HIGH REV'S! I need'em! There addictive like Crack!

[pocket-rocket]

Turbo motors make power under higher loading. The 3.73 gears didnt load well at launch. Id zip through the first gear before the boost would hit.

The 5th gear may become a dog now with the motor spinning 1000rpms at cruising (65mph). The TKO600 has a .69 overdrive.

The fuel economy should be good though.

Gotcha This little fact slipped my mind since I didn't have any caffeine at that point in the day.

[Driver_10]

ok cool, but getting alittle off track for me. what will the iron 3.4 heads do on a 2.8 piston? or bottom end? does the CR go up? or will i only get flow?

Not a thing. The 3.4l and 2.8l iron heads are the same. Take my advice. Remove the iron heads and scrap them. Grab a set 3100 large-port heads and start from there. (cant use the 3500 heads on the 2.8l block. Valve interference.) Iron heads flow like shit through a straw.

This isnt a sincere suggestion, but a high-rev combo I thought up some time ago.......

3400 block, "6-in", bushed eagle "ultralight" I-beam rods w/ 2.100 crank bore, 2.8l DOHC steel crank re-ground 3.03 stroke, sealed power hypereutectic 3.4l flat-top pistons w/ vavle reliefs & 1.46 Comp-hieght, (would protrude .030 proud of the bore).070 annealed copper head-gaskets. (fidanza aluminum flywheel for shits and giggles)

This shortblock will survive hypothetically sustainable 8910rpm with a 9200 red-line. (not mentioning the "super-duper" cam and ported 3500 heads youll need. A snazy sheet-metal "runnerless" intake plenum or short-runer ITB set-up would be needed too.

[robertisaar]

Not a thing. The 3.4l and 2.8l iron heads are the same. Take my advice. Remove the iron heads and scrap them. Grab a set 3100 large-port heads and start from there. (cant use the 3500 heads on the 2.8l block. Valve interference.) Iron heads flow like shit through a straw.

This isnt a sincere suggestion, but a high-rev combo I thought up some time ago.......

3400 block, "6-in", bushed eagle "ultralight" I-beam rods w/ 2.100 crank bore, 2.8l DOHC steel crank re-ground 3.03 stroke, sealed power hypereutectic 3.4l flat-top pistons w/ vavle reliefs & 1.46 Comp-hieght, (would protrude .030 proud of the bore).070 annealed copper head-gaskets. (fidanza aluminum flywheel for shits and giggles)

This shortblock will survive hypothetically sustainable 8910rpm with a 9200 red-line. (not mentioning the "super-duper" cam and ported 3500 heads youll need. A snazy sheet-metal "runnerless" intake plenum or short-runer ITB set-up would be needed too.

you know whats sad? for a SBC, every one of those parts is availible in the aftermarket. and almost every part listed for a 60* is custom made at a much higher expense.

and how did you come up with the 8910/9200 numbers? feet per minute calc for the pistons?

[blownarrow]

Not a thing. The 3.4l and 2.8l iron heads are the same. Take my advice. Remove the iron heads and scrap them. Grab a set 3100 large-port heads and start from there. (cant use the 3500 heads on the 2.8l block. Valve interference.) Iron heads flow like shit through a straw.

This isnt a sincere suggestion, but a high-rev combo I thought up some time ago.......

3400 block, "6-in", bushed eagle "ultralight" I-beam rods w/ 2.100 crank bore, 2.8l DOHC steel crank re-ground 3.03 stroke, sealed power hypereutectic 3.4l flat-top pistons w/ vavle reliefs & 1.46 Comp-hieght, (would protrude .030 proud of the bore).070 annealed copper head-gaskets. (fidanza aluminum flywheel for shits and giggles)

This shortblock will survive hypothetically sustainable 8910rpm with a 9200 red-line. (not mentioning the "super-duper" cam and ported 3500 heads youll need. A snazy sheet-metal "runnerless" intake plenum or short-runer ITB set-up would be needed too.

