GM 3.1v6 in Z26 Beretta
Duane Lascoe
I have run into a small problem with my Z26 Beretta. I purchased this car
a year and some ago because the dealer was trying to get rid of them fast
and had lowered the price of the Z26 model, I believe there was some hail
damage, but i'll be damned if I can find it. The '95 Z26 was $50 cheaper
than a non Z24 cavalier with the 150hp engine. I liked the looks of the
Beretta better so I got it. Please don't critisize my choice on car, It
was new, very cheap, looks nice and is PAID for.
It seems that not that many people know what the beretta is. Most of the
people I run into think it has the same 3.8 engine as the base '95
Camaros based on the principle that the top Cavalier engine is beretta
base and top beretta engine is camaro base, from Z24-Z26-Z28. Well, I
guess they forgot the Z34 but I won't go there. What I need to know is,
what can I do for my Z26 to help the performance of the engine to bring it
up to all of my friends expectations? Starting from simple and cheap.
Also, is there any information out there on the GM 3.1. I have not been
able to find anything to help me out. It should not take too much to get
this 2750 lbs car to be a bit more peppy.
Also, I still have my Lumina with a 3.4 engine. This dual overhead cam
engine seems pretty good. The cars backend was demolished by a truck.
Does anyone know if the 3.4 will fit in the beretta? 215-225hp in this
little car wouldn't be too bad.
--
******************************************************************
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
******************************************************************
** dla...@sky.net **
******************************************************************
le...@ee.lbl.gov
Duane Lascoe wirtes:
> Also, I still have my Lumina with a 3.4 engine. This dual overhead cam
> engine seems pretty good. The cars backend was demolished by a truck.
> Does anyone know if the 3.4 will fit in the beretta? 215-225hp in this
> little car wouldn't be too bad.
I have an '89 Beretta and I've often dreamed about this swap. The
2.8/3.1 V6 use the same block as the 3.4 so you're supposed to be able
to just bolt the 3.4. I bet it's still a ton of work.
All that said, if I had a donor car like yours, I would do it in a
second. You would probably want to take the computer and everything and
from the ECM point of view, pretend you had a Lumina.
It would be worth checking smog implications of this kind of a swap
before doing anything.
Craig
DAVID ITZKOWITZ
LE>> Also, I still have my Lumina with a 3.4 engine. This dual overhead cam
LE>> engine seems pretty good. The cars backend was demolished by a truck.
LE>> Does anyone know if the 3.4 will fit in the beretta? 215-225hp in this
LE>> little car wouldn't be too bad.
LE>I have an '89 Beretta and I've often dreamed about this swap. The
LE>2.8/3.1 V6 use the same block as the 3.4 so you're supposed to be able
LE>to just bolt the 3.4. I bet it's still a ton of work.
I have the 88' Corsica w/2.8V6 and if its anything like the Beretta
-which it is, there is not much room under the hood, so I cant see the
same engine with DOHC's could have the clearance for the heads.
Dave
---
* SLMR 2.1a * hAS ANYONE SEEN MY cAPSLOCK KEY?
ter...@foothill.net
water jackets are smaller to allow a bigger bore.
If the 3.4L intake will clear the hood, go for the swap. Yes it will be work to
get all of the relays, wiring, and brain in. The fuel pump in the gas tank, I believe
is the same (45PSI).
Michael Palmer
My fear has always been the cam-drive accessories at the front of the
block not clearing the passenger side shock tower (mines an '88 Z24 and
the stock 2.8 comes pretty close to the tower already). I'd rather do
some research and find out how GM got 225HP from a pushrod, GenII-based
3.4L V6 for the 1990 Beretta Indy pace car. Looking at pictures of it
(Chevy Power by HPBooks), you can see tubular headers (where'd they get
those and more importantly, where can *I* get those?!?) and an LT1-style
short-runner intake manifold.
I wonder if Chevy sells parts off the shelf to bore out a 3.1 to 3.4L
(pistons?), install the intake and exhaust manifolds from the Beretta
pace car and the ECM recalibration to get an engine of comparable power
output....hello Chevrolet!
