Why v6?
Supreme Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 4,009
Likes: 6
From: Mesquite, Texas
Car: 89 rs, 86 Trans Am
Engine: RS-V6... Trans Am-LG4
Transmission: RS-T5... Trans Am 700r4
Re: Why v6?
you know, I don't have a 3.1. I have a 2.8. Why would I put a 3.1 plenum on the car? That's not my style. I wouldn't put a IROC hood on my car either, because I don't have one. I'm not a poser
Say what you want, but there was a time when I considered painting my plenum, but then I just decided to work on it until it was nice enough that I wouldn't consider covering up a great finish with paint. I suspect you would have done the same if you had the chance
Say what you want, but there was a time when I considered painting my plenum, but then I just decided to work on it until it was nice enough that I wouldn't consider covering up a great finish with paint. I suspect you would have done the same if you had the chance
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,574
Likes: 0
From: right behind you
Car: '85 maro
Engine: In the works...
Transmission: TH700 R4
Axle/Gears: 3.73 posi
Re: Why v6?
Way to fart on his parade vetruck. I don't blame him for being offended after putting that time into it.
I knew those truleo things were crap but they weren't even aluminum? $700 and people actually bought a couple?!? PT Barnum was right.
I knew those truleo things were crap but they weren't even aluminum? $700 and people actually bought a couple?!? PT Barnum was right.
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,598
Likes: 2
From: Davenport, Iowa
Car: Still a 3rd Gen
Engine: 450HP 355
Transmission: TH350
Axle/Gears: 9" with 4.11's
Re: Why v6?
I've seen the Truleo Fiero intake in person, it's one of the worst designed things i've ever seen for the 60v6. #1 the plenum volume is too small, #2 the runners are too small and long and #3 the runners actually stuck inside the plenum a little which would cause some serious airflow issues.
as far as why V6? Because i felt like it. Eventually i'll grow tired of them just like i did back when i was building SBC's with junk 70's parts and getting 6 MPG.
I hate to ***** this picture out but it is pretty sexy..

320+ HP and 30+ MPG @ ~350 lbs dressed.
as far as why V6? Because i felt like it. Eventually i'll grow tired of them just like i did back when i was building SBC's with junk 70's parts and getting 6 MPG.
I hate to ***** this picture out but it is pretty sexy..
320+ HP and 30+ MPG @ ~350 lbs dressed.
Junior Member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
From: So. Cal
Car: 92' Camaro RS
Engine: 3.1 V6
Transmission: 700r4
Re: Why v6?
Wow, Reading this thread has been refreshing! I am new to the world of third Gens and joined this site the day I bought my car, but I've been terrified to post cause there are a lot of V6 haters around here. I got the 3.1 V6 for two reasons. 1) The price was right, 2) They are easy to understand and work on. I've been hip deep in that engine compartment for 6 weeks now and I'm lovin' it. There isn't much that I cant get done in an afternoon on this thing cause it's so roomy and easy to work on.
My love for my 3rd Gen inspired my younger cousin to run out and get an 87 firebird with the Crab 305. He was running around with his chest puffed out cause he has an 8 and I "only have a dinky 6". But now he's begging for my help every other day cause the thing is nothing but a headache.
I'm proud of my car and would greatly appreciate any pointers on how to make her all she can be while still being sensibly cool. Thanks for loving the 6 guys.
My love for my 3rd Gen inspired my younger cousin to run out and get an 87 firebird with the Crab 305. He was running around with his chest puffed out cause he has an 8 and I "only have a dinky 6". But now he's begging for my help every other day cause the thing is nothing but a headache.
I'm proud of my car and would greatly appreciate any pointers on how to make her all she can be while still being sensibly cool. Thanks for loving the 6 guys.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Why v6?
I've seen the Truleo Fiero intake in person, it's one of the worst designed things i've ever seen for the 60v6. #1 the plenum volume is too small, #2 the runners are too small and long and #3 the runners actually stuck inside the plenum a little which would cause some serious airflow issues.
as far as why V6? Because i felt like it. Eventually i'll grow tired of them just like i did back when i was building SBC's with junk 70's parts and getting 6 MPG.
I hate to ***** this picture out but it is pretty sexy..

