quote Originally posted by FieroFanatic13: Staying on topic here, the Chevy "60 Degree V6 Power Manual," which outlines how to build 60 degree engines, contains this quote early on in the book: "Production V6 60 degree blocks are suitable for high performance street use, off roading, and limited competition applications. Production V6 blocks used in SCORE/HDRA off-road racing, for example, routinely produce over 270 horsepower and provide hundreds of miles of troublefree operation at high engine speeds." This doesn't appear to be conjecture or shade tree mechanics making claims, but an actual resource that is available. Just my two cents. -Gary

This is also using only early 80's technology and 2 bbl carbs for the most part. There were a few 4bbl ones. They even show you how to make a 4bbl intake. With port injection and better ignition systems more is possible. There were performance heads offered by GM. I have seen them at swap meets. I saw a full on race 60degree V-6 at Carlisle one year at one of the swap meets with Kinsler style injection and drysump oiling system. Should have bought it I guess.

I was just quoting the resource book in my post. It seemed to imply that our stock 2.8's are capable of holding up better at farily high output levels than some people here on the forum believe. I don't know myself, and I don't have experience getting numbers like they mention out of our little engines, so I won't argue with anybody who does have experience in that department!

I know an old time boat racer. He still has his old hydroplane rotting in the back yard, and he knows pushrod engines really well. He claimed that a 60*v6 can be made to turn at 8,000 rpm in a speed boat and I believe him. He was also talking carb'd application. My V6 is certainly packing a punch at 6.200 rpm and I don't have the nerve to wring it out. I'm willing to bet it would hit 7.000 and it is not a prepared racing block.

Arn

The rev limit on my 3.4l DOHC turbo is set to 7200 RPM. And I see it often. I think many have nailed it when they say tuning is key. I am putting out over 400 WHP and drive the car a lot (~50k miles on the turbo setup). I don't take it easy on my car and I haven't had any engine failures. I do have hypereutectic pistons and good rod bolts, but that is it internally. Engines are stronger than you think. It just takes safe tuning.

------------------
62 Buick Special
86 GT, 5-Speed
87 GT, 3.4l DOHC Turbo 415 WHP, 11.9 @ 118
88 Toyota Supra Turbo

quote Originally posted by Matt Hawkins: The rev limit on my 3.4l DOHC turbo is set to 7200 RPM. And I see it often. I think many have nailed it when they say tuning is key. I am putting out over 400 WHP and drive the car a lot (~50k miles on the turbo setup). I don't take it easy on my car and I haven't had any engine failures. I do have hypereutectic pistons and good rod bolts, but that is it internally. Engines are stronger than you think. It just takes safe tuning.

I as well twist mine to 7200 alot, sometimes with a healthy dose of nitrous and have ben doing so for about 4 yrs with no internal problems. I drive it almost every day

quote Originally posted by The_Stickman2: You forgot something?

Nope, just commenting on the "hundreds of miles" statement, considering that cars are expected to go well over a hundred thousand trouble-free miles nowadays.

JazzMan

[This message has been edited by JazzMan (edited 11-28-2007).]

quote Originally posted by JazzMan: Nope, just commenting on the "hundreds of miles" statement, considering that cars are expected to go well over a hundred thousand trouble-free miles nowadays. JazzMan

Yes but my point was you left out that "at high speeds" point. Sorry but hundreds of miles at high speed under severe conditions such as those in SCORE can very well translate to many many street driven miles. Maybe a Hundred thousand or so.

quote Originally posted by AP2k: Man, that would be something else to have a 150 hp duke.

I was thinking the exact same thing we need more (serious) performance duke threads

quote Originally posted by The_Stickman2: Yes but my point was you left out that "at high speeds" point. Sorry but hundreds of miles at high speed under severe conditions such as those in SCORE can very well translate to many many street driven miles. Maybe a Hundred thousand or so.

My original comment was a paraphrase, focusing on the part specifically relating to the "hundreds of mile" part, and wasn't intended to be a snip and choose quote to make a point that wasn't true. I've gone back and edited my post to include the full sentence, and now want to make this comment: A race engine isn't expected to last any longer than the race. They get rebuilt often. Maybe 10% of the time they don't even make it to the end of the race. Races may be a few hundred miles long, so that means that many race engines really only last as long as the race, and are quite thoroughly worn out at that point.

