So you might disagree with me, but I don't view the Fiero as a great platform for drag racing. To me, this seems more like a car for turning than going straight. When handling is the priority, weight is more of an issue than power. Because of that, I've never viewed the S/C 3.8 or the LS series at a great fit for a Fiero at around 450 lb and 480 lb respectively. GM makes the powerful & light (380 lb) High Feature 60° DOHC V6 engine but it is very top heavy which is not good for handling. With the introduction of the Gen 5 LT1/EcoTec3 small block, GM finally makes an all aluminum pushrod V6! The 4.3L LV3 makes 285 hp and 305 ft·lb with direct injection and continuously variable valve timing. I'm guessing it would weigh 360 lb. It could be a great compromise between power and weight for a Fiero and not make so much torque that it grenades OEM trans-axles. Best of all, it would be a base engine for trucks, so in a few years it will be cheap as hell.
I always wondered about putting a high HP engine in a Fiero...buying a c5 proved to be a lot easier. Anyway, one of the detractors about the Fiero was that nobody made a "non-exotic" trans-axle with torque ratings much more than 300 ft·lb. I guess that's not the case anymore. The DQ500 transverse dual-clutch trans-axle is rated to 600 N·m or 442 ft·lb. That's enough capacity to handle an LS3! Getting this trans-axle to bolt up and the controllers that run it would probably be a nightmare, but it's cool that there are high capacity OEM trans-axles out there now.
I like that 4.3! When I first read that the new Chevy trucks were going to have a 4.3 as the base engine, I was wondering how many years that Chevy was going to drag out the old "3/4 350" boat anchor.
I always wondered why they didn't build an LS-based V6. (One of my LS1 books even states that the LS1 design started out as a V6.) This architecture is not exactly "LS", but it is an evolution of that architecture. That V6 is going to make nearly as much power as the 5.3 that I have in my Silverado. And that can't be bad.
They really need to sell it as a crate engine, with a stand-alone ECM.
[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 10-03-2013).]
Yeah the Gen 5 Ecotec 4.3 has my eye for a good/fun daily driver, as well as other reasons.
The unknown and potential major challenge will be how connected the ECM must be to the BCM in order for it to run.
However, I wouldn't rag on the LS V8's being too heavy. Take a look how my 88 Fiero Coupe with LS4/F40 tips the scales vs. the stock 88's as well as other 88's with engine swaps. As you do the swap, there are a lot of options for keeping weight to a minimum. https://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum1/HTML/092246.html
Looking at this engine too for when I get out of school. Hope some one else does this swap before then so I can learn from them, Hopefully an F23 is an option.
My 85 only gained about 70 lbs when I installed the 3800sc and 4T60e. I lost about 20lbs, when I updated the starter and did away with the distributor/alternator blower. It can also be made to keep the center of weight lower than the 2.8. I do like the idea of the 4.3 version of the engines that are out. However, for swaps, the old saying the simpler the better. The 3800 is a good balance of performance and keeping the wiring down. Haven't seen many problems with VVT on GM engines. The DoD is starting to show it ugly side as the engines age. The 90 degree direct injection hasn't been out their that long but we are seeing issues on the 3.6. The 3.6 also has a good number of other problems we are seeing. The 3.6, with all of it's "supposed to do" offerings, was still only about 20lbs lighter than the 3800. I wished GM would have continued with the 3800. If they added VVT and made aluminum heads for it, I think that it would still have been very useful. Then again, it would have been nice if GM had got the casting rights back for the 215 block. Look how long Rover used it. Some of the lightest production V8s until BMW came out with their recent ones.
You need to compare engine weights properly. A fully dressed High Feature V6 is definitely going to weigh more than 380 lbs.
The 4.3L engine is indeed quite interesting, but you're going to have to add the weight of the adapter plate to fit it in a Fiero.
Back to the LS, I expect my LS4 will weigh less than the stock 2.8, when I get it done. The bare block only weighs 100 lbs. A lot of the extra weight on the stock LS4 comes from the very heavy cast iron manifolds, and some cast iron brackets used for the accessory drive.
Have you seen specs for the new Cadillac 60 degree v6? It all aluminum and has over 300hp /400 hp twin turbo . Now if it will bolt up to a getrag one can only hope. The rpo is LGW and LGX.
Have you seen specs for the new Cadillac 60 degree v6? It all aluminum and has over 300hp /400 hp twin turbo . Now if it will bolt up to a getrag one can only hope. The rpo is LGW and LGX.
