Not sure what you mean by "flipping the intake". It is installed as the factory originally installed it.
Daryl,
I'm in the midst of doing the same/similar swap. Already have the F40 out of a Saab 9-3; on the hunt for a complete drop out. Ideally, I'd find an LFX out of a '12+ Camaro or a LGX out of a 15+ Camaro Caddy (ATS, CTS, ETC). Just been a pain finding an engine as Copart stuff has skyrocketed in price (and not worth it) and most recyclers yank all the accessories/electronics off.
As far as flipping the intake, the intake is mounted forward facing; good for those cars, bad for the fiero's. It appears the mounting schema is symettrical for the intake, that is you can simply flip the intake around. Although I don't know if this would be completely do-able as Camaro setups point the throttle body downward. Hopefully this picture helps clear that up:
[This message has been edited by RandomTask (edited 12-04-2019).]
The LF3 did come in a transverse form in the XTS-V but the turbos are a bit on the smaller side for low end torque to lug the XTS around. The turbo's measured on my LF3 shoud fit in our engine bay but like i said, the turbo to intercooler pipes can't. The pipes perhaps could be ovalized or rerouted or a BFH against the rear firewall and the engine shifted aft but I opted to remove them and go with a custom exhaust and mount over the F40 like the LP9 SAAB layout and a more appropriate mid ranged sized turbo. Unfortunately the manifold bolt patterns are different between the LF3/LF4 and the LFX/LGX so the turbo's can't be swapped over.
The LFX's are good motors but they're built internally to be normally aspirated and will fail if pushed too far with forced induction. Do a search for GretchenGotGrowl on the Camaro forums. Granted, he eventually wrung near or at 700lb/ft out of his LFX but had to replace blocks, beef up internals, HPFP, etc.. That's where the LF3/LF4 come into play... they already have the built in fueling internals to handle forced induction included. Per Renik performance out of California their weak points, if upping the boost, are needing a bigger HPFP or larger HPFP cam on the cam, upgraded LPFP, the titanium rods on the LF4 can shatter under detonation, and the main and CR bearings are a little soft for OEM embedibility / reliability.
Thanks so much for this!
Clutch - Yeah, I found in this thread that a stock Saab clutch would work. My *thought* process is to use a SPEC FW w/ a Stage 3 Spec clutch. Thanks so much for the axle info!
Have you heard of anyone running an ECU from a manual Camaro having any of these stumbling issues? (unsure of the identification of the ECU's).
My biggest thing with the LF4 is the cost. For $7k for a setup, might as well as go LS at that point.
[This message has been edited by RandomTask (edited 12-04-2019).]
Originally posted by RandomTask: Thanks so much for this!
Clutch - Yeah, I found in this thread that a stock Saab clutch would work. My *thought* process is to use a SPEC FW w/ a Stage 3 Spec clutch. Thanks so much for the axle info!
Have you heard of anyone running an ECU from a manual Camaro having any of these stumbling issues? (unsure of the identification of the ECU's).
My biggest thing with the LF4 is the cost. For $7k for a setup, might as well as go LS at that point.
Not to hijack Danyl's thread...
I have the SPEC Alum flywheel and Stage 3+ setup waiting to go in for my LF3/LF4.... It goes in as soon as I finish F40 3.09FD swap...
The stumbling issues I referenced were due to not enough teeth/resolution on an external reluctor wheel feeding the E36/E92 ECM. I've fitted an LF4 ATS-V 6speed harness and ECU to my LF3 as they are 99% the same physically but the XTSV 's BCM controls the FPCM while the ATSV has a FPCM controlled by the ECM....having said that I have no point of reference to the Camaro manual LFX ECU. I would advise getting ahold of the Mitchell, or equivalent, wiring diagrams as the FSM wiring diagrams for the XTS and ATS were barely usable and far too broken up, and seeing if the manual has a separate FPCM. Since the ATS and he Camaro share a great deal in layout I would say they probably would have similar wiring layouts as well with the ATS being more complex due to the myriad of options and features Cadillac installs.
[This message has been edited by msweldon (edited 12-04-2019).]
Originally posted by RandomTask: Thanks so much for this!
Clutch - Yeah, I found in this thread that a stock Saab clutch would work. My *thought* process is to use a SPEC FW w/ a Stage 3 Spec clutch. Thanks so much for the axle info!
