3500 Fuel injectors, I need a source for higher flow

[Joseph Upson]

The 3400 rail with the 3500 plenum and any modifications, close-ups of the rail if possible so that I'll have an idea of what approach I'm going to take.

By the 3500 injectors being so new it's not likely there is anything available anywhere close to my budget, some of the high performance Fords have the right plug style injector but again I believe they are the longer version from the pictures I saw on ebay and they will also run upwards of near $300 for a set in the 40 lb/hr range, where the early design injectors can be had at much less in the high flow range. I won an auction last night for a set of 36 lb'ers.

It is weird in a way regarding the compression issue with the aluminum vs. cast iron heads but hey it works in my favor so I'll take it. I'm also going to take advantage of oil cooling to further reduce the internal engine temperatures. I have run an oil temp gauge before on a turbocharged 2.8L and the oil temp ran in the 240 range at times so if my cooler can keep it around 180 that would work wonders for the overall temperature and anti knock benefits with the heads and block having what amounts to an internal and external cooling effect working simultaneously.

If only GM had installed oil squirters on all 6 cylinders the way they did in the 3900. I'm tempted to look into buying one more 3500 just to tear down and do that to as well as port the heads and install the 3800 valves in to take advantage of the steel crank and powder forged rods. The pistons in all of GMs blown engines according to the spec sheets on their site are CAST, icluding those found in the supercharged solstice, I think that says a lot about the durability when detonation is absent.

Back to the TGP ecm briefly, I believe it much wiser to use the TGP programming and tune up to the 3500 instead of tuning down with the 3800SC programming due to the aluminum heads calling for a considerably different timing map. Us Fiero swappers labor over the issue of tuning the 3.4L from the camaro properly but the major contribution to that being a task is installing an intake system on it designed for a smaller engine that it was still to small for as opposed to leaving the stock intake on the 3.4L which flowed better than that found on the 2.8 in the Fiero.

Taking that route would certainly yield better performance even if you used the stock 2.8s programming simply because you at least have matched injectors on the larger engine which flow more fuel eventhough they are being pulsed on for the same amount of time that the 2.8 injectors are. Of course that's my theoretical opinion.

Thanks, guys for all your help, I have a very good source for parts and intend to acquire a roller cam and send it to Crane about 120 miles away from me and see about a profile and regrind. I was quoted $50 on the profile which is small beans for the knowledge, but I want to get all I can get out of this motor and if they can modify the cam to breath at 7K I'll send them the money to do so, and I'll post what I find out for all to see.

I took a look at the LS6 springs but I don't know that the springs on the 3500 aren't strong enough to reach that high with say a .015-.030 shim. I would much rather do the shims than the springs if that is sufficient. If the engine weren't so new I'd be more eager to mix and match, but I have heard individuals make claims that were incorrect so I want to be sure before I switch parts out unnecessarily. I will not really get things going until next month, I'm supposed to be studying for a really big exam but can't quite suppress my plans until I'm done.

[bszopi]

To get the steel crank in a 3500, you have to go with the Buick Terraza. It is the only 3500 to get the steel crank. I have 2 3500s, one from a Malibu and the other from a... Whatever the Chevy version of the Terraza is, sitting in my basement and both have the cast crank.

[Joseph Upson]

Not according to this GM page http://media.gm.com/division/2005_pr...ain/index.html

Click Car engines on the top left. If the info is incorrect GM got it wrong two years in a row, because 2004 lists a steel crank for the LX9 3500 as well, we have to keep in mind there are two 3500 engines the odd one being an option in the Monte Carlo. Both the 3500 and 3900 in the G6 carry the same stroke and both 3500 that I found listed on the site show steel cranks.

Maybe there was a mid year change, the terraza is not listed on the spec sheet with the G6 as a vehicle that gets this particular engine.

The 2005 Malibu, Malibu Maxx and Pontiac G6 which my engine is from shows a steel crank on the spec sheet.

[RacerX11]

According to this page, only the Buick gets the forged crank: http://tinyurl.com/ka7sb

This agrees with Brad's hands-on experience with cast cranks in both of his engines.

Marty

[Joseph Upson]

You watch your mouth pal, I've been living with what might turn out to be false hope and I don't want anyone to take that away from me. Today is my birthday and as far as I'm concerned I have a steel crank and I don't want to realize anything different until I spin it up to where it flies out of the block in pieces and I can see for myself that it isn't.

The page you listed is apparently removed. No biggy, since the Terraza and the G6 are both 05 newbies, maybe just maybe there is a chance it is steel, like the situation with the LSx engines where some camaros and firebirds got LS6 blocks initially intended for the Corvette in place of the earlier weaker design the car was supposed to come with, you could find out by checking the casting number on the block.