The ONLY manual transmission that ever came with a High Feature engine, was in a Saab. The Getrag F40, in the 9-3 2.8t. The bell pattern is different from the classic Metric FWD pattern the Fiero used. The Cadillac engine you mention is the same 3.6 used across the board. The twin turbo version is the only one that is unique to Cadillac IIRC, in the ATS-V. The N/A version is what replaces the previous LFX RPO 3.6 DOHC.
The ONLY manual transmission that ever came with a High Feature engine, was in a Saab. The Getrag F40, in the 9-3 2.8t. The bell pattern is different from the classic Metric FWD pattern the Fiero used. The Cadillac engine you mention is the same 3.6 used across the board. The twin turbo version is the only one that is unique to Cadillac IIRC, in the ATS-V. The N/A version is what replaces the previous LFX RPO 3.6 DOHC.
Yeah I've been seeing that f40 moniker in the forum. Is it a pain to retrofit? Is the return on investment worth it?
Originally posted by Silvertown: Yeah I've been seeing that f40 moniker in the forum. Is it a pain to retrofit? Is the return on investment worth it?
It is not a direct bolt-in swap, if that's waht you mean. The ROI depends on how much you invested, and what you get out of it, so there's no definite answer to "is it worth it?" The answer is subjective.
Most F40s that have been swapped in though, are the ones from the G6, which used the metric bell pattern, behind the 3.9 V6. Finding one with the High Feature bell pattern can be much more challenging, and expensive.
Have you seen specs for the new Cadillac 60 degree v6? It all aluminum and has over 300hp /400 hp twin turbo . Now if it will bolt up to a getrag one can only hope. The rpo is LGW and LGX.
If I were going to do a High Feature V6, I would retain the 6 speed automatic. My wife's mom has a CTS with the LY7 and 6 speed auto (yes, I know it's longitudinal, but the gearing is similar, IIRC) and it will really move a 4000 lb car. The tap shift makes it interesting. I could imagine it (with the transverse tranny, of course) in a Fiero.
Having said all that, the LZ9 3500 is 240 HP, right out of the box, and will pretty much bolt right to the cradle, using stock mounts; and will also bolt right to our transaxles (and it came with the F40, if you want to go that route.) Wiring would be the challenge, but that will be present with any later swap.
It is not a direct bolt-in swap, if that's waht you mean. The ROI depends on how much you invested, and what you get out of it, so there's no definite answer to "is it worth it?" The answer is subjective.
Most F40s that have been swapped in though, are the ones from the G6, which used the metric bell pattern, behind the 3.9 V6. Finding one with the High Feature bell pattern can be much more challenging, and expensive.
Can you buy better (meaning hardened)parts for the getrag? Can it be beefed up?
Originally posted by Silvertown: Can you buy better (meaning hardened)parts for the getrag? Can it be beefed up?
You mean the 282 in the Fiero? Not really. You can send the parts off to be cryo treated, and shot peened, but you're probably better off switching to the F23.
Getrag, BTW, is just a company which designs and builds transmissions. The 282 in the FIero is one that Getrag designed, but it was built at GM's plant in Muncie. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getrag
If I were going to do a High Feature V6, I would retain the 6 speed automatic. My wife's mom has a CTS with the LY7 and 6 speed auto (yes, I know it's longitudinal, but the gearing is similar, IIRC) and it will really move a 4000 lb car. The tap shift makes it interesting. I could imagine it (with the transverse tranny, of course) in a Fiero.
Having said all that, the LZ9 3500 is 240 HP, right out of the box, and will pretty much bolt right to the cradle, using stock mounts; and will also bolt right to our transaxles (and it came with the F40, if you want to go that route.) Wiring would be the challenge, but that will be present with any later swap.
When I get to the point of the swap hopefully gm will have it in a crate over the counter by then. But if it's $16000 there's no way I would try it. At $9000 I would. But last time I checked an ls7 was $21000 or was it $27000 and at that price I would rather have a 454 lsx.
You mean the 282 in the Fiero? Not really. You can send the parts off to be cryo treated, and shot peened, but you're probably better off switching to the F23.
Getrag, BTW, is just a company which designs and builds transmissions. The 282 in the FIero is one that Getrag designed, but it was built at GM's plant in Muncie. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getrag
I watched a show one time (Nova?) on absolute zero and at the time they were not using cryogenics. Anyway they were saying that when you reach absolute zero that metal would change at the atomic level and I can't remember the exponential numbers on its failure rate as compared to untreated but it was significant. Is it expensive?
