PDA

View Full Version : 200hp 3.4l is it possible without power adder?


pyrokilla
09-30-2003, 05:49 PM
Hey I have exhaust, no cat (not needed in my part of the world), CAI, plugs / wires. What more do I need besides headers to hit the 200hp mark?

Justin Kirkham
09-30-2003, 05:56 PM
A lot.

-Justin

95Batmobile
09-30-2003, 06:00 PM
You need to be me :D

pyrokilla
09-30-2003, 06:24 PM
Damn you funsters graemlins/fluffy.gif Who has some dyno's showing thier 3.4lhp......besides Tiago's insane turbo run graemlins/love.gif

95Batmobile
09-30-2003, 06:44 PM
If there was a damned dyno around here I'd go to it lol
There was one like 10 minutes away where I could run my car for free :D but the owner of the shop had to go to jail so the shop was closed...

ianwells100
09-30-2003, 07:19 PM
2 things here... forget the 3.4L if you want sell it, buy a 96+ and get a 3.8L which is a much better engine with 200hp stock... just bite the bullet and lose the money which it'll cost to get the newer car... the L96 swap, whats with that you want a v8 with 240hp, whats the point of that, get an LT1 or LS1, or a better idea, sell your car, and buy a v8 f-body...

2nd point, whats up with you not needing a cat, i hate BC, why the hell do i need a cat, just because i live in the greater vancouver area, and ppl in the interior and the island dont, screw that, Canada is full of idiots who discriminate more than anyone else, and i thought canada was meant to be one of the most liberal places around, all i ever see is discrimination... this blows!!!

StudlyCamaro
09-30-2003, 08:10 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by ianwells100:
2 things here... forget the 3.4L if you want sell it, buy a 96+ and get a 3.8L which is a much better engine with 200hp stock... just bite the bullet and lose the money which it'll cost to get the newer car... the L96 swap, whats with that you want a v8 with 240hp, whats the point of that, get an LT1 or LS1, or a better idea, sell your car, and buy a v8 f-body...

2nd point, whats up with you not needing a cat, i hate BC, why the hell do i need a cat, just because i live in the greater vancouver area, and ppl in the interior and the island dont, screw that, Canada is full of idiots who discriminate more than anyone else, and i thought canada was meant to be one of the most liberal places around, all i ever see is discrimination... this blows!!!<hr></blockquote>


if you knew how not restrictive today's cats are you wouldnt care...

CAMAROWIDBASS
09-30-2003, 08:28 PM
my 3.4 dynoed at 132 RWHP...

mods included.

K&N Air filter
Catco high flow cat
Cut out


I saw 126 RWHP with the cut out capped, so i gained 5 rwhp with open exhaust.


And i did 175 tq

Ryan94V6
09-30-2003, 08:37 PM
You need all my bolt on mods plus internal engine work done. With these mods you should have over 200 Hp. And if we could ever re-program our PCM's right then it would add even more Hp.

Ive got my engine built and all I can say is my car is running like a beast! I havent put my car to the limit yet but I can tell that its going to be one fast mother fugger once the engine breaks in. Right now its got 240 miles on the engine.

pyrokilla
09-30-2003, 08:41 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by CAMAROWIDBASS:
my 3.4 dynoed at 132 RWHP...

mods included.

K&N Air filter
Catco high flow cat
Cut out


I saw 126 RWHP with the cut out capped, so i gained 5 rwhp with open exhaust.


And i did 175 tq<hr></blockquote>

How have you lost 30hp?

ianwells100
09-30-2003, 09:26 PM
sorry to flame on you, but dude, seriously, RWHP... get it yet, you have stock 160hp at the FLYWHEEL... from flywheel to wheels (hence rear wheel horse power) you lose around 20%, so he is fine...

again sorry, but i'm in a bad mood, and that post was not needed...

and to Studly Camaro, i have a carsound hiflow cat on my car, that doesn't bother me, what bothers me is stupid, hypocritical canadian people who run a corrupt 'aircare' program, which i have to pay $48 for every 2 years, which doesn't bother me, but its the fact that just because i live in the greater vancouver area (i live 40 mins away from vancouver), i have to do this, but other people in BC dont, thats crap, lets make all the air cleaner, and make everyone do it... that'd be a much better idea, and less discriminatory

pyrokilla
09-30-2003, 09:32 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by ianwells100:
sorry to flame on you, but dude, seriously, RWHP... get it yet, you have stock 160hp at the FLYWHEEL... from flywheel to wheels (hence rear wheel horse power) you lose around 20%, so he is fine...

again sorry, but i'm in a bad mood, and that post was not needed...

and to Studly Camaro, i have a carsound hiflow cat on my car, that doesn't bother me, what bothers me is stupid, hypocritical canadian people who run a corrupt 'aircare' program, which i have to pay $48 for every 2 years, which doesn't bother me, but its the fact that just because i live in the greater vancouver area (i live 40 mins away from vancouver), i have to do this, but other people in BC dont, thats crap, lets make all the air cleaner, and make everyone do it... that'd be a much better idea, and less discriminatory<hr></blockquote>

Right, thanks. Ya, here on VI we don't have aircare yet, but we will get it one of these years im sure.

Big Bad James
09-30-2003, 11:26 PM
200 HP out of a 3.4L? Of course it's possible. A ****ing 2.2L 4 cylinder can put out 200 flywheel, why can't a 3.4L?

In fact, there was a 3.4L that CAME with 200 horsepower, STOCK. 200 horse, 215 torque. Enter the 3.4L Dual Twin Cam V6 found in some Lumina Z34 in the early-mid 90s. Remember them?

I mean, I still raped one pretty badly, but it's in the power-range you're looking for. Do a swap, buy a rear-end-wrecked Lumina Z34 with the 3.4L Dual Twin Cam V6.

MustangEater8251
10-03-2003, 01:24 AM
The DOHC 3.4L is crap don't ever get a ca with that motor its the biggest nightmare fo nightmares of a motor to own...


A guy swapped Series II 60* v6 heads onto his 3.4L f-body, I think he had a little over 200 hp. But he had to have custom headers made, since the exhaust ports are shaped differently.


I think you would regret buying a 3.8L... I am trying to avoid everything I can to get one, even if it is a wonderful deal.

ianwells100
10-03-2003, 02:12 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr> I think you would regret buying a 3.8L <hr></blockquote>

why??? i had a 3.4L camaro with catback and CAI, went to a stock 3.8L and there was a world of difference, and now i have the catback and CAI for my 3.8L its even better, and gets better fuel economy... i don't get what you mean above????

no offence, but the 3.4L engine's a really bad engine compared to the 3.8L, i dunno why ppl are so dear to them...

MustangEater8251
10-03-2003, 04:26 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by ianwells100:


why??? i had a 3.4L camaro with catback and CAI, went to a stock 3.8L and there was a world of difference, and now i have the catback and CAI for my 3.8L its even better, and gets better fuel economy... i don't get what you mean above????

no offence, but the 3.4L engine's a really bad engine compared to the 3.8L, i dunno why ppl are so dear to them...<hr></blockquote>

Not trying to be dear to them just don't think its that big of a boost, maybe its just me, I seem to have one of the quicker 3.4Ls, and when I drive the 3.8L I have access to its actually slower then my 3.4L.

Mikael
10-03-2003, 07:16 AM
Its been done. Took every bolt on, but stock heads/cam, etc. 200rwhp that is. Tim LeGros (i think was his name)

MustangEater8251
10-03-2003, 09:24 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Mikael:
Its been done. Took every bolt on, but stock heads/cam, etc. 200rwhp that is. Tim LeGros (i think was his name)<hr></blockquote>

He had 200rwhp, with stock heads and cam? Not to sure about that.... unless you count Nitrous as a bolt on.

93v6firebird
10-05-2003, 01:22 PM
3.4L suck a$$
They were overrated at 160hp, mostly because GM couldnt admit that after making the 2.8 to the 3.1 and then to the 3.4 they got ****ty gains. Its more like a 145-150hp and 125 at the wheels.
You'll need all boltons, lighten up the drivetrain, headers, and some internal engine work - p&pd heads, intake, valve job, rocker arms.
Honestly if you wanna get big gains out of your car buy tiago's turbo... if you wanna go all out strengthen the internals as well.
Just what I think.

Ted
10-05-2003, 05:09 PM
An Lt1 could be had at so little. My friend bought a '94 Trans am for like 5600 and it was in really good condition. Most of you could sell your cars for that much. I dumped a lot of money into my car until I realized I wasn't getting no where fast. I'm not in the process of trying to sell it and buy a v8. Seriously guys, it's not that impossible. You might as well go big, or go home.

95Batmobile
10-05-2003, 06:30 PM
This has turned into a bashing of the 3.4L when all the guy was asking was how to get 200rwhp.
Why don't you guys give the 3.4L some credit, it isn't that bad of a motor and sure as hell sounds a lot better than the 3.8L. It might not be as fast stock vs. stock, but this is a board where everybody is modifying their cars so how does stock vs. stock matter? My car is faster than a lot of 3.8 owners.

To answer the question, you will need a lot more work. If you don't want to do major work like heads/cam you can get every bolt on and a 50 shot and you'll be at 200rwhp. My car will be at 180rwhp N/A, stock internals, but I'm special ;)
Just keep workin on the 3.4L if you'd like, but if you want to go fast you will probably put a couple thousand in the car until you're stuck with one decision: turbo/super or LT/LS1.

Ted
10-06-2003, 09:22 AM
Dude i'm not bashing the 3.4L by no means. I just wish that you guys could see it through my eyes. Your talking about modding a 3.4L to get 200hp, and to be faster right? But the thing is I have a 3.8 with several mods done and I am nowhere near fast. Your going to waste your money and be disappointed. I idea behind the 3.4L and 3.8L engine was for economy. I'm not saying that there isn't superchargers or turbochargers or how many other stuff you can do to the engines. All I am saying is that it isn't too practical to mod these engines for extreme amounts of horsepower. Me, I want something thats going to blow the doors off the competition. I'm not going to be getting anywhere fast with the 3.8L. I think a lot of you guys should re-evaluate the situation here.

firstlove94
10-06-2003, 09:44 AM
Man its bad enough to have jerk-offs with v8's crashing threads and bashing v6's in general, but I am completely sick of 3.8 guys acting like they have HP up the A$$ and knocking 3.4's. I'll say this , nobody asked you about a 3.8, this is a question for 3.4 guys! Shut your piehole about how people's engines suck! It doesn't help answer the questions that are being asked! GEEZ!!

Timbo1969
10-06-2003, 10:51 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 95Batmobile:
This has turned into a bashing of the 3.4L when all the guy was asking was how to get 200rwhp.
Why don't you guys give the 3.4L some credit, it isn't that bad of a motor and sure as hell sounds a lot better than the 3.8L. It might not be as fast stock vs. stock, but this is a board where everybody is modifying their cars so how does stock vs. stock matter? My car is faster than a lot of 3.8 owners.

To answer the question, you will need a lot more work. If you don't want to do major work like heads/cam you can get every bolt on and a 50 shot and you'll be at 200rwhp. My car will be at 180rwhp N/A, stock internals, but I'm special ;)
Just keep workin on the 3.4L if you'd like, but if you want to go fast you will probably put a couple thousand in the car until you're stuck with one decision: turbo/super or LT/LS1.<hr></blockquote>
The V8 is the better option in this equation easily. The LT-1 swap into a 93-97 can be done for under $3000. where as a super/turbo kit cost's $3500 and you have to rebuild the engine( to do it right). Simple if you want to get the best bang for your buck, get a V8.

93v6firebird
10-06-2003, 11:20 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by firstlove94:
Man its bad enough to have jerk-offs with v8's crashing threads and bashing v6's in general, but I am completely sick of 3.8 guys acting like they have HP up the A$$ and knocking 3.4's. I'll say this , nobody asked you about a 3.8, this is a question for 3.4 guys! Shut your piehole about how people's engines suck! It doesn't help answer the questions that are being asked! GEEZ!!<hr></blockquote>

Dont take it so personally... I own a 3.4 and I realize they suck. Why cant you come to this realization as well?

black34v6
10-06-2003, 03:34 PM
everyone always forgets me..

i have a 3.4L with 200 hp (flywheel) and 245 ft/lbs of tq. dyno proven. (with a cutout and no cat of course..)

it cost me about.. (calculates) - 60 for the heads/lower intake...50 for the fuel rail.. 30 for the lines.. 50 for the upper intake + Tb...about a week's worth of work.. and if you are doing this without a rebuild - (i rebuilt my motor) - then you need an extra 500.00 for pistons..

altho the aluminum heads could be done on the stock iron head pistons, you'd just have 12.5:1 CR. but it could be done.

the other thing that no one here seems to be able to get into their heads...

i havent done anything to the parts i got. the only "performance" parts i have on the engine are the headers. everything else i bolted on is factory stock (i.e. - came from GM that way: no porting/polishing/deburring or gasket matching involved)

i dont have a AFPR. i dont have a PCM reprogram. i have the stock 3.4 cam, i have the stock 3.4 bottom end, and i have grand am pistons (from a 3400) in my car. CR = 9.6:1 - and im putting out 170 rwhp / 207 rwtq.

thats the same as a 3.8, but a tad more tq ;) and more tq is always good.

my 1/4 mile time was ****ty, but im trying to get back now that i've learned how to handle the car better.. my last run was 16.0 @ 83 mph (2.49 60'). my baseline 1/4 mile (stock 3.4 with K&N FIPK / 3" exhaust) was 16.5 @ 84 mph (2.55 60') -- yes i need work on my launches.

anyway. its doable. just depends on how much work you wanna do. i would say for about 750 you too can have a 200hp/245tq 3.4L OHV engine.

its all n/a. and its all in "stock" form.

just some info for everyone to remember.

