I have read here where some of the members are putting Ls4's, Lt1's and L something 6's in their cars. Are any of these FWD GM car engines? If they are , what was the year and body of their manufacture?

I am not in the 'loop' on all of these new engine designations, and platforms and would like to know the scoop on these engines?

If any of these and their transmissions are FWD why are they not being swapped in large numbers. What negatives are holding these back?

------------------
88 Coupe 4.9 V8
Pointblank, Texas

[This message has been edited by josef644 (edited 01-08-2010).]

the ls4 is the only one that is a fwd platform engine. 2006 and up gm w bodies [impala, monte, etc] would be your source. the others can be made to work with adaptor plates

------------------
88blackchopv8

quote Originally posted by av8fiero: the ls4 is the only one that is a fwd platform engine. 2006 and up gm w bodies [impala, monte, etc] would be your source. the others can be made to work with adaptor plates

It was your thread that I was just reading that got me to ask these questions. Thanks for the information

I used a 2006 Monte Carlo SS.


LS4 is stock form using ALL Monte controls and electronics.


Same engine adapted to swap into the Fiero.


Installed.




------------------

[This message has been edited by Rickady88GT (edited 01-08-2010).]

Check out rickady88gt's threads. His is actually running and complete, but he is using the auto trans that came with his engine. If you're looking for a stickshift be prepared to fabricate

------------------
88blackchopv8

Rickady88GT whats involved in swapping one of these into a Fiero? Is the wiring/PCM a monster to do. I just finished the harness for my 4.9 swap. I didn't think it was to bad.

I like Ricks approach for swapping powertrain as a unit but expect to do this swap with a bit of PCM reprogramming. The BM, ABS and other things are missing and traction control can also an issue. Nice neat swap.

------------------
" THE BLACK PARALYZER" -87GT 3800SC Series III engine, 3.4" Pulley, N* TB, LS1 MAF, Flotech Exhaust Autolite 104's Custom CAI 4T65eHD w. custom axles, HP Tuners VCM Suite.
"THE COLUSSUS"
87GT - ALL OUT 3.4L Turbocharged engine, Garrett Hybrid Turbo, MSD ign., modified TH125H
" ON THE LOOSE WITHOUT THE JUICE "

The biggest thing holding most people back, I think, is cost.

These things get expensive quick.

quote Originally posted by Dennis LaGrua: I like Ricks approach for swapping powertrain as a unit but expect to do this swap with a bit of PCM reprogramming. The BM, ABS and other things are missing and traction control can also an issue. Nice neat swap.

Actually I do have all of the components accept the AIR BAG system.
I adapted wheel speed sensors to the front wheels, but have yet to adapt a sensor to the rear.
I did have the PCM reflash for the tranny protection limits. BUT this is needed even in the stock W bodies if you want to smoke the tires.

quote Originally posted by Rickady88GT: Actually I do have all of the components accept the AIR BAG system. I adapted wheel speed sensors to the front wheels, but have yet to adapt a sensor to the rear. I did have the PCM reflash for the tranny protection limits. BUT this is needed even in the stock W bodies if you want to smoke the tires.

I located your build at about 430. I have just finished reading the whole thing. Wonderful job.

quote Originally posted by av8fiero: Check out rickady88gt's threads. His is actually running and complete, but he is using the auto trans that came with his engine. If you're looking for a stickshift be prepared to fabricate

I have the F40 6 speed, but I don't think I will put it in this car. That was the plan when I go the tranny. I think I want to just start with a factory manual LSx drive train and adapt the F40 to it?

quote Originally posted by Rickady88GT: I have the F40 6 speed, but I don't think I will put it in this car. That was the plan when I go the tranny. I think I want to just start with a factory manual LSx drive train and adapt the F40 to it?

