People forget that without boost the intake is under negative pressure. To get to 1 bar in the intake manifold takes about 8 psi on my setup. There is nothing wrong with my guage. I think I am not wording this right, what I mean is it takes 8 psi of pressure in the tube that goes from the turbo to the throttle body to get the ECU to see 1 bar in the intake manifold. And since a MAP sensor is reading Manifold Absolute Pressure (pressure in the intake manifold after the throttle body), a 1 bar MAP will show the intake manifold under boost with a limited range. My boost guage and all my reference points for water/meth etc are connected directly to the intake manifold after the throttle body.
What "people forget" is that MAP is "Manifold Absolute Pressure". A 1 bar MAP sensor reads pressures from 0 to 1 bar. 1 bar is atmospheric pressure.
quote
Originally posted by wftb:
Here is a screen shot of what I see on my laptop while taking a scan:
We have gotten way off topic but you can see the MAP is reading boost.
As you can see, the 1 bar MAP sensor is reading 104 kPa, at maximum, as one would expect from a 1 bar sensor. The MAP signal trace is clipped, indicating the manifold pressure is outside the sensor's ability to read.
[This message has been edited by Will (edited 09-03-2019).]
The MAP signal goes up and down and corresponds with the boost needle going up and down on the boost guage. At 8 psi on the boost guage is when the MAP signal flatlines cause it has reached its max. I really don't care one way or the other about the accuracy or value of the reading. Once the flatline point is reached, tuning wise all hands are on deck- PE is on, timing reductions are made etc. All I have said is the MAP does read boost. For tuning on my setup, that is all that matters.
------------------ 86 GT built 2.2 ecotec turbo rear SLA suspension QA1 coilovers on tube arms
[This message has been edited by wftb (edited 09-03-2019).]
Negative, ghost rider. At the cursor in your image, the MAP is flatlined and the reading is 104 kPa. This means your 1 bar MAP maxed... At 104 kPa.
8 psi of boost is ~155 kPa. If your gauge is showing 8psi of boost right when your MAP sensor hits 104 kPa, then your gauge is wrong. If they're both right, then you're wrong about the gauge hitting 8 psi when the MAP sensor flatlines.
Your ECM is *NOT* boost-aware. It is possible to tune a MAF system this way, but it's not a good idea.
RussK is the guy that told me what to do with my tune and steered me to tunes that would help. I found the thread above with a search but all the threads from around 2007 on the HP tuners board are gone, they delete threads when they get old I was told.
When GM sold the supercharger kit for 03 and 04, it came with a dealer reflash but did not come with a 2 bar map sensor. If you order a supercharger kit from ZZP, they only list a 2 bar map for an 05, nothing for 03 or 04.
Everything I have found confirmed what I learned a long time ago- a 2 bar map is not compatible with my OS. People tried and failed, but when it comes right down to it if you do not go totally crazy with boost levels you can tune just fine with the 04 OS.
The guys on the old ecotec forum that were shooting for big power with 2004 systems like mine tried to tune 80 lb injectors and could not make them work, can't remember why but at the power levels they were at by then most of them went to stand alone systems.
Note the RPM value, one of the reasons that most people thought you could not tune this ECU for boost:
Until HP tuners came along you could not get PE to come on below that rpm.Before I got HP tuners I used an 8-1 vortec FMU and a snow watermeth system to make the car driveable then adding bigger injectors made it work well. But to change injector constant, turn on PE, shut off VATS and change the redline and the speed limiter and a bunch of other stuff, I had to get HP tuners.
High Octane spark advance vs MAP reading vs rpm or why a 2 bar map would accomplish nothing. There are HO/LO tables, tables for PE, tables for alcohol HO/LO etc etc but on none of those tables can you change the map values. So no matter what map sensor you have it will flat line at 104.1. And most of the tables only go to 6000 rpm, even though you can set rev limiters etc as high as you want.
------------------ 86 GT built 2.2 ecotec turbo rear SLA suspension QA1 coilovers on tube arms
[This message has been edited by wftb (edited 09-05-2019).]
Ok so this next question is only for a direct swap Eng, trans, TCU, ECU-
Other than mounts, tune, and wiring what else do I need to look into to complete this swap? I know I would need the "corvette" fuel filter for returnless fuel. Is that all for fuel? What about coolant routing, is it similar? Coolant fill will need a place in the engine bay, Does anyone know if Joseph Upson is still active? He knows this engine well from his posts but he didnt cover ever little detail in his build. Also he made so many changes that it is hard to decipher what is needed on the straight swap. So far this is what I have gathered for needs:
4T65E mounts for 3800 swap from WCF Axles built from Sinister instructions Tuning will also be done by Ryan at Sinister when the time comes. I will be using Aftermarket gauges possibly something like this: Gauges Custom motor mounts Corvette fuel filter Fuel pump? If so what kind flow rate etc.... Miles and miles of wire Weather pack connectors and crimps, pin removal tool Fuse box
There is a lot in this short list but I feel like I am not thinking of something. What else would I need? For the dummy lights to work like the CEL temps etc., The donor I buy will have all this wired through the instrument cluster. Will the factory service manual for the donor have the info on how to separate out the wiring to independently wire out these lights? I want to use the CAN-BUS gauges to limit how many redundant sensors are needed to get things to work. Like I said I will be buying a complete donor so all the sensors and accessories will already be present. I know fitment with AC and Alternator may be an issue so that will require some fab work. I don't even know if I will keep AC it currently doesn't work, but it would be nice to have. Custom exhaust will need to be done as well.
