i was just bored one day playing with design concepts in google sketch up.

has any one tried to modify a mid-engine in a j-body im just curious and don't be a hater im not talking a v8 v6 im just curious is it possible and what kinda cash would it take
i have a 89 subaru justy with a 1.2l 3cyl (like 75 hp) the dimentions are perfect

nuts bolts wiring are not the issue

i would neeed to remove the rear seat and cut out a portion of the floor get longer @!#$ cables and longer half shafts convert from steering to stationary the engine and trans mount with 3 solid mounts

any one know what kind of frameing would i need

Two words: Too much! Period. Better to find a low-end model Fiero, cut-up it's space-frame and fit it underneath.
Stuff like I've mentioned has been done alot by component car builders so that oughta give you a clue as to look for tips (Re: Kit Car Magazine & Kit Car Illustrated).

Go beyond the "bolt-on".

I was going to say what ^ he said. Better off starting with a Fiero.

^I've always wanted to get a 4cyl fiero and swap the Iron Duke for an eco...only question is, other than engine mounts, would the transmission bolt up?

_________________________

Yes it would, Rob. All GM engines that are commonly found in FWD apps use what's called the "Metric" bellhousing pattern. For the record, THM 200's (Not THM 200-4R's) & 700-R4's (Latter to become 4L60's & 4L60E's) were also made with this pattern to allow use of those engines in RWD apps (Camaros, Firebirds & S-trucks). The olny headache you'll face is that the Fiero auto trans' (If that's the way you're going) during the car's production was non-electronic in control (Re: Mechanical shift, TCC & line pressure control internally, with throttle-valve cable hook-up to throttle lever). The OBD-II might look for those extra inputs & outputs and wonder where they are and set a fault code if you don't use a coresponding production trans for the engine or turn off those functions with a HPTuner. Otherwise, it's just a matter of matching the clutch pieces up so they connect.

Go beyond the "bolt-on".

Nickelin Dimer wrote:Yes it would, Rob. All GM engines that are commonly found in FWD apps use what's called the "Metric" bellhousing pattern. For the record, THM 200's (Not THM 200-4R's) & 700-R4's (Latter to become 4L60's & 4L60E's) were also made with this pattern to allow use of those engines in RWD apps (Camaros, Firebirds & S-trucks). The olny headache you'll face is that the Fiero auto trans' (If that's the way you're going) during the car's production was non-electronic in control (Re: Mechanical shift, TCC & line pressure control internally, with throttle-valve cable hook-up to throttle lever). The OBD-II might look for those extra inputs & outputs and wonder where they are and set a fault code if you don't use a coresponding production trans for the engine or turn off those functions with a HPTuner. Otherwise, it's just a matter of matching the clutch pieces up so they connect.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the Iron Duke uses the small bolt pattern found on most V6 and OHV 4 cylinders, NOT the same pattern as the DOHC engines. This would mean a tranny swap out.

Someone brought a fiero to the bash with an ecotec in it. its possible

The Quad4 is DOHC, and it uses the same pattern. Same story with the LN2. If it's found in FWD apps, it uses the metric pattern. The General isn't one to change something that works just for one engine family like Mopar did (Don't get me started...).

Go beyond the "bolt-on".

The Quad 4 does NOT use the same pattern as the LN2. Although GM was good enough to use the same pattern on most V6's and I4 OHV engines, the DOHC's got a separate pattern. That's what I'm talking about. I am not terribly familiar with the Iron Duke, but I'm pretty sure it has the same pattern as the LN2, so to put in an Eco would require a different tranny.

Well, only one way to find out...

Go beyond the "bolt-on".

thanky for the sugestions guys

Nickelin Dimer wrote:The Quad4 is DOHC, and it uses the same pattern. Same story with the LN2. If it's found in FWD apps, it uses the metric pattern. The General isn't one to change something that works just for one engine family like Mopar did (Don't get me started...).

The LN2 uses the Isuzu tranny whereas the 2.4 is a Getrag (like the V6 fiero).

_________________________

Quiklilcav wrote:The Quad 4 does NOT use the same pattern as the LN2. Although GM was good enough to use the same pattern on most V6's and I4 OHV engines, the DOHC's got a separate pattern. That's what I'm talking about. I am not terribly familiar with the Iron Duke, but I'm pretty sure it has the same pattern as the LN2, so to put in an Eco would require a different tranny.

Thanks. Another question though, what transmission does the new 3.6l use? I would love to swap one of those into a Fiero.

_________________________

Rob Durrett wrote:

Nickelin Dimer wrote:The Quad4 is DOHC, and it uses the same pattern. Same story with the LN2. If it's found in FWD apps, it uses the metric pattern. The General isn't one to change something that works just for one engine family like Mopar did (Don't get me started...).

The LN2 uses the Isuzu tranny whereas the 2.4 is a Getrag (like the V6 fiero).

96-99 5 speed LD9's use Isuzu transmissions. The type of transmission is meaningless. The bolt pattern on the transmission as well as the mounting points decide whether it will be a relatively easy swap or not. I too don't know if the Iron Duke has the same bolt pattern as the LN2/V6 engines but

Nickelin Dimer wrote:The Quad4 is DOHC, and it uses the same pattern. Same story with the LN2. If it's found in FWD apps, it uses the metric pattern. The General isn't one to change something that works just for one engine family like Mopar did (Don't get me started...).

LN2, Quad4/TC, ECOTEC, L-series (saturn motor) are all GM I-4 platforms that use different bolt patterns.


-

"Youth in Asia"...I don't see anything wrong with that.

