I'm researching, and researching, and then researching some more... The goal is a high output 60 degree motor that meets the constraints of SCCA GT2. Upon reading the 2008 GCR, the fiero is limited to the 2.8, 3.1, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5 versions of the 60 degree V6. All equipment can be updated/backdated. The kicker is the only motor allowed to used the aluminum heads is the 3.1. All others must us "iron crossflow type" cylinder heads. Seeing how the newer 95 camaro 3.4 has the better oiling system ideal for a competion motor, I have some Ideas and need some input. This is my first dive into SCCA club racing so if I'm not understanding the rules properly, perhaps any of you SCCA guys might help clarifiy them.

The idea is a 95 camaro 3.4, de-stroked to a 3.1ish size. Using the 92mm bore and a 76mm stroke (2.8) crank, one ends up with a 3.0L. A little offset grind and I get the 3.1. This would allow for longer rods, to get more power from piston/rod ratio. Updating to gen III heads, 12:1 compression, and a custom cam to put power in the 4500-7000 rpm band. Would this be plausable?

Or... Stick with iron heads on a 3.4 motor?

Anyone know of copper headgaskets for these motors? How long would standard head gaskets hold up to 12:1+ compression?

I wish the SCCA did car classes like the NASA does, but I'm only 45 minutes from Waterford Hills. A trip to an active NASA road course would cost me two weeks pay in gas money just to tow the car out there, add in $250 for a weekend registration.

These are my thoughts, what do you think?

If you want to be competetive in SCCA, you might want to look into getting a Mazda Miata or something similarly competetive. There's a reason you don't see many Fiero's out there...

As far as your engine ideas go, it looks like you've done a lot research into the mods for your engine. It sounds like a lot of work too. I would be inclined to sticking with more of a stock approach for reliability and repeatability. However, if performing the engine mods is easy for you to accomplish, it sounds like a rewarding project, and plausible.

an N/A engine at 12:1 is not a lot of cylinder pressure, it's less than a typical stock 3100 with a mild 6 psi of boost, even though the theoretical dynamic compression ratio is similar, because the boosted 9:1 engine has more air in a larger volume making it's effective 12:1. more air and more fuel gives more peak cylinder pressure for the given amount of clamping force from the head bolts, and the given diameter of the head gasket. Thus, you should be just fine with 12:1 using regular Fel Pro composite gaskets.

USE THE STEEL HEADS,, especially if you want to run hi compression,, check head carefully,,magneflux it between the valves,, the old heads are liable to have cracks but it is te valve area that will hurt you,,on tight couses you need light weight wheels and disc brake assemblies with fiero..not important on ovals or high speed courses..To be competitive you need to pay some one to flow and port heads..

quote Originally posted by zero2sixtyin2pt8: The idea is a 95 camaro 3.4, de-stroked to a 3.1ish size. Using the 92mm bore and a 76mm stroke (2.8) crank, one ends up with a 3.0L. A little offset grind and I get the 3.1. This would allow for longer rods, to get more power from piston/rod ratio. Updating to gen III heads, 12:1 compression, and a custom cam to put power in the 4500-7000 rpm band. Would this be plausable?

I haven't read the rules, but if you can build an engine like that, you might as well go with the early 3500 block and heads and have a 94mm bore with gen IV heads.

Here is the first rule you need to learn in SCCA if you want to get through tech (if you start winning):

quote General 1. It is not permitted to make any changes, alterations, or modifications to any component produced by the manufacturer, unless specifically authorized by these rules, or required by the GCR.

Before we go too far into component selection, it's best to also pay attention to this rule as well:

quote 4. It is permitted to lighten, balance, or modify in shape, by tooling, the standard or optional components of the engine and drive train, provided it is always possible to identify them as such. Material shall not be added to these components unless specifically authorized by these rules.

as well as:

quote 5. Alternate engine and drive train components considered replacement parts, such as seals, bearings, valve guides, pushrods, water pump, timing chains/belts and sprockets, nuts, bolts, studs, washers, and gaskets are permitted. Bushings or offset keys of unrestricted origin may be installed.

