I have started this as a new thread rather than hijack another thread relating to the 3.4 cast iron head engine.
A couple weeks back on the related topic, Joseph Upson wrote: "The 3500 is nothing more than an improved 3400, mind you there are two, one has VVT and is not what I'm referring to. There are custom performance upgrades for it in the 60 degree V6 store, ported heads and intakes, etc. It will run off of your current ecm and you can send the cam out for a regrind for under $100 or buy one of the pre ground cams from the V6 store. Some may not agree but except for those wanting to maintain the stock look, I don't understand the reason for sticking with the Fiero intake and iron heads over the aluminum head engines, given the amount of cost and effort it takes to work the engine up to aluminum head engine stock performance. I just through the 3500 up for consideration because obviously you want more power. 3.4L vs. the 3400, one should choose the 3400 everytime, ~20 more hp & Tq and 30 less lbs due to the aluminum heads. Imagine what you would get with headers, a cam and spring upgrade and some mild port and polish work. It is what it is."
I believe the newer 3400 is 185 torque and 200 hp out of the box. Does anyone know where it would be with mild mods; e.g headers and intake. How about adding cam, etc.
As I recall, the earlier 3400 had 170 hp and somewhat less torque. Are the different hp/torque figures attributable to mechanical differences (e.g. compression ratio) or otherwise (e.g. timing, fuel management, etc.)?
The 3500 looks even better with 211 hp and 214 torque out of the box. Again, what are the relatively easy mods for these engines?
Now, the 3900 shows some real potential at 233 hp and 240 torque in stock form. Joseph... I need some help here.
There was some mention of using a 7730 computer. O.K. where does it come from, and what, if any alternatives to this computer exist.
You can manage the engine you choose with pretty much any GM computer that can support all of the required sensors on the engine of choice. The 730 is popular because of its simplicity and versatility relative to other later ECM's especially when tuning is required for use on an engine that never used it.
You are embarking on a good idea however, the aluminum head engine has yet to develope a following on the forum for your efforts to really be appreciated. Another drawback is that the engines up for discussion are so well documented on the 60 degree V6 forum with pictures, projects and engine specifications that at the moment it would be easier to look their for information. I'm hoping for no more surprises so that I can put the 3900 swap on the road tomorrow and hopefully provide some respectable results for the effort.
IP: Logged
08:13 PM
Oct 29th, 2007
FierOmar Member
Posts: 1646 From: Glendale, California, USA Registered: Dec 2001
In a related topic discussing the 3.4 (Camaro/F-bird), Orief stated:
"As for your reference about 3500 V-6's, They have the aluminum heads. To kind of put it into perspective If you take a stock iron head and do a full port/polish job on it, It will flow slightly better than a stock series II aluminum head. The stock series III aluminum heads used on the "ram air" versions of the 3400 flow more than a fully ported iron head. I cannot comment on the newer 3500 or 3600 motors, But I am willing to bet they flow even more. On the two 3.4L engines (one carb'd and one Trueleo/EFI) I built they were running about 230hp at the crank If I recall the 3500/3600 motors are around the 250-270 hp range. Their heads are vastly improved over the 22 year old iron heads we are working with.
As for the flow data, The Hi-Flo intake was mounted onto a stock head. That is why the numbers are nearly the same. It shows that the intake manifold does not pose any restriction before the head. I can also tell you that the Trueleo does flow more so if you port the heads the intake still will not restrict your engine. Maybe if Francis ever gets a fully ported iron head he should run them on the flow bench to show what is possible with fully ported and polished head and their intake.
Now look at just the head data, Notice how at .400 lift the flow is the same as the .500 lift? That means that even if you had a .800 lift cam you are never going to flow more than 146.96. So the 272 cam with 1.6 rockers may be opening up .500, but there isn't enough flow to utilize it all.
To further give you some info, The stock head flowed 146.96 at .400, My ported heads flowed 165.7 at .500 and 166.5 at .600 So you can see that stock heads won't do much above the .400 lift but with a port/polish, You have ample flow even over .500 lift.
