I take issue with the "poor running 4.9". I NEVER said it runs poor - it pings a little because I run it on the edge on TPS setting and timing to get top performance. It's an out of the crate new engine. When I take the ping out, I don't like the performance - so I run a little octane booster. I don't own anything that "runs poor". Ask Ed Parks, Frank Martin, or anyone that has seen any of my Fieros. I just gave you some numbers on my two cars, both of which run pretty darn good. I am NOT disappointed with the way my 4.9 runs.
Tom, I'm not trying to argue sematics and in hindsight perhaps I made a poor choice of words to describe your 4.9. However, given the 1/4 mile numbers from other 4.9 wouldn't it be fair to say the performance of your 4.9 is subpar?
IP: Logged
08:29 PM
Tom Corey Member
Posts: 838 From: Melbourne, FL, USA Registered: Feb 2002
IIRC, Tom's motor is hardly a Heavily worked over SBC. Its a stock(read:you can go buy it at your dealer) zz3(now called zz4) with roller rockers.
Thank you for the comparision.
Tom, what rockers did you put on your zz3? Are the full fulcrum rollers, or just roller tips? 1.5(2) or 1.6 ratio? What clutch are you running? Did you do any other performance enhancements when you pulled your motor last?
The rockers are 1.5 Crane Roller tip rockers. I'm running Archie's Centerforce clutch. The aluminum-head ZZ3 engine is ported, polished, and balanced running the stock ZZ3 roller cam (valve springs are stock ZZ3), and a CSI electric water pump. Headers are Sanderson Shorties - I think CC-90s. The carb is a 600 CFM Holley, jetted for the ZZ3, chromed and modified by Inglese (Coolflex)to flow 650 CFM - sitting on the ZZ3 aluminum intake manifold. Ignition is MSD 6AL and HEI distributor. Exhaust uses chambered tubular JC Whitney mufflers (I think like the Stinger has) without resonator tips. Oh, yeah, I'm still working on it, but here's a pic.
[This message has been edited by Tom Corey (edited 01-05-2004).]
IP: Logged
08:56 PM
Tom Corey Member
Posts: 838 From: Melbourne, FL, USA Registered: Feb 2002
Tom, I'm not trying to argue sematics and in hindsight perhaps I made a poor choice of words to describe your 4.9. However, given the 1/4 mile numbers from other 4.9 wouldn't it be fair to say the performance of your 4.9 is subpar?
I agree. But I've done a lot of drag racing (NHRA & AHRA) through the years with various cars I have owned way back when they were new (66 Mustang dual 4-barrel Hypo 289 w 3 spd, 66 Olds 442 4 spd, 68 GTO 400 HO 4 spd, plus 3 Corvettes (LT-1, L-82, and base 350). I have driven my 4.9 18,000 miles and it runs really good (I think) for a 200 hp engine - it does well against 5.0 Mustangs - none have beat it. Knowing what it took to run low 13.s in those early muscle cars (and 12's in some instances, I don't really buy all the 13 second times 4.9 guys claim with the 4T60E (2.73). Maybe I will after I learn how to use this G-Timer and fool around with the chip, etc - but i don't buy it right now.
IP: Logged
09:16 PM
rockcrawl Member
Posts: 2528 From: Lehigh Valley, PA Registered: Jul 2000
What do I have to do to make you believe me? There are at least three PFF members that have been in the passenger seat when I did it.
OK, guys plese don't get offended. I'm basing my statements on the way MY 4.9 runs. And I do think it runs well (except for the little dead spot at about 50-60 mph). Engine sounds strong, feels strong. sounds good, doesn't miss, doesn't hesitate. That's why I find the 13 second times using the same stock setup hard to believe. However, I'm still open to the possiblility that my 4.9 is a dog. Could be. I'll play with it over the next few weeks, add Rockcrawls chip, and also play with the G-Timer and see what happens. Hey!, If we can find a way to make it go faster I'm sure as heck not going to complain!!
IP: Logged
11:01 PM
rockcrawl Member
Posts: 2528 From: Lehigh Valley, PA Registered: Jul 2000
I have lots of slips from the modded one, 13.3-13.6. I have a 14.5 second slip from a stock 4.9 with 3.43 4T60E. It was about 30 degrees and I lit the tires through first and into second. On a good day that car ran about the same as the 2.73s, but no faster. It felt faster off the line (when it hooked up) and got 2-3 mpg less, but the 1/4 mile times were about the same.