-R

edit: dyno with cutout open : http://camaro.adwire.com/dyno1.2.jpg

[ October 06, 2003: Message edited by: Russell ]</p>

Jerriko
10-06-2003, 03:53 PM
Good deal. I am working on my rebuild now. I'm putting a 3.4L in my 87 Formula. I'm going a little farther though as far as mods are concerned. Regardless, you can take any engine and make it have power. I don't believe in a waste of time when it comes to what you want to do. Anyone who tells you otherwise is an idiot that needs to mind his own business.

Harbin1
10-06-2003, 08:02 PM
There's a pic of my dyno in my sig. It was pretty lame, can you say ~127 RWHP! :( That helped my to decide that I'm waiting for my Z28 to come along before I get back into the modding game! graemlins/burnout.gif

ianwells100
10-06-2003, 10:31 PM
i dont wanna knock the 3.4, i had a 3.4L 95 camaro, now i have a 3.8L 97 camaro, so i know, i did some work to the 3.4L (intake, catback...) and it is not nearly as fast as my 97 3.8L was stock, now that i have intake, catback, hi-flow cat... in my 97 3.8L, the 3.4L is no where near being close to as fast as my car...

yes, the 3.4L is a good enough engine, but if you want power, get a v8, i need my car as a nice looking, nice sounding daily driver, 'til i finish my qualifications at uni (then i'll get an LS1)... but for those of you saying 'my 3.4L is quicker than many 3.8L' how? seriously, how, this thread is about getting to 200hp... which very few have, 3.8L's come stock with 200hp, so how can a significantly sub 200hp car beat many 200 (+ with minor mods) hp car (dont get too technical here, i'm just making a clear point), and mustang eater, your best 1/4 mile is in the mid 15's, how can that be faster than a car that comes stock running, low 15's high 14's (or somewhere around there)...

dont make arguements without thinking first, few 3.4's make 200hp, 3.8's come stock 200hp (with 25 ft-lb more, aswell)... so dont try bashing the 3.8L by saying your 3.4L beats many 3.8L's, its an illogical arguement

[ October 06, 2003: Message edited by: ianwells100 ]</p>

black34v6
10-07-2003, 01:05 AM
It's not an illogical arguement if its the TRUTH. I love that little cop-out. people that say "stop saying your 3.4 will beat 3.8's cause the 3.4 doesnt come stock with 200 hp..."

well. when you get your Z28, and it can beat vipers, stop saying it can...cause its illogical that it ever could..you see cause - it didnt come with 400 hp stock.

(stupid #@$ arguement) -- anyway. im not saying that the 3.4 is superior to the 3.8. never said it was. what i said was that i have a 200 hp 3.4L. Also - the 3.8, its not its fault it cant do anything in the 96-02 cars, they have OBD2 and dont take as well to mods without a computer reprogram - mostly cause the ODB2 will back out changes to run like stock. (its got a stronger "big brother" program)

and all the 3.8 owners, dont be upset just cause a 3.4 can beat a 3.8. thats just like the z28 owners calling a v6 rice cause they are jealous that it can do better than their car.

I see this all the time. never fails, someone asks about the 3.4, and most of the 3.8 guys/girls (usually guys) come into the thread and are like, well my opinion, since i have a 3.8, is that the 3.4 is weak and you should ditch it.

and dont make the arguement that the 3.4 is sold a lot and 3.8's are bought over it -- my opinion (note: opinion) on that is that the 3.4 is a project motor. it takes a lot of thought and planning to get it to move well. and a lot of people want a lot of power easily. sometimes it doesnt come that way.

but for all of you that think the 3.4L motor is a pos - well..why is the 2.8L run in circle track cars? cause its a naturally bred race engine. its 60* design makes it internally balanced, no ill forces to vibrate engine components and wear them out prematurely.

the 2.8/3.1/3.4 are all the same family. 60* V-6 motors (the engine block has a 60* seperation between the cylinders) and are nicely done. in fact, the 60* design is so loved by GM - they are reintroducing a new line of 60* motors. starting with the 3.2L 60* motor that is in the caddy CTS. making 220 hp / 218 tq. thats not to shabby for a 3.2L. of course it is a DOHC.

whatever..im getting down the long-winded path. just, and im asking this nicely, this board is here for people to learn. if someone wants to learn, let them. dont try to force your ideals and opinions on them. if someone wants to build up their 3.8L motor, i let them..i dont say, it'd be better to buy a v8 or - the 3.8 sucks - or anything like that.

If a 3.4L owner wants to try to build up their engine. let them. dont try to force their opinion to your belief. dont try to suade them with cool power figures or anything like that.

cause as i said, my engine is now a stock 3400 engine (yes STOCK) with a 3.4L RWD camshaft (little more aggressive than the hyd. roller in the 3400) in it, and the MORE RESTRICTIVE 3100 intake (i still have to put the 3400 on there!)

so if the 3.4 is so crappy, (the 3400 is simply the newer generation 3.4, just like the 3800 is the new gen 3.8) why could i just swap pistons (bigger dish, lower cr) - swap heads - swap intakes to the newer design, and get headers, and come out with the same power as a 3.8..

you be the judge of that.

-R

MustangEater8251
10-07-2003, 01:19 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by ianwells100:
best 1/4 mile is in the mid 15's, how can that be faster than a car that comes stock running, low 15's high 14's (or somewhere around there)...

<hr></blockquote>

How many people have drien lwo 15s to high 14s DEAD STOCK!

JSut post our time and say it. It relatively rare jsut because one person did it does not mean its possible.

Ted
10-07-2003, 07:49 PM
I think that all ianwells was trying to say is that most 3.8 owners on here have modded cars and that once the 3.4 gets to 200hp+, most 3.8s are going to be farther ahead in the game. I don't think he meant that a 3.4 could never out perform a 3.8 because it is illogical.

95Batmobile
10-07-2003, 08:03 PM
You guys need to listen to russell, he is a very wise man :cool:

I think you have more than 200hp at the flywheel russell, if you have an auto. I didn't look to see if you were auto or manual, but if you are auto you have a lot more. Our automatic trannies take a lot of power to run, I dyno'd at 115rwhp, everything stock except the TURDnado fuel saver, so thats 45hp loss from the damned automatic. I have done a lot of work since then and I am waiting for a chance to prove to everybody that my 3.4L is among the fastest N/A. I will show you all when it's running high 14s N/A and there will be no beeching or complaining smile.gif

Anyway, let the guy try for 200hp, some people like to work with what they have instead of taking the high road and swap a V8. And if you don't think my car can beat 3.8Ls, tell that to my friend with a 2001 Camaro ;) (M5, 3.42s, LSD, all that stuff)

black34v6
10-07-2003, 11:57 PM
Specs on my car:

Year: 1994
Make: Chevrolet
Model: Camaro
Style: Coupe
Engine: 3.4L (204ci) OHV 60* V6 (upgraded to 3100)
Bore: 3.623"
Stroke: 3.31"
Cylinders: 6
Heads: Gen III Aluminum (1996) with D shaped exhaust ports and oval intake ports - stock condition with stock 1.72 intake and 1.42 exhaust valve.
Intake: Tuned-port style plenum with single bore throttle body
Throttle Body: 50mm stock 3400 TB - 308cfm
Exhaust: RKSport headers to 3" catback exhaust system with torque step (headers-&gt;cat-&gt;2.25" s-pipe-&gt;3" i-pipe back)
Fuel Delivery: stock fuel pump with 19# Fuel injectors from 1996 Grand Am
PCM: stock program
Transmission: Borg-Warner T5 5-speed with no reverse synchronization
Gears:
1st - 3.75
2nd - 2.19
3rd - 1.41
4th - 1.00
5th - 0.72
6th - N/A
rev - 3.53

heres why i posted all this crap -- its in response to that "when a 3.4 gets to 200 hp, the 3.8 could go way farther" post. my car is a stock "hybrid" 31/3400. when i get the 3400 intake and plenum (+10 hp diff. - bigger plenum and intake runners) i will have a STOCK 3400 sitting in my car with the only difference being the more radical camshaft from the RWD engine. now, my engine will be a stock 3400 engine making 200 hp (210?) and 245+ tq - stock. just like the stock 3.8L (3800) makes 200 / 225. so.. if a STOCK 3400 with a rwd cam in it, makes 200 hp, the same as a stock 3.8L...why is the 3.8 better?

im just curious..thanks.. btw - it isnt. and no amount of evidence will prove otherwise. lb for lb the 3.4L is a better engineered motor. the reason that it doesnt perform as well is because gm wasnt thinking "v6 performance" when they brough it out. the 3.4L uses the same tired old iron heads that have been around since 1983 when the 2.8L v6 was introduced (they are EXACTLY the same from 1983-1995!!) - stupid GM..and even after GM developed the aluminum heads for the 60* motor in 1990 - and put them on FWD engines (why i have no idea) and got more hp/tq to the smaller 3.1L engine in the FWD cars, they STILL did not put them on the 3.4L...or the 3.1L in the f-body, even tho the f-body is a sports/performance car and would have deserved them. why? cause the v6 was meant to be a "economy" option. if you wanted performance the dealer would talk you into a v8. it wasnt till around 1995, when they noticed that people were gravitating towards the v6, and the 3.8 was released here in CA - that they actually thought v6 performance. and by then they had developed the Generation III Aluminum heads, a set of heads which flow AS WELL AS the set of heads that are currently on Tiagos car (im serious... they flow that good)

why they didnt use them? dunno...ask GM.

-R

[ October 08, 2003: Message edited by: Russell ]</p>

toast
10-08-2003, 09:17 AM
1st you 3400 Russel is no where near stock and if it was then it would have stock 3400 compression, piston, rods, exhaust, intake, etc. Stock 3400 are at 185hp and 205lbs of tq. As far as the the 60 degree engine being a better design well that is debatable. Personally i am not a fan the the 60 degree family of GM engines. Also why went they voted as one of the 10 best engines like the 3.8. The 3.8 has been around alot longer and has a much better track record than any other GM v6 besides the 4.3. GMs best V6 engines are the 90 degrees plain and simple. Both the 4.3 and 3.8 are used and track racing and in nomoures other compotions. I am bashing the 3.4 then soo be it, i am just giving my opion on the the 3.4. Do i think it is weak, yes i do, but do i think it has ponteal, well yea look at Tiango. GM replaced the 3.4 with the 3.8 even after the new 3400 came out because the 3.8 is a better engine nad if the 3400 was in the base camaro in 02 i would have never have bought it. The 3.8 is an awesome engine and one of the best V6s that GM has.
Mustangeater: just because your 3.4 can beat a stock 3.8 with 3.08s does not mean that all 3.8s are slotches. If that were true then i guess my car bever ran a 14.85. :rolleyes:

95Batmobile
10-08-2003, 09:46 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by toast:

Mustangeater: just because your 3.4 can beat a stock 3.8 with 3.08s does not mean that all 3.8s are slotches. If that were true then i guess my car bever ran a 14.85. :rolleyes: <hr></blockquote>

Dude, step back a little bit and look at what you're saying.
You are arguing against Russell on points that have alraedy been made, and now you are saying mustangeater can only beat stock 3.8s with 3.08s? You're also forgetting mustangeater ran that with like ONE WHOLE MODIFICATION.
And like I also said, I can beat my friends 2001 3.8... he has 3.42s with LSD against my 3.23s.

But whatever man, there is no use beating a dead horse. If you think the 3.8 is that much more superior then so be it. I don't understand it and I'm not gonna try to change your mind.

cb1101
10-08-2003, 09:59 AM
Can I ask A crazy question?

Who gives a rats a$$ which engine is better? that was not the topic..at all! All the guy wanted to know was if it was possible to hit 200 hp on his 3.4 w/o a power adder. Yes it is. for the record.

Toast...I can tell your upset...i couldn't read/understand half the things you were saying in your post.


Russel, in all fairness your car is not stock. Im sure you put a lot of money in that puppy to get it where it is now.

If i am totally out of line I appologize, but i just had to put my .02 in.

Thank you have a great day!

Ted
10-08-2003, 10:28 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>now, my engine will be a stock 3400 engine making 200 hp (210?) and 245+ tq - stock. just like the stock 3.8L (3800) makes 200 / 225. so.. if a STOCK 3400 with a rwd cam in it, makes 200 hp, the same as a stock 3.8L...why is the 3.8 better?<hr></blockquote>

Who said the 3.8 was better? I said this in my previous post, nobody was getting at that. But you do your cam and all your engine work and it's right about making what the 3.8 is stock, then yea the engines are rated very close to eachother and it's all good. But while you 3.4L guys are doing that. The 3.8L guys are hard at work adding camshafts and all that good stuff and then what are we at? I'll you this much, we're not at no 200hp still. All we're trying to talk about here is potential. Any engine can have potential but after you do all that work on it, how much further can you go?

black34v6
10-08-2003, 11:52 AM
sorry but i just have to laugh at pretty much everyone on this thread - cause yanno what. all of the 3.8 owners that are debating that my engine "isnt stock" - you just dont get it. and im not gonna waste my time trying to make you understand anymore. go ahead and think i dont have a stock motor. yes. i did tons of engine work, i ported the heads, and i did valve jobs, and i gasketmatched everything. no the engine isnt stock, its got a huge cam in it too..really..

