TeamSwift

Home of the Suzuki mini-compacts ! Your Home for all things Suzuki Swift, Geo Metro, Holden Barina, Chevy Sprint, Pontiac Firefly, and Suzuki Cultus. TeamSwift is a technical performance oriented community!
It is currently Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:17 am

Underbody braces, turbos and more!

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 1:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 3:38 pm
Posts: 33
Location: michigan
Hey guys, just wanted to ask about the g10t, since I've been reading that there are some difference on the later model firefly turbo having hydraulic lifters and the rest of the turbo lineup has mechanical. Which is the preferred engine in you guys' opinion? I am assuming that the hydraulic version of these motors are even more difficult to find than the mechanical version, so I guess I am just trying to see what is the ideal setup, and then trying to be realistic about what is actually practical to find. Thanks!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 1:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 10:28 pm
Posts: 1170
Location: So Cal, USA
Hydraulic is more common as they are in 2nd & 3rd gen vehicles.

The MK1 vehicles are mechanical, the head is a different configuration
with Hemi configuration and is a better flowing head than the
hydraulic valve setup.

(Edit): See Superfly clarification below.
(I was not specifically referring to G10T, just G10
..should have been more specific)


Last edited by JamalSpelling on Sun May 19, 2013 2:21 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 1:59 pm 
Offline
a.k.a Bum head
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 5:29 pm
Posts: 3157
Location: London, ON
Keep in mind that finding the turbo electrical and other bits for the Mk2 engines is tough since they were only sold in the Great White North.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 2:15 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2003 4:16 am
Posts: 8033
Location: Ontario, Canada
There are no turbo 3's with mechanical lifters. The first gen did not use lifters, but had a rocker arm setup with mechanical lash adjustment. The first gen is the better motor. The hydraulic ones were Canada only, so almost impossible to find in the US.

_________________
Contact 3tech: g10pro@rocketmail.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 2:33 pm 
Offline
@ssclown

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:58 am
Posts: 756
Location: not here
I'm not an engineer but it seems to me a no brainer that a solid lifter is better than a hydraulic lifter because its lighter, therefore lower reciprocating valvetrain mass, and simpler, therefor less to go wrong, and because its one piece of solid steel it probably does a better job of lifting the rocker arm than an oil filled multi part hydraulic lifter. The only advantage I know of for hydraulic lifters is they are maintenance free, unless one collapses, something which cant happen to a solid tappet.

I seem to remember that the 340 cubic inch six pack Dodge motor, built for performance, used solid lifters.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 6:44 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2003 4:16 am
Posts: 8033
Location: Ontario, Canada
The Toyota Echo comes with solid lifters, the Swift GTi, with hydraulics. Therefore, I would conclude that hydraulic lifters are better for high performance :lol:

_________________
Contact 3tech: g10pro@rocketmail.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2013 12:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 3:38 pm
Posts: 33
Location: michigan
While they would be nice for ease of maintenance and might be better on the margins as far as better performance, I just don't think that the rarity of parts or the difficulty of working on one of those would be worth it. Sometimes I think Suzuki has ofrgotten the ole' US of A when it comes to cars :(


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2013 2:17 am 
Offline
@ssclown

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:58 am
Posts: 756
Location: not here
suprf1y wrote:
The Toyota Echo comes with solid lifters, the Swift GTi, with hydraulics. Therefore, I would conclude that hydraulic lifters are better for high performance :lol:



The AAR 'cuda with a 340 six pack comes with solid lifters and the Edsel Corsair comes with hydraulic lifters.
Therefore, I would conclude that solid lifters are better for high performance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2013 3:08 am 
Offline
Teamswift Racer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 5:56 am
Posts: 2328
Location: Christchurch NZ, quake capital
wyattae2002 wrote:
While they would be nice for ease of maintenance and might be better on the margins as far as better performance, I just don't think that the rarity of parts or the difficulty of working on one of those would be worth it. Sometimes I think Suzuki has ofrgotten the ole' US of A when it comes to cars :(

Do you blame them? the average american is not interested in driving a small car and thats pretty much what they build, the cost of having a dealer and parts network would be huge in a country the size of the States and if you don't have a range of large SUV's to carry the rest of the model range it's hard to do business.
I see they have sold well over 3 million new suzuki swifts since the new model came out in 2005.
http://3d-car-shows.com/2013/suzuki-swi ... worldwide/


As for solid lifters, I have spent plenty of time researching this, I beleive there will be a small gain at high rpm but I don't think the gain will be worth the effort.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2013 6:20 am 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2003 4:16 am
Posts: 8033
Location: Ontario, Canada
There is no gain in power. The only benefit, from a performance perspective, is the ability to rev higher without the lifters "pumping up", or over compensating for the lash, and actually keeping the valves open when they're supposed to be seated. Something that doesn't happen in our application. 50 years ago, that was a problem on large pushrod V8's with tiny little hydraulic lifters, although knowing how to set them practically eliminates the problem. In the 80's, I was using hydraulics to 7000 RPM in small block chev motors with no problem.

_________________
Contact 3tech: g10pro@rocketmail.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2013 6:50 am 
Offline
@ssclown

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:58 am
Posts: 756
Location: not here
coasterII wrote:
suprf1y wrote:
The Toyota Echo comes with solid lifters, the Swift GTi, with hydraulics. Therefore, I would conclude that hydraulic lifters are better for high performance :lol:



The AAR 'cuda with a 340 six pack comes with solid lifters and the Edsel Corsair comes with hydraulic lifters.
Therefore, I would conclude that solid lifters are better for high performance.



I checked it and it isn't the 340 six pack that comes with solid lifters its the General Motors ZL1 that came in some 1969 Camaros and Corvettes. It had solid lifters so it could rev higher, up tp 8,000 rpm, than hydraulic lifters.

I owned a '68 Barracuda 340S and a Z28 and I remember the Haynes or Chilton for one of them showed valve gap specs for some years with solid lifters, but I was mistaken in thinking it was the Barracuda, it was the Z28.

But anyway, the solid lifters rev higher, which in my opinion is better, and which is why I own ten or eleven '85 to '88 MK1 Fireflies, Forsas and Sprints which do not have hydraulic lifters and I only own three of the '89 and up Swifts, Fireflies and Geos which do have hydraulic lifters.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group