Wondering about 3.4L intakes...

[Brian Dieckman]

I just realized that the 3.4L engine is stil in existence. Surely they've improved the intake by now...

The question is, are they all being used in front wheel drive applications? If not, I bet there's a better intake to replace ours.

Just food for thought.

-Brian

[Tiago]

you can't just put the new intake on. you have to change the heads along with lower and upper intake manifolds, fuel rails, and probably more stuff......

[3.4 slow to go]

dohc 3.4, welder, & some metal stock for motor mounts. I think the 3.4 rwd base intake might fit, will look it up in the gmpp catalog,....... if I can find it.

[Brian Dieckman]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 3.4 slow to go:
dohc 3.4, welder, & some metal stock for motor mounts. I think the 3.4 rwd base intake might fit, will look it up in the gmpp catalog,....... if I can find it.<hr></blockquote>

Yeah, I'll get right on that. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

What cars are the DOHC engines in? Aren't they all FWD? (ie intake at the back)

Anyway, by buddy just got a Grand Prix SE, it's not much faster than my 3.4...

-Brian

[TealV6]

This is a good question for Russ. When ever he sees this, he needs to get over here and put his .02 in ;)

Steve

[Dojo2000]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Brian Dieckman:


Yeah, I'll get right on that. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

What cars are the DOHC engines in? Aren't they all FWD? (ie intake at the back)

Anyway, by buddy just got a Grand Prix SE, it's not much faster than my 3.4...

-Brian<hr></blockquote>

Monte Carlo Z34 (W-body) its the LQ1 engine (215 HP) they've got crappy low-end torque
The Grand Prix has the LG8 (175 HP)
Theres a misprint on GM's page, I'm pretty sure the LG8 is a 3.1L V6 not 3.4L like it says under Type

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>
Copied from http://redfox340.tripod.com/wbodyperformance/id8.html
Q: What about installing a supercharged 3.8 liter V6 in my W-Body, they fit in right...?
A: Yes you could, but you must not see the power you already have! The LQ1 DOHC is one of GM most powerful six-cylinders throughout it's history. In fact, before selling the engine package to the public, the motor first dynoed at 281 horsepower. The reason they downsized the power was because Hydromatic didn't think their FWD tranny would hold that much of torque. So, in keeping your top-of-the-line DOHC, invest in other performance parts beyond the basic bolt-ons; they're out there. Maybe then you'll appriciate the power of the DOHC not much sooner after that. Oh yeah, and before I forget, the re-wiring on the supercharged 3.8 liter V6 is a pain since a new ECM and PCM are required to have the motor run. <hr></blockquote>

[ August 03, 2002: Message edited by: Dojo2000 ]</p>

[Shadly]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Dojo2000:
Monte Carlo Z34 (W-body) its the LQ1 engine (215 HP) they've got crappy low-end torque
<hr></blockquote>
I've always just ignored these threads because I knew what was involved. I had no idea that the Monte Carlo engine was such a monster. What makes them this powerful as opposed to a Grand Prix engine?

[Dojo2000]

The LQ1 is a 3.4L DOHC engine.

The Grand Prix SE has the 3.1 liter 3100 V6
175 @ 5200 rpm
195 ft-lbs @ 4000 rpm
http://www.gm.com/automotive/gmpower...er/31_main.htm

[black34v6]

the DOHC engine isnt a "monster" -- it just looks like it is. talk to any 3.4 DOHC owner. they HATE their powerband. the car has no guts till it hits 3k rpm. so at highway speeds you have tons of power, but if you are trying to take someone off the line -- forget it.

the 3.4 DOHC has some potential. 210hp / 215tq was the last rating, and the only reason that the power is that low is because GM wanted to bring the motor out at 275hp but hydramatic, makers of the fwd auto trannies, couldnt build something to support the hp.

here is the problem in modifying the engine:
just TRY to find someone that can help you make cams or headers for it that wont charge you so much that it would be worth it more to just get a LS6. i wouldnt touch the 3.4 DOHC engine with a 10 foot pole now that i know what i do know about it. unless i had an a$$load of money.

as for changing out the intakes on the 3.4 OHV engine (in the RWD F-body):

you have a few options. the 2.8/3.1/3.4 RWD all use the EXACT SAME LOWER INTAKE -- therefore you can use the middle/upper from the 2.8/3.1 RWD if you want to, altho it wont give you much gains. GM switched to the intake they are using now for a reason.

as for the other option, you can always use the 3x00 intake. however - to do this you also have to convert to the aluminum heads. while there is no apparent disadvantage to switching to aluminum heads, seeing as how they flow as well as fully ported iron heads, and the injectors that are in the fuel rails used with them are 19# instead of the lower 16# in the 3.4L RWD engine, the problems that arise in using the 3x00 (3100,3400 - FWD 3.4L engine) are such:

