Originally posted by wftb: I decided early on that I did not want the weight of a 3800. I wanted a handling car and you need a lighter motor to do that. If you follow the Fiero LeMons/Chump car threads and watch the videos you will see all of the v6 powered cars spinning out from time to time. My car does not do that, it is completely neutral. As I hit the limit, all four tires will slide but the rear will not slide out nor does the front plow. You just end up taking a wider arc that can be easily corrected by dropping the throttle or a tap on the brakes.
i have followed this thread for a few years now. It seems like few on this forum have much if any concern about weight. It is so refreshing to hear someone discuss the effects of weight. Of course you can offset weight with more HP in acceleration, but HP does not affect handling - weight does. There is no substitute for less weight in the rear of the Fiero. i have moved my battery to the front, taken out the AC compressor and the resonator/balance weight on the cradle. The more i remove weight from the rear and the more i add to the front, the better she handles. i have gone so far as to weight the gen 2 headlight motors and compare them with the gen 1. The gen 2 motors are 40gm heavier with stock gears, and with the Rodney Dickman brass gears, they are 200gm heavier.
In addition, i really like the way you have set up your engine for great HP and tork. Perhaps if the gages thing is resolved, i will do an Ecotec swap rather than a 3800SC, but for now, my duke runs good, so why change it?
Thanks for the post I like your comments. I think the thing that will make swaps like the ecotec popular will be affordable standalone engine management systems. But for somebody like me that does not care about stock gauges it is not hard to make the stock cavalier/sunfire/cobalt etc Ecm/bcm work in a Fiero or any other car for that matter. There is a thread on the locostusa forum about an ecotec powered Volvo P1800. http://locostusa.com/forums...pic.php?f=36&t=16309 If you are going to mod a Fiero, you need to think of it more like a rolling chassis and less like a complete car. Put in whatever you want and make it all yours. To me the only other alternative is to do a restoration to factory stock. My car was too far gone to do that to(rust etc) but I have had a lot of fun doing mods. It is my hobby car and I will never stop changing things.
[This message has been edited by wftb (edited 08-24-2018).]
Thanks for the post I like your comments. I think the thing that will make swaps like the ecotec popular will be affordable standalone engine management systems. But for somebody like me that does not care about stock gauges it is not hard to make the stock cavalier/sunfire/cobalt etc Ecm/bcm work in a Fiero or any other car for that matter. There is a thread on the locostusa forum about an ecotec powered Volvo P1800. http://locostusa.com/forums...pic.php?f=36&t=16309 If you are going to mod a Fiero, you need to think of it more like a rolling chassis and less like a complete car. Put in whatever you want and make it all yours. To me the only other alternative is to do a restoration to factory stock.
i have no rust on my car. i decided a long time ago that stock was not the way i wanted to go, but i don't look forward to massive amounts of work either. Handling is very important to me, and almost all my mods have had to do with handling - poly everywhere, rebuilt steering column, steering rack. In that light i do my own alignments with string, ruler, bungies, and levels. i put in the max camber on the rear, and toe of 8mm in the 42" of the levels on the rear. i just got thru checking and adjusting my rear alignment. A few days of driving to let it set and then i will do the front. i will let the early adopters iron out the details on the ecotec swap and then i will follow along. jon
ps thanks for the link, lots of good reading there
------------------ I'm the original owner of a white ' 84 2M4 purchased Dec 10, 1983 from Pontiac. Always garaged, no rust, 4-wheel drifts are fun! 3800 SC swap to come!
Interesting thread this one👍 I agree about the weight of a 3800, especially when you have the turbo hanging off the rear like mine! My car is 500kg at the front and 800kg at the rear! This makes cornering at the track a little bit touchy, but I'm used to it (and I run very sticky tyres!), most of the time😵😨 A lighter engine is better for handling and overall car response. Regards, Rafe ------------------ '87 Fiero GT. 3800 turbo. Sticky tyres. Driven hard!
[This message has been edited by Frenchrafe (edited 08-27-2018).]
Originally posted by Frenchrafe: I agree about the weight of a 3800, especially when you have the turbo hanging off the rear like mine! My car is 500kg at the front and 800kg at the rear!
Well, lets see 1300 Kg is 2860 lbs. i guess that is about right. Seems that the fastback is heavier than the notchie. But a 38% front 62% rear weight distribution is crazy rear heavy. i understand that the factory weight distribution (which year model???) is 44% front 56% rear. i figure roughly that moving the battery to the front moves 2% from rear to front so with that simple mod maybe a 46% 54% balance can be achieved. (OK maybe that is an exaggeration.)
