mobile-menu-icon
GM Authority

3.6L Four-Cylinder Engine With GM LS Head Makes 500 Lb-Ft Of Torque

BluePrint Engines has been creating crate engines for over 40 years. With that much experience under its belt, it’s no surprise that the Nebraska-based engine specialist will revel an interesting concept that draws some attention. Well, that’s just what BluePrint did at the recent Performance Racing Industry (PRI) show when it introduced a 3.6L I4 gasoline engine with a GM LS head.

3.6L I4 gasoline engine with GM LS head.

Intended for use in power and forestry equipment, this four-banger has the ability to make around 340 horsepower and 500 pound-feet of torque when equipped with the proper turbocharger. BluePrint brought his huge I4 to the PRI show to gauge interest and determine its market potential. As it turns out, it seems that market certainly exists for the motor, as the crate engine company has received an overwhelmingly positive response to the concept engine.

For now, there is no price range or plans to put it into production, as the engine is still in the concept phase. However, prospective customers may express interest directly to BluePrint Engines by sending their name, phone and email address to [email protected].

There are a few things that make this 3.6L I4 engine noteworthy. First, it’s relatively large for an inline four-cylinder. Typically, I4 engines displace somewhere in the ballpark of 2.0L, making this concept engine almost twice as large as the average. Secondly, this engine is fitted with a GM LS head, notable because the LS head is designed for a “V” configuration, as opposed to an inline one. Regardless, it would be very interesting to see how this Frankenstein runs.

Though this particular engine is just a concept for now, it can be found with the head from Ford’s 302 (5.0L) V8. That particular gasoline engine is available and EPA-certified, and boasts the ability to run on natural gas, propane or pump gas. This is good news for prospective buyers, as it means it would be less resource-intensive to bring this concept to market, potentially enabling BluePrint to more easily build a business case for it.

BluePrint Engines tell GM Authority that attendees of the PRI show had some interesting ideas about the application of this engine, ranging from Chevy S10 trucks to pontoon boats to early Jeeps. What would you throw this monster of a four-banger in? Sound off in the comments section just below.

Subscribe to GM Authority for more GM-related engine news and around-the-clock GM news coverage.

As a typical Florida Man, Trey is a certified GM nutjob who's obsessed with anything and everything Corvette-related.

Subscribe to GM Authority

For around-the-clock GM news coverage

We'll send you one email per day with the latest GM news. It's totally free.

Comments

  1. Looks like a solid old-school design. Perfect for equipment where the emissions diesels are still giving everyone fits.

    JUST be around in the future for parts and service! Have seen too much otherwise repairable equipment junked, because the original manufacturer had gone through multiple mergers/buyouts, and any parts were long since no longer available.

    Reply
    1. Try buying a Brake Booster for a 04 GTO!

      Reply
      1. Better off getting any 04 GTO stuff from Australia, all our cars here are exactly the same, only we have so many more variations and options and its all rhd 🙂
        Dont think there’s any conversion problems.
        The VT Commodore was one of the most produced and sold vehicle during the late 90’s and early 2000’s.
        Theres alot i could go into but google is everyone’s best friend! 😉 best of luck 👍

        Reply
    2. Looks like a great industrial engine.

      Reply
    3. Be cool in a rail buggy or a trail rig

      Reply
  2. Naturally…a standby generator!

    Reply
  3. That would be a fun engine and something older and lightweight, like a Chevy 2, which turned into Anova of late 60s and early 70s. However those have gotten so expensive for the blue collar guys, how about something frankensteinish, like an AMC Javelin, the 401s are so hard to find, put this engine in it with a manual transmission, oh my goodness it would handle and run like a scalded cat.

    Reply
    1. Or a Chevette, Vega or the like.

      Reply
    2. I want to put this in Cherokee crawler this things needs to come to market

      Reply
  4. I wish they would have shown the pistons. Not sure if this is true, but with that large of a displacement, those pistons could be the size of a coffee can. I also heard years ago that the reason you never really saw a 4 cyl with more than about 2.5 L is because they would become quite rough and not refined enough for autos. Does anyone know that to be true?

    Reply
    1. 4 cylinders are not “naturally balanced”. They use balance shafts to help, but you’ll need a big enough car for the engine mount rubber to dampen those harmonics. V6’s ditto. The 2 engines that are naturally balenced are I6’s and cross plane V8’s. The problem with V8’s and higher cylinder counts is that when you make a 2L V8, the cylinder wall to volume ratio is so high you loose too much energy to cooling.

      Ideally all engines would be V8’s-I6’s for harmonics, or large single cylinders for efficiency. Engineers balance both to optimize their vehicle.

      Reply
      1. Steve: good info. I have a little experience with I-6 (I had two Jags in the past with them) and I found them to be quite smooth and quiet.

