raging squirrel Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 (edited) I suppose I should put this here, we will see if I can figure out how to post the pics. I am taking my 1979 Brat and converting it to rear drive only with a Metro 1.0 3cyl. engine and Suzuki Samurai transmission. I love the mileage of the Metro, but prefer the style and utility of the Brat. After serious number crunching and research, the project is feasible. I will need to shed a few hundred pounds to have a power to weight ratio acceptable for the engine. Half of this will occur as a mere bi-product of the swap itself. Some of it will come from the removal of non-essential parts and parts that are not compatible with the new power plant. This includes the original jumpseat assembly, in case anyone needs that for a restoration. After that, further weight loss will come from a variety of hand built parts as time and fishing allow. Some numbers: My current 95 Metro has a factory curb weight of 1880 lbs. The 79 Brat has an official weight of 2175. The Metro and Samurai transmissions share similar gear ratios. The Metro has a final drive ratio of 4.10:1, XFI versions (the ultimate fuel saver version) has a final drive of 3.52:1. The Brat, I believe, is about 3.70:1. The optional Limited slip is a 3.90:1. All in all, a pretty good match for my goals. My two big obstacles are weight reduction and fitting a speedometer drive since the trans has no provision. A simple drive from a motorcycle hub mounted to the back of one of the front hubs (remember, the half shafts will no longer be there) will likely be the solution since the magnetic rotor in the speedo unit doesn't care what is turning it and they really are all the same from my research. The front tire on a street bike has roughly the same diameter as the tires on the brat, so it should be accurate enough. I will be using the Metro speedo unit most likely, since I believe that the fuel injection ECU does get input from a VSS (vehicle speed sensor) in the speedo. I am awaiting my diagrams to confirm this. I am using the simpler harness and more fuel efficient management system from a 91 Metro. Depending on how this version works, the ECU and camshaft from the XFI version may get swapped in later for an increase in fuel efficiency. The XFI stuff will cost HP, but the torque rating is the same. A few enhancements to build a little more torque would get me a power to weight ratio at 2000 lbs. curb equal to my current car at 1880lbs. Three ft/lbs. is all it would take. Still no rocket, but a great little runabout for a man who commonly racks up 120-300 miles in a single day. Anyway, time for photos. Edited April 30, 2012 by raging squirrel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlindSight Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Let us know how it goes! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirk Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Sanity? I think your off your pickle! But I can't wait to see the result! My Gen1 2wd sedan weighs in at 850k same as your metro so I think you are in with a good chance of getting the weight down on the brat. regards Dirk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyale 2.7 Turbo Posted May 3, 2012 Share Posted May 3, 2012 Nice Conversion Idea... I'll Like to see Photos. In my Country, people do some conversions like That, but Usually for Reliability and / or the Lack of Parts. Once I Came across a "Bratsun" in a Mountain Village, here you can see Pics of it: http://ultimatesubaru.org/forum/showthread.php?t=91449&page=3 Good Luck! Kind Regards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dover Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 How has it been going so far? I'm a Metro guy myself. I was thinking of this, and you might be better suited getting a 4 cylinder G10B to pickup a little more power. If you're pulling too much weight it could reduce the fuel economy as well as the life of the engine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonvo Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 i dont understand why it completly null and voids the point of the vehicle and come on the subi comes with a 1.6 even my tired ea71 in a wagon got about 30 mpg so metro mpg is possible with the original drivetrain so why codswallop with it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeroy Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 Hmmm... the OP has not been active on the forum since May 2012... Perhaps not really a Subaru nut (like the rest of us!)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonvo Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 kinda what im thinking Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlindSight Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Sadness, was really hoping to snag his jump seats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.