quote Originally posted by lou_dias: Which block are you using? 3500/3900 VVT?

3.4 PR

Iron heads won't work with the 99mm bore block

quote Originally posted by La fiera: 3.4 PR

To get to 3.7L - are you using a different crank? or will you really just bore it to hell and back and cross your finger?

quote Originally posted by lou_dias: To get to 3.7L - are you using a different crank? or will you really just bore it to hell and back and cross your finger?

quote Originally posted by La fiera: https://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/140469.html Look at this thread. That's what I'm using now in the 3.4 250WHP Supernatural. SBC solid lifters. The block is in machine shop getting the last bore correction to fit the pistons. The only difference between the 3.4 and 3.7 is the bore. And of course, the entire rotating assembly is lighter. But to answer your question; yes, I'm working on it. I should have the the short block ready in 2 weeks. I will not install it right away. I want to see how much more I can squeeze out of the 3.4 Supernatural and then the 3.7 will go in.

Glad to hear it! Sorry I thought I'd read that whole thread but I guess not. I really like what you're doing here.

quote Originally posted by Travis D: Glad to hear it! Sorry I thought I'd read that whole thread but I guess not. I really like what you're doing here.

Its all good! That's what I said "look at this thread". I don't read entire threads either, I skim over them and get the entire idea. But yea, stay tuned!

quote Originally posted by La fiera: Its not 99mm bore Will.

LOL. Lou asked if you were using the 3500/3900 block. The LZ4/LZ9 block has a 99mm bore from the factory, but is incompatible with the iron heads. Try to keep up.

[This message has been edited by Will (edited 09-28-2018).]

quote Originally posted by Will: LOL. Dennis asked if you were using the 3500/3900 block. The LZ4/LZ9 block has a 99mm bore from the factory, but is incompatible with the iron heads. Try to keep up.

I believe they bolt up but since the bores are offset, things aren't lined up directly. I forget who posted a picture of one how it lines up... However it looks *possible* to use...
My engine builder was trying to sell me a 3500VVT block. It looked just like at 3400 block until I noticed the VVT menchanism and then I took note of the offset bores...

[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 09-25-2018).]

quote Originally posted by Will: LOL. Dennis asked if you were using the 3500/3900 block. The LZ4/LZ9 block has a 99mm bore from the factory, but is incompatible with the iron heads. Try to keep up.

Lol!! I'm sorry Will! Louis made that question. I've been following your thread on your car and the lines look pretty good! When is it going to be ready?

Now I remember... It was Joseph Upson that showed that iron heads will bolt up to the VVT blocks.

quote Originally posted by lou_dias: I believe they bolt up but since the bores are offset, things aren't lined up directly. I forget who posted a picture of one how it lines up... However it looks *possible* to use... My engine builder was trying to sell me a 3500VVT block. It looked just like at 3400 block until I noticed the VVT menchanism and then I took note of the offset bores...

"Possible" is a many-splendored thing.
If iron heads were made to work on the 99mm bore block, both deck surfaces would be more welding rod than virgin iron.

quote Originally posted by Will: The end of the year? Don't ask which year, though. I bought a new place when I got back from Afghanistan (1.2 acres in DC Metro!) but now I don't have a garage, so I go to my dad's on the weekends to work on the car.

I see! That's why I made sure that the last house I bought the garage is as big as the house!

quote Originally posted by La fiera: I see! That's why I made sure that the last house I bought the garage is as big as the house!

Well... since I have 1.2 acres...

quote Originally posted by Will: Well... since I have 1.2 acres...

You win, I have 1/2 an acre!!

I'd rather have your mortgage

quote Originally posted by Will: I'd rather have your mortgage

simplify and things will get easier! (Small Cubes)

Got the short from the machine shop and now I'm just test fitting the pistons. I did this mathematically so the test fitting would verify my calculations and that it would work, and it did. Stay tuned!