HAHAHAHAH

-R
graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif

Jerriko
10-08-2003, 12:01 PM
What I find the funniest is if the 3800 is SO great, why has GM decided to discontinue them? This ain't no joke. At school, we have factory reps in all the time and that's what the GM techs told us. As far as block design goes, they rated the newer 3800s and the 93-95 3.4 as the strongest blocks GM made. That's why I decided to make my engine swap to a 3.4 from the 2.8 terd. It's a direct bolt-on. But its sad how this string was transformed from a quest for knowledge into a bunch of crap.
Jim

black34v6
10-08-2003, 12:07 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by toast:
1st you 3400 Russell is no where near stock<hr></blockquote>

yes it is.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>and if it was then it would have stock 3400 compression, piston, rods, exhaust, intake, etc.
<hr></blockquote>

it does. i have the stock 5.7" forged steel connecting rods. stock crank from the 3400 (it uses the 3.1's crank) i have stock pistons, specifically asked for from Coast Motor supply and acquired from GM as OEM parts, i have a stock 3400 intake, in fact thats what the 31/3400 intake look like (check out the pics here: http://camaro.adwire.com/modpics) the only two things that are different, are my rksport headers, and the fact i have a more aggressive cam - i used the stock 3.4 rwd cam, which is more aggressive than the 3400's cam

3.4L RWD cam:
(flat tappet hydraulic)
109/111.5/196/202/.395/.410

3400 FWD cam:
(roller hydraulic)
109/107/196/196/.395/.395

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>
Stock 3400 are at 185hp and 205lbs of tq.
<hr></blockquote>

yes they are - and ive talked to a few 3400 owners, and they think im getting better numbers because of the beefier cam. mind you its still the "stock" cam that came in my 3.4L RWD camaro. i never changed it.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>
As far as the the 60 degree engine being a better design well that is debatable. Personally i am not a fan the the 60 degree family of GM engines. Also why went they voted as one of the 10 best engines like the 3.8. The 3.8 has been around alot longer and has a much better track record than any other GM v6 besides the 4.3. GMs best V6 engines are the 90 degrees plain and simple. Both the 4.3 and 3.8 are used and track racing and in nomoures other compotions. I am bashing the 3.4 then soo be it, i am just giving my opion on the the 3.4. Do i think it is weak, yes i do, but do i think it has ponteal, well yea look at Tiango. GM replaced the 3.4 with the 3.8 even after the new 3400 came out because the 3.8 is a better engine nad if the 3400 was in the base camaro in 02 i would have never have bought it. The 3.8 is an awesome engine and one of the best V6s that GM has.<hr></blockquote>

thats all well and good. but see. the reason the 3.4 was removed from the f-body was because with them trying to beef it to 200 hp (thats what they attempted) - it wouldnt pass smog in CA. and they need a car that is 50 state legal. so if it wasnt for California, the 3.8 would probably not have emerged for some time in the f-body.

you can have your opinion. i know the facts.

nikkev
10-08-2003, 12:36 PM
How come no one has mentioned on here that the 3.8 usually dyno's at 150rwhp when bone stock? All you bashers keep saying that the 3.4 is over-rated,but so is the 3.8.Also,Tim LeGros made 200rwhp with a stock internal 3.4 motor,only bolt-ons.He made 295rwhp with nitrous.Peace to the V6 camp and you guys need to get along! graemlins/fluffy.gif

black34v6
10-08-2003, 12:43 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by nikkev:
How come no one has mentioned on here that the 3.8 usually dyno's at 150rwhp when bone stock? All you bashers keep saying that the 3.4 is over-rated,but so is the 3.8.Also,Tim LeGros made 200rwhp with a stock internal 3.4 motor,only bolt-ons.He made 295rwhp with nitrous.Peace to the V6 camp and you guys need to get along! graemlins/fluffy.gif <hr></blockquote>

thats all conjecture. he never dyno'd without the nitrous.

and the 3.8 manual usually dyno's at 170 rwhp.

Timbo1969
10-08-2003, 12:45 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by MustangEater8251:


How many people have drien lwo 15s to high 14s DEAD STOCK!

JSut post our time and say it. It relatively rare jsut because one person did it does not mean its possible.<hr></blockquote>
Actually if you look at the Timeslips page you'll see that stock 3.8 N/A times start in the mid 16's. Running high 14's is very hard with a stock 3.8 especially if it has the 3.08 open rear end. Actually the only V6 car I've see run in the 14's stock is the GTP, as far as current GM cars go anyway. This site is about modifying your car to make it faster. It's not about which motor is better. So please give the which motor is better debate a rest.

nikkev
10-08-2003, 01:00 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Russell:


thats all conjecture. he never dyno'd without the nitrous.

and the 3.8 manual usually dyno's at 170 rwhp.<hr></blockquote>


Sure he did.He got his highest NA dyno and his worst N2o dyno on the same day.He dyno'd 199.7? or something like that.And this was in an auto.I am comparing autos to autos here!He did a few more mods and expected to hit 300rwhp+ with nitrous,but actually lost a few ponies on the juice and gained a few NA.I tried to model my old '95 3.4 after his!

[ October 08, 2003: Message edited by: nikkev ]</p>

black34v6
10-08-2003, 01:25 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by nikkev:



Sure he did.He got his highest NA dyno and his worst N2o dyno on the same day.He dyno'd 199.7? or something like that.And this was in an auto.I am comparing autos to autos here!He did a few more mods and expected to hit 300rwhp+ with nitrous,but actually lost a few ponies on the juice and gained a few NA.I tried to model my old '95 3.4 after his!

[ October 08, 2003: Message edited by: nikkev ]<hr></blockquote>

damn. well he told me he never did..sorry if im wrong on that one..

nikkev
10-08-2003, 02:09 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Russell:


damn. well he told me he never did..sorry if im wrong on that one..<hr></blockquote>

All the numbers I got were off his old V6 website,plus a few e-mails.I don't know if the V6 site is still up or not.Haven't had my 3.4 in a while.I sure do miss it graemlins/crybaby.gif

97 30th RS
10-08-2003, 03:49 PM
I hate to chime in so late but, I absolutely hate it when people come on V6, READ IT AGAIN, V6 sites and talk about V8's. No one here has or at this point some might not want a V8 with turbo kits coming out. I don't even bother wasting my time with those *******s at fbody.com Those guys think a V8 is god's gift when most of them can barely afford to mod them because of the insurance. I have always wanted to do a bad *** , big boost 3.8. After watching these motors in racing action and watching Supras puttin out 950 rwhp. Yeah yeah yeah it is a different motor but imagine how much rwhp a 3.8 can make with the same mods as a Supra might get, rods, pistons, cam, head and manifold work, then top off with a T-66 like I want or maybe even a T-70. If a Honda 4 cylinder can move a these a 3.8 liter damn sure can and I am going to do it. By the way, 3.4's don't suck they just require a little work to get 200 hp {I assume the guy meant at the motor}. Tiago, pathogen and others are starting a new revolution for fbody performance. **** doing a V8, that is old news. It's all boost to me now. There I am done. graemlins/burnout.gif

nikkev
10-08-2003, 05:10 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 97 30th RS:
I hate to chime in so late but, I absolutely hate it when people come on V6, READ IT AGAIN, V6 sites and talk about V8's. No one here has or at this point some might not want a V8 with turbo kits coming out. I don't even bother wasting my time with those *******s at fbody.com Those guys think a V8 is god's gift when most of them can barely afford to mod them because of the insurance. I have always wanted to do a bad *** , big boost 3.8. After watching these motors in racing action and watching Supras puttin out 950 rwhp. Yeah yeah yeah it is a different motor but imagine how much rwhp a 3.8 can make with the same mods as a Supra might get, rods, pistons, cam, head and manifold work, then top off with a T-66 like I want or maybe even a T-70. If a Honda 4 cylinder can move a these a 3.8 liter damn sure can and I am going to do it. By the way, 3.4's don't suck they just require a little work to get 200 hp {I assume the guy meant at the motor}. Tiago, pathogen and others are starting a new revolution for fbody performance. **** doing a V8, that is old news. It's all boost to me now. There I am done. graemlins/burnout.gif <hr></blockquote>


Hehe,not all of us are jerks.Also,don't hate us,Tiago is making a kit for LS1's too!
graemlins/thumbsup.gif

MustangEater8251
10-09-2003, 03:46 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Timbo1969:

Actually if you look at the Timeslips page you'll see that stock 3.8 N/A times start in the mid 16's. Running high 14's is very hard with a stock 3.8 especially if it has the 3.08 open rear end. Actually the only V6 car I've see run in the 14's stock is the GTP, as far as current GM cars go anyway. This site is about modifying your car to make it faster. It's not about which motor is better. So please give the which motor is better debate a rest.<hr></blockquote>

Thats what I am trying to say... I see a 3.8L as a high 15, low 16 second car with the potential for mid 15s relatively easily.

Not a high 14, low 15 second car STOCK. Sure they can be modded an run better, I just hate when people make up facts.

3.4L definitely has flaws, but then again so does the 3.8L...

But they both can be built up, an both have potential... 60* v6 is used in many many circle track cars, an also in lots of kit cars like Stalkers.

93v6firebird
10-09-2003, 05:02 PM
Russell: did you buy your car with the engine in form that it currently is?
If you bought an LS1 and put in it.. would your car be stock?
stop being ridiculous. Your car isnt stock.

black34v6
10-09-2003, 05:20 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 93v6firebird:
Russell: did you buy your car with the engine in form that it currently is?
If you bought an LS1 and put in it.. would your car be stock?
stop being ridiculous. Your car isnt stock.<hr></blockquote>

i didnt say my car was stock - stop being stupid..o wait..thats impossible for you.

i said the ENGINE was akin to a stock 3400 engine. specs wise. the only differences are TWO: cam / headers. thats it. everything else about the 3.4 in my car and the stock GM 3400 are identical. EVERYTHING.

and do everyone a favor, stop sticking your nose in **** you dont know about. getting tired of you thinking you are all superior. the only thing you are is a sophomore.

-R

firstlove94
10-09-2003, 05:27 PM
Man I have been waiting, reading and searching for some info on this 200hp thread and I *****ed that a bunch of 3.8l shlubs keep pipin' up about their cars being better, please read this! Shlubs who have 3.8's and opinions on 3.4's: I don't care what you have in your car, I don't care about your opinion unless its helpful, if your on here to dog out a 3.4 then shut up! I have already posted once that your negative and unneeded comments just waste the time of people tring to learn something and the moderator told ME to chill out cause he has a 3.4 and they suck! F*** that man I love my car I want to run the engine thats in MY car, I WANT HELP FROM A FRIKKIN BOARD THAT ISN'T ALL ABOUT ONEUPSMANSHIP! Is there anybody (thanks Russell)other than russell with something helpful to say! Otherwise Shut UP!!!

MustangEater8251
10-09-2003, 07:07 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by firstlove94:
Man I have been waiting, reading and searching for some info on this 200hp thread and I *****ed that a bunch of 3.8l shlubs keep pipin' up about their cars being better, please read this! Shlubs who have 3.8's and opinions on 3.4's: I don't care what you have in your car, I don't care about your opinion unless its helpful, if your on here to dog out a 3.4 then shut up! I have already posted once that your negative and unneeded comments just waste the time of people tring to learn something and the moderator told ME to chill out cause he has a 3.4 and they suck! F*** that man I love my car I want to run the engine thats in MY car, I WANT HELP FROM A FRIKKIN BOARD THAT ISN'T ALL ABOUT ONEUPSMANSHIP! Is there anybody (thanks Russell)other than russell with something helpful to say! Otherwise Shut UP!!!<hr></blockquote>

AMEN!
but sorry to say thats hard to do here...

Acutally if i remebered correctly my car was supposedly near 200 hp at the flywheel, I think I came up with 173 at the wheels doing the weight of car, 1/4 mile trap speed and time formula. But that is not exactly accurate. And I not really sure I mad the gains I did with my mods... But hey if the calculators are right then they are right.

Anyone have a link to one I will try it out again.

[ October 09, 2003: Message edited by: MustangEater8251 ]</p>

Justin Kirkham
10-09-2003, 07:29 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Man I have been waiting, reading and searching for some info on this 200hp thread and I *****ed that a bunch of 3.8l shlubs keep pipin' up about their cars being better, please read this! Shlubs who have 3.8's and opinions on 3.4's: I don't care what you have in your car, I don't care about your opinion unless its helpful, if your on here to dog out a 3.4 then shut up! I have already posted once that your negative and unneeded comments just waste the time of people tring to learn something and the moderator told ME to chill out cause he has a 3.4 and they suck! F*** that man I love my car I want to run the engine thats in MY car, I WANT HELP FROM A FRIKKIN BOARD THAT ISN'T ALL ABOUT ONEUPSMANSHIP! Is there anybody (thanks Russell)other than russell with something helpful to say! Otherwise Shut UP!!!<hr></blockquote>

It's funny how some 3.8 owners get the attitude of a V8 owner when discussing 3.4's....