320+ HP and 30+ MPG @ ~350 lbs dressed.
as far as why V6? Because i felt like it. Eventually i'll grow tired of them just like i did back when i was building SBC's with junk 70's parts and getting 6 MPG.
I hate to ***** this picture out but it is pretty sexy..
320+ HP and 30+ MPG @ ~350 lbs dressed.
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,598
Likes: 2
From: Davenport, Iowa
Car: Still a 3rd Gen
Engine: 450HP 355
Transmission: TH350
Axle/Gears: 9" with 4.11's
Re: Why v6?
http://www.tcemotorsports.com/ is his site, Marc does excellent work.
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,574
Likes: 0
From: right behind you
Car: '85 maro
Engine: In the works...
Transmission: TH700 R4
Axle/Gears: 3.73 posi
Re: Why v6?
That turbo setup I sold you will help a bit
. Now you need to get a transgo reprogram kit and enjoy barking the tires.
. Now you need to get a transgo reprogram kit and enjoy barking the tires. Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 354
Likes: 1
From: Manchester,PA
Car: 86 Firebird SE
Engine: 2.8L
Re: Why v6?
Glad Purple here piped up, because I was going to say, this guy put a whole FWD 3500 into his Camaro. I think this was the same engine that propelled his Cavalier into the 12's. The 3500 makes a shade over 200HP stock. Put in a good port and polish job and a good cam, and those numbers just went up bigtime. Top it off with a turbo and a good tune, and youre smoking V8's. I am personally shifting several ways on engine options. I can put in a hybrid, install a whole 3500, or just say screw it and drop in a 5.3. As for V6's making gobs of power. Take a look at the Buick GN. While yes it is a 90* V6, those things SCREAM! They can easily make over 600HP with a single turbo. Or the 4.3 Cyclone/Typhoon trucks. They make huge power out of the V6 as well. So you see, it is very possible to make big power out of a V6 and still keep your fuel mileage, and weight distribution as well. And one last thing, it is very unique to have a V6 that makes enough power to walk a modded V8 in a straight line and embarrass the same said V8 in the corners. Some food for thought. And Vetruck, why did you have to slam 58Mark's polish work? He did it himself and obviously takes pride in his work. Instead of being arrogant, why not give the guy kudos for at least attempting to make his car his own. It takes MANY hours to do that kind of polishing. Hell I'd pay the guy to polish my stuff, it looks like a good job to me.
P.S. I spanked a 305 TPI Z28 on my way to work this morning on the highway with my lightly modded 2.8
P.S. I spanked a 305 TPI Z28 on my way to work this morning on the highway with my lightly modded 2.8
Last edited by 86ttopbird; Sep 22, 2010 at 09:38 PM.
Supreme Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,615
Likes: 5
From: PA
Car: 1996 Camaro, 1985 Camaro
Engine: 3.8, 3.4
Transmission: WC T5, 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3.23(?), 3.42
Re: Why v6?
you sure it was a tpi? the carb 305s are slow but I seem to recall the tpi 305s not being nearly as slow..
Supreme Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,564
Likes: 1
From: Central FL
Car: 91 Camaro
Engine: 3.1...not hardly stock
Transmission: 700r4....not stock either
Axle/Gears: 3.73
Re: Why v6?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuzQW45kv0s
that run was a 15.13 best run shortly after that was a 14.97@89.95mph

check out my cardomain pages for more pics http://www.cardomain.com/ride/471476
that run was a 15.13 best run shortly after that was a 14.97@89.95mph

check out my cardomain pages for more pics http://www.cardomain.com/ride/471476
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,598
Likes: 2
From: Davenport, Iowa
Car: Still a 3rd Gen
Engine: 450HP 355
Transmission: TH350
Axle/Gears: 9" with 4.11's
Re: Why v6?
http://www.streetfire.net/video/v6-z...ile_176252.htm
That was my second fastest run with the old Z24 (and getting beat by a 3rd gen)
and a slower run down the strip (inside the car)
http://www.streetfire.net/video/insi...00z_195986.htm
Dyno video.. (and sheet)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCdRK...eature=related
That was my second fastest run with the old Z24 (and getting beat by a 3rd gen)