This has to be cheaper than trying to shoehorn that high-winding DOHC
motor between the shock towers.
Scott Widmer
Michael Palmer wrote:
> My fear has always been the cam-drive accessories at the front of the
> block not clearing the passenger side shock tower (mines an '88 Z24 and
> the stock 2.8 comes pretty close to the tower already). I'd rather do
> some research and find out how GM got 225HP from a pushrod, GenII-based
> 3.4L V6 for the 1990 Beretta Indy pace car. Looking at pictures of it
> (Chevy Power by HPBooks), you can see tubular headers (where'd they get
> those and more importantly, where can *I* get those?!?) and an LT1-style
> short-runner intake manifold.
>
> I wonder if Chevy sells parts off the shelf to bore out a 3.1 to 3.4L
> (pistons?), install the intake and exhaust manifolds from the Beretta
> pace car and the ECM recalibration to get an engine of comparable power
> output....hello Chevrolet!
Check out the lastest version of the Chevrolet Power Catalog. It has
one whole section devoted to extracting maximum performance from Chevy's
60 degree V-6 engine (2.8L, 3.1L, 3.4L). In addition, there are a slew
of performance parts available from GM and several other aftermarket
sources designed to build up these engines. See the GM Performance
Parts Catalog.
Note of caution: many of the components and techniques discussed in the
above manuals are intended for computer-free and emission exempt
applications. Use of such parts/procedures in PCM/ECU equipped vehicles
would most likely adversely effect exhaust emission output (if you even
cared) as well as require custom remapping of stock fuel and spark
curves (PCM/ECU recalibration). The latter could become quite an
involved and iterative (trial and error) process.
> This has to be cheaper than trying to shoehorn that high-winding DOHC
> motor between the shock towers.
At first glance you might think so, but recalibrating the electronics
and upgrading the various systems (fuel, exhaust, cooling, transmission)
to accommodate the additional power output can become quite costly. If
economics are part of the equation (which they usually are), then I
would look into installing a larger, higher output drivetrain
(engine/transmission/axle shafts including all accessories, sensors, and
electronics) from a donor car instead of attempting to massage the
smaller stock set-up (example: install 3.4DOHC or 3.8L (3800) Buick
rather than build/upgrade the 2.8L drivetrain). The performance
potential would be far greater for the money you would spend.
-Scott Widmer
srwi...@cle.ab.com
ter...@foothill.net
In <31FD2F...@ndigital.com>, Michael Palmer <mpa...@ndigital.com> writes:
>ter...@foothill.net wrote:
>>
>> In <8C54597.0561...@moondog.com>, david.i...@moondog.com (DAVID ITZKOWITZ) writes:
>> >LE>> Also, I still have my Lumina with a 3.4 engine. This dual overhead cam
>> >LE>> engine seems pretty good. The cars backend was demolished by a truck.
>> >LE>> Does anyone know if the 3.4 will fit in the beretta? 215-225hp in this
>> >LE>> little car wouldn't be too bad.
>> >
>> >LE>I have an '89 Beretta and I've often dreamed about this swap. The
>> >LE>2.8/3.1 V6 use the same block as the 3.4 so you're supposed to be able
>> >LE>to just bolt the 3.4. I bet it's still a ton of work.
>> >
>> >I have the 88' Corsica w/2.8V6 and if its anything like the Beretta
>> >-which it is, there is not much room under the hood, so I cant see the
>> >same engine with DOHC's could have the clearance for the heads.
>> >Dave
>> >---
>> > * SLMR 2.1a * hAS ANYONE SEEN MY cAPSLOCK KEY?
>> There are some subtle differences between the 2.8/3.1L and the 3.4L mainly the
>> water jackets are smaller to allow a bigger bore.
>>
>> If the 3.4L intake will clear the hood, go for the swap. Yes it will be work to
>> get all of the relays, wiring, and brain in. The fuel pump in the gas tank, I believe
>> is the same (45PSI).