Here is a comparison of the stock head Francis posted, the 3.4L heads I had ported and polished, and the stock series III aluminum heads. (aluminum head flow data was from a Grand Am Ram Air 3400)
So, as I understand, the stock 3400 aluminum head will outflow a ported cast iron head. If similar gains cam be accomplished by porting the aluminum heads, it may have some real potential.
------------------ FierOmar
[This message has been edited by FierOmar (edited 10-29-2007).]
IP: Logged
12:45 AM
fierodeletre Member
Posts: 834 From: Behind Animal's Drum Set. Registered: Oct 2006
I still say the ultimate v6 for a fiero is the 3.6 vvt DOHC DI. 306 hp.....
------------------ 1984 Fiero SE, White, first love, sold... 1986 Fiero SE 2M6, gold 1988 Fiero 2M4, the Fox 1987 Fiero GT, Blue, 3.4/4T40 Still looking for that perfect CJB 88 GT...
IP: Logged
01:00 AM
FierOmar Member
Posts: 1646 From: Glendale, California, USA Registered: Dec 2001
AFAIK, the only other DOHC is the 3500, but there is also a version of the 3500 which is OHV. And the DOHC 3500 does not have Direct Injection, which is part of why the 3.6 dohc is so potent. I can't wait for the DI v6 to become more ubiquitous.
------------------ 1984 Fiero SE, White, first love, sold... 1986 Fiero SE 2M6, gold 1988 Fiero 2M4, the Fox 1987 Fiero GT, Blue, 3.4/4T40 Still looking for that perfect CJB 88 GT...
I believe the VVT function in the pushrod motors is more for emissions control by eliminating the EGR than performance. The GM power numbers vary slightly over some models. In a comparison of the non VVT against the VVT engine the difference in power output is respectable but when you compare how much larger the entire intake port passages all the way through the heads are and the size of the valves in the VVT motor 1.87int/1.52exh it becomes apparent that the VVT function probably contributes a small amount to the power increase simply because the cam lobes can not be varied independently of eachother to maximize performance in the manner that the VVT 3.6L does. The overall power increase between the 3400 and non VVT 3500 with .1L increase and a cylinder head upgrade is greater than what was achieved between the non VVT 3500 and VVT 3500 with a more significant intake flow capacity increase and addition of VVT. The sport utility vehicles have the highest power ratings. If you perform the kind of mods on these engines that are being performed on the iron head systems you would see much more power.
Well, after spending a good bit of time trying to find the specs, I came up with the following: GM's aluminum head V6 engines vary in displacement based on the combination of bore and stroke used. Generally stroke is either 2.99" or 3.31" and bore varies from 3.51 to 3.9 (disregarding the 2.8 for now).
The following displacements are or have been available in various GM cars.
Size Bore Stroke 2800 3.51 2.99
3100 3.51 3.31
3400 3.62 3.31
3500 3.70 3.31
3500 3.90 2.99
3900 3.90 3.31.
So, it appears that there are two separate configuerations for the 3500, one (Chevy)having a larger bore and shorter stroke and the other (Pontiac G6) with the smaller bore and longer stroke.
It also appears that the VVT for the Chevy came into use on the 2007 models.
------------------ FierOmar
[This message has been edited by FierOmar (edited 10-29-2007).]
IP: Logged
02:22 PM
Lilchief Member
Posts: 1742 From: Vevay,Indiana Registered: Feb 2004
Problem with just switching cranks between engines is the wrist pin height on the piston has to match the crank's stroke or you would either have no compression or pistons hitting heads. Dan
Originally posted by Joseph Upson: Yes, it's the same as swapping the 2.99" stroke crank for the 3.31" stroke crank.
Joseph: Do I have it right on the VVT part? The information I looked at seemdd to be somewhat less than 100% reliable.
Also, I found the info on Superdave's 3500 SFI. He claims 273.7 WHP and 257.25 WTQ which he estimates to be around 315 HP and 296 TQ at the crank. Do you know which 3500 he has? I am guessing it is the longer stroke version based on the torque figure.
Joseph: Do I have it right on the VVT part? The information I looked at seemdd to be somewhat less than 100% reliable.
Also, I found the info on Superdave's 3500 SFI. He claims 273.7 WHP and 257.25 WTQ which he estimates to be around 315 HP and 296 TQ at the crank. Do you know which 3500 he has? I am guessing it is the longer stroke version based on the torque figure.
