2.8 Quest

[Halogram]

Ok long topic. So bare with me if i forget anything Ill update post.

Got a 2.8 block from J-Yard have block prepped = decked, bored (if needed) stress tested, cleaned ya know the whole nine yards.

Crank was checked to the max, givin the works to strengthen the crank

looking at 10 to 1 compression
JE Forged Pistons
JE Forged Rods

Have Aluminum heads from my 88 FBird gonna up the valve size to 1.72 int / 1.42 exh fully ported, 3 angle valve job. manley valvetrain. again the works. topped off with http://www.cranecams.com/?show=brows...umber=25759-12 <1.6 rockers>

add in this a comp cams timing chain http://www.powerandperformancenews.c...&Store_Code=CC

edelbrock intake (4 bbl) with spacer to give me required rpm to 6500 http://www.edelbrock.com/automotive/...chev.html#2.8L it will be matched to the heads

the carb will be edelbrock 500 cfm which should be plenty.

the cam will be a crane cam 460 / 480 lift http://www.cranecams.com/?show=brows...tType=camshaft

new dampner, flexplate, melling oil pump high volume http://www.hi-performance.com/OilPumps.htm

headers from pacesetter w/ full exhaust setup (flowmaster_

clevite 77 bearings all the way around

car has a done up 700r4 and a 373 rear gear 2800 street stall tci converter

since I have the basics down, ive done alot of research for the past year and a half on the 2.8 and the 3.1 not much power gain from going to a 3.1 10hp difference with this setup so I stuck with the 2.8 and have been satisfied with it. Though GM under powered these things from the factory. But anyways the motor pushin 258hp naturally aspirated. Now my main concern atm is will the stock crank hold a extra 100hp given to the engine. Dont know what the car runs yet in the quarter being its still winter. but let me put it this way a guy with a mustang i think all he had was a intake and carb on it nothing else lost to the firebird. he was like man what ya got didnt beat him by alot kept ahead of him no probs. soon as I showed him the motor, his face fell and asked if he could look for a nitrous kit. I said sure.. and look no kit on the car. Now am I right to be concerned that a 100 horse shot of nitrous giving the 2.8 358hp would put the 3200lb car in the quarter in the 12.5 - 13 range. Will the stock crank hold that horsepower, or am I gonna have to locate a custom crank maker. so i can have a forged crank.

[bszopi]

RE: 2.8 Quest

Well, personally, I don't think you know what you have. There were never any production aluminum heads that would bolt up to an Edelbrock intake. And then you are saying "the carb WILL be... the cam WILL be.." like its something you want to do in the future, but yet you are quoting your engine having 258hp. And with that, I've seen 3.2L engines with a much better flowing topend, aluminum heads and higher compression not getting the numbers you are stating...

As far as the nitrous question goes, I've seen a 3.4L engine turbo'd and nitrous'd running well over 300hp and 400 ft-lbs on a stock bottom end, so you should have no issues.

[SappySE107]

RE: 2.8 Quest

Aside from everything brad said (fully agree), the 2.8 and 3.1 may show little difference but the real world has the 3.1 killing the 2.8 till maybe your top end peak since the 2.8 has a shorter stroke.

You can run a 100 shot no problem, just as long as you have the fuel there for it. Thats the only way you are gonna get close to your 285 idea of power. 12s, nope. Probably low 14s, high 13s if you get a perfect launch. The iron heads don't really flow unless you hog them out for boost. With the carb setup, i dunno, 500 cfm seems a bit high. I thought the stockers were in the 300 range. Have you built any other motors or tuned a carb before?

[Guest]

Re: RE: 2.8 Quest

Well, personally, I don't think you know what you have. There were never any production aluminum heads that would bolt up to an Edelbrock intake. And then you are saying "the carb WILL be... the cam WILL be.." like its something you want to do in the future, but yet you are quoting your engine having 258hp. And with that, I've seen 3.2L engines with a much better flowing topend, aluminum heads and higher compression not getting the numbers you are stating...

As far as the nitrous question goes, I've seen a 3.4L engine turbo'd and nitrous'd running well over 300hp and 400 ft-lbs on a stock bottom end, so you should have no issues.

Werd YO!

I'm not gonna through a BS flag up just yet, but your post is very hard to follow, in what you have done or will do, or....????

Again, there were no factory genI aluminium heads, all production genI offereings were iron.

If a custom intake was made a carb could be used with the genII or III Aluminium heads, but, most people opt to go EFI, since it is more driveable and usually makes a better power curve.

[Halogram]

ok I was half asleep when i wrote that article and looking back on what i wrote i shoulda clarified what I have done better and what i want to do next I have cast iron heads, witht he intake on it right now. And 500cfm doesnt seem to be hurting the motor. no signs of running rich. Now heres the question, the aluminum heads I have wont mate up with the edelbrock intake I have? wouldnt the bolt pattern be the same? Edelbrock technician Josh I talked to said that it should bolt up to the aluminum heads with minor mods to the bolt holes on the intake. So was he just blowing smoke up my tail pipe? Anyways, Ill clarify my post with a have and want to do list so there is no confusion. Sorry about the confusion, and yes I know what I have, never said typing was my thing ill have a new thing posted today, in english this time

[sharkey]

the cast iron and aluminum heads are way different, and there is more than bolt holes that wont line up. the heads are a completly different design. i dont know what josh was smoking, but must have been pretty good.

if you want to run aluminum heads, you need to run fuel injection or make a custom intake.

[geoffinbc]

Nope aluminum heads are so far gone from iron heads there is no similarities. Except valve size. Not a single aftermarket intake is made for any aluminum heads (with one exception but that is another story)

A 500 CFM carb is big for a 2.8L. I dont think it is needed. A 390 would be better matched I think. Hell a 390 will feed a mild 300 CI motor.

I dont like the Edelbrock intake beacuse one side has different port sizes than the other. But other than that it seems good. Maybe a die grinder can fix the port sizing.

That Comp timing chain is the same type as stock.

Your 88 heads already have the biggest valves readily atainable on the iron heads.

Oh and never quote your horsepower numbers when it has never been proven. Only ricers do that. And you need to have a spoon engine LOL.

[sharkey]

yea but he already has a fork engine!!!

confused??? let me explain. my buddy decided that it would be funny to make fun of ricers with his 87 z24. to counter all the spoon engines, he got a decal made for the back window that says "powered by fork". the responce from people was hillarious. most were asking what a "fork" motor was, then there were the ricers thinking they were all that talking about how good the fork motor is. keep in mind this is at a big sport compact car show when he put the decal on.

ever since then, we have kinda reffered to the 660 motors as "forks"