Doesn't change my plans any, I just like the idea of the added strength.

Thanks

[RacerX11]

I fixed the link. Sorry, I didn't mean to rain on your parade. I do agree, though, that even if it isn't forged, it should be stronger than the earlier small-journal cast cranks. Nobody has really pushed the limits of these earlier cranks, anyway, so it should handle anything you can throw at it.

Marty

[Joseph Upson]

I found the clarification earlier, the cast crank is however stronger than the 3400 due to the larger throw journals according to GM, at least the rods have some added insurance.

[bszopi]

I found the clarification earlier, the cast crank is however stronger than the 3400 due to the larger throw journals according to GM, at least the rods have some added insurance.

Unfortunately, I might have to beg to differ again with you...

http://60degreev6.com/discussion/viewtopic.php?t=8475

[Joseph Upson]

That appears to be a compression bend in the rod in the pictures characteristic of the suspected hydaraulic lock someone mentioned, there was also mention of bent pushrods and a valve, clearly in my opinion not the result of your typical engine failure due to a defective rod under normal use, anything is possible though, it's hard to say much for sure with absolute certainty about the durability of parts on a damaged engine unless you have the facts from the person that destroyed it, my stress concerns deal with the centrifugal forces that can result in a stretch failure that might likely happen at the wrist pin at high rpm.

Maybe that engine was in a car that rolled and was left upside down for a while long enough for oil to get past the rings and into the cylinder and someone tried to start it unaware of it and ruined it, who knows. I'm siding with the hydraulic lock because there is another bent rod, I'm not scared to push it and see.

On the clarification comment above, I was referring to the steel crank application being in the Terraza, I thought GM made the crank pins larger for rod bearing life, but apparently it was to stiffen the crank, the steel crank just has a double dose.

[SappySE107]

The steel crank is going to weigh more, which is good or bad depending on how you wanna look at it. Unless you are going to push some serious boost/nitrous through it, you aren't going to need the steel crank anyway. Id be happy with either setup honestly, though id probably take the iron crank over the steel for weight reasons on an NA motor.

Hopefully that was hydrolock, as it would seriously suck if GM did such major revisions to the 60V6 motors to have rod failures. Thats worse than intake gasket failures.

[SappySE107]

Im not going to be able to take pics of all the mods needed to put a 3400 rail on a 3500 lower with the 3500 plenum, as I dont have a 3500 plenum here to destroy like that. onefastv6 would be the one to take pics of that since he has that setup. I might see him this weekend.

You have to grind through the plenum, add material inside the TB arm area, and grind down the bracket that holds the FPR in place. Lots of fun.

[Joseph Upson]

No problem, pictures of the 3400 rail would work fine, I could look at them and relate the differences to what I have on the 3500. I Imagine it is possible to remove the core from the scraeder valve on the 3500 fuel rail and rig a pressure regulator attachment and add an additional check valve to monitor pressure when needed and run a return line from the added regulator. The fuel injectors I won in the auction may be the shorter version of the new design injector, I will not know until I receive them. If by chance they are I'll check into installing the in tank pressure regulator the engine was setup for.

[SappySE107]

You could remove the regulator on the 3400 rail, run an AN fitting, and then an external FPR somewhere else. That would probably be the easiest way to go about it if you want an adjustable regulator.

[Joseph Upson]

I would like to but it depends on the injectors, if they are the long version of the new style I'll have to switch to the 3400 rail for the time being, I don't know what the flow rate is for the stockers on the 3500 but i'm pretty sure they'll fall short before I reach my goal, however this makes me wonder if I might be selling the OE injectors short a bit to soon:

http://www.turbochargedpower.com/Pontiac%20Grand%20Am.htm

[Joseph Upson]

Found them, ~30 lb/hr injectors from an 8100 GM big block. They are the same size as the stock 3500 injcetors the only difference is the plug is a little smaller. I got the fuel rail and fuel pump assembly really cheap and the added blessing is that the fuel rail although a late model is apparently not returnless, the regulator is attached to the rail and is adjustable with three tubes attached to it; an inlet, an outlet to the rail and a by-pass to the return line, all I have to do is cut it away from the fuel rail and put it in line in a remote location near the intake and it will still function as a returnless system, so now I don't need to do a thing to the 3500 rail.

The stock pressure setting for the 8100 system is listed as 56-60 psi, so running the listed pressure range will probably push the injectors safely as high as 34 lb/hr since a company that deals with them quoted me 32 lb/hr at 3 BAR (~44 psi).

I have already disassembled and figured out a way to modify the 3500 throttle body so that stays as well, not as quick as the adapter plate but the personal touch and skill is my nature of doing things. That includes incorporation of the TPS sensor and IAC motor.