-Justin

MustangEater8251
10-09-2003, 07:33 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Justin Kirkham:


It's funny how some 3.8 owners get the attitude of a V8 owner when discussing 3.4's....

-Justin<hr></blockquote>

V8 owner to 3.8L owner...
"why did you mod a v6, the money you spend on the v6 is outragous for what it takes to be stock to a v8.

3.8L owner to 3.4L...
"why do you mod a 3.4L, the money you spend on the 3.4L is outrageous for what it takes to be stock ot a 3.8L.

tongue.gif

toast
10-09-2003, 08:25 PM
Well at least we are not modding 4cly like some people i know, cough(James)cough. :D tongue.gif ;)

95Batmobile
10-09-2003, 08:38 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 97 30th RS:
I hate to chime in so late but, I absolutely hate it when people come on V6, READ IT AGAIN, V6 sites and talk about V8's. No one here has or at this point some might not want a V8 with turbo kits coming out. I don't even bother wasting my time with those *******s at fbody.com Those guys think a V8 is god's gift when most of them can barely afford to mod them because of the insurance. I have always wanted to do a bad *** , big boost 3.8. After watching these motors in racing action and watching Supras puttin out 950 rwhp. Yeah yeah yeah it is a different motor but imagine how much rwhp a 3.8 can make with the same mods as a Supra might get, rods, pistons, cam, head and manifold work, then top off with a T-66 like I want or maybe even a T-70. If a Honda 4 cylinder can move a these a 3.8 liter damn sure can and I am going to do it. By the way, 3.4's don't suck they just require a little work to get 200 hp {I assume the guy meant at the motor}. Tiago, pathogen and others are starting a new revolution for fbody performance. **** doing a V8, that is old news. It's all boost to me now. There I am done. graemlins/burnout.gif <hr></blockquote>

Good point, except a 950rwhp supra will run like 10s.
Supras are a hard car to get down the track, but they look bad *** .

I think the point has been proven, 3.4 isn't that bad of a motor, and TTT.

MustangEater8251
10-10-2003, 06:31 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 95Batmobile:


Good point, except a 950rwhp supra will run like 10s.
Supras are a hard car to get down the track, but they look bad *** .

<hr></blockquote>

Whats the difference between a 700 hp supra, a 800 hp supra, a 900 hp supra and a 1200 supra...


Nothing they all run 12s

tongue.gif

95Batmobile
10-10-2003, 07:55 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by MustangEater8251:


Whats the difference between a 700 hp supra, a 800 hp supra, a 900 hp supra and a 1200 supra...


Nothing they all run 12s

tongue.gif <hr></blockquote>

graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif
Good one..

Jim Gunther
10-14-2003, 12:40 PM
I was unable to jump in on this thread 'til now but, maybe that's a good thing.

Fact is, I'm 'kinda commited to the 60 degree motor and I'd like to get some nice reliable power out of it. Logic tells me that 1 Horsepower per Cubic Inch OUGHT to be pretty easy to attain.

In my application (I'm building a www.StalkerV6.com) (http://www.StalkerV6.com)) I don't have to worry about computer, smog or the rest of that confusing &lt;to me&gt; stuff. I have great headers, I'll probably use the Holley 390 CFM Carb with an Edelbrock manifold ("tho it doesn't LOOK like it could flow properly). Other than that, there appear to be few ways to boost power. Heck, I haven't even seem a bullet-proof Turbo or Supercharger yet.
Maybe somebody knows of reasonable work that can be done to the heads?

MustangEater8251
10-14-2003, 03:28 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Jim Gunther:
I was unable to jump in on this thread 'til now but, maybe that's a good thing.

Fact is, I'm 'kinda commited to the 60 degree motor and I'd like to get some nice reliable power out of it. Logic tells me that 1 Horsepower per Cubic Inch OUGHT to be pretty easy to attain.

In my application (I'm building a www.StalkerV6.com) (http://www.StalkerV6.com)) I don't have to worry about computer, smog or the rest of that confusing &lt;to me&gt; stuff. I have great headers, I'll probably use the Holley 390 CFM Carb with an Edelbrock manifold ("tho it doesn't LOOK like it could flow properly). Other than that, there appear to be few ways to boost power. Heck, I haven't even seem a bullet-proof Turbo or Supercharger yet.
Maybe somebody knows of reasonable work that can be done to the heads?<hr></blockquote>


hehe here is ome stuff you can do...

http://www.rksport.com/prod_detail.php?prod_id=02099100&view=detail

go to the v6 section and dig throught eh internal v6 stuff.


Actually you have mroe potential then most of us, since you have no computer, you are running off a distributor that is one of the big problems with cams for 3.4Ls, they run off a sensor, not mechanically by a distributor, like yours is.

A cam will liven up the motor alot, the stock cam is like a truck cam that is for a motor made to pull a boat or something, 160hp, 200 ft. lbs. is a big gap.

Also I think super six still will do 3.4L heads I think someone jsut got some recently.

by the way v6 stalkers, are awesome, guy pulled best time of the day, beating out shifter carts at one autocross I went to awhile back.

Jim Gunther
10-14-2003, 06:27 PM
Thanks for the link Eric.

You probably saw Dennis Brunton in the StalkerV6. Dennis is the developer/builder of the Stalker. He's located in Bradenton, FL. He's got over 25,000 pretty hard miles (LOTS of Autocross) in the last 2 years. The Red and Black car is the prototype/mule whatever.
Be well,
Jim

StudlyCamaro
10-23-2003, 11:37 AM
yeah i know im late here.. where should i start

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

i said the ENGINE was akin to a stock 3400 engine. specs wise. the only differences are TWO: cam / headers. thats it. everything else about the 3.4 in my car and the stock GM 3400 are identical. EVERYTHING.<hr></blockquote>


i hear what you are sayin buddy, and i compleetly agree smile.gif

if you had ported the heads, or put a new cam in.. that would be a diff story..

and to thoes of you who said that russell had spent a lot of money on his car.. umm.. do a search and see how much he spent including paying someone to rebuild the motor.. you might think differently after that tongue.gif


oh and BTW 200 HP N/A is an obtainable goal for the 3.4L , this thread almost makes me want to run my new motor n/a just so i can prove a point lol

mattsv6
10-23-2003, 01:41 PM
hell, if you guys want too see a n/a 3.4 make over 250 too the wheels ill take my turbo kit off and run on a dyno, and i am sure that josh would also like too do this. there are soo many things better with the 3.4 then the 3.8. i love going too the track and seeing all the gay little 3.4 motored cars owning the v8 cars due to consistency. i have seen them go as fast as the 9's and there is no calling bs about that. if the 3.4 is such a bad motor then how did it hold up too the abuse i have thrown at it so far.there is also a raceblock for the 60* motor that is totally bulletproof. idont see one of those for the 3800 series 2 jsut yet. but i think the 3800 is a kickass motor. and why are we arguing about which v6 is better anyways? who cares. we all get flamed by most of the v8 guys because they have 2 more cyllinders and all that crap. stop complaining and talkin crap and go mod your cars. i take credit cards, checks, money orders, and cash. and i canmake your lil six go as fast as you want. graemlins/burnout.gif

elvis89fb
10-26-2003, 11:29 PM
well alright now that you have all flamed and burnt each other to crispy, wasting good web space to run each other down, listen to some expert help,
1. i personally know of a 3.4 which is turning 200 hp at the rear and dyno qualified easly also know another 3.4 who is turning 300 hp at the rear also dynoed qualified and have heard there are some out there turning low 9s

2.for those of you who dont know and it seems most are in that catagory 2.8 3.1 3.4 are all v6 60 degrees and all are excellent engines, well tested and raced, when done right but, i bet you didnt know there is also a winston cup race engine 4.2 hybred 60 degree v6, yep i knew you didnt know that. super six is a excellent choice to start with any mod works, talked to them just the other day, and they have some parts that i have on hold that im picking up this week.

3. my v6 4.2 winston cup race engine makes more horse power per cylinder than your v8s, also with 25 to 30 miles to the gallon, any shmo can go and buy a v8 and run it, but it takes real enginering and work and brain power to make a v6 take v8s and spank them and guess what when they want to know what your running, it hurts twice as bad to realize they just got beat by a 6 daily driver.also i might add it dosnt take long to see whose car the crowd at the show is interested in seeing and its not the v8

4. you might check fleugal, i dont think i spelled there mname right, tho maybe one of you guys can help out on the web site and spelling but they make a excellent roots blower, which got its start at b and m products and that was back in the 80s when they were more then just a tranny company, then gm got to looking at the work they had done and started to work with flegual, which resulted in a co-op project the roots blower for the 6s, which now has resulted in a very reliable product that comes custom for your car, with everything you need to make it go, i talked to them a while back

5. now concerning the 390 holly, excellent choice and it works well and flows well, i know because i run it on my car now, however i think we will both find out shortly when i try both the 500 and 600 cfm edlebrock that both of those may in the long run depending on your mods be a better carb choice,
check back with me on that and i will let you know.

iknow you said you were running a edlebrock manifold which one and dont forget that when you are done with all the work add the 75 to 100 shot and set it up as a dry shot graemlins/burnout.gif

95Batmobile
10-26-2003, 11:44 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by elvis89fb:
well alright now that you have all flamed and burnt each other to crispy, wasting good web space to run each other down, listen to some expert help,
1. i personally know of a 3.4 which is turning 200 hp at the rear and dyno qualified easly also know another 3.4 who is turning 300 hp at the rear also dynoed qualified and have heard there are some out there turning low 9s

2.for those of you who dont know and it seems most are in that catagory 2.8 3.1 3.4 are all v6 60 degrees and all are excellent engines, well tested and raced, when done right but, i bet you didnt know there is also a winston cup race engine 4.2 hybred 60 degree v6, yep i knew you didnt know that. super six is a excellent choice to start with any mod works, talked to them just the other day, and they have some parts that i have on hold that im picking up this week.

3. my v6 4.2 winston cup race engine makes more horse power per cylinder than your v8s, also with 25 to 30 miles to the gallon, any shmo can go and buy a v8 and run it, but it takes real enginering and work and brain power to make a v6 take v8s and spank them and guess what when they want to know what your running, it hurts twice as bad to realize they just got beat by a 6 daily driver.also i might add it dosnt take long to see whose car the crowd at the show is interested in seeing and its not the v8

4. you might check fleugal, i dont think i spelled there mname right, tho maybe one of you guys can help out on the web site and spelling but they make a excellent roots blower, which got its start at b and m products and that was back in the 80s when they were more then just a tranny company, then gm got to looking at the work they had done and started to work with flegual, which resulted in a co-op project the roots blower for the 6s, which now has resulted in a very reliable product that comes custom for your car, with everything you need to make it go, i talked to them a while back

5. now concerning the 390 holly, excellent choice and it works well and flows well, i know because i run it on my car now, however i think we will both find out shortly when i try both the 500 and 600 cfm edlebrock that both of those may in the long run depending on your mods be a better carb choice,
check back with me on that and i will let you know.

iknow you said you were running a edlebrock manifold which one and dont forget that when you are done with all the work add the 75 to 100 shot and set it up as a dry shot graemlins/burnout.gif <hr></blockquote>

Since you apparently think of yourself as the omniscient god of V6s, you sure don't pay attention to detail when the topic of the post says "possible WITHOUT POWER ADDER".

You are talking about superchargers and NOS when the guy doesn't want a power adder, so basically everything you said was worthless.

And last time I checked, ur v6 that nobody knows about isn't all that "secret"...

Also... heard that v6s are turning low 9s... wow... special. If I had money I could put an LS1 or LS6 in the low 10s n/a...

More hp per cylinder than a V8... special.. do you also drive a Civic by any chance? You sure do sound like a ricer.

Next time try not to come off as such an a55hole in your post, and if you are an a55, at least make sure you're posting something that is answering the topic question.

elvis89fb
10-27-2003, 12:08 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 95Batmobile:


Since you apparently think of yourself as the omniscient god of V6s, you sure don't pay attention to detail when the topic of the post says "possible WITHOUT POWER ADDER".

You are talking about superchargers and NOS when the guy doesn't want a power adder, so basically everything you said was worthless.

And last time I checked, ur v6 that nobody knows about isn't all that "secret"...

Also... heard that v6s are turning low 9s... wow... special. If I had money I could put an LS1 or LS6 in the low 10s n/a...

More hp per cylinder than a V8... special.. do you also drive a Civic by any chance? You sure do sound like a ricer.

Next time try not to come off as such an a55hole in your post, and if you are an a55, at least make sure you're posting something that is answering the topic question.<hr></blockquote>

this is the problem with this site and other 2nd rate car sites, you are to busy flaming to listen to anything someone has to say,

1. im am by no means the god of anything, but since ihave owned both corvettes 1969 350 350 roadster and a camaro since 1984, i think that working with the v6 for 19 years, pretty much qualifies me as a expert at some thing dont you think,since if you ever read any of the mags, you would know that i also sponsored one of the fastest 2.8 in the usa, but since you know nothing of my quite lenghty background, i will forgive you
this one time

2. i didnt miss the addiage of without power adder and only offered that as a addition if and when he would care to try some more power after everything else,not to mention the quite lenghty other treads discussing other cars with so called supercharger or turbo packages.

