94Camaro

Ok so here -- once and for all -- im going to explain why aluminum heads are better than the iron ones. Its really really simple.

They flow better.

How much better you ask? Well let me put it this way. I found a flowbench sheet for a set of 3100 (3.1 Gen II Aluminum) heads from a friend of mine that knows the 3x00 engine backwards and forwards. The 3100 heads (Gen II) come with the same valves as our stock iron heads, 1.72/1.43 (intake/exhaust). However the valves are canted, which helps airflow at higher rpms because the valves dont get in the way of each other, and keeps the air flowing well.

The exhaust ports have been D shaped instead of O shaped. The difference also allows for better airflow at higher RPMs, while maintaining good flow at lower RPMs as well.

Now all said and done -- these heads, the Gen II aluminum heads found on any 1996 Grand Am GT -- flow as much as a set of 900.00 ported iron heads.

I took the flowcharts my one friend gave me, and then talked to Tiago of Force Fed Fabrications. He gave me flow charts for his fully ported iron heads. Worked on by Norris Racing Tech (and I personally know this for a fact), a LOT of research went into these heads to make them flow optimally - including researching larger valve sizes and port shapings and everything.

In the end they were made to flow 158cfm on the intake side @ .500 lift and 142cfm on the exhaust side @ .500 lift. (the flow on the aluminum is better all around, but ill just show this cause its what i remember...off the top of my head).

I took the stock flowbench from the Gen II heads, and found them to flow 162cfm @ .500 intake and 139cfm @ .500 exhaust.

Wow is what I said. We are talking about a stock aluminum head, one that hasnt been ported or polished or gasketmatched. One that has all the stock casting flaws and everything -- flowing as much as a completely ported Iron head. Again:

Fully Ported Iron Heads (@.500" lift):
158cfm Intake / 142cfm Exhaust

Stock Aluminum Heads (@.500" lift) (1996 or so model year):
162cfm Intake / 139cfm Exhaust

Stock Aluminum Heads (@.500" lift) (2000 or newer):
200cfm Intake / 180cfm Exhaust

Thats insane. I can only imagine what a set of ported aluminum heads would flow -- and I plan to have it checked when I get mine ported.

What that means, is that if I took one of Tiagos turbo kits and threw it on my car, I would get the same results he has. Without any of the work. And it can only go up from there. Get It?

There is no strength problems, my car never overheats, and the aluminum topend actually shaves off a LOT of weight. One of the aluminum heads weighs maybe 20-25 lbs. ONE of the iron heads feels like it weighs around 40-50 lbs. means you are losing 50lbs right there just by switching. After using these heads on my car, I will never put the iron paperweights back on.

That is my opinion and I'm sticking to it. Aluminum heads on your 3.4L RWD engine is the BEST "bolt-on" (yes its a bolt on cause they bolt right up with very little modification) you can do. Hands down. Update to the newer technology and toss the 10-year old crap that GM decided to stick with when they put the engine together.

Just my .02.

-R

p.s. i also found out just recently that a set of 3400 heads (2000+ model year 3400) flow 200 cfm on the intake and 180cfm on the exhaust. thats just insane! May 20th, 2006 I am going to dyno the 3.4 with its new clutch I just put in and ill correct my sig and put new numbers up. then its off to the track! we'll see what this setup is capable of. also - the aluminum heads should bolt up fine to the 2.8/3.1 provided you use all the right equipment. the only drawback is that you will have to convert to DIS -- the 3400 plenum cant be notched like the 3.4L can. other than that, should be no problem.

V6sucker

no one said they were not better. HellI would kill for some nice aluminum heads for my 383...
But if you swap the heads you also have to swap intakes, which sometimes does not work out well.

Project: 85 2.8 bird

swap rotating assy, heads & intake. convert for DIS, the 3.4 will already have the sensor(s) inplace.

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

JUST FYI, The 3100 and 3400 heads are gen III, not II. All gen III heads use a D-shaped exhaust port, which is the easy way to tell them from the genII heads (2.8L/3.1L used on FWD vehicles between '87 and '94). GenIII started in '94 on all 660 equipped FWD cars, except the J-body, and I think there was one other car that kept the genII design for that final year.

The genIII head is even a vast improvment over the genII as far as port flow is concerned.

I also used the genIII heads in my turbo Jimmy, that in an untuned state, with too small of an injector and many other not quite optimum parts, layed down 218 HP and 270 Ft/lbs at the wheels, which is about 250 HP and 310 Ft/lbs at the crank, not bad for the small port 3100 top end, and stock parts thrown together.