When i did my conversion from the bumperpad facias to the GT aero facias, i did not use the steel in the sides for the rocker panels or the aero moldings above it. i left the supports out of the rocker panels because the GT rocker panel is only 1 cm wider - why put some steel in there for just that difference. The rocker without steel in it is nice and solid. Likewise with the aero panels above the rocker, i glued them in. Glue has to be lighter than steel. The steel for the rockers and door moldings weighs 4.6 lbs, and that doesn't include the steel in front or behind the door. Every little bit helps.
i notice that the car seems to handle better when the sun roof is stored in the front - which is where it is most of the time as i like the open feeling. Which brings up another topic, i have never heard many complaints about the handling of the stock vehicle at speed. When my 84 was stock, it was plainly dangerous to drive at speed, 110km/h as the steering wheel would take maybe 30degrees each way to make the car respond to stay in the freeway lane. So i put weight in the front - tire chains to start, then moved the battery, then took out the AC compressor from the rear. This made the steering wheel response better, maybe 20 degrees. The vent for the front really made the car handle better at speed, but without the other mods, i wonder. Now the car has about a 10 degree response to keep the car in the lane on the freeway. Now i feel completely safe at 120 km/h. But i wonder if a splitter would make the car handle even better at speed?
Does anybody know the true weight of the ecotec motor with and without trans?
jon
------------------ Astronomy says we will find a coded signal from outer space. Then we'll KNOW that life exists there, for coded signals aren't by chance.
Biology says there are coded genetic signals in every cell, but we KNOW that no intelligence created life.
I'm the original owner of a white ' 84 2M4 purchased Dec 10, 1983 from Pontiac. Always garaged, no rust, 4-wheel drifts are fun!
This is one of many threads dealing with engine weights. I don't know how accurate they are. https://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum1/HTML/089287.html As weighed at the 30th show, my car was 2790lbs with a full tank of gas. That is 44% front 56% rear .It is now 44lbs lighter , mostly removed from the back. But I have no access to wheel scales so I do not know the distribution as it sits now.
Well, lets see 1300 Kg is 2860 lbs. i guess that is about right. Seems that the fastback is heavier than the notchie. But a 38% front 62% rear weight distribution is crazy rear heavy.
In fact my car is heavier at the front - my mistake! This is the copy of my "Contrôle technique" (MOT for the British, don't know what you call it in the USA? Inspection?)
So the car weighs 1389kg with about 42% front and 58% rear.
I will be thinking about battery up front etc to try and even it out. And yes, they don't handle super great at high speeds - that's the reason we call it "white knuckle driving"! I set mine up to be higher by 3 or 4cm at the rear so the nose is down more. Seems to help a bit.
So let me get this straight, the Iron Duke weighs 350 lbs, the 60 degree V6 (L44) weighs 362 lbs, the base Ecotec weighs 307 lbs, the supercharged Ecotec weighs 330 lbs and the turbocharged Ecotec weighs 360 lbs.
The stock Fiero auto is 125 lbs and the manual transaxles are 74 lbs for the 4-spd and 78 lbs for the 5-spd. The F23 weighs 112 lbs and the F40 weighs 124 lbs
So my stock duke with the 4 speed tranny weighs 428 lbs (without flywheel and clutch)
If i put in an Ecotec N/A with the F23 my car will LOSE 11 lbs- the combo will weigh 419 lbs (without flywheel and clutch)
If i put a turbo Ecotec in with the F40 my car will gain 56 lbs - the combo will weigh 484 lbs (without flywheel and clutch)
If i put in a 3800 S/C and keep my 4 speed tranny it will weigh 448 + 74 = 522 lbs (without flywheel and clutch) for a gain of 94 lbs.
THIS makes my decision a lot easier, remembering that ALL of this weight will be in the rear. Can the intercooler (does it have one) be placed in the front?
i weighed my catalytic converter that i removed several years ago and it weighed 14 lbs. i plan on hollowing it out and if i need to add a cat, i will have one ready ;-)
jon
------------------ Astronomy says we will find a coded signal from outer space. Then we'll KNOW that life exists there, for coded signals aren't by chance.
Biology says there are coded genetic signals in every cell, but we KNOW that no intelligence created life.
I'm the original owner of a white ' 84 2M4 purchased Dec 10, 1983 from Pontiac. Always garaged, no rust, 4-wheel drifts are fun!