and a slower run down the strip (inside the car)
http://www.streetfire.net/video/insi...00z_195986.htm
Dyno video.. (and sheet)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCdRK...eature=related
Last edited by DeathStarr89; Sep 22, 2010 at 09:50 PM.
Supreme Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,564
Likes: 1
From: Central FL
Car: 91 Camaro
Engine: 3.1...not hardly stock
Transmission: 700r4....not stock either
Axle/Gears: 3.73
Re: Why v6?
I've gotten that look many a time! And, thats from my 660 3rd gen! Its great! I had one guy at the track one night, wouldn't talk to me anymore after he found out my car was a v6 (and had spanked his 305).
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 354
Likes: 1
From: Manchester,PA
Car: 86 Firebird SE
Engine: 2.8L
Re: Why v6?
haha well beating a 305 thats not saying much
(no insult intended, but the 305 is a joke lol) lol but still it does not get any better than somebody wanting to know how big your V8 is that just whooped them and then they get all jacked seeing that it was a V6.
(no insult intended, but the 305 is a joke lol) lol but still it does not get any better than somebody wanting to know how big your V8 is that just whooped them and then they get all jacked seeing that it was a V6. Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,574
Likes: 0
From: right behind you
Car: '85 maro
Engine: In the works...
Transmission: TH700 R4
Axle/Gears: 3.73 posi
Re: Why v6?
Was it tbi? Cause that's no accomplishment lol. Even before I turbo'd my 2.8 I could spank tbi 305's with just headers, tuning and gears.
Edit- Do'h! 86ttopbird got to the punchline before me!
Edit- Do'h! 86ttopbird got to the punchline before me!
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 354
Likes: 1
From: Manchester,PA
Car: 86 Firebird SE
Engine: 2.8L
Re: Why v6?
The one I beat was a TPI. lol you can not mistake those runners. :P And you would be hugely surprised what a good tune can do for these engines.
Last edited by 86ttopbird; Sep 22, 2010 at 10:12 PM.
Junior Member
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
From: Jacksonville, NC
Car: 89 firebird
Transmission: 700r4
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 354
Likes: 1
From: Manchester,PA
Car: 86 Firebird SE
Engine: 2.8L
Supreme Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,564
Likes: 1
From: Central FL
Car: 91 Camaro
Engine: 3.1...not hardly stock
Transmission: 700r4....not stock either
Axle/Gears: 3.73
Re: Why v6?
I know that beating a tbi (or 305 for that matter) isn't saying much. I don't remember which that one was. I've beat many v8s, though.
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,574
Likes: 0
From: right behind you
Car: '85 maro
Engine: In the works...
Transmission: TH700 R4
Axle/Gears: 3.73 posi
Re: Why v6?
Obrien's going to keep the stock ecm. I warned him to keep it below 6psi 'till he decides to learn how to tune. Might not be a bad idea for you to put in a little larger injectors, like 17 lb/hr for some cushion.
Junior Member
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
From: Jacksonville, NC
Car: 89 firebird
Transmission: 700r4
Re: Why v6?
ill look into that then. Tuning will come soon. Do you think it would be safe to drive on the stock injectors until i can find new ones, if i take it easy?
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,574
Likes: 0
From: right behind you
Car: '85 maro
Engine: In the works...
Transmission: TH700 R4
Axle/Gears: 3.73 posi
Re: Why v6?
You'll be fine, but there's certain conditions where the stock ecm isn't best. Probably doesn't have nearly enough accel enrich so don't flat out romp on it, roll into the throttle a bit and don't hang out at part throttle under boost. Power enrich is enabled at 3/4 throttle and is much safer there than 1/2.
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,036
Likes: 28
From: Florida
Car: 1989 Camaro RS
Engine: LH6
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 3.42 Auburn Posi
Re: Why v6?
I love my little 2.8L V6. I just love the sound of a V8. One day I'll get another 3rd gen with a V6 and turbo it, but for now, my plan is a 350.
Supreme Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,564
Likes: 1
From: Central FL
Car: 91 Camaro
Engine: 3.1...not hardly stock
Transmission: 700r4....not stock either
Axle/Gears: 3.73
Re: Why v6?
rubberducky, no offense, and obviously you can do what you want but, why not work with the v6 you have now then buy a v8 car? just thinking it'd be less work than swapping to a v8 then buying another v6...
Supreme Member
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,319
Likes: 0
From: Tigard, OR
Car: 87 iroc-z camaro
Engine: 305TPI
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: G92 3.23 posi
Re: Why v6?
For some of us, going fast in a straight line, gets BORING. Sure, I like going fast in a straight line, but I like carving corners more. A big heavy V8 in the front end puts a bigger kink in weight distribution and handling than having a nice V6 in their. To many of us, the V6 is a cheaper place to start. Some of us simply can't afford to go out and buy a V8 and all the other parts necessary to swap into our V6 cars. For others, it's something different to help add innovation to a sport that appears to be stagnating. Here are my reasons for going V6:
A) Decreased curb-weight.
B) Better weight distribution.
C) Because of reasons A) and B), better handling.
D) Better fuel efficiency.
E) An engine that's begging to be turbocharged to the point of making modified V8 power levels.
F) Not spending hundreds of dollars more on a "V8 Camaro"...that quite possibly was originally a V6 car anyhows.
Redsledd, if you still can't understand why we do this, hey, don't worry. We're not starting the apocalypse or anything equally disastrous. We're just finding ways off getting our rocks off that don't coincide with yours.
Hell, I'd love to see an EcoteCamaro with a twin-charged LSJ out of a Cobalt SS Supercharged. That sounds like another project I'll have to add to my list...
A) Decreased curb-weight.
B) Better weight distribution.
C) Because of reasons A) and B), better handling.
D) Better fuel efficiency.
E) An engine that's begging to be turbocharged to the point of making modified V8 power levels.
F) Not spending hundreds of dollars more on a "V8 Camaro"...that quite possibly was originally a V6 car anyhows.
Redsledd, if you still can't understand why we do this, hey, don't worry. We're not starting the apocalypse or anything equally disastrous. We're just finding ways off getting our rocks off that don't coincide with yours.
Hell, I'd love to see an EcoteCamaro with a twin-charged LSJ out of a Cobalt SS Supercharged. That sounds like another project I'll have to add to my list...
Supreme Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,564
Likes: 1
From: Central FL
Car: 91 Camaro
Engine: 3.1...not hardly stock
Transmission: 700r4....not stock either
Axle/Gears: 3.73
Re: Why v6?
I don't think anyone is trying to say an ls motor is a pig. while the ls swap is becoming more and more common, a lot of v8 third gens that you'd go buy from somebody will still have an old iron sbc in it. a lot of times that'll be a 305, too. that's a different story. the ls motor is still going to be a bit heavier and have a bit more nose weight than a v6 but that can be compensated for with a little heavier front springs and what not and the ls certainly is no slouch!
Supreme Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,615
Likes: 5
From: PA
Car: 1996 Camaro, 1985 Camaro
Engine: 3.8, 3.4
Transmission: WC T5, 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3.23(?), 3.42
Re: Why v6?
Don't think he was, but even with aluminum the position of the weight isn't as good, plus I think it still weighs more, albeit it just a little or about the same, but personally, I won't even put a v8 in my car unless its aluminum, don't want the weight and distribution of weight of a cast iron v8 block, and since I can't afford an LS, going to build the v6 see if I can get the power I want out of it, if not, I'll get a fiero and put the v6 in that and buy an lsx for the camaro someday when I have the money,lol, which I might do anyways since I want a fiero.
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,036
Likes: 28
From: Florida
Car: 1989 Camaro RS
Engine: LH6
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 3.42 Auburn Posi
Re: Why v6?
None taken, but I don't know how to weld, so I couldn't build a turboed V6 like I planned. And my V6 already has a lot done to it. It prolly would be faster, it just needs a tune.
Senior Member

