I have lots of increase in low to Mid range now with my 3.4 pr swap. Ported heads cam etc but it chokes out after 4500. Kinda kills it for me. I would rather sacrifice 10 fpt from 4500 upward to get 18hp more from 4500-5500 + it’s all preference.
Lou I should also have mentioned that after I do all of this next years plan is to add a supercharger! lol
quote
Originally posted by lou_dias:
Wow you did a nice job there, but remember - I speculated that there is such a thing as too big an opening. I did lose a few ft*lbs of torque below 4600 rpm if you watch the video I made of my dyno on the first page of this thread. However - if you're going for power to 6000+ rpm then great!
I have lots of increase in low to Mid range now with my 3.4 pr swap. Ported heads cam etc but it chokes out after 4500. Kinda kills it for me. I would rather sacrifice 10 fpt from 4500 upward to get 18hp more from 4500-5500 + it’s all preference.
I started building a 3.4 PR eng and got distracted. Got the headers but I probably wouldn't port these iron heads very much. Does the 3.4 in a Camarobird choke out above 4500? Because it if doesn't have a limiting intake it should benefit nicely from a cam, lifters, headers.
EDIT: "The power rating of the 3.4 L (3,350 cc) L32 ("S-code") used in the Camaro and Firebird was 160 hp (119 kW) at 4,600 rpm and 200 lbâ‹…ft (271 Nâ‹…m) torque". So it peaks at 4600 stock.
[This message has been edited by sourmash (edited 04-13-2020).]
That’s stock numbers. Ported heads, lifters, heads ported and custom manifolds Cam etc etc. Will change those specs My issue is increasing ng the breathing not the rest of the swap.
[This message has been edited by jjd2296 (edited 04-13-2020).]
Remember- the rated HP at RPM is just a rating.....The actual power curve will go on beyond that RPM. Case in Point; LS7 engine is rated at 505 HP at 6300 RPM, but that engine will pull all the way to 7000. I suspect that the 3.4 F-body with it's original manifold will pull strongly to at least 5000 and maybe 5500....The big problem is the Fiero >>2.8<< intake manifold which allows a 2.8 to pull to 6000......The 3.4 Liter at 4900 rpm will equal the flow of the 2.8 @ 6000 rpm.
I still think that someone should have made an adapter lower manifold to allow use of the canted valve aluminum heads from the 3400-3900 V6s with the Fiero upper manifold so that it looked stock (Obviously the upper would need the "Dawg" mod)
Instead of the forced induction route, me and Rei (LaFiera) went the route of more compression and bigger cams. A 260 cam should still be a decent forced induction-capable cam. Ours aren't. But that's what it's all about: different strokes for different folks.
When you do forced induction, I recommend switching to E85. We run E85 naturally aspirated and still made gains of 7-10% more power. Fuel economy goes out the window, but that's usually always the price you pay.
[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 04-13-2020).]
well ill be at the equivalent of a 272 cam once I switch to 1.6 roller rockers. I don't have AC so my plan next year is to install a v1 vorterch supercharger where the ac compressor would be. Fierosound was nice enough to give me a template for the bracket as well as other info I need. I don't think there is anywhere here in Ontario Canada to buy E85
[This message has been edited by jjd2296 (edited 04-13-2020).]
That’s stock numbers. Ported heads, lifters, heads ported and custom manifolds Cam etc etc. Will change those specs My issue is increasing ng the breathing not the rest of the swap.
JJ, the cure for your problem is simple. Give the runners plenty of volume and speed and the plenum should have at least 3.5 liters of volume (it has to be big). The bigger the plenum, the more torque you'll make and since HP is a mathematical calculation based on torque, you'll make the HP. That 262 cam you have is basically a stock cam. The aftermaket cams available for these engines are way too soft, even the roller versions from WOT.
The problem you have is that you are emptying the plenum way too early and then the TB is not big enough to keep the plenum filled at higher rpms. The Vortec Supercharger will do about the same but since you are compressing the incoming air you are heating it up at the same time. Now you have the weight of the supercharger, extra heat, and also need extra fuel to prevent detonation (even if you use E85 you'll need more fuel if you are supercharged). Also the engine has to spend hp to turn the supercharger, in other words it will not be efficient. You'll make more power but at the expense of efficiency. And that is not taking into consideration the engine sound, It'll sound like a hurt duck or a Buick Grand National.