The accuracy of the link I posted is up for debate. If you do a search you will find 15 threads with varying weights. I have my doubts that a stock 2.2 ecotec weighs 307 lbs. Some of the v6's are listed at close to the same weight. I do not have a scale to weigh engines with but moving the ecotec around my garage on an engine stand is a piece of cake compared to a 2.8 v6. I have always figured I was saving a 100 lbs by going to a 2.2 ecotec instead of my old 2.8. Here is a thread with weights of cars collected at the 30th and 35th shows. mine is the 86 gt eco powered car, weighed at the 30th. The fellow that weighed the cars had individual scales for each wheel so that is how I calculated my front rear bias. But the link does not give that info. As you will see some of the weights are surprising but I have to assume they are accurate. https://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/141663.html
[This message has been edited by wftb (edited 08-30-2018).]
Doing my preliminary research on the ecotec engine, i read the thread about the 1800 Volvo and have read your thread and the other ecotec threads her on this forum. i also read threads on ecotec forums. i have noticed that the LE5 motor is available cheaply in the scrap yards, with the 5 speed tranny and superchargers for the ecotec run about 250. Apparently the LE5 motor can be supercharged to around 250hp before major engine mods need to be done, due to the rods used in the motor. i remember that you interchanged various ecotec motor parts to build the motor that you use now. What are your thots about going this route? jon edit: my car seems to handle better now that ive installed the 3 core radiator instead of the single core radiator that it came with - more weight right on the nose.
------------------ Astronomy says we will find a coded signal from outer space. Then we'll KNOW that life exists there, for coded signals aren't by chance.
Biology says there are coded genetic signals in every cell, but we KNOW that no intelligence created life.
I'm the original owner of a white ' 84 2M4 purchased Dec 10, 1983 from Pontiac. Always garaged, no rust, 4-wheel drifts are fun!
[This message has been edited by longjonsilver (edited 09-08-2018).]
The first production LE5 motor is a very good engine. It came with better rods,pistons and crankshaft than later versions. I am talking about the version that was in the Solstice, Sky and the base motor in the Cobalt SS. The early L61 ecotec electronics will not run this engine because it has a different reluctor wheel. But the strong bottom end makes it a good choice for a turbo because you do not need any internal mods to boost it.
The engine in my car has Eagle rods and Wiseco pistons and a head gasket from an LSJ.The rest is all stock first gen 2.2. Because the present engine was from an automatic car, I had to use the water pump piping from my old engine. I also used the oil pan because the new engine's pan had a hole in it.
The superchargers that are available used are either take off's from LSJ motors or they are from the kit that GM sold for the cvalier/sunfire/cobalt 2.2's. These kits came with new injectors and a tune that got downloaded in to the car at a GM dealer.
Stock 2.2 engines have no problem handling the kind of boost from these superchargers. It is when you run a lot of turbo boost or nitrous that the weak link in a 2.2 gets exposed: the ultra thin upper ring lands of the pistons. But if you do a turbo setup and do it right you can keep a 2.2 together at sub 300 HP levels in stock form. Keep the boost down to 8PSI, intercool it, bigger injectors, an FMU and watermeth injection is one way to do it.
The stock LSJ head gasket has proven to be the way to go for boost. Better and cheaper than aftermarket head gaskets.
Do a search on member 4thfiero. He has a turbo LE5 with Alphafab engine management.
[This message has been edited by wftb (edited 09-09-2018).]
Yes, WFTB used the OEM Cavalier instrument cluster in his swap. Is this something that you don't like?
I too have a running Ecotec (L61)/F23 swap in my car. I went the other direction and used aftermarket gauges in my car. I clearly showed how to wire up a tachometer using a pull-up resistor using the stock PCM. I also modified the Fiero sending unit using late model Suburban guts and now have a functional fuel gauge. (See my thread for more information).
In case others out there are thinking of swapping in an L61 Ecotec, here is a snippet of information (from my swap) regarding how I resolved the Ecotec tachometer signal.
Steve, let me know if you don't want this in your thread and I'll remove it.
As you know, I've swapped in a 2.2 Ecotec into this car. Since I'm using the stock PCM and BCM, and not the Cavalier cluster, I needed to make the Equus aftermarket tachometer work with the Ecotec. Here's how I did it.
By looking at the 2003 Cavalier wiring schematic, a tachometer trigger signal is sent by the PCM through the serial data line and to the cluster where it's converted. Since I'm not using the Cavalier cluster, I had to go about this another way.
Looking at the PID value charts was useless as it merely states, "Not Used" on several pins.
By using an oscilloscope, each pin labeled "not used" was checked. Success was present when pin 32 on the blue connector showed an open collector output for a tachometer.
Since I had an aftermarket tach that doesn't have an internal "pull-up" resistor, I had to add one. Note: I didn't have a 1K ohm (1000) resistor handy but I had some 1.2K (1200) ohm resistors in my collection.