There is absolutely nothing wrong going this route and it's probably easier to pull off vs. using an ls4 based engine. You will need an adaptor plate between the engine and transaxle. The big advantage to using the ls4 is the ability to bolt up the F40 with NO adaptor plate, thus keeping the engine as far to the left as possible making some space at the front of the engine, and keeping frame rail cutting and modifiying to a minimum. Plus the ls4 is actually shorter than other ls series engines due to a different crankshaft, rear flange bosses, and front accessory package. It's simply the most compact ls series engine. If you're looking for the displacement of the bigger ls engines according to 'Isolde' the block can be bored safely to 5.7l size, the stroke is the same between those 2 engines. Any ls series head and intake can be used though some tweaking may be necessary. While my project is far [really far] from complete, it should be relatively easy to adapt ls1/6 electronics to run the ls4 , thus solving most if not all of the electronics issues. The hard part is the starter/starter mount. That is the stumbling block right now. Get that figured out and the rest of the issues are relatively easy to overcome.

[This message has been edited by av8fiero (edited 01-09-2010).]

Yes, the LS4 will take overboring to 3.905" without problems. The cast-in sleeves are thick enough. But I have installed a rwd LSx into my '84 Fiero, with a 1/8"-thick adapter plate and the F40, and it will go without butchering anything. It's extremely tight, but it can be done. You just have to use a remote electric water pump. And since it seems I'm the first to try this combo, there's still an issue with positioning a starter, but I'm going with Fieroguru's method. Yes, he's going SBC instead of LSx, but for this, that doesn't matter.

quote Originally posted by av8fiero: There is absolutely nothing wrong going this route and it's probably easier to pull off vs. using an ls4 based engine. You will need an adaptor plate between the engine and transaxle. The big advantage to using the ls4 is the ability to bolt up the F40 with NO adaptor plate, thus keeping the engine as far to the left as possible making some space at the front of the engine, and keeping frame rail cutting and modifiying to a minimum. Plus the ls4 is actually shorter than other ls series engines due to a different crankshaft, rear flange bosses, and front accessory package. It's simply the most compact ls series engine. If you're looking for the displacement of the bigger ls engines according to 'Isolde' the block can be bored safely to 5.7l size, the stroke is the same between those 2 engines. Any ls series head and intake can be used though some tweaking may be necessary. While my project is far [really far] from complete, it should be relatively easy to adapt ls1/6 electronics to run the ls4 , thus solving most if not all of the electronics issues. The hard part is the starter/starter mount. That is the stumbling block right now. Get that figured out and the rest of the issues are relatively easy to overcome.

I understand why you want to use the RWD LSx stuff on the LS4, it makes good sense. But the front accessory drive setup is not as compact as you might think. I had to cut the lower frame rail to clearance the new position of the Alt. (you don't have to relocate it if you don't want to) BUT the water fill is in a bad spot. And two of the pulleys hit the shock tower and required clearancing.



I had to relocate this pulley because it hit the fire wall.




I relocated one coil because of deck lid hinge clearance issues.


Water fill clearance.




I removed the deck lid hinge mount and relocated it because I wanted to keep the stock (modified) springs. ( I really don't like the struts in the engine bay)






I think the "ideal" accessory drive system is the Short Star setup. It is as compact as possibly can be and nearly perfect for the Fiero shape engine bay. So I would configure this setup to an LSx V8 and ditch the LS4 stuff.



------------------

[This message has been edited by Rickady88GT (edited 01-09-2010).]

I hear ya on the front accessories. a different accessory setup would most likely get you more clearance. I would still start with an ls4 though because the crank snout is shorter and the balancer pulley is tighter to the engine. maybe some kind of combination of "normal lsx" and ls4 accessories could be adapted to work together. I like your hinge mod to clear the water fill, it looks like a nice clean mod.

I think what makes the shortstar setup so compact is the water pump being integrated the way it is. On an LSx, you have to deal with that somehow, and I guess the LS4 setup is about as compact as they could come up without having to reinvent the engine block specifically for a FWD application.

Also I noticed you still have the power steering reseviour on your car. Does your car have power steering? I wonder if it would be possible to mount the alternator in place of that pump and not route the belt towards the original alt position, eliminating that clearance issue. if not maybe an idler that doesn't go quite as far as the original alt position could still get you the required belt routing and also give the necessary clearance

quote Originally posted by av8fiero: Also I noticed you still have the power steering reseviour on your car. Does your car have power steering? I wonder if it would be possible to mount the alternator in place of that pump and not route the belt towards the original alt position, eliminating that clearance issue. if not maybe an idler that doesn't go quite as far as the original alt position could still get you the required belt routing and also give the necessary clearance

Yes I have power steering. It is a quick ratio F body rack and I LOVE it. I will never own another Fiero without a fast ratio power steering system.
You could not use the pump location for anything but the PS pump because the intake manifold takes up all that space. The pump works there because the cylinder offset. One head is further forward than the other creating a small void wich the pump occupies.

