well ok each to their own i suppose.... :roll: i unrest my case....
i just dont know why u would actually want an astron in a performance car, i mean any revs over 5 grand (and thats being generous) and they feel like they`re gonna explode. a big block chev revs better than an astron! my stock unbalanced 4g63 8 valve loves 7000 rpm and has done for 60000km and counting.. the 4G54 is one of the most coarse lethargic rattly whiny dunger 4 cylinder engines ever made, right up there with the holden starfire four. maybe if u like big cubes and bottom end torque u should be driving a V8, hell there aint no substitute for cubic inches, right????
of course capacity is a CHEAP way to increase horsepower and torque but with current technology u can make mega bottom end torque and responsiveness out of smaller and smaller engines.... my brothers EVO3 is a good example of that. hi flowed TD05H makes awesome bottom end on the 2lt.
in fact if u really had your heart set on running a 2.6+ litre turbo engine, i`d still suggest ripping out the magna motor and installing either an ISUZU 4ZE1 2.6 8 valve or the slightly larger toyota 3RZ-FE 16 valve dohc engine, these are both good engines that respond REALLY well to the usual mods.. look at james palomara`s rodeo ute (over 500hp at the wheels at horsepower heroes - 4ZE1) and the u.s. celica pro rwd drag cars(3RZ-FE with 1500hp).. both still use stock block and crank aswell.
in the uk the widebody was available firstly as a 2lt then in 2.6 form. the 2lt narrowbody is MUCH more highly sought after in the uk as they go better and handle better. just ask steve!!!!!! they changed to the 2.6 lt as the smaller engine was, as i said, strangled by the emission controls. not to say that the 2.6 wasn`t strangled aswell, but obviously with the bigger capacity it made LESS of a difference. they even promoted the 2.6 as being a more environmentally friendly alternative, have u seen the `ITS GREEN` ads they put out? obviously the same deal in america, tho they had the 2.6 waaaaaaaayyyyy earlier in the narrowbodies as their california etc emission laws were and still are the toughest in the world.
and what the hell`s this about front mount intercoolers stuffing up the weight distribution? are you serious?! what size intercooler are u using? out of a mack truck? the point i was making about the 2.6`s weight issues is more to do with the length and height of the things compared to the compact 4G63, look at both from the side mounted over the front axle and you`ll see what i mean. higher centre of gravity, more forward centre of gravity for the 2.6.. more of the engine hangs over the axle centre line.
but all in all if you`ve made up your mind and have already put work into a 4G54 and dont mind settling for second best then all i can do is wish you well and good luck!