I have to ask why swapping th eintake doesn't work out to well?

69charger383

Is it possible to just swap the heads and nothing else? My heads are at a shop right now waiting to be ported and polished.. $650.. I can get a set of heads for $50 and then just get those done instead... Will the comp ration be too high if I only use the heads?? Please help..

Big4x4Ride

so then, what all is needed to swap some 3.1 or 3.4 FWD aluminum heads onto my RWD 2.8??

xplane

OK then i want to do this i just need to know exactly what i need to change to do so. will the ECU from a 4th gen f-body work with the Intake/heads from a FWD engine? do i have to swap the pistons? if yes what about the rods and crank? does the 4th gen ecu mount in the same place as the 3rd gen ecu? if it dont what would be the best place to mount it on my car? if i have forgoten any thing please tell me.

94Camaro

plenty of people have said they were not better. and we arent talkin bout stuff you can buy aftermarket, but GM's own aluminum heads they put on the 3400 engine. (LA1 engine code)
----------
I know bout the differences, its been pointed out somewhere else -- hey i cant be perfect. anyway... how do you mean "swaping out the intake doesnt work too well" ? if you are asking what i think you are -- the ports on the 2.8/3.1/3.4 RWD are DIFFERENT from the 3x00 motor. the intake ports are located differently and are larger than the 2.8/3.x RWD.

also, Tiago of Force Fed Fabrications got something like 290 rwhp / 330 rwtq with 6 psi on his 3.4L RWD engine. im pretty sure you could do better on your Jimmy. not sure why you are running such low numbers... maybe fuel?
----------
no. the heads / intake / fuel rail are all needed.

Dale

iTrader: (12)

Biggest thing I see is bang for the buck... as well not everyone has tools, place, knowledge to do this swap.

But yes, speed cost... How fast do you want to go?
----------
And rotating assy, or atleast the pistons to lower the compression.

94Camaro

the 3.x RWD engines do not have aluminum heads. Just so everyone knows - the parts I am referencing I took off of a 2000 Grand Am GT (3400 engine - LA1 engine code).

To swap the heads onto any of the 60 degree RWD engines (2.8/3.1/3.4) you need the upper/lower intake manifold, fuel rail, throttle body, water neck and valve covers all from a 2000+ Grand Am GT. You also need to purchase a set of RKSport headers (the Pacesetter headers do not have the correct size primaries to fit - it has been verified) or get headers that have 1.75" primaries. (im just tellin you what im using and what has been tried)

All of the sensors and electrical connections will work with the new setup with the exception of the extra temperature sensor at the back of the motor for the gauges. you have to get a GM 3-wire temp sensor (i will dig up the p/n) and splice it in to get both the fans and the guages to read properly.
----------
you dont need the whole rotating assembly..i was getting to this.

you only need the pistons. and only if you want to lower compression. on a 2.8 i dont know that it'd be high enough to be necessary. i dont have the formulas to calculate the CR for the 2.8. for the 3.4 it comes out to 12.98:1 if you dont use pistons designed for the smaller combustion chambers. for the 2.8 - it might be ok and a higher cr might be desirable. I will look into exactly what the numbers are tonite at home and post.

Dale

iTrader: (12)

so on a 3.4, which is orginally a 9.5:1 it turns out to be 13.0:1 basically.

The 3.1 orginally is 8.5:1
the 2.8 orginally is 8.9:1



I know my 3.4 on 93oct pings on occasion, constantly on 87oct. I dont see how it could be drove on any form of pump gas w/o swapping pistons.

But getting accurate numbers is very nice, thanks!!

94Camaro

no problem. i run my 3.4 on anythign from 87-91 and it never pings. i do get the occasional knock (as evidenced by my auto x-ray scanner) but its few and far between adn i have plenty of power in the car. all it is -- tuning. just need to get that taken care of and ill be golden

edit: oh yea. the 3.4 runs 9.0:1 CR - not 9.5. the "3400" - which the L32 is not - runs 9.6:1 (thats what im at right now)

edit #2: to make sure everyone gets the distinction:

2.8L - 198(0?)1 - 1991 F-Body (Fiero?) (8.9:1 CR)

3.1L - 1991 F-Body (8.5:1 CR)

3.4L - 1993-1995 F-body(9.0:1 CR)

3100 - Used in various FWD applications (from what i understand, i could be and probably am wrong on this one.). upgraded to newer plenum/runner design in 1999.(9.0:1 CR (i think))

3400 - appeared in 1997 Chevy Venture and then in 1999 moved into the Grand Am GT. (9.6:1 CR)

All these are seperate motors used in different applications. Just so everyone knows

Project: 85 2.8 bird

so....................... does the 3X00 have accomidations for the dizzy, or does everyone get to switch over to DIS.

