I have decided it's time to swap the 2.5 in my 88 and shoehorn in my 2.8 from my 86. I want to pull it from the top(both engines)to minimize clutter and time. Has anyone done this? I plan to Install my dash from my 86 and the gauges.

What should i do to the V6 short of a rebuild? It runs fine,passes emmisions fine,but it does drip a drop or two of oil(i think it's oil). I want to fix that and replace the clutch. I don't want to spend a bunch of money to do this or replace things that don't need to be replaced. What kind of hi-performance things can be added while it's out? The engine is coming from an 86SE and has 57,000 miles on it.

After fretting for a week about pulling my engine and trans out the bottom, I finally went and just did it.

I wish all cars were this easy! Took about the same time as out the top, but now I have the whole drivetrain layed out in front of me for cleaning, inspection and repair.

There's been some discussion about the 2.5's transmissions ability to handle the V6 power. I think if I were doing this swap, I'd install the tranny from your V6 car also. Pulling the engine/trans cradle from the bottom would make this quick and simple.

However, I believe the 88 has the Lotus suspension which is more desirable, so I wouldn't just swap cradle assemblies, correct me if I'm wrong guys!

When I first bought my car, I installed a new head with the engine in the car, two weeks later the clutch release bearing failed without any warning. If I had it to do over, I would have just dropped everything out the bottom and do what I'm doing now. LOOK AT EVERYTHING!!

Just my 2 cents. There are alot of people here with more experience with this car than myself!

Thanks for the input. I am also concerned about the Isuzu 5speed behind my V6,but I have talked to someone that has done this and he says it's fine after 10 years. I also have been looking at the way my 86 was desingned/built and the way the 88 was designed/built and in my opinion the 88 is a MUCH better car. The 88 cradle MUST be used because of the trailing arm design,they fasten to the main structure of the car. I am not sure if the 4speed will bolt directly to the 88 cradle,but if it will that will cause me to think even harded about using it. The 4 speed used to be very hard to shift untill I replaced my clutch pedal and moved my slave cylinder closer to the tranny.

I have added my spoiler and painted it red. I also got some 87GT wheels and painted the inset black. Other than the offset on the front wheels being different fromt the 88's, and the "Formula" sticker on the doors,I have a Fiero that looks just like a Formula. Now I need the V6 and the gauges from my 86 to actually have an "aftermarket" Formula. And of course the rear swaybar.

Whenever I have an engine pulled out of anything, I always replace the front transmission seal. Cheap insurance. If you have a motor oil leak on the engine, it might be easier to track that down and fix it while it's out too. Also, now is the time to add that aftermarket cam if you so desire. If the water pump is the original, you may consider replacing that and other stuff that normally wears out over time. Good luck.

SCCA: I pulled the v6 out of my 85
GT through the top about 2 years ago or so. I made a little right up on my webpage about it. There are only a couple of pics but this might help you out a little.

You can see it on my webpage at
http://members.aol.com/shaun41178

Later

Thanks Shaun. I saw it a while back,that's how i got the idea of doing it.
That's a cool page you have. The Rice-Boy link is cool too.

If money is an issue (it always is for me anyway) :-) I would suggest at least doing some exhaust manifold cleanup and reinforcment. Here are a couple of links that should explain exactly what needs to be done:

http://www.xnet.com/~nife/techtips/tt-exhaustmanifold.html

http://members.xoom.com/_XOOM/fierov6/OSG/exhaust-manifolds.html

I seem to recall you are from Utah, so if you find a shop that does a good job on your manifolds, please let me know.

V8 Archie claims the Isuzu 5-speed can handle up to 300 hp unless you subject it to "constant abuse." I met a guy from PA at the 1996 FOCOA Nationals in Indy who had a yellow Coupe with a 5-speed Isuzu and a 350 4-bbl in it from a mid-70's Corvette. He had an adapter plate about 1/2 inch thick between the engine and trans to accommodate different bolt patterns. He said he had experienced no problems at all with the Isuzu gearbox. Good luck!