3. and if you think everything i said is worthless, than you are ignorant, look any reliable and pert info is good info, the only thing he needs to do, is decide if he wants to use it or not

4. no my little bit of a secret has really been getting alot of attention, you know jealousy dosnt look good on anybody

5 a v6 doing something no one ever thought it could, like low 9s and possibly 8s is certainly special and takes some enginering and real smart, qualified, thought

6 no i dont drive a civic for you personal info, nor am i a ricer , but what i am is educated and have a degree in nuclear enginering, all tho i dont work in the field, who knows maybe next ill put a nuclear pile in the engine compartment and the next time you try to flame me or come up on my car ill just irradiate you, hahahhahahahahahaha, funny

7 and next time you want to speak to me, have a little more respect and use less cuss words, im sure you learned a good comand of the english language, i respect you, you do the same with me, ok, ok

[ October 27, 2003: Message edited by: elvis89fb ]

[ October 27, 2003: Message edited by: elvis89fb ]</p>

Silver98Maro
10-27-2003, 01:17 AM
Hey, did anyone else notice that pyrokilla, the topic starter, stopped posting not even the middle of the first page of this thread?

his last post was sept 30....almost a month ago

i guess he couldnt find anything else useful in the thread that related to his original question

graemlins/fluffy.gif graemlins/fluffy.gif graemlins/fluffy.gif

93v6firebird
10-27-2003, 01:57 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Russell:


i didnt say my car was stock - stop being stupid..o wait..thats impossible for you.

i said the ENGINE was akin to a stock 3400 engine. specs wise. the only differences are TWO: cam / headers. thats it. everything else about the 3.4 in my car and the stock GM 3400 are identical. EVERYTHING.

and do everyone a favor, stop sticking your nose in **** you dont know about. getting tired of you thinking you are all superior. the only thing you are is a sophomore.

-R<hr></blockquote>

and all you are is a dead beat fatass that gets a god complex b/c you did a stupid ****ing thing to the engine of your car. When you do something that matters or is significant that someone should care about let me know.
Until then stop trying to force down everyones throat that they should worship you b/c you did something revolutionary to your car. Remember its your car.
Oh by the way Im a junior. And something tells me that if we had start a population reduction policy your worthless *** would be killed before me, so stop all the ****ing bull**** and instead of lifting all those ratchets try lifting some weights.
*******.

95Batmobile
10-27-2003, 09:45 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by elvis89fb:


this is the problem with this site and other 2nd rate car sites, you are to busy flaming to listen to anything someone has to say,

1. im am by no means the god of anything, but since ihave owned both corvettes 1969 350 350 roadster and a camaro since 1984, i think that working with the v6 for 19 years, pretty much qualifies me as a expert at some thing dont you think,since if you ever read any of the mags, you would know that i also sponsored one of the fastest 2.8 in the usa, but since you know nothing of my quite lenghty background, i will forgive you
this one time

2. i didnt miss the addiage of without power adder and only offered that as a addition if and when he would care to try some more power after everything else,not to mention the quite lenghty other treads discussing other cars with so called supercharger or turbo packages.

3. and if you think everything i said is worthless, than you are ignorant, look any reliable and pert info is good info, the only thing he needs to do, is decide if he wants to use it or not

4. no my little bit of a secret has really been getting alot of attention, you know jealousy dosnt look good on anybody

5 a v6 doing something no one ever thought it could, like low 9s and possibly 8s is certainly special and takes some enginering and real smart, qualified, thought

6 no i dont drive a civic for you personal info, nor am i a ricer , but what i am is educated and have a degree in nuclear enginering, all tho i dont work in the field, who knows maybe next ill put a nulear pile in the engine compartment and the next time you try to flame me or come up on my car ill just irradiate you, hahahhahahahahahaha, funny

7 and next time you want to speak to me, have a little more respect and use less cuss words, im sure you learned a good comand of the english language, i respect you, you do the same with me, ok, ok

[ October 27, 2003: Message edited by: elvis89fb ]<hr></blockquote>

Ok, for your #1: You need to learn 1 word, HUMBLE. There is always somebody smarter than you out there that you can learn from so don't think you are the best at what you do. Been working with V6s for 19 years? That is an accomplishment and all, IF ITS TRUE, but my dad has been working on cars for over 30 years. He's built the motor and trans in 3 championship winning cars this year alone. Get a clue and realize you're not the only talented person out there.

#2 and #3 I can barely understand.

In response to #4: I am not jealous of you at all. I have the fastest n/a 3.4 on this board, only waiting for the damned track to open so I can prove it. 15.4s? No, try 14s.

#5 was just stupid.

#6: If you're a "nuclear engineer" then my mom is a virgin. Learn some grammar first, then try to lie about your profession. And please, get a "nuclear pile" and come "irradiate" me.

And finally #7: I do have a little respect for you, but like I told you in my last post, you come across as an a55hole on here and that is no way to gain respect.
You say you're all smart and whatnot, but if you read your post you didn't help the guy a single bit in getting his car to 200hp. You just flamed like the rest of the people about how fast a V6 can go and what kind of mileage it gets and blah blah blah.
Try not to be an a55 and you will gain the respect of other members... and drop the whole "nuclear engineer" thing too.

elvis89fb
10-27-2003, 11:35 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 95Batmobile:


Ok, for your #1: You need to learn 1 word, HUMBLE. There is always somebody smarter than you out there that you can learn from so don't think you are the best at what you do. Been working with V6s for 19 years? That is an accomplishment and all, IF ITS TRUE, but my dad has been working on cars for over 30 years. He's built the motor and trans in 3 championship winning cars this year alone. Get a clue and realize you're not the only talented person out there.

#2 and #3 I can barely understand.

In response to #4: I am not jealous of you at all. I have the fastest n/a 3.4 on this board, only waiting for the damned track to open so I can prove it. 15.4s? No, try 14s.

#5 was just stupid.

#6: If you're a "nuclear engineer" then my mom is a virgin. Learn some grammar first, then try to lie about your profession. And please, get a "nuclear pile" and come "irradiate" me.

And finally #7: I do have a little respect for you, but like I told you in my last post, you come across as an a55hole on here and that is no way to gain respect.
You say you're all smart and whatnot, but if you read your post you didn't help the guy a single bit in getting his car to 200hp. You just flamed like the rest of the people about how fast a V6 can go and what kind of mileage it gets and blah blah blah.
Try not to be an a55 and you will gain the respect of other members... and drop the whole "nuclear engineer" thing too.<hr></blockquote>

1 if you could only read, you would understand, that i am very humble and do understand, that every one can learn something from some one else, your problem is you are way to young to understand another person opinion, or respect it and you seem to carry a real chip on your shoulders for those who may know more and your ignorant to think that i would not tell you or for that matter any one the truth, sorry i dont have to prove it, just base fact the truth and as far as your dad is concerned, (if it is true), he has won 3 championships then good for him , im happy to here it and i know your proud of him, but can you now see how the statement, (if it is true),is so dumb, i have no way of knowing if is or not, but i respect you enough to tell me the truth, as i have told you the truth.and i never said, i was the only talented person here, please dont put words in my mouth that were never spoken, but simply offered that info as backing for my perspective,

2 and 3 you cant understand, they are in direct response to your statements, whats there not to understand

4 in response to this, i can only tell you to refer to your 1 above and listen to your own words , i think you need to be a little more humble, or maybe some of the cars that are out there will let you eat there humble dust, hahahaha
remember there will always be someone better, faster, smarter, richer, as well so grow up

5 if you think 5 is stupid, then you are really young or just to stupid,i hope not stupid

6. yes i have a nuclear degree of enginerring, please dont bring your virgin mother into this, stand on your own two feet and sorry its not my grammar that is bad, but my typing, cant type as well as i should to slow and dont take the time to check it all, now that is something i dont do well, but then thats whats secretarys are for and nuclear pile is a joke my young friend, but with the chip on your shoulder, i dare say, very little makes you laugh.

7. if you would get rid of the chip, you would find that im not a donkey at all but a person with a qualified opinion, one which you do not share and that is your right, now as for respect, im not out to earn anybodys respect, i dont have to, i have already earned the respect from many who have gone much faster than you may ever go and have done it many times before you

this is so stupid, a guy wants answers, i gave a general opinion and in my first response even mentioned all the flaming but i guess you couldnt or didnt read that, if he wants more info on my respose, he will contact me and i can tell him how to make more horsepower than he thought possible, i said this entire conversation was stupid and uncalled for, however i beleave that you are either part of the problem or part of the solution so i have taken it upon myself to be part of the solution and to spend the time explaining things to you, things that i dont have to explain, in an attempt and hope that you will learn and grow.

93v6firebird
10-27-2003, 11:36 AM
we do have a rocket scientist on the board, he's from somewhere in the southwest.

elvis89fb
10-27-2003, 11:53 AM
kool i bet his ride flys

93v6firebird
10-27-2003, 12:01 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by elvis89fb:
kool i bet his ride flys<hr></blockquote>
youre a ****in tool go to hell.

elvis89fb
10-27-2003, 07:25 PM
what on earth is your problem :rolleyes:

Drake
10-27-2003, 07:46 PM
I don't know why the hell I keep coming to these message boards. I guess some of you people have nothing better to do than to sit around and trash talk people over the internet. People like you make me sad. Not really sad for me, but for all the time that your wasting...including mine.

elvis89fb
10-27-2003, 07:53 PM
who are you talking about or to

Jerriko
10-27-2003, 08:00 PM
????
What happened here? I remember when this thread got started and no one bothered to answer the topic starter's. I think that anyone responsing to this thread is stupid, including myself. Just stop this crap!

elvis89fb
10-27-2003, 08:02 PM
graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/fluffy.gif graemlins/burnout.gif

ReodDai
10-27-2003, 08:02 PM
Anyone else think its funny that moderators on this board yell and cuss at people. Really need to go look up what your title means, not join in like a small child. Every engine has a good and a bad, every person wants their car to be better, get over it. If someone asks for advice or if something is possible dont' trash them for wanting to try something. Either add in valuable advice or please don't waste people's time in posting. I'm not going to bother adding in advice because the original poster probably hasn't looked at this thread in some time now. If it makes you feel better to trash other people's cars then please moderators start deleting posts or getting rid of people that have no input into the v6 community.
Every person that posts a flame against another person only looks like a cry baby to everyone graemlins/crybaby.gif . I've been a member of this board for a little while and I never really see many posts that have anything valuable in them. It all ends up getting closed for no good reason because "You didn't search--- CLOSED". If you really want to close a thread CLOSE THESE! Not ones that people where actually having a conversation on.

Magnus
10-27-2003, 08:10 PM
all i see is a bunch of children *****ing and moaning.. boo hooo..

Yea 200rwhp is possible with an NA 3.4... but what are your goals and desires??? You're looking at a low 15 sec car then.

Figure it will take some nice $$$... look at your options.. you could do an engine/tranny 3.8 swap for $600 if you look hard enough. Bone stock it would be going much faster than any NA 3.4 with the same gear.

If you will be happy spending a good chunk of $$$ and only running low 15's in the 1/4 (this is NOT a jab its just fact).. then i'd say mod the 3.4.. but you really need to weigh your options out and decide what you really want, and what you can really afford.

elvis89fb
10-27-2003, 08:13 PM
hey ditto and that is exactly what i was saying after my 1st post in response to his questions on the topic and what was being said in return, but apparently they just cant read, so what can you do but laugh it off, but it is stupid and uncalled for, hey if you get a chance to check out scfba.net, you will find we dont allow those types of things to go on and no profanity allowed either stated or implied, we are a good club and site come on over and breath the fresh air

Ryan94V6
10-27-2003, 08:38 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 95Batmobile:
[QB]


I have the fastest n/a 3.4 on this board, only waiting for the damned track to open so I can prove it. 15.4s? No, try 14s.

QB]<hr></blockquote>
Good luck on hitting 14's bro! Im also expecting high 14's depending on the conditions and sh*t . The guy who rebuilt my engine expects about 245 HP out of it. I need to hit the dyno quick to find out. Good luck

[ October 27, 2003: Message edited by: Ryan94V6 ]</p>

95Batmobile
10-27-2003, 08:45 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ryan94V6:

Good luck on hitting 14's bro! Im also expecting high 14's depending on the conditions and sh*t . The guy who rebuilt my engine expects about 245 HP out of it. I need to hit the dyno quick to find out. Good luck

[ October 27, 2003: Message edited by: Ryan94V6 ]<hr></blockquote>

Yeah, I wanted to take my car to a dyno but I can't find one around here anymore!
My dad worked at a shop with the only dyno in the area, but the damn owner went to jail so the shop closed lol. Somebody bought his dyno, but it's just collecting dust and he wont put it in...

Good luck with you hitting 14s too! I have to wait til like next year to run my car :(

What work do you have done? I've done almost everything I can do without messing with the motor tongue.gif I don't really want to tear apart my 3.4... just run 14s then save for an LS6 hehe.

