V6 Discussion and questions about the base carbureted or MPFI V6's and the rare SFI Turbo V6.

how many ppl would swap to fwd alum heads

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jul 21, 2006 | 09:41 PM
  #1  
daves12secV6's Avatar
Thread Starter
Supreme Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,472
Likes: 1
From: Sayreville NJ
how many ppl would swap to fwd alum heads

how many of u would do the swap if there was an manifold available that cleared the stock dizzy on the 2.8/31

the reason im asking is cause im working with my uncle in creating a from scratch manifold to do the swap.the manifold will be a sheetmetal design.along the lines of a high rise carbed manifold.
Reply
Old Jul 21, 2006 | 09:50 PM
  #2  
Six_Shooter's Avatar
Moderator
20 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,370
Likes: 19
Car: 1973 Datsun 240Z/ 1985 S-15 Jimmy
Engine: Turbo LX9/To be decided
Transmission: 5-speed/T-5
Axle/Gears: R200 3.90/7.5" 3.73
Originally Posted by daves12secV6
how many of u would do the swap if there was an manifold available that cleared the stock dizzy on the 2.8/31

the reason im asking is cause im working with my uncle in creating a from scratch manifold to do the swap.the manifold will be a sheetmetal design.along the lines of a high rise carbed manifold.
The only issue with that is, you would then have to create new fuel rails, and a few other things that are eluding me when I looked at doing the same thing.

It was easier, by about 10 fold to just build a crank trigger and use the DIS ignition system.
Reply
Old Jul 21, 2006 | 09:54 PM
  #3  
daves12secV6's Avatar
Thread Starter
Supreme Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,472
Likes: 1
From: Sayreville NJ
yes sixshooter i know about that.and thats already in the works.my uncle has built many custom one off manifolds before from scratch carbed/fuel injection.im quessing also the cold start injector.but why not just elimiate that.and with needing the dual fuel rails also have to change the type of fp regulator that is used.
this is more just for my motor then anything.but i figure if ppl would be interested and i could possibly make a few to sell why not.im already doing the work

