quote Originally posted by Fastback 86: Steven Snyder just put down 221rwhp with an N/A 3.4 DOHC. Thats 9hp under your baseline. https://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/083396.html

quote Originally posted by Steven Snyder: And Michael Smith put down 240 whp with a 3.4 DOHC years ago (http://fiero.cc/fiero-tdc/members/mws/intake/index.html).

It isn't my "baseline". But anyways, So let me get this correct, A stock basic low compression SBC V-8 has 230 rwhp and it is garbage because of two highly modified 3.4DOHC engine make the same rwhp?? Can you say "Apples to Oranges"?? Have you guys been talking to Dennis again???

Let's do the same mods to the SBC and see wht the RWHP is. Oh wait, Then it would take away your point. I mean it's really fair to compare a highly modded engine to a stock engine right? How about comparing it to a "stock" ZZ4? I know of two that put down 309 rwhp. It has a cast iron block and aluminum heads just like the 3.4DOHC. Yes it has more displacement but it also has 8 less valves. That sounds fair right??? So what would you want 221-240 rwhp or 309 rwhp??

Did you happen to notice that a stock 3.4LDOHC that ran on the same dyno the same day pulled a mere 158 rwhp?? I could do a search on the internet and find numerous examples of the same engine getting between 175 to 190 rwhp out of a 3.4DOHC.

I find it amazing that many here keep stating that aside from the fact that Archie lied about what the engine really was, that many think it is an example of all SBC V-8 swap's. Crzyone made this comment on the first page: "How many people who showed up at the dyno who will never see this tread left disappointed seeing a "377" put down 230hp? Can't see that being good for business." Do you think the guy thinking about swapping a 3.4DOHC was excited about 158 rwhp? Or the guy looking to swap in the highly popular 3800SC was overcome with joy at the 170 rwhp??? That's what those stock engines ran the same day. So a N/A 3.4DOHC and a supercharged 3800SC both looked very weak compared to the V-8 that were all run on the same day. Now everyone who was there and going by only what they actually saw on the dyno would most likely call Archie. Why would you want to spend all that time and money to drop in a supercharged engine to only make 170 rwhp when you can drop in a V-8 and gain 60 rwhp more? Sounds like it would be good for business, not bad. See when you compare apples to apples, many of the difference's that folks are discussing disappear. Comparing a stock V-8 dyno'd under poor conditions vs. modifed V-6's under normal conditions isn't going to make any difference to the folks who saw the dyno's at Daytona and are not on either forum.

Archie says all they did was correct a rocker issue and ran it on a more accurate dyno and got 250rwhp. So it's not 9 hp less and 10 hp more, it's more like 29 hp less and 10 hp less. Which makes a [dennis mode] stock dinosaur pushrod engine fueled by an antiquated carb [/dennis mode] more powerful than a "state-of-the-art" Multi-valved, dual overhead cam, modern EFI engine that has been highly modified. For someone seeking max power, What would that person pick? The 240rwhp already highly modified V-6 or the 250rwhp stock V-8 that has no mods but a very huge and popular aftermarket?
Remeber for many years when the F-body and Mustang "HP wars" were going on, a mere 5-10hp difference in the motors was enough to draw in buyers away from the other.

quote Originally posted by Oreif: ..... I find it amazing that many here keep stating that aside from the fact that Archie lied about what the engine really was, that many think it is an example of all SBC V-8 swap's. Crzyone made this comment on the first page: "How many people who showed up at the dyno who will never see this tread left disappointed seeing a "377" put down 230hp? Can't see that being good for business." Do you think the guy thinking about swapping a 3.4DOHC was excited about 158 rwhp? Or the guy looking to swap in the highly popular 3800SC was overcome with joy at the 170 rwhp??? That's what those stock engines ran the same day. So a N/A 3.4DOHC and a supercharged 3800SC both looked very weak compared to the V-8 that were all run on the same day. Now everyone who was there and going by only what they actually saw on the dyno would most likely call Archie. Why would you want to spend all that time and money to drop in a supercharged engine to only make 170 rwhp when you can drop in a V-8 and gain 60 rwhp more? Sounds like it would be good for business, not bad. See when you compare apples to apples, many of the difference's that folks are discussing disappear. Comparing a stock V-8 dyno'd under poor conditions vs. modifed V-6's under normal conditions isn't going to make any difference to the folks who saw the dyno's at Daytona and are not on either forum. ....

