I may have a lead on a 3.1 from a Firebird that I'm considering swapping into my Camaro (which currrently has a 2.8). The Firebird motor is currently a running motor. The owner is "dropping a V8 in" the Firebird.

The Firebird is equipped with an automatic transmission. My Camaro has a 5-speed manual, which I intend to keep.

I did some pretty extensive motor work in the past with my own hands.
The distant past.
I have a lot of tools already. Don't mind buying a few tools to do the job as may be required.

My theory would be to get the 3.1, and "go through it" in detail to be sure everything is ship-shape, and have the 3.1 ready-to-go to replace the 2.8. This would be a practical solution for solving the numerous wear/age issues on the existing motor, and would minimize down-time for the car. If I discover any "issues" during the rebuild of the 3.1, I would be able to deal with those issues methodically, and without time-pressure, on the bench.

I don't want to approach the situation with a plan to rebuild my existing 2.8. My concern about my existing motor is that I would end up pulling the existing 2.8 with the notion of rebuilding, and then I would discover a multitude of issues that aren't easily resolved -- effectively leaving me with a roller in the driveway. That unwelcome situation is to be avoided at all costs.

I'm leery about just buying a rebuilt V6 short-block or long-block from some place like Jasper, or Advance Auto, or Summit, or even a custom-builder. I had a really bad experience in 1989 with motor replacement (rebuilt motor sourced and installed through a motor-replacement shop in Fairfax) in a 1980 Malibu. I don't want to repeat that experience. So, that's why I'm prepared to to it myself. At least this time around I have time on my side. I have a level driveway I can work in, and I have some outdoor work space behind the house where I can spend time getting the replacement motor ready.

This being the V6 forum, I'm hoping to avoid the usual responses on the internet of "drop a V8 in it." I do not want to drop a V8 in it.

I'm not trying to build a race car or super high performance V6. All I really want is a V6 motor which doesn't burn or leak oil, or constantly foul plugs with oil sucked around the valve guides, and which is reliable for driving like a "normal car" for fun outings around the Mid-Atlantic area.

I would very much appreciate any intel you guys might be able to share as to the suitability of swapping a 3.1 in place of a 2.8, or any issues that may relate to mating the manual bell-housing to a motor that was previously mated to an automatic. Would my 2.8 ECM mate up with the 3.1 without having to modify the PROM's?

Thanks in advance.

 

Two ways to go, either use all the 2.8 stuff on the 3.1, or convert everything to 3.1 electronics, etc. Not much of an upgrade from 2.8 to 3.1, the 2.8 electronics and accessories will work ok on the 3.1. A 4th gen 3.4 would be better. Should be lots of threads on 3.4 swaps and later engines.

A V8 swap isn't very practical without a parts car. Whether that parts car is a LS1 4th gen or TPI thirdgen, pretty much everything has to be changed.

 

Easiest way to go, basically just swap the long blocks. Get the 3.1, strip it to a long block. Pull yours, do the same. Put all the 2.8 stuff on it and drop it back in.
Agreed on the 3.4 though, much better upgrade. Unless you have really high mileage and this is quite low mileage. Do you plan on doing anything regarding upgrades?

 

I have a 3.1 from my 92 Firebird that I am wanting to sell, cheap. I live in NJ if you're interested, we could meet part way, depending where you are in VA. It would be complete, wiring harness and all, plus extra new stuff I never even got around to putting on it. It blew the water pump gasket and I thought it was a freeze plug, but I didn't know until I had already started my LS swap. Had 128,000(?) miles on it.
I like when I have all the parts ready to go for a swap, so you wouldn't have much down time

 

PM inbound

 

I have a 3.1l as well located in michigan! If it doesn't work out with scooter let me know, I'm sure we can work something out.

Like the other guys said, long block swap would probably be the easiest.

 

iso of a 3.1 around iowa?

 

Dr Dave, you asked about whether I plan any upgrades as part of the swap.

Not presently.

The purpose of this project is two-fold.
First goal is to deal with all the degradation issues of a 30-year-old motor, worn seals, worn valves, sloppy timing-chain, rusty bolts, etc.
The 2.8 runs OK(ish), but I can tell its really on its last legs. I can run the 2.8 into the ground, or I can take proactive steps.
Second goal is to renew my chops on major motor work. The last valve job I did was in 1979. I've never pulled or installed an entire motor.

I've got a new 2-ton motor hoist, and 1-ton motor stand. I've still got all my tools from my short career in the 70's in the automachine shop. I've bought several more tools recently, including the M18 Milwaukee impact. I have the budget for anything I'm likely to run into on an ordinary V6 overhaul. I have the time to be able to take my time on the project. The one thing I lack, is a garage. I do have a level, paved driveway. The motor disassembly/reassembly work will be done on the un-covered back-porch area. The motor will be covered with a tarp between episodes of work. So, not an ideal situation at all. But not an impossible situation either.

I'm kind of at that point in my life where this is as good as it gets, and I've always wanted to do a complete motor overhaul. I'm relatively healthy and fit for my age. But I realize the clock is ticking.

This car is intended to be just a fun car to drive around town. If it turns out to be reliable enough for a few day trips, that will be all the better. I will not be racing or "showing" this car.

I guess the point is, the whole effort is about the PROCESS of the project more than it is about the RESULT of the project. Although, a good result is going to be my goal.

It helps too that I've already got an "LS" car. So, if I feel like driving 145 mph. I've got one that I can just jump in and do it. It even has functional air conditioning and it doesn't smell bad. OK well, it kind of smells bad. I don't know WHAT the P.O. poured in there, but at least that smell is wearing off with time.

 

Scooter has been kind enough to sell me his 3.1 motor. I've eyeballed it and it looks good to go. Plan is to pick it up first weekend of December.

