The 2.2l 4 Cylinder Engine, commonly found in vehicles like the Chevrolet S10, often becomes a focal point for engine swaps and modifications. One key area of interest is bellhousing compatibility and potential issues with the throwout bearing. This article delves into these topics, referencing observations and experiences related to the S10 and similar engines.
One discussion point revolves around the interchangeability of bellhousings between the S10’s 2.2L 4 cylinder and V6 engines, specifically when adapting them to other vehicles like the MGB. Since the slave cylinder locations on the S10’s I4 and V6 bellhousings appear identical, it raises the question of whether both bellhousings could be compatible with the MGB (or not). Foot box interference is also a known concern in vehicles like the Alpine, further adding to the complexity of such swaps.
Another crucial aspect involves the throwout bearing and its supporting components. A notable difference exists in the length of the front bearing carrier extension tube between the S10 and Camaro V6 gearboxes. The S10’s extension tube is significantly longer, approximately 4.5 inches forward of the transmission mounting face, compared to the Camaro’s shorter tube. This length discrepancy, combined with the use of a thin S10 or front-wheel-drive flywheel and a Camaro V6 transmission, could lead to the throwout bearing extending beyond the support of the extension tube. This situation might contribute to some of the throwout bearing issues encountered in various engine swap scenarios.
Beyond the S10 and Camaro, other 4-cylinder engine options, such as the Jeep I4, present further possibilities. The Jeep I4 bellhousing, like the S10’s, utilizes an internal throwout arm. While the front-to-back positioning of components appears similar to the S10, there are key differences. The Jeep setup features a reversed left/right and high/low configuration, along with a distinct pivot ball mechanism. Adapting the Jeep bellhousing would likely necessitate using the Jeep’s throwout arm and slave cylinder, potentially along with an S10 flywheel. While promising, such a conversion would require a trial-and-error approach to confirm compatibility.
In conclusion, adapting the 2.2L 4 cylinder engine and its associated components, particularly the bellhousing and throwout bearing setup, requires careful consideration of various factors. Compatibility issues, potential interference, and the interplay between components like the front bearing carrier extension tube and flywheel can significantly impact the success of engine swaps and modifications. Further investigation and practical testing are crucial to ensure proper functionality and address potential challenges.