IP: Logged
11:38 PM
Jan 6th, 2004
KissMySSFiero Member
Posts: 5544 From: Tarpon Springs, FL USA Registered: Nov 2000
The rockers are 1.5 Crane Roller tip rockers. I'm running Archie's Centerforce clutch. The aluminum-head ZZ3 engine is ported, polished, and balanced running the stock ZZ3 roller cam (valve springs are stock ZZ3), and a CSI electric water pump. Headers are Sanderson Shorties - I think CC-90s. The carb is a 600 CFM Holley, jetted for the ZZ3, chromed and modified by Inglese (Coolflex)to flow 650 CFM - sitting on the ZZ3 aluminum intake manifold. Ignition is MSD 6AL and HEI distributor. Exhaust uses chambered tubular JC Whitney mufflers (I think like the Stinger has) without resonator tips. Oh, yeah, I'm still working on it, but here's a pic.
Thanks! I'm just curious to know what to expect out of my zz3.
Very impressive numbers too.
IP: Logged
09:59 AM
HarryG Member
Posts: 587 From: Central Ohio, USA Registered: Sep 99
Yes, 15's from a 4.9 is dog slow, barely faster than a 2.8. However, this is not a 15 second time slip from a 4.9 car, this is a 15 second G-tech run. The difference can be significant. Tom, I suggest that the next time you play with your G-whatever, do several runs in each direction and average the results.
------------------ '87 Fiero GT: Northstar, Getrag, TGP wheels, rear sway bar, rod end links, bushings, etc. '90 Pontiac 6000 SE AWD: Leaking ABS unit fixed, load levelling rear suspension fixed, still slow
Tom I dont think your 4.9 times are off too much. When I built Racer_JT's (Jesse) 86GT 4.9/4T60e it only ran a 14.7@90 at Richmond dragway. Too be fair it had the stock MEMCAL and was bouncing off the rev limiter. He has since got a chip from rockcrawl but I dont think he has ran it at the strip since. Jesse says it made a big difference. My car had 3.33 gears, Rockcrawls chip and a MSD ignition and it was quicker than Jesse's.
One thing I noticed about my car during my street racing (yeah yeah... I am sooo bad) was the 1st-2nd shift. I sware it sounded like the engine cut off, then shifted into 2nd! It only did this when I was dead on it. Yours do this? Its not into the rev limiter cause my ECM chip was programmed for 4,900rpm and my MSD chip was 5,000. I raced a friends 96 Corvette (I won by the way) and he was at my back bumper till my car shifted into 2nd but once the shift took place his front bumper was even with my front wheel. Both cars are auto trans.
Anyone elses 4.9/4T60e shift like that?
Steven
------------------ '02 Subaru WRX 14.61@91.87mph bone stock '95 R33 Nissan Skyline GTR V-Spec NISMO stage 1 400bhp '92 Mini Cooper 1.3i 74 brain-numbing hp!!! '87 Fiero GT 4.9/4T60e w/3.33 final drive, ZEX nitrous 65hp shot, 88 cradle w/ 325# coil overs, Poly everything, Upgraded sway bars, KYB's, 16X7 M11's, 11.25 "Zettner" front brakes, Complete MSD ignition w/ 6AL box, Custom 2.5" Flowmaster exhaust, Grand Sport Corvette paint, Carbon fiber interior trim, '98 T/A CD w/ ETR, Reverse Indiglo guages, Pillar mounted AutoMeter O2, Hella H4 conversion. Follow its built up here: https://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum1/HTML/027460.html Sadly... SOLD.
IP: Logged
06:36 PM
Mastermind Member
Posts: 1396 From: Chicago, 4.9 IL Registered: Apr 2002
Thanks for posting that information Tom. You seem to have taken a fair amount of heat for it. I am quite appreciative of seeing numbers versus opinions.
Thanks for posting that information Tom. You seem to have taken a fair amount of heat for it. I am quite appreciative of seeing numbers versus opinions.
Jon Finley '85 GT - Red '86 SE V6 - Red Apple Valley, Minnesota
Yeah, and they keep asking why no one with a SBC will post numbers here.
Caution, the animal in the window is vicious. It will attack, no matter how good your intentions are.