Edit: And 93v6..
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 93v6firebird:

youre a ****in tool go to hell.<hr></blockquote>

That was hilarious graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif

[ October 27, 2003: Message edited by: 95Batmobile ]</p>

Ryan94V6
10-27-2003, 08:53 PM
Ive got the mods in the sig plus a totally rebuilt engine(P&P heads and intakes,pistons and bored 30 over , Cam , 1.6 gold series roller rockers , ect.) Ive got alot more done but its just too much to type. Ive got everything internal done to the engine. Plus every bolton but I will one day have a torque converter.
I just need to save up for a while. (too many bills to pay right now)

elvis89fb
10-27-2003, 08:56 PM
graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif good luck hope you reach the next level graemlins/toto.gif keep running toto one day you may get it and catch up until then ill be seeing you in my rears graemlins/fluffy.gif graemlins/burnout.gif

Magnus
10-27-2003, 08:56 PM
you wont hit 14's with a stock converter in a 3.4 nautrally aspirated.

MustangEater8251
10-27-2003, 09:01 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Magnus:
all i see is a bunch of children *****ing and moaning.. boo hooo..

Yea 200rwhp is possible with an NA 3.4... but what are your goals and desires??? You're looking at a low 15 sec car then.

Figure it will take some nice $$$... look at your options.. you could do an engine/tranny 3.8 swap for $600 if you look hard enough. Bone stock it would be going much faster than any NA 3.4 with the same gear.

If you will be happy spending a good chunk of $$$ and only running low 15's in the 1/4 (this is NOT a jab its just fact).. then i'd say mod the 3.4.. but you really need to weigh your options out and decide what you really want, and what you can really afford.<hr></blockquote>


Ugh... for the love of mother ****ing GOD, stop reccomending 3.8L swaps to people with 3.4Ls!

You have to change engine, tranny, and pcm for it to work! If you are going to do that why not do an LT1 and run low 14s high 13s, stock!

Feck a 3.4L---&gt; lt1 swap is easier then a 3.4L ---&gt; 3.8L swap, since more people have done it, and some things are interchangeable like the AC system.


And sorry I got to say this board is looking REALLY immature, and that is pretty bad coming from me, since afterall I am relatively pretty immature myself

graemlins/fluffy.gif

Either way, people with 3.8Ls, your motors are God, don't waste your time in 3.4L threads.

3.4L guys trying to take my spot on the timesheet list, get off your asses and beat me ;) Its very possible, my actual motor, exhasut manifolds, and pcm are all stock, and though my car is light, I am a big mother****er at 6'5" ~300 lbs.

And to anyone looking to mod there 3.4L, things that helped my car the most, was LSD, adding gear, and opening up the exhaust(but don't do it too much, kills the gains)


Enjoy!

MustangEater8251
10-27-2003, 09:03 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Magnus:
you wont hit 14's with a stock converter in a 3.4 nautrally aspirated.<hr></blockquote>


I disagree.

Ryan94V6
10-27-2003, 09:06 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Magnus:
you wont hit 14's with a stock converter in a 3.4 nautrally aspirated.<hr></blockquote>

And why is that ?
Tim LeGros had a 91 mph trap speed which would be good enough for high 14's . Correct me if im wrong. But Im not sure if he had an aftermarket converter

Magnus
10-27-2003, 09:21 PM
need more than MPH for a 14 sec slip.. you'll need some quickness.. You'd have to do some MAJOR hp mods and SERIOUS weight reduction to put an NA 3.4 in the 14's with a stock verter.

Lets be realistic here. We're not playing the "Oh its possible... IF YOU ARE A MILLIONAIRE!!!!" game. screw that crap.

FYI.. You can get an engine/tranny/PCM/harness 3.8 combo for $600 if you look around. That doesn't include shipping.

MustangEater8251, you are trying to play the what if, lets be hypothetical, can we race in space?, it CAN be done, lets race on paper.... game.

How about we be serious for once and talk realistically.

MustangEater8251
10-27-2003, 09:37 PM
I am being serious its not that hard.

Serious weight reduction to the point of the car not being able to be daily driven? Thats just dumb, no one likes that.

The DOHC 3.4L has 215,hp, 230ish torque, so the block can support it, just need to find a way to get the heads to work as efficiently as it woudl in the DOHC. Then some mods.

YOu can up the comrpession, maybe try the Russell swap.

There are ways to do it, 60* v6 motors have made serious power before and can still.

But why repeat myself, its been said 50 times in this thread, and its falling on deaf ears.

We shoudl all give up and do 3.8L swaps!

Magnus
10-27-2003, 09:44 PM
lol a GOOD converter/tire combo could kick .5 right off of your ET in good weather. Why battle with so much crap when you have so much that can be easily gained from a torque converter.

I'd recomend a PI with a HIGH STR. I don't think Yanks do to well in V6's and I haven't seen edge perform that well either.

MustangEater8251
10-27-2003, 09:50 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Magnus:
lol a GOOD converter/tire combo could kick .5 right off of your ET in good weather. Why battle with so much crap when you have so much that can be easily gained from a torque converter.

I'd recomend a PI with a HIGH STR. I don't think Yanks do to well in V6's and I haven't seen edge perform that well either.<hr></blockquote>


I agree, I think a converter will make a huge difference on an auto a well worthwhile investment, but I still think 14s is possible without a converter.

Ryan94V6
10-27-2003, 10:15 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by MustangEater8251:



I still think 14s is possible without a converter.<hr></blockquote>
Im also with you on that one but we cant find out until someone with a built 3.4 goes to the track. Im still trying to break my motor in so its gonna have to wait alittle while longer.

MustangEater8251
10-27-2003, 10:20 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ryan94V6:

Im also with you on that one but we cant find out until someone with a built 3.4 goes to the track. Im still trying to break my motor in so its gonna have to wait alittle while longer.<hr></blockquote>

If you do take it, might be able to convince me to make the 2.5 hour drive to morrosso, to watch, or even go head to head(won't be in my 3.4L though :( )

Ryan94V6
10-27-2003, 10:28 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Magnus:
[QB]need more than MPH for a 14 sec slip.. you'll need some quickness..

QB]<hr></blockquote>

Lets just put it this way.....My car is so damn quick off the line that I could probly stay or keep up with an AWD WRX off the line.

Magnus
10-27-2003, 10:31 PM
k. No offense, but that really means nothing to everyone without a timeslip.

Lets not bench race.

Ryan94V6
10-27-2003, 10:35 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Magnus:
k. No offense, but that really means nothing to everyone without a timeslip.

Lets not bench race.<hr></blockquote>
Ok, no problem...no timeslips here so I cant prove it . sorry bout that.

Brett Garret
10-27-2003, 10:44 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr> "Nuclear Engineering" <hr></blockquote>

It's Nuke-ular, the S is silent. -Peter Griffin

-Just trying to lighten things up.-
The 3.4L is a damned good engine. The 3.8L is a swell engine too. With the proper boltons and a sweet cam I think 200 isn't TOO hard to reach. It'll cost a bit, but hey, we have different things to work with. To get to 200 specifically try lsd, gears, full 3'(headers and whatnot) back, cai, pulleys, tq converter for the autos, clutch for the manuals, ignition upgrades (plugs, wires, etc), and my personal touch would be a cam the size of a baseball bat ;) . I like Russells setup alot, its very 'clean'. Don't let people put down your engine just because its older or not the latest and greatest. It's not what engine you have, it's how YOU take it on. It seems I've seen more colorfuly modded 3.4s than 3.8s. I don't put down 3.8s because they are a VERY good engine and have what seems as massive potential. But as my prior statement: no engine is 'better' than another - they're all stock till you turn it into something that YOU like. Civics beat Vipers sometimes, sometimes 3.8s beat Mustang GTs (well I like to think more than just sometimes), sometimes I poop too much. It's all in how you play the cards. Godspeed and everyone lets go grab a cold one. &lt;3 -B

elvis89fb
10-27-2003, 11:00 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Brett Garret:


It's Nuke-ular, the S is silent. -Peter Griffin

-Just trying to lighten things up.-
The 3.4L is a damned good engine. The 3.8L is a swell engine too. With the proper boltons and a sweet cam I think 200 isn't TOO hard to reach. It'll cost a bit, but hey, we have different things to work with. To get to 200 specifically try lsd, gears, full 3'(headers and whatnot) back, cai, pulleys, tq converter for the autos, clutch for the manuals, ignition upgrades (plugs, wires, etc), and my personal touch would be a cam the size of a baseball bat ;) . I like Russells setup alot, its very 'clean'. Don't let people put down your engine just because its older or not the latest and greatest. It's not what engine you have, it's how YOU take it on. It seems I've seen more colorfuly modded 3.4s than 3.8s. I don't put down 3.8s because they are a VERY good engine and have what seems as massive potential. But as my prior statement: no engine is 'better' than another - they're all stock till you turn it into something that YOU like. Civics beat Vipers sometimes, sometimes 3.8s beat Mustang GTs (well I like to think more than just sometimes), sometimes I poop too much. It's all in how you play the cards. Godspeed and everyone lets go grab a cold one. &lt;3 -B<hr></blockquote>

graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif nuke-ular the s is silent graemlins/rofl.gif :cool: love it man ill race you to the cold one if you loose you buy graemlins/evilgrin.gif graemlins/burnout.gif :cool:

black34v6
10-28-2003, 05:03 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 93v6firebird:


and all you are is a dead beat fatass that gets a god complex b/c you did a stupid ****ing thing to the engine of your car. When you do something that matters or is significant that someone should care about let me know.
Until then stop trying to force down everyones throat that they should worship you b/c you did something revolutionary to your car. Remember its your car.
Oh by the way Im a junior. And something tells me that if we had start a population reduction policy your worthless *** would be killed before me, so stop all the ****ing bull**** and instead of lifting all those ratchets try lifting some weights.
*******.<hr></blockquote>

wow. all those big words from you. did your mommy help you look them all up? &lt;chuckles a lot at you&gt;

and you are a sophomore. look up the word, you'll understand why i call you it. (wonders if anyone else notices that this guy just has a huge stick up his *** )

i dont expect anyone to worship me. i do notice that 95% of the people on here - forget what i did and i see a lot of "can i get 200 hp" or - "are there any better parts for" - or other questions that have already been answered by what i did to my 3.4

do i think its better than all the 3.4s on here? no. will it be pretty soon? yup.

if you don't know why by now, well. whatever. btw, having a "fata$$" is better than having a fat head. please figure out what you are talking about before you open your mouth

~ "this is what you're doing (moves fingers and thumb like hand is talking)...this is what i want you to do! - (closes fingers and thumb together)".

anyway. grow up ppl. no reason i dont post on this board much anymore. everytime i do i get called an idiot and told i dont know what im doin. whatever. when my car goes damn fast - well..dont come ask me for help.

-R

p.s. - 93Firebirdv6 - Nate i think your name is - dont be judgemental of the 3.4 just cause your dumba$$ couldnt figure out how to make it move. lots of people dont know anything about cars, just like you.

elvis89fb
10-28-2003, 08:58 AM
tell it like it is bro amen amen graemlins/burnout.gif

MustangEater8251
10-28-2003, 10:50 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 93v6firebird:
3.4L suck a$$
They were overrated at 160hp, mostly because GM couldnt admit that after making the 2.8 to the 3.1 and then to the 3.4 they got ****ty gains. Its more like a 145-150hp and 125 at the wheels.
You'll need all boltons, lighten up the drivetrain, headers, and some internal engine work - p&pd heads, intake, valve job, rocker arms.
Honestly if you wanna get big gains out of your car buy tiago's turbo... if you wanna go all out strengthen the internals as well.
Just what I think.<hr></blockquote>

You shoudl do a 3.8L swap they are only $600 so I hear.

mattsv6
10-28-2003, 02:07 PM
blahblahblah. the 3.4 isnt crap and neither is the 3.8. who cares what motor is better stock cause we arent talking stock here. russels combo is proven too wrok and it isnt far from a stock engine wether it is stock too his car o not. if ou think that he is wasting his time with the 3.4 then stfu. noone cares or wantrs too here it. do whatever you want too your car car is it YOUR CAR i will run mid/low 14's in my car n/a all damn day long. you all need too chill hyte hell out. this is why people dont liek v6 guys. they all seem too have something stuck up there asses. jsut go mod your car and have fun. ill be the first too tlak **** , but this is ****ing rediculous :rolleyes:

4thgenowner
10-28-2003, 02:09 PM
Hey Russell, do you have a sound clip of your car?

black34v6
10-28-2003, 11:07 PM
i have a movie of the car on a dyno recently (read: two weekends ago)

gimme a little bit and ill have it uploaded and you can watch it.

-R

Knight5
10-28-2003, 11:21 PM
k all of you with a 3.4 engine get a 3.8 swap :D :rolleyes:
no thanks if I were going to do a swap I'll go with a LT1

mattsv6
10-29-2003, 10:30 AM
why even say that. this is a thread about moding the 3.4. not why you should swap engines because it has .4 liters less then the 3.8. jsut mod the damn motor you have and if you want a full race car put a carbed big block in thereand go 8's. till then you dont need a motor swap unless you blow the motor. imo :mad:

Timbo1969
10-29-2003, 10:47 AM
Somone should Lock this thing as it is way out of hand.

black34v6
10-29-2003, 12:20 PM
here ya go. one vid link of my car on a dyno.

btw - you NEED quicktime to view this as Windows Media player doesnt have the codec required (it doesnt know how to display the video, just play the audio)

altho i guess if you just wanna hear it you can. the visual reference is nice so you know its actually my car tho.

anyhow.

http://camaro.adwire.com/cardyno.avi
(yes i know its a avi file, you still need the latest version of quicktime to view it.)

Tiago
10-30-2003, 07:33 AM
swapping a v6 for another v6 that is not a GN motor = THE GAYEST IDEA EVAH!