That is what made me charge ahead in research of the ultimate intake, cam and head combo, it didn't exist so I had to make it. The norm is that if you can't make power NA put a supercharger or a turbo. Not me, I don't give up that easy.
But the bottom line is that it is your personal build and I respect that. I wish you the best on your goals.
Originally posted by lou_dias: When you do forced induction, I recommend switching to E85.
quote
Originally posted by La fiera: and also need extra fuel to prevent detonation (even if you use E85 you'll need more fuel if you are supercharged).
E85 is the Loch Ness Monster of Canadians.
We've heard tales of it, but never seen it with our own eyes.
I'm not certain the fuel even exists!
quote
Originally posted by La fiera: That is what made me charge ahead in research of the ultimate intake, cam and head combo, it didn't exist so I had to make it. The norm is that if you can't make power NA put a supercharger or a turbo. Not me, I don't give up that easy.
Now, I'd like to see someone take on the challenge of doing it under a stock decklid.
[This message has been edited by pmbrunelle (edited 04-13-2020).]
Ya know, as far as supercharging goes, I've seen these super small, super cheap, superchargers online. (no pun intended) And I wonder if they would make enough boost to keep up with the air demand. You can find them on youtube as the AMR500 or Aisin 500. A lot of applications on smaller engines. Someone tried on a dell sol and said that it was actually impeding airflow at high rpm, but it may just be that he hadn't tuned it or installed it right. Anyways, I know what many of you would say. Not sure if you trust it. But that's what's appealing to me, the cheap price If it doesn't work out and I'm out 250 bucks, oh well. And I have a little supercharger to play around with on something else. I just wonder if anyone has heard of them, or heck if anyone has heard of another more hashed out supercharger system for the 2.8. Not looking to inspire a turbo vs supercharger debate here, everyone has their preferences. I've had supercharged applications, I've have turbo applications, I enjoy the smooth predictable power delivery of a supercharger, and that beautiful whine
JJ, the cure for your problem is simple. Give the runners plenty of volume and speed and the plenum should have at least 3.5 liters of volume (it has to be big). The bigger the plenum, the more torque you'll make and since HP is a mathematical calculation based on torque, you'll make the HP. That 262 cam you have is basically a stock cam. The aftermaket cams available for these engines are way too soft, even the roller versions from WOT.
That is what made me charge ahead in research of the ultimate intake, cam and head combo, it didn't exist so I had to make it. The norm is that if you can't make power NA put a supercharger or a turbo. Not me, I don't give up that easy.
What did you end up doing for a cam? Custom grind? Did you port heads?
my cam is 260H not a stock cam for the 3.4. but ill be putting 1.6 roller rockers which will make the set up equivalent to a 272 cam. my heads are ported, polished and larger valve seats with ss valves
my cam is 260H not a stock cam for the 3.4. but ill be putting 1.6 roller rockers which will make the set up equivalent to a 272 cam. my heads are ported, polished and larger valve seats with ss valves
The larger valve will be a big help. The 1.6 rockers will get you a bit more lift than the 272H cam but very little duration. The 272 has 216 degrees @ .050 and the 260H has only 204 @ .050. with the 1.6 you'll maybe have 207 degrees. The stock cam has about 196 @.050 so that is only 8 degrees extra. You'll need at least 230 @.050 to complement the heads.
Yes Sourmash. I have done all the cams for my engines and for others that want a unique not generic cam. I make them to the specific application. I don't do this for a living, its my passion. So, if in the future any of you need help on a unique cam for your application don't hesitate to PM me, I'll be my pleasure to help you.
That's great to know and something I can draw myself into on some things. But rethinking for my first 3.4 I''m going to back up and not go with CNC porting. I'll intake mod, TB swap, header & cam.