Have you heard of anyone running an ECU from a manual Camaro having any of these stumbling issues? (unsure of the identification of the ECU's).
My biggest thing with the LF4 is the cost. For $7k for a setup, might as well as go LS at that point.
My LFX came from a 2013 Impala. The F40 came from a 2006 Saab 9-3. I had Ryan from Sinister (aka Darth Fireo on this forum) reprogram the Impala ECU for my application. My project has not progressed to the point where I know if it all works yet, but I am confident all will work as planned.
Have you given any thought yet as to how you're going to handle your coolant routing? The HFV6 family of V6's have the coolant exit out of the engine on the passenger side or front of the block and inter the block just above the transmission to block mating point. This is exactly the opposite from the fiero layout. Are you planning on crossing over the coolant pipes in the bay, in the front prior to radiator, or install an aftermarket radiator with the inlet and outlets reversed.
Also, building my motor and transmission mounts for my "LF3.5" I noticed that your axles aren't exactly inline with the lateral and toe links as it looks like the F40 diff/output shafts are angled slightly forward indicating that your engine is shifted rearward a bit. Was this due to firewall clearance with all your accessories mounted toward the firewall or oil pan bosses interfering with the cradle?
Probably moot at this point and may be the 11th hour for you but you can relocate the alternator to the far side of the engine by utilizing the Camaro LFX alternator bracket which could give you some more room...
M
[This message has been edited by msweldon (edited 01-08-2020).]
Have you given any thought yet as to how you're going to handle your coolant routing? The HFV6 family of V6's have the coolant exit out of the engine on the passenger side or front of the block and inter the block just above the transmission to block mating point. This is exactly the opposite from the fiero layout. Are you planning on crossing over the coolant pipes in the bay, in the front prior to radiator, or install an aftermarket radiator with the inlet and outlets reversed.
Also, building my motor and transmission mounts for my "LF3.5" I noticed that your axles aren't exactly inline with the lateral and toe links as it looks like the F40 diff/output shafts are angled slightly forward indicating that your engine is shifted rearward a bit. Was this due to firewall clearance with all your accessories mounted toward the firewall or oil pan bosses interfering with the cradle?
Probably moot at this point and may be the 11th hour for you but you can relocate the alternator to the far side of the engine by utilizing the Camaro LFX alternator bracket which could give you some more room...
M
To your last point, I'm navigating that predicament right now. I'm looking to pick up the Impala alternator due to the belt routing, haha. My LFX is from a 2014 Camaro and Daryls alternator is where my power steering pump used to be.
To your last point, I'm navigating that predicament right now. I'm looking to pick up the Impala alternator due to the belt routing, haha. My LFX is from a 2014 Camaro and Daryls alternator is where my power steering pump used to be.
Keep up the good work!
Why are you looking to put the alternator against the firewall instead of keeping it in the stock camaro lfx location which would be the same as the 2.8 fiero? You can put an idler pulley where the impala alternator is mounted and free up quite a bit firewall, decklid hingebox clearance.
Msweldon & RandomTask, I really haven't worked out the coolant routing yet. As for the engine mounting and related issues, I blocked the engine/transmission in place and moved it around until I liked the position. With the power steering pump removed and a shorter belt in place, it all just seemed to fall into place. I'm not familiar with the Camaro LFX. I went with the Impala motor because it seemed there would be fewer issues using a transverse engine. Hope you guys continue to chime in. The feedback and suggestions are appreciated. Daryl
Why are you looking to put the alternator against the firewall instead of keeping it in the stock camaro lfx location which would be the same as the 2.8 fiero? You can put an idler pulley where the impala alternator is mounted and free up quite a bit firewall, decklid hingebox clearance.
To me, it's simply easier to buy a $120 alternator to mimic the impala routing rather than fabricating a pulley setup that can fix it. (Don't make crappier versions of things you can easily buy). It also looks like I'll have enough room there. I hope GM quality has increased since the 80's and I won't have to change the alternator all that often. The only way to not run an idler pulley where the PS pump was is to switch to a cadillac ATS style setup which would require getting all new accessories + crank pulley etc.