MWBACKUS, You are almost my neighbor. I live in Ogden. You interested in autocrossing??? If so then let me know. The next meet is at the E center July 11th. I am the only Fiero racing so you should come give me a run :)

Did someone say the Isuzu needs an adapter? I heard it bolts right to the 2.8???? Oh great.....another problem. I can get a Muncie i think,but I don't have the cables and all the money I put in will hopefully go to performance mods. I have about $1,500 to spend right now(I'm also saving up for a turbo),but i guess I could spend my whole budget now,about $2,000.

This swap has me stressed out already,now more problems are showing up and I have hardly started!

Thaks for the posts guys....keep them coming.
I need all the help I can get.....Later

Ya dont need an adapter for the Isuzu, that is unless you want to bolt a 350 V8 to it. :-)
$2000 is a pretty good chunk of change to spend on an engine ... that allows for several very enticing mods. Short of a 3.2 build, I would consider a set of headers and a cam (or at least some 1.6 rockers). You could have a 3.4 S-10 conversion long block shipped to Ed Parks, have him relocate the starter,etc. and ship it on down to Ogden. After you sell the old 2.8 long block you would be into it about $2k, but you would have a new engine with over 200hp and hardly even get your hands greasy doing it!
If you have considered a turbo, you may want to check out Dennis LaGruas' site:

http://members.xoom.com/dlagrua/turbo.htm

His turbo conversion would be well within your budget. I saw an 86 Thunderbird turbo in a salvage yard near me that looks perfect for this the other day.
My formula needs a bit too much work for me to consider autocross at this time, but I may get down that way to cheer you on to victory. :-)

Adding headers is an excellent idea, but I'm not so sure about the 1.6:1 rocker arms. The power gains are fairly minimal (maybe a couple horsepower) for the amount of expense involved with the rockers, plus it throws the valve train geometry slightly off. This may lead to premature wear of the valve train components. Want more lift? Put in a new cam.

It is possible that the 1.6 ratio rocker arms will wear the valve guides prematurely, but, I have yet to hear of this problem from those that have used them with the HO 2.8 heads. The effect of this mod is nearly the equivalent to that of using a higher duration/lift cam (both increase the amount of valve lift, etc.). The resulting horsepower gain (~10hp) is only slightly less than that achieved using a performance cam. Although a cam replacement is obviously a better choice when the engine has been removed, a higher ratio rocker arm replacement is an easy perfomance enhancement for those who do not desire the additional expense of a perfomance cam and new lifters.

The 1.6 rockers will give you maybe 0.025 to 0.030 more lift, but does nothing for duration. I'd like to see the dyno numbers for that 10 hp increase. More likely about 2 or 3 hp at max rpm. Not much of an increase when a street engine don't see 6,000 rpm very often. Not trying to argue, but I've seen the dyno figures for a 350 Chevy small block and it couldn't make 10 hp with the 1.6 rockers either.

I dont have the time to look up and list all the sources that I have for this, so I will list one that I think most here could easily verify and relate to:

Source: CarCraft October 97
Actual dyno results:

Stock ZZ4 356.1hp (5250rpm) / 405.9tq

ZZ4 w/ GMPP "Hot" cam 379.0hp (5250rpm) / 413.1tq

ZZ4 w/ "Hot" and 1.6 rockers 394.1hp (5750rpm) / 417.3tq

I have been into high performance engines since I was a teenager. I personally know some of the biggest names ever to set foot at the Bonneville Raceway. (Garth Widison for example, if that name rings a bell.) I would say that if you are intent on contradicting statements that I make about performance mods, it is best that you also enjoy the foul taste of thy own foot.

Just curious now,what Z24 made 356 HP,"stock"? I want one.

Z24?? Who said anything about a Z24?
The ZZ4 is a High Output 350 Chev engine! This is well documented data from "professional" dyno results that illustrates the levels of hp increase one can obtain on a 350 V8 with the addition of a cam (22.9hp) to that of the 1.6 rocker arms (an additional 15hp).

mwbackus, I can tell that you're a bit whizzed off at me, sorry about that. Yes, I have put my own foot in my mouth on numerous occasions and have been dead wrong several times too. But, I too have been building high performance engines for a while, since about 1973 or so. Some of my engine building and race winning heros that I've looked up to have been Grumpy Jenkins, Smokey Yunick, and John Lingenfelter.