But curious about cams I was just perusing Crower's site and found their mechanical tappet cam with 212/216 duration for $67. lol, yes 67 dollars. The 236/242 duration cam is $222.
That's great to know and something I can draw myself into on some things. But rethinking for my first 3.4 I''m going to back up and not go with CNC porting. I'll intake mod, TB swap, header & cam.
But curious about cams I was just perusing Crower's site and found their mechanical tappet cam with 212/216 duration for $67. lol, yes 67 dollars. The 236/242 duration cam is $222.
Those cams you quoted are mechanical cams. That's a whole new level of performance. Comparing a mechanical to a hydraulic is usually a 10 degrees difference @.050 with the hydralic having 10 degrees over the mechanical for a fair comparison. For example, my 304WHP 3.4 has a 244@.050 mechanical cam. If I was to use a hydraulic it'll be at 254@.050 hydraulic.
I'm going to be honest, I haven't read all 100 posts on this thread, but I was just thinking how simple (albeit time consuming) of a solution it would be to just 3d print an intake. I've got a decent amount of experience in 3d modeling, and you could really maximize plenum size, dictate what size runners you wanted (as they would be printed internally, you would need to balance them with plenum volume) and even set it up for a much larger throttle body.
Of course the awesome "Fiero" could be retained or even replace it with the bird logo thing if you wanted to be unique. Am I missing something? Once the model was completed minor changes would be easy and I think they would be relatively inexpensive to print (especially compared to custom intake fabrication and modification). The weight savings would be nice too.
I'm going to be honest, I haven't read all 100 posts on this thread, but I was just thinking how simple (albeit time consuming) of a solution it would be to just 3d print an intake. I've got a decent amount of experience in 3d modeling, and you could really maximize plenum size, dictate what size runners you wanted (as they would be printed internally, you would need to balance them with plenum volume) and even set it up for a much larger throttle body.
Of course the awesome "Fiero" could be retained or even replace it with the bird logo thing if you wanted to be unique. Am I missing something? Once the model was completed minor changes would be easy and I think they would be relatively inexpensive to print (especially compared to custom intake fabrication and modification). The weight savings would be nice too.
I thought about that for a while but I personally have no experience on 3D modeling. I believe with this technology would be much cheaper to build them also. I have several manifolds designs on paper!
Modesto, send me PM so we can talk more. Maybe you can help me to make my ideas into reality!
I'm going to be honest, I haven't read all 100 posts on this thread, but I was just thinking how simple (albeit time consuming) of a solution it would be to just 3d print an intake. I've got a decent amount of experience in 3d modeling, and you could really maximize plenum size, dictate what size runners you wanted (as they would be printed internally, you would need to balance them with plenum volume) and even set it up for a much larger throttle body.
Of course the awesome "Fiero" could be retained or even replace it with the bird logo thing if you wanted to be unique. Am I missing something? Once the model was completed minor changes would be easy and I think they would be relatively inexpensive to print (especially compared to custom intake fabrication and modification). The weight savings would be nice too.
Problem is that most materials used in 3d printing aren't very well suited to the harsh environment posed by a running engine.
lots of vibration temperature transients exposure to solvents or corrosive chemicals
and typically the prints themselves end up porous, with lackluster sealing to the engine (or lower intake ect)
That being said, a 3D printed manifold does serve a useful purpose, in the case of prototyping, it can be made relatively easily, and test fit on the vehicle, without a ridiculous cash outlay.
taking that a step further, we could then set the printed part in plaster, and once the plaster has cured, burn the printed material out and cast the intake from aluminum, or another more well suited material.
Please don't take this to mean plastic can't be made into an intake, OEM's use plastic intakes, and they work great, they just don't 3D print them.
------------------ "I am not what you so glibly call to be a civilized man. I have broken with society for reasons which I alone am able to appreciate. I am therefore not subject to it's stupid laws, and I ask you to never allude to them in my presence again."