Got it nailed. You are the man!

The point isn't that "a basic SBC has 230 rwhp and is garbage because a highly modified 3.4 can make the same RWHP", it's that the 3.4 doesn't require a $1000 adapter. The only thing "not stock" about Steven's 3.4 is the K&N filter and short runner intake [and the rebuild, which I would hope the other engine has anyways]. I would assume the 305/350/377 or whatever it is now has a K&N filter too.

But that's not the point. The point is, if you're going to make

quote your Fiero smoke just about anything on the street.

You're going to need a lot of horsepower. 200whp just doesn't cut it anymore. There are mildly modified showroom cars out there putting 300 to the wheels.

So my question is why? Why hasn't Archie built a 400whp fiero to show off his skills and products?

Don't say it's because of money. He has the money. You don't need a customers credit card to build something to advertise your services. IMHO, it's because fiero trannies break. Most customers with a "hot rod" want a stick. They also want something that won't break if you play with it. So it would be a bad PR move, and he has nothing to gain. So that's why you're seeing what you seeing. Don't blame Archie for shitty transverse trannies...

How much money would you spend on advertising if you already had people lined up outside the door waiting to get in? Judging from all of the threads I've seen Archie post, he's always got multiple projects running. Spending a wad of cash on a halo car for advertising is throwing money away if you're already doing good business.

Maybe if he was just starting out and trying to make a name for himself or if business was slow, he might need something like that to get people excited about his cars. But with his already established reputation, he doesn't seem to need much in the way of advertising.

The best advertisement I've seen for Archie is to take a ride in one of his cars. I did, and I'm sold. And it wasn't some 600 HP drag race only monster, either. It was a mild LT1.

This thread has gone from "why did the engine run so bad" to " why doesn't Archie spend more on advertising?" Face it, the only purpose this thread serves is to try and nitpick everything he does and somehow show his work inferior. Shaunna and his nutswingers can continue their circle jerk and slapping each other on the back about how much trash they talk about him, and his customers will still show up, buy his products, and enjoy their V8 Fieros.

quote Originally posted by Formula88: How much money would you spend on advertising if you already had people lined up outside the door waiting to get in? Judging from all of the threads I've seen Archie post, he's always got multiple projects running. Spending a wad of cash on a halo car for advertising is throwing money away if you're already doing good business. Maybe if he was just starting out and trying to make a name for himself or if business was slow, he might need something like that to get people excited about his cars. But with his already established reputation, he doesn't seem to need much in the way of advertising. The best advertisement I've seen for Archie is to take a ride in one of his cars. I did, and I'm sold. And it wasn't some 600 HP drag race only monster, either. It was a mild LT1. This thread has gone from "why did the engine run so bad" to " why doesn't Archie spend more on advertising?" Face it, the only purpose this thread serves is to try and nitpick everything he does and somehow show his work inferior. Shaunna and his nutswingers can continue their circle jerk and slapping each other on the back about how much trash they talk about him, and his customers will still show up, buy his products, and enjoy their V8 Fieros.

Touche' - very well said!

So much jealousy. He wouldn't be a big target unless he was a big business. Keep up the great work, Archie!

http://www.allinthefamilysi...soundfiles/aitf3.wav

quote Originally posted by Formula88: And yet you didn't post it until after everyone on RFT started talking about it being posted over here. Or as you put it, "I couldn't help myself." and then posted a link to this thread so the nutswingers can find it. If you just wanted discussion, you would have posted the video earlier, and not gone out of your way to make sure everyone on RFT knows you posted it. You did it to earn brownie points over there and to stir up shiat over here. At least have the stones to admit it.

So since you've joined in the fray, should I start calling YOU a nutswinger? Excuse me if I use some tact and NOT resort to name calling right away. Did I know that this thread would probably stir the pot? Of course. Was that the reason I started it? No.

Like I said, I just wondered why it dyno'd so low.

The dyno result is pretty much in the range of what most street driven carbed small block chevy powered vehicles were running on the dyno at the shop I was last working at (Turbo Technology in Tacoma, WA). That included pretty much all the 383 with aftermarket head ones also... 220-260 hp was about it with a carb setup.

