just wondering.

 

I don't like the 3.4 intake but I do like the 6 pack of coils that usually sits there. There is alot of waste in the cap n rotor system.

Matt

 

Only advantage I see is that you dont have to keep taking the upper intake apart to change fuel injectors.

 

I can see an advantage, as it should keep velocity better, Vs the stock "open box"

 

yeah, shorter runner legnth.

 

As is, I'm not sure which is better, but I doubt there's any real performance difference. Its a little easier to diasassemble, with less chance of a vaccum leak, but you cant take it apart to port it either, like you can a 2.8 intake. I like the looks of the 2.8 "Klingon" intake better myself!

 

hehe, yeah. It would be really hard to port the 3.4 intake setup, while the 2.8 setup is fairly easy with a Dremel Flexshaft.

The 2.8 setup also looks cool.

 

3.4 Intake manifold can be made to work on a 2.8/3.1

Here's a '91 Z24. Granted its a FWD setup, but he's still using the same basic 3.1 setup the RWD would.

Running iron heads as opposed to the FWD's aluminum.

http://turboz24.com/Pics/Current_Engine_29.JPG

http://www.turboz24.com

 

well we'd have to get the one off the camaro, also noticed he had coil packs. but, with us running ole' iron heads swaping to that intake puts at the firewall once again, the 3.4L camar owould have to do...but i doubt we'd see any noticeable performance gains from the swap anyway. but, only trying it out would ever tell.

 

Where's the egr on that sucker?

When I did the swap, I already placed the 3.4 upper on the car. The thottle cable & TV will need to be modified to fit, the top nub on the 3.4 tb opening needs to be ground to let the 2.8/3.1 tb fit. Also, you will need use the 3.4 egr, as the tube is made for the short legnth.

THis egr, though is digital, so doing ait to a 2.8 will be difficult~impossible unless you rewire it to 3.1 specs.