        So do you know if the larger displacement 4 cyl engine rumors I heard are true? Maybe someone was just feeding me a bunch of bull. That was a very long time ago too.

        Reply
      2. A 60 degree v6 can be very smooth without balance shafts. The issue of being inherently balanced depends onthe angle betwen the cylinders being a number that divides the number of cylinders evenly into 360 degrees. The problem with the GM 4.3 v6 is that the angle between cylinder banks is 90 degrees, rather than 60 or 120.

        Reply
    2. The Porsche 944 and 968 ended production with 3.0 L turbocharged 8 valve four bangers, and nobody complains about them being too rough.

      Reply
      1. The Porsche engines used twin counter-rotating balance shafts to smooth them out. I believe the technology was originally developed by Mitsubishi and used in their 2.6L 4 cylinder engine in the late ‘70s. Mitsubishi called it the “Silent Shaft” engine. It also ended up in lots of Gen 1 Chrysler minivans.

        Reply
      2. The Porsche 3.0 fours (and many other high output fours) came with vertically offset counter-rotating balancer shafts. They are key to broadly acceptable high displacement four cylinder inline engines. Without that, some of the cost savings are eaten up by expensive engine mounts and greater surrounding structural stiffness in the engine bay.

        Reply
    3. Mercruiser did a 3.7L 4 cyl for a good bit. By all accounts they seemed pretty decent. Id make sure there were dual plug setups in the heads but wouldnt worry otherwise. Similar bore to a 7.3 v8 piston size.

      Reply
  5. This would be cool in a 70’s Opel. I would like to get a look at the valve train. The LS head is designed for push rods and typical I4’s are overhead cam. This engine has neither, I am guessing it has solenoid actuated valves or some sort of pneumatics? Either way, this is definitely an odd top end.

    Reply
    1. It’s a pushrod. You can see the corner of the timing belt cover in the first picture. Cam sits directly starboard and above the crank. Very remincent of the stovebolt chevy

      Reply
    2. In the 90’s and early 00’s the base 4 cyl in the Cavalier/Sunfire, S10/Sonoma and I believe a few other GM vehicles were all OHV pushrod engines, 2.2 Liter displacement if I remember correctly. Everything was internal in the block and you couldn’t tell without tearing it down, this engine could be of the same architecture

      Reply
  6. Might be a good boat engine? They have been using the latest version of what started as the old “Iron Duke” for years. Not to forget the 4.3 V6. This would add grunt to the I4 line-up.

    Reply
    1. Boat engine or boat anchor, that’s the question.

      Reply
  7. nice engine for a Model A or a hot rod …a dual fuel type, propane and gas…would be economical to run…way to go GM…keep ’em coming

    Reply
  8. This sounds reminiscent of the old ICE tractor engines from pre-1960’s when most went to diesel power. I had a1951 Minneapolis Moline Model U farm tractor that had a 283 cubic in. 4-cyl gas engine with two separate heads. Maximum rpm was about 1800. It was a beast with a hand clutch and manual steering. It was rated for 4-14 inch plows and could pull a house. I sold it to a guy in the 80’s to pull logs up out of ravines.

    Reply
  9. Might be cool in a T-bucket rod with tall chrome straight pipes!

    Reply
  10. Mercruiser used the concept of an 8 cyl head on their 4 cylinder 170 marine engines;A 460 Ford head was used on a Mercruiser specific block…displacement was 3.7L.It was replaced by the 4.3 V6 as boats got bigger.

    Reply
  11. NVH has entered the chat.

    Reply
  12. Would like to put it a 1979 MG Midget I am working on. Torque is king! What are the options for in line manual transmissions?

    Reply
  13. This engine block looks like it is early 60’s Stovebolt design, intake and exhaust on same side. Identical design as the 250 inline 6, minus 2 cylinders. Completely different than the Iron Duke which came later. Both use pushrods.
    The Stovebolt was a very durable engine with poor head design , they could run forever but performance was very limited.
    That engine with the LS head would no doubt be popular.

    Reply
    1. Look again! It’s LS head has intake and exhaust on opposite sides.

      Reply
      1. Yes, but the original Stovebolt head did not. The block used for this engine is based on the stovebolt, it also has Chevrolet bolt pattern for the bellhousing, Iron Duke does not.

        Reply
  14. I have a small tire mini rod pulling tractor that this would be amazing in. With a big turbo of course. Please bring this into production and have a great lineup of performance parts!

    Reply
    1. Would look great in a 32 Highboy

      Reply
  15. Looks tailor made for a vintage M-37 3/4 ton Army pickup or a vintage Dodge Power Wagon.

    Reply
  16. No mention of any balance shafts or other vibration-quelling componentry. Without, this must shake like a paint mixer and make the old Ford 2.3L and GM 2.5L’s feel like a sewing machine in comparison. Industrial equipment would not care but unless mounted in a rubber cradle, I’d think this would be too rough for even a consumer marine application.