Archie
IP: Logged
09:56 PM
Tom Corey Member
Posts: 838 From: Melbourne, FL, USA Registered: Feb 2002
Like I said earlier, I will do some more runs on the 4.9 with this G-Timer thingie after I install rockcrawl's new chip and report the results again. To answer the questions regarding the rev limiter, I don't think it affects shift points. It really seems to be a speed limiter instead of a rev limiter, because it definitely shuts down around 108 or so mph. I am willing to accept that Rockcrawl has a 200 hp 4.9 out there that turns the 1/4 mile in the 13's. But the hp numbers vs the weight of the car and 1/4 mile do not compute. There are basic formulas you can use to calculate how much hp/lb you need for bracket racing. I don't believe you will find that 200hp in a 2800-2900 lb car work out to 1/4 mile times in the 13s. Does anybody remember or have the equations you need to calculate this? I think I saw an article on it in Hot Rod Magazine within the last two years. But then I had a friend who's dad owned a 1956 Mercury automatic with a 312 Ford engine that would blow off a LOT of hot cars in the late 50s (I know, I know, most of you weren't even born then - don't rub it in!).
IP: Logged
10:20 PM
Jan 7th, 2004
Mastermind Member
Posts: 1396 From: Chicago, 4.9 IL Registered: Apr 2002
Yeah, and they keep asking why no one with a SBC will post numbers here.
Caution, the animal in the window is vicious. It will attack, no matter how good your intentions are.
Archie
Originally posted by NOS3800
This is a list of owners 1/4 mile time. PM me the times and mph, and I will edit the list for quick reference. Anyone from the forum can be added to the list. Just tell me what motor you are running. I will list fastest to slowest. Please include a few of your MAJOR mods and what tranny. Also, include if your car is a Fastback(FB) or Notchback(NB)or Rebody(RB). NONFORUM MEMBERS: Troy Ritchie: 11.52@121mph FB (383V8 w/NOS)
FORUM MEMBERS: 1.cardealer: 10.98@127mph FB (SBC/NOS- longitudinal auto tranny) 2.FieroX: 11.55@117mph NB (SC3800II-4T60E auto) 3.DonKraus: 11.64@114mph RB (SC3800II-4T65e, posi) 4.Tina: 11.92@120mph NB (383 SBC V8- Isuzu 5 speed) 4.MNFiero3800: 11.92@114mph FB(SC3800II-Stage II intercooler,Stage I TB, cam, headers, DHP PCM, 2.8 pulley, 4T65E auto) 5.Calikid: 12.20@118mph FB (L98 SBC-5speed) 5.LILDV1L: 12.20@110mph NB (SC3800II-2.75 pulley, high ratio rockers, DHP PCM, 4T65 auto) 6.FASTFIEROS: 12.28@111mph FB (SC3800II-intercooled,3.4 pulley,LSI TB, Stage 4 blower, DHP PCM, 85 mm MAF) 8.LFiero67: 12.48@108mph FB (SC3800II-2.8 pulley, cam, port+polished, custom PCM, 4T60E auto) 9.MasterTunerAkimoto: 12.51@118mph (4.9 Caddy) 10.NOS3800: 12.74@105mph FB (SC3800II-3.00 pulley, high ratio rockers, custom PCM, 4T60E auto) 11.DarthFiero 12.79@107mph NB (3800IITurbo-intercooler, 87 GN turbo, ported L36 heads, custom chip, 4T60E auto) 12.custom84cp: 12.80@104mph (SC3800II)
Like I said earlier, I will do some more runs on the 4.9 with this G-Timer thingie after I install rockcrawl's new chip and report the results again. To answer the questions regarding the rev limiter, I don't think it affects shift points. It really seems to be a speed limiter instead of a rev limiter, because it definitely shuts down around 108 or so mph. I am willing to accept that Rockcrawl has a 200 hp 4.9 out there that turns the 1/4 mile in the 13's. But the hp numbers vs the weight of the car and 1/4 mile do not compute. There are basic formulas you can use to calculate how much hp/lb you need for bracket racing. I don't believe you will find that 200hp in a 2800-2900 lb car work out to 1/4 mile times in the 13s. Does anybody remember or have the equations you need to calculate this? I think I saw an article on it in Hot Rod Magazine within the last two years. But then I had a friend who's dad owned a 1956 Mercury automatic with a 312 Ford engine that would blow off a LOT of hot cars in the late 50s (I know, I know, most of you weren't even born then - don't rub it in!).
Is it possible that perhaps, GM underated the 4.9's HP for some reason?