Yeah there were race cars putting down more but I don't think I saw a carbed 350-383 in a street vehicle that made 300hp. That old school magic 1hp per cubic inch isn't really that easy to do, especially to the ground in a vehicle swinging a vacuum/mechanical advance and a carb. Change to a computer running things with full mapping and a turbo and you could get a car with good street manners putting out over 1000hp like a couple of small block ford projects that all got completed while I was there. Nothing stock and megabucks involved there.

Step up to the newer style engines with fuel injection like Archie is also putting into Fieros and I'm sure there are cars he's built putting 400hp to the ground with better driveability attributes. The carbed small block is old school and has it's limits, especially when the constraints of pump fuel and having to be able to crank it up and go come into play. Try running 12.5:1 cr on a carbed street engine with todays gasoline like the new stock chevy motors do... Fuel injection and the incredible power of the computer mapping of spark/fuel/cam timing have taken it to a new level, but that wasn't what was on the dyno.

The 377 claims are/were childish, but with an 80's cast iron head, dual plane intake w/carb, and that exhaust I don't think you'd see 10hp difference to the ground. If the heads are the casting I suspect, the numbers were well within the range of what was to be expected.

quote Originally posted by Oreif: It isn't my "baseline". But anyways, So let me get this correct, A stock basic low compression SBC V-8 has 230 rwhp and it is garbage because of two highly modified 3.4DOHC engine make the same rwhp??

How is my motor highly modified? It's a careful rebuild with a modified factory intake manifold and a ricer-style "cold air intake" with a K&N filter that hasn't been cleaned in 3 years. I didn't do anything else performance-wise. I didn't even change the cam timing, and its also not even tuned properly.

quote Let's do the same mods to the SBC and see wht the RWHP is.

Ok, rebuild the bottom end on the SBC, cut 8 inches off the intake runners, leave everything else stock including the carb and intake manifold..... I bet it would make LESS power because it can't be revved high enough (and doesn't have the head flow) to take advantage of zero runner length it would end up with.

quote Originally posted by Steven Snyder: And Michael Smith put down 240 whp with a 3.4 DOHC years ago (http://fiero.cc/fiero-tdc/members/mws/intake/index.html).

FYI - that car is now owned by pokeyfiero. It is stupid, scary fast.

I went 12.0 @ 118mph on a L67 just a few weeks ago. Just wanted to add that to the thread. Oh yeah, my car has never been dynoed. Ok I'm out.


Later.

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

1 of 2: Graphite Grey Pearl 87 GT 5 spd: 2.8L (Best 1/4 mile: 15.57@87mph, 2.0 60ft)
2 of 2: Ferrari Red 88 Formula/4T65EHD: 97 GTP Motor (Best 1/4 mile: 12.09@115mph, 1.89 60ft w/True Street Radial Tires not Drag Radials!)

My CarDomain Site
My Friend Garrod's CarDomain Site

[This message has been edited by Rare87GT (edited 06-09-2007).]

quote Originally posted by Formula88:How much money would you spend on advertising if you already had people lined up outside the door waiting to get in? Judging from all of the threads I've seen Archie post, he's always got multiple projects running. Spending a wad of cash on a halo car for advertising is throwing money away if you're already doing good business.

Business 101: Advertise, Advertise, Advertise.

If he has people lined up outside the door, he needs to hire more people and get a larger shop.

Your comment is like asking why Coca Cola spends money on TV ads. "Why? Everyone knows about it already!" I guarantee, if I walked around a car show that Archie himself attends, and asked 100 people, 99 of them would never have heard of him. This is the difference between being a hole in the wall and being Jack Roush, CEO of a multimillion dollar company that bears his name.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: What kind of power does Bob Rutz' (rgeeinc) ZZ430 put out? Archie did that install, don't know if he did any special tuning to the engine.

Bob has done a ridiculous amount of work to his car outside of Archie's shop. Aftermarket computer and a lot of tuning.

quote Originally posted by Fastback 86: Bob has done a ridiculous amount of work to his car outside of Archie's shop. Aftermarket computer and a lot of tuning.