Nothing having a 12.0:1 cr engine for daily driving too. Swap over fwd pistons, iirc, they're dished to keep the pistons & valves from saying hi. 2.8 pistons are flat tops, and I never took the heads off of the 3.4 to see what they are. Dale knows.

Dale

iTrader: (12)

Your right, the 3.4 is 9.0. So I've been spewing wrong info for 15 months

However, as for ping/knock. your on a different ecm then us. I know my 3.4, with 3.1 intake/ecm, and headers, ping often on 93oct gas. Imagine what it would do with 12.98? That is, unless I reporgrammed the ecm which I have been trying to get done for along time, and havent.


More good info on the gen3 heads, they have the fast burn chamber, splayed valves, and roller fulcrum rockers.

I still have yet to see someone get a fwd intake to work with a dizzy. So that would mean swap to the FWD ecm system.

V6sucker

it is just not a simple bolt on. There are other things that you have to do as well.

94Camaro

edit: Lemme rephrase this...

By "not a simple bolt on", what do you mean? Are you talking about bolting the new intake up to the iron heads? Cause if you are thats just not possible.

Iron heads + 3x00 intake/plenum = not gonna happen. at least not without some serious rework to the lower intake manifold. The intake runners on the lower intake manifold, while not only being taller are evenly spaced. The difference is something like this:

Iron Head:
O OO

Aluminum Head:
O O O

Not to mention that the 3x00 LIM is like 5 inches taller than the 2.8/3.x LIM. (that goes for all that use the FI - not TBI...FI - setup.) This would misalign the ports on the intake and the ports on the head.

---------------------------

If you are talking about that the 3x00 intake manifold doesnt just bolt up to the 2.8/3.x RWD Iron block then you are mistaken. It really is just a bolt on. There might be other things you have to do to use the heads, but when you are putting the thing together there is no modification you have to do to the 3x00 heads or to the iron block to make the intake / plenum from the 3x00 motor bolt to it.

the bolt holes / all oil passages line up on the 3.4L RWD -> Gen III Aluminum heads/3x00 intake&plenum. Everything fits just right.

94Camaro

no. you can use the 3.4 RWD ECM with the setup. which has provisions for the DIS coils (i have DIS on my motor) -- also has SFI. means you would get better gas mileage along with the better power. <twirls finger>

anyway - i dont think you could use a distibutor with the 3x00 intake due to teh fact that the plenum (actual air chamber of it) sits DIRECTLY over the dist plug on the 3.4.

oh yea - one more thing..this setup is ferking tall.
here are some pics of a 3100 setup (1996 Grand Am GT parts before i found out bout the 2000 parts and swapped to them (im running 2k GAGT parts now):

http://black34v6.wcfb.cc/modpics
(note the 1/8th inch of clearance between the plenum and the cowl - i measured)

Naft

man working on a 4th gen must suck, that engine bay looks a bit trickier . . . unless you can remove that plastic **** on top.

94Camaro

lol..under the plastic **** -- is metal ****. you cant remove that, the windshield is actually sitting on top of it. yes working on a 4th gen sucks sometimes.

p.s: thats a L32 - 3.4L RWD. 60* engine. (= narrow as ****) they shoved a 90* LT1 into that same engine bay. just imagine working on that (no thanks!)

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

94 Camaro, yeah my question was now answered by the poster that I was asking about the not working out so well as you saw.

Also my number were low because of a few factors, only one of which was fuel. I have since discovered these changes that needed to be made and when it goes back together I'm sure I'll be somewhere around 300 HP and more in torque at the wheels. I also started with the small port top end. so that was a limiting factor. The S.P. 3100 was only rated at 150 to 155 HP, so to have a 100 HP "gain" over that, I think it was ok, considering I was running less comp ratio (8.9:1) than the rated 9.5:1 of the 3100 (9.6:1 in later years). I was also running non roller 1.5:1 rockers and the flat tappet cam, again things that will limit power, though the cam is a GMPP equivilant to the Crane 260-2.