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
From: DeKalb, IL
Car: 2006 Cobalt SS/SC
Engine: LSJ
Transmission: F35 MU3
Axle/Gears: 4.05
Re: Why v6?
No offense dude, but grow a thicker skin.
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,023
Likes: 3
From: Evansville, IN
Car: 1992 Camaro RS 25th Anniversary
Engine: 3.4L v6 with a t3/t4 Turbo
Transmission: T-5 Conversion
Axle/Gears: 3.23 SLP Limited Slip
Re: Why v6?
How you been Steven, long time no talk. I never come in here anymore since the car is gone. Tweo people if I recall bought the Trueleo intake and both saw terrible # with them from what I remeber. I can't recall who the other person was. The real trouble with them is they were steel, not aluminum. Shannon had to ceramicoat hers, that why it is not real shiny, but it was certainly different when she popped the hood. She had over 15 years into building that show car.
Who is this Mark guy? He shines up a stock 2.8 upper plenum and thinks he's got gold or something. Go figure. I see someone with too much time on their hands. Should have gone to the junkyard and got a 3.1 to do without the stupid 2.8 emblem. Nice job, just wrong upper to use.
Who is this Mark guy? He shines up a stock 2.8 upper plenum and thinks he's got gold or something. Go figure. I see someone with too much time on their hands. Should have gone to the junkyard and got a 3.1 to do without the stupid 2.8 emblem. Nice job, just wrong upper to use.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Why v6?
I lost my Camaro in a divorxe. I hear she's dead now (Cancer) so I do not know what happened to the car. I personally would not want it- I want no memories of her. SHe found out a few months after filing divorce on me that she had cancer- then the dumb bitch spent the better of the next 2 1/2 years tryng to see both of us broke because she was bitter about it. They probably burried her in it.
Last edited by Vetruck; Sep 24, 2010 at 12:31 AM.
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,504
Likes: 105
From: Fayette County, OH
Car: basic third gens
Engine: that I like
Transmission: to restore
Axle/Gears: and enjoy
Re: Why v6?
I'm sorry, but I've spent A LOT of time behind the wheel of both motors, and I'm calling BS. If that 305 TPI is sick, than maybe you beat it, but you surely didn't "spank" it.
Re: Why v6?
I've got to agree,BS. Also,there are some 300+hp 305's running around,I've got one,but to answer "why a V6", I've modded 4's V6's and V8's loved them all.
Re: Why v6?
Maybe he didn't know you were racing...
Before the $hit storm starts, let me quote the most famous ex-con, drug addict, transvestite lovin, 15 minute of fame guy I know...Rodney King. "Can't we all just get along?"
Seriously dude, I'm just teasing.