Ummmm 8910rpm with a 9200 red-line it's like crack!

[Driver_10]

you know whats sad? for a SBC, every one of those parts is availible in the aftermarket. and almost every part listed for a 60* is custom made at a much higher expense.

and how did you come up with the 8910/9200 numbers? feet per minute calc for the pistons?

The rotating assembly will maintain between 4500-4700 feet/ per min on a well built rotating assembly. Take (FT/per MIN * 6)/ stroke. (4500*6)/ 3.03= 8910 or so.

Its the stroke that determines the max rpm. Longer strokes produce faster piston speeds. Shorter strokes produce slower piston speeds.

FYI. The parts that I just described are readilly available at most speed shops. Only the cam would need to be custom order. The pistons are readilly available as well.

[BillS]

There is no point running an engine to higher RPM than the power peak plus a few hundred.

Why would you want to?

If RPM floats your boat, but a Honda S2000! The GM heads just don't flow enough to be worthwhile.

[robertisaar]

If RPM floats your boat, but a Honda S2000!

my lawnmower makes more torque than a S2000.

and i believe the most correct way of determining how high it should get reved is to the point that when it downshifts, you will be at peak torque. depending on gear ratios, that might be tough.

[SappySE107]

Bill, why don't you just stop posting because you aren't contributing shit.

[BillS]

1 - the S2000 is certainly not a low down torque machine, it is a high revving screamer - but that is what he is talking about trying to do with the Fiero engine, ill suited as it is to high RPM operation.

2 - I am contributing my opinions. If you don't agree, say why, don't simply try to censor anything you don't like.

[SappySE107]

Your opinion doesn't help him get more RPM now does it. If that is all you can contribute, just don't post. If I wanted to censor you, there would be no 'try" about it. Its a simple task.

FYI, 3400 heads flow plenty for RPM. Now your opinion is based on ignorance. Damn. That sucks. I can be a jackass too.

[robertisaar]

there would be no 'try" about it. Its a simple task.

i can attest to this.... a lot of threads that get off-topic that i'm replying to usualy get shut down pretty quickly by none other.

[BillS]

Your opinion doesn't help him get more RPM now does it. If that is all you can contribute, just don't post.

Not sure why you are getting shirty about this. I simply stated that there is no point running an engine above the point where it quits making power, just for the sake of buzzing it.

The cast iron headed engine, which is what the OP is talking about, has significant limitations on rev range, unless you throw out the cast iron heads and go alloy or OHC - which is NOT what he was talking about. If you disagree with that, fine, but please tell us how you would make a cast iron headed engine produce a power peak of 7500 and still be drivable on the street.

[SappySE107]

I'd throw the cast iron heads into a lake because they are junk to me. Then I would install 3400 heads, because they are vastly superior to anything you could do to those junk iron heads.

[Weston19]

Im kinda doing something similar. Im de-stroking a 3500 v6 using 5.850 con-rods, .070 headgasket and 1.46 comp-hieght. custom forged pistons.

Im destroking the 3.31 crank to apprx 3.190 to accomodate the longer rods and increase red-line rpm from 65-ish to 7500rpms. Im also modifiying the block (if its possible) to run oil-squirters on all 6 cylinders. This, with a ported set of 3500 heads and comp-cams #122 behive springs should deliver a sustainable 7500rpms under boost without float. This will be running through a TKO600 5-speed gear box to a moser 12-bolt rear-end w/ 3.42 gears.

Im still planning out a cam for the motor. Im looking for a 2000-7000 power-band. I still got a lot of odds and ends but Im getting closer. Ben (AKA SappySE) will be doing my cam for me.

Are you using the 3500 crank? If so, how much is the offset grind going to cost you? Im trying to price it out here, people are shooting me some insane numbers...1400+.......This is pretty much exactly what i wanted to do until i seen the cost on offset grind.....

[MidnightriderZ24]

have u ever smoked a crack rock?