stuart69427

OK, so if I had a complete 93-95 Camaro to help with the "boogie" I am going to do would it be a lot easier to switch to the strong electronicly controlled 4l60e ??? Sine I would have all the parts to change over my system?

I was also thinking that If I used the ECM from the Donor that would make the swap easier right? (well besides the harness )

give me some thoughts on if this is a good idea?

Also would that mean I could also use all the 3.4 Sensors and not worry about re-using the 2.8 ones ?

Wait isn't the 3.4 intak too tall or something? correct me if I am wrong?

TomP

Well, last I knew, there was no aftermarket controller for an electronic 700r4 trans, so you'd have to use the ECM. Honestly I think you'd be better off getting a '92 700r4 (aka 4L60) from a junkyard car and putting that in.

85f-bird

Well heck, if you've got the car why not swap every single thing that's worthwhile inside of the engine bay. The DIS system, SFI unit, the works. Would require some work, but heck, you've got it all at your disposal, that way when u sell off the 93-95 f-body, you won't be selling a DIS 2.8L equipped with a 3.4L intake etc, take it all!!!. then if you want that 4l60e, why not swap out computers while u were at it anyway.

stuart69427

So you don't think it would be worth it?

Just to take EVERYTHING from the donor and put it on my car? Even if I use the Computer and all the 3.4 Wires and Sensors and whatnot?

Karl's "version 1.0" re-uses the 2.8 Computer and all its sensors which requires you to adapt the 2.8 sensors onto the 3.4.

What I was thinking was to set up the 3.4 and 4l60e exactly like it is in the 4th gen into my 3rd Gen.

Even if I had a complete donor car, you still think it isn't worth the trouble?

My biggest question is the 4l60e becuase I have a "gut feeling" that my tranny isn't going to last much longer, and a 4l60e would be better and could handle the torque of the 3.4 unlike our weak 700r4's...

the '92 700r4 bolts right up, right?

Hey if I got a 700r4 from a '92, I could also snag a rear end from the same car and drop in a SLP POSI takeoff, ....hmmmm...

Need I reirteriate "Danger Men Thinking!"

TomP

Who said the 700r4 is weak? The 700r4 IS the 4L60. The 4L60 IS the 700r4. Gm went to a new naming convention for their transmissions in 1993.

It's a misconception that the 700r4 is a weak transmission. People always say "the 700r4 is weak, swap a TH350 in"- but guess what? When TH350 trannies came out, they were breaking all the time! People said the TH350 was weak, and swapped it out for the Powerglide (2 speed). TH700r4's got a bad rep from their first years in '82-84, but people forget the TH350's went through the same thing.

Plus, neither of us said the entire drivetrain swap wouldn't be worth it...

stuart69427

what I meant was that everyone that has done the 3.4 swap has had to rebuild there transmission shortly awards... they couldn't handle the torque from the 3.4... Sure a rebuild would handle the torque, but why not put in a 4l60e when I could get one at just around the same price of a rebuild???

I knew that the 700r4 was the 4l60 but thanks anyways

My point of view was that if I had access to a 4l60e, why not put that in ???

In your excellent opinion, which would be better, a 700r4 or a 4l60e ? If you could have either or for the same price, which would it be ?

MDv6man

If you want to go through the hassle of hooking up the 4l60e -- go ahead. It's alot more work and would yield the same results if you got a 1992 4l60. I would suggest a 92 4l60 or rebuild the current 700R4. Keep in mind if the 700R4 is rebuilt, you could upgrade to the better boost valve and corvette servo. The 4l60e and the junkyard 4l60 would not have these benefits.

TomP

my only reasoning against the 4L60e is that you need to swap the ECM to get it to work- so if you swap Everything, then it would make sense. Personally I'd stick with the non-electronic trans, simply because I know what's inside those. I haven't seen anything about the internals of the 4L60e... they might be more expensive to replace if something goes wrong.

stuart69427

Oh a Transgo shiftkit would defiantly find itself home in there

I am just trying to see what my otions are, thanks for bearing with me

stinger74

an early 700r4 is crap. a later one is one of the best tranny's around. experience talking

KED85

3.4's
The 3.4 intake is fine, but all of your current car wiring, cables, ARE MUCH EASIER REATTACH TO WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY THERE.
Keeping it simple is what makes the end result swap so much easier to work with (problem solve).
TO ME, I really like the 2.8/3.1 intake.
WHY?
It's a two piece design, WAY easier to modify (open up for air flow) than the one piece design of the 93-95 3.4 intake.
ALSO.
Swapping in the electronic shifting tranny does most certainly dictate use of the donar car ECM.
If you get your current tranny rebuilt, you'll be fine.
You can sell all the left over parts for so much, your final cost to you (swap parts, etc...) will end up being profit!

Really, keep your swap plan simple.
You win in the end & the ride is back on the road quicker.
And I'd rather hear how happy you are with the effort/labor you put out then asking how to hookup different year induction/ignition systems.
From one that knows, good luck with your 3.4 swap search!

stuart69427

So your saying That It would be better to just stick to your plans?

I didn't know that the 3.4 Intake was a One peice Design... But it can be fabbed to work right? (Wait isn't Project2.8 doing that ??? ) But its easier to Port/Polish the 2.8 Intake ? OK...

btw - the GMPP Catalog is now $7 ...

As another option, would the 3.4 from GMPP work in our cars even thugh its for the S10 ??? Worth the tons of extra money to have a new engine???

MDv6man

That depends on how quick you want to be driving again...