IP: Logged
12:58 AM
KissMySSFiero Member
Posts: 5544 From: Tarpon Springs, FL USA Registered: Nov 2000
Like I said earlier, I will do some more runs on the 4.9 with this G-Timer thingie after I install rockcrawl's new chip and report the results again. To answer the questions regarding the rev limiter, I don't think it affects shift points. It really seems to be a speed limiter instead of a rev limiter, because it definitely shuts down around 108 or so mph. I am willing to accept that Rockcrawl has a 200 hp 4.9 out there that turns the 1/4 mile in the 13's. But the hp numbers vs the weight of the car and 1/4 mile do not compute. There are basic formulas you can use to calculate how much hp/lb you need for bracket racing. I don't believe you will find that 200hp in a 2800-2900 lb car work out to 1/4 mile times in the 13s. Does anybody remember or have the equations you need to calculate this? I think I saw an article on it in Hot Rod Magazine within the last two years. But then I had a friend who's dad owned a 1956 Mercury automatic with a 312 Ford engine that would blow off a LOT of hot cars in the late 50s (I know, I know, most of you weren't even born then - don't rub it in!).
Moroso's Power-Speed Calculator says 200 HP in 2800Lb *could* turn 13.25@97.5
I believe the calculator assumes that's the average power applied ie. a 200 HP motor would have to be kept at peak all the time.
IP: Logged
11:29 AM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
Originally posted by Mastermind: That list might be another reason SBC owners don't post their times. 3800SC actually dominate the list. One would think SBCs would but no.
Half of the top 5 are SBC, the other half are 3800SC. (there's 2 #4's listed, so there's actually 6 cars in the top 5). Seems evenly split, unless you count the 3800's running 13 and 14 second times. The slowest SBC on the list is CaliKid, running 12.20's. Does that prove all SBC's run 12 seconds or faster? No. Nor does it prove domination of one engine over the other. It does show that 3800 owners are more likley to post their times. That could be various reasons, including a need for acceptance and to prove themself. See, statistics can be manipulated to say lots of things. Doesn't necessarily make it so. The only real facts you can draw from the list are....
Cardealer has the fastest Fiero on the list. FieroX has the fastest transverse engine Fiero on the list. Tina has the fastest 5-speed Fiero on the list. MasterTunerAkimoto has the fastest 4.9 on the list. Will has the fastest Northstar on the list. The fastest 4.9 is FASTER than the fastest Northstar on the list. There are more 3800's on the list than SBC.
------------------
IP: Logged
01:26 PM
Will Member
Posts: 14256 From: Where you least expect me Registered: Jun 2000
One thing I noticed about my car during my street racing (yeah yeah... I am sooo bad) was the 1st-2nd shift. I sware it sounded like the engine cut off, then shifted into 2nd! It only did this when I was dead on it. Yours do this? Its not into the rev limiter cause my ECM chip was programmed for 4,900rpm and my MSD chip was 5,000. I raced a friends 96 Corvette (I won by the way) and he was at my back bumper till my car shifted into 2nd but once the shift took place his front bumper was even with my front wheel. Both cars are auto trans.
Anyone elses 4.9/4T60e shift like that?
Steven
Steven - Since I have had your beloved Blur I have noticed the "skip" between 1st/2nd when I stand on it hard. You are right about the shift - but it does not do it every time. If I shift manually it seems more prone to do it if I don't shift before it hits about 4900 on the tach. If I let the tranny do its stuff automatically it doesn't seem to do it all the time. I have also been running 93 octane in it and that seems to help, too. But all in all it is a torque monster that jumps out of the hole like it is being shot from a cannon! Not that I do that all the time - but the guy in the '04 Mach 1 didn't know what happened when the light turned green! If anyone has any ideas why it does this "skip" let us know.
This thread reminds of something. I had a "discussion" with Ed Williams, owner of "Taz." This occurred two years ago at Ed Parks' Swap Meet. I can tell Ed is very proud of his 4.9L, as evidenced by the gaudy stickers and bric-a-brac pasted all over the car.
Ed is a feisty son of a gon, too. Now, I had just driven TWO 4.9L Fieros. The first was Ed Parks', with the Caddy four speed auto. The second was George Ryan's 4.9L, with the Getrag. I wish I had a G-Tech that day. Both are quick cars, but not nearly as quick as some on this forum think they are. And not NEARLY as fast as Ed Williams thinks Taz is.
Archie brought the Stinger to that Swap Meet. You know -- yellow chop top, and LT1 in the trunk. Sleek, and at least 300 HP. Now, I loved the 4.9L, and I was impressed with it. But there's a big difference between 220 and 300 HP. The 4.9L really started to wheeze at about 60, and you KNOW that LT1 would just be hitting its stride at that point.