>
>block not clearing the passenger side shock tower (mines an '88 Z24 and
>the stock 2.8 comes pretty close to the tower already). I'd rather do
>some research and find out how GM got 225HP from a pushrod, GenII-based
>3.4L V6 for the 1990 Beretta Indy pace car. Looking at pictures of it
>(Chevy Power by HPBooks), you can see tubular headers (where'd they get
>those and more importantly, where can *I* get those?!?) and an LT1-style
>short-runner intake manifold.
>
>I wonder if Chevy sells parts off the shelf to bore out a 3.1 to 3.4L
>(pistons?), install the intake and exhaust manifolds from the Beretta
>pace car and the ECM recalibration to get an engine of comparable power
>output....hello Chevrolet!
>
>motor between the shock towers.
has thicker cylinders to handle the bigger bore.
You could get the 3.4L upgrade for about $1700. It a complete long block 3.4L
spec'd at 165HP 195ft-lbs. GM pat number 12363224. It's drilled for the rear wheel
drive, but should work in and FWD since the "front" motor mount bolts to the front
of the block and the "rear" mounts bolt to the transxle. Open it up and balance
and blueprint it, change to a true double roller chain, and true roller rockers.
That would fly.
As for the headers, I've been trying to find some for my X11 and there are none
to be found for the FWD cars. If anyone knows of some, let me know!
TK
Carl Porter
Duane Lascoe wrote:
>
> I have run into a small problem with my Z26 Beretta. I purchased this car
> a year and some ago because the dealer was trying to get rid of them fast
> and had lowered the price of the Z26 model, I believe there was some hail
> damage, but i'll be damned if I can find it. The '95 Z26 was $50 cheaper
> than a non Z24 cavalier with the 150hp engine. I liked the looks of the
> Beretta better so I got it. Please don't critisize my choice on car, It
> was new, very cheap, looks nice and is PAID for.
>
> It seems that not that many people know what the beretta is. Most of the
> people I run into think it has the same 3.8 engine as the base '95
> Camaros based on the principle that the top Cavalier engine is beretta
> base and top beretta engine is camaro base, from Z24-Z26-Z28. Well, I
> guess they forgot the Z34 but I won't go there. What I need to know is,
> what can I do for my Z26 to help the performance of the engine to bring it
> up to all of my friends expectations? Starting from simple and cheap.
> Also, is there any information out there on the GM 3.1. I have not been
> able to find anything to help me out. It should not take too much to get
> this 2750 lbs car to be a bit more peppy.
>
I drive a '92 Camaro with the 3.1 and a '87 Firebird with the 2.8. So far the only
things I've done are get a flowmaster, K&N filter, and change the plugs to NGK UR-6s (or
was that RU-6?). I've run nitrous, a NOS fogger, on the Firebird. I haven't seen or
heard of much else available for the engine. There are chips available for the 2.8/3.1
engines in the mini pickups but I'm not sure these would be compatible with ours. The
Chevy dealer here keeps The Chevy Power Handbbook & The Performance Parts Catalog in
stock. I need to go get new ones as the 24 valve engines came out since mine were
published. The standard balance, porting, etc., work if you care to spend the money.
Your 3.4l engine is the same block as the 3.1, the main difference in fitting it in
will the the heads. The 4 valve jobs are wider so the engine will be slightly taller and
the clearances around the fender wells will be tighter. Personally I've been wanting to
try the same thing only going from transverse to longitudinal mount in the F-bodies.
Carl
ter...@pc4684ke.rose.hp.com
Close, but the 3.1L can not be bored to 3.4L.
Topi K Junkkari
Scott Widmer <srwi...@cle.ab.com> wrote:
>Check out the lastest version of the Chevrolet Power Catalog. It has
>one whole section devoted to extracting maximum performance from Chevy's
>60 degree V-6 engine (2.8L, 3.1L, 3.4L). In addition, there are a slew
>of performance parts available from GM and several other aftermarket
>sources designed to build up these engines. See the GM Performance
>Parts Catalog.
