"jester74" (jester74)
08/14/2015 at 23:30 • Filed to: None
3
4|
"jester74" (jester74)
08/14/2015 at 23:30 • Filed to: None | 3
| 4 |
This is calling out to me.
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
CAR_IS_MI
> jester74
08/14/2015 at 23:44 |
|
That engine looks wrong. 79 had a lot of changes for emissions, primarily the air intake was a bit different with many additional attachments, as well as the exhaust header having a crude type of EGR thing that’s way way too complicated for what it doesn’t do. Maybe the parts were changed out, but I would be cautious as if its an older motor swapped in (still a twin cam 2000, but earlier design) you may not be able to pass inspection and, depending on the build, may be underpowered (although, the 79 was the 3rd lowest HP output of the 2000 twin cam’s thanks to the bad emissions crap).
Source: I own a 79 124 spider.
|
jester74
> CAR_IS_MI
08/15/2015 at 00:00 |
|
That's interesting. If I decide to pursue it, I'll ask that question. Thanks for the headsup.
Mr. Ontop, No Strokes, No Smokes...Goes Fast.
> jester74
08/15/2015 at 01:44 |
|
if you are comfortable working on your own engine...because you will be. A Lot. My bother had one and I promise you, it spent far more time in his yeard than it did on the road.
RallyDarkstrike - Fan of 2-cyl FIATs, Eastern Bloc & Kei cars
> jester74
08/15/2015 at 04:31 |
|
I stand behind this idea! :D