    Reply
  17. Need one of these for my 88 S-10 , time to retire the ole iron duke !

    Reply
  18. In responce to JM Crawler did you forget about the iron duke? 4 cylinder cast iron push rod OHV. They were used in right hand drive post office jeeps. We couldn”t never get them to idle worth a hill of beans. They would chirp rubber when you put them in gear.They were also used in first gen Fieros

    Reply
    1. There was a race variant of that motor called the super Duty 4. It came with a respectable forged crank, forged rods, forged pistons, and a cylinder head that could breathe quite well. It was capable of 10,000 rpm and used a 4 barrel carburetor. It was available through the chevy performance catalog and could be configured in various displacements ranging from 2.0-3.3 liter. It performed well in the racing circuits across a variety of racing disciplines. Late variants could accommodate a SBC head. Design characteristics of this 3.6 are much like those of the Super Duty 4. This updated platform has huge potential.

      Reply
    2. In response to John Sparano, all Fieros offered the iron Duke and the 2.8L V6. My 1988 has the Duke from factory, it’s a leading base model coupé but I’m slowly working on making my own version of an SE. Only difference is there’s not going to be cruise control, power windows, power mirrors, and power trunk popper.

      Reply
  19. This looks like a modern version of the Pontiac Super Duty 4 which could be configured a variety of ways with the largest displacement at 3.3 liters. I would love to use this motor in some of my Fiero’s

    Reply
  20. 4″ stroke way to large to turn any decent gas engine rpms, they would need to cut it down which is going to reduce displacement since the bore is maxed out. It would be like building a 7.2l small block chevy with terrible vibration. The short block is similar to, but not the same as, a chevy II. Blueprints LS head isn’t that great either, ls3 or l92 are much better. Dan Binks, retired Pratt Miller corvette team crew chief has built a few USAC midget motors that are LS Corvette racing blocks with one cylinder bank machined off, an LS head, and mechanical fuel injection. Sort of like the concept of the old Fontana midget motors that were based on half an sbc. I’d be more interested in a Binks engine than this.

    Reply
  21. How about a power bump for the 2.7 turbo in the new Silverado and upcoming Colorado…?

    Reply
  22. Porsche 944 turbo. “951”. Sounds perfect. Even better s2 Cabrio because the Porsche turbo is already great.

    Reply
  23. 4 bangers have really come a long way in terms of being smooth and quiet. My ’23 NISSAN ALTIMA has that 2.5L and you can barely hear or feel it when it idles. Plus because it has good power, it doesn’t even run past 2000rpm when I go 70mph.
    Contrast that to the time I had a 1987 FORD TAURUS that had a 2.5L 4 and while it wasn’t too bad of a screaming engine, it wasn’t smooth and quiet. I rented a few GM cars back in the 1990’s that had the IRON DUKE 4. The OLDMOBILE CIERA was a smooth comfortable car but that buzzing engine was such a put off along with that TAURUS that I swore off all 4 cylinder engines. But I had no choice now since even V6’s are pretty much gone now. But given that they at least smoothed these new 4’s out, cylinder numbers are pretty much a non factor now.

    Reply
  24. Lots of GM 3.0 engine blocks in Mercruisers up through at least 2016 in some boat brands. These are economical to run and relatively easy to maintain. Could push up to 20 ft boat as fast as 30 mph with Alpha 1 outdrive 20-21″ pitch /14.25″ prop.Getting harder to find fresh blocks and heads for rebuilds. Would love to see a modernized 3.x approved for marine use to drop in these watercraft. Got to keep the rpms in same range though or outdrive gear and prop changes become negative factors.

    Reply
  25. I like it. Lots of possible swaps.
    I would like to see a 6 cylinder head that would fit the Ford 300-6. This would be a large capacity 6 that runs very smooth. If you have never heard a large 6 making power you are in for a treat.

    Reply
  26. Be cool in a rail buggy or a trail rig

    Reply
  27. I would put this baby in my 2001 Jeep Cherokee XJ

    Reply
  28. My 07 pontiac solstice would look good wrapped around that beast. Should slide right in lol

    Reply
  29. Chevy Cruze hatchback or sedan

    Reply
  30. 1998 S10 swap with turbo interest

    Reply
  31. I like it wounder if they retainedthe flat Plaine crank like the 2.2 liter

    Reply
  32. With 300+ horse power, and 500 pound feet of torque, it would be fun in anything 2500 pounds or less!
    I would use two of them in a 35 foot fountain lightning, or 35 foot cigarette playboy, and I would mount them staggered so the drives aren’t burried, with the propellers turning in. Extension boxes maybe, but definitely long tabs, indexed for extra running surface, since the wheels are turning inward. I can see this in my future!