:D

ReodDai
10-30-2003, 09:10 AM
Don't make me swap a 2JZ into my car, give it a fart cannon, make a wing out of a park bench, and melt the sides of my car to form ground effects.... cuz I'll do it dammit!

Timbo1969
10-30-2003, 09:24 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by ReodDai:
Don't make me swap a 2JZ into my car, give it a fart cannon, make a wing out of a park bench, and melt the sides of my car to form ground effects.... cuz I'll do it dammit!<hr></blockquote>
A 2JZ engine would be sweet in our cars though if you could make it fit.. smile.gif With true duals and one monster turbo you'd run 9's or maybe even 8's

93v6firebird
10-30-2003, 09:58 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Russell:


wow. all those big words from you. did your mommy help you look them all up? &lt;chuckles a lot at you&gt;

and you are a sophomore. look up the word, you'll understand why i call you it. (wonders if anyone else notices that this guy just has a huge stick up his *** )

i dont expect anyone to worship me. i do notice that 95% of the people on here - forget what i did and i see a lot of "can i get 200 hp" or - "are there any better parts for" - or other questions that have already been answered by what i did to my 3.4

do i think its better than all the 3.4s on here? no. will it be pretty soon? yup.

if you don't know why by now, well. whatever. btw, having a "fata$$" is better than having a fat head. please figure out what you are talking about before you open your mouth

~ "this is what you're doing (moves fingers and thumb like hand is talking)...this is what i want you to do! - (closes fingers and thumb together)".

anyway. grow up ppl. no reason i dont post on this board much anymore. everytime i do i get called an idiot and told i dont know what im doin. whatever. when my car goes damn fast - well..dont come ask me for help.

-R

p.s. - 93Firebirdv6 - Nate i think your name is - dont be judgemental of the 3.4 just cause your dumba$$ couldnt figure out how to make it move. lots of people dont know anything about cars, just like you.<hr></blockquote>

I think its funny you call me stupid. Maybe one day I'll hire your fatass to work on my car.
I dont gauge my worth based on my knowledge of cars - maybe I should start gauging it on how much better I am than people like you tho.
Get off your egomaniac highhorse.
Also stop trying to pull vocab words out of your *** because for you to call me a sophomore, which in fact I was last year, while knowing I am a college student - and then attempting to correct me by using an incorrect form of a word, just shows how incompetent you really are. A sophomore means nothing except for being in the second year of school, a project. However the form of the word I believe you meant to use was "sophomoric" which means immature and inexperienced. Many people believe that sophomore actually refers to immaturity, however in fact it is only sophomoric that actually refers to having limited knowledge because of the limited time spent in pursuit of said knowledge. Maybe you'd know this if you ever got past your sophomore year of tech school?
You seem to have a surfeit of erroneous platitudes that you regard to be apropos to annotate my psyche, however I adduce a rival hypothesis. You are attempting to obfuscae the verisimilitude of my intellect, with sophomoric allusions to my mother and other impertinent topics.
Now, Mr. Fatass... that is the correct usage of sophomoric.
Care to challenge me to a "wah wah wah I wish I was wittier than you are" battle again?
If you want your mom to help you look up those words, I'll tell her to get her clothes on and get to your place immediately.

[ October 30, 2003: Message edited by: 93v6firebird ]</p>

Timbo1969
10-30-2003, 10:01 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 93v6firebird:


I think its funny you call me stupid. Maybe one day I'll hire your fatass to work on my car.
I dont gauge my worth based on my knowledge of cars - maybe I should start gauging it on how much better I am than people like you tho.
Get off your egomaniac highhorse.
Also stop trying to pull vocab words out of your *** because for you to call me a sophomore, which in fact I was last year while knowing I am a college student - and then attempting to correct me by using an incorrect form of a word. A sophomore means nothing except for being in the second year of school, a project. However the form of the word I believe you meant to use was "sophomoric" which means immature and inexperienced. Maybe you'd know this if you ever got past your sophomore year of tech school?
You seem to have a surfeit of erroneous platitudes that you regard to be apropos to annotate my psyche, however I adduce a rival hypothesis. You are attempting to obfuscating the verisimilitude of my intellect, with sophomoric allusions to my mother and other impertinent topics.
Now, Mr. Fatass... that is the correct usage of sophomoric.
Care to challenge me to a "wah wah wah I wish I was wittier than you are" battle again?
If you want your mom to help you look up those words, I'll tell her to get her clothes on and get to your place immediately.<hr></blockquote>

graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif

mattsv6
10-30-2003, 12:02 PM
dude dont laugh at this ****. it really isnt all that funny. we have a nonsense thread here that isnt going anywhere fast. all people are doing is fighting and noone cares. if i was a mod i would have locked this on the second page. but im not so keep the crap flying. btw, how the hell you gonna run "true duals" on a inline sixand you can do jsut as much too the 60*as you can with the 2jz. you jsut have too no what the hell you are doing with engines first. that motor is such a pita too wrk on btw.

MustangEater8251
10-30-2003, 12:27 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by mattsv6:
dude dont laugh at this ****. it really isnt all that funny. we have a nonsense thread here that isnt going anywhere fast. all people are doing is fighting and noone cares. if i was a mod i would have locked this on the second page. but im not so keep the crap flying. btw, how the hell you gonna run "true duals" on a inline sixand you can do jsut as much too the 60*as you can with the 2jz. you jsut have too no what the hell you are doing with engines first. that motor is such a pita too wrk on btw.<hr></blockquote>


Exactly my thoughts...

But then again this board has always been kind of crappy for the 3.4L anyways...

Timbo1969
10-30-2003, 12:28 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by mattsv6:
dude dont laugh at this ****. it really isnt all that funny. we have a nonsense thread here that isnt going anywhere fast. all people are doing is fighting and noone cares. if i was a mod i would have locked this on the second page. but im not so keep the crap flying. btw, how the hell you gonna run "true duals" on a inline sixand you can do jsut as much too the 60*as you can with the 2jz. you jsut have too no what the hell you are doing with engines first. that motor is such a pita too wrk on btw.<hr></blockquote>
Dude I was JOKING...

MustangEater8251
10-30-2003, 12:28 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Tiago:
swapping a v6 for another v6 that is not a GN motor = THE GAYEST IDEA EVAH!


:D <hr></blockquote>

Ain't that the truth!

Magnus
10-30-2003, 12:50 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by MustangEater8251:
Exactly my thoughts...

But then again this board has always been kind of crappy for the 3.4L anyways...<hr></blockquote>

More like 3.4 guys try and contstantly claim how great their 60 degree motor is and how superior it is to the 90 degree 3.8..

People try and give advice but then no.. oh.. they are ragging on 3.4's.. my *** . Get real.

FYI.. how much would it cost to do intake and headers on a 3.4.. maybe $700? If you could drop in a 3.8 for $600 and pick up 40rwhp instantly with much more potential, is that not worth it?

or is that just worthy of being laughed at cause your swapping a V6 for a V6.. yet you're getting much more HP/$$$..

FWIW, I was able to sell all my V6 mods to do a stock LS1 swap for free.. it was an even trade.

Its up to the individual to determine what is best for them. Its a shame certain members have to be offended by constructive recomendation.

Timbo1969
10-30-2003, 12:55 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Magnus:



Its up to the individual to determine what is best for them. Its a shame certain members have to be offended by constructive recomendation.<hr></blockquote>
I agree totally
graemlins/thumbsup.gif

MustangEater8251
10-30-2003, 01:08 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Magnus:


More like 3.4 guys try and contstantly claim how great their 60 degree motor is and how superior it is to the 90 degree 3.8..

People try and give advice but then no.. oh.. they are ragging on 3.4's.. my *** . Get real.

FYI.. how much would it cost to do intake and headers on a 3.4.. maybe $700? If you could drop in a 3.8 for $600 and pick up 40rwhp instantly with much more potential, is that not worth it?

or is that just worthy of being laughed at cause your swapping a V6 for a V6.. yet you're getting much more HP/$$$..

FWIW, I was able to sell all my V6 mods to do a stock LS1 swap for free.. it was an even trade.

Its up to the individual to determine what is best for them. Its a shame certain members have to be offended by constructive recomendation.<hr></blockquote>

No one ever said the 3.4L was superior thent he 3.8L but the more of 3.4L owners saying that the 3.8L is not the god send of motors on the planet.

Its more of a fact if you are going to the trouble of a Motor swap as intricate as a 3.4L to 3.8L it woudl be dumb not to go bigger to lt1.

Lets say it costs, $600 for the stuff needed for a 3.8L swap(which I think is too low), and it costs abotu $1,000 for the stuff needed for an LT1 swap.

You do the 3.8L swap, no way $400 worth of mods on the 3.8L is going to make you evenly matched with a LT1, now is it.

Best bang for the buck on a motor swap is going to be to go higher, with an lt1. Its inhererently easier to do a 3.4L-&gt;Lt1 swap then a 3.4L-&gt;3.8L swap. Like I said earlier, there are some interchangeable parts betweena 3.4L and the lt1, but nearly none on a 3.4L and 3.8L.

In the end I think you woudl be spending nearly the same money to go to a 3.8L as it woudl cost to go to a Lt1.

hence why doing a 3.4L to 3.8L swap is dumb, the difference in the end is not that great, would be better to mod the 3.4L to average 3.8L territory, then do a lt1 swap, then to go to a 3.8L.


3.4Ls raggin on 3.8Ls? Where does that happen. I see a thread of how to get power out of my 3.4L and 3.8L owners coming in and saying, get a 3.8L. Ignoring what the question was. Question was not how to get 40 more hp out of my car was, how to get 200 hp out of my 3.4L

MississippiMaro
10-30-2003, 02:03 PM
The 3.4 is the best engine EVER

How do i know this?

Because it's mine...all mine!

Nuff said....peace out

Mississippi formula for more 3.4L Power

1 3.4 Block
1 Redneck with hammer
1 Redneck with machine shop
1 Keg of Bud Light

= 5,000 HP engine and 2 drunk *** rednecks. plus once you drink all the beer you can machine the keg shell into performance parts :D

[ October 30, 2003: Message edited by: MississippiMaro ]</p>

black34v6
10-30-2003, 02:17 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 93v6firebird:


I think its funny you call me stupid. Maybe one day I'll hire your fatass to work on my car.
I dont gauge my worth based on my knowledge of cars - maybe I should start gauging it on how much better I am than people like you tho.
Get off your egomaniac highhorse.
Also stop trying to pull vocab words out of your *** because for you to call me a sophomore, which in fact I was last year, while knowing I am a college student - and then attempting to correct me by using an incorrect form of a word, just shows how incompetent you really are. A sophomore means nothing except for being in the second year of school, a project. However the form of the word I believe you meant to use was "sophomoric" which means immature and inexperienced. Many people believe that sophomore actually refers to immaturity, however in fact it is only sophomoric that actually refers to having limited knowledge because of the limited time spent in pursuit of said knowledge. Maybe you'd know this if you ever got past your sophomore year of tech school?
You seem to have a surfeit of erroneous platitudes that you regard to be apropos to annotate my psyche, however I adduce a rival hypothesis. You are attempting to obfuscae the verisimilitude of my intellect, with sophomoric allusions to my mother and other impertinent topics.
Now, Mr. Fatass... that is the correct usage of sophomoric.
Care to challenge me to a "wah wah wah I wish I was wittier than you are" battle again?
If you want your mom to help you look up those words, I'll tell her to get her clothes on and get to your place immediately.

[ October 30, 2003: Message edited by: 93v6firebird ]<hr></blockquote>


heh. you really think youa re funny. yanno. im surprised with posts like this, that you havent been stripped of your title already.

what exactly do you contribute to the firebirdv6.com community?

elvis89fb
10-30-2003, 03:05 PM
amen :D :cool: graemlins/burnout.gif

95Batmobile
10-30-2003, 03:06 PM
I think Magnus and MustangEater should Box and somebody record it. graemlins/thumbsup.gif

MississippiMaro
10-30-2003, 03:10 PM
Even better

Russel and MustangEater

vs.

Magnus and 93v6Firebird

WWF Tag team style.... graemlins/thumbsup.gif

MustangEater8251
10-30-2003, 04:24 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by MississippiMaro:
Even better

Russel and MustangEater

vs.

Magnus and 93v6Firebird

WWF Tag team style.... graemlins/thumbsup.gif <hr></blockquote>

I like that better I am a better wrestler then boxer smile.gif

Or even better a Mad Max 2 Beyond Thunderdome style match, with large blunt weapons around the cage smile.gif

[ October 30, 2003: Message edited by: MustangEater8251 ]</p>

4thgenowner
10-30-2003, 05:53 PM
I would say its possible but it would take alot of work. :eek:

FunkZ
10-30-2003, 06:09 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Mikael:
Its been done. Took every bolt on, but stock heads/cam, etc. 200rwhp that is. Tim LeGros (i think was his name)<hr></blockquote>

Yup, Tim LeGros (aka SoSlow) with just about every bolt-on available, including both a Hypertech programmer and a Jet Stage 2 module. The motor internals were stock.

191.7 rwhp n/a
256.8 rwhp with nitrous

http://members.tripod.com/~bpador/showcase34.html

Magnus
10-30-2003, 07:00 PM
LT1 swap will take a little bit more work than a 3.8 swap..

