What you do is go in circles. You compare my dyno to another dyno like everything is apples to apples. You're just here to troll. What someone else's motor dynos at is irrelevant to my motor because all I care about is making my motor perform to my expectations, not yours. I'm not going to switch cams, transmissions or heads. If you have nothing contructive to say STFU and go troll somewhere else.
It's relevant to the argument that the iron heads don't hold the engine back like you say.
You consistently make claims that the iron heads will perform as good or better then the aluminum heads, and are consistently shown that they don't, and when you are given data that does not support your claims, you cry fowl play, or not apples to apples.
The above posted dyno shows very clearly that a stock 3500 has a much broader torque curve, and matches your engines peak torque, and you claim it's not a fair comparison because of the exhaust? your engine has different pistons then stock, ported heads, ported intakes, headers, ect. yet because the 3500 has a crush bent Y pipe, it's not a fair comparison??? that 3500 wasn't even rebuilt! it was a junkyard engine thrown in the car! yeah it's not apples to apples, it's a comparison that FAVORS your engine. stock 3500>modified iron headed 3400.
You claim flow numbers are meaningless, and then start using flow numbers as a basis for comparison. where I'm from that is called being hypocritical.
It's relevant to the argument that the iron heads don't hold the engine back like you say.
You consistently make claims that the iron heads will perform as good or better then the aluminum heads, and are consistently shown that they don't, and when you are given data that does not support your claims, you cry fowl play, or not apples to apples.
The above posted dyno shows very clearly that a stock 3500 has a much broader torque curve, and matches your engines peak torque, and you claim it's not a fair comparison because of the exhaust? your engine has different pistons then stock, ported heads, ported intakes, headers, ect. yet because the 3500 has a crush bent Y pipe, it's not a fair comparison??? that 3500 wasn't even rebuilt! it was a junkyard engine thrown in the car! yeah it's not apples to apples, it's a comparison that FAVORS your engine. stock 3500>modified iron headed 3400.
You claim flow numbers are meaningless, and then start using flow numbers as a basis for comparison. where I'm from that is called being hypocritical.
I claim you're a troll. This isn't a thread about iron heads vs aluminum heads. The trollish threads you started didn't catch on so you came to this one. It's jerks like you that everytime someone says they are gonna do a 3.4 swap, you chime in and say "don't waste your time". Well, I'm sorry you wasted your time on a 3500 when you could have just gone 3800SC to eventually a turbo 3800. No one cares. I'm actually in shock you haven't been speed-banned with all the hate and propaganda you spread.
Atleast carbon and sleevePAPA have provides some tuning advice. You've done nothing but troll.
What are the specs for a fiero 2.8 stock cam and for a 3400 stock cam, Is the firebird can also the same since the same heads are used?
I don't know all the specs off the top of my head but the Fiero cam has .390"/.410" in/ex lift with 1.5 rockers and the stock 3400 roller cam has .436" for both with 1.6 roller rockers stock. Despite not having as much total lift as the Comp Cams 260H it gets close to max lift sooner and hence stays near max lift longer thanks to its roller-cam design.
I believe the Firebird/Camaro uses the same Fiero cam.
[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 01-27-2014).]
I claim you're a troll. This isn't a thread about iron heads vs aluminum heads. The trollish threads you started didn't catch on so you came to this one. It's jerks like you that everytime someone says they are gonna do a 3.4 swap, you chime in and say "don't waste your time". Well, I'm sorry you wasted your time on a 3500 when you could have just gone 3800SC to eventually a turbo 3800. No one cares. I'm actually in shock you haven't been speed-banned with all the hate and propaganda you spread.
Atleast carbon and sleevePAPA have provides some tuning advice. You've done nothing but troll.
lou, just because you don't believe what I say doesn't make it "propaganda". I back my claims up with real test data, and real comparisons, I don't instantly say someone is wrong if I can't back that claim up, and that has been made apparent in many threads. many of the threads I post in, I try to emphasize the 3x00 engines as an option, because many people don't realize what the engines are capable of. My aluminum head thread showed data, both flow data, and dynographs comparing each engines cylinder heads, with data from multiple sources. I'll quote you now from your aluminum head thread:
quote
Originally posted by lou_dias:
There's been much iron-head vs. aluminum-head debate lately.
