Hey all, new guy here. I'm sure this has been discussed before, but has anyone supercharged their 2.8 MFI? I'm definitely going to do it if it fits my budget (and if it's possible). I love my car and it's engine but 25-40% more HP would make driving it so much more fun. I've heard that it may require an new fuel pump/lines, and it presents some tuning issues. If I don't supercharge I'll probably just put a performance chip in it or something.

 

Nobody has done it due to the cost. If 3-4K is your budget, it is possible. The gains for that amount of $$$ are really not worth it in my opinion. Here's why-- the stock 2.8s have 135HP. With a proposed 25-40% gain, your HP would be around 169-189 HP. Not too much considering a 75HP shot of Nitrous oxide could boost HP to 210 for about 600 bucks.

 

Also, you can buy an HT 3.4 Crate motor from GM that produces 160HP (with a carb). Given that GM has 3.4s in some FWD fuel injected cars that produce 175HP, I would assume that with proper tuning of the Eprom you can expect similar gains.

And, if REALLY want more HP, you swap in a stronger cam. And if that's STILL not enough, add that NOS

 

just to add....if that still doesnt satisfy your hunger
go and get a bike ....

 

I know that nobody wants to hear this, and I am NOT advocating it, just stating: For 3-4K dollars, you could easily swap in a Tuned Port 350, which in 1990-1992 was 240 HP, stock. That would be more than you would get from just bolting a supercharger up to your 2.8 liter and running 6 PSI of boost. Besides, nobody makes a 'kit' for these engines. You would have to buy the charger and some tubing, and fabricate the mounts and other stuff.

I am running a 75 HP nitrous shot on my 1992 3.1 Liter V6 in my Firebird. I haven't had any trouble out of it, and it puts me near the 220 HP mark. It is definitely the cheapest way to gain large amounts of HP. You have to respect it, keep the mixture right, and don't get greedy with the HP or you will be sweeping up parts of your crank and rods off the road. I have had mine since spring of 1996, and have had no problems with it, so it can definitely be made to be reliable.

 

what kind of times are u running ...pontiacguy??/

75HP...is it a wet kit?
im guessing its a wet kit..as there are no adapters
for our cars to incorporate the dry kits

 

Yes, the option of swapping a V8 always exist, but for all the work involved in a V6 to V8 swap (cooling sytem, suspension, transmission, motor mounts, ECM, possibly the rear end, brakes), the cheapest alternative yet is to sell the V6 car and buy a V8 car (a burnt out 305 being the best car to start from).

A "built" V6 should have it's cooling system, transmission and suspension reviewed also...HP creates heat and you need the cooling system to support it. HP breaks trannies and going fast means having the suspension and brakes to handle it. And even though it is "just a V6", when you start making power, you do have to look at all of those things or you could have trouble. Most V8 guys have to redo their cooling systems, suspension, brakes, tranny and rear end when they start making more HP. And those aftermarket parts get quite expensive.

But with a V6 car, your "high performance" cooling system and suspension can usually be found cheaply in a V8 car. Whereas the V8 needs to go aftermarket - the V6 can "upgrade" from a wrecked V8 car. And, when the suspension is setup right, a V6 is a better balanced car due to the lighter weight in the front. A properly setup V6 of similar HP should be able to outhandle any V8 just because of the better balance. Not every road in this world is a straight line of 1,320 feet in length.

 

About the times... Don't flame me, but I have never had it on a track, and around here, it would be 1/8th mile times even if I had. I can give you a rough estimate, and this is my estimate only... I think I am in the 15.3-15.6 second range somewhere. The reason I think this is because I have streetraced it several times in the past, and the cars I have been able to beat, and ones I have gotten beat by would indicate that. With the nitrous, I can beat a stock late 80's 5.0 mustang with a 5 speed. It is close, but I have won a couple of those. Now, if they have put a chip and a set of pulleys or some other bolt ons in there, then they will beat me. I think that those cars ran in the low 15 second time frame stock. Correct me if I am wrong. My car is also an automatic with T tops. I forgot to mention that.

It is a dry flow system for, ironically, a late 80's 5.0 Mustang. The injection systems are very similar between the Five-oh and the 60 degree GM V6. This kit was adjustable from 50 to 150 HP, and I set it on 75. It puts pressure on the fuel pressure regulator to up the fuel pressure when you are spraying. In this way, it self-compensates for variations in bottle pressure, to an extent. It is supposed to be 75 HP at about 800 PSI, but when the bottle is really hot and the pressure is at about 1150, it really lights off the thing! I am probably getting really close to 100 HP gain with that.

I am hoping that this year I will get to take it to the 1/8th mile track and at least time trial it with and without the nitrous. That way, I can have something to compare with everyone else. It feels really good and does what I wanted, so I never bothered to take it to a track.