The pull-up resistor pulls the open (collector) output up to +12V. When the output transistor turns on, its collector terminal is connected to ground. Hence the output is a square wave from near-ground to near +12V.
Here's the schematic that made it all work, simple really. Note: My PCM part # is: 12576162
Since pin 32 was not used, there was no wire coming from the connector. I took another PCM harness pig tail and removed a white wire.
Remove the turquoise clip and unlock the connector.
This leads to exposed terminals and wires. I took a white wire just because.
On the car, I had to undo the clip and disassemble the connector.
Since cavity 32 was unused, I had to drill a small hole in order to place the connector through. Here, you can clearly see the white wire protruding from cavity 32 on the blue connector.
I extended this new white wire to the stock Fiero harness. I then chose to add the pull-up resistor in the back of the instrument cluster. In this location, I could tap into the two electrical points that I needed. -The green wire is the tach signal wire. -The resistor is then attached to the signal wire and the opposite end attaches to a keyed-on +12V.
A little video to show that it actually works.
[This message has been edited by Lunatic (edited 09-09-2018).]
Thanks for adding that Shayne. And for those that have never visited his thread(look for Lunatic in the construction zone) there is a wealth of knowledge and how to stuff in his thread. No matter what type of ecotec you install you could not go wrong using his methods.
Thanks Lunatic, i had read your thread, but had lost it and was wondering where the thing about the gages was? Now i know.
So i guess if i source an LE5 motor, and add a stock supercharger, i will get a reliable engine? i don't need a lot of HP - i must only have 85 HP now, 200HP would be fun and not too much weight in the rear, i guess. thanks jon edit: The F23 tranny weighs about 45 lbs more than the stock Muncie or Getrag trannies. Does your estimate of the weight of the ecotec include the weight of the transmissions? i suspect that the weight gain of the F23 transmission makes up for any loss of weight from the transition from the 2.8 V6 to the ecotec. Dunno about the iron duke engine.
------------------ Astronomy says we will find a coded signal from outer space. Then we'll KNOW that life exists there, for coded signals aren't by chance.
Biology says there are coded genetic signals in every cell, but we KNOW that no intelligence created life.
I'm the original owner of a white ' 84 2M4 purchased Dec 10, 1983 from Pontiac. Always garaged, no rust, 4-wheel drifts are fun!
[This message has been edited by longjonsilver (edited 09-10-2018).]
When I first ran my 2.2 it was bone stock. It was noticeably faster than my rebuilt 2.8. The 2.8 had forged pistons and was bored 30 thou over and complete rotating assembly was balanced. It isnt just the lighter weight, it is the way the ecotec delivers full power over a broader rpm range that makes it a better choice for a sports car over a 2.8.
The weights quoted for the 2.2 in one of the links is a fully dressed weight. I don't know if the other engines are fully dressed or not (alternator,AC compressor and bracketry etc). The main engine mount and related hardware (cavalier version) weigh 8 lbs and the lower stock dogbone at least 6 lbs.I don't know what the alternator and compressor weigh but you can see how hard it is to compare apples to apples. Making your own motor mounts saves weight.Alternator and AC compressor bolt directly to ecotecs without external mounted brackets also saving weight. There is only one serpentine belt and it is very short.
When the LE5 came out in the Solstice, it was rated at 178HP. Different applications had different ratings but even without a supercharger you are doubling your HP with a stock LE5 over the duke.
My F23 has been perfect as long as I have had it. It had 60000 KM on it when I got it and I have put on around 120000KM on it since. I am still using the original clutch that it came from the wreckers with. I highly recommend using the GM OEM clutch. The extra 45 lbs over the 4 speed that came in my car is worth it for the reliability.
Originally posted by longjonsilver: edit: The F23 tranny weighs about 45 lbs more than the stock Muncie or Getrag trannies.
I believe your statement is incorrect Jon.
The 4 speed is the lightest trans by a slim margin, then the 282 (39.9 KG / 88 lbs) then the F23 (46 KG / 102 lbs) and finally the F40 is the heaviest by 30-40 lbs (56 KG / 123 lbs).
I did a bit of work over the last couple of days. Ever since I put the heavier springs on I have not been happy with the ride harshness. But I put up with it, telling myself that it will be better that way when I take it for a track day. But here it is almost October and I heavent made a track day yet.
So I decided to put my lighter set of springs on (350 frt 200 rear vs 450frt 350 rear) to smoothe out the ride. Took about 4 hours.