Found this pic online which is basically what I want to run:
To me, it's simply easier to buy a $120 alternator to mimic the impala routing rather than fabricating a pulley setup that can fix it. (Don't make crappier versions of things you can easily buy). It also looks like I'll have enough room there. I hope GM quality has increased since the 80's and I won't have to change the alternator all that often. The only way to not run an idler pulley where the PS pump was is to switch to a cadillac ATS style setup which would require getting all new accessories + crank pulley etc.
Found this pic online which is basically what I want to run:
BTW, did you get my PM?
That setup is basically ideal for the Fiero, and is pretty much exactly what my Northstar runs.
Applications that have electric power steering ditch the PS pump and simplify the accessory belt drive significantly.
Msweldon & RandomTask, I really haven't worked out the coolant routing yet. As for the engine mounting and related issues, I blocked the engine/transmission in place and moved it around until I liked the position. With the power steering pump removed and a shorter belt in place, it all just seemed to fall into place. I'm not familiar with the Camaro LFX. I went with the Impala motor because it seemed there would be fewer issues using a transverse engine. Hope you guys continue to chime in. The feedback and suggestions are appreciated. Daryl
Daryl,
Gladly help in any way I can. You've done a phenomenal job thus far. I'll be catching up to you soon; just placed my order for the clutch so I can start bolting things together.
So you're tracking, on the Camaro LFX, the power steering pump and alternator are switched as to what they are on the Impala. (Fun fact, in GM's infinite wisdom on the Camaro PS Pump, they put a bolt that disconnects the pump right behind the outer edge of the pulley; you have to take the pulley off to get the pump off the block). Since we don't need the PS pump, that leaves the Camaro LFX in a little of a predicament, I can't run straight from the AC to the water pump b/c the tensioner is in the way. My options are to either keep the alternator where it is and fabricate a PS delete pulley setup, or just buy an Impala alternator and install it (where the Camaro PS pump used to be).
The only thing I'd be worried about in the picture above is the amount of belt wrap I'd be putting on the alternator. The impala setup has an idler pully right next to it to increase the purchase. While we won't be driving the alternator anywhere near as hard as an impala (since we have way less electrical needs) it's still a concern. For piece of mind, I'm on the lookout for the bolt/washer setup for this idler pulley.
[This message has been edited by RandomTask (edited 01-09-2020).]
Oh and to add, I pulled the intake off and it looks like if you go to a camaro setup, to flip the intake around, you just need to lightly trim (~3/16") some of the ribbing on the bottom throat of the intake to clear the high pressure fuel lines.
The motor I have has ~100k miles on it and the valves are coked and I'm going to have to clean them. Seems some of the Camaro guys are seeing coking at around 15k miles. Might behoove you to pull the intake off and take a peak while everything is way more serviceable (ie, out of the car).
I got wireing instructions form Sinister (Darth Fiero on this forum). He also reprogrammed my ECM. It isn't really a schematic, more like instructions about what wire of the Impala harness goes to where on the Fiero. Since his changes are his intelectual property, I am reluctant to share without his authorization. Ryan is great to work with and was able to answer questions as I went along. Worth the money to have his brain to pick. If I were you, I'd contact him. sp1@gmtuners.com Hope this helps. Daryl
I got wireing instructions form Sinister (Darth Fiero on this forum). He also reprogrammed my ECM. It isn't really a schematic, more like instructions about what wire of the Impala harness goes to where on the Fiero. Since his changes are his intelectual property, I am reluctant to share without his authorization. Ryan is great to work with and was able to answer questions as I went along. Worth the money to have his brain to pick. If I were you, I'd contact him. sp1@gmtuners.com Hope this helps. Daryl
Totally understand. Yeah, I already reached out to him. .. just need to finish the paperwork and send it to him.
So people are tracking if they want to do this with a Camaro LFX - My suggestion is do the impala and source a Camaro intake; way easier. From my research, the horsepower is in the intake and tune.
