GMC Terrain, Equinox, and SRX Forum banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Anyone know if the Ecotec that GM is using in the Nox / Terrain is related to the GM Quad 4 of the early 90's?
Is it the same thing just refined with a new name? Or is it completely different?

Just curious..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
239 Posts
The Ecotec is an evolution(or modern incarnation) of an engine that came to life in Europe in the early 70s, had several generations of development and use around the world(including the '75 Vega) and was finally introduced to North America as the Ecotec in the early 00s.
The Quad4 Came to life in North America in the 80s, evolved into the "TwinCam" through the 90s and was phased out in favour of the Ecotec in the early 00s.
The overarching concepts of the two engine families are very similar(I4, overhead cam shaft designs) but the specific engineering and execution are still very different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
GMCdriver said:
The Ecotec is an evolution(or modern incarnation) of an engine that came to life in Europe in the early 70s, had several generations of development and use around the world(including the '75 Vega) and was finally introduced to North America as the Ecotec in the early 00s.
The Quad4 Came to life in North America in the 80s, evolved into the "TwinCam" through the 90s and was phased out in favour of the Ecotec in the early 00s.
The overarching concepts of the two engine families are very similar(I4, overhead cam shaft designs) but the specific engineering and execution are still very different.
Exactly what I was looking for.
I had a HO Quad 4 (180HP) back in the early 90's and it was very powerful and efficent but it didnt hold up very well.
Was worried that I had just order the 2010 verson of the GM Quad 4 for my Terrain.
Sounds like its not.
Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
315 Posts
bocks said:
Exactly what I was looking for.
I had a HO Quad 4 (180HP) back in the early 90's and it was very powerful and efficent but it didnt hold up very well.
Was worried that I had just order the 2010 verson of the GM Quad 4 for my Terrain.
Sounds like its not.
Thanks!
I miss my HO Quad...You have to look @ when that car was produced. Mine was 190hp, this was in '90 (my first car). This engine has no comparable in performance for size. Still the ecotec design has no not passed the Quad's in performance of a n/a (the highest is the latest vvt/di 2.4 setup). Can you imagine if the quad was continued and improved with vvt-i direct injection? You talking an engine that would have more power then most v6's and turbo 4's. The ecotec turbo 4 only puts out 260/260. The quad turbo set the land speed record.

The issue that ruined the quad was not reliablity...But the average consumer didnt care about performance, and the quads idled rough and where not as refined as the opel based engines (ecotecs). So that plateform won out....but dont knock quads, they have place in history (first production america dohc, and still GM's highest output 4cylinder w/o turbo...and this is from 1990 (sad imo)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
grometsc said:
I miss my HO Quad...You have to look @ when that car was produced. Mine was 190hp, this was in '90 (my first car). This engine has no comparable in performance for size. Still the ecotec design has no not passed the Quad's in performance of a n/a (the highest is the latest vvt/di 2.4 setup). Can you imagine if the quad was continued and improved with vvt-i direct injection? You talking an engine that would have more power then most v6's and turbo 4's. The ecotec turbo 4 only puts out 260/260. The quad turbo set the land speed record.

The issue that ruined the quad was not reliablity...But the average consumer didnt care about performance, and the quads idled rough and where not as refined as the opel based engines (ecotecs). So that plateform won out....but dont knock quads, they have place in history (first production america dohc, and still GM's highest output 4cylinder w/o turbo...and this is from 1990 (sad imo)
I hear ya. The HO Quad 4 was ahead of its time. Yes, it was rough and LOUD and had to be beat in order to make power (and it had plenty) but all of the head gasket problems sealed the deal enough that GM changed its name to Twin Cam from Quad 4 so people would buy them.
Curious what did you have in 1990 that made 190HP? I thought the only 190 HP Quad 4 was a 1991 Olds Achieva SCX? (W41 package if I remember correctly)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
315 Posts
bocks said:
I hear ya. The HO Quad 4 was ahead of its time. Yes, it was rough and LOUD and had to be beat in order to make power (and it had plenty) but all of the head gasket problems sealed the deal enough that GM changed its name to Twin Cam from Quad 4 so people would buy them.
Curious what was did you have in 1990 that made 190HP? I thought the only 190 HP Quad 4 was a 1991 Olds Achieva SCX? (W41 package if I remember correctly)
The engine actually was a 92 from my brothers wrecked SCX W41 (90-93). It was installed in a 90 Beretta GT :)

Should have clarified...I liked to do engine swaps when I was younger...

Had a 96 GP GTP (3.4 dohc) but swapped in a 3800 Series II S/C when I got the chance


I'm trying to get out of the "modification" phase with cars.

THis was my last setup from a 2.0L Ecotec

http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r23/grometsc/Cobalt%20SS/GMS1best.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Cool. That makes sense now. Sounds like fun!

At any rate the current Ecotec seems to be a nice modern engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
315 Posts
bocks said:
Cool. That makes sense now. Sounds like fun!