    Reply
  33. Might fit well in my 55 dodge car

    Reply
  34. Exactly what I want to put in my Las Vegas build s10 perfect power plant!!!

    Reply
  35. Can anyone say F1. They switched back to V6.

    Reply
  36. I have a 1974 25ft Chris craft with 2 3 liter 140hp. Would love 2 of these in it if cost effective

    Reply
  37. If I had this engine I would put it in a 2000 Chevrolet Astro Van along with a new 10 speed automatic transmission for better fuel efficiency. If I played my cards right I could probably get over 35 mpg.

    Reply
  38. Hey Guys!
    How about a FIERO swap for the trusty, albeit lethargic & anemic IRON DUKE 4 cyl?
    Perhaps there’s also a possibility for a Stage Iii (?) swap for the Solstice / Sky KAPPA platform. Who knows? Does any one dare to try? lol.

    Reply
  39. I have an 05 Toyota Tacoma . It is my daily driver and my woods crawler. I would put this engine in my truck any day.

    Reply
  40. If this engine was made affordable it would end up in a LOT of older GM vehicles. The key to that would be versatility in application.. Just by looking at the pics it looks like a 151c.i. ” iron duke” with a LS head.Having two different drive train layouts for this engine would make it versatile one for fwd and rwd. I would like to see what kind of performance improvement i could expect if i swapped one of these in my dd caviler…# LS swap the world!!

    Reply
  41. I would love to put this into my 2002 Saturn Sl1!!

    Reply
  42. think it will fit in a 94 ranger xlt?

    Reply
  43. IMMEDIATELY GETTING THROWN INTO A PONTIAC FIERO, THERES NO OTHER WAY

    Reply
  44. This configuration would mesh nicely into my 1971 IH Scout 800B. Hopefully it becomes available with a rear sump oil pan.

    Reply
  45. Hey guys!
    I had an epiphany last night! Instead of doing an LS1 swap into my 2007 Pontiac Solstice GXP, then having to replace my front shocks for more beefier ones, not to mention enlarging the transmission tunnel in the floor for a bigger tranny set-up with all the sweat equity & costs involved, it makes more sense to keep the stock 2.0l engine, rebuild it with spec performance parts (forged parts of course), slap on the LS1 head, add the larger turbo and enjoy having a sore face from grinning ear to ear!
    That’s what I call a recipe for fun!
    P.S. Don’t forget to drop the top! 🤪

    Reply
  46. 72 Opel is begging for it

    Reply
  47. Mid engine Corvair… Enough said! 😎

    Reply
  48. The question was, ‘what would you throw it in?’
    Answer, at that level of power, anything I could actually.

    Reply
  49. The 2.7 liter, turbocharged, GM four cylinder is a much more attractive power plant. It has an excellent balancing system and is a thoroughly modern product.

    Reply
    1. I have the 2.7L in my ’21 Silverado. You are right! Excellent and efficient. Tons of power + 21mpg…

      Reply
  50. I’m thinking about a sleeper mgb gt

    Reply
  51. A Pontiac Fiero

    Reply
  52. With a 2.75 to 3 in stroke it would be nice and smooth enough plus enough displacement with the good flowing modern cyl. heads. I like the HD iron block and 3 in mains!

    Reply
  53. Maybe a long term goal, but maybe a Fiero. I daily a 1988 with the original 2.5L, currently has 268k miles on it, but I’m not replacing the engine until it either grenades itself or the parts are completely un-replaceable.
    I’m not particularly concerned about “power,” I’m more into the econo-commuter 2 door/2 seat mindset, the power would be a bonus as I like to take my car to the track and see my lap times.

    Reply
  54. I would love one of these for my Datsun 200b coupe! Sr20’s are gettin harder to find and too expensive

    Reply
  55. It would be a perfect platform for a five-cylinder 3.5 Colorado canyon swap. If they have the bell housing and harnesses I would buy this right now

    Reply
  56. Any news on this proto type 3.7 LS I4 engine ?

    Reply
  57. 84 indy fiero would be awesome to see that much upgrades for our love of old cars.

    Reply
  58. Can I get one of these for a Chevy Cobalt? I’d say it’ll handle it, but the problem is availability.

    Reply
  59. Man I want this on the market !

    Reply
  60. I would put this motor in my daughters 97 rav4 just for the fun of it to see how hard the rav would go

    Reply
  61. I would definitely like to see these come out and/or a inline 6. Preferably for a S-10. I would like to see it in my little 4wd. With aftermarket fuel system by Holley or fast system. Also aftermarket parts, carburetor, intake, cam, etc,.

    Reply
  62. I’d like to put one in a 32 Ford Roadster

    Reply

Leave a comment

Cancel