Several of us were examining a crate motor sitting on the floor of the shop. We were observing just how tiny the intake and exhaust ports on the heads were. We were also having a discussion about a carb plate one gentleman wanted to place on top o the intake, but none of us thought that it would make any more power. The ports are just soooo tiny. Well, Ed Williams walks into the middle of this discussion, and apparently doesn't like the fact that we are saying "It's fun, but it's not as fast as the Stinger." Ed's philosophy is "torque is all you need," and there's no question that the 4.9L cranks out plenty of that. He told me point-blank that no car out there could keep up with his Taz, especially not that thing with the Chevy in the back. After calling him into question and challenging him to run his car against something like the Stinger, he swore at me and stomped off. After all, measurements are king, and I told him that if he was a real engineer, he would know that. No wonder he was pissed at me.
In fact, having ridden in both a 4.9L Fiero AND a turboed 2.8L, I think the turbo boys could have a couple of surprises for those of you with the 4.9L. I doubt any of you could keep up with Dennis LaGrua's car, and he spent far less on his initial project than a comparable 4.9L. This is not to disparage any 4.9L Fiero. What a blast! AND THE SOUND!!!! So much fun.
I'm just saying that Tom's results don't surprise me. Yes, I know there are people out there cracking 13's with the 4.9L, and that doesn't surprise me, either. But if any of you think you can keep up with a moderate SBC (and his engine is only a moderate example of that engine), think again. Would I kick the 4.9L out of bed for eating crackers? No way. But I wouldn't be dumb enough to pick a fight with the nearest 300 HP Fiero and then claim something is wrong with my 220 HP model when I get dusted.
------------------ GO BUCKS!!!
IP: Logged
11:53 PM
Blacktree Member
Posts: 20770 From: Central Florida Registered: Dec 2001
The only real facts you can draw from the list are....
You forgot a few facts:
-- 1FST2M6 has the fastest 2.8V6 on the list -- Befarrer has the fastest (and only) 2.5 4cyl on the list -- The fastest 2.8 V6 is faster than a stock 3800SC
BTW, thanks to those who posted hard data (this includes Tom).
[This message has been edited by Blacktree (edited 03-07-2004).]
IP: Logged
11:57 PM
Mar 8th, 2004
Mastermind Member
Posts: 1396 From: Chicago, 4.9 IL Registered: Apr 2002
This thread reminds of something. I had a "discussion" with Ed Williams, owner of "Taz." This occurred two years ago at Ed Parks' Swap Meet. I can tell Ed is very proud of his 4.9L, as evidenced by the gaudy stickers and bric-a-brac pasted all over the car.
Ed is a feisty son of a gon, too. Now, I had just driven TWO 4.9L Fieros. The first was Ed Parks', with the Caddy four speed auto. The second was George Ryan's 4.9L, with the Getrag. I wish I had a G-Tech that day. Both are quick cars, but not nearly as quick as some on this forum think they are. And not NEARLY as fast as Ed Williams thinks Taz is.
Archie brought the Stinger to that Swap Meet. You know -- yellow chop top, and LT1 in the trunk. Sleek, and at least 300 HP. Now, I loved the 4.9L, and I was impressed with it. But there's a big difference between 220 and 300 HP. The 4.9L really started to wheeze at about 60, and you KNOW that LT1 would just be hitting its stride at that point.
Several of us were examining a crate motor sitting on the floor of the shop. We were observing just how tiny the intake and exhaust ports on the heads were. We were also having a discussion about a carb plate one gentleman wanted to place on top o the intake, but none of us thought that it would make any more power. The ports are just soooo tiny. Well, Ed Williams walks into the middle of this discussion, and apparently doesn't like the fact that we are saying "It's fun, but it's not as fast as the Stinger." Ed's philosophy is "torque is all you need," and there's no question that the 4.9L cranks out plenty of that. He told me point-blank that no car out there could keep up with his Taz, especially not that thing with the Chevy in the back. After calling him into question and challenging him to run his car against something like the Stinger, he swore at me and stomped off. After all, measurements are king, and I told him that if he was a real engineer, he would know that. No wonder he was pissed at me.
In fact, having ridden in both a 4.9L Fiero AND a turboed 2.8L, I think the turbo boys could have a couple of surprises for those of you with the 4.9L. I doubt any of you could keep up with Dennis LaGrua's car, and he spent far less on his initial project than a comparable 4.9L. This is not to disparage any 4.9L Fiero. What a blast! AND THE SOUND!!!! So much fun.