Originally posted by Silvertown: I watched a show one time (Nova?) on absolute zero and at the time they were not using cryogenics. Anyway they were saying that when you reach absolute zero that metal would change at the atomic level and I can't remember the exponential numbers on its failure rate as compared to untreated but it was significant. Is it expensive?
Treating the F40 is about $1200 I think. I'm not bothering with treating mine that's going behind my LS4. If I break it, then I'll buy a new trans and get it treated and the Quaife LSD, but I'll spend my money on other go fast bits for now.
Originally posted by Silvertown: When I get to the point of the swap hopefully gm will have it in a crate over the counter by then. But if it's $16000 there's no way I would try it. At $9000 I would. But last time I checked an ls7 was $21000 or was it $27000 and at that price I would rather have a 454 lsx.
An LS7 is about $13K for the crate motor. If you want to put it in a Fiero, you'll need Archie's kit though. The LS7 is nice, but there are much cheaper LSx options that'll get you 500 HP.
An LS7 is about $13K for the crate motor. If you want to put it in a Fiero, you'll need Archie's kit though. The LS7 is nice, but there are much cheaper LSx options that'll get you 500 HP.
Originally posted by tb30570: I always wondered about putting a high HP engine in a Fiero...buying a c5 proved to be a lot easier. Anyway, one of the detractors about the Fiero was that nobody made a "non-exotic" trans-axle with torque ratings much more than 300 ft·lb. I guess that's not the case anymore. ...
This is still very much the case if you want to shift manually. I have never understood the appeal of an automatic transmission in a car you intend to drive for enjoyment. An auto kills all the fun for me.
The 282, F23, and F40 are about all we have to work with an none are ideal in my opinion. I'd rather have the C5 if I wanted 300+ hp
[This message has been edited by jscott1 (edited 09-18-2015).]
This is still very much the case if you want to shift manually. I have never understood the appeal of an automatic transmission in a car you intend to drive for enjoyment. An auto kills all the fun for me.
The 282, F23, and F40 are about all we have to work with an none are ideal in my opinion. I'd rather have the C5 if I wanted 300+ hp
why waste the money on a c5 when the c7 is everything corvette lovers have been waiting for a long long time. Plus if your too old to clutch the auto is faster than the stick. But i'm with you on shifting part.
This is still very much the case if you want to shift manually. I have never understood the appeal of an automatic transmission in a car you intend to drive for enjoyment. An auto kills all the fun for me.
The 282, F23, and F40 are about all we have to work with an none are ideal in my opinion. I'd rather have the C5 if I wanted 300+ hp
Would like to look at this engine and an F23 with an LSD. One of you guys can do it first though so I can know what the bugs are before I get started lol Completely agree about a manual.
So you might disagree with me, but I don't view the Fiero as a great platform for drag racing. To me, this seems more like a car for turning than going straight. When handling is the priority, weight is more of an issue than power. Because of that, I've never viewed the S/C 3.8 or the LS series at a great fit for a Fiero at around 450 lb and 480 lb respectively. GM makes the powerful & light (380 lb) High Feature 60° DOHC V6 engine but it is very top heavy which is not good for handling. With the introduction of the Gen 5 LT1/EcoTec3 small block, GM finally makes an all aluminum pushrod V6! The 4.3L LV3 makes 285 hp and 305 ft·lb with direct injection and continuously variable valve timing. I'm guessing it would weigh 360 lb. It could be a great compromise between power and weight for a Fiero and not make so much torque that it grenades OEM trans-axles. Best of all, it would be a base engine for trucks, so in a few years it will be cheap as hell.
I always wondered about putting a high HP engine in a Fiero...buying a c5 proved to be a lot easier. Anyway, one of the detractors about the Fiero was that nobody made a "non-exotic" trans-axle with torque ratings much more than 300 ft·lb. I guess that's not the case anymore. The DQ500 transverse dual-clutch trans-axle is rated to 600 N·m or 442 ft·lb. That's enough capacity to handle an LS3! Getting this trans-axle to bolt up and the controllers that run it would probably be a nightmare, but it's cool that there are high capacity OEM trans-axles out there now.
your right about the weight issues. Just wish gm had kept working on that quad 4 until they got it right. It would have got some of the weight off the back and not make the fiero so easy to swap ends if it broke loose. But if you got the money lsm systems will make the block of your dreams come true.
why waste the money on a c5 when the c7 is everything corvette lovers have been waiting for a long long time. Plus if your too old to clutch the auto is faster than the stick. But i'm with you on shifting part.