I suppose the above mentioned catalogs are GM products?
I doubt the GM dealerships up here know much about them - so where can
publications like these be obtained?
I live in Finland (which is a long way from where most of you are from),
but make occasional business trips to the US and am quite accustomed to
dealing with US businesses, so a Stateside mail order source for these
pubs would be appreciated.
My engine is one of the first ones (2.8L in a 1980 Phoenix SJ) and will be
needing a rebuild anyway, so I'd like to do it with the best parts available
and get some performance gains.
No computer, no strict emission standards, why not give it a try?
Regards
Topi
ter...@foothill.net
From GM Dealer get:
Chevy Power PN 24502488 $15
GM Performance Parts PN 12365414 $6.95
From Motorbooks International:
Power Pro Series
How to Rebuild Your GM V-6 60` Engine by Tom Currao
P.O. Box 2
729 Prospect Ave.
Osceola, WI 54020
ISBN 0-87938-841-2
Great books!
As for the 1980 rebuild, change the timing chain cover to an 81 or later.
Also, many Fiero block parts are exactly the same (for the HO versions of the
engine).
Michael Palmer
Scott Widmer wrote:
>
> Michael Palmer wrote:
>
>
> Check out the lastest version of the Chevrolet Power Catalog. It has
> one whole section devoted to extracting maximum performance from Chevy's
> 60 degree V-6 engine (2.8L, 3.1L, 3.4L). In addition, there are a slew
> of performance parts available from GM and several other aftermarket
> sources designed to build up these engines. See the GM Performance
> Parts Catalog.
The last version of the Chevy Power catalog I looked at actually didn't have a whole
heckuva lot for the 60-degree V6. The "high-performance" cylinder heads shown, for example,
are simply the aluminum GenII variety already found on my 2.8.
You say there's "a slew of performance parts ... <from> several other aftermarket
sources"...could you please elaborate and let us know which companies exactly make hi-po
stuff for the lowly little V6?
Crane, I know, makes a "Compucam" supposedly good for 15HP or so. That's pretty much it as
far as I knew for aftermarket support. I guess since it isn't a rear-wheel drive
carbureted V8, the Edelbrocks, Holleys, Crowers, Hookers etc of the world think it simply
isn't worth supporting in the aftermarket, while GReddy and Stillen fall all over
themselves to keep Nissan and Honda owners happy. Who makes stuff for the non-traditional
North American iron? FWIW, did you know that Edelbrock sells performance heads for a 500
CID Cadillac (!) motor??? What a market there must be for those! This after I was told by a
customer service rep at Edelbrock that the market simply isn't there to develop slick stuff
for the 60-degree injected V6. Hmph.
>
> Note of caution: many of the components and techniques discussed in the
> above manuals are intended for computer-free and emission exempt
> applications. Use of such parts/procedures in PCM/ECU equipped vehicles
> would most likely adversely effect exhaust emission output (if you even
> cared) as well as require custom remapping of stock fuel and spark
> curves (PCM/ECU recalibration). The latter could become quite an
> involved and iterative (trial and error) process.
>
Remapping the ECM isn't a problem...lots of experience there! I'd probably only have to
adjust the timing, and the fuel recal could probably be accomplished with an adjustable
fuel pressure regulator and a boost in fuel pressure (i.e. from 40 PSI to, say, 50 to
start). Drive around a bit and see what the integrator and BLMs do and where the O2 sensor
sits during cruise and during full throttle acceleration (600-750mV best...). Just ask the
Buick GN crowd about tuning based on injector size/flow and fuel pressure.
> > This has to be cheaper than trying to shoehorn that high-winding DOHC
> > motor between the shock towers.
>
> At first glance you might think so, but recalibrating the electronics
> and upgrading the various systems (fuel, exhaust, cooling, transmission)
> to accommodate the additional power output can become quite costly. If
> economics are part of the equation (which they usually are), then I
> would look into installing a larger, higher output drivetrain
> (engine/transmission/axle shafts including all accessories, sensors, and
> electronics) from a donor car instead of attempting to massage the
> smaller stock set-up (example: install 3.4DOHC or 3.8L (3800) Buick
> rather than build/upgrade the 2.8L drivetrain). The performance
> potential would be far greater for the money you would spend.