Before the $hit storm starts, let me quote the most famous ex-con, drug addict, transvestite lovin, 15 minute of fame guy I know...Rodney King. "Can't we all just get along?"
Seriously dude, I'm just teasing.
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,504
Likes: 105
From: Fayette County, OH
Car: basic third gens
Engine: that I like
Transmission: to restore
Axle/Gears: and enjoy
Re: Why v6?
To prevent an argument, I'll state why I call BS.
I've owned several 305 TPI Camaros. I driven several V6 third gens. I'm well aware of the capabilities of both, and there is no comparison in power. Yeah sure, I haven't actually OWNED any V6 third gens. BUT, I have owned countless Chevy Celebrities with the very same iron-headed multi-port 2.8 in them, which by the way is a lighter weight car. You guessed it, no comparison. In '87 the Celebrity got the aluminum headed genII 2.8 that made more power. Still no comparison. I had a '89 Celebrity with a ringer 2.8, I swear it was the fastest (stock) 2.8 ever built. It was still no where close to being able to keep up with any of my 305 TPI cars (although it was very close to the 305 carb motor in my '85 T/A).
I've owned several 305 TPI Camaros. I driven several V6 third gens. I'm well aware of the capabilities of both, and there is no comparison in power. Yeah sure, I haven't actually OWNED any V6 third gens. BUT, I have owned countless Chevy Celebrities with the very same iron-headed multi-port 2.8 in them, which by the way is a lighter weight car. You guessed it, no comparison. In '87 the Celebrity got the aluminum headed genII 2.8 that made more power. Still no comparison. I had a '89 Celebrity with a ringer 2.8, I swear it was the fastest (stock) 2.8 ever built. It was still no where close to being able to keep up with any of my 305 TPI cars (although it was very close to the 305 carb motor in my '85 T/A).
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 354
Likes: 1
From: Manchester,PA
Car: 86 Firebird SE
Engine: 2.8L
Re: Why v6?
Call it BS if you wish. I was there and so was the other guy. If I had his phone number I would tell him to sign up here and verify. The STOCK 2.8 makes around 125 HP not much less than the STOCK 305 TPI that this guy was driving. His name was Gary, real nice dude. I KNOW I passed him up. I KNOW what was under his hood. So then bl85 must be talking BS too then? A 300+ HP 305 had to have a good bit of money dumped into it seeing as you can get that out of a 350 with a cam change, a good set of heads, headers and a tune. How is the 2.8 in a Celebrity and a 2.8 MPFI in an F-body the same? One is front wheel drive one is rear wheel drive. They are tuned differently, cammed differently, pretty much all different with some similarities. That is like comparing apples to oranges.
Last edited by 86ttopbird; Sep 24, 2010 at 10:47 PM.
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,023
Likes: 3
From: Evansville, IN
Car: 1992 Camaro RS 25th Anniversary
Engine: 3.4L v6 with a t3/t4 Turbo
Transmission: T-5 Conversion
Axle/Gears: 3.23 SLP Limited Slip
Re: Why v6?
Call it BS if you wish. I was there and so was the other guy. If I had his phone number I would tell him to sign up here and verify. The STOCK 2.8 makes around 125 HP not much less than the 305 TPI. I KNOW I passed him up. I KNOW what was under his hood. So then bl85 must be talking BS too then?
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 354
Likes: 1
From: Manchester,PA
Car: 86 Firebird SE
Engine: 2.8L
Re: Why v6?
Well I beat him thats for sure. Him and I were talking after we pulled into the convenience store for about 15 mins. Here is the ratings for our cars. His was an 86 too...
1986 Engines:
2.8 V6 135 HP
305 V8 145 HP
Doesnt look that far off to me? I am not going to defend my position anymore. I KNOW what happened and I talked with the guy for 15 mins. If this was a 350 TPI car NOW youre talking 225HP stock. Do a few mods to this and you could get 300+HP easily. Thats a tough one to beat unless you have an LT-1 or LS1 or a hell of a built and turbo'd V6.
1986 Engines:
2.8 V6 135 HP
305 V8 145 HP
Doesnt look that far off to me? I am not going to defend my position anymore. I KNOW what happened and I talked with the guy for 15 mins. If this was a 350 TPI car NOW youre talking 225HP stock. Do a few mods to this and you could get 300+HP easily. Thats a tough one to beat unless you have an LT-1 or LS1 or a hell of a built and turbo'd V6.
Last edited by 86ttopbird; Sep 24, 2010 at 11:04 PM.
Supreme Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,615
Likes: 5
From: PA
Car: 1996 Camaro, 1985 Camaro
Engine: 3.8, 3.4
Transmission: WC T5, 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3.23(?), 3.42
Re: Why v6?
Um, the 305 tpi def makes more than 145, thats the carb one that isnt uncommon for v6s to beat...you said a 305 tpi, not 305 carb...a 305 carb is a realistic kill for a lightly modded, v6, or if its running better, but a 305 tpi, you wont beat unless you have some mods under the hood.
TGO Supporter
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 6,775
Likes: 27
From: So.west IN
Car: 87 Formula/ 00 Xtreme
Engine: TPI 305/ v6
Transmission: struggling t-5/ 4l60E
Axle/Gears: 3.08/ 3.23
Re: Why v6?
coming from a v6 guy i doubt it, maybe if it was a tbi i would agree with you(as i actually have ran with tbi's with my old 3.1 that i had in the car)...the tpi makes a crap ton more tq and the hp isnt that close, if you spanked him, or even beat him..that car was sick for sure

