Cavalier NHRA

2098 Views 13 Replies 9 Participants Last post by LGRpup, Dec 24, 2003

Rex Raider

Discussion Starter · Oct 28, 2003

FWD CHEVROLET CAVALIER — A WHOLE LOTTA PERFORMANCE FROM THE ECOTEC 2.0L ENGINE

“One thousand horsepower from a 2.0-liter engine.” No, that’s not a typo. That’s the output of this special Ecotec engine. Yes, that’s the same engine that powers the Chevrolet Cavalier, and next year’s Chevy Cobalt. No, you can’t order this exact vehicle from your dealer; however, you can order the components to build your very own 1000-plus horsepower Ecotec engine through GM Performance Parts.

This special Cavalier, on display at the 2003 Specialty Equipment Market Association (SEMA) show, competes in the National Hot Rod Association (NHRA) Pro Front Wheel Drive class. In race trim, this four-cylinder engine is equipped with a turbocharger and intercooler to achieve 1000-plus horsepower and 650 lbs.-ft. of torque. Power is transferred to the 28x10.5-inch front tires via a six-speed, sequential, manual transmission.

The Cavalier runs on methanol fuel and features a full-tube frame chassis, Penske triple-adjustable front and rear shocks and an independent rear suspension.

It also features carbon-fiber race brakes, a safety roll cage, six-point safety harness, a head and neck support (HANS) system, a fire-suppression system and an independent witness crash recorder to record safety data in the event of an impact.

The Chevrolet Cavalier’s NHRA-approved full carbon-fiber body measures 47.5-inches tall, 68.7-inches wide, and is 202-inches long. It’s finished in Tangelo Orange and Cinnamon Brown exterior paint with white pearl flames.

The Cavalier Sport Compact program in 2003 won the Pro FWD class championship by capturing seven victories in the 10-race Summit Sport Compact series. The Cavalier currently holds the national speed record in Pro FWD at 186.48 mph.

With this record of success, Cavalier is now regarded as a driving force in Sport Compact competition. And all of this proven Ecotec engine performance and durability will be part of next year’s Cobalt performance story, so stay tuned.

CHEVROLET CAVALIER FWD DRAG RACER HIGHLIGHTS:
- Ecotec 2.0L I-4
- 1000-plus horsepower
- 650 lb.-ft. torque
- Six-speed sequential manual transmission
- Methanol fuel
- Full tube frame chassis
- Penske triple adjustable front and rear shocks
- Independent rear suspension
- 2003 NHRA-approved full carbon fiber body
- Carbon-fiber race brakes
- Safety roll cage and six-point harness belts and HANS device
- Fire-suppression system and independent witness crash recorder
- 28x10.5-inch front drag race tires
- 25x4.5-inch rear drag tires
- Tangelo Orange and Cinnamon Brown with white pearl flames

See less See more

Save

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

Ghrankenstein

· #2 · Oct 29, 2003

From what I understand, the Cobalt should be getting a "Gen II" Ecotec.

Dunno how it'll be different, but my guess is that it will be different in some way that is better.

Glad to be of service.

Ghrankenstein

Save

mackingu

· #3 · Oct 29, 2003

Originally posted by Ghrankenstein@Oct 29 2003, 03:54 AM
From what I understand, the Cobalt should be getting a "Gen II" Ecotec.

Dunno how it'll be different, but my guess is that it will be different in some way that is better.

Glad to be of service.

Ghrankenstein

i don't think that "Gen II" would be an appropriate name for the ECOTEC going into the cobalt, as there has never been a previous 2.4L ECOTEC using VVT. unless, of course, you're referring to the ECOTEC family of engines. in that case, i concede. :bounce:

Save

Ghrankenstein

· #4 · Oct 29, 2003

I'm just saying, "Gen II" Ecotec is what I might have heard somewhere...

Ghrankenstein

Save

demonspeed

· #5 · Oct 29, 2003

Well, considering the current Ecotec is a 2.2, they are refering to a 2.0 Ecotec in the article. I'd say yeah, Gen II Eco. I also wouldn't consider the 2.4 Twin Cam, or even the 2.3 Quad 4 to be in relation to the Ecotec.

Save

mackingu

· #6 · Oct 29, 2003

Originally posted by demonspeed@Oct 29 2003, 04:46 PM
Well, considering the current Ecotec is a 2.2, they are refering to a 2.0 Ecotec in the article. I'd say yeah, Gen II Eco. I also wouldn't consider the 2.4 Twin Cam, or even the 2.3 Quad 4 to be in relation to the Ecotec.

don't you mean, 2.4L Quad 4? and, if it was based on anything other than the L851, it's not even close to an ECOTEC.

Save

sykboy

· #7 · Oct 29, 2003

They didn't make a 2.4 Quad 4.

(I know it is basically the same, I am J/K) They did make quite a few changes from 94-96, 95 being kind of a ******* child. Does any of this really matter? The base Cobalt is said to still carry the 2.2 Ecotec, which is what the racing program uses(stated in there release) destroked for more RPM. And the 2.4 VVT is probably quite a bit more different as the 94 quad 4 was from the 96 Twin Cam. Obviously more. It would be cool if they were close enough to retro-fit the VVT to the 2.2, though. Perhaps it simply is a 2.2 that has been bored or stroked and has a selenoid or whatever to control the cams(oversimplified, I know). All I know is that this 2.4 seems to be a great step up. Broad torque, piston skirt oil squirters(sounds ready for boost), hopefully the same stout structure as the Eco. maybe we will see this in the NHRA cars in the not so distant future.