Rotating assembly in and torqued. Next items are the camshaft, timing chain and oil pump and then its going to wait to take the place of the 3.4.
As far as the car I ordered a set of mounts and shift cables and the fixture to install an F23. Also have the LSD installed in the F23. I also have the new clutch kit.
I should have it running soon, I'll keep you posted.

Neato! Are you going to share the engine "recipe" if everything works out?

quote Originally posted by Blacktree: Neato! Are you going to share the engine "recipe" if everything works out?

Yep, with the ones on my team! And you are one of them

Calculated the piston to head clearance to get the custom made head gaskets ordered.
It'll have 11:52.1 compression ratio.

You're missing the crank sensor.

quote Originally posted by Will: You're missing the crank sensor.

Yes! I use it as a plug!

"I wouldn't say I've been missing it, Bob"

Marley??!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E2w4sTLKtA

White folks stuff I guess!!! I'm from the Caribbean so you know I don' t speak your jargon

That was an "Office Space" movie reference. Lol

Since I'm upgrading the valvetrain to make it more efficient I had to re-work the cam profile I previously had
to take advantage of the valvetrain upgrade. Also taken into consideration was the "Race Pipes" that I have
on the 3.4 now and the percentage of exhaust to intake flow ratio. I dubbed it the "370 GTO" cam


WIth a primary coat of dry Molibdenum its going in with plenty of Gibbs Racing breaking lube!


Timing chain on and camshaft degreed.

You are doing some great work and it is exciting to see someone else pushing the 60degree engine platform. I look forward to your results.

That being said I do wonder why you are using the Camaro engine and not any of the highly available roller cam blocks? I have moved away from flat tappet completely and see no reason to even be messing with it in this day and age. Not to mention that any of the later blocks have a much easier to seal cast aluminum structural oil pan with better bottom end support and a windage tray. They also have an OEM oil cooler option that is really trick. I just view it as a much better starting point in my opinion and is just as easy to mount and work with as the Camaro engine.

Keep up the good work and I cant wait to see how this engine performs... I may have to copy some of your bottom end ideas for my next race engine!

quote Originally posted by thedrue: You are doing some great work and it is exciting to see someone else pushing the 60degree engine platform. I look forward to your results. That being said I do wonder why you are using the Camaro engine and not any of the highly available roller cam blocks? I have moved away from flat tappet completely and see no reason to even be messing with it in this day and age. Not to mention that any of the later blocks have a much easier to seal cast aluminum structural oil pan with better bottom end support and a windage tray. They also have an OEM oil cooler option that is really trick. I just view it as a much better starting point in my opinion and is just as easy to mount and work with as the Camaro engine. Keep up the good work and I cant wait to see how this engine performs... I may have to copy some of your bottom end ideas for my next race engine!

Well thank you very much for your kind words and complements!
But to answer your question on why I don't use the highly available roller cam block, the one thing that keeps me away from them is the weight of the lifters.
A good solid flat tappet lifter weights 60 grams and the roller lifter in your V6 weights about 325 grams.
That is almost five and a have times the weight of one solid lifter! Now multiply that weight times 12.
On roller lifters only, your engine is carrying 8.60lbs of extra weight
That means that if you are running a very aggressive cam you must have a very hi pressure set of springs to prevent valve float and keep those lifters under control.
If you are a visual person like me here are 2 pictures that represent the weight difference between a roller and a solid flat tappet lifter.

That's 3 exhaust valves and 1 push rod from the stock 3.4/2.8 engine and 1 pen.= 1 roller lifter


Thats 2 intake valves out my 206cc Go-Kart engine.= 1 solid flat tappet lifter.

Also your RPM climb will slow down due to the weight of the lifters and the engine will loose between 1300 to 800rpm also due to the extra weight.
And then last but not the least, the timing chain will stretch easier and faster due to the lifters weight.
So, the bottom line is that the few hp you think the roller cam gives you due to friction, It will require 5 times that same hp to run it because of the weight of
its components.
On a low RPM, slow response UPS or FEDEX truck rollers lifters work wonders! But on a All-Out racing engine I'll never use them.
Now, if everything is lighter, the engine will rev faster, more freely and higher. Will need less spring pressures and less timing chain stretch.
My goal is not only 300WHP, but also how fast it gets there.