>
Sure would be nice to have that slick 3800 motor in there. I know of a fellow who put the
supercharged 3800 from a Bonneville into an older Buick Century chassis, ended up with what
looked like a factory install (*very* clean) and runs mid to low 14s.
I'd be happy with a switch to a 3.1L motor of about 200 HP normally aspirated. With about
190 cubic inches and MPFI/knock detection this *should* be as simple as rebuilding with the
same type of hi-po parts available to the small block Chevy and Ford crowds - headers,
intake, cam, 10:1 pistons etc. Does *anyone* make this stuff for this engine (the 60-degree
V6)?
Michael Palmer
ter...@foothill.net wrote:
>
<*snip*>
> You can't bore a 3.1L to a 3.4L. The cylinders aren't large enough. The 3.4L
> has thicker cylinders to handle the bigger bore.
That figures. <*sigh*>
>
> You could get the 3.4L upgrade for about $1700. It a complete long block 3.4L
> spec'd at 165HP 195ft-lbs. GM pat number 12363224. It's drilled for the rear wheel
> drive, but should work in and FWD since the "front" motor mount bolts to the front
> of the block and the "rear" mounts bolt to the transxle. Open it up and balance
> and blueprint it, change to a true double roller chain, and true roller rockers.
>
> That would fly.
Sure would. I'd love to put 200 HP into this 2700 LB chassis. It'd probably twist itself
into a pretzel and would dart off into the weeds when you poked it, but it'd be a
heckuva fun thing to have. What a sleeper eh?
>
> As for the headers, I've been trying to find some for my X11 and there are none
> to be found for the FWD cars. If anyone knows of some, let me know!
Does anyone know if "Headers by Ed" makes a kit for these that you weld yourself? They
claim to support more than 90 different types of engines...I wonder if the FWD 60-degree
V6 is one of those configurations...
Topi K Junkkari
>From GM Dealer get:
>
>Chevy Power PN 24502488 $15
>GM Performance Parts PN 12365414 $6.95
The biggest GM dealership in Finland (Metro-Auto) knew nothing about the
second one. They recognized the P/N on the first one but did not stock it
and could give no price quote.
Fortunately one of my colleagues is in the US right now, I'll ask him to
get these for me. (recommendations for a helpful GM dealership in the
Triangle area of North Carolina, anyone?)
>Power Pro Series
>How to Rebuild Your GM V-6 60` Engine by Tom Currao
I was fortunate enough to get this book when I was in Raleigh, NC a couple of
months ago. I could not imagine something like this existed for the
"forgotten engine" - and then I came across it while idly browsing the shelves
at Barnes&Noble!
>As for the 1980 rebuild, change the timing chain cover to an 81 or later.
What for? The extra stud in the upper part of the cover?
I guess I will have to drill the corresponding hole in the block surface
myself?
BTW, in another thread you were asking if anybody knows of any exhaust headers
for the FWD applications. I have a redistributor's catalog which is dated
1992 and contains reprints from a Hooker Headers catalog. It lists part #2146
as suitable for "Pontiac Phoenix 79 1/2 - 81 60 degree V6". I have not tried
to get them (yet), though. Might (unfortunately) be discontinued?
Could you please list the major modifications you've made to your X11 engine?
Do you use the original carburetor and intake manifold, which aftermarket parts
are you using, etc.
Regards
Topi
Scott Widmer
ter...@foothill.net wrote:
> As for the headers, I've been trying to find some for my X11 and there are none
> to be found for the FWD cars. If anyone knows of some, let me know!
Contact Hooker. They make a set of tubular headers for the X-11 and V-6
Citation. Tube diameter is 1.5"; collector diameter is 2.5". An O2
sensor bung is included in the rear header and AIR injection ports are
optional. They are true dual exiting units (no cross-over pipe exists).