The 2.8/3.1 specifically has an oiling problem with the bottom end, namely the rods and mains oil gets siphoned off from the cam bearings, which in turn are supplied by one of the two oil galleys in the block. What happens is that as the cam bearing wear and clearances increase the amount of oil volume lost through the cam bearings and into the pan increases. The pressure will stay relatively good because the restriction in the cam bearing area of the block is enough to build pressure, even though oil volume is decreasing at the rods and mains. Now, this won't be a problem with a race engine run at high speeds for "hundreds of miles" because it takes time for the cam bearings to wear, but is a real problem on a street engine run for a hundred thousand miles. In fact, generally the 2.8 will have a rod bearing problem, #3 and/or #4 most often, by a hundred thousand miles if not sooner, unless the engine was really babied and taken care of for that time.

This clearly illustrates the fact that race engine durability doesn't always have any bearing (no pun intended) on street durability of the same family of engine. The requirements and parameters under which a race engine is built and operated are rarely connected to those of a street engine, and no inference of that is wise to make.

Personally? I wouldn't want to build a two-galley 60° block more than the low 200's for reliability, and a three-galley block (the 3.4) to maybe the high 200's. But my desire is long-term reliability, recouping the best value from the cost of the build.

JazzMan

quote Originally posted by JazzMan: In fact, generally the 2.8 will have a rod bearing problem, #3 and/or #4 most often, by a hundred thousand miles if not sooner, unless the engine was really babied and taken care of for that time.

For '88 the 2.8 block was improved. These issues are much improved in the newer block design. I run my Formula to 6K regularly with 135K on the clock. It was NOT well taken care of before I got it. My understanding from the V6 power book is that this is the result of lead-in grooves for the rod journal oil holes being machined into the main journals at the factory. This step is stated as imperative for any high performance V6 in that book.

I believe Porsche did a study and found that 1 mile of racing is the equivalent of 1000 miles of street driving in terms of engine wear. This is primarily due to RPM, although when used Dikes-type piston rings and/or gas porting can have a significant impact on cylinder bore wear.

The power book does seem to be talking about "racing" applications, yes, but the sentence still reads

"Production V6/60 degree blocks are suitable for high performance street use..."

before it goes into the remark about the 270hp for hundreds of miles part. I doubt "high performance street use" means that 270hp number, but it still suggests that the production blocks should be better than some believe- certainly able to take a good increase over stock output levels? The "low 200's" remark earlier would seem sensible to me I guess.

But I'm not an engineer, so don't listen to me, please!

-Gary

the only good thing about iron motors is theyre generally much stronger then aluminum. the downside is weight. the upside of our engine is its smaller because its a 60 deg V and not the usual 90. the 60 degree angle also conserves more hp by not throwing weight to the sides like a 90 or 180 degree engine, this is why the vr6 is a good enigne. the early 12v engine has a 15degree angle, timing chain, and bucket style lifters and allows it to spin to high and fast. forged pistons are designed to handle the high btu output of a forced induction engine while a stock cast style piston will heat up and fatigue. forged pistons are not the end all, go bonkers on boost though. tuning is the biggest factor in any motor. id pay more attention to tuning than anything, if you get a turbo, bolt it on and then pay whatever to get it tuned right. you will be rewarded with reliabilty, gas milage, and power.

generally i think the most damaging things you can do are timing, compression, boost in that order

[This message has been edited by megafreakindeth (edited 11-29-2007).]

Would using as TURBO KIT such as the Miller Woods or Design One for example, be a safe bet given that they come with chips or ECM upgrades, etc.? I would think they couldn't/wouldn't have sold them if they grenaded engines?

-Gary

quote Originally posted by Will: For '88 the 2.8 block was improved. These issues are much improved in the newer block design. I run my Formula to 6K regularly with 135K on the clock. It was NOT well taken care of before I got it. My understanding from the V6 power book is that this is the result of lead-in grooves for the rod journal oil holes being machined into the main journals at the factory. This step is stated as imperative for any high performance V6 in that book.

Yes, the lead in grooves on the crank main journals is a big improvement. They didn't change the block at all as far as I know, to add a third oil galley for the bottom end would be a major redesign which they didn't do to the 60° block until the 3.4 block came out. I've taken apart '87 motors that had the lead-in grooves, I assume this was a running change made that year. The '88 crank is a completely different design due to it being internally balanced.

JazzMan

I have an 87 rebuilt engine I'm preparing. It has the 88 style oil pan but is the externally balanced engine. Does anybody know if there are differences in the oil galleries in the newer style block which came in during the 87 engine run?

Arn

The blocks are the same for all 2.8-3.1 variants from '85 up, the earlier blocks had smaller main bearing journals. The 3.4 was the first revision to alter the oil galley layout, the cam/rod bearing problems were ultimately solved by that change.

JazzMan