I still maintain that 1.6 rockers on a nearly STOCK V6 engine will not make 10 extra ponies. I admit that you are right about the dyno numbers on that high performance V8. However, a 350 V8 is nearly twice the displacement of a 2.8 V6, so you're bound to have a much larger jump in horsepower using the 1.6 rockers. The 350 dyno test that I was referring to was for a near stock V8 and it did not make 10 extra ponies. So, therefore, a V6 probably won't either.

Also, look at those dyno figures that you quoted. The last dyno test using the 1.6 rockers was 500 rpm more than the other tests. That in itself could be most of the jump in horsepower, especially running a "hot" cam that makes more hp in the upper rpm range than a stock cam does anyway. I would have been convinced if they had done the rocker change before and after the cam change and had tested it at equal rpm all the way through. We are comparing apples with oranges here.

Let's just say that higher ratio rockers do make more horsepower (how much more is open for debate), but the changed valve train geometry is harder on the engine too. My point is that changing the cam, in my personal opinion, is a better way in the long run. Peace brother, I didn't mean to get you hot under the collar.

Actually, I am not "hot under the collar", and I do like to discuss these subjects. I do expect that if someone expresses an opinion that totally contradicts something I have stated, that they back it up with some documented data and facts. Otherwise it is little more than unconstructive critizism, and something I consider inappropriate in a forum such as this. Although I could reference other data that supports my viewpoints on this, I do feel it is probably better left alone.

I figured it was something like that(V8),probably with 90DEG headers on Bill Mitchell's dyno too,but I like the idea of cheap horsepower,even if it's on an engine I'll probably never own,or put into my Fiero.How much for a set of 1:6 rockers?Did GM ever use them on anything?
Lets see how much it costs for 3-4% potential gain in HP,maybe it's a good deal after all?

The following info should provide a good source for comparison of some of the available rocker arms for the 2.8 V6. The listed values are based on local retailers, correspondence with manuf., etc..

CompCams Magnum Roller Tip 1.6:1 Rocker Arms
1414-12 $112.00 ~ 6hp to 8hp

Crane Gold Race Extruded Al 1.6:1 Rocker Arms
25759-12 $230.00 ~ 8hp to 10hp

Stiffer springs and new pushrods should be used with the higher ratio rocker arms, and this would add ~$75 to the total cost. Keep in mind that even if engine removal and a cam upgrade is planned in the future, most of the performance benefits of the rocker arm upgrade would be retained as illustrated in the post above.
The manufacturer also recommends that a free flow exhaust, headers, etc. be employed to obtain the maximum performance benefit from valve train upgrades.

Considering the header situation($$$),the rocker arms aren't a bad thing for the $,also considering you don't have to take much apart either.Kind of reminds me of what Pontiac was doing in the sixties with motors back then(header/manifold dillema,changing rocker arms trying to get a little more,etc.)
At least we don't have aluminum exhaust manifolds to choose from for our cars!

MW,
I'm with Batboy on this one. The numbers you see in the catalog, I have Summit, Jegs and PAW in front of me, are for a V-8. Our smaller V6's don't respond as well because of the smaller displacement. I could see where you might get 3-4 HP out of a rocker swap. But for the money? Ouch!! Cost per horsepower is quite high. I have Fiero friends that have tried them and all have said they wished they saved their money.
That' why I didn't put them on my 3.2 when I rebuilt my GT's motor this past winter. I instead used the stock high-perf replacments from GM. I got the part number out of the GM engine performance book.
That's my $0.02 worth.
Dan-O

If I could go to a junkyard and pull some gennie,GM ones out of a hulk,for free or close to it,then I might do it,but really don't think I'll be using any expensive aftermarket parts on this motor unless they will swap onto the 4-cam motor(ie. muffler,MSD).I'll just enjoy what GM provided for now,and not worry about 3% HP improvements for $112+valve cover gaskets+time spent screwing around.