104.1 In the VCM scanner is total KPA. the first 101 (roughly) is atmospheric pressure (which varies based on various environmental factors like elevation, temperature and humidity).
There are slight variances in MAP sensors where they read slightly above their max but not by much.
You can do various hacks and rescales in HP Tuners to make boost work with only a 1 bar sensor, but if you aren't using MAF with a 1 bar you don't have very accurate control of fueling and spark with boost.
On a side note with how cheap you can get entire cars these days you would be stupid to start with anything less than an LSJ. PCM is already setup for boost with a 2.5 bar MAP sensor. They are even better when you rip off the blower and add a turbocharger.
LNF/LHU engines are even better but they are far more pricey, and more work to deal with because of DI.
[This message has been edited by OntarioKev (edited 09-07-2019).]
Ok so this next question is only for a direct swap Eng, trans, TCU, ECU-
Other than mounts, tune, and wiring what else do I need to look into to complete this swap? I know I would need the "corvette" fuel filter for returnless fuel. Is that all for fuel? What about coolant routing, is it similar? Coolant fill will need a place in the engine bay, Does anyone know if Joseph Upson is still active? He knows this engine well from his posts but he didnt cover ever little detail in his build. Also he made so many changes that it is hard to decipher what is needed on the straight swap. So far this is what I have gathered for needs:
4T65E mounts for 3800 swap from WCF Axles built from Sinister instructions Tuning will also be done by Ryan at Sinister when the time comes. I will be using Aftermarket gauges possibly something like this: Gauges Custom motor mounts Corvette fuel filter Fuel pump? If so what kind flow rate etc.... Miles and miles of wire Weather pack connectors and crimps, pin removal tool Fuse box
There is a lot in this short list but I feel like I am not thinking of something. What else would I need? For the dummy lights to work like the CEL temps etc., The donor I buy will have all this wired through the instrument cluster. Will the factory service manual for the donor have the info on how to separate out the wiring to independently wire out these lights? I want to use the CAN-BUS gauges to limit how many redundant sensors are needed to get things to work. Like I said I will be buying a complete donor so all the sensors and accessories will already be present. I know fitment with AC and Alternator may be an issue so that will require some fab work. I don't even know if I will keep AC it currently doesn't work, but it would be nice to have. Custom exhaust will need to be done as well.
PMd.
For the work you are considering doing as stated in the PM, anything less than the 3.6L in its 320ish hp LFX, or 330ish hp LGX version, is not getting your efforts worth, as the LZ9 will require the same amount of work. Either of those 3.6L motors stock should net you a 12s car and give you outstanding fuel efficiency to boot.
The Camaro enthusiast have boosted bone stock motors with 11.5:1 compression to 15 psi + on pump gas (not E85) some with and without water/meth injection and the accepted breaking point of ~600 whp so boosting is an after thought. Think long and hard about it.
[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 09-07-2019).]
For the work you are considering doing as stated in the PM, anything less than the 3.6L in its 320ish hp LFX, or 330ish hp LGX version, is not getting your efforts worth, as the LZ9 will require the same amount of work. Either of those 3.6L motors stock should net you a 12s car and give you outstanding fuel efficiency to boot.
The Camaro enthusiast have boosted bone stock motors with 11.5:1 compression to 15 psi + on pump gas (not E85) some with and without water/meth injection and the accepted breaking point of ~600 whp so boosting is an after thought. Think long and hard about it.
The ONLY manual transmission that works with the 3.6 is the F40. Going F40 adds considerable complexity and cost to the swap. The LZ9 can bolt up to a 282 or Fiero swappable F23. Yeah, the F23 needs to be swapped, but it only needs mounts and shift linkage while the F40 requires new axles as well. Boosted power production is going to be a wash between the two, as the LX9 has been pushed to >500 RWHP.
Also, the high feature V6's don't play so nice with the Fiero front cradle crossmember and may require more cradle mods than the LZ9.
[This message has been edited by Will (edited 09-09-2019).]
Until HP tuners came along you could not get PE to come on below that rpm.Before I got HP tuners I used an 8-1 vortec FMU and a snow watermeth system to make the car driveable then adding bigger injectors made it work well. But to change injector constant, turn on PE, shut off VATS and change the redline and the speed limiter and a bunch of other stuff, I had to get HP tuners.
High Octane spark advance vs MAP reading vs rpm or why a 2 bar map would accomplish nothing. There are HO/LO tables, tables for PE, tables for alcohol HO/LO etc etc but on none of those tables can you change the map values. So no matter what map sensor you have it will flat line at 104.1. And most of the tables only go to 6000 rpm, even though you can set rev limiters etc as high as you want.