Yes, but the restriction GM had with the LS4 was the overall length, and having to adapt an engine never considered for FWD duty to such a package. The water pump could be a more compact unit, at the expense of sticking out more from the front of the engine.

quote Originally posted by SGS: Yes, but the restriction GM had with the LS4 was the overall length, and having to adapt an engine never considered for FWD duty to such a package. The water pump could be a more compact unit, at the expense of sticking out more from the front of the engine.

The W body platform might a larger engine bay than our Fiero's, but for sure it has a different shape. The water pump adds about 2" of length when compared to the 4.9 pump and passages. I think GM's ultaate goal was not just getting the water pump compact, but intigrating many components into it to save money. They only had to fit it into the W body wich did not have as tight of space as the Fiero.

See the huge water passages that weave around the front of the engine.




The 4.9 is all about ultimate compactness in length.

[This message has been edited by Rickady88GT (edited 01-09-2010).]

Yes, but like the shortstar, the 4.9 was designed from the outset to be in a FWD application...whether this be transverse, or stranger yet, longitudinal. In either case, the length of the engine was critical.

In contrast, I'm sure when the LS1 saw daylight in 1997 that it wasn't even a remote consideration that it would one day be stuck under the hood of a car sideways in a FWD application. So whereas with FWD specific engines the cooling system may be designed for ultimate compactness, the LS1's cooling system was designed for performance. Having to adapt to having both supply and return passages (and two of each on top of that!) coming out of the front of the engine, yet try to move the water pump to the side, results in the crazy aluminum casting you see on the LS4. It's just the compromise necessary to shorten the engine as much as possible.

So I'm not suggesting that that other engines aren't more compact than the LS4, I'm simply saying that the LS4 was a compromise in using an engine architecture never intended for a FWD vehicle. As a comparison, the accessory drive on the LS4 is almost 3" closer to the engine than the accessory drive on the LS3 used in Corvettes!!!

So even though the bizarre accessory arrangement can cause fits in a Fiero, imagine having to deal with the engine being 3" longer.

quote Originally posted by Rickady88GT: Yes I have power steering. It is a quick ratio F body rack and I LOVE it. I will never own another Fiero without a fast ratio power steering system. You could not use the pump location for anything but the PS pump because the intake manifold takes up all that space. The pump works there because the cylinder offset. One head is further forward than the other creating a small void wich the pump occupies.

I know you like your power steering, but I'm wondering if you built an alternator mount that basically mounted the alternator backwards so to speak, with the belt running in between the engine and alternator, in the area of th p.s. pump if it would clear the strut tower. If you could fit it there in that void in front of the strut tower and still route the belt that could solve alot of clearance issues. Do you have a pic looking down at the front of the engine with the passenger side grill vent removed? That pic would show alot about what could be done there.

quote Originally posted by av8fiero: I know you like your power steering, but I'm wondering if you built an alternator mount that basically mounted the alternator backwards so to speak, with the belt running in between the engine and alternator, in the area of th p.s. pump if it would clear the strut tower. If you could fit it there in that void in front of the strut tower and still route the belt that could solve alot of clearance issues. Do you have a pic looking down at the front of the engine with the passenger side grill vent removed? That pic would show alot about what could be done there.

That is how West Coast Fiero did there LS4 Swap. They made an alt mount that holds the alt in the stock Fiero Battery location just like you are talking about.
But there is no room to use the PS pump location, the strut tower is just to close.
I dont think I have pics of it?

Gotcha. Well, the LS4 accessory drive only protrudes 3" from the front face of the block. I just think it would be tough to make the accessory drive more compact and fiero friendly without it sticking out farther from the block. I think a remote electric water pump would be mandatory.