Yes, understood. I was talking about the numbers "out of the box".

quote Originally posted by ryan.hess: The point isn't that "a basic SBC has 230 rwhp and is garbage because a highly modified 3.4 can make the same RWHP", it's that the 3.4 doesn't require a $1000 adapter. The only thing "not stock" about Steven's 3.4 is the K&N filter and short runner intake [and the rebuild, which I would hope the other engine has anyways]. I would assume the 305/350/377 or whatever it is now has a K&N filter too.

No it didn't require $1000 adapter, But how much do you think it cost to get the block bored, The heads shaved, the whole thing balanced/blueprinted and a new set of pistons?? Rebuild is one thing but his engine is modified from stock.

So now If the block is bored, balanced/blueprinted and the heads are shaved it is still considered stock???

quote Originally posted by Steven Snyder: How is my motor highly modified? It's a careful rebuild with a modified factory intake manifold and a ricer-style "cold air intake" with a K&N filter that hasn't been cleaned in 3 years. I didn't do anything else performance-wise.

Shaving heads .014 is a performance modification. It reduces the chamber size of the heads.
Boring the cylinders and using performance pistons is a modification. .030 larger cylinder/piston with reduced head chamber size = more power.
Balancing and blueprinting is a performance modification. Allows the engine to spin easier throughout the RPM range.

People usually consider an engine highly modified when the internals of the engine have been modified beyond stock specs.

quote Originally posted by Steven Snyder: Ok, rebuild the bottom end on the SBC, cut 8 inches off the intake runners, leave everything else stock including the carb and intake manifold..... I bet it would make LESS power because it can't be revved high enough (and doesn't have the head flow) to take advantage of zero runner length it would end up with.

Ahh, But that isn't all you did. I can tell you that if you shave the heads on a 350 and bore it out, port the intake, then have the engine balanced and blueprinted, The V-8 will gain at least 31 horsepower just like your engine. Shaving .014 off a stock SBC head would move the combustion chamber from roughly 96 cc's to about 88 cc's. That all by itself is good for 8-10 hp, Bore out the cylinders and replace them with decent pistons and you can grab another 10-12 hp. Port out the intake and balance the entire rotating assemble and another 8-10hp is gained.
Also please note a stock 3.4DOHC only pulled a 158 rwhp the same day on the same dyno.

quote Originally posted by Scott-Wa: That included pretty much all the 383 with aftermarket head ones also... 220-260 hp was about it with a carb setup. Yeah there were race cars putting down more but I don't think I saw a carbed 350-383 in a street vehicle that made 300hp. That old school magic 1hp per cubic inch isn't really that easy to do, especially to the ground in a vehicle swinging a vacuum/mechanical advance and a carb.

Interesting, My 350 cubic inch SBC V-8 hit 309 hp to the wheels and there is another member with a ZZ4 and a carb who also dyno'd 309 hp to the wheels. All this from an off-the-shelf GM built crate engine. They both use vacuum/mechanical advance and a 4-bbl carb.

quote Originally posted by FastIndyFiero: Like I said, I just wondered why it dyno'd so low.

It dyno'd low for the same reason the 3.4DOHC was only 158 rwhp and the 3800SC was only 170 rwhp.
As for the exact reason nobody has been able to find out yet. (Weather, Set-up, Correction factors, operator, ETC.)
It would be nice to know why all 3 engine readings were low.

quote Originally posted by ryan.hess: Business 101: Advertise, Advertise, Advertise. If he has people lined up outside the door, he needs to hire more people and get a larger shop. Your comment is like asking why Coca Cola spends money on TV ads. "Why? Everyone knows about it already!" I guarantee, if I walked around a car show that Archie himself attends, and asked 100 people, 99 of them would never have heard of him. This is the difference between being a hole in the wall and being Jack Roush, CEO of a multimillion dollar company that bears his name.

So now, in addition to not liking his swaps, or his advertising model, you now have a problem with how he staffs his shop? Bottom line, you don't like anything about the way he runs his business. Fair enough. But, hey, it's his business and if he runs it the way he wants to why should you care? More importantly, since given your complaints about him you're not likely to be a customer, why should HE care?

