It's been a while. Let's look at some fun photos of what should be America's Escort

Pete Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Andrew_Frick Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So the Eco-tec is newer, lighter, more
> refined,
> > high power out, better supported in the
> states
> > derivative of
>
> the Quad 4.
>
>

Wrong, the Eco-tec is more closely related to the XE engine. The Quad 4 is completely different and not nearly as good as either.

As far as the XE engine goes, it's essentially based on the shortblock that we all know and (don't) love in the Pontiac Sunbird/Chevy Cavalier. I'm refering to the OHC 1.6/1.8/2.0 litre 'Brazilian' engines. The XE is a continuation of that shortblock, with a Cosworth-developed twin-cam 4-valve head.

The Ecotec thing gets a bit funny however. Opel has had 'Ecotec' models for many years, long before we got the GM corporate all-alloy 4-cylinder Ecotecs in the Cobalts, Skys, Saturns, etc. The original Ecotec was again based on the OHC cast-iron blocks, but with a new GM-designed head (totally different from the XE's Cosworth-designed head), which makes less power, has less power potential, yet runs cleaner emissions-wise. Hence the reason for the Ecotec at all...the older C20XE could not pass newer European emissions standards. The cast-iron blocked Ecotecs included 1.4, 1.6, 1.8 and 2.0 litre versions. These were not as successful in BTCC racing or rally in terms of power output, compared to the older XE's.

The new Ecotec is a GM/Opel clean-sheet design, and is all alloy unlike the prior Ecotecs used only in Europe. It is surprisingly heavy however, a friend of mine procured a 2.2 Ecotec to fit in his Manta and it weighs 315 lbs! That's actually a few pounds heavier than the all iron CIH engine that came out of the Manta.

Oh, and the older twin-cam XE's are no lightweight either, they weigh more than the CIH engines too, except for the 2.4 litre version with the heavy 8-cwt crankshaft.

Bob

---

Opel is a 4-letter word...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10498579@N07/sets/



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/27/2009 10:00PM by Ascona73.

john vanlandingham Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> And you Micheal hows that PV coming?
>

The PV's on hold. The more I took it apart, the more it became apparent the shell is toast. Too rusty. I got some new frame rails and a new front floorpan for it (they're still made and are pretty cheap, oddly enough), but then found that most of the upper firewall and drip rail was actually bondo. So I'm looking for another shell. This one will provide a lot of valuable spares, like fenders and a windshield and so on, and the engine's good (if I want to run it in historic, which I'm not sure I do), but the rust has gotten too deep into the actual unibody to salvage it. I guess I could have it acid-dipped and then POR it or something, but at this point I'd rather just start with a better one. They pop up quite often on craigslist - the issue isn't finding them, but finding one that's not too bad but not too nice either.

---

Self-righteous douche canoe

Ascona73 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> AManta.
>
> Oh, and the older twin-cam XE's are no lightweight
> either, they weigh more than the CIH engines too,
> except for the 2.4 litre version with the heavy
> 8-cwt crankshaft.

Bob, have you confirmed this as a fact or are you repeating what you've been told or read somewhere?

Thingk o f a few things and tell me how that could be:

*Basic block is shorter and bore centers a lot less 86mm bore vs 95.25mm helps
*That means crank is shorter. Rods and mains smaller, less weight
*Piston is lighter, rods probably about same since XEs so much longer in the XE.
*Countweights are doubtless less burly, certainly less weight
*less valve train stuff
* and crowning it all is the nice alloy head vs the MASSIVE CAST IRON THING!

Iron weighs almost per-zactly 3 times what aluminum weighs.

~~~Are we really supposed to believe the XE weighs MORE?

Sorry, when they came out back in '88 I was told they weighed about 40kg LESS, and that seems to make sense.

About then, EVERYBODY's new motors were around that sort of savings as that.

I always hear all sorts of bizarrely outrageous claims on the motors that I have shipped on pallets, don't know why engine weights are so hard to nail down, so:

Have you confirmed this yourself the XE is MORE, and if so where does the additional weight come from since everything, every part is smaller, lighter, or lighter materials?

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

hoche Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> john vanlandingham Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > And you Micheal hows that PV coming?
> >
>
> The PV's on hold. The more I took it apart, the
> more it became apparent the shell is toast. Too
> rusty. I got some new frame rails and a new front
> floorpan for it (they're still made and are pretty
> cheap, oddly enough), but then found that most of
> the upper firewall and drip rail was actually
> bondo. So I'm looking for another shell. This one
> will provide a lot of valuable spares, like
> fenders and a windshield and so on, and the
> engine's good (if I want to run it in historic,
> which I'm not sure I do), but the rust has gotten
> too deep into the actual unibody to salvage it. I
> guess I could have it acid-dipped and then POR it
> or something, but at this point I'd rather just
> start with a better one. They pop up quite often
> on craigslist - the issue isn't finding them, but
> finding one that's not too bad but not too nice
> either.
>

Generally, that's the PV experience.. They hide there rust fairly well.

I miss mine, but it was like yours and more work to fix than it would be to make one from scratch.

I wish you luck in your quest.. they certainly aren't that hard to find considering.

As you found out though if not stripped, they require a very thurough inspection.

While I really miss my PV, the NSU is a much better fit in the garage and is 100% more solid.. that and it's not THAT much smaller inside.. will have to get a roof rack for any family trips tho

---

Andrew M
Onterrible
30ish

john vanlandingham Wrote:

> Bob, have you confirmed this as a fact or are you
> repeating what you've been told or read
> somewhere?

John, I don't have an XE in my hands to compare the two, but I did inquire to a good friend of mine in France.

I stand corrected, as I was comparing the C20LET (turbo) to the CIH 2.0 litre. The C20LET is 162 kg fully dressed, the CIH 2.0 litre is 153 kg fully dressed, and the C20XE is 136 kg fully dressed, so it is in fact lighter.

Bob

---

Opel is a 4-letter word...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10498579@N07/sets/