Things - Belt Routing - Impala is already set up for it. I discovered that I can't just install an Impala alternator as the oil filter setup is different from the Camaro vs the Impala. The Camaro's comes straight up off the block to a cartridge style filter. The Impala setup goes back (towards the rear of the block) and out the "left" side of the block to utilize a canister filter; pretty much where the stock oil filter is located. The Camaro oil filter setup will prevent you from installing impala alternator. I had to purchase the Impala oil filter housing Assy (GM PN: 12657485)
Cooling - The Impala again, is better setup for this. First, the t-stat housing on the Camaro aims the inlet to the right to go around the block towards the front of the engine. The impala housing (PN is 12681132) aims it to the left (towards the front of a Fiero). As far as the outlet, the Camaro setup aims it straight forward, more than likely into the fiero right side strut tower. The impala kicks it to the left (front of fiero). I just picked one up off ebay for $20 as I couldn't find the part in any online catalog (eg GMPartsDirect) but the PN cast into the unit is 12597590.
I still have to figure out I want to run this to the cooling of the car, notably since the inlet/outlet is reverse from the Fiero setup. I'll most likely get a custom radiator to address this. I'll burn this bridge when I get there.
Intake - You can the Camaro intake 180* You do need to break out a dremel and trim some of the ribbing underneath the "throat" of the intake to clear the high pressure pump plumbing that's on the back side of the engine. I actually think once you do this it will put you in better shape for intake plumbing.
[This message has been edited by RandomTask (edited 01-28-2020).]
RandomTask, just how much of the hp increase do you think is because of a better intake? Does your research indicate that any of the increase is because of better exhaust? Daryl
RandomTask, just how much of the hp increase do you think is because of a better intake? Does your research indicate that any of the increase is because of better exhaust? Daryl
RandomTask, just how much of the hp increase do you think is because of a better intake? Does your research indicate that any of the increase is because of better exhaust? Daryl
This along with programming is what I thought made the difference. I followed a discussion and trial on an LLT vs. LFX intake on the Camaro forum where an LLT intake was mounted on an LFX, or the other way around and the end result I vaguely recall seemed to favor the LLT intake, but the overall outcome for the effort was that it wasn't worth the trouble.
I was also not impressed with the fact that a different intake manifold, larger intake valves, increased intake camshaft duration, moving the power peak 400 rpm higher to 6800 and adding .2 more compression points for the LFX, only netted 11 additional hp more than the LLT for the Camaro. That's an awful lot of upgrading for the return, of course that's only a snap shot as the entire performance curve would have to be compared for the over all difference.
There is a 7hp difference between the single and dual exhaust LLT for the Saturn outlook, so the exhaust definitely appears to have a notable effect with the typical fwd arrangement.
RandomTask, just how much of the hp increase do you think is because of a better intake? Does your research indicate that any of the increase is because of better exhaust? Daryl
No idea. May be 5-10hp? Like I said earlier, I *think* the camaro intake will make swapping this setup way easier but I'll let you know when I get there.
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:
This along with programming is what I thought made the difference. I followed a discussion and trial on an LLT vs. LFX intake on the Camaro forum where an LLT intake was mounted on an LFX, or the other way around and the end result I vaguely recall seemed to favor the LLT intake, but the overall outcome for the effort was that it wasn't worth the trouble.
I was also not impressed with the fact that a different intake manifold, larger intake valves, increased intake camshaft duration, moving the power peak 400 rpm higher to 6800 and adding .2 more compression points for the LFX, only netted 11 additional hp more than the LLT for the Camaro. That's an awful lot of upgrading for the return, of course that's only a snap shot as the entire performance curve would have to be compared for the over all difference.
There is a 7hp difference between the single and dual exhaust LLT for the Saturn outlook, so the exhaust definitely appears to have a notable effect with the typical fwd arrangement.
Ceteris paribus, about 10hp. Camaro went from 312hp to 323hp. The LFX is also 20lbs lighter than the LLT.
To me the crown jewel is in the exhaust. The integrated exhaust port on the head makes re-routing the exhaust light years easier than fabbing up a custom set of headers that the LLT would require.
To me the crown jewel is in the exhaust. The integrated exhaust port on the head makes re-routing the exhaust light years easier than fabbing up a custom set of headers that the LLT would require.
But also means that it's impossible to build headers for the LFX...
Then start with an LLT, if custom headers are worth the lower HP start...
Well since the LFX has basically built-in long manifolds... Where does the extra power come from? Cams? Intake ports? I was under the impression it was cams, which would be part of a stout LLT build anyway...
