4.0 Liter inline 6.

[GunnerRob]

GM also has an L5 in the colorado....

An L5 just ain't natural.

That engine is HUGE! long and its taller than the firewall

Maybe a person could lay it over on it's side!

[jmanz6]

Yeah, the L5 is the same size as the L6, with one cylinder cut off. I've been to the lab where they developed the casting method for the blocks (lost foam), and they are big engines. They are meant for trucks.

[Aussie260z]

I think this would be a great idea,

This engine was designed by Chrysler in the 60's as a replacement for the slant 6 and was intended as a truck motor, however they went with the 318-340-360 V8's and pretty much left this motor alone,

Then the good folks at Chrysler Australia decided to do some work on it and brought it out here, then put it into there cars from about 1970 onwards, and we got the awesome hemi6, which came in 3 configurations - 3.7litre, 4.0litre and the 4.3litre - they were called the 245 & 265 Hemi's (even though they werent actually hemi engines),

At its peak the 265Hemi pumped out about 225kw (302hp) and propelled the RT VH 1972 E49 Charger down the Quarter in 14sec flat, which was the record for a production passenger car in Australia for some 20-25years, and this was with 1972 rubber and a 1370kg car,

This car had tripple 40mm webbers, from memory not much happened before 3000rpm, in the E49's atleast, there were milder versions like the E48 which was a slightly detuned version of the E49 - much more streetable camshaft,

This engine has a mid mounted sump and looks a hell of a lot like an L-series engine, i think i would fit no worries and the engine mounts would probably be really easier to fabricate just because the mounts on the block are in roughly the same position as the L-series,

The Jeep 4.0litre is based on the Hemi 245 but it is not the same engine, it from memory is just slightly different all over, and also has a front mounted sump, but it does have fuel injection,

For the US folks getting your hands on an Australian Modified Hemi6 would be pretty difficult, but would be alot easier to fit, and there is people who flog off tripple throttle body setups and Supra 5-speed gearbox adapters, plus i have an article somewhere of someone turbo'ing one of these engines and getting alot of power out of them,

But, fitting a Jeep 4.0litre would probably be alot harder than fitting the aussie modified 4.0litre or 4.3litre hemi6

[Murph]

If you want a big cube I6, I think it'd be hard to go past the aussie ford falcon 4L twin cam inline 6 (neglecting two issues, does it fit and can you get one to the US for reasonable $).

The stock NA engine pumps out a solid 190kW. There's also the turbo versions at 240kW and 270kW. Nizpro offers a kit for the NA motor that will bring it upto 270kW (retaining as good as stock driveability) for about AU$7k. The turbo motors they're now pulling well over 1000HP from.

It'd no doubt be a little heavy in a zed, but for straight line work......it'd be a weapon.

[The C110]

Beat me to the post,

The Barras 4.0l twin-cam would most definitely be great option, whether in NA or turbo form. I dont beleive there are any I6 motors produced by a local manufacturer in the US that compare to it.

Firing up the 'truck motor' debate a little more, Nissan does produce a big cube I6 that could be a possibility for the Z [space would obviously be the only issue]. Its the 4.8l twin-cam unit found in the Nissan Patrol! Quite likely gargantuan in size, it nonetheless produces grin-inducing tourque!! :D

Aussie260z, the 265 hemi found in the VH R/T Charger was indeed a legendary motor. If memory serves me correctly, however, that car did not hold the 1/4 mile saloon car record in Australia for the 25 years that you speak of. It was most definitely the Phase III GTHO Falcon, with a time of 13.8 seconds [i think]. The Charger was, however, a fantastic compeditor to the Phase III, and both cars were legends in Australian Automotive history....if only Nissan had taken the plunge and homoglated the KPGC10 or KPGC110 to compete against these beasts..[they were thinking about it]!!! I guess, effectively, we discovered the answer to that possibility in 89', '90 when the R32 GTR dominated.....

Cheers,

Tom

[Aussie260z]

Arrrrgghhhhh.............i know i have this written down somewhere, just not at hand,

The GTHO Phase 111 (all 380hp of it - the Phase 4 was supposed to have something like 410hp) went down the quarter a fraction slower than the VH RT Charger,

like 14.4-9secs (something like that), the monaro was somewhere around 15.7secs (argh Holdens),

However,

The Charger's top speed was only about 195-200kms/hr, while the Monaro & GTHO was around the 230km's mark,

The Charger did a 14.0sec quarter mile, which was not bettered (and this is even debated) untill, i think a VS commodore (well a mid 90's Holden),

My brother bought me a 70's Wheels Car magazine which had all those cars in it and listed all there specs, my memory might be failing me, but im like 99% certain that the Charger, down the Quarter at least, beat everyone, including the 380hp, 8mpg, GTHO-Phase 3,

I was reading through, i think a Zoom magazine, recently and it had interviews with Jim Richards, Mark Schaife, Tony Longhurst, John Bowe and a few others and they talked about the cars they all drove in the old Group A touring car class (before the V8 Supercars) and the R32 just sounded incredible, just killed everything in sight, then it was resricted with weight and boost penalties, but still killed everything in site

[speedyblue]

Aussie260Z has got it right. The Phase 3 was the fastest aussie car, and the charger was the fastest accelerating aussie car, just pipping the Phase 3 down the quarter. The hideous yellow GTS commodore (limited edition thing with the big ricey rear wing) was the car that finally bettered the 1/4 mile time by pulling a 13.7 or something similar.

Still, I think a 265 hemi with a set of tripple SU's would make a killer street car with fairly good driveability and economy. Get an alloy head for it and an alloy case supra box and it would weigh the same as the L6 engine/gearbox combo. Would definately need chassis reinforcing though for all the torque.

[260DET]

........................................... Get an alloy head for it and an alloy case supra box and it would weigh the same as the L6 engine/gearbox combo. Would definately need chassis reinforcing though for all the torque.

The L6 is not a particularly light engine by modern standards, significantly heavier than the apparently under rated VG30E for example. My research indicates that the VG is also a stronger engine than the stock L6, with the added advantage of a more suitable configuration as far as weight distribution goes.

Certainly the S30 body needs added rigidity for any real performance application although the stronger 260/280 body is slightly better in that regard.

[bemmerguy714]

BMW M series in-line six. 3.2L 320HP... taken out of the Z3 series BMW... and dropped right into your 240-Z.. transmission and all... All it takes is MONEY! If you love in--line six's you have to love this engine!

DO IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That engine hauls. Nothin like a Euro Transpant!!!!!

[e_racer1999]

there are some guys around here that want to swap in a 3.5L M5 motor into a Z.... they offered to buy mine but i told them it wasn't for sale...

[bemmerguy714]

there are some guys around here that want to swap in a 3.5L M5 motor into a Z.... they offered to buy mine but i told them it wasn't for sale...

The M5 has more power BUT the M3 has more potential do to that is a ligher engine and there are more Performace parts for it. Dont get me wrong if u drop a M5 engine ur made. But i would get a m3 engine. The S52s to be exact. S50s are good too.

[260DET]

Nissan engines>BMW engines