I decided to set up the shocks with a lot stiffer settings than normal. I set the rears at 8(stiffest setting is 18) and the fronts at 5 and drove about 20 KM. It rode about the same as with the heavier springs set at 1 all the way around. This was on roads I drive all the time so it was easy to make the comparison.
I needed to drive to Hanover to pick up a part so I thought I would drive over with the front at 3 and the rears at 4. Then I drove back with all the shocks at 1. On the way over ride was noticeably better but still too noisy. I lke a car to be on the stiff side but with a quiet suspension. Bumps should be seen and felt but not heard.
Driving the same roads on the way back with the shocks set at 1 that was achieved. Instead of a bang when the car hit bad expansion joints or things like a recessed storm drain now all you here is a low whump noise.
I am still going to track days in the future but I am not going to put my heavier springs back on. The range of adjustment on my shocks is something I have not utilized enough. If you set these shocks at 18 the effect would be almost like replacing the shock with a piece of pipe. So I should be able to adjust the shocks to get the roll control I want without stiffer springs. For the rest of this Fiero season, I am going to enjoy the quiet ride.
I even cleaned the calipers:
[This message has been edited by wftb (edited 09-27-2018).]
The Fiero is now away for the winter. The suspension has worked great this year, only one small thing to fix over the winter. One rear lower control arm has developed a bit of fore and aft slop because I did not get a smooth cut on one of the bushings causing wear on the rear delrin washer. Only about 1/32 of an inch and will be easy to fix by making a thin sheet metal washer to protect the delrin from the end of the bushing. No detectable wear in any of the Del A Lum bushings or the Febest bushings installed in the front lower control arms.
On the tuning front I learned 2 things at the end of the summer : Once you change your injectors to something in the range of almost double your stock size, both my water meth injection and the Vortec 6:1 FMU become useless and can actually cause some harm. Earlier in the thread I describe how I had to dial the W/M way back so it did not cause KR - now it is effectively shut off. With the larger injectors there is no point to having the FMU in the circuit, the extra pressure just sends too much fuel in and then the ECM just dials it back. But in the meantime the fuel pump is putting out more pressure and that shortens its life. I am on my 3rd fuel pump now. This is an aftermarket unit and it is starting to behave like it might be wearing out.
So I blocked off the boost signal to the FMU and now the pump is behaving normally again. It might die anyway I will find out next year.
------------------ 86 GT built 2.2 ecotec turbo rear SLA suspension QA1 coilovers on tube arms
Being retired now I have lots of time to work on my hobby cars. But it also means I have a lot less money to play around with. So instead of paying for insurance for 2 summer cars, I need to cut back to 1 summer car. Since I am busy getting stuff done to the 91 Civic wagon (getting power steering working, installing an OEM roof rack, and it needs new axles), I am going to drive the wagon this summer. Once I have the wagon finished and back on the road, I am going to start a major Fiero project that will likely take me a year.
I was looking the other day at pics of custom made cradles and I have decided to make one. I have pretty well taken the 86 rear chassis based SLA suspension as far as I can. There is still room for improvement but the gains would be minimal.
There are 2 big things I want to change: I want longer upper and lower control arms and I want the arm mounts to be at right angles to the car rather than running on the strange angle that the stock ones are at now. I also want a spindle that incorporates an upper and lower ball joint instead of using an adapter.
For instance, a spindle from the new Civic Type R:
I have not found one yet but GM and Ford also have a strut suspension that utilizes 2 ball joints. Or I could make my own spindles, utilizing some stronger newer FWD bolt on bearing packs. The Type R spindle assembly is available for a mere 327.00. Per side. They probably wont make it in to my local wreckers any time soon. 4 wheel drive cars that use upper and lower control arms might provide some thing too.
This project will be the biggest thing I have tackled yet. I will be using the rear coilovers I have on the car now, quite happy with the way they work. The wheels I have also have an extra larger bolt pattern on them so I will not have to buy new wheels if I cant find a suitable 5X100 bearing assembly. My front and rear tires are not interchangeable any ways.
Edit: It is now 2020 and I have still not started on the custom cradle project.Later in the thread you will see some further suspension mods that worked out well. And none of the spindles I want have made their way into our local pick and pull yet. So I am kind of doubting I will make a cradle.
[This message has been edited by wftb (edited 01-01-2020).]
So far the only nice pictures of this type of suspension I have found is from Honda. Tried Ford and the newest Camaro but no bare suspension pics. Buick is a good idea, will have to do some more searches. Really just looking for spindle possibilities.
[This message has been edited by wftb (edited 01-30-2019).]
The Buick system looks very promising and best of all they have been making these suspensions since 2010 I think so parts should be available at a wreckers. Thanks Will.