A dizzy will not fit with the genIII top end, more due to the LIM than the UIM. I'll have pics of how much would need to be cut out to clear a dizzy in a bit, basically the entire #6 runner will be blocked off. The UIM would need some mild grinding, but for best results would require soem cut out and material welded in to cover the hole, but this is moot, because the LIM still won't work as is. I had thought about a few ways to make it work, but have come up with a better plan that I will be exploring soon and if it works out I will make this part available for those that want to swap to the top end while retaining your original ECM.

Dale

iTrader: (12)

I know you can use the 3.4 ecm, obviously as you are. But I've already wired a l32 ecm into an s10, I'm not going to do that to my camaro.

Most people on here would like to use the current ecm system, which because of the dizzy aint going to happen. Trust me, I'd like to go to the fwd heads for better flow, lightness, etc. But the cost/effort for the gain just isnt worth it.

I also give you serious props for doing it. Its people like you that help the rest of us know what will/wont work, and what has to be done to do it.

Do you have a site anywhere that list everything you have done to the motor so when you get dyno results we know what all its from?

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

Dale, Like I said in my last post, I'm working on a way for people to keep thier current ECM.

Also check out Gen III power J-bodies It's geared more towards the J-body, but many things are still very similar. There is also a section in the forums for "other platforms", since well, I help run that site. I want to add a complete section for non-j-body cars at some point, the more we have there, the easier it will be to convice the web masters to add that site.

Project: 85 2.8 bird

reminds me of My engien bay, 80% done - FirebirdV6.com/CamaroV6.com Message Board , post #6

If/when you come up & show/provide how to keep the dizzy, rotating assy swap along w/top end swap will be a sweet ride & not need the uber expensive gas for daily driving.

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

I forgot to mention earlier, that even with the 2.8, the SCR will go over 11:1 by just swapping the heads, not a bad thing, really, but something to consider.

V6sucker

I know that the entire set up, heads/intake will completely swap ove to the iron block.
It is if you do not get the right year, you have to worry about other factors such as compression ratio's and wiring issues unless you want to swap out and run a different harness/ecu. I have also heard about the RWD exhaust mani's not bolting to the Gen 2/3 heads. If so, then that is a whole other ball game.

I am saying that, the swap is alot more involved that just unbolt old/bolt-up new.

Gumby

If enough folks were willing to pay $1500-$1800 for some new heads....

Are a few places like bulldog performance that make stuff for folks like us who get left out of the summit catalogs.


Welcome to Bulldog Performance


Cost like $10,000 in pre orders to get them to cast new heads

94Camaro

well yea the ENTIRE swap. what you had mentioned was just the intake. there are a lot of factors that went into doing the swap.

just want to make it clear to everyone that i HAVE done the swap and am running Gen III aluminum heads on my iron block 3.4L RWD engine. just to make sure we're all on the same page. i know exactly everything that needs to be done to make this work.

and no you cant use the RWD manifolds. the bolt holes are spaced too far apart. the exhaust ports are also larger. i spent a week porting my cast iron manifolds so i wouldnt have to buy headers, only to find out there was no way to get the bolt holes to line up properly (i even u-notched them)

in the end had to go headers. got lucky the first time and got RKSport headers, found out later that pacesetter's primaries are too small -- the port on the aluminum head is bigger than pacesetters primary size! RKSports are 1.75" -- dunno what P.S. are.

all the sensors line up fine with the exception of ONE. the temp sensor on the back of the head. have to get a 3-wire sensor for that (gm makes it...ill get the p/n later)

theres not a lot into this...just have to cover the bases is all. takes about a week - so to do everything.

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

I too have done the swap as I have mentioned, had it running, then some things in my life changed, decided to upgrade pulled it apart and have not had a chance to finish it....

I also built my own headers, since I have a turbo on mine. I think I made more modifications to my set-up than 94 Camaro. I chose to use my existing throttle cable, so I modified the TB linkage. I modified the FPR to be adjustable, made new brackets for the belt driven accessories, and an external adjustable crank trigger, since the 2.8L (RWD) Block does not have provisions for the crank trigger.

Headers are most easily modified to run this top end, and I gotta ask..... If you're making the swap to the genII/III top end, why would you want to limit yourself with stock cast manifolds anyway?

69charger383

With the aluminum heads and FWD 3.4 internals would the comp ratio still be that hihg or will it drop back down to 9:1 area??

xplane

All ya need to do is change the pistons and it will put it back to where its supposed to be.

69charger383

Nicee!!

redraif

Well since my heads are off my 3.4 now.. I will have to get some pics of the pistons, but they do have reliefs in them.