SuperDave's non VVT 3500 has estensive modifications otherwise it started out as a 200 hp 220 lb/ft base engine. You should email him and ask if he had it dynoed or if he's going by an estimate based on his quarter mile times which are in the 13 second range now.
[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 10-29-2007).]
I believe Superdave does have dyno numbers to back up his claims. He has a tremendous setup for a 60 degree v-6!
I'v been on the AL head bandwagon forever, but very few here are ready to embrace it. A few things that have prevented me from actually doing a AL engine swap...
**No aftermarket headers for the fiero application
**Some fabrication of engine mounts....which no one seems to want to outline.....
**No aftermarket camshaft options, just regrinds which I have had mixed results with
**Still havn't seen any real solid dyno proof, with the exception of superdave. There are a few examples of 200WHP iron head efi's here....
One thing i have been pleased with is the amount of support the SFI, DIS conversion has received.
I have had my fiero for over 8 years, but can never bring myself to spend the $$$ to make it as fast as it should be. I have a number of other cars that I have worked with, mostly imports, and I can get over 200WHP with off the shelf parts...admittedly sometimes through forced induction which I could do with the fiero....But when I can get over 200WHP with a 1.8L with ease and have to spend double to maybe see 200WHP on the fiero....its no wonder I havn't embarked on that project yet.
I keep my eye on this forum in hopes of someday finding a good recipe for power with my 60 degree v-6, maybe a semi built AL head 3.5 is the way to go.
[This message has been edited by fiero87 (edited 10-29-2007).]
IP: Logged
10:52 PM
FierOmar Member
Posts: 1646 From: Glendale, California, USA Registered: Dec 2001
Originally posted by fiero87: I've been on the AL head bandwagon forever, but very few here are ready to embrace it.
I have had my fiero for over 8 years, but can never bring myself to spend the $$$ to make it as fast as it should be. I have a number of other cars that I have worked with, mostly imports, and I can get over 200WHP with off the shelf parts...admittedly sometimes through forced induction which I could do with the fiero....But when I can get over 200WHP with a 1.8L with ease and have to spend double to maybe see 200WHP on the fiero....its no wonder I havn't embarked on that project yet.
I keep my eye on this forum in hopes of someday finding a good recipe for power with my 60 degree v-6, maybe a semi built AL head 3.5 is the way to go.
As Joseph Upson said in another thread: "Some may not agree but except for those wanting to maintain the stock look, I don't understand the reason for sticking with the Fiero intake and iron heads over the aluminum head engines, given the amount of cost and effort it takes to work the engine up to aluminum head engine stock performance."
Now, being in California, and not wanting to bother with the smog referee, I have a Camaro 3.4 set aside for my 88 GT. No cams, headers, porting, or anything else that cannot be put back to stock appearance and performance within a few minutes. Just a nice little cruiser.
The track car is a different matter alltogether. Although I have an extra 3.4, and all the goodies needed to dress it up, I am finding it difficult to argue with Joseph's logic. Orief has steadfastly maintained that the 3.4 can produce decent power, but has also conceded that it has limits of about 225 hp and 235 tq at the flywheel. And, in order to get there, I would need to spend almost $2,000 over the acquisition cost of the engine, to work the heads and improve the breathing.; both intake and exhaust. For less money, I can go buy a 3.9 and have even more power. Oh yeah, if I'm in the mood to spend money, I could always add some of the same mods and gain even more. Relatively simple mods like freeing up the intake and exhaust should bring the 3.5 fairly close to maximum performance I could expect for the Camaro 3.4. And, to sweeten the pot, using the aluminum heads will cause a loss of about 30 lbs. from the rear of the car, maybe a few more if the lightweight starter is used as well.
There is some talk about headers, cams, etc. on the 60degreeV6 forums. Obviously, these things can be made although it would likely be less expensive if there were a group of people were standing in line.
