quote Originally posted by Oreif: Typically the head flow data is shown per head, Those numbers above are the total for both heads at max lift. The HVE 60* V-6's are an entirely different head design as they incorporate V.V.T. technology. The 3400 in a Grand Am is just a regular pushrod 60* V-6. You cannot compare a 3400 out of a Grand Am to the newer 3500 engines. The ONLY thing they share is the 60* vee of the cylinders.

That's not the VVT 3500 he linked to Oreif, that's the 3500 who's top end is being installed on the 3400 as an upgrade. As for the VVT heads, they are the same style as the previous heads only better having LS1 cylinder head influence in the design. What makes them impractical for use on the non VVT engines is the moderately larger valves and slightly larger deck surface, otherwise they still bolt to the non VVT engine and at a glance you couldn't tell the heads apart except for the water passage opening at the end of the head that can just as easily be plugged with a freeze plug the way the non VVT heads are.

quote Originally posted by BigMike: The primary reason I've shied away from the smallblock swap is price. You get the basic kit for $1000, but there are a lot of odds and ends to get as well. I also dont really want to cut the fender on the car. The primary reason I lean toward a 60 degree engine is, again, simplicity. It basically bolts in. If I go with the iron heads, an edelbrock intake and carb, and a distributor from an s10, it's an easy swap. ...

Here are some pics of the carb'd 3.4L I had:




(FYI ~ there is no fender cutting to fit a SBC V-8 into your car.)

Here is what my engine looks like now:

All of the heads that have flow numbers posted in WOT-TECH are non VVT heads. All aftermarket cams made for the 2.8, 3.1 and 3.4L will work in the aluminum head motor also, the question is whether or not they are worth sacrificing the roller cam for which can be ground or reground to the specs of the cams you mentioned since roller cam blanks for the 60 degree are available and solid roller camshafts are available to allow for radical regrinds beyond what the stock cam can tolerate. Custom pushrods are less than $100 for the engine should one desire to go with the flat tappet. It's still a 2.8L dimension wise and except for the VVT engines if it fits in the iron head motor it will fit in the aluminum head motor equivalent, it's just a matter of compression ratio management for the pistons.

quote Originally posted by Joseph Upson: That's not the VVT 3500 he linked to Oreif, that's the 3500 who's top end is being installed on the 3400 as an upgrade.

Huh? 3500 heads on a 3400? I don't think that is correct. The link to the 60* V-6 thread clearly states a 3500 engine and his personal website shows it is a 2004 LX9 3500. http://www.v6z24.com/registry/SuperDave

While I was incorrect that it is V.V.T., It is a different design head than what was used on a late 90's Grand Am 3400.

[This message has been edited by Oreif (edited 01-14-2010).]

quote Originally posted by Oreif: Here are some pics of the carb'd 3.4L I had: (FYI ~ there is no fender cutting to fit a SBC V-8 into your car.) Here is what my engine looks like now:

Nice. Since you've had both, I'd like to get your opinion on the smallblock's driveability vs the v6. Obviously, power is higher, but what about turning, stopping, etc?

Also - I thought you had to cut the fender for clearance for the water pump - no? Interesting... How hard is the fabrication overall for the smallblock swap?

Thanks!

quote Originally posted by Oreif: Huh? 3500 heads on a 3400? I don't think that is correct. The link to the 60* V-6 thread clearly states a 3500 engine and his personal website shows it is a 2004 LX9 3500. http://www.v6z24.com/registry/SuperDave While I was incorrect that it is V.V.T., It is a different design head than what was used on a late 90's Grand Am 3400.

I wasn't refering to his engine as being a hybrid, I know his is a 3500, I was indicating that the 3500 top end is being retrofitted to 3400 engines as an upgrade.

quote Originally posted by BigMike: Nice. Since you've had both, I'd like to get your opinion on the smallblock's driveability vs the v6. Obviously, power is higher, but what about turning, stopping, etc? Also - I thought you had to cut the fender for clearance for the water pump - no? Interesting... How hard is the fabrication overall for the smallblock swap? Thanks!