I just went back to your post that started this mess. You don't have a MAF? Yeah, just get a PowerFC and lie to the ECU. If your engine is still holding together it's by the grace of God and liberal use of duct tape.
The ONLY manual transmission that works with the 3.6 is the F40. Going F40 adds considerable complexity and cost to the swap. The LZ9 can bolt up to a 282 or Fiero swappable F23. Yeah, the F23 needs to be swapped, but it only needs mounts and shift linkage while the F40 requires new axles as well. Boosted power production is going to be a wash between the two, as the LX9 has been pushed to >500 RWHP.
Also, the high feature V6's don't play so nice with the Fiero front cradle crossmember and may require more cradle mods than the LZ9.
My understanding is that he intends to use an automatic, which would be a 6 speed for the 3.6L and although he mentioned boost later in the thread, the primary focus is on naturally aspirated performance and fuel efficiency, for which there is no stock pushrod 60 deg motor close in performance to the DI 3.6L power to displacement. The LGX is a short "breath away from 100 hp per L. The front cradle crossmember is easily adjusted with a saw and welder, very common to Fiero swaps. Either way it's a lot of work for both engines so he may as well get his "blood, sweat and tears" worth the first go around.
I just went back to your post that started this mess. You don't have a MAF? Yeah, just get a PowerFC and lie to the ECU. If your engine is still holding together it's by the grace of God and liberal use of duct tape.
No MAF and no duct tape either. And I have not blown anything up. Turbo charged for 12 years now using the same ECM. I really see no reason to change, I am happy with my setup and changing it to something else just means spending money for nothing. What's a Power FC?
------------------ 86 GT built 2.2 ecotec turbo rear SLA suspension QA1 coilovers on tube arms
My understanding is that he intends to use an automatic, which would be a 6 speed for the 3.6L and although he mentioned boost later in the thread, the primary focus is on naturally aspirated performance and fuel efficiency, for which there is no stock pushrod 60 deg motor close in performance to the DI 3.6L power to displacement. The LGX is a short "breath away from 100 hp per L. The front cradle crossmember is easily adjusted with a saw and welder, very common to Fiero swaps. Either way it's a lot of work for both engines so he may as well get his "blood, sweat and tears" worth the first go around.
Since the LZ9 was built with the 4T65E, and that trans swap has been scienced out by the 3800 crowd, the LZ9 swap is still MUCH easier with an automatic than the 3.6 swap.
Having to carve the crossmember is not so common and is not necessary for a lot of swaps. It's also that much extra work that goes into the 3.6 swap that doesn't go into the LZ9 swap.
Since the LZ9 was built with the 4T65E, and that trans swap has been scienced out by the 3800 crowd, the LZ9 swap is still MUCH easier with an automatic than the 3.6 swap.
Having to carve the crossmember is not so common and is not necessary for a lot of swaps. It's also that much extra work that goes into the 3.6 swap that doesn't go into the LZ9 swap.
The work I'm referring to is in the wiring necessary to accommodate the operating system. I don't imagine many will be so attached to the original cross member contours that they wouldn't be willing to change them as needed in exchange for 100 or more hp and better fuel efficiency, after all it is a swap. "Easier" is relative to skill level and or resources and patience, which you yourself have shown.
Purchasing a complete vehicle is a tremendous head start that few here have initiated their swaps with. I'm just saying get the most out of the effort now as opposed to spending even more to do it later after realizing a 3500/3800/3900 Fiero will still be relatively slow by today's production car standards. 10yrs ago, great, today those iron block combos are behind the times except for a "Back to the future" theme.
They both have their merits. And I have thought about them both a lot. I dont think it is quite 100 hp either. I mean the numbers are LZ9 250 and the 3.6 depending on the iteration you get is at 300-325 so it is 75 HP difference at most. Now that said there is infinite more aftermarket support for the 3.6 then the 3.9 and the potential is through the roof, the 3.9 is not going to be an easy motor to do much with past the swap so it will not be modded past that.
That said, for this first swap I think I am still going to stay with the 3.9 knowing that once I am there it is not going to go anywhere else. I will enjoy the added power, mileage, and dependability for a few years. I will gain the knowledge I need for future projects. This will be a learning experience for me and as I said before I want to make sure I do something I can complete. I know that I will not have a rocket in today's terms, but it will be a better ride than a 2.8 with a 3 speed auto. I enjoy this car with that anemic combo, almost doubling the power will be plenty for me.... for now.
