Great example of OE engine parts durability

[Guest]

I have often felt that we under estimate the strength of the stock engine parts and this article certainly encourages me not to worry to much about stock pistons in a properly tuned engine.

Perhaps the Ecotec is the basis of some of the improvements made in the V6 engine. The article below demonstrates a process I have wanted info on for a long time although on a V6, pushing a stock engine to its limits to find its weaknesses. If the stock Ecotec is a reasonable example, we can expect to get more than 100 hp per litre from the newer V6 engine. In this write up the stock pistons out lived the stock rods and who knows how much boost they could have taken. Enjoy.

http://www.year2032.com/ecotec.htm

[ForcedFirebird]

That article also tells us that it is OK to use high compression and boost. I didn't see where they reduced the 10:1 compression. At 2psi they were already making over 350hp.

I also like how they "removed the valve seals to prevent collisions with the retainers during high lift conditions"

[Joseph Upson]

The production turbocharged Ecotec has several of the modifications that the engine in the write up received that the other Ecotec motors, 2.2 and 2.4 did not get in stock form like the steel crank and upgraded heads. Some one replied once to my comment about GM addressing the V6 rods as forged, powder metal and sinterforged powder metal as being the same thing but I don't believe that is accurate. The rods for the turbo Ecotec are specifically called forged steel and listed in the "extra" column in addition to the list column. The rods for the other Ecotec motors with cast cranks are referred to as forged powder metal. The stock turbo motor is also rated at 260 hp so it definately has stronger rods than the powder metal or forged powder metal I would imagine.

[torq455]

i like how they say the HP rating was ~20hp higher than that of the factory rating. i don't think GM dyno tested their motor without the muffler and a modified down pipe. funny how they keep referring to a stock motor. the only things stock they kept are the girdle and crank fasteners. yeah pretty good for a "stock" motor.

[Joseph Upson]

i like how they say the HP rating was ~20hp higher than that of the factory rating. i don't think GM dyno tested their motor without the muffler and a modified down pipe. funny how they keep referring to a stock motor. the only things stock they kept are the girdle and crank fasteners. yeah pretty good for a "stock" motor.

Stock motors when ordered aren't shipped with downpipes and mufflers and I don't believe most people consider the exhaust system as part of the actual motor, since they differ across vehicles so much. I would think it's an independent system. The 283 hp failure point is still amazing for a 2.2 L engine even with a restrictive exhaust system installed to choke it down to a lower number which I'm sure would still have been above 200hp and averaging more than 100 hp/litre. Of course that engine was no longer stock when they cracked it open and started changing parts but by then the point had already been made.

[El_Diablo]

stock block.... not stock motor

we coudl do a lot with our stock blocks aswell but noone gives us shit as far as internals (special order shit is custom IMO so yeah they make pistons but its not as simple as the tecs have it)

[Joseph Upson]

stock block.... not stock motor

we coudl do a lot with our stock blocks aswell but noone gives us shit as far as internals (special order shit is custom IMO so yeah they make pistons but its not as simple as the tecs have it)

Not sure what you mean, up to the initial breaking point they used a stock motor, internals were not changed until after the initial failure over 283 hp. I'm not considering the changes above that point although now some production versions come with some of the modifications they made during their testing.