Problem is that most materials used in 3d printing aren't very well suited to the harsh environment posed by a running engine.
lots of vibration temperature transients exposure to solvents or corrosive chemicals
and typically the prints themselves end up porous, with lackluster sealing to the engine (or lower intake ect)
That being said, a 3D printed manifold does serve a useful purpose, in the case of prototyping, it can be made relatively easily, and test fit on the vehicle, without a ridiculous cash outlay.
taking that a step further, we could then set the printed part in plaster, and once the plaster has cured, burn the printed material out and cast the intake from aluminum, or another more well suited material.
Please don't take this to mean plastic can't be made into an intake, OEM's use plastic intakes, and they work great, they just don't 3D print them.
Coming from a background of 2d and 3d printing I looked into this last year and concluded more or less the same thing: 3D printing to prototype but then 3D printing to make the molds to be used for casting in Aluminum. Why? 3D printing is too expensive for production long-term, at least at this point. Selling cast Aluminum is the cheapest path forward to an affordable intake. You'd still need someone to finance the project and probably more than 10 final units to sell to recover costs.
Coming from a background of 2d and 3d printing I looked into this last year and concluded more or less the same thing: 3D printing to prototype but then 3D printing to make the molds to be used for casting in Aluminum. Why? 3D printing is too expensive for production long-term, at least at this point. Selling cast Aluminum is the cheapest path forward to an affordable intake. You'd still need someone to finance the project and probably more than 10 final units to sell to recover costs.
well, in my suggestion the 3d print would be consumable, so the manifold, while being repeatable, would be more of a one off part. Realistically, producing an aftermarket intake manifold for the Fiero is not something likely to be profitable by any stretch of the imagination, as the manifold would cost at a minimum $300-400 , and that amount of money goes a long way towards a 3800, so your average Fiero owner won't even consider it.
------------------ "I am not what you so glibly call to be a civilized man. I have broken with society for reasons which I alone am able to appreciate. I am therefore not subject to it's stupid laws, and I ask you to never allude to them in my presence again."
I think the primary advantage of the printed manifold whether metal or composite (I know they are developing new filaments all the time so one suitable for this application is bound to come up at some point) would be in retaining the stock appearance while increasing performance in a variety of applications like 3.4 hybrid swaps, etc. Someone with a stock 2.8 probably wouldn't have need or interest. In any event I agree, no way it would be profitable.
Could be. My thought was folks would spring for $300-400 whereas the $500-600 price point is getting dicey.
Was just looking at the Edelbrock web site and they are doing 3D prototyping and casting just down the road from me. Edelbrock R&D
Not to be a buzzkill, but there's no way something like this comes in at the $300-400 price point, the amount of work required is intense. especially for something as complicated as an intake manifold.
the big picture steps:
3D print Set it in plaster Burn the plastic out Acquire the metal for the pour Prep the furnace Firing up the furnace melting enough metal to account for shrink and cavity fill after degassing. Clean the raw casting, inspect the raw casting machine the casting inspect the machine work
that's all before you even get the first dime. the only way you don't lose money on something like this is if you're retired, and have all of the tools, equipment, and knowledge to do it all yourself, it's a major effort.
------------------ "I am not what you so glibly call to be a civilized man. I have broken with society for reasons which I alone am able to appreciate. I am therefore not subject to it's stupid laws, and I ask you to never allude to them in my presence again."
Originally posted by ericjon262: Not to be a buzzkill, but there's no way something like this comes in at the $300-400 price point, the amount of work required is intense. especially for something as complicated as an intake manifold.
One problem is that people expect to pay mass-production prices for low-quantity items
This is kind of what happened with Black Top Racing; they used to make a cool starship Enterprise intake (very labour-intensive)... then they went to taking a cut on reselling off the shelf LED bulbs.
quote
Originally posted by ericjon262: that's all before you even get the first dime. the only way you don't lose money on something like this is if you're retired, and have all of the tools, equipment, and knowledge to do it all yourself, it's a major effort.
You shouldn't go into a project like this focusing on some direct monetary gain.
The payback is in having fun learning new skills, and possibly having a part that you could use for yourself.
If you can sell a few copies at the end to cover some costs, that's just a bonus.
I actually have a work colleague (well, he's not an employee, he's a freelancer), and he only takes on work that he finds personally interesting or useful. This helps him to remain motivated to bring his projects to completion. He doesn't live rich this way, but he does makes a living.