Not everyone wants to run a multimillion dollar corporation. Some people do what they do for a living because they love it. Jesse James once said in one of his interviews that going on TV was the worst mistake of his life. It's made him famous and rich, but all he wants to do is build cool stuff. The fame and business end of everything takes away from that.

Walk around a car show and ask how many people have heard about Ed Parks. Probably very few, even among the Fiero crowd. But I'll bet he has more fun doing what he does for a living than the CEO of Coca-Cola.

This argument taken to it's logical conclusion comes down to one thing. How we each choose to live our lives and pursue what makes us happy. For some it's the quest to be a millionaire stock broker. For others, they want to be the fastest down the quarter mile track while breathing nitro fumes. Who are we to say someone else isn't living their life correctly? If someone is racing in Super Street, do we condemn them because they should have spent more money to run Top Fuel?

Find something you enjoy in life and do it. I enjoy cars. I've had a few fast cars in my day, from a '72 Trans Am with a numbers matching 455 HO to an '87 Grand National I bought off the showroom floor. I've also had some fun cars that weren't fast, like my Fiero and my dad's '61 Corvair. My stock Formula doesn't hold a candle to my old '87 GN, but you know what - the Fiero puts a bigger smile on my face when I drive it. I never took either one to the drag strip, so what do I care what the ET is?

There are some people who only seem to derive pleasure from making fun of others. If that describes you, you know it and you're a nutswinger. And for that, you would have my pity, if I cared. But maybe one day these people will find something that makes you happy that doesn't require trying to tear someone else down. Good luck.

quote Originally posted by Fastback 86: Who's comparing apples to oranges? Comparing a "stock dinosaur pushrod engine fueled by an antiquted carb" to a modern, nearly stock, DOHC engine. Except its a V6 to a V8. With 8 less valves, 2 less cylinders, and 2.3 LESS liters of displacement. You're telling me that it takes the equivalent of an extra 4-bangers displacement to make 10-30 more horsepower? What a deal! How bout we compare something a little closer? Say DOHC V8 to Pushrod V8. N* numbers kick the crap out of the numbers Archie put down.

The engine you used is NOT stock. (see my post above)

So what part of "A STOCK 3.4DOHC was dyno'd the SAME day on the SAME dyno and it only hit 158 rwhp" do you not understand?
Or wait lets use a STOCK 3800SC, Again same day, same dyno and it only hit 170 rwhp. There are normally aspirated production 4-cyl engines hitting that so now by those examples the 3.4DOHC and the 3800SC are garbage engines??????? Is that what you are saying? Seriously if you apply your logic for a V-8 then the same must be used when comparing the other types of engines that were dyno'd the same day right?


For the record, My normally aspirated carb'd ZZ4 V-8 unmodified from GM specs, puts out more horsepower to the wheels than the stock normally aspirated DOHC V-8 Northstar engine does. As well as 88 more rwhp than a modified 3.4DOHC engine.

[This message has been edited by Oreif (edited 06-09-2007).]

This is the silliest argument I've ever read.

I lost interest after I found out why it made such low hp for a "377"

quote Originally posted by Formula88: But, hey, it's his business and if he runs it the way he wants to why should you care? More importantly, since given your complaints about him you're not likely to be a customer, why should HE care?

You're insightful.

The reason I care, is because Fieros have such potential. "We coulda been a contender." In all other performance car businesses, they have a guy that does the racing (usually the owner, go figure). Someone to test new products and push the envelope. ZZPerformance has Zoomer - the guy with the FWD 12.61 grand prix; seats 4 in luxury.

We have all kinds of fiero performance/engine swap shops. Not 1 pushes the envelope.

quote Originally posted by Shaunna on the "other" forum: NOT what someone else has to go and spend even more money to have it tuned. Like Oreif had to do. I can guarantee his first pull after coming out of your shop wasn't 309 whp. I bet it was well below just like the 3 cars that dynoed in Daytona all with SBC V8's.

Well you lost that bet. Baseline was 302 rwhp (initial run) then it was tweeked and the final run was 309 rwhp. There really wasn't much tuning required.
For the record, I didn't "need" to spend the money for a dyno run, I was just curious what it put down and the guys at the shop who assisted with the carb'd and EFI 3.4L also wanted to check it out.

quote Originally posted by Oreif: It dyno'd low for the same reason the 3.4DOHC was only 158 rwhp and the 3800SC was only 170 rwhp. As for the exact reason nobody has been able to find out yet. (Weather, Set-up, Correction factors, operator, ETC.) It would be nice to know why all 3 engine readings were low.