------------------ FierOmar
IP: Logged
11:47 PM
Oct 30th, 2007
Raydar Member
Posts: 41116 From: Carrollton GA. Out in the... country. Registered: Oct 1999
As Joseph Upson said in another thread: "Some may not agree but except for those wanting to maintain the stock look, I don't understand the reason for sticking with the Fiero intake and iron heads over the aluminum head engines, given the amount of cost and effort it takes to work the engine up to aluminum head engine stock performance."
I believe that a lot of the reasoning behind using the iron head motor is that it's already been done. Frequently. A lot of the people who are looking for more power in their Fiero are new to Fieros, and perhaps new to turning wrenches, in general. They choose a swap that has the knowledge base to help them out if they get stuck. And when you talk about 160, 180 or 200 HP, it sounds really "big" compared to 140 (and waaaay bigger than the Duke's 98 or so.) The 3x00 is still largely experimental, at least in our application.
I installed my iron head 3.4 about 4 years ago, and I've learned a tremendous amount. But I (even at my age) was one of those "cautious" swappers, at one time. My next swap may very well be a 3x00 of some sort. Especially since they're pushing the numbers made by a stock 3800SC, and exceeding the HP numbers of the 4.9, in a much more compact package.
------------------ Raydar 88 4.9 Formula IMSA Fasback..........................88 3.4 coupe -soon to be something other than red Read Nealz Nuze!Praise the Lowered!
IP: Logged
11:32 AM
FierOmar Member
Posts: 1646 From: Glendale, California, USA Registered: Dec 2001
Originally posted by Raydar: I believe that a lot of the reasoning behind using the iron head motor is that it's already been done. Frequently. A lot of the people who are looking for more power in their Fiero are new to Fieros, and perhaps new to turning wrenches, in general. They choose a swap that has the knowledge base to help them out if they get stuck. And when you talk about 160, 180 or 200 HP, it sounds really "big" compared to 140 (and waaaay bigger than the Duke's 98 or so.)
The 3x00 is still largely experimental, at least in our application. I installed my iron head 3.4 about 4 years ago, and I've learned a tremendous amount. But I (even at my age) was one of those "cautious" swappers, at one time. My next swap may very well be a 3x00 of some sort. Especially since they're pushing the numbers made by a stock 3800SC, and exceeding the HP numbers of the 4.9, in a much more compact package.
Raydar:
Actually, the 4.9 is a fairly compact package, particularly for a V8. And there have been plenty that have been completed. I would drop a 4.9 into the 88 GT in a heartbeat if it weren't for the California smog compliance issues. I believe the three most common reasons for using the 3.4 are (and not necessarily in the order I am listing) (1) the availability of an engine that is relatively inexpensive, (2) ease of installation, and (3) ability to maintain the stock look, all while adding some boost to performance.
Moreover, while I respect the power of the 3.8SC and the 3.4 Twin Dual Cam, both add more weight than the 3.4 PR or the 4.9. In California, the 3.8 would likely require the use of an automatic trans. While the 3.4 TDC did come with a 5 speed, they are a bit difficult to find here in California.
The fact is, I don't need or want the fastest street Fiero... just a nice cruiser.
------------------ FierOmar
[This message has been edited by FierOmar (edited 10-30-2007).]
IP: Logged
01:17 PM
Raydar Member
Posts: 41116 From: Carrollton GA. Out in the... country. Registered: Oct 1999
Actually, the 4.9 is a fairly compact package, particularly for a V8. And there have been plenty that have been completed. I would drop a 4.9 into the 88 GT in a heartbeat if it weren't for the California smog compliance issues. I believe the three most common reasons for using the 3.4 are (and not necessarily in the order I am listing) (1) the availability of an engine that is relatively inexpensive, (2) ease of installation, and (3) ability to maintain the stock look, all while adding some boost to performance.
Moreover, while I respect the power of the 3.8SC and the 3.4 Twin Dual Cam, both add more weight than the 3.4 PR or the 4.9. In California, the 3.8 would likely require the use of an automatic trans. While the 3.4 TDC did come with a 5 speed, they are a bit difficult to find here in California.
The fact is, I don't need or want the fastest street Fiero... just a nice cruiser.
I understand about the 4.9. I've got one. I still think the 3x00 is something I'd like to do, at some point. Especially since a bunch of people have figured out how to tune them. There are precious few folks who have the means to modify a 4.9 program. Unfortunately, I'm not one of them.