At any rate the current Ecotec seems to be a nice modern engine.
If I ever play with another car...I want a 88 Fiero GT Formula and drop in a 2.0L LNF Ecotec w/ bigger turbo upgrade....above 300 on fwd is just stupid imo
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
That's one thing I like about GM, they take an engine design and beat the hell out of it until it's rock solid. Some reviewers kick GM for their old pushrod V8 designs, but heck, then those old V8s still work and get the best gas mileage over OHC V8 engines, AND get 100K mile warranties, well then... I put this I4 in the same category. GM had some issues with this engine a couple decades ago, but today it's well refined and very strong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
grometsc said:
If I ever play with another car...I want a 88 Fiero GT Formula and drop in a 2.0L LNF Ecotec w/ bigger turbo upgrade....above 300 on fwd is just stupid imo
Our local 10sec Buick FWD would disagree with you...LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,085 Posts
GMCdriver said:
The Ecotec is an evolution(or modern incarnation) of an engine that came to life in Europe in the early 70s, had several generations of development and use around the world(including the '75 Vega) and was finally introduced to North America as the Ecotec in the early 00s.
The Quad4 Came to life in North America in the 80s, evolved into the "TwinCam" through the 90s and was phased out in favour of the Ecotec in the early 00s.
The overarching concepts of the two engine families are very similar(I4, overhead cam shaft designs) but the specific engineering and execution are still very different.
That's some very interesting history, thanks for sharing, GMCdriver!
8)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,085 Posts
Nukedog said:
Our local 10sec Buick FWD would disagree with you...LOL
Yikes, FWD???
:eek: :eek: :eek:
How the heck do you get the tires to bite so you can run 10's in a FWD Buick?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
315 Posts
Nukedog said:
Our local 10sec Buick FWD would disagree with you...LOL
3800 Series II Twincharged

Do you know what it takes to achieve those numbers

Its a complete waste/stuipid because normal driveability suffers

How the heck do you get the tires to bite so you can run 10's in a FWD Buick?

Preloaded weight transfer bars that push the front wheels down. You can see them in this youtube link....They are illegal in any rules race.......But its the only way

Turbo Impala Runs 10.06
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,085 Posts
grometsc said:
3800 Series II Twincharged

Do you know what it takes to achieve those numbers

Its a complete waste/stuipid because normal driveability suffers


Preloaded weight transfer bars that push the front wheels down. You can see them in this youtube link....They are illegal in any rules race.......But its the only way[/color]
Ah ha!
Interesting, makes sense, thanks grometsc!
Man am I getting old and out of touch LOLOLOLOL!
Would it not be legal in "run what you brung" bracket racing?
Now I must ask...why the wheelie bars? ? ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
315 Posts
gearhead said:
Ah ha!
Interesting, makes sense, thanks grometsc!
Man am I getting old and out of touch LOLOLOLOL!
Would it not be legal in "run what you brung" bracket racing?
Now I must ask...why the wheelie bars? ? ?
The wheel bars are pushing the rear up which forces the front down....thats the pre-load. Notice how high the rear suspension is! Its putting more force then a RWD will generate due to force (reason not allowed in rules racing unless this has changed, but I doubt it will)....Add some sticky slicks, pre-loaded....just press the gas to go. Really no fun in driving that way imho. I perfered scca (road racing) vs doing stop light or drag racing
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,153 Posts
Having owned 4Cyl engines from Honda/Acura, Toyota, Nissan and Mazda....I think I can safely say that the 2.4 Ecotec is the best 4 banger I've had...and that includes the legendary AE86 twin cam/16 valve in my 85 Toyota Corolla GTS. The AE86 was smooth and revved like a motorcycle engine..but gets knocked out of first place because of the almost complete lack of bottom end torque. The Ecotec is fairly smooth for such a large 4 banger, does a surprisingly good job of motivating a fairly large/heavy vehicle, and yet still manages to give good gas mileage. Who can ask for anything more? Of course seven months of ownership is way too early to make a judgement on durability..but I think you could safely say it won't be any worse than similar engines from other manufacturers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
grometsc said:
3800 Series II Twincharged

Do you know what it takes to achieve those numbers

Its a complete waste/stuipid because normal driveability suffers


Preloaded weight transfer bars that push the front wheels down. You can see them in this youtube link....They are illegal in any rules race.......But its the only way
Long time no replay.

The car was an S/C Buick converted to a Turbo (Le Sabre...90 something) and it gets good mileage and runs 10.80's spinning a good bit on slicks). We have 93 octane pump gas all motor Mustang locally that run high 9's and often drive over 1 hour to the track.

If you want a money race we got you covered my friend..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
626 Posts
Narg said:
That's one thing I like about GM, they take an engine design and beat the hell out of it until it's rock solid.
Some would argue they do that not because of some noble cause toward continual improvement, but because for the past 30 years GM hasn't really had much money to put into development of entirely new engine designs and tooling. It's far cheaper to take what you have and improve it.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top