Also there is this: 2007 Chevrolet Impala police package 3.9L/240-hp/245 lb-ft V-6 Four-speed automatic 0-60 mph: 7.5 seconds Quarter-mile: 15.6 seconds at 91.2 mph Skidpad: 0.84 g (avg) Figure Eight time: 27.9 sec @ 0.60 g (avg) 60-0 mph: 132 ft
This is in a car that weighs a full 1000 LBS more than the Fiero. It is not impressive but it is enough to have some fun
The donors for this engine will also be cheaper do to age, supply and demand. So while I will not make the HP i truly wish to hit, (300 WHP ~ 375 crank) It will give me everything else I am looking for. An Economic swap that has a "easier" process. Like Joseph said "easier" is relative to skill level. And I know enough to ask the some of the right questions, but not all. My skills are I have taught myself rudimentary welding, I understand enough about cars to fix most things, and a willingness to learn. IE not a lot of skills. I will go into this swap knowing that it is not going to hit my power goal and that the 3.6 could. But with this I will learn invaluable skills, have more of a working knowledge of what to do and not to do, and still end up with a great car that will be a joy to run and drive. I also plan to outline the whole thing and do a write up on it so that it may help others if they want a good econo swap. At least these are my goals. I do have a father that has a personal machine shop with a lathe, mill, welder, and other assorted tooling that I can fall back on if I need something. (though he is 5 hours away from me, but hey it is a good excuse to go visit!)
As far as the manuals. I love driving a manual, however, my car is an auto, and I already find my big ass feet cramped in the Fiero with only 2 pedals. I know I can convert easy enough but I think it may give me the excuse I need to buy another Fiero that I can 3.6 F40 LOL.
So with that said, my list of things I need to do this further up the page....
quote
4T65E mounts for 3800 swap from WCF Axles built from Sinister instructions Tuning will also be done by Ryan at Sinister when the time comes. I will be using Aftermarket gauges possibly something like this: Gauges Custom motor mounts Corvette fuel filter Fuel pump? If so what kind flow rate etc.... Miles and miles of wire Weather pack connectors and crimps, pin removal tool Fuse box
What have I not thought of that I need to address? Also I may decide to use the instrument cluster from the donor car to save the $700 and use what I already have. I dont know just yet. Thanks again for the great discussions and information.
The work I'm referring to is in the wiring necessary to accommodate the operating system. I don't imagine many will be so attached to the original cross member contours that they wouldn't be willing to change them as needed in exchange for 100 or more hp and better fuel efficiency, after all it is a swap. "Easier" is relative to skill level and or resources and patience, which you yourself have shown.
Purchasing a complete vehicle is a tremendous head start that few here have initiated their swaps with. I'm just saying get the most out of the effort now as opposed to spending even more to do it later after realizing a 3500/3800/3900 Fiero will still be relatively slow by today's production car standards. 10yrs ago, great, today those iron block combos are behind the times except for a "Back to the future" theme.
With the bracket I posted earlier in this thread, and the available mount brackets for the 4T65, the LZ9 powertrain should be darn close to a bolt-in. Yes, the 3.6 makes more power, but you're also significantly downplaying the amount of extra mechanical work involved. I'm probably downplaying the amount of extra wiring involved... after all, the 3.6 has four cam sensors/phasers + a fuel pressure transducer & probably other additional sensors vs. the LZ9's single phaser and no transducer
They both have their merits. And I have thought about them both a lot. I dont think it is quite 100 hp either. I mean the numbers are LZ9 250 and the 3.6 depending on the iteration you get is at 300-325 so it is 75 HP difference at most. Now that said there is infinite more aftermarket support for the 3.6 then the 3.9 and the potential is through the roof, the 3.9 is not going to be an easy motor to do much with past the swap so it will not be modded past that.
That said, for this first swap I think I am still going to stay with the 3.9 knowing that once I am there it is not going to go anywhere else. I will enjoy the added power, mileage, and dependability for a few years. I will gain the knowledge I need for future projects. This will be a learning experience for me and as I said before I want to make sure I do something I can complete. I know that I will not have a rocket in today's terms, but it will be a better ride than a 2.8 with a 3 speed auto. I enjoy this car with that anemic combo, almost doubling the power will be plenty for me.... for now.
Also there is this: 2007 Chevrolet Impala police package 3.9L/240-hp/245 lb-ft V-6 Four-speed automatic 0-60 mph: 7.5 seconds Quarter-mile: 15.6 seconds at 91.2 mph Skidpad: 0.84 g (avg) Figure Eight time: 27.9 sec @ 0.60 g (avg) 60-0 mph: 132 ft
This is in a car that weighs a full 1000 LBS more than the Fiero. It is not impressive but it is enough to have some fun
The donors for this engine will also be cheaper do to age, supply and demand. So while I will not make the HP i truly wish to hit, (300 WHP ~ 375 crank) It will give me everything else I am looking for. An Economic swap that has a "easier" process. Like Joseph said "easier" is relative to skill level. And I know enough to ask the some of the right questions, but not all. My skills are I have taught myself rudimentary welding, I understand enough about cars to fix most things, and a willingness to learn. IE not a lot of skills. I will go into this swap knowing that it is not going to hit my power goal and that the 3.6 could. But with this I will learn invaluable skills, have more of a working knowledge of what to do and not to do, and still end up with a great car that will be a joy to run and drive. I also plan to outline the whole thing and do a write up on it so that it may help others if they want a good econo swap. At least these are my goals. I do have a father that has a personal machine shop with a lathe, mill, welder, and other assorted tooling that I can fall back on if I need something. (though he is 5 hours away from me, but hey it is a good excuse to go visit!)
