boredom at work + curiosity = supercharger on 2.6v6 vectra b??

pattokbox

Full member
Points
21
Location
Australia, Canberra ACT
Car
2000 Vectra 2.6 v6
Hi people,

Just out of curiosity and boredom. Would it be feasable / possible for a supercharger kit on the 2.6 vectra b engine. Would the cost completely out-weigh practicality or would it simply just not work. Ideas? Thoughts?

Kind regards
Patto
 
Hello mate. Yes it would work but the amount of money involved in silly for what you get. You would be better supercharging the 3.0 or 3.2 V6 as this will see you past the 300bhp mark. Expect around about £5000 for the conversion. There is one better that doesn't cost the earth ewhich is to fit the turbo from the Saab V6 turbo. The Saab engine is the same 3.0 that Vauxhall used (both GM so makes sense) and knockedc the car up to 250bhp without changing any of the internals. It's a low pressure turbo. Also if you decide to uprate the internals then you can fit a hybrid turbo and get some serious numbers.
 
wow!! thats ludacris. so the 3.0 or 3.2, are they standard from the vectra C?? im in Aus so it can sometimes be hard to find that sorta gear for a vectra. And which saab turbo??
 
wow!! thats ludacris. so the 3.0 or 3.2, are they standard from the vectra C?? im in Aus so it can sometimes be hard to find that sorta gear for a vectra. And which saab turbo??

Saab 3.0 turbo, it has under piston oil squirters too which is a benefit over the X30XE, the bore is the same as the Vauxhall 2.0 turbo series but apparently Z20LEH pistons are the ones to use as they have the valve pockets in the correct place, the C20/Z20LET don't

I did my X30XE the ghetto way by using spacers between the block and heads to decompress the engine:
decomp.jpg
 
Last edited:
Surly the 3.0 is a better conversion if thats the case as that is 207bhp standard, and the 3.2 is 208bhp standard. I'd go for the weight save myself. The courtenay 3.0 that was put in the Calibra that I had previously was a 210bhp block as standrd (receipts to prove).
 
Surly the 3.0 is a better conversion if thats the case as that is 207bhp standard, and the 3.2 is 208bhp standard. I'd go for the weight save myself. The courtenay 3.0 that was put in the Calibra that I had previously was a 210bhp block as standrd (receipts to prove).

I don't know if the 3.2 is 208bhp because of emmisions but it should have a bit more torque than the 3.0.

Aren't the 2.6 and 3.2's fly by wire? It won't make a difference if you're just using the block but bear it in mind if you want to use the ecu and stuff on a cable throttle etc.
 
Not sure about the 3.2 but yes the 2.6 is fly by wire. Has no HT leads either lol. But just done a bit os seraching and the 3.2 definatly seems to be 2 or 3 bhp more than the 3.0 but weighs a few more KG. Also, isn't the crank longer on the 3.2? Heard of peeps having to make special mounts to move the engine over a bit.
 
Last edited:
Not sure about the 3.2 but yes the 2.6 is fly by wire. Has no HT leads either lol. But just done a bit os seraching and the 3.2 definatly seems to be 2 or 3 bhp more than the 3.2 but weighs a few more KG. Also, isn't the crank longer on the 3.2? Heard of peeps having to make special mounts to move the engine over a bit.

The 3.2 is a steel crank too, good for boost :)
 
3.2 is basically a straight swap for the 2.6, whereas the 3.0 is a straight swap for the 2.5

And aye, the 3.2 and 2.6 are just stroked versions of the earlier engines.
 

Please watch this on my YouTube channel & Subscribe.


Back
Top