It would also be nice to find out why shaunna didn't dyno his car that day. Maybe he knew something everyone else did not. I would really like to see what kind of 1/4 mile times shaunna's car runs but he refuses to go take it to the track. I bet it's because he has to run from a dig and that there is a definant finish line. He beat all these cars but have yet to see him beat a V-8 powered car . His excuse is "uh my camera was not working" or something ghey. I bet his turbo 3.4 runs a mid 13 second time ,maybe low 13's. yet there are other V8 powered fiero's that run much quicker than that , yet shaunna conveniantly doesn't mention those cars. For all the members of RFT who hang on everything shaunna says i truely feel sorry. He has a flock of sheep and is tending it effectively. Why doesn't anyone call him out? Because he posts mediocre vids of him beating 4 bangers? When he posts vids of his races with V-8 cars he seems to ALWAYS lose. Why ? He talks his turbo 3.4 up so much you'd think he'd be able to stomp a camaro or stang. Oh i guess he can only beat the Stock v-8's Yeah you are the man dude you beat a GXP with the LS4 (14 sec car by the way). I bet it was stock LOL . Good job pulling that boat with a crappy driver off the line .
Shaun take your turd to the track and shut every one up . .. especially me ! I can't wait to see you run 13's or slower it will make my day LOL !

------------------
SHAUNNA IS THE NEW CALIKID BECAUSE "HE HAS NOTHING TO PROVE"

The whole problem here is connected to todays world, were more is better!
I have two more cylinders than you now you hate my car.
Can someone point me to that company I can buy a 300hp crate v-6 motor from? I want to check out the price.
Have a Great Day
Gary

quote Originally posted by GKDINC: Can someone point me to that company I can buy a 300hp crate v-6 motor from? I want to check out the price.

Sure! It's called GM. It will be available late this year. It's a 3.6L V6 DFI..... naturally aspirated... 302 hp @ 6300 rpm and 272 ft·lbf @ 5200 rpm. It's called the LLT and is slated for MY2008.

I know the 3800 SC would fit the bill too, but it would not have 300hp from the factory, which I think is what you're looking for.

So how much horsepower would an equivalent 350 make? 478hp. Again, naturally aspirated; that's quite a feat.

quote Originally posted by ryan.hess: We have all kinds of fiero performance/engine swap shops. Not 1 pushes the envelope.

Then pick up the banner and do it yourself. But don't sit on the sidelines and complain that someone else isn't doing it the way you think they should. If you know better - do it.

http://www.worldcastings.co...ods_pages/101011.htm I'd like to see one of these in a fiero. Probably never will though.

302 @ 6300rpm My Fiero tach gauge is going to be in the red. I'm going to do some searching and see how many venders I have to call to install a v-6 super charged junk yard motor. ( I'm on dial-up) be back in a couple days.
Wish me luck
Gary

Customer comes in from California, to attend Dells show and display his car. Discuss.

quote Originally posted by Formula88: Do you have a link to where we can buy that 302 HP 3.6L V6 now? I can show you a number of places where you can get a ZZ4 that puts out more than that - to the rear wheels, stock. (I take it the 302 HP figure is flywheel HP, so installed in a car it's closer to 260 HP (figuring about the same losses as Orief's ZZ4 swap) 478 HP NA would be impressive. How about 465 HP in a 350, normally aspirated? http://www.sdparts.com/prod...nKeyCrateEngine.aspx

For all the people b***ing about not comparing stock motors to stock motors, one could argue that that's not a stock engine, never slated or installed in a stock car, and never warrantied for 100,000 miles. (that's not directed at you) I bet it sounds like hell too. The 3.6 is going into butter smooth 600 rpm idle cadillacs in model year 2008. You will be able to buy them this fall.

quote Originally posted by Formula88: Then pick up the banner and do it yourself. But don't sit on the sidelines and complain that someone else isn't doing it the way you think they should. If you know better - do it.

I don't swap engines for people, and I don't have anything to sell. If I did, you'd better believe it.