As far as the manuals. I love driving a manual, however, my car is an auto, and I already find my big ass feet cramped in the Fiero with only 2 pedals. I know I can convert easy enough but I think it may give me the excuse I need to buy another Fiero that I can 3.6 F40 LOL.
The car engines have manifolds with dual cats. The minivan engines have older style manifolds with a crossover pipe that should be much easier to adapt to a Fiero than the car style manifolds.
Since AFM/DOD doesn't work without a BCM, don't waste your time with an AFM engine.
With the bracket I posted earlier in this thread, and the available mount brackets for the 4T65, the LZ9 powertrain should be darn close to a bolt-in. Yes, the 3.6 makes more power, but you're also significantly downplaying the amount of extra mechanical work involved. I'm probably downplaying the amount of extra wiring involved... after all, the 3.6 has four cam sensors/phasers + a fuel pressure transducer & probably other additional sensors vs. the LZ9's single phaser and no transducer
The motors come out complete with wiring harness and PCM so the number of sensors are not important as they are already wired and plugged into the PCM, it's the chassis interface end of the harness that has to be worked with and the associated BCM for both will expect to see pretty much the same essential inputs.
bmwguru has what is probably the most impressive and successful similar swap involving the turbo 2.8L version of the 3.6L motor from a Saab swapped in. I didn't review the entire swap thread, but the only complaint about mounting I saw early on involved the difference in the Saab F40 vs. the G6 F40 and having to make new mounts as a result. We have seen nearly every GM motor offered over the past 15 years, or a version of them swapped into the Fiero and some how the 3.6L is not friendly enough to swap, but the 4.6L DOHC Northstar and other V8 motors are? I don't buy it for a second in the absence of EXACTLY what this alleged snafu is to discourage such an effort.
Again it's a swap and will require some far from impossible custom work. With all of the madness I've created, this is exactly the kind of reasoning I would use, get the most out of my effort the first go around, to avoid more time and money fiddling with it later on.
The motors come out complete with wiring harness and PCM so the number of sensors are not important as they are already wired and plugged into the PCM, it's the chassis interface end of the harness that has to be worked with and the associated BCM for both will expect to see pretty much the same essential inputs.
bmwguru has what is probably the most impressive and successful similar swap involving the turbo 2.8L version of the 3.6L motor from a Saab swapped in. I didn't review the entire swap thread, but the only complaint about mounting I saw early on involved the difference in the Saab F40 vs. the G6 F40 and having to make new mounts as a result. We have seen nearly every GM motor offered over the past 15 years, or a version of them swapped into the Fiero and some how the 3.6L is not friendly enough to swap, but the 4.6L DOHC Northstar and other V8 motors are? I don't buy it for a second in the absence of EXACTLY what this alleged snafu is to discourage such an effort.
Again it's a swap and will require some far from impossible custom work. With all of the madness I've created, this is exactly the kind of reasoning I would use, get the most out of my effort the first go around, to avoid more time and money fiddling with it later on.
This is a very sound argument. However I have read all of that post, and BMWguru is seasoned in the arts of custom and swaps, and even he did not get his to run properly on the stock ECU, he ended up going stand alone on that build it also took him several years to complete. Yes he did get it to run on the stock ECU but it wasnt right. I do agree that the 3.6 is the better motor and it would be better to swap that one in, I would not have the issues bmwguru had since I would be using mated engine trans ecu tcu bcm. But it is out of my league right now.
My Fiero is my hobby. I do this swap and enjoy it, learn more. Get tired of this swap and go for the 3.6 or next great V6 out there. enjoy that move on. Any heavily modified car is not done for the value monetarily It is done for the value the owner gets from the experience. There is a big enough difference in the 2 that with my modest skill set the 3.6 is not feasible now. It will be, just not now.
Maybe the next swap is not even a V6 at that point, maybe get a totaled Bolt and do an electric Fiero, that is the future anyway. Electric motors. Instant torque, no curve just a flat line of instantaneous torque. Wouldn't that be something?
But none of that has to do with this swap. I do enjoy this exchange of ideas and I totally understand your point of view. I have it myself. And I know that while I could be spending my time and money on the best swap that might not ever get completed, or even worse I do complete and dont get the modifications to fit the 6 speed auto done correctly and end up crashing.
The 3900 will require some custom motor mounts but that is about it. I am not even sure if I will have to remove the hinge boxes for it. the trans already has been hashed out even as far as the shift cable bracket. The trans mount locations are set, drive axles are already figured out, this also already locates the engine as well.
The 3.6/ 6T70 will have a ton more work in these areas that I would have to figure out all on my own. I am not confident that I know enough to make sure I get it right to where I dont drop a shaft from wheel travel, or have binding, or crash in a wall due to bump steer from mounting the trans to far left right front or back.... This ultimately is why I have decided to forgo the power and a better transmission. Also with the LFX will the combined intake/exhaust manifold cause fitment issues? No one knows, I would be blazing a new trail on that and I dont have the required skills or knowledge for those kind of builds.