Anybody have any pics of the FWD heads... was curious since I'm porting my iron ones... just want to see how the intake side looks... I know the iron ones pretty intimately by now... LOL

Any info on how far Tiago took his heads??? Been looking on maxing mine out. (going beyond a gasket match job) How do his compare to super sixes??? If you can't answer that is he pretty forth coming with info on what works?

Personally, 2 wks ago, I had to make the choice all over again when my ported iron heads turned out cracked. But I went back iron due to time constraints and I don't want to got crazy with swapping the whole top end even if I can retain my ecm. Finally making head way on getting the tune right with some decent chips! Just got the Truleo intake and I'm way happy with it. Serious TQ gain!Now if those guys had made a intake like mine to match up to the FWD heads and still retain the Distributor... Oh wow I would be all over it.

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

There are a few options there though....

You can use the RWD 3.4 pistons, that will give you somewhere around 12.5:1 SCR, yeah baby, but not a good DD SCR.

You can use the 3400 pistons that will give you an SCR of 9.6:1, which is the stock SCR for the 3400, and a good point to be at.

There is also the 3.4 DOHC pistons, off the top of my head I do not know what SCR these will yeild, but are an option.

Then there is aftermarket.
Currently there is a GP on V6Z24.com - Moon's Cavalier Z24 Page - Home, for forged 3400 pistons that will give an SCR of about 9:1, thier reasoning is for turbo apps, I don't agree, I'd rather have between 9.3 and 9.6:1.

Then ther eare at least three different head gasket thicknesses that will change the SCR, though you can only use the thickest gasket with the 3400 pistons as they come proud of the block by .018" to .020".

Blue1989RS

Back to the flow numbers.....

How much vacuum was pulled on that flow rate? And what is the stock flow rate on the iron heads? I also heard that these heads do not gain past 0.440" of valve lift. Is this true? What is a good flow rate to shoot for per cylinder volume? If the 3.4 draws 0.020 cu.ft. per cylinder, it would take 15,800RPM to reach the 158cu.ft./min flow rate listed above. (the cylinder draws once every other revolution, so 0.020/2 into 158).

I'm just asking questions cause I'm curious. I have a 2.8 block with a 3.1 crank/pistons and a .060" overbore. I also have iron heads, gasket matched, completely ported with unshrowded valves, a .430" lift cam, and a custom chip. Its pretty fast but I'd like to go faster (and lighter).

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

I just saw that the GP for the forged 3400 pistons can include a higher SCR if you wish at no additional cost. It's be orchestrated by 89jyturbo, that is also a member of this site as well.

94Camaro

the 3.4 iron heads are identical to the 3.1 iron heads. no change whatsoever. they just dumped them onto the 3.4 in fact the only differences that i know between the 3.1 and 3.4 in the fbody are:

a) DIS system instead of Distributor
b) plenum redesigned
c) larger block to accomodate the 3.623 bore.
d) SFI system

other than that the engines are identical. the 3.4 uses the 2.8/3.1 lower intake, the 2.8/3.1 heads, the 2.8/3.1 exhaust manifolds, the 3.1 injectors (16#) and fuel block.

ill get to work finding out that other info for ya. i just know a guy who ports/polishes heads and does pcm reprogramming and deals a lot with the 3400 stuff.

he told me that the stock flow rate on the 3400 heads is 200 cfm on the in and 180 on the ex.

the 3.4L RWD iron heads flow the same as the 3.1L iron heads and i dont quite remember offhand what they are..but its not very good... something like 120-130 on the in and less than that on the ex. i can see if i can find my stock flw files from DD2k for the 3.4 heads.

Blue1989RS

That would be great if you could! I've been wanting to know for a while what the stock numbers are and with what valve lift. How much is enough tho? I know that the better if flows, the higher you can rev it, but how much is enough for these little motors?

94Camaro

i just realized you have a 3.3L ?? how big did you bore that sucker?

oh yea -- btw..the "3.4" isnt a 3.4
its a 3.35L

Blue1989RS

Muahahaha! 0.060" over. I figured that the difference between a 3.1 and a "3.35" is .120", so I split the difference. Plus I found standard overbore pistons at 60 over as part of a rebuild kit. I mean, come on, this motor will outlast fossil fuels so I'm not worried about boring it again. It sounds meaty too....

94Camaro

yea as i said - you basically now have the same motor i have in my car. trust me the "3.35" (3.4) sounds pretty evil. check out my car w/ a cam (its a little echoing with teh cutout open but sounds nice with it closed - listen all the way thru):

http://camaro.adwire.com/idle.mp3

nice job.