If you want to buy me a C7 I would gladly drive it. But Dollar for dollar I was comparing a C5 to the cost of installing the same LSx motor in a Fiero. You get a much better integrated package and a usable manual transmission. A C7 is in a whole different class of dollars.
[This message has been edited by jscott1 (edited 09-18-2015).]
Originally posted by Silvertown: your right about the weight issues. Just wish gm had kept working on that quad 4 until they got it right. It would have got some of the weight off the back and not make the fiero so easy to swap ends if it broke loose. But if you got the money lsm systems will make the block of your dreams come true.
If you want to buy me a C7 I would gladly drive it. But Dollar for dollar I was comparing a C5 to the cost of installing the same LSx motor in a Fiero. You get a much better integrated package and a usable manual transmission. A C7 is in a whole different class of dollars.
That lsx is a beast. I want to put one in a 94 fbody. Is yours fuel injected or carbed?
If I remember correctly gm had a running mega hp quad 4 prototype. So does the eco tech share anything with the Q4? Or is it the successor. What I was saying was they never got it into production above 250hp. They could have made it t all aluminum by 2000s but they didnt. I still think it's the best looking 4 ever. It's just like the fiero a day late and a dollar short of being what they should have been. I would probably do a Q4 swap like that black and yellow hot rod magazine fiero but I'm smitten by the l32. It just looks right where it was supposed to be. In the back of a fiero.
Originally posted by Silvertown: If I remember correctly gm had a running mega hp quad 4 prototype. So does the eco tech share anything with the Q4? Or is it the successor. What I was saying was they never got it into production above 250hp. They could have made it t all aluminum by 2000s but they didnt. I still think it's the best looking 4 ever. It's just like the fiero a day late and a dollar short of being what they should have been. I would probably do a Q4 swap like that black and yellow hot rod magazine fiero but I'm smitten by the l32. It just looks right where it was supposed to be. In the back of a fiero.
Ecotec is a DOHC I4 engine. Some have a lot of newer features too. SIDI, variable displacement oil pump, etc… The Ecotec is also the base for GM's HCCI engine research.
Ecotec is a DOHC I4 engine. Some have a lot of newer features too. SIDI, variable displacement oil pump, etc… The Ecotec is also the base for GM's HCCI engine research.
I watched a video of cars racing each other the other day on an oval and a guy in a yellow fiero was kicking butt until he ran into mustangs and camaros. But there was this cobalt ss that hung in there pretty good. I think that engine has potential I just don't find it an appealing sight when I lift the deck lid up. I know form follows function and I am a proponent of it but I wouldn't have bought a fiero if I went by the rules.
yes of course in a Fiero. It was quite an upgrade from an iron duke but at the end of the day what I spent on the Fiero I could have easily had a C5. .
[This message has been edited by jscott1 (edited 09-19-2015).]
It takes a lot of money to beat a small block chevy. I tell ford guys I understand their hate of of bowties by telling them if I finished 2nd place for the last 80 years I'd be pissed off too. Somewhere in America right now theres a SBC putting a beatdown on a ford. That's what I call a family tradition. Would that not make a great commercial slogan? But I must admit I love that new mustang 350.
Originally posted by jscott1: yes of course in a Fiero. It was quite an upgrade from an iron duke but at the end of the day what I spent on the Fiero I could have easily had a C5. .
Is that north star. I'm not familiar with cadillac engines. But I do know it takes a lot of power to move a big cadillac so it must really move that fiero. I was thinking about the 2002 zo6 coupe as a buy as I really liked that car when it came out. But they are a lot bigger car than the fiero. Had 85 vette go by me in my fiero and they were looking down at me. Then I remembered the fiero had the lowest profile of any car those years.I don't alook at the fiero as a downgrade to any car regardless of price. I see a car that Carroll Shelby saw. And I could buy a new corvette if I wanted. But when I raise the garage door and see that gt waiting for me to get in, its magic.
Originally posted by cmechmann: I wished GM would have continued with the 3800. If they added VVT and made aluminum heads for it, I think that it would still have been very useful.
