topic says all.

 

3.4 engine harness, ecm, maybe even 3.4 tps. 3.4 decapitated distributor plug, unless yo want to fudge w/people :sillylol:

 

Two crank sensors, 1 cam sensor, Different ICM, Coil Packs.

TPS I belive is same.

Some things are "the same" but use different plugs.

Then shortening, and extending the harness as needed.

 

You can't do it. The block need to be machined for a cam sensor, and I'm pretty sure the only RWD V6 black to have it is the 3.4. The think that goes into the dist. hole only drives the oil pump, there's no wires coming out of it.



Keith

 

what he said

 

DOH!!!!!!! , we were thinking 3.4 block

 

Not only cam, but crank too.

Then the 3.4l timing chain cover, and 3.4l blancer, because it picks ONE of its crank positions from the balancer.

Then for the crank, you will have to put in the proper cam with a cam sensor.

IMO, just better/easier to swap the whole block, guts, ecm. To much expensive machine work.

 

OK, so you want to run the 3.4 SFI injection or just the ignition?

If you want the entire pacckage, it can be done but very involved and the VATS system will be one of the harder parts to get around, and the cam sensor, I guess the crank sensor would be involved too, but can be done.

Now If it's just the ignition you want, this can be done, and requires some fabbing, nothing says that the crank sensor HAS to be internal in the block, right?

You would want to swap to a different ECM or at least PROM, this will take some research.

But I will show a pic of my crank trigger that was designed by myself and built by my grandfather.



This is in a 1985 GMC Jimmy, but the engine stuff is pretty much the same.

Here's another pic:



And here is where I mounted my coils:

 

Those pictures should be an inspiration to Doward! 3.4 w/ a Turbo SFI. It can be done! Even if that engine bay is a little different from ours...

 

Hi raven. I'm "delete" off s-series.org.


Also, vats is no issue to get around at all. One little gizmo to buy, hook the 3 wires of it up, and vats is gone.


why does everyone think vats is hard to get around

 

Dale.

It's that it is hard to get around VATS, for someone that is into electronics, or knows how the system works, it's just that it is more involved than just swapping in an ECM that is not wanting to see any security features.

What is this part that you are talking about? I use a relay and a resistor when installing remote starters, but that is in vehilces that had the security from the factory.
If a person was to get just the ECMand engine harness it might be involved to get the security side of it bypassed.

 

I'll have to take a pic of it for you. It taps into the ecm "security" wire, and deletes the vats system.

No matter how much I try to explain the system, nobody understands it. But its done on 70%+ of the lt1, ls1 style swaps.

 

I just want to eliminate the distrib, and run coil packs.

I can make a crank trigger, nothing like hall effects! Or mag sensors!

 

1987-up 2.8/3.1 cranks have a center counterweight that the 81-86 2.8 cranks didn't have. The counterweight was added to allow for DIS on the FWD Gen II motors. I believe all cranks were notched appropriately for the sensor, didn't matter what motor they went into. (This is also why 87-up v6's are internally balanced, the cranks have extra meat to 'em.)

So is there a hole that lines up with the crank sensor in the Gen I (rear wheel drive) blocks from 87-up? Could one be drilled/tapped?

Also I believe our ignition modules use a hall effect sensor in them; anyone know if I'm right or not?

 

That center counter weight is not a counter weight, but a timing disc, the only reason it is there is for the DIS crank sensor and has teh proper notches in it for the DIS ignition. Not all '87 and up FWD cranks were notched, any that used aluminium heads did, there were the early '90s Lumina APV minivans that used a 3.1 FWD iron head combination, the crank was essentially the same as the aluminium head version, had the timing disc on teh crank but no notches cut. The internal balancing is just due to design change, not that the disc had anything to do with that. GM Performance books will say that if the newer FWD internally balanced crank is used, but with a distributer, the timing disc can be shaped to acheive the proper neutral balancng after maching work for lightening is done.

No, that is why I had the crank trigger made for mine, there is only a very thin side of the block in that area, and myself I did not feel comforatable with drilling a hole in my block and posibly weakening it, as I know I will be abusing it.

Yes, that is the case, but would require even more work to get it to trigger the DIS correctly, if that is what you were thinking, you would need to double up on trigger points and add 2 that are only 10* from the nearest trigger notch, for home signals.

 

I wasn't implying that (adapting the ignition module we have for DIS), that'd be hell.

Sorry for mis-naming the "timing disc"; my "Rebuilding the 60 degree V6" book, by Tom Currao, calls it a counterweight. He said that because of it's addition, the engines were able to be balanced internally, and for 87-up Gen I motors, all have neutral balanced flywheels & flexplates. That's my reason for wanting to (eventually) buy an 87-89 2.8 block to rebuild.

Thanks for the info!!