The motors come out complete with wiring harness and PCM so the number of sensors are not important as they are already wired and plugged into the PCM, it's the chassis interface end of the harness that has to be worked with and the associated BCM for both will expect to see pretty much the same essential inputs.
bmwguru has what is probably the most impressive and successful similar swap involving the turbo 2.8L version of the 3.6L motor from a Saab swapped in. I didn't review the entire swap thread, but the only complaint about mounting I saw early on involved the difference in the Saab F40 vs. the G6 F40 and having to make new mounts as a result. We have seen nearly every GM motor offered over the past 15 years, or a version of them swapped into the Fiero and some how the 3.6L is not friendly enough to swap, but the 4.6L DOHC Northstar and other V8 motors are? I don't buy it for a second in the absence of EXACTLY what this alleged snafu is to discourage such an effort.
Again it's a swap and will require some far from impossible custom work. With all of the madness I've created, this is exactly the kind of reasoning I would use, get the most out of my effort the first go around, to avoid more time and money fiddling with it later on.
Dude... it's a scale. Easy: Order brackets, bolt in place, done in a weekend Medium: Carve the stock crossmember, make some brackets you can't buy Hard: Blow the cradle apart and frankenstein it back together, build exhaust manifolds from scratch, make your own flywheel
Results tend to go along with the difficulty.
You're saying they're all the same, so why not go for the biggest result. That's completely discounting the extra work involved--for a beginner in this case--which is a silly point of view.
I've seen BMWGuru's work on a different car in person. It is *NOT* impressive.
Yeah, the newer architectures mount the PCM to the engine. Does it clear the decklid?
[This message has been edited by Will (edited 09-11-2019).]
The 3900 will require some custom motor mounts but that is about it. I am not even sure if I will have to remove the hinge boxes for it. the trans already has been hashed out even as far as the shift cable bracket. The trans mount locations are set, drive axles are already figured out, this also already locates the engine as well.
GM has had essentially the same accessory configuration in FWD V6 cars since the Gen II V6's right after the Fiero was built. The waterpump is offset forward of the crank, the A/C compressor is low on the front side of the engine with the PS pump right above it. The alternator is on the back side of the engine.
The difference between the normal FWD stuff and Fieros is that the FWD cars mount the alternator so high on the back side of the engine that it interferes with the Fiero decklid. It's also pretty much in the same space as the Fiero dogbone mount.
3800 swaps require a "low mount" alternator bracket and a dogbone mount to connect to the Fiero dog bone bracket. That's a component that hasn't been made yet because the 60 Degree V6 swaps were never as popular as the 3800 swaps. I got started on a Gen II component that would be both low alternator mount and dogbone bracket... it shouldn't take much to update it to a Gen IV version. I can help you out with the design work on that, but I'll own the design afterward.
The car engines have manifolds with dual cats. The minivan engines have older style manifolds with a crossover pipe that should be much easier to adapt to a Fiero than the car style manifolds.
Since AFM/DOD doesn't work without a BCM, don't waste your time with an AFM engine.
I have read that thread too... I have been silently cyber stalking 3900 threads, and there are not a lot of them. I dont think I finished all of that thread though. I might get the Uplander as my donor for this reason. but that will come down to best salvage price with lowest miles I can find more than any certain car.
I know I will need to get my hands on the FSM for both the donor and the 1988 Fiero. I bought the Haynes / Chilton For the Fiero. I also got from eBay a "Pontiac Service Manual" That doesnt look any different than the Haynes when going through it says Bishko Automotive Literature GM Restoration Parts on it but it does say copyright 1987 Gernal Motors Corp on it. So if this isnt the FSM and someone has one for the 1988 GT then I would love a copy please.
Joseph, what all from your experience am I missing or not thinking of that would be needed on the 3900 for a straight swap? Since you went back to ODBI you didnt have to worry about drive by wire, I will have to figure out a mount for a gas pedal. do the 3100/3400/3500 manifolds fit the 3900? if they do do they restrict flow from being smaller passages? can they be ported if that is the case? This is only if the 3900 manifolds will not work in a way I want them to just looking for options. I know you had to worry about turbos on your builds so it may not cross to my project.
GM has had essentially the same accessory configuration in FWD V6 cars since the Gen II V6's right after the Fiero was built. The waterpump is offset forward of the crank, the A/C compressor is low on the front side of the engine with the PS pump right above it. The alternator is on the back side of the engine.
The difference between the normal FWD stuff and Fieros is that the FWD cars mount the alternator so high on the back side of the engine that it interferes with the Fiero decklid. It's also pretty much in the same space as the Fiero dogbone mount.
3800 swaps require a "low mount" alternator bracket and a dogbone mount to connect to the Fiero dog bone bracket. That's a component that hasn't been made yet because the 60 Degree V6 swaps were never as popular as the 3800 swaps. I got started on a Gen II component that would be both low alternator mount and dogbone bracket... it shouldn't take much to update it to a Gen IV version. I can help you out with the design work on that, but I'll own the design afterward.