as far as those few things im not aware of anything else that would have to be changed
Reply
Old Jul 21, 2006 | 10:03 PM
  #4  
daves12secV6's Avatar
Thread Starter
Supreme Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,472
Likes: 1
From: Sayreville NJ
oh and the reason for not swaping to dis is to save the money on having to buy new msd stuff.really dont have the money to do all that.the manifold wont cost me anything but my time to build
Reply
Old Jul 22, 2006 | 02:00 AM
  #5  
drdave88's Avatar
Supreme Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,470
Likes: 6
From: Waterford, MI
Car: 1998 Camaro Z28
Engine: 6.0L
Transmission: 4L60E
Axle/Gears: 3.73
lots would be interested im sure, as long as its not gonna cost hundreds of dollars. there have been a few things that have been considered on this v6 forum over the past couple of years that ive seen, most dont fly. dowards turbo, sadly didnt, AM's intake didnt (although he might not have produced it) and there may have been a few other things here and there. its gotta be pretty cheap for the majority to buy it from the past experiences. if the price is right though, lots of us would be for it im sure.
Reply
Old Jul 22, 2006 | 02:47 AM
  #6  
daves12secV6's Avatar
Thread Starter
Supreme Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,472
Likes: 1
From: Sayreville NJ
Originally Posted by drdave88
lots would be interested im sure, as long as its not gonna cost hundreds of dollars. there have been a few things that have been considered on this v6 forum over the past couple of years that ive seen, most dont fly. dowards turbo, sadly didnt, AM's intake didnt (although he might not have produced it) and there may have been a few other things here and there. its gotta be pretty cheap for the majority to buy it from the past experiences. if the price is right though, lots of us would be for it im sure.
yeah i cant say anything on price cause were still doing the design work.and what it really comes down to is how hard its gonna be to machine the base.i wouldnt expect ppl to buy them but if there is no interest at all.i wont have to worry about anything except making my own,but if there is interest as i build mine i can make jigs and fixtures for the machine work etc so that any subseqent manifolds i build could be done with alot more ease
Reply
Old Jul 22, 2006 | 06:36 AM
  #7  
planman's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
From: Kissimmee FL
Car: 92 RS
Engine: 3.1 V6
Transmission: 700R4
Sign me up. The heads are the biggest performance problems on our engines.
Reply
Old Jul 22, 2006 | 06:40 AM
  #8  
ScottieB's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
From: Sherman, Tx - N. of Dallas
Car: Blue 89' RS
Engine: 5.7L
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3.42
money speaks, let us know an estimated cost, and the performance difference we will see with your product. Sell it to us!
Reply
Old Jul 22, 2006 | 08:30 AM
  #9  
daves12secV6's Avatar
Thread Starter
Supreme Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,472
Likes: 1
From: Sayreville NJ
when i get one done i will,as far as performance gains i cant use my motor to compare since im running a turbo motor
Reply
Old Jul 22, 2006 | 08:57 AM
  #10  
xplane's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 830
Likes: 0
From: Kansas
Car: 85 camaro sport coupe
Engine: 2.8 MFI
Transmission: v6 700R4 wish it was a 5spd Stick
Axle/Gears: Stock non posi 3.42s
https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/v6/3...=aluminum+head he is talking about a 3.4 and not a 2.8 but if your gonna change this much on the engine why not go ahead and switch blocks?
Reply
Old Jul 22, 2006 | 09:16 AM
  #11  
daves12secV6's Avatar
Thread Starter
Supreme Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,472
Likes: 1
From: Sayreville NJ
cause i dont happen to have a 3.4 block that i can.if i did id be building a 3.4 instead.so im just gonna build another bored 3.1
Reply
Old Jul 22, 2006 | 10:51 AM
  #12  
69charger383's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
From: Connecticut
Car: 2005 Lincoln LS, 83' Z28
Engine: 242 DOHC and an empty engine bay.
Transmission: 5R55S, T5 soon to be auto
Axle/Gears: 3.58s and soon to be 4.10s
Id be interested. I started the swap awhile ago but couldnt go through with it because I didnt want DIS and I didnt know what would happen without the Cold Start Injector. Is it going to be aluminum or steel? What about runner length/shape?
Reply
Old Jul 22, 2006 | 02:44 PM
  #13  
Naft's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
From: Chico, CA
Car: 89 Firebird, 92 RS
Engine: 2.8L MPFI, 355 TPI
Transmission: t-5, t-5
Axle/Gears: open 3.42, posi 3.42
the problem is that fuel injected manifolds ARE expensive. for a v8 you can spend $1k easy on a new manifold, but you see more hp gain because there are more cubes. its not that much cheaper to make a manifold for a v6 then a v8. expect to shell out a bare minimum of $4-500 for a complete manifold that does anything.
Reply
Old Jul 22, 2006 | 06:35 PM
  #14  
Six_Shooter's Avatar
Moderator
20 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,370
Likes: 19
Car: 1973 Datsun 240Z/ 1985 S-15 Jimmy
Engine: Turbo LX9/To be decided
Transmission: 5-speed/T-5
Axle/Gears: R200 3.90/7.5" 3.73
Originally Posted by daves12secV6
yes sixshooter i know about that.and thats already in the works.my uncle has built many custom one off manifolds before from scratch carbed/fuel injection.im quessing also the cold start injector.but why not just elimiate that.and with needing the dual fuel rails also have to change the type of fp regulator that is used.
this is more just for my motor then anything.but i figure if ppl would be interested and i could possibly make a few to sell why not.im already doing the work

as far as those few things im not aware of anything else that would have to be changed
Yeah that cold start injector may or may not be an issue, I've never played with the iron head MPFI stuff, only carb and aluminium head MPFI/SFI.

You could retain the stock FPR, you will just have to plumb it like the OEM set-up was, one fueal rail to the other and the FPR at the end of the second rail, no biggy. The biggest problem with the OEM manifold, just as an FYI, which I was going to attempt to modify at one time, was the angle of the injector and the tube accross the back of the intake from one fuel rail to the other. I was trying to do it cheap and keep as many OEM parts as possible, so that I could concentrate on other things. Sadly it's either a whole new intake or swap to DIS, DIS swap for most will be cheaper and easier to do than a custom intake manifold.