1)the intake can be turned around, but the TB points over towards the passengers side and has to have extra piping made to straighten it, and then turn it 90* towards the intake (meaning there is more of a path for the air to follow)

2)cooling. well, this isnt much of a problem aside from the fact that the 3x00 engine has the heater core line adapter (the screw-in looking thing) out of the drivers side of the intake, and cant be changed, and will require fabrication of a pipe or a longer hose, whichever is more convienient (im going with a longer hose)

3)fuel rails. the fuel rails are different, and hook up differently. im currently looking into the problem, and might be able to solve it by using rubber hose, but i might have to chop up the 3.4 RWD fuel lines (in the engine bay) to fix the problem.

4)and this by far is the biggest problem: Combustion chamber size.

im sure you are wondering, "wtf does combustion chamber size have to do with anything?" well, the space under the valves in the iron heads are 52cc (cubic centimeters) -- whereas ALL of the current FWD engines (3400/3100) have 28cc spaces under the valves. this space forms the ceiling of the combustion chamber, the cylinder, and is where the spark plug is located. well, here is the inherent problem.

go from 52cc -&gt; 28cc = going from 9.0:1 Compression Ratio -&gt; 12.48:1 Compression Ratio

i know you are thinking, awesome! but, you would have to run 101 or more octane ALL OF THE TIME to maintain that compression ratio. (oh yea, 101 octane is currently $4.00/gal) - the way around it? pistons designed to be used with the aluminum heads.

now here is why TealV6 said i should come offer my two cents. my car is currently sitting in a garage waiting for me to finish dismantling and removing the engine so i can send it off to a machine shop to have it rebuilt and have the right pistons put in and the aluminum heads put on. after which i will convert to the 3x00 intake and fuel equipment.

ill keep everyone posted as to the progress. and im already taking pictures. ill see if i can get something up and around.

if you have any other questions feel free to post here, or if you wanna take the time you can email me too. the email address is in my profile.

-R

edit: so my big dumbass just realized the other point of this thread. yes the 3.4L engine is being used in other applications. such as the Grand Am GT (3400 (3.4) FWD engine putting out 185 hp in its top form and 205 tq. they use a better intake and a roller camshaft setup that works way better over the whole power range. the problem is that there would have to be a lot of work involved to use the 3400 engine in a RWD application. namely you have to rotate the intake manifold, and custom create motor mounts as well as some other stuff.

anyway... its doable, but its more feasible to just use the intake/heads than trying to fit the whole motor in. you can get a nice hyd. flat tappet camshaft to go with the alum. heads and make it work nicely. trust me ive got some nice things in store for these heads/intake [img]smile.gif[/img] ill keep everyone posted. -R

edit #2: what'd i do, put everyone in awe of my awesome knowledge or something? (LOL) this thread got really really quiet all of a sudden... :-p

[ August 08, 2002: Message edited by: Russell ]</p>

[Shadly]

Russell, OK so it sounds like you're putting FWD OHV heads on a RWD OHV engine and you're tracking down pistons to decrease compression to a more realistic number. I get that. The DOHC engines are capable of 275hp. What separates these from OHV? It couldn't be compression because these DOHC engines still run on 87 octane pump gas. I realize you free up some friction using a DOHC setup, but 115 extra horses??? There's something else going on here and I want to apply the same technology to my car. I couldn't slap a DOHC engine in there anyway because I'd fail visual during smog(I'm sure you're familiar).

[black34v6]

Oh yea, you'd fail pretty badly. ACTUALLY. It is legal in the state of California to put a car engine different than the one you have in your car provided:

1) It came from a car, not a truck.
2) It is of the year of your car or newer.
3) It is in the same weight class as your car.

meaning that you can use any engine that came in a CAR in 1994-present, that came out of a car weighing AS MUCH as your car. You then have to pay 30.00 to a smog referee to have them look at/test your car to make sure everything is "kosher" and then if everything passes, they will give you a certificate that will allow any smog station to smog your car as the engine in the car, and not as the engine that came with it stock.

I actually played with the idea of throwing a LS1 into the car, but I don't have the money for a swap like that.

--
Anyway, on to the rest of the DOHC thing...

The reason they were able to get up to 275 hp, was cause yes, they used higher compression. as well as better cams. And I'm sure a better ECM program as well. I wouldnt be surprised if they were going to use headers either.

GM said it's (3.4 DOHC) potential was 275HP. They never released it as such, and so I don't know how one would achieve that high a number. But yes it DID use a higher compression, 10.1 or somewhere around there. The DOHC heads are cast aluminum btw, and can absorb more heat, making them easier to run on pump gas.