I sure as hell wouldn't say 'spanked' though. It was more of an embarrassing win if you go by c.i. comparison.
The old 'silver bullet' (stock 84 camaro, 280k 305) could beat a TBI car though. Not a huge accomplishment.
I'll be happy to eat that statement if your turd muncher ever gets a clutch to hold the turbo though
Last edited by deadbird; Sep 25, 2010 at 12:10 AM.
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,504
Likes: 105
From: Fayette County, OH
Car: basic third gens
Engine: that I like
Transmission: to restore
Axle/Gears: and enjoy
Re: Why v6?
Call it BS if you wish. I was there and so was the other guy. If I had his phone number I would tell him to sign up here and verify. The STOCK 2.8 makes around 125 HP not much less than the STOCK 305 TPI that this guy was driving. His name was Gary, real nice dude. I KNOW I passed him up. I KNOW what was under his hood. So then bl85 must be talking BS too then? A 300+ HP 305 had to have a good bit of money dumped into it seeing as you can get that out of a 350 with a cam change, a good set of heads, headers and a tune. How is the 2.8 in a Celebrity and a 2.8 MPFI in an F-body the same? One is front wheel drive one is rear wheel drive. They are tuned differently, cammed differently, pretty much all different with some similarities. That is like comparing apples to oranges.