I'm just saying that Tom's results don't surprise me. Yes, I know there are people out there cracking 13's with the 4.9L, and that doesn't surprise me, either. But if any of you think you can keep up with a moderate SBC (and his engine is only a moderate example of that engine), think again. Would I kick the 4.9L out of bed for eating crackers? No way. But I wouldn't be dumb enough to pick a fight with the nearest 300 HP Fiero and then claim something is wrong with my 220 HP model when I get dusted.
Archie's installs are at least 10 grand 4.9s are much less. If you don't mind I'd rather pocket the extra dough for use on other things. After all, money is a VERY important part of the equation of which you mysteriously left out.
As a 4.9 owner this makes fine reading and I would be very interested if I were looking to challenge/race Turbo and SBC powered Fieros. The key word being Fieros. I don't race, I simply enjoy spirited driving. As I drive around Chicago I fear no car that happens to end up next to me at a stoplight. And why should I? Moreover, I knew what I was getting when I chose the 4.9. Furthermore, if someone happens to beat me it won't be by much. And finally, there is always someone faster, something for all of us to remember. Even Fieros with SBCs tucked in them.
[This message has been edited by Mastermind (edited 03-08-2004).]
IP: Logged
12:31 AM
crzyone Member
Posts: 3571 From: Alberta, Canada Registered: Dec 2000
Having someone install a motor for you is always going to be expensive, I think most people opt to install it themselves.
If you do it yourself and get a few deals at swap meets, you can easily do it for $4000, including motor. $10,000 in my eyes isn't too much to spend. If you buy a nice fiero for $5000 and $10,000 on the swap, you have a nice car that will out perform most cars on the street. To buy a new car with the same performance would set you back probibly 3 or 4 times that amount.
4.9 is a nice motor for what it is, but it will never be on par with a sbc for performance potential. Its not hard to get 400hp from a sbc, naturally aspirated and no nitrous. Master Tuner does pull a nice quarter mile time but it is on the bottle.
Enjoy the low 0-60 times of the 4.9, it is a fairly inexpensive and easy swap for a fiero. I was 75% done my 4.9 conversion before I sold it, I realized that I would eventually want more power and the 4.9 has big limitations.
------------------
[This message has been edited by crzyone (edited 03-08-2004).]
IP: Logged
04:12 AM
Archie Member
Posts: 9436 From: Las Vegas, NV Registered: Dec 1999
Archie's installs are at least 10 grand 4.9s are much less. If you don't mind I'd rather pocket the extra dough for use on other things. After all, money is a VERY important part of the equation of which you mysteriously left out.
Actually the cost of a SBC swap is the thing you keep mis-quoting while you ignore the questions you've been asked.
It's about time you start telling the TRUTH. out of 19 V-8 swaps we did last year only 2 of them were more than $9K. Almost every SBC V-8 swap I've done in my shop has been using a NEW CRATE ENGINE, not some used 4.9 you picked up in a junkyard someplace. A page on my web site talks about engine swap costs with the SBC http://www.v8archie.com/arch10.htm Why don't you go read that before making statements that are incorrect.
BTW, one other thing, you've been asked several times what you paid for your 4.9 swap from Ed's & you haven't answered. You quote everybody else, just so we can see what a wonderful deal the 4.9 swap is, why don't you give us a number for your swap?
Archie
------------------
IP: Logged
07:22 AM
Mastermind Member
Posts: 1396 From: Chicago, 4.9 IL Registered: Apr 2002
Actually the cost of a SBC swap is the thing you keep mis-quoting while you ignore the questions you've been asked.
It's about time you start telling the TRUTH. out of 19 V-8 swaps we did last year only 2 of them were more than $9K. Almost every SBC V-8 swap I've done in my shop has been using a NEW CRATE ENGINE, not some used 4.9 you picked up in a junkyard someplace. A page on my web site talks about engine swap costs with the SBC http://www.v8archie.com/arch10.htm Why don't you go read that before making statements that are incorrect.
BTW, one other thing, you've been asked several times what you paid for your 4.9 swap from Ed's & you haven't answered. You quote everybody else, just so we can see what a wonderful deal the 4.9 swap is, why don't you give us a number for your swap?
Archie
Archie, the 10 grand quote came straight from your mouth, as I was checking various installers to get my car back on the road. That price was simply out of the question. especially when I had numerous other things to repair or replace on my car. Finally on the price question, perhaps Tom will tell us what you and Ed charged. I've already said my piece in that regard. I'd suggest people call both Archie and Ed to discover the price differential.