This will necessitate a custom fabricated exhaust system. Cost of the
headers is about $250-300.
-Scott Widmer
modified '81 X-11 (with Hooker headers, among other things)
Scott Widmer
Michael Palmer wrote:
> The last version of the Chevy Power catalog I looked at actually didn't have a > whole heckuva lot for the 60-degree V6.
Well, true GM doesn't offer as many choices of high performance
components for the 60 degree V-6 as they do for, say, their small block
V-8. But, the list is pretty complete- from the bowtie aluminum block
to 12:1 forged pistons to HO cast iron heads and most everything in
between.
> The "high-performance" cylinder heads shown, for example, are simply the
> aluminum GenII variety already found on my 2.8.
Actually, unless GM has changed their thinking, they recommend the cast
iron HO cylinder heads (larger valves than the regular duty iron head)
for heavy duty/high performance applications over the Al heads.
> You say there's "a slew of performance parts ... <from> several other
> aftermarket sources"...could you please elaborate and let us know which
> companies exactly make hi-po stuff for the lowly little V6?
Sure. Edelbrock makes an aftermarket intake manifold to accept a 390
CFM Holley carb. Though this intake set-up is design for longitudinal
applications, a few minor modifications will adapt this to a front drive
arrangement. They also offer a "performance" cam (204/214 degrees
duration, .4+" lift) and a tubular header and cat back exhaust system
for S-10 trucks/Blazers.
Though Holley makes no direct replacement performance carb for the
2.8/3.1 V-6, several of their smaller carbs (350 & 500 CFM 2300 series
2BBL and 390 CFM 4BBL) can be adapted for use on these engines. Also
for TBI equipped trucks, Holley makes 500 CFM throttle body units that
are a direct bolt on for the 60 degree V-6.
Hooker makes headers for the most recent generation V-6 equipped X-body
cars (Citation, Phoenix, Omega, Skylark) and S-10s and Camaros which
carry the 660 engine.
Crower, I believe, has 1.6 roller rocker arms for these engines.
Wolverine makes a high performance cam (214/224 degrees duration, .450"
lift, other grinds might be available.
Mallory makes a Unilite electronic distributor available with vacuum
advance and high performance Promaster coil for these V-6s.
Hilborn, I think, offers an aftermarket sidedraft mechanical fuel
injection system.
Haltech makes universal user tunable/stand alone engine controllers for
port fuel injected 6 cylinder engines.
Either Paxton or Vortech, makes a supercharger kit for the 2.8L MPFI
Camaro/Firebird.
GM offers 12:1 high performance pistons for the 2.8L; TRW makes high
performance pistons as well.
As I stated in my previous post, most of the goodies above are designed
for use on non computer controlled/emission "exempt" vehicles. You are
right, though, about there not being a lot in the way of direct bolt on
performance parts for the late model Gen II MPFI engines.
> I guess since it isn't a rear-wheel drive carbureted V8, the Edelbrocks,
> Holleys, Crowers, Hookers etc of the world think it simply isn't worth
> supporting in the aftermarket, while GReddy and Stillen fall all over
> themselves to keep Nissan and Honda owners happy. Who makes stuff for the
> non-traditional North American iron? FWIW, did you know that Edelbrock sells
> performance heads for a 500 CID Cadillac (!) motor??? What a market there must > be for those! This after I was told by a customer service rep at Edelbrock
> that the market simply isn't there to develop slick stuff for the 60-degree
> injected V6. Hmph.
Yes, I saw Edelbrock had recently come out with these heads. Actually,
you'd be surprised how many people are building up Caddy engines for
performance. However, I do understand where you're coming from.
> This after I was told by a customer service rep at Edelbrock that the market
> simply isn't there to develop slick stuff for the 60-degree injected V6. Hmph.
Back when this engine came into existence ('79/'80), it was used as a
power plant in several series of races. Because of this and because it
was thought that smaller displacement engines were going to be the wave
of the future (even for performance oriented vehicles), many aftermarket
parts manufacturers responded with offerings for the baby V-6.