 

It's definitely a fun process, I love rebuilding engines. Nothing wrong with replacing some parts with a few "fun" parts on the way though .

 

First step

 

Oooh baby!... A little more to the right!

 

Glad you made it home, I assume, with no issues

 

Totally smooth sailing home. Leather seats from our friend in NY arrived on time, and are every bit as nice as described.

 

looking for a 3.1 near midwest region

 

Love this stuff more photos please as You go along , whilst the motors out is it worth doing anything to the clutch and tranny ??
Just a thought .

 

While its apart, I intend to inspect/repair/replace everything I can.

Rest assured there will be updates.
There is lots of other stories with this car at https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/hist...wner-88-a.html

Progress will be slow through the winter months. My work area consists of my open-to-the-elements back porch, and my driveway.

The plan is to blow the motor apart and get a good look and measurement of everything. If that doesn't go sideways on me, the 3.1 will replace the exising 2.8.

The 2.8 is still running (only fair), and leaks a lot. I'm not gonna pull the 2.8 until I know the 3.1 lives.

 

I had an 87 2.8 manual car once and blew the engine doing burnout-outs with it. Ended up buying a 92 RS with a 3.1 for a donor and swapped the 3.1 into the 87,... keeping the original 87 stick tranny.

If you use the 3.1 ECM it's going to need VATS input before it will allow you to run the engine - so be prepared to overcome this. To get past dealing with the wiring I converted the entire dash assembly from the 87 set-up to the 92 RS dash set-up & kept the original 87 Steering column in place. the key cylinder was removed from the 92 RS column and I left the key in the cylinder (turned to RUN) and stuffed it inside the console to overcome VATS.

Back to my original point !! I just bolted the 3.1 to all the original 2.8 tranny parts and tried to drive away. ( BAD IDEA !! )


Your going to need to get yourself a 3.1 flywheel !


FYI: I noticed that the 3.1 in your picture has an exhaust manifold with a port on it for the AIR (SMOG) pump. I don't know if your car has to pass a state test or is exempt, but I've got that manifold without an AIR port on it if your interested. ( Check your current 2.8 ! ) You should also be able to remove the smog pump altogether and buy a non-SMOG drive belt too. (Dayco PN for non-AC and non-SMOG serpentine belt = 5060815)


Good luck with your project !

 

John, thanks for joining the thread!

Thanks for the heads-up on the VATS regarding the computer, and the 3.1 flywheel advice.
What happened when you bolted-up to the 2.8 flywheel?

I plan on using just the "longblock" (3.1 heads, 3.1 block, pistons, crankshaft, camshaft, timing assembly, oilpan)

Unless there is reason to not use the 2.8 ECM, I plan to leave that in place.
Also planning to use the 2.8 intake.

Keeping the 5 speed manual transmission.

I'm in Virginia, so I'm supposed to leave the smog stuff on the car if I want to run standard tags. I have two other cars, and one is a 2011 with the L99 motor. I goes almost 100 mph in third gear... and it has six. So, my driving habits with the '88 will easily comport with the "occasional driving" limitation of Antique tags. Antique tags would give me the lattitude to make a lot of changes that could run me afoul of the Virginia "visual" smog-equipment inspection for standard tags.

I'm still in the "deciding" phase of what to do about exhaust, and the concommitant decision about maintaining smog equipment. I'm really not bucking to make this car a race car or anything really unique. The only reason I'm spending time on it is because I like to turn wrenches if I'm not forced to be in a hurry about it. This car seems easy enough for my skill-set and schedule and budget. The look of it is what hooked me. It just looks right to my eye. Everybody has their own sense of taste and ideal.

At the end of the day, I'd like this car to start reliably, idle smooth, run smooth, brake smooth, and not leave fluid puddles every time it stops.

I drove it to a motor builder out in Warrenton today. I want to strip the 3.1 donor block, and have a look at everything. I'm not buying my own hot-dip tank, or cylinder boring machine. So, at the very least, I'm gonna need to hire-out the work to prep the block. I met the owner, David Lucash at http://proautoperformancecenter.com/ today. Got a quick look at his operation. I'm impressed. Otherwise, its very hard to nail-down any kind of reliable auto machine-shop operation in the Northern VA area. Very few shops want to do any work whatsoever on older cars - let alone specialized motor work.

I may be "that guy" who knows just enough to get himself in a whole lot of trouble. I was trained in automechanics by the Virginia public schools for two years in the 70's. That seems so long ago that I'm tempted to lie about not being so old. After so many years of trying to make people think I was OLDER than I actually am. How the worm has turned. I worked in an automachine shop as a second-year intern/apprentice, and then stayed on for a few months after graduating high school, but before college. I did some flywheel work, drum and rotor work and a whole lot of starters and alternators, and a whole lot of hot-tank parts cleaning. Even did one valve job before I decided to follow the books (and the hot college co-eds!).

Thanks for listening to my rambling.

BTW, the 2.8 today, so long as I keep my foot in it, runs pretty decent on the highway. Runs OK around town as long as I don't let it bog, or try to make it idle for too long. The 2.8 will stay right where it is until the 3.1 is ship-shape. I tremendously appreciate you all listening and offering encouragement and advice as things progress.

 

The early 2.8 flywheel and flexplates have weights cast into and welded to them, since the early 2.8 is externally balanced. Later 2.8s ('87+) and any larger displacement after of the 660 are internally balanced, so the flywheels and flexplates are neutrally balanced for that application.

 

My 2.8 is a 1988 model (Sport Coupe - factory 5-speed).

So does this mean my 1988 2.8 flywheel may be compatible with the 1992 3.1 motor after all?