In the book "John Lingenfelter On Modifying Small-Block Chevy Engines" on page 113 where he discusses installing 1.6:1 ratio rocker arms on a V8, he says, "This also places more pressure on the rocker stud and ball. While this is an easy and inexpensive way to increase lift, generally this move does not dramatically increase power when used in conjunction with stock iron cylinder heads."

In the book "Chevrolet Power: The Official Factory Performance Guide!" on page 74 it states, "Although high-ratio rockers may offer a performance gain, they also impart higher loads to the rest of the valvetrain. These higher loads can cause valvetrain malfunctions, reduce durability, and contribute to premature valve float."

NASCAR race engine builders are putting about three different rocker ratios on the same motor nowadays: 1.6, 1.65, and 1.7, but they also have to stagger the rocker studs in the head to correct the valvetrain geometry, which is extremely expensive machine shop work.

I know Fiero headers and a free-flowing exhaust system are very expensive, but it's still the very best way to get more power out of a near stock, street driven V6. On the 2.8 you can expect an extra 20-25 horsepower and 15-20 ft/lbs of torque, plus better gas mileage (assuming you can keep your foot out of it). I'll let you guys decide which is better.

I had already expressed that further debate of this subject is undersirable, but whatever..
I used the V8 dyno data above, only to show that greater than 10hp increases on a 350 V8 using a higher ratio rocker can be obtained. I did not indicate how this would or would not translate to applications on the 2.8 V6, and I doubt that a linear relationship would exist between the two different power plants. As stated prevously, I have yet to here reports of valve train failures from those that have been using the higher ratio rockers (on high mileage 2.8's) for the last few years. To me, this carries substantially more weight in my decision then carefully selected paragraphs cited to discourage this modification. As far as which mod would exhibit a better value, perhaps we should look at the numbers here using the lower of the forementioned hp increase for each. Note that for both cases, the required capabilities to perform a DIY installation are assumed.

Headers with high flow exhaust

Headers $500
High flow Cat $100
Flowmaster muffler $75
Exhaust gaskets $15
Total $690

20hp / $690 = .03 hp/$

1.6:1 Rocker Arms

Rocker arms $115
Springs and pushrods $75
Valve cover gaskets $10
Total $200

6hp / $200 = .03 hp/$

The numbers for hp increase obtained from using the 1.6:1 rocker arms are not just my viewpoints on this matter. Technicians from both Crane and Comp Cams support these values. If you can provide actual dyno data that disproves this, I am sure that they would be just as interested in seeing it as I would.

All this talk about engine mod's made me remember that episode of HorsePower TV where they took the latest bolt on parts and put them on a stock engine. The baseline horsepower at the drive wheels was 111 HP. After adding a MSD ignition, wires, a cold air intake with big KN filter, coated header and cat back exhaust the HP was only 127. A gain of 16 HP??? Each one of the bolt on parts claimed to add at least 10-15 horsepower but they seemed to fall short of their claims. Either the factory stuff is pretty good, or the aftermarket needs to stop misleading consumers with stuff like a 20 horse power air filter. Either way, research carefully and spend wisely!

Yup,GM stuff may not be flashy,but the tech is usually there.Not very impressed with most aftermarket stuff,usually wind up making my own or adapting OEM parts from another vehicle.Quality control is a foriegn concept to SO many small companies.I learned a(hard)lesson after my first total engine rebuild,at the age of 18,when I requested from the cam grinder that I wanted my cam ground,not some welded garbage,well,he gave the "weldedshaft",and my motor suffered,big time,as the lobes wore into fine little shavings...

Cooter, this is very good information, and exactly the type of data we need to make informative decisions for our performance enhancement dollar. I fully agree that the intake system on the V6 fiero is very well designed, and not an area to spend alot of money trying to extract a few ponies. The high power multiple spark discharge systems will probably not effect peak horsepower an appreciable amount. They can however extend the hp curve to provide more useful power in the upper rpm ranges, an important benefit to fiero V6. A controlled study performed by Herb Adams may also be very useful to those interested in performance improvements. A shortened online version is available here:

http://www.fiero.org/text/firedup.txt

My phone was out for 3 days. What happened to my thread? :)