Ha Ha Ha...I know there's LOTS of you here!! After much contemplation, reflection, calculating, soul searching and heavy drinking...I've settled on the lowly 2.8 litre (173 cubic inch) carbureted (1986 and older) Chevy 60 degree V6 to "power" (using the term semi-loosely!) the Mighty 49 Chevy project! The motor is compact...short AND narrow (thanks to the 60 degree banking), and I was more than satisfied with the performance of the one I owned...in a fwd Celebrity, no less! So...what exactly are the differences between the front wheel drive engines and the rear wheel drive engines? Is it just the motor mount positions and carburetor orientation? (If so, no biggie!) I ordered the "Chevy 60 degree V6 to TH350 tranny adapter" from Speedway to make using a common, cheap V8 tranny possible, and to simplify installation, since I'm making up some KILLER engine mounts that swing way into Overkill Territory...the tranny will be mounted by the conventional mount, as well as a bellhousing mount (like a motor plate), and there will also be custom motor mounts to the side or front of the engine...it ain't goin' NOWHERE!! Now, my questions.... 1. Differences between FWD and RWD engines? 2. Is an older "pre-feedback" distributor available? 3. What year did this engine first appear? I know, I know, it's kinda oddball, but if anyone anywhere will know this stuff, HAMBers will!
Oil pump and pan are different, for sure. Might even be something with placement of the distributor. I know when I was looking for a replacement for my Blazer, it had to be from a rear wheel drive vehicle. Personally, you ain't going to be happy with it. That's a big car to pull around with a small motor with a notoriously weak crank.
Might want to PM flatheadpete, he has got an inline six, it would be alot cooler than being "king turd". I am sure "babymomma" would be happy to get rid of it if you can't convince him, should be cheap.
OK Hack here's the deal. The starter is on th opposite side with a front drive 60 V6. There is one bell housing to do the job, though. It is the old 2.8 F body 4speed bell. It is configured for starters on both sides! You need the clutch fork to go with it. Converting to hydraulic clutch is straight forward. The adapters I've seen for V8 pattern bells require a rear drive 60 degree engine. If you want mor power later on, a 3.4 pushrod or DOHC engine will work if you use the mentioned bell housing, since orientation wont matter. I have the needed bell and an Edelbrock hirise intake fore your needs, if yoyu wanna talk about it. Just PM me. Man, I just got home from Coldwater, they coulda been delivered!
Dont do it.... The 2.8 is the crappiest motor GM has ever built. I had some that I did some stuff to pump it up and it still sucked. I did a 30 over, bigger cam, headers and better induction and still junk... GM does not sell them anymore I do not think, they recommend the 3.1 as a replacement.. I would go either 4.3 or 3800
Not when ypu only need the k member and some way to mount the struts and fwd and rear engine mounts. It would be an easier swap than some MII conversoins. Not that I'm promoting it oe anything
i'd rather see ya put a ford in it than one of those pieces of crap... they ain't got enough power to pull a fat girl off a tricyle as far as the differences,block IS different(starter,motor mount bosses,pan,etc. gm will sell ya a 3.4 replacement(it wasn't available in anything but a crate motor) for 82-85 s-10 that'd have a closer time pulling a 50 chevy that a 2.8.... b&m usta make a blower for 'em but the limp dick bottom end will prolly leave the hard way as the intake+/or head gaskets undoubtably will dump large amounts of coolant in the crankcase assuming the pos crank seal doesn't leak all the oil out 1st.... shall i go on? i worked for a dealer when these shitboxes were new. #1, i'll NEVER work for a dealer again. #2 i'm not too thrilled about cars in general right now, but the 2.8l is one of the biggest POS's EVER! oh yeah, throw the 2.8 in the trunk,it'll lower it at least..
tomslik is right on the money,as far as i'm concerned.you ought to at least have enough respect for the old gal to slap an inline engine in there.
2.8s...... intake gasket leakingest, cam flatteningst, rear main leakingest, limp wristed engine GM ever made. If you absolutley must, I believe the 82 or 83 S-10 had a normal HEI type distributor. My mind tries to block all memories of that cast iron bitch. Everytime one of those things came into the dealership, I'd act real busy till the service dispatcher gave the job to another tech. I could never make any real money on those little fuqrs. Seriously, must you do this? Maybe a 3.8 Buick....
Hack, 82 frt drivers vave an HEI with an advance system. They are cheap enough at the ol' parts store you would think. Speedway has a set of headers for 60 degree engines, maybe they are worth lookin' at. Those things realy need better exhaust, read somewhere that headers are double diget horsepower makers on them. What gear are you going to use?
I didn't even think a 2.8 was capable of double digit power!!! Seriously Hack, if anyone was crazy enough to try this, it would be you , but 2.8's really are better boat anchors than motors!
All in favor of Hack scrapping the idea say "I"........ I! Sometimes it just takes some intervention, admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery.
