Iron duke question

[Hawk258]

I was kicking around on Wikipedia and found an interesting piece of info, It seems the iron duke lived on into the s-10 up to 2003, I am curious as to whether or not the 2200 block is interchangeable with the iron dukes in the eagles. as the I4 2200 in 1994 has a MPFI and horsepower was increased to 120. That seems like a heck of a horsepower increase for the 4 cylinder eagles while still maintaining fuel economy, has anyone tried?

This is of interest as I am currently trying to find as much as I can that would allow the eagle drive trains to be updated in all their forms.

 Only thing I have left is to see about finding a way to re-manufacture the body and the sheet metal if that happens In theory we could keep the eagle alive in full dress for years to come. Especially since BMW is now going full bore with carbon fiber unibody construction, that would be something to look further into as well.

[rollguy]

If I remember correctly, the later Iron Duke used the GM metric bell pattern. The Eagle (as well as other early 'Duke's) has the "Chevy" bell bolt pattern.   The head and fuel injection parts may be interchangeable, but I am not sure.  The Pontiac Fiero used the Iron Duke, and I remember seeing some dialog here about using HP parts from the Fiero on the Eagle.

[carnuck]

I still haven't found out 100% about the Duke in Eagles, but supposedly all '80 up are the same 60 degree GM pattern (as used by 2.8 V6 in Chevs and XJs and the AMC 4 cyl used '83 up)
Front wheel drive has different block mounts and waterpumps plus they are 2.5L. The 2.2 wasn't used in Eagles and the earlier Gremlin engine was Audi based. (it went on to get fuel injection and more power in Porsche 924)

[Hawk258]

Thanks rollguy, I am asking as the 2200 was the used in the S-10 Trucks 1994 thru 2003. and considering that there is a fair share of engines that use the Iron dukes construction I am just curious if anyone has attempted a HP build or swap with any of these engines. Cause like I said, IF they can be used to replace the 2.5 iron duke in the Eagles (Possibly) need the transmission. (And a Transfer case swap)as this would give people some options to prolong the Eagles life.

I have a side update for those interested I found an outfit that builds Iron Dukes in race flavors we are talking some pretty decent horse power here folks. They have 2 versions the 2.7L 272 hp (203 kW) version and a 3.2L 330 hp (250 kW) version both produce by Kansas Racing Products and still makes the engines after buying the rights to make them from GM.

Cosworth also produced a 16-valve head (Cosworth Project DBA, 1987) for the Iron Duke.

www.kansasracingproducts.com

[rollguy]

Thanks rollguy, I am asking as the 2200 was the used in the S-10 Trucks 1994 thru 2003. and considering that there is a fair share of engines that use the Iron dukes construction I am just curious if anyone has attempted a HP build or swap with any of these engines. Cause like I said, IF they can be used to replace the 2.5 iron duke in the Eagles (Possibly) need the transmission. (And a Transfer case swap)as this would give people some options to prolong the Eagles life.

One would need the entire package (engine, trans, transfer case) from a donor 4X4 S10.  That would probably make a decent swap to prolong the life of an old, tired (and underpowered) Iron Duke in an Eagle.  Not to mention the added bonus of fuel injection.

[carnuck]

Added pain of a newer than '95 EFI system you mean? I would use an S10 700R4 off a 2.8 on the Duke or AX-6 (S10 T5 was weak)

[maddog]

I would use an S10 700R4 off a 2.8 on the Duke or AX-6 (S10 T5 was weak)

my dad had an 83 and an 84 s10 and both had the five speed they were good transmissions for both towing and offroading but that's my opinion.

[Sunny]

I would use an S10 700R4 off a 2.8 on the Duke or AX-6 (S10 T5 was weak)

my dad had an 83 and an 84 s10 and both had the five speed they were good transmissions for both towing and offroading but that's my opinion.

The T-5 should be fine behind an Iron Duke, but anything with a bit of power will make shrapnel out of a T5.

[Hawk258]

Speaking of the Borg warner t-5 is there anyway to get the guts of a World class T-5 to work in the housings of the eagles T-5 or is there too much of a difference?

[captspillane]

The Eagle T5 is identical to the Jeep CJ7 T5. There is a guy in PA that sells professionally rebuilt T5s for about 600. He used to offer a world class version for about 1000. Its not a simple conversion, since there are two or three things that need to be machined or otherwise modified. Its also not a complete conversion, because there is something that cannot be carried over to the Jeep housing. If you put the time into searching its been done.

Thing is, the T5 is considered weak because the housing is very thin. It flexes under load more than other transmissions. That flex puts alot of undue wear on components. A world class T5 might have a few beefier parts but its still a weak transmission. Race guys prefer light weight over longevity, but we want it to be robust. In our Eagles you have alot of better options. A NV3550 or AX15 is cheaper, stronger, and easier to find.

[captspillane]

I still haven't found out 100% about the Duke in Eagles, but supposedly all '80 up are the same 60 degree GM pattern (as used by 2.8 V6 in Chevs and XJs and the AMC 4 cyl used '83 up)
Front wheel drive has different block mounts and waterpumps plus they are 2.5L. The 2.2 wasn't used in Eagles and the earlier Gremlin engine was Audi based. (it went on to get fuel injection and more power in Porsche 924)

This isn't correct. The 60 degree pattern from Chevy V6s was used with the AMC 4 Cyl. AMC made the switch in late '83 to this engine. Its totally different than the Iron Duke. The Iron Duke has a small block Chevy bolt pattern.

[carnuck]

Early Dukes had the SBC pattern till '80. After that they went to 60 degree (this is from Chev forums. They matched up with the 2.8V6 and used the same trans)

[Hawk258]

Well, It seems if I were a voting man, the 4 cylinder has many more options for upgrades that could be performed. Though that is just an educated theory. Though it brings up many new ideas to mind on how to keep these beast on the road longer without too many sacrifices. (IMO)

[BenM]

Early Dukes had the SBC pattern till '80. After that they went to 60 degree (this is from Chev forums. They matched up with the 2.8V6 and used the same trans)

As near as I can tell, GM sold the remainder of the pre-80 castings to AMC. I may be suspicious of 84 model year Iron Dukes near the switch to the AMC 150, but 80-83 are going to be the old-style SBC pattern.

[captspillane]

Early Dukes had the SBC pattern till '80. After that they went to 60 degree (this is from Chev forums. They matched up with the 2.8V6 and used the same trans)

As near as I can tell, GM sold the remainder of the pre-80 castings to AMC. I may be suspicious of 84 model year Iron Dukes near the switch to the AMC 150, but 80-83 are going to be the old-style SBC pattern.

As I understand it, GM sold the tooling along with the rights to AMC for them to make their own engines. All AMC Iron Dukes are definately a SBC pattern. When cruising through Chevy forums it would be interesting to see if anyone has upgraded a pre-80 SBC block like ours to use fuel injection from the later 60 degree blocks.

To be clear, I have personally seen a 1983 SX4 with an AMC four cylinder. The switch happened in late '83 model year.

Apparently someone with a 60 degree bellhousing for an AMC four cylinder could put in a post-80 Iron Duke from a Chevy. Those bellhousings are commonly discarded from Jeep conversions. It would be possible then to have all stock eagle parts except the engine for those considering updating their Iron Dukes to fuel injection. The later iron dukes actually had more horsepower than a stock 258, so it might be worthwhile.