I have argued that the main attraction of the 3X00 engines is the roller cam adaptation of the blocks. I have argued that in our 6/60 motors that the heads are not the limitation of the engine's power.
We have GM documentation showing 100HP/L out of a 2.8 and a 3.0 respectively with 12.5:1 compression using Falconer ported heads and ITB-designed Falconer intake. Back then the 3.1 and 3.4 weren't around yet so who knows what they could have achieved.
I see no dynograph showing a real torque curve, no specifications of the engine other then 12.5:1 compression ratio itb intake, and ported heads. how big was the cam? hydraulic or mechanical? roller? lightened crank? stock crank? how many cuts on the valves? wet sump? dry sump? power at the wheels? crankshaft? with accessories? the list could go on for days.
quote
Originally posted by lou_dias: Well, the "aluminum head enthusiasts" are trying to say that a race-prepped 3500 would destroy the old #'s of GM's smaller diplacement engines...due to the 'advances' of the heads...
So I looked for a race-prepped 3500 build.
I found this user on another forum named 'SuperDave'. http://www.jboi.org/registry/Superdave Seems pretty 'race-prepped' to me. Even uses a higher lift cam than what is possible on iron heads. Iron heads are limited to .510" lift.
stock bottom end with a cam, ported heads and intake. hardly race prepped, and the cam, LSx guys run more lift then that on street too, does that mean every cammed LSx is a race engine?
quote
Originally posted by lou_dias: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCdRKvMlmck 274.6 hp, 248.9 tq He was using higher compression but got poor results and when back down to stock 9.8:1 compression. He then decided to build a 1/4 mile car out of an '89 Camaro... You can see the build here: http://www.thirdgen.org/tec...633-my-3-5-swap.html He decided to at an ITM intake. Yep...INDIVIDUAL THROTTLE-BODY intake MANIFOLD. Funny thing is this car using a 700R transmission dynoed at lower HP but more TQ. 263/263 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxewiTeUMlk
Is it possible that running open exhaust on his 3500Z car got him more HP and less TQ? Is it possible that running an exhaust on his 3500RS car got him more TQ and less HP?
I would answer yes to both questions.
ITB intake, many European and Japanese cars run ITB's factory, does that mean all of these are race setups too?
quote
Originally posted by lou_dias: Regardless he still didn't surpass GM's older tech. Yes, GM has to spin the motors higher with more comprssion, but that is easily made up for by the extra displacement and higher lift cam. IF the iron heads were restrictive, spinning the motors faster wouldn't have had any benefit.
The main point here is that iron heads can flow 300 HP naturally aspirated. They would have probably flowed even more behind a 3.4 or 3.5 L motor. Heck, Falconer's port-job on the intake side wasn't even as good as Oreif's porting when he dyno'ed 2 iron head engines at ~200rwhp.
HP is related to air flow. A 3.4 flows/requires as much air at 4941 RPM as a 2.8 does at 6000 RPM. Engines are just air pumps. Flow = flow. HP=HP. I have yet to see the heads being the factor in limiting horse power on v6/60 engines.
again, you have no quantifying information here, there is nothing listed about these 280-300 IH engines, just ported heads and ITB's. so there is no basis for comparison, then myself and several others show dynographs with build threads that have quite a but of information on the mods to an engine and car, and you claim there's no basis for comparison.
the only reason I've consistently posted in this thread is because you make claims, then don't back them up. you just basically say "you're wrong because I said.", either that, or you just don't have the capacity to interpret charts and graphs(which I do not believe is the case). This, to me, is the definition of trolling. call me a troll all you want, I back my claims, with real data. I don't post something if I can't back it up. and the few times I have mis-spoke, I have responded with an apology, and edited my post.
you claim your engine setup is so great, but you have yet to break 200 hp, with any intake setup. and a stock 3500 does, what's the difference? stock cam, stock intake, stock tb, stock exhaust manifolds, oh wait, it's got a custom crush bent y pipe, so, almost stock.
[This message has been edited by ericjon262 (edited 01-27-2014).]
If you want to know what a stock 3500 dynoes at, post a dyno from the car that the engine belongs in. Don't give me some bull about them dynoing at 206rwhp stock when they aren't even rated that high at the engine.