Rob Durrett wrote:

Nickelin Dimer wrote:The Quad4 is DOHC, and it uses the same pattern. Same story with the LN2. If it's found in FWD apps, it uses the metric pattern. The General isn't one to change something that works just for one engine family like Mopar did (Don't get me started...).

The LN2 uses the Isuzu tranny whereas the 2.4 is a Getrag (like the V6 fiero).

Wrong. The 95-99's use the Isuzu, regardless of engine. The difference is that the 2.2 and 2.4 versions have different bellhousings. The 00+ use the Getrag, and the same rule applies with the different version for the 2.2 OHV and the 2.4.

LN2 was around in block design since the '82 model year, and all GM factory transverse mounting apps engines use the same bellhousing mount face with few exceptions (Northstar, Aurora). The LN2 isn't one of the exceptions. I recall seeing articles in Hot Rod & Street Rodder that pertaine to the Quad4 that said it does use the same bellhousing mount face design as other common factory transverse mounting application engines, but I'll need time to search for it as it's been a while since I've seen it. Think I'll check the Mitchell manual while I'm at it. Oh, and Rob... the 3.6L V-6 found in the new CTS uses on of the new 6L--E series transmissions, but I don't know what bellhousing design it uses. Like I said: Only one way to find out...

Go beyond the "bolt-on".

There are a multitude of people that have done Quad 4/TC swaps from LN2's in the past with Whitecavy probably being one of the last to do it. They DON'T have the same bellhousing bolt pattern.


-

"Youth in Asia"...I don't see anything wrong with that.

Nickelin Dimer wrote:LN2 was around in block design since the '82 model year, and all GM factory transverse mounting apps engines use the same bellhousing mount face with few exceptions (Northstar, Aurora). The LN2 isn't one of the exceptions. I recall seeing articles in Hot Rod & Street Rodder that pertaine to the Quad4 that said it does use the same bellhousing mount face design as other common factory transverse mounting application engines, but I'll need time to search for it as it's been a while since I've seen it. Think I'll check the Mitchell manual while I'm at it. Oh, and Rob... the 3.6L V-6 found in the new CTS uses on of the new 6L--E series transmissions, but I don't know what bellhousing design it uses. Like I said: Only one way to find out...

Thanks. Well, if I ever get the money to, I'm doing it and then supercharging it!

_________________________

Nickelin Dimer wrote:LN2 was around in block design since the '82 model year, and all GM factory transverse mounting apps engines use the same bellhousing mount face with few exceptions (Northstar, Aurora). The LN2 isn't one of the exceptions. I recall seeing articles in Hot Rod & Street Rodder that pertaine to the Quad4 that said it does use the same bellhousing mount face design as other common factory transverse mounting application engines, but I'll need time to search for it as it's been a while since I've seen it...

Man, you need to do a little more research here. You've got the first half right. The LN2 DOES use the more common bolt pattern. It's the DOHC engines that are different, and the Northstar engine in the FWD apps use the same bolt pattern as the LN2. The difference is that the flywheel bolt pattern uses 8 bolts instead of 6, and some trannies need a very slight modification to clear the starter, since it's at the top. The bellhousing bolt pattern is the same, though.

Ecotec engines need an 'ecotec transmission'
In simple terms they are in there own little world.
If using the ecotec tranny isnt needed, you can use a spacer and adapter plate as I did.
I used the MT2 transmission which is similar to the MK7 used with LN2s, but the gearing is sweet for the ecotec or any high revving DOHC.

The 2.5L Iron Duke, 3.8s, SBC, 3400,LN2s ,etc.all share the same bolt pattern.


Ecotec into a fiero is straight forward, and is the only GM mid-engine that is cost-efficient to swap it in, most likely not a mid engine cavailer.


Heres a pic the day after i got it into the car.




now The L61 Powered Fiero
PURE DICE, PURE Design.Innovation.Creation.Excellence.

Not bad. Say, where are you locating the PCM? And how is the ALDL going in this swap, too?

Go beyond the "bolt-on".

PURE DICE (ecotecfiero) wrote:...The 2.5L Iron Duke, 3.8s, SBC, 3400,LN2s ,etc.all share the same bolt pattern.

WOW. Seriously a lot of misinformation coming out in this thread!

SBC does NOT use the metric bolt pattern. Neither does the 4.3 V6, or the BBC's. They use the large standard GM bolt pattern.

Most other V6's, as well as most OHV I4's, and the Northstar V8, use the metric bolt pattern.

The DOHC engines use an entirely different pattern.

Nickelin Dimer wrote:Not bad. Say, where are you locating the PCM? And how is the ALDL going in this swap, too?

I megasquirted and got rid of all that extra crap, no emissions, no BCM or PCM. That pic is way old its much different now anyways.

Quiklilcav is correct the SBC does not use the same pattern, adapter plates are required for swap my bad



now The L61 Powered Fiero
PURE DICE, PURE Design.Innovation.Creation.Excellence.

Standard, Quik? I believe you mean Chevy in as Buick, Oldsmobile & Pontiac after '67 ('66?) used the same pattern amongst themselves upon their in-house divisional engines that was nothing like what Chevy used. Caddilac also made use of the B-O-P pattern on it's engines during their production. Don't ask me about AMC who also used THM trans', as I don't remember what they look like. I do know that the 200-4R has a special bellhousing all it's own, a universal design that matches both Chevy & BOP patterns but not Metric. Just throwing this out there for clarity...

Go beyond the "bolt-on".

I agree about it being much easier to start with a Fiero (I would like to see a turbo Quad...), but just for argument's sake, there was a mid-engine Acura Integra in Super Street's USCChallenge that used the drivetrain from a Prelude (H22+5-speed)...
I'd rather just do the Fiero myself, but a mid-engine cav would certainly be unique. It'll take a sh*tload of fab work though...