Now we get to the "meat" of the matter:

quote f. Engine, Reciprocating 1. Engines may be rebored a maximum of 1.2mm (0.047 inch) over the standard bore size listed in the GTCS. A cylinder block from any model from the same manufacturer which is of the same material and dimensionally identical throughout, except for non-critical bosses, is permitted. 2. Crankshaft main bearing caps may be modified or substituted. Main bearing cap straps or girdles and/or additional main bearing cap bolts may be used, provided that no material is added to the block for their attachment. 3. The crankshaft may be replaced with another of the same basic material, but with no change in stroke and provided the angles of the crank throws remain the same. The engine firing order shall remain unchanged. 4. Connecting rods may be replaced with any connecting rod of steel (ferrous) material. Aluminum, titanium, and non-metal connecting rods are prohibited, except where fitted as standard. 5. Any pistons and piston pins may be used. 6. Any camshaft(s) may be used, provided locations are (is) the same as standard. 7. Any cam followers may be used, except that roller cam followers shall not be used unless fitted as standard equipment. 8. Any rocker arms and rocker assembly supports may be used. 9. Valve sizes are unrestricted except when limited by the GTCS for specific automobiles. Centerlines shall not be altered. Valves may be of alternate material; non-metal is prohibited. 10. Compression ratio may be altered by machining, using any head gasket(s) or elimination of head gasket(s).

Now, if we go back to Rule 1 in this last reference, it IS permitted to change the block (to any GM Block) that is "dimensionally identical throughout". That means bore, bore spacing, and is still cast iron. You can overbore from the stock Fiero 1.2mm. That's it.

Nowhere is it mentioned in the rules that cylinder head material or type is unrestricted or can be changed (at least that I can find). Unless you have a ruling from National HQ that says the aluminum heads are premitted, then you will be referred back to the first rule I posted.

It is not permitted to make any changes, alterations, or modifications to any component produced by the manufacturer, unless specifically authorized by these rules, or required by the GCR.

I don't believe you're going to be able to run the aluminum heads, by my reading of the rules, but I'll be the first to say I'm not expert at them. I do know that when you first show up and don't do all that well, nobody will give a darn one way or the other, but if you get better, and start beating the local hot shoes, they will use the rulebook to put you in your place as quick as humanly possible.

John Stricker

quote Originally posted by jstricker: Here is the first rule you need to learn in SCCA if you want to get through tech (if you start winning):

Is that from the GT2 book? That sounds more like an IT rule...
I could be more familiar with SCCA's rule breakdown.

[This message has been edited by Will (edited 09-04-2008).]

Will,

That is from the 2008 General Competition Rules, GT2, 3, and GTL section 9.1.2.

John Stricker

quote Originally posted by Will: Is that from the GT2 book? That sounds more like an IT rule... I could be more familiar with SCCA's rule breakdown.

forget the mazda, look at the solstice. it is still a pontiac and they are very competitive.

Only in SSB, as far as I can see, and they cost a lot more to get competitive than the Miata.

John Stricker

quote Originally posted by jerry455: forget the mazda, look at the solstice. it is still a pontiac and they are very competitive.

GCR-292
Under the notes column in line with the 2837cc engine that the "factory aluminum heads may be used" Which fore some reason I thought was the 3.1 earlier.


The big ? is would I be better off with an aluminum head 2.8 or an iron head 3.4?

I saw that as well. My issue is I don't think the 2.8 ever had factory aluminum heads, did it?? The 3.1 and 3.4 did, IIRC, but I don't remember the 2.8. I looked on the 60 degree V6 website at their history of the motor and didn't see where they indicated they were ever put on the 2.8. I know my old Celebrity with the 2.8 had the DIS (which I'd consider using if I were you) but cast iron heads.

That said, if I thought it would be approved, I'd go with the late aluminum heads as they had bigger valves and flowed better, again IIRC, but don't be surprised if you get protested for them if you run well. Honestly, though, I'm not sure how competitive a 2.8 Fiero would be in GT2. There are some FAST cars that run GT2.

John Stricker

Edited to add that I'm pretty sure the 3.4 won't be allowed. It violates the "1. Engines may be rebored a maximum of 1.2mm (0.047 inch) over the standard bore size listed in the GTCS. A cylinder block from any model from the same manufacturer which is of the same material and dimensionally identical throughout, except for non-critical bosses, is permitted." rule in that it is not dimensionally identical throughout (bore size 88.992mm vs 91.948mm, that's more than the 1.2mm allowed overbore).

quote Originally posted by zero2sixtyin2pt8: GCR-292 Under the notes column in line with the 2837cc engine that the "factory aluminum heads may be used" Which fore some reason I thought was the 3.1 earlier. The big ? is would I be better off with an aluminum head 2.8 or an iron head 3.4?

[This message has been edited by jstricker (edited 09-06-2008).]

quote Originally posted by jstricker: I saw that as well. My issue is I don't think the 2.8 ever had factory aluminum heads, did it?? The 3.1 and 3.4 did, IIRC, but I don't remember the 2.8. I looked on the 60 degree V6 website at their history of the motor and didn't see where they indicated they were ever put on the 2.8. I know my old Celebrity with the 2.8 had the DIS (which I'd consider using if I were you) but cast iron heads.