------------------ Astronomy says we will find a coded signal from outer space. Then we'll KNOW that life exists there, for coded signals aren't by chance.
Biology says there are coded genetic signals in every cell, but we KNOW that no intelligence created life.
I'm the original owner of a white ' 84 2M4 purchased Dec 10, 1983 from Pontiac. Always garaged, no rust, 4-wheel drifts are fun!
Yes that is the thread. Reading some bad stuff about alpha fab lately you should stay away from them. There are lots of other engine management suppliers around and engines like the LE5 can be had in wrecking yards.
Been thinking that the LE5 with the F23 would be a good fit for me. Here is something from Wikipedia
quote
The LE5 is a larger 2.4 L—2,384 cc (145.5 cu in)—version of the Ecotec. Both the 88 mm (3.5 in) bore and 98 mm (3.9 in) stroke are larger, and Variable Valve Timing on the intake and exhaust improve low-end torque. Compression is 10.4:1. Power is 164–177 hp (123–132 kW) and torque is 159–170 lb·ft (215–230 N·m). The engine uses a reinforced "Gen II" block. Connecting Rods are GKN Forged C70 Powered Metal from July 2007 on.
The differences (i think) can be attributed to testing and reporting of results. But any of them would be a huge upgrade from my increasingly tired Iron Duke. Best of all they are matched together by GM so lots of parts such as flywheels and clutches are available.
------------------ Astronomy says we will find a coded signal from outer space. Then we'll KNOW that life exists there, for coded signals aren't by chance.
Biology says there are coded genetic signals in every cell, but we KNOW that no intelligence created life.
I'm the original owner of a white ' 84 2M4 purchased Dec 10, 1983 from Pontiac. Always garaged, no rust, 4-wheel drifts are fun!
The differences in power levels were mostly due to the exhaust systems used in the various platforms. The design of some of these vehicles meant the exhaust was just naturally more restrictive. In the case of the LE5 in general you want the older ones that were used in the Solstice/Sky or the Cobalt SS non supercharged. That will guarantee you get the forged crank and connecting rods. GM made the engine in to a cheaper version in later years without the forged internals.
Any stock Ecotec engine, LE5 or L61 will run the wheels off even a pristine stock V6 Fiero. For a performance upgrade over either stock Fiero engine, I think any Ecotec is a great choice.
Been thinking that the LE5 with the F23 would be a good fit for me. Here is something from Wikipedia
The differences (i think) can be attributed to testing and reporting of results. But any of them would be a huge upgrade from my increasingly tired Iron Duke. Best of all they are matched together by GM so lots of parts such as flywheels and clutches are available.
The Ecotec F23's had 3.82ish FDs for normal apps, then 3.74ish for the early XFE's and 3.63 for the later XFE's. Because of the higher gross weight of the vehicle, the HHR transmission had a 4.17 FD, while the even heavier Saturn Vue trans had a 4.41 FD *AND* a 0.81 fifth gear.
I bought and installed a hoist over the winter. Was getting to the point that I just did not want to work under my cars any more crawling around on my back. this makes working on my cars fun again.
While I had the car up on the hoist, I took a bunch of pictures of the underside showing some of the stuff I have done and showing stuff I want to improve upon. Bumpsteer bracket after lots of use still like new: Stock rear brakes still working fine after 3 years on the car. I am happy with the way they work, even for track days. If you look carefully, you can see that the entire disc is not being swept by the pads, making the effective size of the rotor about 1/2" diameter less: The front rotor is being swept right to the outer edge by the Willwood caliper: I use Lebarron front rotors instead of the usual rear rotor. This requires shimming of the bracket. I used a stack of grade 8 washers and have not had any problems. Making some better standoffs is one of those jobs I have never got around to. The front Lebarron rotors are lighter because they do not have the built in drums. The nuts are for security, the spindles are threaded. A turbo car carries a lot of plumbing:
A better Idea how tight QA1 2.5"ID coilovers fit. Turbo is only visible from underneath Solstice cat,no muffler needed.
I wasn't intending to drive the Fiero this year mostly because of insurance costs but I took my youngest son's car off my insurance because he is out of the country on an exchange for school till January. Gave me extra money to use for the Fiero so it went back on the road in late August. I will drive it until the snow flies, hopefully up to the middle of December.
In the meantime, I am making some changes to clean a few things up and take off some weight. To support the water to air intercooler and to have the Cavalier radiator expansion tank at the front of the car, I had 3 extra 5/8" heater hoses run to the front of the car. Here they are in the process of being removed:
I relocated the overflow to the spot where the battery sits in a stock fiero:
Quickie bracket made up.