Over the years in passenger car & light truck duty, this engine didn't
really prove itself very well. It was plagued with quality problems and
customers complained about its lack of power and durability. Further
more, the price of gas remained low. Thus, GM responded (as did the
others in the industry) with larger displacement engines which didn't
have to work as hard and produced more power than the 60 degree V-6.
In the mid 80s, the 660 engine was significantly revised and dubbed the
Gen II. The introduction of MPFI, distributorless ignition, and a more
complex ECU scared off many performance parts manufacturers from
developing new components for the engine and instilled fear into the
majority of back yard mechanics/hot rodders who didn't understand how
these systems were affected by engine modifications.
In addition, small gains in performance (computer chip, K&N air filter,
etc.) are not that noticeable- so why bother. While larger increases
(cam, headers, head work, larger injectors, exhaust system, higher
compression pistons, etc.) require more money than most people are
willing to spend for this engine in the kind of car its in.
Additionally, these mods require custom ECU programming- something that
not too many places specialize in and even fewer people have the means
of doing it themselves.
> Remapping the ECM isn't a problem...lots of experience there! I'd probably only > have to adjust the timing, and the fuel recal could probably be accomplished
> with an adjustable fuel pressure regulator and a boost in fuel pressure (i.e.
> from 40 PSI to, say, 50 to start). Drive around a bit and see what the
> integrator and BLMs do and where the O2 sensor sits during cruise and during
> full throttle acceleration (600-750mV best...). Just ask the Buick GN crowd
> about tuning based on injector size/flow and fuel pressure.
If you have experience at reprogramming ECUs, then you should be able to
install just about any performance part available for this engine and
make it all function harmoniously. Definitely do the pistons and the
cam, port and polish the heads, free up the exhaust (get headers and
eliminate the converter if you can) and increase fuel and intake air
flow.
> Sure would be nice to have that slick 3800 motor in there. I know of a fellow
> who put the supercharged 3800 from a Bonneville into an older Buick Century
> chassis, ended up with what looked like a factory install (*very* clean) and
> runs mid to low 14s.
I hear ya! I've been wanting to dump one of these things in my '81
X-11. I'd even settle for the non-blown version (205hp).
> I'd be happy with a switch to a 3.1L motor of about 200 HP normally aspirated. > With about 190 cubic inches and MPFI/knock detection this *should* be as simple > as rebuilding with the same type of hi-po parts available to the small block
> Chevy and Ford crowds - headers, intake, cam, 10:1 pistons etc. Does *anyone*
> make this stuff for this engine (the 60-degree V6)?
With some of the items listed above, you should be in the neighborhood
of 200 ponies. However, you might be sacrificing low end torque and
drivability in the process. That's why, while I'm a huge fan of the 60
degree V-6, I still feel that there is no substitute for cubic inches.
If you want more usable power across the engine's operating range, go
with the 3800 or something similar.
-Scott Widmer
srwi...@cle.ab.com
ter...@pc4684ke.rose.hp.com
>Sure would. I'd love to put 200 HP into this 2700 LB chassis. It'd probably twist itself
>into a pretzel and would dart off into the weeds when you poked it, but it'd be a
>heckuva fun thing to have. What a sleeper eh?
That exactly what my X11 does. Point it and pull the trigger and off you go, into that
ditch, up that tree, off that cliff. A little too much torque steer now.
>
>>
>> As for the headers, I've been trying to find some for my X11 and there are none
>> to be found for the FWD cars. If anyone knows of some, let me know!
>
>Does anyone know if "Headers by Ed" makes a kit for these that you weld yourself? They
>claim to support more than 90 different types of engines...I wonder if the FWD 60-degree
>V6 is one of those configurations...
I've been look for X11 headers. No luck so far.
ter...@pc4684ke.rose.hp.com
available. But a dealer search might find a set. Apparently the tops are thick
enough to mill down for a more reasonable compression ratio.
GM no longer supplies special pistons for the 660, althought the stock HO pistons
(9.1:1) are still available.
TK