 

Yeah, but the fact that your "lowly 2.8" is able to keep up let alone beat them from time to time is a major blow their egos. You don't get that same "humiliating satisfaction" with a V8 unless it does 12s or better "au natural".

 

So, back to the supercharger. Everyone keeps advising against it, but for some reason, I won't let it go. Let's say, hypothetically, that I decide to supercharge. Honestly, I'm not a racer, I just enjoy driving. So I'd be happy with even 170 hp (and a little more torque wouldn't hurt either). So if I put in a supercharger, what's the maximum psi boost the engine could live with if I didn't modify anything else? Beyond the supercharger, what simple mods can I do to pick up a few hp here and there (besides NOS).

 

Not to sound mean, but no one has done this before, so no one knows what the engines themselves could handle.

If you want 170 hp, get the 3.4 L swap it in and do an exhaust mod with roller rockers that should give you the power you want without having to tap the computer to get the SC setup working right. I know we all want to do that SC or Turbo mod, but once someone starts in, suddenly they realise that they need a huge budget to finish this project. With no aftermarket avaible it makes the setup extremely hard to do.

 

If you REALLY want to know about superchargers in general, I suggest that you check out the "Power Adder Board" for general information. There is no specific information for 60* V6s because there are not Supercharge kits available. ANYTHING you do will be "do it yourself" with custom fabrication.

If you are good at machining, welding and have all the equipment and tools - go for it. But if you don't then you are going to need to acquire those skills and tools before you can even consider adding a supercharger to a V6.

As for how much boost a stock 60* V6 can handle, as mentioned, know one knows for sure because no one has done it. One can make an educated guess that since most of the "two bolt cast pistion production block" V8s can hand 6 psi with no problems then you can probably get the same with the V6. I know a few guys who've tried 9 psi and they ended up rebuilding their engine fairly quickly. To handle higher boost levels you really need to have forged pistons/crank, four bolt mains etc.

But lastly, you MUST remember that a Supercharger has "parasitic" power loss (generally around 75 HP). This power loss is the same whether the supercharge is installed on a 502 Big Block or 2.8 V6 because this is the amount of energy needed to spin the supercharger off the crank. Given that you won't be able to more than 6 psi, your actual power gain is going to be less than if installed on a V8. In fact, you may find that after ALL that work that you got hardly any extra power whatsoever.

If you think about it, how often do you see a supercharger on a small V6 or a 4 cylinder? Other than the 3.8 V6 (which is bigger), I can't think of too many. But I can think of a ton of turbocharged ones. For small displacement motors, turbocharging is much more practical than supercharging because (as I said before), the stock motor will probably not handle more than 6 psi but with the turbo you don't loose 75 HP to parasitic power loss like you do on the supercharger.

 

Thanks, everyone for your input. I guess I won't do a supercharge then. But, holy s%^& guys. If I hear one more person telling me to do an engine swap when I've already said I have no plans to do so, I'm going to freak out. But I guess I'll think of something to do with my 2.8.

 

Most of the people that tell me to "just do an engine swap" haven't even changed out a transmission, let alone swap an engine. Of course, most of those people aren't on thirdgen.org! Guys from this website -have- swapped motors, changed trannies, rebuilt rears, and just about anything else that could be dreamed up.

So keep that in mind next time your friend of a friend's friend makes some smartmouth comment about swapping a v8 in. Ask them if they've ever done it. When they stammer out a "n-no, but it should be easy", just laugh at them, and start rattling off springs, computer, injectors, fuel pump (did you know you have to drop the tank, friend of a friend's friend? No? Then shut up, friend of a friend's friend!), wiring harnesses, exhaust manifolds, changing the intake sensors (V8 Bosch hot-wire MAF vs V6 GM frequency-film MAF, or MAP/Baro sensors), the flux capacitor, etc. They'll look and feel stupid in under 12 seconds.

(laughs) I remember when I was dropping my dead trans out, so it could be rebuilt, and then I'd put it back in myself. Had a problem getting the driveshaft out; I thought it'd fall out when I removed the u-joint strap botls. Ran into this kid from my town, he owned a hot '77 or '78 Nova, and asked him if he ever had that problem. The same kid always told me to just swap a v8 in. He looked at his friend, they laughed, and the kid said that no, and if he ever did, he'd just pay someone to do it for him. So I laughed back and told him I'd see him later. I mentally put him into my "moron who bought a hot ride and doesn't know dck about cars" file.

So basically I'm just saying to keep in mind the person's experience when they tell you to drop a v8 in. They might not know anything about engines besides their neighbor's '67 Camaro (with no computers/emissions/smog), or, they might be a real gearhead who's been there before.