[This message has been edited by Mastermind (edited 03-08-2004).]
IP: Logged
08:35 AM
PFF
System Bot
Kento Member
Posts: 4218 From: Beautifull Winston Salem NC Registered: Jun 2003
BTW, one other thing, you've been asked several times what you paid for your 4.9 swap from Ed's & you haven't answered. You quote everybody else, just so we can see what a wonderful deal the 4.9 swap is, why don't you give us a number for your swap?
Archie
Not trying to start anything but I am doing a 4.9 Swap currently and IF I do not have several parts Ceramic Coated, the total cost will be under $600 to include the Motor. I have done a ton of wheeling and dealing, bartering, and swapping of stuff around. I figure IT would be under $1500 if I have not been a cheap bastard. Plus I will be able to do this myself with the limited resources I have available to me. Will it be the fastest thing on the streets, I want QIUCKEST, not fastest, I can get in enough trouble with Mr. Officer with a 2.5
Would I love a SBC Fiero, Hell yeah, im not stupid, just crazy
Actually the cost of a SBC swap is the thing you keep mis-quoting while you ignore the questions you've been asked.
It's about time you start telling the TRUTH. out of 19 V-8 swaps we did last year only 2 of them were more than $9K. Almost every SBC V-8 swap I've done in my shop has been using a NEW CRATE ENGINE, not some used 4.9 you picked up in a junkyard someplace. A page on my web site talks about engine swap costs with the SBC http://www.v8archie.com/arch10.htm Why don't you go read that before making statements that are incorrect.
BTW, one other thing, you've been asked several times what you paid for your 4.9 swap from Ed's & you haven't answered. You quote everybody else, just so we can see what a wonderful deal the 4.9 swap is, why don't you give us a number for your swap?
Archie
As a neutral observer who has done business with Archie and Ed I think I can say apples and oranges here.
These are the two swap options I was really torn between. I reasearched them both for over a year. I believe the price I was quoted as standard at Ed's for a 4.9 swap was $5000, IIRC. I never intended to have someone else do the swap so that number went in one ear and out the other. I can't for the life of me remember if that includes a salvage engine.
What I found out was that I was not in the market for a 4.9. As a novice mechanic, I am comfortable with a SBC. There are loads of mods, options and such that I feel comfortable doing. I find that kind of the fun part. It was worth the little extra money for me. The Cadillac engine also didn't really fit the "theme" I was going for. The 4.9 was very appealing. I can certainly understand why it is a popular swap.
My point is, I believe the market for the 4.9 is somewhat different from the market for the SBC. Some people are Beatles people and some people are Elvis people. Some like Ginger, some like Mary Ann.
Archie and Ed have both been great to deal with. I respect greatly what both people do to keep the Fiero community alive and interesting. I think they each provide valuable products, services and information to different markets of the Fiero engine-swap community.
IP: Logged
10:14 AM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
I love how people compare having Archie to the swap with a new crate motor with installing a used motor themselves. Let's see, how is paying someone to install a $3000 engine comparable to installing a $400 engine yourself? If you want to make comparisons, see how much Ed Parks charges to install a new crate 4.9 (if they're available).
Yes, a SBC swap will typically cost more because of the adapter kit, but saying a 350 costs $10,000 and a 4.9 swap is only $600 is misleading at best.
IP: Logged
11:21 AM
California Kid Member
Posts: 9541 From: Metro Detroit Area, Michigan Registered: Jul 2001
I love how people compare having Archie to the swap with a new crate motor with installing a used motor themselves. Let's see, how is paying someone to install a $3000 engine comparable to installing a $400 engine yourself? If you want to make comparisons, see how much Ed Parks charges to install a new crate 4.9 (if they're available).
Yes, a SBC swap will typically cost more because of the adapter kit, but saying a 350 costs $10,000 and a 4.9 swap is only $600 is misleading at best.
I was not trying to compare, I just saying that I am being extremely fruggle<sp?>, or read as cheap. I never said that a SBC swap is 10k. I am saving a lot of cost and doing it myself as everyone knows Labor is a very big factor in the price of a swap.
