right side
5) range rover electonics incuding ecu are prone to fail and other or after market ECU's are advisable
6) IT HAS BEEN DONE!! GOOGLE "rover v8 swap samurai" I found picks of this swap in the UK
That is all of my resuch on the subject as I am still playing with a turbo tracker motor! Cheers!
The 1.6 weighs about 170lbs, the V8 is much heavier. The engine fits in without too much difficulty, the problem is the trans and running gear. There are a few V8 sammys over here but they are usually a Zuk body on a shortened RR chassis. For the sort of offroading that we do they aren't very practical, the 1.6 swap is the most common although diesels are becoming more popular.
-
A 16V with a turbo will give you plenty of top end to spin 'em.