I have an 88' Camaro RS, Spent a lot on the 2.8 to get it running, now it's blown. Dang oil pump! Anyway, I need to know what would be the best upgrade That will utilize my $3,000+ worth of new electric components and if possible my 2.8 intake. I want to stay with the v6 just more power. I've considered the 3.4DOHC for it's import killing potential. Any thoughts?
-
-
if i were you, i would be getting rid of the 2.8 intake as fast as possible...
i'll let john know about this thread, he can give a lot more info on what does and doesn't work for f-bodies... -
Get yourself a 3.4 out of a 4th gen and put a 3500 top end on it
Comment
-
ok for the risk of sounding stupid, I've seen you guy's referring to the 3500. what's this out of? And How much electrical will I have to change? And seriously, what's wrong with the 2.8 intake? I only ask because I have so much tied up in the whole 2.8. almost everything external has less than 5,000 miles on it including the ECM.Comment
-
simple reference that works about 99% of the time
If its wrote as a 3.4 its RWD
Wrote as 3400 its FWD
so the 3500 is a FWD motor and its out of a whole boat load of GM cars.
The f-body intakes are known to be restrictive as all hell. Plus the aluminum heads off the fwd motors flow a lot better than older iron heads on the rwds.
I'm not up to date on my f-bodies but I'm sure you already have some sort of multi port injection on a 88 so the wiring might not be that hard. If you still got TBI ignore that last comment.87 3.4 4x4 blazer
3 inch body lift, t-bar/shackle lift, 31x10.5sComment
-
The 3500 didn't really come in a boat load of vehicles, as it was only available for 3-4 yrs. But to list a few, it was available in the Malibu, the newer vans (Uplander, Terraza, etc), and a couple other vehicles I can't think of right now.-Brad-
89 Mustang : Future 60V6 Power
Follow the build -> http://www.3x00swap.com/index.php?page=mustang-blogComment
-
Originally posted by bszopi View Post
Nope, not many years/platforms at all, they were made only slightly longer then the 3.4 Camaro motor.
g6 and malibu are the ones you see guys using here.Last edited by ForcedFirebird; 09-14-2009, 10:09 PM.Comment
-
Well coming from I was looking for a engine that only came in 2 models for 3 years, sorry lol. Still more than compared to the rwd 3.4.Originally posted by bszopi View Post87 3.4 4x4 blazer
3 inch body lift, t-bar/shackle lift, 31x10.5sComment
-
Ok you're saying to use the 3500 heads and intake on the 3.4? I can assume this intake faces the right way for rwd? Guys I meant it when I said v6 rookie. I half a$$ed know what I'm talkin about with older v8's. But a motor head none the less.Comment
-
What's the advantage of the 3500's top end over the 3.4's?Comment
-
2.8
KS.
I have an 87 camaro with the 2.8. there is a company in Mo. that makes a stroker motor out of the 2.8 to a 3.4. I love the motor. I have had mine about 2 yrs and I know the intake is very restrictive. I currently am having issues finding a better intake and throttlebody. I know when I ordered my motor they said the 2.8 that I had wouldn't accept the 3.4 or 3.5 alum. heads so I'm trying to research that now as well. But this motor has alot more power to if and am sure i can squeeze more with a better intake and throttlebody. I did have them port my heads and went with bigger cam and 1.6 roller rockers.Comment
-
Ok sounds good thanks. Why is the 2.8 intake so restrictive? can it not be port matched and polished? Or is this just a waste of time? I know finding plenum gaskets for this intake can be a chore, but I figured if one could get rid of the rough inner surface that it would be a good design simply because of its raise above the motor would help keep it cool. But I guess this wouldn't matter since the injector sockets are at head level.Comment
-
long, spiderleg intake ports aren't great for power.
look at TPI 305/350 motors, essentially the same idea.
give good torque at low-RPM but thats about it.Comment
-
I had seen the f body tpi v8's, but never had the chance to run one. I don't mean to beat my head against the wall here, but isn't what you said a total contradiction to the concept of the Holley tunnel Ram?Comment
-
tunnel ram is a bit different. the ports on it ARE long, but thats where the torque comes from. the ports are also FAT, which is why it makes power up top, not the bottom.Comment
Comment