Oh, almost forgot- my views on it? If you supercharge it, good luck; many have brought it up before, and nobody's completed it. I will be honestly impressed if anyone ever supercharges or turbocharges a 2.8/3.1 in a Camaro/Firebird. It will require a lot of fabrication, and if you don't have the tools/time/knowledge, it will take you a lot of cash to pay someone to do it. Any hack can buy a turbocharger off eBay for $100 and put it under their pillow. But to install it, you'll go through hell- it'll definately be worth it, you'll get instant "king" status of the 82-92 V6 crowd- but it will be hell. Because it will be hell, you might want to think about the motor swap; because BOTH will be hell- but which one gives you the chance for further improvement? A blown/boosted 2.8 that can't be improved on any more, because it's already stressed? Or a 350, which is probably on-par with a supercharged/turbocharged v6- and then add a supercharger/turbocharger to the V8 a few years later? And Then add a N2O shot? Woah. Hold onto your seatbelt and rollcage!

 

Well TomP, I sincerely appreciate your comments. You know, I may not have done stuff like an engine swap or rebuild before, but I do know a lot about cars, and specifically my car. Also, people who tell other people to put in a V8 seem to have an endless supply of money to pay for gas. I live in Vancouver, BC, and the gas up here is about $2 USD a gallon. And I basically support myself on summer employment, so you do the math. Also, since no one's tried supercharging a 2.8 maybe I will do it just to prove or disprove that it can be done. As an engineering student with a mechanical and electrical background, I can probably figure out the performance increase/life expectancy better than some gearhead's guess. It's just a matter of finding the time to get to it. And also, I have basically free access to custom machined and welded parts, so that can reduce the cost considerably.

 

Someone owes me a nickle!

 

How much is gas a Litre up in Bc right now?

Did you patten the KED85 3.4 Litre engine swap? If so I better shut up or I will owe you some serious cash soon.

 

Hey Joe_L, it's sitting at about 77cents canadian a liter in Vancouver, but it has been as high as 90cents lately.

 

Okay ours just hit 77.9 Self serve this weekend. It was up at 89.9 for a long time, and now it is finally dropping (all prices are Regular 87 octane)

 

It really isn't worth it. A 3.4l swap is a good way to go if you don't want to go through the trouble of a V8 swap. Unless you get all the parts for free, the cost of doing the swap most likely be the same as just buying a V8 thirdgen, which is the best mode to go through If you crave a lot of power.



I want to supercharge my 2.8l too, mainly for the novelty. I really want to see one done in a thirdgen. If no one else does it successfully, then I will attempt to try it. For me, I think 200 bhp is plenty for me. I don't crave a lot of power. I just want to see what a 2.8l can do.

If I can find a place to mount it in my cluttered engine bay and have a bracket made, the rest would be a little easier.


I know some of you get tired of this topic, since no one has done it in a thirdgen. I am going to have my engine built naturally aspirtated for the time being.


Even though I have plans for a supercharger, I will not even talk about it, or post pics of the progress until it was a complete success. So, you guys will never hear me talk about supercharging a 2.8l from hear on unless I do it successfully.

 

Well, I've been away for the weekend... Thanks for the compliments Glenn91. I have a 1992 car, so it is the 3.1 liter. Shouldn't be too much difference in my opinion.

I think that the supercharger would be a good upgrade. It wouldn't take 75 HP to run it, either. A supercharger isn't anything but a big air pump, and it depends on the amount of air it is moving and the pressure it is going up to as to how much HP it requires. Getting 6 PSI, which is about the safe limit on a stock piston V6 or V8 IMHO, on an engine as small as a 2.8 or 3.1 wouldn't require a supercharger to work terribly hard, and thus shouldn't require as much power to drive it. Probably will take 25 HP parasitic loss to produce 6 PSI on these engines. Just my opinion.

For a little while back in the mid 1980's there were companies making bolt on supercharger kits for some small engines, and getting about 45% HP gains with them. I feel that at about 6 PSI of boost, even with the parasitic losses, most engines will gain around 40-50% more power. They had a roots type blower that would bolt onto a 2.8 liter carbed engine in an S10, a roots type that would bolt onto a carbed 22R and 20R Toyota 4 cylinder, which is 2.4 liters, and there were others too. You are right that a turbo is theoretically more efficient, especially on smaller motors, but they are a lot more complex too.

It would be great fun to do this, and I think that the results would be quite surprising for such a small engine. It will take a lot of fabrication, though. Let us hear about it if you decide to do it.

 

Yes, and the AIR pump is also an air pump that doesn't even develop any pressure and most guys rip that off and claim at least 10 HP saved. I can't see only 25 HP from an "air pump" that is also building boost too.

