Performance 84-86 Iron Duke TBI Units! (Page 3/3)
ironpuke84 NOV 24, 10:46 PM

quote
Originally posted by cartercarbaficionado:

get her broke in and then hammer it. the engine that head came off had no shortage of power and definitely spun up to 6500 a few times (stupid automatic.) but it should beat out a stock v6 manual pretty easy.



which head is this if I might ask? It's not the SD4 head is it?
82-T/A [At Work] NOV 25, 07:27 AM

quote
Originally posted by Patrick:

I'm willing to bet that the reported "white smoke, fuel dripping from tail pipe" was simply condensation/water. There's no way that was "fuel" dripping out of his tailpipe.




I'm not getting any fluid like that out of the tailpipe, I did get a couple of drips when I first started it (which I'm sure is condensation). The car hadn't run in like 3 months. But what I'm getting is a cloud of smoke only after the car has been sitting. The fuel pressure regulator is off, and the injector is a much larger injector too... and I'm guessing that fuel is pooling in the intake manifold while it's sitting at idle. Then when I blip the throttle, it takes all of that excess fuel at once and it's just too much... and creates that cloud of smoke.

But driving around, not a single bit of smoke anywhere. Runs well, I'm just getting horrible fuel economy. And then when I pull into a spot and let the car sit for more than a couple of minutes, and blip the throttle... a little cloud of smoke.

I plan to lean it out... but there's an adjustment tool that I really want to get... otherwise, I have to keep taking the top of the throttle body off.




This sneaks right up and under the fuel pressure regulator (little hole in the bottom of the bowl) and allows you to turn the bolt to raise and lower the spring pressure plate. I assume the tighter the spring (in the FPR) the less fuel will come out of the injector?



quote
Originally posted by ironpuke84:

which head is this if I might ask? It's not the SD4 head is it?




It's not the SD4 head, but it's also not a stock Fiero head. The Fiero heads all have the year stamped in them, and the casting is a bit more open (for oil to drain down). I can't remember the website, but it talked about several cyl heads that were ever so slightly better than the stock Fiero head, and were recommended for using if you were building a performance duke. I don't remember what engines they came from... maybe the S10? That wasn't my goal, but I ran the head casting number, and it ended up being one of the ones it recommended (if you couldn't find or afford an SD4 head). To me personally, I can't tell a bit of difference between a stock Fiero cyl head and this cyl head. It seems to have a little bit more meat in some places, but supposedly it has slightly larger intake passages with some restriction removed. I hadn't really paid much attention to that, and was just more interested in getting it installed.

But it runs pretty nice... lots of low-end torque. I haven't been flooring it at all, but it effortlessly pulls off the line below 3,000 rpms.

EDIT: I looked it up... it ended up being a 552 cyl head. From another forum, it said: "The exhaust ports aren’t really any better, but the intake ports are better and the intake valves aren’t shrouded like they are in the 1984-1986 767 casting heads."

[This message has been edited by 82-T/A [At Work] (edited 11-25-2025).]

ironpuke84 NOV 25, 12:02 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
It's not the SD4 head, but it's also not a stock Fiero head. The Fiero heads all have the year stamped in them, and the casting is a bit more open (for oil to drain down). I can't remember the website, but it talked about several cyl heads that were ever so slightly better than the stock Fiero head, and were recommended for using if you were building a performance duke. I don't remember what engines they came from... maybe the S10? That wasn't my goal, but I ran the head casting number, and it ended up being one of the ones it recommended (if you couldn't find or afford an SD4 head). To me personally, I can't tell a bit of difference between a stock Fiero cyl head and this cyl head. It seems to have a little bit more meat in some places, but supposedly it has slightly larger intake passages with some restriction removed. I hadn't really paid much attention to that, and was just more interested in getting it installed.

But it runs pretty nice... lots of low-end torque. I haven't been flooring it at all, but it effortlessly pulls off the line below 3,000 rpms.

EDIT: I looked it up... it ended up being a 552 cyl head. From another forum, it said: "The exhaust ports aren’t really any better, but the intake ports are better and the intake valves aren’t shrouded like they are in the 1984-1986 767 casting heads."




This looks very promising, I look forward to seeing how it performs under wide open throttle. Hopefully if this works well many 2.5L owners like myself will get a bit more kick out of the old Duke.
82-T/A [At Work] NOV 26, 07:32 AM

quote
Originally posted by ironpuke84:

This looks very promising, I look forward to seeing how it performs under wide open throttle. Hopefully if this works well many 2.5L owners like myself will get a bit more kick out of the old Duke.




I think the biggest thing is making sure that the intake manifold is properly matched to the bored TBI unit. From what I can tell so far, the car feels lighter, if that makes sense... it feels like there's less effort to get the car moving and to accelerate (compared to a few months ago with the stock TBI unit).

The problem... not so much a problem as a difficulty, is that she's upgraded a lot of things on the car. It has the 88 accessories, a lighter alternator with less rotating mass, a decoupler pulley, a shorty header, bored intake and bored throttle body, a supposedly better cyl head, a harmonic balancer, a rebuilt transmission with better gearing, and a newer catalytic converter. So, while it does all add-up, it's hard to tell what made the biggest difference.

But it would be great once it's broken in, to get it dynoed to see what all these things add up to.

My guess is that I'm probably seeing around ~115hp, maybe 120hp with everything.
82-T/A [At Work] NOV 28, 06:50 PM
Quick update... sigh... hahah.

We got a laptop set up and installed Paul Romsky's ALDL scanner / reader. Unfortunately, the laptop can't hold a charge (ordered a new battery), so in the mean time, we ran it idling / warm in the garage. I've recently had a problem (since we re-installed the cyl head), that the temperature gauge on the dash is not showing temperature at all. Like... AT ALL. The needle is firmly planted at the 100 mark, and just sits there. It full warms up, and I can show with my temperature gun that it's getting to 180-190 at the filler neck, and around ~200-210 at the cyl head.

So, I hooked up Paul's ALDL reader and loaded up the scanner GUI, and oddly enough, his temperature gauge (which is reading from the CTS) also shows that it's extremely cold (I think it said something like 50 degrees or whatever). So both my actual gauge, and his CTS-read gauge are not reading temperature... of course, I don't think it's a problem with his scanner... it actually makes me realize that either my engine is running below 100 degrees (I kind of doubt it), or it's sharing a ground wire that's not properly grounding.

We must have forgotten a ground somewhere... so I'm going to go back and look in there. It's pretty cool though...

But it would make sense why the fuel economy is soooo bad. It's thinking the engine is running at extremely cold temperatures so it must be dumping a ton of fuel in there.