First of all, the lowest output LB9 was 190 horse and gobs of torque. There's absolutely NO COMPARISON in power between it and a stock 2.8. Secondly, I WAS NOT comparing apples to oranges! The '85 and '86 Celebrity uses the VERY SAME mpfi 2.8 as used in the F-body. Just because a motor is turned sideways does not mean it's different. Same heads, same cam, same intake, etc. Plus the Celebrity is lighter weight and has LESS drivetrain losses. Let me remind you I also have lots of time behind the wheel of V6 third gens too, including automatics and 5 speeds. Sounds like apples to apples to me

Tell you what, you're not that far away. We can meet in the middle, you bring your 2.8 car and I'll bring my 100% stock '86 305 TPI car (yeah, the low-output year). We can run them and see what's what, loser buys lunch. I like to eat at Chili's BTW.
Heck, I'll get someone to come with me. That way there is a witness and I can bring my '86 Celebrity too. I bet it will give your 'lightly modded' car a hard time too.
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,023
Likes: 3
From: Evansville, IN
Car: 1992 Camaro RS 25th Anniversary
Engine: 3.4L v6 with a t3/t4 Turbo
Transmission: T-5 Conversion
Axle/Gears: 3.23 SLP Limited Slip
Re: Why v6?
I still beat you in my p.o.s 91 -ssbag... miles, feet, inches, faster is faster

I sure as hell wouldn't say 'spanked' though. It was more of an embarrassing win if you go by c.i. comparison.
The old 'silver bullet' (stock 84 camaro, 280k 305) could beat a TBI car though. Not a huge accomplishment.
I'll be happy to eat that statement if your turd muncher ever gets a clutch to hold the turbo though

I sure as hell wouldn't say 'spanked' though. It was more of an embarrassing win if you go by c.i. comparison.
The old 'silver bullet' (stock 84 camaro, 280k 305) could beat a TBI car though. Not a huge accomplishment.
I'll be happy to eat that statement if your turd muncher ever gets a clutch to hold the turbo though

not beat. I could get you with the bad clutch I bet.86 Sport Coupe M5,A4 LG4 V8 9.5:1 5.0 (305) 155@4200 245@2000 4bbl 2.73 ---- 2.73
86 Berlinetta A4 LG4 V8 9.5:1 5.0 (305) 155@4200 245@2000 4bbl ---- ---- 2.73 ----
86 Z28 M5,A4 LG4 V8 9.5:1 5.0 (305) 165@4400 250@2000 4bbl 3.23 3.73 2.73 ----
86 Z28 M5 *L69 V8 9.5:1 5.0 (305) 190@4800 240@3200 4bbl HO 3.23 3.73 ---- ----
86 Z28 A4 LB9 V8 9.5:1 5.0 (305) 190@4000 285@2800 TPI ---- ---- 2.73 3.23
86 Sport Coupe
Berlinetta M5,A4 LB8 V6 8.9:1 2.8 (173) 135@5100 160@3900 MFI 3.42 ---- 3.42 ----
i highlighted yours vs his, and man this is coming from a die hard v6 guy, those two cars are nothing alike. if you beat it awesome but it was becuase of some other issue aside from power
Last edited by Pillsbry10; Sep 25, 2010 at 10:24 AM.
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,023
Likes: 3
From: Evansville, IN
Car: 1992 Camaro RS 25th Anniversary
Engine: 3.4L v6 with a t3/t4 Turbo
Transmission: T-5 Conversion
Axle/Gears: 3.23 SLP Limited Slip
Re: Why v6?
Dude, why don't you do a little research before you spout off the next time
First of all, the lowest output LB9 was 190 horse and gobs of torque. There's absolutely NO COMPARISON in power between it and a stock 2.8. Secondly, I WAS NOT comparing apples to oranges! The '85 and '86 Celebrity uses the VERY SAME mpfi 2.8 as used in the F-body. Just because a motor is turned sideways does not mean it's different. Same heads, same cam, same intake, etc. Plus the Celebrity is lighter weight and has LESS drivetrain losses. Let me remind you I also have lots of time behind the wheel of V6 third gens too, including automatics and 5 speeds. Sounds like apples to apples to me
Tell you what, you're not that far away. We can meet in the middle, you bring your 2.8 car and I'll bring my 100% stock '86 305 TPI car (yeah, the low-output year). We can run them and see what's what, loser buys lunch. I like to eat at Chili's BTW.
Heck, I'll get someone to come with me. That way there is a witness and I can bring my '86 Celebrity too. I bet it will give your 'lightly modded' car a hard time too.