Really depends on what's out there... If the only thing your seeing are boat anchors that were poorly maintained and have 100K+ on 'em, I'd spend the extra $$$.

KED85

As the owner of the wrecking yard told me, "These days, low milage 3.4 are gettting harder to come by, every day."
Point well said.
BUT
Somehow, it is wise to obtain the 3.4 specific parts.
The injectors, the exhaust manifolds and if you are lucky, the "Y" pipe to CC (it's worth grabbing!).
The factory crate is $1800, now.
It is very wise and I strongly suggest this, to make the next "newer" engine look exactly like your current engine in the engine bay.
That's why I sent ya the pic of my 3.4 swapped in under the 2.8 induction system.
I dare ya to find the 3.4 in my engine bay.
And you know what, it all works/matches up just great.
Dead reliable great.
And a strong runner, too.
That's why I suggest you rebuild every subsystem (ignition, fuel, tranny) to be swapped over, in strong shape and correct adjustments.
This eliminates any future error/down time in the 3.4 swap.
Yes, I do believe it's way easier to mod/open up a two piece air intake design.
Think of access for proper removal of metal.

Honest,
These days
Think $1800 to rebuild a 1995 3.4 engine is a fair deal?
Think $1800 for brand new factory built 3.4 long block isn't a fair deal?
THIS ALL DEPENDS how much you really love your ride.
And guys, it is an investment.
Truly an investment.
Time, money and future resale or delay for "new" 2003 car & those payments.
My Wife's 1968 6 Cylinder Camaro, I just had neighbor across street, who owns 4 CHRYSLERS (1970 Cuda, 1971 Charger RT/SE 440-6 Pak, 1969 Charger, ex-drag racer 440-6 Pak, and a 1969 Road Runner) ask if he could buy my Wife's 1968 Camaro.
All those rides and he wants a SIX CYLINDER F BODY!

funstick

the only real 3.4 from 2.8 swap problem i see is tunnign the ecm for the newer larger motor. if yr in the baltimore md area id be willing to help you out.

MDv6man

Tell him to get an Aspen or Volare with a 225 slant six...

Ryan_Alswede

4L60 is a stronger transmission, it has a better oil pump and more splines on front shaft from the reading I've done on the transmission boards. YES you can control a 4L60e transmission, they do make a control box, I've seen one in hot rod Mag for controling the 4L80e transmsission (wich is the same controls valve body only a little different shift points and bellhosing) but the box costs $$ v8 guys use them when they rebuild old 2nd Gen Camaros and they use the 4L80e tranny for their automatic, (saw it on hot rod TV)

stuart69427

Money and time are the biggest factor for when this will happen. I hope to be able to do it next summer, just trying to get my options together while I am broke and bored...

KED85

Please obtain the current issue Car Craft.
They detail a 4L60E tranny install on a vehicle without the proper computer.
It shows every step....

ECM & the 3.4
ABSOLUTLY NOT AN ISSUE AT ALL.
Why?
I am using the 1985 induction/ignition.
I had not one single problem with ECM function at all.
I even used a Corvette ECM (1985 year ECM is direct swap in using the orignial 1985 2.8 PROM).
I recently switched to a Pontiac 6000 ECM (1985 version).
No problems, as long as I am using the 1985 2.8 PROM for my induction/ignition system.
Please ignore what ever ya heard.
I can honestly report ZERO ECM problems due to larger cubic inches & even using/swapping in the 1995 3.4 injectors.
And anyone else that has done the 2.8->3.4 Long Block Swap Boogie (atleast 30 have by now) they all report zero ECM problems.
Ask us about tranny life, tho

Project: 85 2.8 bird

I'm still using the 2.8 induction, just keeping the 3.4 serp belt layout. just gotta be different (hope it works )

funstick

im sure with a good retune that you could realy get the screw turning alot harder. that 2.8 prom code has alot of work that needs to be done to get optiml perfomance. have you even scanned the ecm to see what its doing.


do a search for winaldl build te cable run some datatlogs make a post hear about what you see in term on INT BLM and o2 voltage. also use the setting for the 1986 2.8

KED85

Say What?
man, I am so old tech...
IF there is a wide range, bring the way to improve, please.
Ever make it to LA?
What I really need to do is open up my exhaust system.
I am awaitng that result very soon with best thoughts on that project.
Next, I'd just port match my 1985 intake set up.
After I got to those two next stages, then I'd seek out PROM work.
I'm happy my Wife & Son don;t get stranded in the ride.
BUT my Wife does grin with the extra HP this swap provides.
Who cares about AC drag on engine......

funstick

winaldl is a code data scannign program for the 1227302 ecm. this is the ecm in yr car. it actually does more thna the ecm in yr car but will work for it anyways.

the cable is need to connect to teh dianostic port on yr car here is a link to teh software and cable howto.


www.winaldl.webhop.net

this is some good sofatware it kicks ***. there are directions on the website on how to use it.


the 1986 2.8 setting works for the camaro ecm.

Ryan_Alswede

funstick, so you can just download the software and make a cable and it would work?? Cool can you make me a cable or tell me where I can buy one??

KED85

Does this stuff require a Lap top a PC based lap top?
I only use Macs.
Thank you for the translation!
I could do more with this 85 ECM?
It only controls spark, fuel, engine fan on & off.

Ryan_Alswede

KED85 looks like PC to me because the program was made using MFC (Microsoft Foundation Classes from MS Visual C++) Anybody wants to make me a cable I'll buy it.

KED85

The cable is a non stocking item at electronic stores?

Ryan_Alswede

Yeah ked85, look at the page that says how to make the cable, you have to use transistors and resistors and stuff.