That would be great. I am fine with that. Hywil has this installed with a 5 speed i forgot which but here is a picture of his install
He did have to delete his hinge boxes, not sure what else he had to do though. But i think he kept the stock alternator mount. I can ask him later.
Looks like he had to remove the right hinge box because he mounted his alternator high on the front of the engine. I don't see a reason why it couldn't go basically where it is on the Fiero 2.8.
So with this motor and trans being set up to push over 1000 pounds more than the Fiero, what ratios would be best for the Fiero? I guess I could spend some time digging through 3800SC threads to find this info, but if you know it off hand that would be great.
I'm neither a 3800 guy nor a 4T65E(HD) guy. I just know the options are there. If you turbo it, you probably want the tallest gears. If you throw rod bolts, cam, pushrods and valvesprings in it and spin it to 7000, you probably want the shortest gears. If you don't mod the engine, leave the transmission alone too.
I'm never on here anymore, I just don't frequent forums near as much as I used to... but excited to find a thread in line with what I'm starting to consider
I have a complete Aztek ($0) that I've been slowly getting closer to finally getting to work on pulling the engine/harness/PCM (read: AZ climate is not conducive to manual work most of the year without a/c or swamp coolers). Lately I've been looking more into the LZ4/9 and after seeing what MARS did with his 3rd gen Camaro, I may just go with the LZ9.
I may or may not plan on a turbo, but, like Chuck has said, info is real spotty. I did find a post with some LZ9 flow tests (Joseph posted here a while back)
Quick search showed a Motor Trend page with the flow vs cylinder number (HP = 0.25714 × CFM × No. of Cylinders), so in theory the 3900 heads are capable of close to 400hp at their peak, n/a (used 255cfm since the lowest from 3 cylinders was about 260cfm and I like to err on the safe side of estimating)... granted that would be a max-effort cam designed for n/a, but since turbo is the "in" thing nowadays, you can have the best of both worlds, so long as you build it properly and don't get hasty in your endeavors.
My 2.8 is still plugging along at a little over 197k, daily driving it about 40 miles a day, 6-7 days a week. Lowest oil pressure I've seen so far is a tick under 40psi, if the gauge is right, but it obviously feels a bit underpowered, even compared to most of today's commuter cars.
If I can seem to remember to, I'll try to keep tabs on this thread, since it seems Chuck's thoughts are similar to mine... I don't want to go through the extra fabrication labor involved with something like an LFX swap (not to mention the engine bay would be a bit more cramped than it already is), but I need something that will better keep up with the yahoos on the road today. For me it's either do this, or find something like a C5. I have a couple other vehicles available to drive if it comes to it, and wouldn't have the added car payment by doing the swap.
I did a performance rebuild on the 2.8 that came with my 86 GT. I spent over 2000.00 on it, bored over balanced etc etc. It ate a cam lobe after about 800 KM. Later I learned that the only decent lifters are GM OEM, not the aftermarket lifters I put in. The GM lifters were 5 times the price.
This reads like my story as well.
Rebuilt my 2.8 into a 3.1 w/ crank and rods, and a .040 overbore. Went with an inexpensive (but recommended) cam and lifter kit. Wiped a lobe almost immediately. I set the valve lash pretty low so it wouldn't be aggressive to the cam during break-in. Babied the car, didn't make a difference.
I'm determined to stick with the 3.1 I've built because it's the original motor, and I'm past the point of making this car something it isn't. I just want to keep it as I remember it since it was my first car.
But, if I had no history with this car, and it was new to me... I would ABSOLUTELY be doing the 3.9 V6/60 w/ 6-Speed manual swap... all... day... long.
I may or may not plan on a turbo, but, like Chuck has said, info is real spotty.
Quick search showed a Motor Trend page with the flow vs cylinder number (HP = 0.25714 × CFM × No. of Cylinders), so in theory the 3900 heads are capable of close to 400hp at their peak, n/a (used 255cfm since the lowest from 3 cylinders was about 260cfm and I like to err on the safe side of estimating)... granted that would be a max-effort cam designed for n/a, but since turbo is the "in" thing nowadays, you can have the best of both worlds, so long as you build it properly and don't get hasty in your endeavors.
My 2.8 is still plugging along at a little over 197k, daily driving it about 40 miles a day, 6-7 days a week. Lowest oil pressure I've seen so far is a tick under 40psi, if the gauge is right, but it obviously feels a bit underpowered, even compared to most of today's commuter cars.
If I can seem to remember to, I'll try to keep tabs on this thread, since it seems Chuck's thoughts are similar to mine... I don't want to go through the extra fabrication labor involved with something like an LFX swap (not to mention the engine bay would be a bit more cramped than it already is), but I need something that will better keep up with the yahoos on the road today. For me it's either do this, or find something like a C5. I have a couple other vehicles available to drive if it comes to it, and wouldn't have the added car payment by doing the swap.
Motor on
I will try to keep updating with more info and questions to try and get a lot of info all in one place. This thread has slowed down some since I started it since I am in a holding pattern on my project plans until I get some life out of the way.