Here's a transplant similar to what is done for the Fiero: 170.4 hp/193 ft/lbs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCKRYk4YbRA feel free to add 5-8 hp since it's an auto...You back up your crap with more crap. There's also plenty of dynos of STOCK 3400's putting down 150rwhp in their original vehicles. You are trying to make my mods seem extreme and other people's mods look minor. I did more to the heads to MATCH gen3 head flow. My extra .4 of compression nets me about 3hp over the stock 9.5 compression of 3400/3500 enginee - WOOP DEE DOO. A stock 3500 dynos at 15-20 hp more than a stock 3400. Isn't 20>3? Great comparison.
Now let's look at what else my rebuild gave me: 2.2 cubic inches WOW! 204.4025298 = stock 3400 3.62" bore 206.6673605 = my .020" over bore due to rebuild 213.536723 = 3.7" bore of the 3500
Yeah, according to a troll like you I should be rocking more power than a 3500 thanks to my 0.4 extra compression and 7 less cubic inches than a 3500 that already comes with a larger intake and more cubes netting 20 more rwhp than a 3400.
Don't give me your CRAP about 206 rwhp with a crimped exhaust. Maybe everybody should go crimping exhausts... TROLL!
[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 01-28-2014).]
Originally posted by ericjon262: see no dynograph showing a real torque curve, no specifications of the engine other then 12.5:1 compression ratio itb intake, and ported heads. how big was the cam? hydraulic or mechanical? roller? lightened crank? stock crank? how many cuts on the valves? wet sump? dry sump? power at the wheels? crankshaft? with accessories? the list could go on for days.
As those were MAX EFFORT RACE ENGINES, I think it's safe to assume "all of the above". 280HP from a 2.8 and 300 HP from a 3.0 represent the absolute limit of the iron heads under the best conditions. As comparable wheel numbers have already been made with aluminum heads using production intakes and comparatively few additional mods, it should be obvious which heads have more potential.
Anyway... car needs more cam and more gear to make use of more power.
Don't give me your CRAP about 206 rwhp with a crimped exhaust. Maybe everybody should go crimping exhausts... TROLL!
There is a very noted difference in the length and routing of exhaust between a Fiero and a Cavalier. You also can't use the 3500 'header' like manifolds in that generation of J-body due to space constraints, so Weatherall's Auto was using the log front manifold and crossover, most likely from a 3500 van since that is where motor came from, and from the pictures he still had the full Cavalier exhaust installed.
There is a very noted difference in the length and routing of exhaust between a Fiero and a Cavalier. You also can't use the 3500 'header' like manifolds in that generation of J-body due to space constraints, so Weatherall's Auto was using the log front manifold and crossover, most likely from a 3500 van since that is where motor came from, and from the pictures he still had the full Cavalier exhaust installed.
Why is the dyno sheet of a 3500 in an actual Fiero 'crap' and dyno video of a 3500 in a Cavalier more representative of a Fiero swap?
If anything, that should tell you about how much variation there can be in swaps. We already discussed the variation in dynometers, that everyone keeps forgetting. Post dynos of 3500s in their original car with no mods then to get a baseline. If a modded 3.4 Fiero can match that power, which is a fact, why is he still being a no-life'd troll? His comparisons are useless because mods vary. It's crap because he keeps trolling like its the norm. His posts go in circles. All he does is repeat him self. He serves no constructive purpose in this thread. He had dedicated threads for his trollishness but in the end no one cared about them. It's like he's personally insulted that iron heads can be ported to 'hang' with aluminum heads. Poor baby.
This thread is about my car/engine not a motor that will never go in it.
[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 01-28-2014).]
As soon as I finish my move, I'm going to get back to working on my Fiero again which has been in storage for the past two and a half years. I'm seriously debating just going with a 3500 or 3400 block and doing this swap (with the iron heads) so I can keep the factory intake, and STILL make use of the roller cam.
Lou, do you have any videos on YouTube where I can actually hear what it sounds like? The race videos were cool, but it's hard to actually hear the engine?
If you have any where you're kind of doing a walk-around, or a simple cruise with maybe a WOT thrown in there, I'd love to see it. Thanks!
