Forgive me that I have not read all of the replies. However. There is a lot of aftermarket stuff for 60 degree Chevy engines. But that I know of there was only one stock turbo 2.8. That was the McLaren edition Grand prix 1989-90. And with that, the hp rating was only up to 205. That was also the aluminum head DIS engines. With not much more increase in weight you could put in a stock Series II n/a 3800 with wiring and ECM. Then you would end up with the same horse power with more torque without having it boosted. Though you could beef up the internals of the 2.8 to take boost, you still have to deal with getting everything tuned in to get it right. I have used 2.8 stock, Series 1 3800 SC, Series II 3800SC and Series II 3800n/a. The Series II 3800n/a has been the most dependable. Not 1 hickup in the last 40,000 miles.
Turbos are not used in top fuel and most likely never will be
The potential is certainly there but
The intake well is far too big
Nitromethane is old school rocket fuel. Got us to the moon .
The length of intake tract would store so much potentially explosive gasses that a hiccup could be a big boom.
The superchargers are mounted on top and fuel is mixid as it passes thru. It passes through a intercooler and then into the manifold.
The physical volume of pressurized and mixed fuel and air is fairly small
However with a turbo the fuel will be required to be injected far enough down the system to achieve a consistent mixture before combustion.
This has not been done while maintaining a save volume of combustion charge.
Top fuel is in the 5000hp range
Look at it this way
To make that much power you must burn enough fuel to support it With the cubic inches they can run if a cylinder miss fires several times in a row it will be holding so much fuel it will hydraulically lock up and the engine explodes.
That much fuel must be evenly and we'll mixed with the air or it will not fire properly
It's not that turbos wouldn't have a definite competitive edge
It's that their just not safe to use in this way
It's already a big risk with a compressor
Gas and Alcohol don't have those problems so turbos are allowed
That's why I machine .080 off the outside of a SBC rod and use arp rod bolts
Same in every other way other than the needed removal of the side material and pressing in a nice bushing so the wrist pin floats in the small end of the rod..
Modify a SBC main girdle (just cut off the front section and the rest fits like it was designed for the 60degree engines) and use some arp studs and you got a bottom end that will take 350+ hp all day long.
How do you narrow the SBC rods? I've seen it done by ID chucking the big end in a lathe, but always curious about other ideas.
Interesting tidbit about the SBC main girdle. It's pretty wild that the two engines use the same main bolt pattern.
Originally posted by Coolkoolpyle:
Machine the heads to take SBC screw in studs Use SBF 1.6 roller rockers and SBC valves and you got a fierce top end to match.
Another interesting tidbit. I'd heard about screw in rocker studs, but not SBF rockers.
Originally posted by Coolkoolpyle:
I'm a pretty busy guy but maybe over the winter I'll find the time to show the 60degree guys the tricks to power and long life. (there are a couple of oiling system mods that are game changers in the bottom end) Especially the 2.8.
Maybe I should do one of those "how to Hotrod the 60* V6" books you see on the more popular engines.
In any case I'm excited to get started
More than anything I really enjoy projects like this.
I'm curious about the oiling modification.
Maybe you should publish a book.
I live for building, and what's important is that you build what you like.
ARP makes rocker studs for conversion to SBC rockers. Then you can use narrow-body SBC rockers in your V6. It's a common mod, and fairly inexpensive. With the conversion studs, and some aftermarket springs and retainers, my 3.4 V6 valvetrain can handle up to .550" valve lift. No head machining necessary. It uses the same heads as the 2.8 V6.