I am working on a Dizzy swap that will fit the genIII intake, to test the viability of it, to see if it actually does make more power. I will have both ignition systems on my truck and do consecutive dyno pulls to see if there is a difference, and if there is what that difference will be.
Reply
Old Jul 22, 2006 | 11:31 PM
  #15  
xplane's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 830
Likes: 0
From: Kansas
Car: 85 camaro sport coupe
Engine: 2.8 MFI
Transmission: v6 700R4 wish it was a 5spd Stick
Axle/Gears: Stock non posi 3.42s
i just posted that so people could see the NA results for that 3.4 setup with the alum heads. i would just imagine that a 2.8 would just make a few less with the same mods.
Reply
Old Sep 5, 2006 | 06:21 PM
  #16  
RSFreak's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,262
Likes: 0
From: Renton, WA
Car: 1985 Camaro, 1986 Trans Am
Engine: 5.0L carbed and 5.0L TPI
Transmission: TH700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.23 and 3.27 posi
Originally Posted by Six_Shooter
The only issue with that is, you would then have to create new fuel rails
I don't think custom fuel rails would be much of a problem. I was just looking at a Buick 3.3L setup today. It's "fuel rail" consisted of a hardline with injector fittings spaced as needed and a FPR at one end. Seems like this would be pretty simple to fabricate.
Reply
Old Sep 5, 2006 | 07:47 PM
  #17  
Six_Shooter's Avatar
Moderator
20 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,370
Likes: 19
Car: 1973 Datsun 240Z/ 1985 S-15 Jimmy
Engine: Turbo LX9/To be decided
Transmission: 5-speed/T-5
Axle/Gears: R200 3.90/7.5" 3.73
Originally Posted by RSFreak
I don't think custom fuel rails would be much of a problem. I was just looking at a Buick 3.3L setup today. It's "fuel rail" consisted of a hardline with injector fittings spaced as needed and a FPR at one end. Seems like this would be pretty simple to fabricate.
Easier said then done, especially when you realize that the 3.3 has the injectors all vertical and perpendicular to the fuel rail, where as the 3100/3400 have the injectors at different angles and are not perpendicular to the fuel rail, the injector pockets are also machined at angles.
Reply
Old Sep 5, 2006 | 08:28 PM
  #18  
daves12secV6's Avatar
Thread Starter
Supreme Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,472
Likes: 1
From: Sayreville NJ
hey figured id give an update since somone brought this thread back from the dead.ive started to assemble the 3.4.and got a basic design down,for the manifold.the easiest way to do it was to buy fuel rail material and make my own rails.the manifold will have a rail on each side feeding 3 injectors.though the way/stuff im using to do this requires to convert ur fuel line fittings from stock to "AN" fittings.the fpr will not be mounted on the rail but will be mounted inline with the inlet on the fuel rail.much liek an electric fp equioed carbed car.its a bit oricey to do this way,as the fpr is just about 200$'s but for my application this type of fpr was best suited to my needs.anyways i shoudl have the manifold base done in a few days,and ill get some pics up
Reply
Old Sep 5, 2006 | 10:10 PM
  #19  
RSFreak's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,262
Likes: 0
From: Renton, WA
Car: 1985 Camaro, 1986 Trans Am
Engine: 5.0L carbed and 5.0L TPI
Transmission: TH700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.23 and 3.27 posi
Originally Posted by Six_Shooter
Easier said then done, especially when you realize that the 3.3 has the injectors all vertical and perpendicular to the fuel rail, where as the 3100/3400 have the injectors at different angles and are not perpendicular to the fuel rail, the injector pockets are also machined at angles.
I was mistaken, it was actually a 3.8L, but I see your point. However, I still think it could be done and as I am currently seeking some alum. heads, I may be fabricating something soon...
Reply
Old Sep 6, 2006 | 08:33 AM
  #20  
Six_Shooter's Avatar
Moderator
20 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,370
Likes: 19
Car: 1973 Datsun 240Z/ 1985 S-15 Jimmy
Engine: Turbo LX9/To be decided
Transmission: 5-speed/T-5
Axle/Gears: R200 3.90/7.5" 3.73
Yes a new rail can be made, I never said it couldn't infact it would be required, but not with a dizzy in the stock location attempting to use a modified stock genIII lower, seeing as the #6 injector is VERY close to the dizzy location, IIRC, there is not enough room left between the injector top and the dizzy cap, to allow for a well flowing fuel rail.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Dkelz313
Tech / General Engine
17
Apr 7, 2016 10:38 PM
gta90
TPI
40
Sep 15, 2015 04:00 PM
theurge
TPI
7
Aug 21, 2015 12:46 PM
MENINBLK
Transmissions and Drivetrain
6
Aug 5, 2015 11:58 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:13 PM.