Saturn Sky Forum banner

Buick 215ci V8 into RedLine

4K views 24 replies 11 participants last post by  tchr49 
#1 ·
Has anyone converted their RedLine to accept a Buick/Olds aluminum 215ci? Any issues with the engine mounts and mating the gearbox or auto transmission? Considering the low weight and torque/power potential of the 215ci one would think it would be a preferable V8 conversion. Thoughts anyone? Thx.
 
#5 ·
A stock engine won't get you to anywhere near 160.

Converts with the rear wing, about 143 mph (according to a GM engineer) and the coupe 147-148. This will vary with altitude, temperature etc.

NA = 122/123 mph.

The 215 swap into a Kappa is a foolish suggestion. And I'm not saying that to be offensive - it is descriptive. It has far less power than even an NA engine and is a 1960 design far inferior to the original engines. It makes no sense at all any way you look at it.
 
#7 ·
Of course - you added around 40+ bhp with that tune and that will be reflected in terminal velocity. Stick an LS7 in and it will go up even more. The figures I quoted were for stock NA and GXP, from a GM engineer based on GMs own testing.
 
#8 ·
To all my fellow Sky Dudes, thanks for the feedback. It’s not necessarily bhp I’m looking at but ft/lbs. Don’t underrate the lightness, and tuning and upgrade capabilities of the 215cc V8 which eventually became the Rover/Range Rover V8 etc, looking at 375 ft/lbs in stock form v Sky RL’s 260 ft/lbs in stock form. Not mention 518 bhp in forced air form. I once placed a 215ci into an MGB. Nothing could touch it. Still, my inquiry was had anyone done it to a Sky. From the answers I conclude ~ no.
Thx lads.
 
#9 · (Edited)
The 215 put out 150 bhp and 220 Tq when released. Those are gross figures. They equate to 110 bhp (net) and 170 Tq net.

Are you saying that those figures compare well to the stock GXP outputs of 260 bhp/260 Tq? Or are you using '215' incorrectly to refer to the later larger displacement Rover versions?

And in regard to the MGB with a 215 in it, I run an MG with a 3.4 fuel injected GM V6 and it runs very nicely against a hopped up 215 powered one. They are about equal. I have about 200 bhp in my car. As far as nothing else being able to touch the MGB, try a small block Chev or Ford engines MGB - they regularly leave the Rover engined versions in the dust.

PS - my Solstice runs 375 bhp/375 Tq and gets 30 mpg. It is a very mild tune. You can easily get between 400 and 500 bhp out of the LNF should you want to. Without sticking some dinosaur engine in it.
 
#14 ·
The 215 put out 150 bhp and 220 Tq when released. Those are gross figures. They equate to 110 bhp (net) and 170 Tq net.

Are you saying that those figures compare well to the stock GXP outputs of 260 bhp/260 Tq? Or are you using '215' incorrectly to refer to the later larger displacement Rover versions?

And in regard to the MGB with a 215 in it, I run an MG with a 3.4 fuel injected GM V6 and it runs very nicely against a hopped up 215 powered one. They are about equal. I have about 200 bhp in my car. As far as nothing else being able to touch the MGB, try a small block Chev or Ford engines MGB - they regularly leave the Rover engined versions in the dust.

PS - my Solstice runs 375 bhp/375 Tq and gets 30 mpg. It is a very mild tune. You can easily get between 400 and 500 bhp out of the LNF should you want to. Without sticking some dinosaur engine in it.
Gee wsphon...you took the fun right out of it. Guess I'm gonna stick with this little 4 banger that I think should be close to your output now. Though I'd like another 500whp vehicle, this little short chassis setup at this power level is plenty fun and as you mentioned, knocks down decent mpg as wel.
 
#11 ·
Instead of going V8, go with the 2JZ Supra motor...If I were thinking about building a V8 in these cars, I would seriously look at the 2JZ before even thinking of doing anything else.
 
#12 ·
The Sky/Supra 2JZ Supra has been done. Just look it up in YouTube. Looks bad ass. The Olds 215 is a solid option for smaller cars. Used to be a popular choice, could still be. With the MG it would certainly solve one problem ... all the leaking fluid that the Brits forgot would drip out of the engine (I owned a TR-7, fun car but you got good at analyzing puddles on the ground). If you make the conversion come post a picture of it.
 
#19 ·
Actually the aftermarket IC won't get you any more power, but it will allow the engine to produce whatever power it has longer before experiencing heat soak and reduction of power.

The difference is something you'd probably never notice in normal driving - you have to be doing solo competition or similar to pump out enough heat to overwhelm the stock IC.

I high flow CAT or converterless downpipe does give a decent bump if the tune is suitable.
 
#20 ·
To heat soak the intercooler I think you would also have to be doing something that demanded high power and alternated with no forward motion (like solo, drag racing, or stop-light racing). Any road driving / racing will include enough periods of lower power demand at a high enough speed to force enough air through the intercooler to prevent heat soaking.
 
#21 ·
I disagree that a larger intercooler will not give you higher horsepower. It definitely will under the right circumstances. Less flow restriction and reduced engine input temperatures will definitely be beneficial. Turbochargers heat the air even at moderate power levels.
 
#24 ·
I can tell you, if you get a HFC, CAI and an AM IC, you can get an extra 20-40hp out of a dyno tune. My car was over 350bhp when he had to back it down due to knock from heat soak. He said he didn't want to risk me tracking my car and blowing it up. But he told that with the HFC and IC I would have had no issue with being well over 350bhp. I'm at about 325bhp without any of that.

For the record, the LTG engine will see over 400bhp with those mods and a dyno tune. He had an ATS at the shop pushing over 400hp with those mods. But, the motor that ZZP tuners really love is the 3.5L eccoboost from Ford. Every one of their employees was driving a vehicle powered by the 3.5L. He said they make well over 600hp easily with nothing more then a tune.
 
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