The 2.8 did indeed get DIS & aluminum heads in '88 (Everything else FWD went to DIS then, but the Fiero stayed iron head... don't know why). In FWD cars, DIS = aluminum heads. The iron head 3.4 in F-bodies had DIS, but wasn't FWD. There were iron head 3.1 minivans, but I don't know if they were DIS or dizzy.

IOW,
All iron head 2.8s have distributors
All DIS 2.8's have aluminum heads
All DIS 3.1's have aluminum heads with the possible exception of iron head minivans.
All 3.4's have DIS, iron or aluminum head.

The 3.1 and 3.4 would also be illegal because they have 8mm more stroke than the 2.8.

Will,

For several years I owned a 1987 Celebrity with a 2.8L. Bought it from a guy that burned the motor up (wp went out, no coolant, etc.) on I70 in the middle of summer. I bought a replacement long block engine and put it in and the wife drove it to work for the next 5 years or so.

That car had the 2.8L engine with DIS and cast iron heads. This I know for a fact, not from a website or publication.

What other variations there were, I don't know, but I do know that DIS does not equal Aluminum Heads in all cases in FWD cars. Now perhaps in 1988 it did, but not the first year of DIS in the 2.8, in every instance. BTW, I also went through at least 4 or 5 coils and 2 or 3 coil modules. They mounted them at the lower front of the engine block on these cars, almost directly behind the engine cooling fan, and in wet weather very hot water got sprayed directly onto the ignition module. Not the best of designs. I later discovered it would corrode the ignition module mounting ears where they bolted to the black, making a high ground resistance, and after I would take the module off and clean these areas at every oil change I had no more DIS failures.

You are absolutely correct on the 3.1/3.4 cranks being illegal due to the increased stroke.

I assume you're correct that there were aluminum heads on the 2.8, I've really never checked. Were the GenII aluminum heads splayed valves, or inline? My memory wants to say they had the larger intakes with splayed valves and if that's the case, they would definitely be a worthwhile upgrade.

John Stricker

quote Originally posted by Will: The 2.8 did indeed get DIS & aluminum heads in '88 (Everything else FWD went to DIS then, but the Fiero stayed iron head... don't know why). In FWD cars, DIS = aluminum heads. The iron head 3.4 in F-bodies had DIS, but wasn't FWD. There were iron head 3.1 minivans, but I don't know if they were DIS or dizzy. IOW, All iron head 2.8s have distributors All DIS 2.8's have aluminum heads All DIS 3.1's have aluminum heads with the possible exception of iron head minivans. All 3.4's have DIS, iron or aluminum head. The 3.1 and 3.4 would also be illegal because they have 8mm more stroke than the 2.8.

quote Originally posted by jstricker: For several years I owned a 1987 Celebrity with a 2.8L. That car had the 2.8L engine with DIS and cast iron heads. This I know for a fact, not from a website or publication. I assume you're correct that there were aluminum heads on the 2.8, I've really never checked. Were the GenII aluminum heads splayed valves, or inline? My memory wants to say they had the larger intakes with splayed valves and if that's the case, they would definitely be a worthwhile upgrade.

That's strange. I've NEVER heard of a DIS iron head 2.8 before. I've seen Gen II 2.8's in junkyards before. I was going to grab a 282 out of a Grand Prix w/ such an engine, but it got crushed before I could.
IIRC, the Gen II heads do indeed have splayed valves. They work MUCH better than iron heads, but have about half the chamber size. In a 2.8, Gen II heads over pistons for iron heads with .040 quench clearance will have a compression ratio of something like 12.6:1. The Gen II intake manifold, however, is pretty terrible.

While bore & stroke seem to be pretty tightly controlled, a short stroke engine like a 2.8 can benefit from longer conrods, especially at very high compression ratios. SBC conrods for small rod journals can be made to fit the V6 with light mods. A 6" or even 6.125" conrod could be used.

However, if the OP wants to run GT2, I think he's better off picking a platform that would be competitive (Corvette?) than trying to get a Fiero to run in a classed in which it could be so badly "outclassed".

quote Originally posted by Will: However, if the OP wants to run GT2, I think he's better off picking a platform that would be competitive (Corvette?) than trying to get a Fiero to run in a classed in which it could be so badly "outclassed".

GT-2 isn't quite as expensive as GT-1 (Vette, Viper, Panoz, and Jaguar country), but it's right up there. 300 and 350Z Nissans are competitive, Porsche GT3, cars like that. I personally can't see a Fiero being competitive in GT-2, but it might be fun to try. One would certainly have to bring their "A" game, that's a fact. If I were to get into club racing, I'd be much more likely to go the IT route myself.

John Stricker