Originally posted by Silvertown: Is that north star. I'm not familiar with cadillac engines. But I do know it takes a lot of power to move a big cadillac so it must really move that fiero.
The 4.1/4.5/4.9 v8 is a pushrod engine while the 4.0/4.6 N* is a DOHC. The 4.1/4.5/4.9 v8 is much lighter than the N*. I've seen reports that it weighs 360 lbs while vs. 468 lb for the N*. The 4.1/4.5/4.9 v8 has great low RPM power but lacks high RPM capability. If I was building a low budget rock crawler, I'd take a serious look at this engine.
Originally posted by Silvertown: It takes a lot of money to beat a small block chevy. I tell ford guys I understand their hate of of bowties by telling them if I finished 2nd place for the last 80 years I'd be pissed off too. Somewhere in America right now theres a SBC putting a beatdown on a ford. That's what I call a family tradition. Would that not make a great commercial slogan? But I must admit I love that new mustang 350.
It really doesn't take all that much to beat an SBC. They can be great engines. But they can also be pretty bad engines. Swapping a 3.4 pushrod engine from the 4th gen F-body, with a little port and intake work, cam, decent exhaust, and a tune, will give you a Fiero that will run circles around a whole decade's worth of Corvettes. Go instead for a Series II or III 3800 SC, and you'll be blowing the doors off a whole lot more.
All it takes is area under the curve versus weight and aero. A stock Fiero has the weight advantage in a lot of cases, and sometimes an aero advantage, but definitely lacks in the area under the curve for power.
Originally posted by dobey: It really doesn't take all that much to beat an SBC. They can be great engines. But they can also be pretty bad engines.
if you want to make a 500 hp engine for drag racing, a SBC is pretty hard to beat. Heads, cam, headers, carb and you got it. However this is not a great combo for a daily driver......with big cam and big carb comes terrible fuel economy, terrible idle and not much vacuum required for braking. And all those bolt-ons aren't as cheap as most people say.
In stock form, the high c/r pre-emissions SBC put out decent power (300hp+) but the low c/r post emissions SBC is a boat anchor (180hp-). Power/Cost ratio is pretty good with early SBC's but Power/Weight ratio isn't. Even with a stock cam and carb, fuel economy isn't competitive with pretty much any of than other options (if you care about fuel economy).
[This message has been edited by tb30570 (edited 09-19-2015).]
Originally posted by tb30570: if you want to make a 500 hp engine for drag racing, a SBC is pretty hard to beat. Heads, cam, headers, carb and you got it. However this is not a great combo for a daily driver......with big cam and big carb comes terrible fuel economy, terrible idle and not much vacuum required for braking. And all those bolt-ons aren't as cheap as most people say.
In stock form, the high c/r pre-emissions SBC put out decent power (300hp+) but the low c/r post emissions SBC is a boat anchor (180hp-). Power/Cost ratio is pretty good with early SBC's but Power/Weight ratio isn't. Even with a stock cam and carb, fuel economy isn't competitive with pretty much any of than other options (if you care about fuel economy).
We're not talking about drag racing. For a 500+ HP N/A pure drag racing motor, a BBC is probably going to be a better choice than an SBC, too. These days though, it's much easier to build a high HP engine to use for drag racing, that will be drivable on the street too, using a Gen IV 4.8/5.3 truck motor, throwing a set of big injectors and fuel rails on it, a set of extremely high energy coil packs and plug wires, good plugs, a turbo with a boost controller, and a decent tune. A mild mannered 300 HP for the street can easily turned into 1000 HP for the track. Doing the same with an old SBC is going to cost a lot more, and be less reliable.
The 4.1/4.5/4.9 v8 is a pushrod engine while the 4.0/4.6 N* is a DOHC. The 4.1/4.5/4.9 v8 is much lighter than the N*. I've seen reports that it weighs 360 lbs while vs. 468 lb for the N*. The 4.1/4.5/4.9 v8 has great low RPM power but lacks high RPM capability. If I was building a low budget rock crawler, I'd take a serious look at this engine.
The Pushrod Caddy would not be my first choice for drag racing, but it is a significant improvement over the iron duke if that's what you have. And a nice improvement over the 2.8L stock V6. It's all aluminum and used to be plentiful in the junk yards. It's getting old by today's standards but in the early 2000s it was a popular choice for Fieros for daily drivers.
[This message has been edited by jscott1 (edited 09-19-2015).]