First of all, the lowest output LB9 was 190 horse and gobs of torque. There's absolutely NO COMPARISON in power between it and a stock 2.8. Secondly, I WAS NOT comparing apples to oranges! The '85 and '86 Celebrity uses the VERY SAME mpfi 2.8 as used in the F-body. Just because a motor is turned sideways does not mean it's different. Same heads, same cam, same intake, etc. Plus the Celebrity is lighter weight and has LESS drivetrain losses. Let me remind you I also have lots of time behind the wheel of V6 third gens too, including automatics and 5 speeds. Sounds like apples to apples to me

Tell you what, you're not that far away. We can meet in the middle, you bring your 2.8 car and I'll bring my 100% stock '86 305 TPI car (yeah, the low-output year). We can run them and see what's what, loser buys lunch. I like to eat at Chili's BTW.
Heck, I'll get someone to come with me. That way there is a witness and I can bring my '86 Celebrity too. I bet it will give your 'lightly modded' car a hard time too.
, ill even give you the option of new clutch or old clutch ha ha
Supreme Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,615
Likes: 5
From: PA
Car: 1996 Camaro, 1985 Camaro
Engine: 3.8, 3.4
Transmission: WC T5, 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3.23(?), 3.42
Re: Why v6?
Well the v6 does have way better gearing, but still not enough to make up the difference in torque im sure, but I would be willing to bet my 3.4 would hold its own against an 86 lb9, would have me on torque by probably about 45, but I would have it on hp by 10 or so, but also less weight with a low optioned SC, v6 and AC delete, plus 3.42 gears., would def be worth watching, would be close I think.
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,504
Likes: 105
From: Fayette County, OH
Car: basic third gens
Engine: that I like
Transmission: to restore
Axle/Gears: and enjoy
Supreme Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,615
Likes: 5
From: PA
Car: 1996 Camaro, 1985 Camaro
Engine: 3.8, 3.4
Transmission: WC T5, 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3.23(?), 3.42
Re: Why v6?
Pilsbry I've been meaning to ask, when you dynoed your car, what throttle rpm was it at in its peak, and how much boost was it been making, been wondering how close I can figure my N/A 3.4 being to your #s. Would rather guess on the low side, so I've been more or less assuming that mine makes 200 hp and 240 tq at the crank.
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,023
Likes: 3
From: Evansville, IN
Car: 1992 Camaro RS 25th Anniversary
Engine: 3.4L v6 with a t3/t4 Turbo
Transmission: T-5 Conversion
Axle/Gears: 3.23 SLP Limited Slip
Re: Why v6?
Pilsbry I've been meaning to ask, when you dynoed your car, what throttle rpm was it at in its peak, and how much boost was it been making, been wondering how close I can figure my N/A 3.4 being to your #s. Would rather guess on the low side, so I've been more or less assuming that mine makes 200 hp and 240 tq at the crank.
i honestly think with the exhaust leak fixed and a clutch that holds ill put down close to 200 hp and 230 tq at the wheels without boost
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 10,401
Likes: 5
From: Utah
Car: 89 RS 89 iroc 87 firebird
Engine: 3.1 Turbo/ 355 twin turbo
Transmission: a4 w/ 4500 stall/ a4 / t5
Axle/Gears: strange s60 /w 3:42's
Re: Why v6?
haha yeah it would be fun, once its on the ground again lunch will be on you sir, your not horribly far from me either
174.6hp and 210tq @ 4332 rpms(which is when the clutch slipped) at less than 1/2 throttle, no boost
i honestly think with the exhaust leak fixed and a clutch that holds ill put down close to 200 hp and 230 tq at the wheels without boost
174.6hp and 210tq @ 4332 rpms(which is when the clutch slipped) at less than 1/2 throttle, no boost
i honestly think with the exhaust leak fixed and a clutch that holds ill put down close to 200 hp and 230 tq at the wheels without boost
though its hard to say since im not sure what cam u have 