Don't listen to all the people that say they are junk. They obviously have no experience with them. I run circle track in a 2.8 class. You can get 350hp out of them with very little work and money. I have $1200 in mine but I have access to a machine shop so all machine work is free. I twisted mine over 7000 rpm all season!!! with nothing but one bent pushrod when I hit the mud and zinged it over 8 grand. I'm noy going to argue with all the non believers on this post but if you want more info please feel free to PM or e mail me. The only draw back I can tell you from experience unless you want to use stock manifolds you'll be building headers. I don't know if I would use a 2.8 in a hot rod but If I was on a tight budget and that is what I had I would.
what would be fun, snag a rolled bonneville SSei, supercharged riviera, grand prix, etc. and stick the 3.8 supercharged fwd drivetrain into a tail draggin skirted 49-50 chevy, for some real fun, go with stationary hubcaps, then watch the front tires magically go up in smoke!
[ QUOTE ] . I run circle track in a 2.8 class. ..... i twisted mine over 7000 rpm all season!!! [/ QUOTE ] what did you use for cam/lifters/valve train? i have a little experience racing the 2.8 v-6 in SCCA ITA class and could never find a REAL performance canshaft for it. Lunati and others just basically have hydraulic lifter street grinds, 6000 rpm max......GM performance has a couple stiffer cams(both hydraulic) that they claim will go 6500 rpm's with the correct springs. does someone make a solid lifter cam for it? it was a good little motor in a pontiac fiero,would go like hell up to the 6000 rpm rev limiter...but way to small for a heavier car
I say go for it a 2.8 isn't all that bad you can find alot of go fast parts for them you just have to know where to look intakes, cams,hedaers and even rollers rockers are out there. I had a couple of S-10 with 2.8s and I could bet most 4.3 S-10 with them. I think the replacment 3.1 or 3.4 motor is a little better with 9:1 compression the 2.8 has 8:1 . In the early 80's B&M had a blower for one but is hard to find and I found out later that some miget sprit car classes ran 2.8's I seen one with a 4 weber intake on it .
I'm looking at the next version of that motor (3.1) myself. I've heard the later 2.8s are better ....after they were internally balanced. Anybody else have a preference on the best year models?
With a 3 inch stroke and a 5.7 long rod, along with better breathing for each cube per cyl than an old LT1, the thing should respond in similar fashion to a 283/302 sbc. The torque production should be in a similar rpm range. Some sbc parts will work such as roller rockers (narrower models ,drill and tap the heads for 3/8 studs)some model lifters and such. A local guy has one in an MG midget, and it'll scare most folks. That thing only weighs 1600 lbs of course. l
One other thing, do they have different bellhousing patterns for FWD/RWD? I thought I heard something about that once. Although a 2.8 S-10 shouldn't be that hard to find... Jay
The pattern is the same but the starter mounts on opposite sides. The correct bellhousing was mentioned earlier for using fwd engines. The fwd port injected mills have alloy heads with canted valves and much better breathing. Unfortunately, there was no carb intake for them and the aftermarket ones are hard to find. I've seen dual weber 3 bbl units as well as tunnel rams for them though. The aluminum heads might need O rings though with any squeeze due to thier tendency to use up gaskets A 3.4 DOHC can be used to wake some really good power, but those things seem to be always needing head gaskets. They sound real good with open exhaust when they are at higher revs though.
Hey 36 3window Crower and Comp Cams both offer some nasty solid lifter cams but I'd recomend Comp just because of the great customer service they gave me. I don't like the lifters though. I prefer the direct lube lifters on any solid lifter cam. I use 1.6 SBC roller rockers and .135 longer pushrods. I'm building a stud girdle for next year but it was ok last year. With the 1.6 rockers I'm just over .510 lift. I'd have to do some checking I can't remember right now but the valves I used were a ford part number.
FatHack~ I worked for a company that ran 2.8 Celebritys from the beginning of their run until the end. I may have SOME insight to share as I bought one of them coming off lease and a friend bought another. The friend bought an earlier one that was a carb engine. That was 86 or earlier. The water pump on that FWD 2.8 was similar to the old Buick V8 style: large alum casting covering the front of the engine. Those castings were prone to wasting away due to the small cross section for water flow. I don't know if the RWD engine used the same casting. The later FWD engines used a kind of remote mounted pump that inserted into a different style casting. I've replaced a couple of those pumps. The later engines used a serp belt and I think the package was shorter with the serp belt. I think the later engines had larger bearings and stronger cranks. As installed in S10's and F bodies the early engines had HEI distributors until they went to direct fire from the crank sensor. There are different places for the crank magnet and pickup depending on the body style (FWD vs. RWD). I think the later 3.4 engine can be converted to use an HEI. You might have to juggle parts to create a non-computer controlled HEI dist with vacuum advance. Avoid the early DOHC 3.4 - there was a lot of warranty work on these as they didn't sell well and the factory never got enough time to sort them out. I agree with the other opinions about going for displacement (current 3.4). The 2.8 didn't seem to last in S10's. I've seen plenty of them replaced with the crate engine or 4.3's or SBC. It may be that they were not maintained well in work trucks and suffered the consequences.
The Jalopy Journal