The 75HP parasitic loss was from various books that I had read that tested the amount of HP it required to turn various superchargers to generate around 6 psi (non were actually installed on a motor as I recall either - as they were testing the loss to spin it). On centrifigal, the HP loss varies as you spin it faster and faster. While roots type has more loss at lower rpms because it is positive displacement - but it also generates more boost at lower rpms.

Since the time those books have been published to today, there has been many advances in superchargers since then (though mostly with inter-coolers). Maybe today the typical parasitic loss is less than 75HP when you spin a 6psi sc 6,000 rpm @ the crank. But the bottom line is to spin a supercharger to 6,000 rpm will incur the same parasitic HP loss regardless of the motor it is installed on. It's building pressure and that pressure puts resistance on the impeller fans as it spins.

What you are more apt to see with a V6 installation is that a supercharger rated for 6 psi on a V8 may generate a little extra pressure on the smaller motor. I recall this from someone who swapped a SC 305 and installed the SC on a 406. Their max boost was less when they went to the bigger motor as it consumed more air. Again, this is probably best discussed on the Power Adder Board as most of the guys there are experienced with SCs and can give "hands on knowledge".

 

I am not intending to argue with you, but just want to point out one thing: A supercharger is supposed to displace a fixed amount of air per revolution of the input shaft. To make 6 PSI of boost on a 350 might require the charger to move 1500 CFM to build 6 pounds of boost. To build 6 pounds of boost on a 191 Cubic inch V6, the supercharger may only have to move 750 CFM. I don't know that these numbers are anywhere in the ballpark, just pulling them out of my rear for illustration purposes.

If the same charger is spinning the same RPM, attached to the two different engines, it will provide 6 PSI on the 350, but will probably squeeze the little V6 up to 10 or 12 PSI. Since you only want to get 6 PSI, you would have to slow down the supercharger, so that it made 6 PSI of max boost, or either use a smaller charger that turned the same RPM. Either way, it will require less power to produce 6 PSI of boost on an engine that is roughly half the size.

I don't doubt that a supercharger producing 6 pounds of boost on a large displacement V8 can eat up 75 or even a lot more HP. I just don't see that on a V6. If it ate up 75 HP, and the engine theoretically only produced an extra 60 HP, bolting on a supercharger would give you a net gain on -15 HP. If the supercharger ate up, say, 20 HP, and then made the engine's output increase by 60 HP, you would end up with a 40 HP gain, which on most of these engines would be about 25-30%, or a little less than what is advertised.

I am not trying to flame you, just presenting a different way to look at this.

 

No flame taken.

 

I'm glad of that. Some people around here get all huffy and defensive if you dare to disagree or advocate another point of view. Most don't though, and I am glad you are one who doesn't mind honest debate.

 

Screw that. I am getting so tired of having to custom make or fit a lot of the parts for my 2.8l. Last thinkg I want is more work for me to do on my thirdgen, so I am abandoning the idea. I still want a turbo, but I would much rather get another car that already has a turbo in it.

3.4l swap is looking pretty good at this point.

 

Yep the best option for the buck, just port and polish, put a good exhaust system behind it, and a fair cam in it and you'll have 200hp real cheap.

 

3.4l swap is looking pretty good at this point.

Yep the best option for the buck

Just insert 3.4, mix & match your old & new induction & ignition stuff.
NO true need for any 3.4 playing, just close the hood & go!

 

The reason I am finding the 3.4l swap very tempting is because of the better block, and the 3.4l runs smoother with less vibration than my 2.8l. That is very appealing to me.

I would love to do the swap myself, but I lack the time, space, skills, and tools to do it. The only thing I do have is a little cash to get it done.

I should get a junk engine and just take it apart and put it back together again to get some practice.

 

I thought that the block is the same in the 2.8-3.1-3.4

 

The block is essentially the same, its just has better oil channeling to the engine parts, and I believe the cylinder walls are thicker and stronger. I'm not 100% sure though. All I know is that next to the aluminum block, the 3.4l block is just better.

 

the 3.1 is just a stroked 2.8 and the 3.4 uses the same crank as the 3.1 but the 3.4 has a larger bore and thicker walls for the larger bore.

 

2.8-3.1 use he "same" block.
The 3.4 block is more meat initially from the get go.
One cannot "make" a 3.4 from a 2.8-3.1.
All I can recommmend is that the 2.8-3.4 Long Block Swap Boogie a great option for the money & effort.
It's a true win-win situation in engine swaps.
Like a Chevy Small Block 283 to a Chevy 350 or even 400 Small Block engines.
There are still so many rear wheel drive only 1993-1995 low milage used running 3.4 engines out there.
Start searching, ya never know!