As soon as I finish my move, I'm going to get back to working on my Fiero again which has been in storage for the past two and a half years. I'm seriously debating just going with a 3500 or 3400 block and doing this swap (with the iron heads) so I can keep the factory intake, and STILL make use of the roller cam.
Lou, do you have any videos on YouTube where I can actually hear what it sounds like? The race videos were cool, but it's hard to actually hear the engine?
If you have any where you're kind of doing a walk-around, or a simple cruise with maybe a WOT thrown in there, I'd love to see it. Thanks!
I have dyno videos posted on my loudfiero channel. I'm running a Flowmaster 55 series muffler. Here's one:
[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 01-29-2014).]
It seems I may be returning to my 250 ft*lbs ways... I found that my CPS and knock sensor wires were sitting against the block and transmission just underneath a header. The heat caused the loom to melt and the wires are brittle. I wire-tied the wires away from the block and now 80% of the time my engine runs like a champ again. I believe the signal was arcing out on the block...or atleast being interfered by it. The wires are very brittle and I still get some temporary timing issues but overall, it's a huge improvement.
After I finish moving into my new house this weekend, I'll be dropping the car off for maintenance, including new knock and CPS wires...then if that all works out, dyno to follow as I'm sure I'll need a new tune...
After some weeks... So some rerouting of sensor wires, the car was running better. Still had a weird skip. Slipped a belt so I had it towed to a mechanic and told him to investigate the skip.
Turns out my ignition module was bad and I was missing a cylinder or perhaps two. It wasn't the coil packs or wires. Should be running like a champ again. Looks like it will be back to the tuning drawing board.
I also added '88 cradle adapters because I though my body roll on hard turns was causing the spring to hit the tire in the back... well when the mechanic went to install the adapters, turns out I had 0 pressure on that strut. Well, that explains my twitchiness going into turn 3 a few times last year... Waiting on new coil over assembles from Arraut Motorsports now...
Zero pressure in a strut isn't a bad thing... zero pressure in just one would be weird, but you could have depressurized the other to match.
The Koni custom shop routinely ships depressurized shocks to autocrossers looking to keep a low ride height and not have their cars lifted slightly by the gas pressure in the damper.
Yet another delay: the difference between the RCC coil-over and Aurrat Motorsports...
I had no pressure in the right rear strut last year so I am replacing them both. Forgot Archie installed RCC coil-overs in the back...thought I could just swap out everything but the springs... Epic fail...
@Will, the back right strut with no pressure it what made me spinout on turn 3 last year after replacing the bad bearing...if it was the back left, I wouldn't be as concerned...
If it's not one thing it's another...
On a brighter note, my mechanic is actually impressed with the power of the motor now that I'm running on ALL 6 cylinders again. Apparently, I've had a bad ICM for a few years... Well that explains my power loss...
[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 05-13-2014).]
Like I said, having one depressurized and one not would be weird, as that creates an asymmetric roll stiffness.
However, the struts don't need the gas charging to function. The gas charging just makes them less prone to foaming and cavitation when subjected to extended hard use. Your races are too short for that to matter.
In assigning blame for your spinout, are you sure the nut behind the wheel is tight enough?
Like I said, having one depressurized and one not would be weird, as that creates an asymmetric roll stiffness.
However, the struts don't need the gas charging to function. The gas charging just makes them less prone to foaming and cavitation when subjected to extended hard use. Your races are too short for that to matter.
In assigning blame for your spinout, are you sure the nut behind the wheel is tight enough?
especially when the depressurized one is the one taking the brunt of the abuse on a circle track... as for the nut behind the wheel, I try to over-engineer the handling because I will never claim to be the best driver...
Car's running much better with 2 degrees of advance added back.
In round 3 I easily pulled off a 19 second lap while babying turns 3 and 4. Faced some completion in round 4 and rather than allowing the car to drift wide, I kept the wheel too tight to left and just spun out when I punched it. Clearly my driving hasn't improved...
Last year, I would have to try hard to get a 19 second lap. If I didn't spin out in turn 2 and beat that Camaro, I was guaranteed a 3rd place finish. Ended up 5th.
Car is having maintenance done and new alignment. Broken engine or transmission mount. Hope to get it on the dyno and play some more with timing.