The 3.4L was fun. The thing is turning, stopping, and all around normal driving has been the same. From your question, I am assuming you are referring to the weight difference. My car was originally an automatic. Taking out the auto/3.4L and swapping in the ZZ4 V-8 (iron block/aluminum heads) and the 4-spd manual trans my car only gained 30 lbs. If it would have been a manual to begin with there would only be an 80 lbs difference. It does not handle or brake any differently. I have raced the car on local road course tracks for a many years and aside from the obvious increase in power, there is no difference in handling or braking. Think of it this way, How differently does your Fiero handle when you have a 150 lbs friend sitting in the passenger seat? With the mid-engine design, any weight added is in front of the rear axle the affect (from weight) is minimal when you are only talking 150lbs or less.

The waterpump is an electric waterpump. You can either make a dent in the sheet metal of the wheel well or cut a small hole and over it with a rubber skirt to clear the electric motor housing.

The only mods to the actual car are the clearence for the waterpump and the right decklid hinge needs to be trimmed to clear the valve cover of the engine.

Just for reference, The 3.4L I built cost me just under $1700 to build and I installed it in a weekend. The crate ZZ4 was $3800 just for the engine. If I had not received a huge bonus back then I would still be driving the 3.4L (probably with a manual instead of the auto).

Thanks for the info, Oreif. I'm still tossing around ideas, so that helps a lot.

Since we're on the subject of weight, does anyone have info about the weight of the stock manifold vs an edelbrock manifold and carb? It seems like the carbureted setup would be a bit lighter.

quote Originally posted by BigMike: Thanks for the info, Oreif. I'm still tossing around ideas, so that helps a lot. Since we're on the subject of weight, does anyone have info about the weight of the stock manifold vs an edelbrock manifold and carb? It seems like the carbureted setup would be a bit lighter.

Edelbrock + Holley 390 cfm 4-bbl carb weighs 3.8 lbs lighter than the stock Fiero intake set-up (upper, middle, lower, injectors, fuel rail and throttle body)

Don't know how much lighter the 2-bbl carb is or the Offenhauser vs. Edelbrock intake.

So, roughly the same once you add in the air cleaner, etc. I can live with that. Thanks again.

I have both intakes, and I've had both carbs. I didn't weigh them but, the 2 barrel is lighter than the 4 barrel fo' sho'. The Edelbrock is heavier than the Offenhauser. The Offy is a single piece dual plane intake whereas the Edelbrock is a 2 piece and is quite a bit taller. The Offy is short enough to clear the deck lid but the Edelbrock needs a scoop for clearance.

Hope this helps.

Arn

While I understand your disinclination to go the injected route, let me tell you that it isn't as bad as you think.
I have a ton of carbs operating on my cars, and only 4 that are injected, but when I used a 3.4 engine in a transplant, I bit the bullet and retained the injection, because it seemed like such a cop out to abandon the much better and more modern technology for an atniquated carb.

It wasn't all that bad. I did pay someone to modify a Camaro wiring harness for me, but I could certainly have done it myself in a coupel of probably frustrating days. I retained the DIS, lost the sequential aspect and went back to MPFI like the Fiero because it was easier to use a slightly earlier ECM (1990 as opposed to the 1994 engine year of the Camaro) so that I could just swap chips for tuning instead of mailing off the whole PCM. No big deal.

The alloy heads ARE significantly better than the cast iron, which frankly are piss poor at flow. To say that a set of cast heads will flow near a stock alloy set begs the question; a modifed alloy set will flow just that much better.

It might be worth reconsidering the injection decision - I promise it won't hurt that much!

BTW, if you want real power but don't want to go V8, the 4 cylinder route is worth looking into. Now up to 320 BHP on my 2 litre Ecotec LNF......

My aversion to efi is really the learning curve of things that I don't know. I'm pretty familiar with the sensors and such, but re-piining a new ecm, burning a chip, laptop tuning, etc. are all things I am very ignorant about.

Plus, I like carbs. I like simplicity. I like low-tech. I like the ability to tune my car with the turn of a wrench.

Plus I think the carbureted manifolds flow better. Maximizing the potential of the 3.4 is really what it's all about.