As for that kind of power on a N/A 3.4 motor. I have plenty of ideas, but I wont discuss them here because of all the "naysayers" (no flames intended) that will tell me that the 3.4 isnt capable of that kind of power. Email if you are interested in hearing more about those ideas...

Anyway, the DOHC engine is a total pain to adapt into the 4th Gen f-body Chassis. You have to remember hood clearance as well as other factors. (custom engine mounts, relocating the starter to the passenger side) I would reccomend sticking with the OHV FWD Heads and intake. you could get a decent amount of power out of that combination coupled with a good high-end cam (im looking at high end hydraulic, or possibly -- cause I dont drive much -- a solid flat tappet (adjustment hell) which N/A with the heads/headers/intake (with a little custom work on the intake for a setup not-quite-stock) has the possibility to put me in the 230-250 hp N/A range. Which isn't bad considering the low 9.0:1-&gt;9.5:1 CR increase.

I just dont reccomend the DOHC, but that does NOT mean that you shouldn't try it. [img]smile.gif[/img]

-R

p.s. If you wanna go DOHC -- I hear the Northstar engine fits nicely. and people actually make motor mounts for it to work in a f-body. I'll see if I can dig up the link with it there. (its been done before).

EDIT: Shadly -- where you at in SoCal. I'm out in the San Fernando Valley (Canoga Park of course) -- we have a car club out here called GMEternal that meets every Friday at Cruisers Car Wash in Northridge, CA. very easy to get to, just do a lookup for Cruisers Car Wash, or if you need directions tell me where you are coming from (what city) and I can tell you how to get there. I'm just saying because I will be there tomorrow night (sans camaro) and you can ask me any question you feel like asking. + GME is a pretty good bunch of guys, mostly f-bodies. mostly 4th gen too. mostly v8 as well. heheh. we need more v6 members, and more GM cars.

[ August 08, 2002: Message edited by: Russell ]</p>

[Shadly]

Hey, thanks for the invite. I definitely would if I could. I'm in Orange. It's a little far from Northridge, but I wouldn't mind popping in sometime to meet some of you guys. I'm familiar with GMEternal from Skapimp's rantings on this board. Where is he, by the way?

Here's the deal with my engine... I love working on it. It has around 70k, so a mild overhaul will be needed shortly for preventive maintenance. I was going to replace the timing chain, water pump, head gaskets, and do a major tune-up. That would be an excellent opportunity to do something with those heads. It runs good, I'm just anal about effeciency and maintenence. I would love to increase the horsepower and still have it run good AND pass smog.

I'm just running theories through my head here. So you actually are increasing your compression and compensating with the aluminum heads. It seems like you're taking a backward approach. Isn't there an aluminum head based on the design of our iron head already out on the market that would make those pistons unnecessary? If you're saving money by going the decreased combustion chamber/milled piston route, that's one thing, but I thought pistons and were kind of pricey? Are these off-the-shelf or custom? I'm not diss'n your ideas, I just want to learn your motivation for doing it like this. Also, you're asking quite a bit out of just a .5 increase in compression ratio... How much of a cam did you have in mind? Would you still have a solid idle with that setup?

p.s.- I LOVE this! There's some innovation going on here. I want to hear your other ideas and I'm sure there's a lot of people reading this that want to as well. I wish you would post them, but if not, my email is in my profile. Just think of the pissed off 3.8 guys if you develop a really easy way to pass 200hp with this engine. Thanks for sticking with the 3.4!!!

Edit: Hey Russell, another member here turned me on to this site. I now understand completely what you are doing and I think a rebuild is in my future. www.60degreev6.com

[ August 09, 2002: Message edited by: Shadly ]</p>

[nova]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Russell:


As for that kind of power on a N/A 3.4 motor. I have plenty of ideas, but I wont discuss them here because of all the "naysayers" (no flames intended) that will tell me that the 3.4 isnt capable of that kind of power. Email if you are interested in hearing more about those ideas...
<hr></blockquote>

You've got e-mail. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Rich97 W68]

Russell,
Where've you been man?!?!

I just wanted to drop in one good off-topic remark before wandering off to bed: I love you man!!! - but a 3.4L can't make that kind of power simply because it would then stomp the crap outta my car!!!!! [img]graemlins/dunce.gif[/img]

Booooo!!!! :D

LOL

Rich
[img]graemlins/fluffy.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/burnout.gif[/img]

[Shadly]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Rich97 W68:
but a 3.4L can't make that kind of power simply because it would then stomp the crap outta my car!!!!! [img]graemlins/dunce.gif[/img]

Booooo!!!! :D

LOL

Rich
[img]graemlins/fluffy.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/burnout.gif[/img] <hr></blockquote>

[img]graemlins/rofl.gif[/img] There's a number of us that have our fingers crossed!