Blue1989RS

Nice sound bite 94Camaro!

https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/tech...light=head+cfm

Going off what Traviz said,

HP = .2575 x CFM (@ 28" of water) x number of cylinders

So the ported iron heads would have a max, head limited hp of 244HP while the stock aluminums would be 250HP. Since neither motor setup produces that much HP (maybe around 190-200HP), I would bet to wager that the main advantage to going with the 3400 heads would be the nicer intake setup.

What do you think the torque would be for these motors? If they are at 200ft*lbs, then the HP=RPM*torque/5252 equation would suggest you would have to wing it up to 6572RPM. Which is a doable number! I bet the FWD intake setup massively outflows the RWD intake setup, giving the motor the ability to breath and produce tq at higher RPM, producing more HP.

I've convinced myself, I'm building another motor. Damn it....

94Camaro

whered you get that formula (n/m found it)

the 2000+ 3400 aluminum heads flow 200 cfm on the intake, and 180 on the exhaust... by that:

HP = .2575 x CFM (@ 28" of water) x number of cylinders
or..
HP = .2575 X 200 X 6
HP = 309

unless im missing something?

94Camaro

edit.

94Camaro

LOL. heres a link to my dyno sheet i got after rebuilding the motor and swapping to the 3100 heads / intake (from a 1996 grand am gt, 1.5 stamped rocker arms, 1.720" in / 1.430" ex valve)....

http://camaro.adwire.com/dyno4.html

dont ask me why they use "speed" - i dont know. but those are the ACTUAL numbers from the printout they gave me that i put online (pima).

anyway - something else i guess i forgot to add. the 3100 / pre 2000 3400 heads have 1.720" intake valves and 1.430" exhaust valves. the 2000+ 3400 heads have 1.760" intake and 1.430" exhaust. not sure why the exhaust flow is better but thats what i found out, probably a redesign in the exhaust side.

I edited my post above to include the difference between the two heads. so if you are thinking of getting max power out -- use 200 cfm and the 2000+ heads (btw thats before porting and polishing)

cant wait to actually play with these heads lol.

91greenbird

iTrader: (4)

Well it seems alot of people are interested in this including me. So far i read that you need fwd pistons, fuel rail, throttle body, fuel injectors, plenum/runners/base, cylinder heads, valve covers, ecu to run coil packs?? There should be a post on directions on doing the swap and all the parts you need to do this. How much fabricating is needed and i dont kno if other people realized that but if you can only use rks headers to do this swap then you'll need a custom y-pipe for it to work on thirdgens right?

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

I'm (slowly) working on a guide for this. The problem is I think I have come to the conclusion that I will have to write a seperate swap for each body style, meaning that I can't do what I originally set about doing and writting one guide to talk about all longitudily mounted swaps.

I might be able to get away with having the basic engine build and then seperate sections for each body style regarding installation of.

Input?

Blue1989RS

I think that the swap would be more complete if you told them to put a RWD bare block on a FWD motor, cause thats what you have to do! Everything needs to swap, from rotating assy to throttle body. I can take pics of the entire swap, I just need to go to the junk yard here and pick up an entire motor....

Dale

iTrader: (12)

T, you dont need another motor around your damn house

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

Yes and no.....

Yes, it easier to just swap the internals from a FWD to a RWD, but there are parts that don't need to be, in fact from same displacment RWD engine to same displacement FWD engine, building this hybrid, the only part that would need to be swapped short block wise is the pistons. The crank is the same stroke between the 2.8 RWD and FWD, the stroke is the same between RWD 3.1/3.4 and FWD 3.1/3.4. The con rods are the same throughout. (only 3500 and newer 660s uses a different rod)
The only reason I used a FWD 3.1 crank in my build was because I had a few kicking around, and wanted to build a "stroker" instead of retaining the 2.8L displacment (2.9L with the overbore). The longer stroke is what I was after for torque production for towing.
If I wasn't building a turbo engine, I would use RWD pistons with the FWD top end for some wicked SCR, and have responce like nothing else. I've always loved the sound of a high compression engine. As it is, I'll be building the FrankenBeast with an SCR of 10:1, and adding boost on top of that, how much, I'm not sure yet.

Blue1989RS

There's always room for just one more motor...... At least I've sold 2 of them in the last couple of weeks! hehe. I told my girlfriend that I was gonna build another motor for the camaro, needless to say, it didn't go over very well. I'll just have to sneak the pieces in..... lol.