Cali - Kid, I can agree with what you are saying too but some of us dont have the resources ( both $$ and Time) to have someone else do this. I also want the satisfaction of knowing I did it myself. Do I have any guar that I wont have a blown motor 3 min after I start it up nope. I have been working on cars and engines for many years and I have done everything I know of to ensure that wont happen. Am I going to take it to Orlando Speed World and set a new track record or to SCCA Solo events and blow everyone away, of course not, to think of such would be assinine of me. If you are on a tight budget and barter well you can do things cost effectively. Do I expect it to win against your car in either show or race, hell no, but I know this, your car is one of the standards we strive for. The only catagory I could win over you is in the CRAZY Owner class I feel confident that I will be very happy and will have a solid car when I am finished with it ( if it is ever finished )
IP: Logged
12:27 PM
Howard_Sacks Member
Posts: 1871 From: Cherry Hill, NJ Registered: Apr 2001
I think what it is is that there is the potential to do the 4.9 on the cheap that doesn't exist with the SBC swap.
quote
Originally posted by Formula88:
I love how people compare having Archie to the swap with a new crate motor with installing a used motor themselves. Let's see, how is paying someone to install a $3000 engine comparable to installing a $400 engine yourself? If you want to make comparisons, see how much Ed Parks charges to install a new crate 4.9 (if they're available).
Yes, a SBC swap will typically cost more because of the adapter kit, but saying a 350 costs $10,000 and a 4.9 swap is only $600 is misleading at best.
IP: Logged
01:11 PM
Dave Rodabaugh Member
Posts: 278 From: Columbus, OH Registered: Feb 2002
Archie's installs are at least 10 grand 4.9s are much less. If you don't mind I'd rather pocket the extra dough for use on other things. After all, money is a VERY important part of the equation of which you mysteriously left out.
As a 4.9 owner this makes fine reading and I would be very interested if I were looking to challenge/race Turbo and SBC powered Fieros. The key word being Fieros. I don't race, I simply enjoy spirited driving. As I drive around Chicago I fear no car that happens to end up next to me at a stoplight. And why should I? Moreover, I knew what I was getting when I chose the 4.9. Furthermore, if someone happens to beat me it won't be by much. And finally, there is always someone faster, something for all of us to remember. Even Fieros with SBCs tucked in them.
Your prices are a little skewed. To have Archie install a brand new V8 for you would not run $10k. To have Ed Parks install a new 4.9L would run you $5k. I know, because I've asked him. So, really, apples-to-apples, you're going to pay Archie $8k or less. You're going to pay Ed $5k or more. Is there a price difference? Sure. But neither of these figures are "on the cheap." To me, "on the cheap" would be $1500, and if you aren't a DIY-er, you cannot do either for that.
Now, let's do an apple-to-apple for the DIY'er. You can get both used engines for the same amount of money. So that's a wash. Yes, the Archie kit costs money, and I dunno about you guys, but if I do one of those I'm going to buy his super-duper-ultra-mega-deluxe kit just so I can bolt it all together. So let's say I spend $2500 for everything in addition to the engine. Then I do all the wrenching myself. What am I in for? About $4000.
Now, there is no *adapter* kit for the 4.9L, but it's no bolt-in, either. Mounts, wiring, plumbing -- all that stuff has to be done. Hey, I can't fabricate, because have neither the equipement nor knowledge to weld, etc. In other words, I *need* a kit, and you're going to find that I am rather normal in this regard. So, after everything is said and done, the 4.9L is probably going to run me * at least * $2k. On the cheap? Sure. A lot less than the SBC? NO. What it comes down to is whether I want to spend the extra dough for the incremental power. I've been wrenching for about a decade now, and I have learned a certain lesson. Sometimes I spend extra money for what I really WANT, because if i don't, I'll perpetually regret it later on. I think HP is one of those things. I really liked the Caddy swap, believe me. But if I'm going to DIY a V8 swap, I'm going for the SBC. There's a big difference between 220 HP, with no real extra potential, and 300 HP, with lots of extra potential.
You really shouldn't miscategorize Archie's work like that. The SBC isn't as expensive as you say, and the 4.9L isn't as cheap as you claim.
------------------ GO BUCKS!!!
IP: Logged
02:20 PM
Howard_Sacks Member
Posts: 1871 From: Cherry Hill, NJ Registered: Apr 2001
Don't be fooled. You need to weld the motor mount on Archie's "kit." It's not exactly an elegant solution.
quote
Originally posted by Dave Rodabaugh:
Hey, I can't fabricate, because have neither the equipement nor knowledge to weld, etc. In other words, I *need* a kit, and you're going to find that I am rather normal in this regard.
What do I have to do to make you believe me? There are at least three PFF members that have been in the passenger seat when I did it.
I am more than a little tired of guys taking a shot at somebody by saying they want time slips before they will believe the person. Rockcrawl gets alot of respect from folks.