Tank in place and mostly plumbed
I removed the aluminum tank from the front trunk and made a small reservoir out of ABS plumbing parts. The AL tank was not heavy but fill it with 50/50 water and antfreeze and it comes out at about 15 lbs or so.add the weight of the hoses and the rest of the antifreeze and there was some decent weight saved. And now my front trunk has some useable space again. The tanks for comparison:
I took the front mounted intercooler rad and the pump and relocated them to the space where the stock Fiero has a catylitic converter. The ABS reservoir tank sits just below the intercooler and it's purpose is to keep the pump flooded and add a bit more coolant than you would have with just the HX and the rad and hoses full.
I was expecting this setup to not cool as well as the old setup and that is the case. First scans showed a peak temperature at the IAT of 110 degrees F on a day with an ambient temp of 85 F. The old setup always kept charge pipe temps at 5 to 10 degrees above ambient temp. I added a simple heat deflector below the charge pipe where it goes across above the turbo and exhaust manifold and this dropped the peak temp down 10 degrees F.
I still have some work to do to get the temps in the charge pipe down to where I want them to be. I noticed that the intercooler rad is made of steel and really it is kind of tiny. It worked well when it was sitting in front of the radiator but in it's new spot it is not good enough. On the frozenboost.com website where I originally purchased the system, they now have bigger aluminum rads and I hope to install one of those over the winter. In the meantime I am running the watermeth injection system to keep the KR down.
[This message has been edited by wftb (edited 09-23-2019).]
Made an improvement to the interiour by getting a different steering wheel. My old GT wheel was in terrible shape and I almost bought one off of Villain's thread in the mall but just do not want to spend the money right now. He has some nice ones for 75.00 but I got this one from a wreckers. It was sitting in an 85 but there is also an 84 there and neither had the steering wheel on. So I don't know what this wheel was on to begin with, but it cleaned up nicely and only 20.00 cdn.
I also changed my charge cooler. Again. Not happy with the way the new setup works and not willing to spend more money for a better rad I got rid of this assembly(kept the pump)
And replaced it with this:
That is my no longer used ac condenser. Looks like a giant radiator to me. I have it fed with some lightweight tygon tubing and since it sits first in the airstream I did not bother with a fan. I need a hot day to test it properly but it only ran 10F over ambient under full boost. So hopefully an improvement and about 12 lbs of weight saving.
[This message has been edited by wftb (edited 09-29-2019).]
------------------ Astronomy says we will find a coded signal from outer space. Then we'll KNOW that life exists there, for coded signals aren't by chance.
Biology says there are coded genetic signals in every cell, but we KNOW that no intelligence created life.
I'm the original owner of a white ' 84 2M4 purchased Dec 10, 1983 from Pontiac. Always garaged, no rust, 4-wheel drifts are fun!
Thanks, from a 2004 cavalier. It looks better in pictures, the upper plastic mount does not fit very well and is a bit hacked up. Looking to find something better soon. Everything works except the gas guage, need to drop the tank again to try and fix that. The float is stuck against the plastic baffle in the tank. So I use the trip odometer to decide when it is time for a fill up.
So let me get this straight, the Iron Duke weighs 350 lbs, the 60 degree V6 (L44) weighs 362 lbs, the base Ecotec weighs 307 lbs, the supercharged Ecotec weighs 330 lbs and the turbocharged Ecotec weighs 360 lbs.
Curious where you got these weights. I own intercomp 4 corner race scales. I'm showing 280 lbs for a turbo 2.0 with a gt3582 hanging off it. Only thing missing to be complete would be a/c and alternator, Which won't make it 360 lbs.
My car will be sub 2300 lbs with a big focus on weight balance.
Curious where you got these weights. I own intercomp 4 corner race scales. I'm showing 280 lbs for a turbo 2.0 with a gt3582 hanging off it. Only thing missing to be complete would be a/c and alternator, Which won't make it 360 lbs.
My car will be sub 2300 lbs with a big focus on weight balance.
i got them from various places on the internet. It is part of my research/decision making on Ecotecs to determine my choice for an engine swap, which will not be this winter as i have dew wipes, radio, door handle, tach, and wiper board repairs to do. If that gets done, then i have seat and nose repainting todo. The duke runs good and i'm sick of too many car projects. i would love to have some hard numbers from one person weighing a variety of motors all with the same accessories and fluids, on the same scale. Not gonna happen tho. But thanks for your input, i am very concerned about weight balance and total weight. My car handles better wth the 3 core radiator rather than the single core, and with the battery under the headlight rather than in the front trunk. Of course i removed the AC compressor.
jon
------------------ Astronomy says we will find a coded signal from outer space. Then we'll KNOW that life exists there, for coded signals aren't by chance.