Rei,

The real benefit of the roller lifters isn't the reduced rotating resistance, it is the roller tip allowing lobe ramp rates far beyond what a flat tappet allows (flat tappet lobe ramp rates are limited so the edge of the tappet doesn't gouge the cam lobe). The faster ramp rate gets you to the higher lift portions of the profile faster and you stay there longer with the same overall duration which provides a significant area under the curve benefit to them.

Solid roller lifters are lighter than hydraulic rollers (but still heavier than flat tappet) and might be a good compromise, but I also don't know if there are any aggressive roller cam options for the 60 degree V6 family either. It might be worth getting a roller lifter and cam and dial indicate the ramp rate profile between the two.

WOT-Tech sells a variety of roller cams...up to .540" lift IIRC.

I just switched to E85 and I'm still tuning but I picked up 7rwhp and 8 or 9 ft*lbs... If you don't care about fuel economy and just want even more power, I recommend it.

Thanks for the response! I knew you must have had a very good reason for doing what you do, engines like this don’t happen by accident.

I think you might want to rethink your roller lifter weight though. LS lifters, the same diameter but taller than 60° lifters, appear to weigh 122 grams. I would expect a 60° roller lifter to weigh less than double a flat tappet. Combine that with the shorter pushrod weighing less and the weight penalty may not be as great as you think. Also I believe the roller lifter is inherently more reliable and can take higher spring loads better. Although flat tappets have been very successful they just take much more care to not screw up the cam.

I have a set of roller lifters on my bench but no scale to verify. There are also no solid rollers or other performance hydraulics available for this platform. I just went through all that. I thought the v8 lifters would work but they’re too tall.

Anyway, I’ll keep following along and rooting for you, good luck!

quote Originally posted by lou_dias: WOT-Tech sells a variety of roller cams...up to .540" lift IIRC. .

The cam on this engine is .550 on the intake.

quote Originally posted by fieroguru: Rei, The real benefit of the roller lifters isn't the reduced rotating resistance, it is the roller tip allowing lobe ramp rates far beyond what a flat tappet allows (flat tappet lobe ramp rates are limited so the edge of the tappet doesn't gouge the cam lobe). The faster ramp rate gets you to the higher lift portions of the profile faster and you stay there longer with the same overall duration which provides a significant area under the curve benefit to them. Solid roller lifters are lighter than hydraulic rollers (but still heavier than flat tappet) and might be a good compromise, but I also don't know if there are any aggressive roller cam options for the 60 degree V6 family either. It might be worth getting a roller lifter and cam and dial indicate the ramp rate profile between the two.

This.

quote Originally posted by La fiera: The cam on this engine is .550 on the intake.

At the same peak lift, the greater area under the lift curve means that a roller cam can get way more air into the cylinder than a flat tappet cam.

quote Originally posted by thedrue: I think you might want to rethink your roller lifter weight though. LS lifters, the same diameter but taller than 60° lifters, appear to weigh 122 grams. I would expect a 60° roller lifter to weigh less than double a flat tappet. Combine that with the shorter pushrod weighing less and the weight penalty may not be as great as you think. Also I believe the roller lifter is inherently more reliable and can take higher spring loads better. Although flat tappets have been very successful they just take much more care to not screw up the cam. I have a set of roller lifters on my bench but no scale to verify. There are also no solid rollers or other performance hydraulics available for this platform. I just went through all that. I thought the v8 lifters would work but they’re too tall.

Would a *MECHANICAL* LS roller lifter work?
There are a LOT of those on the market, including ones with the roller riding on pressurized oil instead of needle bearings, making them immune to bearing failure with stiff springs and high ramp rates.