There are a ton of these motors and transmissions in the yards now. Especially if you dont mind doing the LZ4 / LZE 3.5. This engine made it's way into fleet cars from 2006 to 2011. That is millions of motors out there and they are cheap since there is no demand for them. finding the 3.9 is a bit harder but not too bad . The Impala alone sold 1.37 Million in this time period. This is also not a ground breaking swap as I know of a few that have been done. Keep in mind if you want AC you will have some notching to do on the cradle. Also some thing to note - If you do want to do forced induction that will require an aftermarket ECU and most likely a cam swap due to loss of VVT. Or do what Joseph did and revert to an older ECU and still cam swap. Also if you use the 3.4 from the Aztec it has same trans as the 3500/3900 so that part of the swap will carry over. But I also understand not wanting to put that much effort into doing a swap then changing it out a few years later.
quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: This reads like my story as well.
Rebuilt my 2.8 into a 3.1 w/ crank and rods, and a .040 overbore. Went with an inexpensive (but recommended) cam and lifter kit. Wiped a lobe almost immediately. I set the valve lash pretty low so it wouldn't be aggressive to the cam during break-in. Babied the car, didn't make a difference.
I'm determined to stick with the 3.1 I've built because it's the original motor, and I'm past the point of making this car something it isn't. I just want to keep it as I remember it since it was my first car.
But, if I had no history with this car, and it was new to me... I would ABSOLUTELY be doing the 3.9 V6/60 w/ 6-Speed manual swap... all... day... long.
Right on still having your first car, that is awesome!! You could always get your hands on another Fiero and do the F40/LZ9 swap
Though I am not trying to make my car something it isn't, I am trying to make it something I built And in the process make it something that it was supposed to be if it weren't for GM protecting the Corvette sales. the C4 was a cool car but it was not as good as it should have been, a Fiero with some performance should not be a threat to a flagship car if it was done properly.
Just popping on here with another question / observation. Has anyone used a "Piggyback ECU" like the ECU Master DIGITAL ECU TUNER 3, 4 BAR for boost applications on these motors?
I am not sure if this is something I should look into at a later date if I wanted to boost and not do a full stand alone ECU. If I understand it correctly these will intercept your incoming signals ( and be able to read boost since it has a 3 or 4 bar MAP with it) and then send correlating info to the stock ECU to trick it into operating the fuel and air according to what the boost needs. This raises a question of will it do this safely and is it worth it to add boost and keep your VVT and stock cam etc.
Many of the later model GM ecm already have tables setup for fuel/spark control under boost, so an add on piggy back ecm probably isn't a requirement.
I am going to run the E40 ecm with boost and I know the E67 ecm has spark & fuel tables that will accommodate boost as well.
I asked Ryan this a few months ago on the LZ9 and here is his response.
quote
No 3900 was never turbo or supercharged in any factory application.
It is possible the factory 3900 ECM (even with DBW) could be custom tuned to work with a turbo. But these ECMs didn't use a wideband o2 sensor, and that would be preferred in any serious turbo build.
There are quite a few aftermarket ECUs on the market that use a wideband o2 input so they can accurately control air/fuel ratio at full throttle w/ boost. But I'm not sure if there are any that can control the 3900's VVT system - and that would be something I would want working if you kept the stock cam in the engine.
This is what made me look at possibly a piggy back situation. Since the piggy back ECU would be using a wideband and then tricking the factory ECM to use correct tables accordingly, this might be a solution to keep the VVT and have forced induction. But I can see a lot of issues on using a piggy back to do this... Just looking for input on this.
If the engine is supported by HP tuners you can add a wideband O2 sensor that gets wired in to the HP tuners hardware. Leave the stock O2 sensors hooked up to the original wiring. The wide band then is used as a tuning tool and not part of normal operation.
------------------ 86 GT built 2.2 ecotec turbo rear SLA suspension QA1 coilovers on tube arms
I don't think that an aftermarket standalone ECU automatically implies losing the VVT.
Generally speaking, the MegaSquirt 3 ECU (I own this, so I am familiar with it) supports VVT. My work colleague has a Haltech, and he installed it on a DOHC Subaru with VVT (so that's four cam phasers, and four cam sensors).
I would not use a piggyback device... because why use two electronic boxes to control the engine when one box will suffice?
I leave it as an exercise to the reader to determine which aftermarket standalone ECUs are compatible with the High Value V6's particular implementation of VVT.
[This message has been edited by pmbrunelle (edited 02-27-2020).]
Most modern VVT actuators use a PWM signal to control the phasers. 50% DC = keep the cam where it is. I'm not sure if there's a standard for whether off is advance or retard (and vice versa).
BMW's early VANOS systems would hold timing with no input, then had separate solenoids for advance and retard, making the controls twice as complicated from an ECU I/O standpoint.
And in the process make it something that it was supposed to be if it weren't for GM protecting the Corvette sales. the C4 was a cool car but it was not as good as it should have been, a Fiero with some performance should not be a threat to a flagship car if it was done properly. 