I’m at 2:56 and 29:50 … Ran an 18ish second lap in the 2nd race…which is amazing! Still lost though. The Camaro that beat me should have won the whole event but he lost control in the semi-finals coming out of turn 4 and took 3rd. The turbo AWD Eagle Summit that he lost to should have took 1st after beating him but he blew something in the finals and lost boost and lost to the BOSS Mustang which wasn't even as fast as my 2nd round race. Oh well, that's how it goes in these tournament-style matchups...
Here's the rest of the event in case anyone is interested...
[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 07-24-2014).]
Well I didn't stick around because it would be a while longer for #'s 4 & 6 but #1: 100 #3: 110 #5: 120 #2: 95 Well, that answers every question about why my engine has been under-performing... Now is not a good time to have to do a rebuild. Was hoping to wait until the spring. Also sprung a leak on the internal slave cylinder of the F40...
Just got the call on #4 & 6: 95 & 110...
[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 08-18-2014).]
Originally posted by raysr11: Boy Lou I gotta hand it to you, you can take a licking and come out kicking!!!!! This iron head vs aluminium is wild!
Well, it made no sense that this motor used to make so much more power but after the Trueleo intake swap and 7730 conversion, I had a short on my injector harness and they were running 100% of the time to the point where I had a fire start from fumes coming out my valve cover breathers. So my rings probably went to hell at that point so any tuning I did from then on was just never gonna be enough. In a way it feels good to know this once and for all rather than speculate. This motor was built in 2006 so it's served me 8 years but only about 20k miles due to these issues. I'm surprised I don't have bearing issues.
Money is tight right now...I'd like to splurge on a .480/.480 cam but I don't know if the timing will work out...
Argh! Mechanic says it will be 2 weeks before he can pull the motor. With the 3 week turnaround time quoted by the machine shop, looks like I'll miss the last race of the season on Oct 7 as well... :/
The + side is I have time to get a cam... .480/.480
Since I'm doing another rebuild, I decided to open up the ports to 1 3/8". Also painting them with some ceramic paint...but I'm still going to wrap them.
[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 11-29-2014).]
I know some people still find it hard to believe I made 249 rear wheel torque...but... When you consider I was on a Mustang dyno that's a few % below a dyno jet you get...
[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 11-29-2014).]
Well I didn't stick around because it would be a while longer for #'s 4 & 6 but #1: 100 #3: 110 #5: 120 #2: 95 Well, that answers every question about why my engine has been under-performing... Now is not a good time to have to do a rebuild. Was hoping to wait until the spring. Also sprung a leak on the internal slave cylinder of the F40...
Just got the call on #4 & 6: 95 & 110...
Golden opportunity to step up to aluminum heads and make some power
Well, the inside diameter of the header primaries are 1-3/8" so I was just matching everything up... But since you mean the intake side, I leave that to my machinist.
[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 12-16-2014).]
Well, the inside diameter of the header primaries are 1-3/8" so I was just matching everything up...
Sorry, was talking about the intake. For the headers, they are built to match the engine, not engine built to match the headers, IMHO. Its going to need more cam now to get more out of the raised powerband, otherwise you may find its going to be a dog in the entire rpm range.
FWIW, raif's car my have put down ~250 lb ft, but if you look at the dyno sheet, the torque takes a sharp dive after the initial tip-in.
Sorry, was talking about the intake. For the headers, they are built to match the engine, not engine built to match the headers, IMHO. Its going to need more cam now to get more out of the raised powerband, otherwise you may find its going to be a dog in the entire rpm range.
FWIW, raif's car my have put down ~250 lb ft, but if you look at the dyno sheet, the torque takes a sharp dive after the initial tip-in.
I went to the .480/.480 cam from WOT-Tech... Engine is now .040" over-bored...
[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 12-16-2014).]
Since I'm doing another rebuild, I decided to open up the ports to 1 3/8". Also painting them with some ceramic paint...but I'm still going to wrap them.
We had our header flanges made thick so that they could taper into the runners nicely and allow customers to enlarge them easily. Nice to see someone take advantage of that. As for that the iron heads, here's what we found on the flow bench> http://trueleo.com/Fierointake.htm ------------------
[This message has been edited by Francis T (edited 12-17-2014).]