Biology says there are coded genetic signals in every cell, but we KNOW that no intelligence created life.
I'm the original owner of a white ' 84 2M4 purchased Dec 10, 1983 from Pontiac. Always garaged, no rust, 4-wheel drifts are fun!
Curious where you got these weights. I own intercomp 4 corner race scales. I'm showing 280 lbs for a turbo 2.0 with a gt3582 hanging off it. Only thing missing to be complete would be a/c and alternator, Which won't make it 360 lbs.
My car will be sub 2300 lbs with a big focus on weight balance.
i got them from various places on the internet. It is part of my research/decision making on Ecotecs to determine my choice for an engine swap, which will not be this winter as i have dew wipes, radio, door handle, tach, and wiper board repairs to do. If that gets done, then i have seat and nose repainting todo. The duke runs good and i'm sick of too many car projects. i would love to have some hard numbers from one person weighing a variety of motors all with the same accessories and fluids, on the same scale. Not gonna happen tho. But thanks for your input, i am very concerned about weight balance and total weight. My car handles better wth the 3 core radiator rather than the single core, and with the battery under the headlight rather than in the front trunk. Of course i removed the AC compressor.
jon
------------------ Astronomy says we will find a coded signal from outer space. Then we'll KNOW that life exists there, for coded signals aren't by chance.
Biology says there are coded genetic signals in every cell, but we KNOW that no intelligence created life.
I'm the original owner of a white ' 84 2M4 purchased Dec 10, 1983 from Pontiac. Always garaged, no rust, 4-wheel drifts are fun!
The other day I decided the rear of the car was a bit low so I adjusted the spring perches on the rear shocks to do this.The springs on the back are only 200 lbs so a bit of sag had probably set in. I took it for a ride and in town on our bumpy roads I noticed some thumping that wasnt there before.
The rear of the car has always had minimal travel the way it sat. Wheel movement compared to shock travel was pretty much 1 to 1. So with the soft springs cranked up to get the ride height I was after, when I went over a good sized bump I am pretty sure the shock was hitting its fully extended internal stop. Not good.
I have been thinking of ways to get more travel in the rear suspension. I came pretty close to buying some new KYB struts and some 7" coilover sleeves but just did not want to part with the cash. I built my system so I could go back to struts if I want.
So what I decided to do was to mount the bottom of the coilovers that I am using now on to the upper control arm and off of the strut adapter. This gives about 5" of wheel travel for every 3" of shock travel for a total calculated wheel travel of 6.6", a big improvement.
This requires new perches on the upper arms as well as new upper mounts for the coilovers.
Cutting off old upper mount:
Make a hole big enough to install the shock from the top:
Make a new bolt on upper coilover mount:
I welded a nut to a piece of 1/8" flat bar nd slid it in to the strut brace and welded it to the end of the square tube and plug welded for good measure. This will make it much easier to get the coilovers off. The new mount will be held in place by 2 -7/16" grade 8 bolts. To make the new lower mounts, I carved up some flat bar to fit the arms, cut the old mounting tabs off the strut adapters and welded them on to the upper arms.
I don't have a pic with it all installed yet because I am waiting for paint to dry. I installed everything except the coil springs and I ran it up and down and I now have 1 1/2" more droop and I can run way in to the wheel well, all with out hitting the stops on the shock. I managed to fit the mounting plate so my camber adjusters still work and are easily accessed.
I now have the driver side suspension pieces all welded up and I will install them tomorrow when the paint drys. Along with more travel, the 200 lb springs are not strong enough to do the job any more. Trying to get to the desired ride height means way too much preload and that just lessens available travel. I have 2 other sets of springs in the garage, 350lb by 10" and 450 lb by 9". Using the 350 lb springs means only about 1/2" of preload to get to ride height so I did not bother trying the 450's. A nice feature of this new design is that ride height can be adjusted without taking the wheels off. Jack the car up under the rear cradle cross bar and you can reach in and easily adjust the coilover height. A few pics:
Coilovers can be removed easily by unbolting top and bottom mounts and pulling them up.
I am always enthused to do a project like this, especially when it works out so well. Designing and figuring it all out is fun, until you have to do the mundane task of replicating the other side of the car. So the last little bit dragged on but the whole project has taken 6 days. Tomorrow I can take it for a ride and hopefully I will not be disappointed.
[This message has been edited by wftb (edited 10-30-2019).]