Of course, anyone who wants to make it big should perhaps not listen to my blabbering... I'm not loaded.
[This message has been edited by pmbrunelle (edited 04-17-2020).]
Originally posted by pmbrunelle: One problem is that people expect to pay mass-production prices for low-quantity items
This is kind of what happened with Black Top Racing; they used to make a cool starship Enterprise intake (very labour-intensive)... then they went to taking a cut on reselling off the shelf LED bulbs.
agreed, the BTR intake had potential, but was too complicated of a design to be viable at the price point they needed to sell them at to have enough volume to be worthwhile.
quote
Originally posted by pmbrunelle: You shouldn't go into a project like this focusing on some direct monetary gain.
The payback is in having fun learning new skills, and possibly having a part that you could use for yourself.
I 100% agree here too, my comments weren't meant to imply that it shouldn't be done because there's no money involved, more just to ensure that it's understood that it won't be a monetarily profitable item to produce, unless you have all the tools, materials, and skills, and consider your time free.
quote
Originally posted by pmbrunelle: If you can sell a few copies at the end to cover some costs, that's just a bonus.
this is tricky, for a part this complicated, I think you would be hard pressed to pay for yours via sales to others, I've tried a couple of times with much simpler, easier to produce parts and the problem I ran into, that this would also run into, is the market. the The general populace of Fiero owners doesn't want a new intake for their 2.8, they want a 3800SC, an LS4, or some more modern, more powerful engine, so your already small market, just shrank even smaller, probably by more than 98%, so to cover your expenses, you end up having to charge more, and then you lose even more of your market.
quote
Originally posted by pmbrunelle: I actually have a work colleague (well, he's not an employee, he's a freelancer), and he only takes on work that he finds personally interesting or useful. This helps him to remain motivated to bring his projects to completion. He doesn't live rich this way, but he does makes a living.
this is why I don't design parts for the iron head engines, despite being asked about it on more than one occasion. I don't find most of the ideas useful or interesting enough for me to put the required time and effort in, when the same effort can be put towards another engine, that is already better than a 2.8.
all that being said, I encourage anyone interested in making a custom intake, to hit the books, do the math, get the torches out, and do it. post your plan, listen to criticism, take feed back, and post the results.
------------------ "I am not what you so glibly call to be a civilized man. I have broken with society for reasons which I alone am able to appreciate. I am therefore not subject to it's stupid laws, and I ask you to never allude to them in my presence again."
That's it right there, the common denominator of why a lot of intake designs don't work; they weren't made with applied physics principles.
These are my reference books, and along with some online calculator so I can verify my math. I'm not as bright as ericjon, pmbrunnelle or Will you know!
That's it right there, the common denominator of why a lot of intake designs don't work; they weren't made with applied physics principles.
These are my reference books, and along with some online calculator so I can verify my math. I'm not as bright as ericjon and Will you know!
I'm no genius I've just spent too much time learning things the hard way to keep screwing myself out of the easy way, IE, 14 page build spanning 7 years, and I'm not driving the car right now... Opening a book, and doing a little research before tearing into a new project pays off big time. The Army has a phrase(or at least I think it's an Army phrase), that I have begun to employ on more and more of my projects, it's the 7 P's
it really can't be emphasized enough, that and having a plan, is only worth anything if you stick to it. start with a goal, set milestones, give yourself deadlines, and follow through, only deviate if absolutely required, or your project can snowball into an absolute monster that never gets finished, or you never realize the results.
------------------ "I am not what you so glibly call to be a civilized man. I have broken with society for reasons which I alone am able to appreciate. I am therefore not subject to it's stupid laws, and I ask you to never allude to them in my presence again."
What I do is also cut back the inner all of these ports a few mm. Basically to about half the thickness you see on the inner edge of the ports. I do this to the middle intake as well. You'll have to use a razor to cut the gasket to match it. This is a substitute for not shaving down the lower part of the upper intake and the upper part of the middle intake.
you can see here what I mean:
It also lets you polish around those areas more...
