Help with a 91 Eclipse

[DaICeMAn]

I have a few questions. I just bought a 91 eclipse for 200$ the tranny houseing has been cracked and twisted it looks like mabey a mount is bad well i just got a tranny from a u-pull-it junk yard i hope it fits lol i know 91 made 2 diff trannys 1 with a 22 tooth and one with a 23 tooth spline but my question is this its had a upper engine rebuild and on the valve cover it says 1.8 that someone wrote but the sticker on the hood says 2.0 well i pulled a 1.8 tranny do these engines have the same block?? and can i do a head swap to make it a dohc?? this is my frist post so plz some one help ty

[DaICeMAn]

Is there a visual way to tell witch engine it is in there the 2.0 or 1.8 ?? i hope they didnt do a swap lol also ima new to dsm but whats the deal with the 1.8 and 2.0 are they the same block with diff heads or something to that effect ?? and if mine does have the 1.8 should i just junk it lol is it realy worth trying to get power out of this is my first import im messing with so and comments will help thanx

[Talon007]

Yeah the 1.8 is garbage. The 2.0 says DOHC on the valve cover with the spark plug wires running down the middle of the valave cover. The 1.8 has the spark plug wires near the back of the V/C. I'm sure they are different blocks, and I'm almost 100% the 2.0 head doesn't bolt on.

[DaICeMAn]

Yes it seems it does have the POS 1.8, but i alreay bought it and i payed 200$ for it and 35$ for the tranny witch aint to bad. Ill prolly just sell it for 1000$ real quick to someone who need a good running car. Ohh it also have a rebuilt head so that might make it sell quicker but thanx for the help. Ill still be around posting because i might pull a 2.0 at the junk yard for 125$ and 50$ core charge cheap and do a engine swap. The car is in real good shape might be worth it to swap motors. What do ya think?

[fast1.8sohcdsm]

Originally Posted by Talon007

Yeah the 1.8 is garbage. The 2.0 says DOHC on the valve cover with the spark plug wires running down the middle of the valave cover. The 1.8 has the spark plug wires near the back of the V/C. I'm sure they are different blocks, and I'm almost 100% the 2.0 head doesn't bolt on.

I don't think the 1.8L is garbage, it was a cheap alternative for someone to have a nice car, but a good economy car at the same time. As for the power, yes 92 horsepower is quite low. But the engine was cutt back hard core from potential. If anyone can remember back the 4G32/G32B were turbocharged SOHC 8 valve engines. These were before the 4G63, and shown an okay potential. The 1.8L is the same engine with 9:1 pistons, a lower rating oil pump, higher flowing cylinder head, and higher displacement then the G32B/4G32. The stroke, crank, rods, and everything else is exactly the same. This engine was turbo at one time, just a better engine was produced with greater results. If it were never to come, who knows if the 4G32 would have been the powerhouse for the 1G Eclipse.

[RockinWRX]

Originally Posted by Talon007

Yeah the 1.8 is garbage. The 2.0 says DOHC on the valve cover with the spark plug wires running down the middle of the valave cover. The 1.8 has the spark plug wires near the back of the V/C. I'm sure they are different blocks, and I'm almost 100% the 2.0 head doesn't bolt on.

Actually , I've read of a few DOHC head swaps on the 1.8's. Dunno actually if it was BS or not. Also , supposedly , the 4G63 crank can be added to stroke it to a 2.0. I don't really know enough about the 1.8 to know if thats possible or not , though.

[fast1.8sohcdsm]

Originally Posted by RockinWRX

Actually , I've read of a few DOHC head swaps on the 1.8's. Dunno actually if it was BS or not. Also , supposedly , the 4G63 crank can be added to stroke it to a 2.0. I don't really know enough about the 1.8 to know if thats possible or not , though.

No, the 1.8L has different sleeves then the 2.0, and it is skinnier. It won't work. End of discussion.

[kjewer1]

Originally Posted by fast1.8sohcdsm

It won't work. End of discussion.

Well thanks for gracing us with your infinite knowledge. This attitude really annoys me. Especially when one calls a smaller bore dimension a "skinnier sleeve." Maybe I'm just on the rag today, who knows...

[fast1.8sohcdsm]

Originally Posted by 95 GSXracer

Well thanks for gracing us with your infinite knowledge. This attitude really annoys me. Especially when one calls a smaller bore dimension a "skinnier sleeve." Maybe I'm just on the rag today, who knows...

I think you have had alittle too much caffine. But if it makes you feel any better, I can blame it on your stupidity with 1.8's. You probably thought the heads would work And I wasn't talking about the sleeves being skinnier, I am talking about the WHOLE block being skinnier. For those who get confused, I guess I need to explain in more detail.

[kjewer1]

Originally Posted by fast1.8sohcdsm

I think you have had alittle too much caffine. But if it makes you feel any better, I can blame it on your stupidity with 1.8's. You probably thought the heads would work And I wasn't talking about the sleeves being skinnier, I am talking about the WHOLE block being skinnier. For those who get confused, I guess I need to explain in more detail.

Dont confuse my potential "stupidy" with 1.8s with your stupidity for owning one, or the excercise in futility that is trying to mod one But back to the matter at hand, I believe RockinWRX was thinking of poeple using the 4g63 head/4g64 block hybrid perhaps. I've never heard anyone doing the 4g63 head on the 1.8, but then again, who would waste the time. I still think you mean to mention the bore dimension is smaller, not the sleeves are skinnier. But if you dnt know what you are trying to say, how should I be able to figure it out

[fast1.8sohcdsm]

Infact, since you have said that statement, from this day forward I will continue to build this engine to run faster times then yours

[Talon007]

Holy fuck dude, 95GSXracer hasn't even posted anything about the 1.8. He corrected you, when you used the term skinnier, is that technical term I havent heard of? If you meant to say the whole block was skinnier you should have sad more narrow, or even said the head bolts in the block won't match the 2.0L head. And yes I get confused when you use a vague description like that. Mabey your the one who needs an attitude adjustment, just because you have "one of the first" 1.8 Turbos out there doesnt mean your king shit.

[fast1.8sohcdsm]

I believe Narrow and Skinny are the same definition. If I were to say more Narrow, I would infact would have thought of the sleeves. 95 GSX doesn't know shit about a 1.8L, and should stay off posts when concerned about a 1.8 4G37. Let the ones who actually built the engine to help others. As for you, my 1.8L Garbage may be the next worry against you on the track.

[Talon007]

So skinny sleeves is the new technical term for the bore diameter of a 1.8 4G37?

Not once did 95GSXracer say anything technical about the 1.8, both RockinWRX and I said something.

Sure your car maybe fast, I'm up for a challenge, but I bet I spent way less money than you did achieving the same goals

[fast1.8sohcdsm]

Originally Posted by Talon007

So skinny sleeves is the new technical term for the bore diameter of a 1.8 4G37?

Not once did 95GSXracer say anything technical about the 1.8, both RockinWRX and I said something.

Sure your car maybe fast, I'm up for a challenge, but I bet I spent way less money than you did achieving the same goals

We are totally getting off topic on this post, but I will reply with this last statement.

My goals are totally off your goals. My goal started when I changed the engine from a Natural Aspirated engine to a Turbocharged engine. THe day I have this engine run low 11's will be a miracle. ANd the day I do that, you can gaurantee that even though I have spent more money they will look at my setup more superior then yours.