IP: Logged
04:37 PM
Apr 21st, 2008
FieroBrad87 Member
Posts: 743 From: Nevada, Iowa, United States Registered: Dec 2005
The Fiero ECM can't handle DIS. The wiring harness is usable with mods to accommodate the extra sensors the 3500 requires. You will need an ECM like the 7730 or MS-II or FAST or many others to control the engine.
IP: Logged
05:18 AM
jscott1 Member
Posts: 21676 From: Houston, TX , USA Registered: Dec 2001
My next swap may very well be a 3x00 of some sort. Especially since they're pushing the numbers made by a stock 3800SC, and exceeding the HP numbers of the 4.9, in a much more compact package.
I'm thinking the same...if my 2.8 ever completely craps out a 3X00 engine sounds like the next big thing out there for our cars. But I personally can't imagine doing a leading edge swap. I would have to take the path already well travelled.
[This message has been edited by jscott1 (edited 04-21-2008).]
IP: Logged
10:04 AM
PFF
System Bot
LZeppelin513 Member
Posts: 761 From: Lake Stevens, Washington Registered: Aug 2003
To all those apprehensive to take on a 3x00 swap: I am 20, poor, and had never worked on a car in my life besides changing my oil. I would like to encourage anyone to do this. I wanted to go for it and did the swap over last summer for reasonably cheap. It was not bad at all thanks to a few forum members (x-thumpr-x, JosephUpson, DarthFiero). I love the engine, reliable, 35mpg, very quick, light, sounds like a beast. I love it. anyway thats my story.
IP: Logged
08:24 PM
merlot566jka Member
Posts: 676 From: Norman, Oklahoma Registered: Jun 2007
To all those apprehensive to take on a 3x00 swap: I am 20, poor, and had never worked on a car in my life besides changing my oil. I would like to encourage anyone to do this. I wanted to go for it and did the swap over last summer for reasonably cheap. It was not bad at all thanks to a few forum members (x-thumpr-x, JosephUpson, DarthFiero). I love the engine, reliable, 35mpg, very quick, light, sounds like a beast. I love it. anyway thats my story.
I know what you mean having started out the same way, I only hope i'm as ambitious about marriage and fatherhood as I am about engines and cars when the time comes.
IP: Logged
10:19 PM
merlot566jka Member
Posts: 676 From: Norman, Oklahoma Registered: Jun 2007
its running, not very drivable, stalls and bucks when in closed loop. waiting on my cable to return, should be here this week.
gonna try a heated o2 on thurs.
im towing it to darth's place in indiana for him to tune while im in great lakes, il. when i leave great lakes, ill pick up the car and head down to florida. once my family and i are re-established where ever we end up, then ill buy all the stuff to tune it myself. as of now, its easier if someone else does it.
joseph,
father hood and being married is far different from cars. trust me. i have a new baby and a farily new wife. its a struggle sometimes, but you cant just use some jbweld and zip-ties to fix family problems. its a whole different world. hard to be ambitious when everything is so scary and new. these are lives, not engines proceed with caution!
father hood and being married is far different from cars. trust me. i have a new baby and a farily new wife. its a struggle sometimes, but you cant just use some jbweld and zip-ties to fix family problems. its a whole different world. hard to be ambitious when everything is so scary and new. these are lives, not engines proceed with caution!
I believe I'll have a pretty good handle on it, I can roll the engnine on its stand out of the kitchen and back into the utility room so it would be out of the way of any woman I would call my wife, and as for kids, I have car parts in the kitchen cabinets where toxic substances would normally be so I already have that licked.
IP: Logged
11:35 PM
Apr 22nd, 2008
merlot566jka Member
Posts: 676 From: Norman, Oklahoma Registered: Jun 2007
i ported and polished a set of heads in my living room in va. lol, my wife almost killed me. i used the kitchen sink for a parts washer, and made a set of fiberglass sub boxes for an escalade in the spare room.
im still married.....
IP: Logged
01:15 AM
Nov 7th, 2008
JumpStart Member
Posts: 1412 From: Central Florida Registered: Sep 2006
