what is so bad about gen ii engines?

[SwiftDrift]

yeah i know, the gen IIIs rock, but some people build the iron heads up still, so its just odd how someone will build the ancient iron heads and the outstanding gen IIIs up yet the gen II is just chopped liver lol

[caffeine]

The Gen II has a few nice improvements like the aluminum heads which are still better than the irons and DIS ignition is much nicer than the old dizzy setup.

But if you're going to use the Gen III heads there's no advantages really over a Gen III block which has a roller cam and better oiling system.

[SwiftDrift]

so the gen i and gen ii's are both just as shitty? so why did gm even bother going aluminum and using canted valves?

Gen II in stock form were rated at 8.9:1 (N/A) and 8.8:1 (turbo).

[caffeine]

The gen II intakes are very restrictive compared to the 3x00 intakes. Id say that's the major limitation. When it comes to cams you can basically use anything that works in a Gen I.

There just isn't really any advantages over Gen III except that you can use a Gen I oil pan. Compression ratio is also lower in the Gen IIs Iirc.

it seems like people figure--if they are going to swap, why not just use the 3500 top end? they cant be that bad.

That's exactly what they think.

If you're going to go through all of the same work, why not put the best you can on/in the engine?

The heads on the 3.1T are no different than the N/A 2.8 and 3.1 of the same generation. Some claim small differences, that would prove to be negligible at best.

[1988GTU]

Rather have an engine with potential than create and to have it.

[SwiftDrift]

many go with 3x00s, some with the old iron heads, but ya dont see like any LH0s being cammed or anything, wasnt the turbo mclaren 3.1 basically an LH0?? how come no one swaps the heads from these to a gen 1? it seems like people figure--if they are going to swap, why not just use the 3500 top end? they cant be that bad.