Well since the LFX has basically built-in long manifolds... Where does the extra power come from? Cams? Intake ports? I was under the impression it was cams, which would be part of a stout LLT build anyway...
Could you not port/ polish the heads on the LFX to gain better in and out flow? I know there would be more polishing done on the exhaust side than on a normal head. I have never seen the inside on the LFX heads just spit balling ideas of gaining power on better breathing.
So, as I understand it, the published hp & torque for engines are as installed in the car . a Camaro has a much different air box and exhaust than an Impala, or any other less sporty car. Could the biggest factor determining the added Camaro power be air box and exhaust, both of which are designed on the non-sporty models to be very quiet? If that is the case, a high flow cold air intake and less restrictive exhaust may just make more difference than you think.
Could you not port/ polish the heads on the LFX to gain better in and out flow? I know there would be more polishing done on the exhaust side than on a normal head. I have never seen the inside on the LFX heads just spit balling ideas of gaining power on better breathing.
there's alot more that goes into building an exhaust than just flowrate, harmonics play a significant role, and with a integrated manifold like the LFX, you're pretty much stuck with what the factory gives you in the respect.
------------------ "I am not what you so glibly call to be a civilized man. I have broken with society for reasons which I alone am able to appreciate. I am therefore not subject to it's stupid laws, and I ask you to never allude to them in my presence again."
there's alot more that goes into building an exhaust than just flowrate, harmonics play a significant role, and with a integrated manifold like the LFX, you're pretty much stuck with what the factory gives you in the respect.
Right. Well built long tube headers will do a lot more for an LLT's naturally aspirated power output than any single-pipe exhaust will do for an LFX's naturally aspirated power output.
It is my understanding that the goal of exhaust design is to equally space exhaust pulses from each cylinder into the collector to encourage scavenging. The common plenum on each head is not ideal for this, but the fact that the firing order alternates banked with each pulse, it isn't as bad as it could be. I would be curious just how big the individual ports make. My guess is that those GM motor engineers have probably considered all of the factors when they did the redesign of the heads for the high feature engine.
They were designing the engine as a concerted system for the 320-330 HP output range that the LFX and LGX have stock. Look at all the little incrememental changes that happen to move from the 320 HP LFX to the 330 HP LGX...
Now think about what has to happen to build a 400 HP LLT...
Originally posted by Daryl M: GM motor engineers have probably considered all of the factors when they did the redesign of the heads for the high feature engine.
The only factor they consider is packaging and where to save a buck. Performance is the least of their concerns. Like you mentioned before that head design is not ideal because of that same reason, make the cheapest design and get it out of the door.
Will, the big reason the LFX-LGX is at the power level it is has more to do with drivability than money. Yes they are capable of more hp, but at what cost? Longevity, reliability and drivability are more important to GM than saving $10 bucks per car or making a motor that is less reliable and has a narrow power band. Just my opinion. Daryl
Will, the big reason the LFX-LGX is at the power level it is has more to do with drivability than money. Yes they are capable of more hp, but at what cost? Longevity, reliability and drivability are more important to GM than saving $10 bucks per car or making a motor that is less reliable and has a narrow power band. Just my opinion. Daryl
Emissions requirements drive far more than that. The engine would probably be fine at a higher power level in terms of reliability, but wouldn't satisfy emissions requirements. With high compression, DI and VVT, the width of the power band is less of a concern.
Will, I did a quick search to find the most powerful naturally aspirated automotive v6 under 4 liters. The best I could find was the 4 liter Porche. When adjusted for displacement, it is about 10% more powerful than the LGX. Since the Porche is a performance car and buyers expect different things from it than someone that buys an Impala, 10% doesn't seem like a big deal. I still would be interested to know just how much difference the exhaust, LLT vs LFX really makes.
It may have been on a defunct forum, but I read a build thread of a guy who put a BMW S38 into an E30. He did a blueprinted build and installed an aftermarket intake cam... I don't remember what the wheel number was, but it was enough to estimate crankshaft power at ~390 from a 3.6 liter inline six.
I noticed that your axles aren't exactly inline with the lateral and toe links as it looks like the F40 diff/output shafts are angled slightly forward indicating that your engine is shifted rearward a bit. Was this due to firewall clearance with all your accessories mounted toward the firewall or oil pan bosses interfering with the cradle? 