See less See more

Save

mackingu

· #8 · Oct 30, 2003

they all stem from the original L851. and honestly, syk, i think your over simplified description is closer to truth than you think.

BTW, the 2.0L without the supercharger makes about 110 HP i believe. i base this on the fact that the rebadged daewoos, with the same bore and stroke and similar compression, but with an iron block, make about that power.

Save

demonspeed

· #9 · Oct 30, 2003

Originally posted by mackingu+Oct 29 2003, 12:17 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (mackingu @ Oct 29 2003, 12:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-demonspeed@Oct 29 2003, 04:46 PM
Well, considering the current Ecotec is a 2.2, they are refering to a 2.0 Ecotec in the article. I'd say yeah, Gen II Eco. I also wouldn't consider the 2.4 Twin Cam, or even the 2.3 Quad 4 to be in relation to the Ecotec.

don't you mean, 2.4L Quad 4? and, if it was based on anything other than the L851, it's not even close to an ECOTEC. [/b][/quote]
Nope. The Quad 4 was the 2.3. The motor basically sucked for it's unreliability, but did make quite a bit of power. It was found in the early Beretta's and 95 Z24. The 2.4 Twin Cam was what replaced the Quad 4 in the Cavaliers. Although a bit better in the reliabilty department, it didn't have all the power of the Quad 4.

I consider the Quad 4 the white trash motor for some reason.

Save

mackingu

· #10 · Oct 31, 2003

Originally posted by demonspeed+Oct 30 2003, 05:48 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (demonspeed @ Oct 30 2003, 05:48 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2003, 12:17 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-demonspeed

Click to expand...

@Oct 29 2003, 04:46 PM
Well, considering the current Ecotec is a 2.2, they are refering to a 2.0 Ecotec in the article. I'd say yeah, Gen II Eco. I also wouldn't consider the 2.4 Twin Cam, or even the 2.3 Quad 4 to be in relation to the Ecotec.

Click to expand...

don't you mean, 2.4L Quad 4? and, if it was based on anything other than the L851, it's not even close to an ECOTEC.

Nope. The Quad 4 was the 2.3. The motor basically sucked for it's unreliability, but did make quite a bit of power. It was found in the early Beretta's and 95 Z24. The 2.4 Twin Cam was what replaced the Quad 4 in the Cavaliers. Although a bit better in the reliabilty department, it didn't have all the power of the Quad 4.

I consider the Quad 4 the white trash motor for some reason. [/b][/quote]
okay, i guess i know nothing about the Quad 4. i always assumed it was just the 2.4L with a different name.

anyway, why'd they call it a "Quad 4"? how long was it produced for?

Save

kmacleod

· #11 · Oct 31, 2003

The Original Quad 4 was the last engine developed by Oldsmobile in '86. It was built @ an engine plant outside Lansing in Delta Township. Yes, the engine was not as refined as it could be.

The reason why the H.O. version of this engine disappeared in the early 90's
was the addition of balance shafts. If I remember right, the H.O. Quad 4
redlined somewhere just above 7000 RPM.

The Twin Cam was the second Generation Q4. The Balance shafts turn @ twice the speed of the crankshaft. So.....You redline @ 7000, your balance shafts are turning @ 14,000 RPM. Hmmnnn :drevil: , Instant destruction of the engine. So the Twin Cam was detuned from 190 to 150HP and the rest is history.

My wifes '96 Grand Am has the Twin Cam. The only embarrasing issue is the sound of the engine is akin to a mercury marine motor tied to a pontoon boat when accelerating......

Ken

See less See more

Save

thehemi

· #12 · Nov 8, 2003

In high school, a friend had a, I believe, '89 Grand Am
with the Quad 4. Under WOT it would squeak into 2nd
gear -- and it was an automatic. It was a nice car.

Save

germeezy1

· #13 · Dec 24, 2003

The original Quad 4 was an awesome engine and they got a version to over 1,000 hp in the Oldsmbile Aerotech done by Batten Engineering. The highest production version produced 190 Hp and redlined at 7500 rpm. I have driven a Beretta with this motor it is rough and loud but boy do they like to rev. I have always wondered because the non H.O Quad 4 put out 150 HP is the Northstar 4.6L 300 horse related to that motor? The new Ecotec will come in 2.0l I think they talk about it on the GM powertrain website. The really good news is the Ecotec 2.4 preliminary specs indicate 170 hp and 170 lb ft of torque. That should give The Nissan 2.5 and the Lancer Ralliart 2.4 a run for the money!

Save

LGRpup

· #14 · Dec 24, 2003

Being involved in the Lansing area I have had a chance to talk to the "old boys" about the Quad 4. They all talk to me about for the time it was a world class engine and are very protective of it. and all of the stories about lining up the calais' behind the plants. the one thing that always comes up is how sweet the motor would have been, but the ol bean counters got a hold of it and that was that.

Save

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.

Top Contributors this Month