It's just a recomendation to those who want to be unique with a V6.. if you really want to have a fast unique V6.. then start with a better foundation.

black34v6
10-30-2003, 07:16 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Magnus:
if you really want to have a fast unique V6.. then start with a better foundation.<hr></blockquote>

graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif

but i am starting with a better foundation. i made sure i had a 3.4 instead of a 3.8. ;)

Magnus
10-30-2003, 07:26 PM
Yea, and your dyno #'s and lack of track #'s show it.

Good luck.

MustangEater8251
10-30-2003, 07:41 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Magnus:
LT1 swap will take a little bit more work than a 3.8 swap..

It's just a recomendation to those who want to be unique with a V6.. if you really want to have a fast unique V6.. then start with a better foundation.<hr></blockquote>

How is a lt1 swap more work then a 3.8L swap?

95Batmobile
10-30-2003, 08:02 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by MustangEater8251:


How is a lt1 swap more work then a 3.8L swap?<hr></blockquote>

Because he said so!

Now shut up and have a tag team wrestling match!

If Russell is fat like 93v6 says, he will own in a wrestling match... NOBODY COULD BEAT YOKOZUNA!!!!! Unless 93v6 has Hulk Hogan's 24" biceps to body slam him with lol

[ October 30, 2003: Message edited by: 95Batmobile ]</p>

MustangEater8251
10-31-2003, 08:44 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 95Batmobile:


Because he said so!

Now shut up and have a tag team wrestling match!

If Russell is fat like 93v6 says, he will own in a wrestling match... NOBODY COULD BEAT YOKOZUNA!!!!! Unless 93v6 has Hulk Hogan's 24" biceps to body slam him with lol

[ October 30, 2003: Message edited by: 95Batmobile ]<hr></blockquote>


Not sure if Russell is big or not but if he is depending on what 93v6 is like, the size advantage is on my side.

I am 6'5" 315 lbs, accordign(weighed a week ago at the docor)

I know Magnus works out but not sure of is height.

By the way not sure this is anywhere near topic anymore.

black34v6
10-31-2003, 11:40 AM
yea no ****..really? ya think? i tihnk magnus, - mr. "i know everything about the f-body and so therefore everyone else is wrong and i am god" - would have better sense to advise a mod to lock this post, seeing how he is one.

i honestly, by this thread, have had my belief cemented that this site is totally 3.8 biased (i used to just think it, now i know it) and that no one here gives a rats *** about the 3.4.

mostly cause of the fact that if no one was in here arguing about the 3.8 this thread would have been locked so quick it'd be like it never existed. of course since their are proponents of the 3.8 in here arguing, the "management" sees fit to not regulate it. i mean..as long as the 3.8 is being seen as the "better motor" - then why not leave it alone?

ive lost faith in this board..too bad they cant do anything to restore it. the "management" of this place sucks *** .

93v6firebird
10-31-2003, 11:43 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Russell:
yea no ****..really? ya think? i tihnk magnus, - mr. "i know everything about the f-body and so therefore everyone else is wrong and i am god" - would have better sense to advise a mod to lock this post, seeing how he is one.

i honestly, by this thread, have had my belief cemented that this site is totally 3.8 biased (i used to just think it, now i know it) and that no one here gives a rats *** about the 3.4.

mostly cause of the fact that if no one was in here arguing about the 3.8 this thread would have been locked so quick it'd be like it never existed. of course since their are proponents of the 3.8 in here arguing, the "management" sees fit to not regulate it. i mean..as long as the 3.8 is being seen as the "better motor" - then why not leave it alone?

ive lost faith in this board..too bad they cant do anything to restore it. the "management" of this place sucks *** .<hr></blockquote>
Im sorry we hurt your feelings big boy. graemlins/crybaby.gif :(
Maybe now youve recognized the problems, you could just get over them?

GreenDragon
10-31-2003, 12:31 PM
Ok if you want power just get rid of the V6 and put an LT1 in. I know i wasted alot of money in trying to put 200rwhp and never came close.

black34v6
10-31-2003, 12:38 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 93v6firebird:

Im sorry we hurt your feelings big boy. graemlins/crybaby.gif :(
Maybe now youve recognized the problems, you could just get over them?<hr></blockquote>

boy..for someone who says he has such a large intellect - you sure have a big mouth to go with it. what..did your mom never teach you when to shut up? you havent hurt my feelings. im just realizing how right everyone else is. this board is just like you, a joke.

thats all.

maybe now that you realized that im not gonna back down from your stupid *** and your little comments about my weight dont mean **** to me -- does that mean you'll grow half a brain and shut your mouth?

probably not. that'd be like asking you to stop breathing...

p.s. - 200 rwhp would be very easy for me to attain, just a coupla tweaks and id be there (im already at 200 chp...200 rwhp = 235 chp.

so all i have to do is get 35 extra hp. eh. not that hard. just need a few things. maybe afpr, bigger TB. that or just do the !Bar trick to the tb..get more airflow..

ill be there...easy.

[ October 31, 2003: Message edited by: Russell ]</p>

mattsv6
10-31-2003, 01:48 PM
if you lal want too no honestly. i have russells heads here that i jsut did about 12 hours of porting too. he will have about 205 too the rw's as soon as he bolts them on. keep the **** flyin graemlins/dunce.gif

Equis
10-31-2003, 03:54 PM
3.8 does not have the potential a 3.4 does....sorry

especially when it comes to forced induction...I've never seen a turbo 3.8 run anywhere near 300 RWHP look at the GTP a whole 240 crank horsepower!!! SCARY!!! tongue.gif

93v6firebird
11-01-2003, 12:16 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Russell:


boy..for someone who says he has such a large intellect - you sure have a big mouth to go with it. what..did your mom never teach you when to shut up? you havent hurt my feelings. im just realizing how right everyone else is. this board is just like you, a joke.

thats all.

maybe now that you realized that im not gonna back down from your stupid *** and your little comments about my weight dont mean **** to me -- does that mean you'll grow half a brain and shut your mouth?

probably not. that'd be like asking you to stop breathing...

p.s. - 200 rwhp would be very easy for me to attain, just a coupla tweaks and id be there (im already at 200 chp...200 rwhp = 235 chp.

so all i have to do is get 35 extra hp. eh. not that hard. just need a few things. maybe afpr, bigger TB. that or just do the !Bar trick to the tb..get more airflow..

ill be there...easy.

[ October 31, 2003: Message edited by: Russell ]<hr></blockquote>
I am better than you. What more can I say?
I told you, one day I might hire you to do something for me... mow my grass or plug my computer in? But youre out of a job if you dont cure that attitude.

viper98885
11-01-2003, 12:52 PM
I think it's time for me to hit the dyno.

mattsv6
11-01-2003, 01:27 PM
yea no kidding huh josh. i think it is time for me too hit the dyno too. i think that my highest pull migt shut a few peoples mouths. lmfao who else agree's graemlins/rofl.gif graemlins/rofl.gif

camarozrule
11-01-2003, 01:40 PM
holy **** im suprised this didnt get locked yet lol sounds more like a pissing contest to me... graemlins/dunce.gif

Camarorulz
11-01-2003, 02:21 PM
Imagine a V8 guy browsing this board and reading the ridiculous arguments about which V6 is better... :rolleyes: I agree with Magnus' comment about constructive criticism: if a 3.8 swap can be done for the price he says, then that's the best thing if you want power/dollar.

If you want to be unique, then the 3400 can be made quicker (as in low-15s, high-14s), for a pretty high price.

Just give the turbo 3.8s some time, they will leave the competition in the dust. I think what we've seen from them (low-14s) is only the beginning of their potential.

SirShaun
11-01-2003, 11:33 PM
How about we all go smoke some ricers? This american made vs american made hate makes me sick!!!!

black34v6
11-02-2003, 03:05 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 93v6firebird:

I am better than you. What more can I say?
I told you, one day I might hire you to do something for me... mow my grass or plug my computer in? But youre out of a job if you dont cure that attitude.<hr></blockquote>

damn yur funny. ever think of becoming a comedian? probably the only thing you'll ever do well. has anyone else noticed his feeble attempts to upset me by referring to my future job status as his lackey?

id rather die personally. well..that or kill him. one or the other. anyhow. i think ill just stop posting replies to this waste of my time. cause seriously my intellect is so much more important than to waste a couple of seconds typing out this reply.

black34v6
11-02-2003, 03:07 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Camarorulz:
Imagine a V8 guy browsing this board and reading the ridiculous arguments about which V6 is better... :rolleyes: I agree with Magnus' comment about constructive criticism: if a 3.8 swap can be done for the price he says, then that's the best thing if you want power/dollar.

If you want to be unique, then the 3400 can be made quicker (as in low-15s, high-14s), for a pretty high price.

Just give the turbo 3.8s some time, they will leave the competition in the dust. I think what we've seen from them (low-14s) is only the beginning of their potential.<hr></blockquote>

yet another 3.8 owner who thinks the 3.8 is the most spectacular thing on the planet.

the only reason teh 3400 didnt get into the 10 best is cause it hasn't been used quite as much as the 3800 has. q tho -- and anyone can answer this. why - if the 3800 is so great - is gm phasing it out?

theres a conundrum.

-R

Jerriko
11-02-2003, 06:04 AM
Russell, I thought your intellect was too important to waste on another response.
?!?
:rolleyes:

LD
11-02-2003, 02:41 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Russell:


yet another 3.8 owner who thinks the 3.8 is the most spectacular thing on the planet.

the only reason teh 3400 didnt get into the 10 best is cause it hasn't been used quite as much as the 3800 has. q tho -- and anyone can answer this. why - if the 3800 is so great - is gm phasing it out?

theres a conundrum.

-R<hr></blockquote>
and your a 3.4 owner who thinks the 3.4 is the most spectacular thing on the planet.
you talk about GM phasing out the 3.8, yet I believe the 3.4 was phased out in like 1995.
btw the 2003/4 gp has a series 3 3800, not quite the phase out you expected? montes and impalas keep them also, and I'm sure alot of Buicks will too.

95Batmobile
11-02-2003, 02:52 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Jerriko:
Russell, I thought your intellect was too important to waste on another response.
?!?
:rolleyes: <hr></blockquote>

Wasting time on 93v6.

Some of you guys don't know when to stop... no use in beating a dead horse.

This is a discussion that will never come to an end, everybody is too stubborn to admit one is better than the other or come to a compromise on opinion so why not just let the thread die?

There are some fast 3.8s and some fast 3.4s...

The price of a 3.8 and the work involved in swapping one is not the best thing you can do with your money for the 3.4.

Bottom line is, if you pick up a 3.4 f-body and a 3.8 f-body straight from the dealership, the 3.8 will win. That doesn't mean much on this board because almost NOBODY has a stock car on here! I will whoop up some stock or mildly modded 3.8s but a lot of you guys will leave me in the dust... who the hell cares?

If somebody likes their car and wants to put money into it, who are you to tell them what to do with their money? The guy asked how to get 200hp out of his 3.4 and ppl suggest putting in a 3.8 ... how does that even relate to the topic?

Let this thread die already.

[ November 02, 2003: Message edited by: 95Batmobile ]</p>

camarozrule
11-02-2003, 07:19 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 95Batmobile:

Let this thread die already.

[ November 02, 2003: Message edited by: 95Batmobile ]<hr></blockquote>

graemlins/thumbsup.gif

MustangEater8251
11-02-2003, 07:31 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 95Batmobile:



If somebody likes their car and wants to put money into it, who are you to tell them what to do with their money? The guy asked how to get 200hp out of his 3.4 and ppl suggest putting in a 3.8 ... how does that even relate to the topic?

Let this thread die already.
<hr></blockquote>

Exactly the whole put a "3.8L in it" thing is dumb. I could care less what motor I have, all I care is what power it makes for the cost. not Wroth the work and effort to put in a 3.8L and not get much of an improvement.

either way the 60* v6 is not being phased out, its still going in many cars. Wear do you think Russell got his parts from?

Just because its not in an f-body doesn't mean they stopped making them.

For waht its worth a Factory 60* v6 was making 280hp, but they decided to detune it to 215 hp, because the torque ate up FWD transmissions too much. Thats more then a GTP has made till just currently and it was done without a supercharger.

[ November 02, 2003: Message edited by: MustangEater8251 ]</p>

speedracer95v6
11-02-2003, 09:09 PM
Not to beat the thread to death or anything (i think that already happened) but I am swapping my 3.4L for a 3.8L. I got a 3.8L with everything (53k miles) for $610 shipped. I couldn't rebuild my 3.4L worth a crap for that (it has 130k miles). But on another note, 200hp with a 3.4 is possible easy without power adder. Just have to swap cam, header and the rest of exhaust, etc.

95Batmobile
11-02-2003, 09:25 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by speedracer95v6:
Not to beat the thread to death or anything (i think that already happened) but I am swapping my 3.4L for a 3.8L. I got a 3.8L with everything (53k miles) for $610 shipped. I couldn't rebuild my 3.4L worth a crap for that (it has 130k miles). But on another note, 200hp with a 3.4 is possible easy without power adder. Just have to swap cam, header and the rest of exhaust, etc.<hr></blockquote>

You are beating this thread even more into a bloody pulp and not helping any by saying you're swapping a 3.8 then saying you need major motor work (headers/cam/etc) to get 200hp.

Wrong time to give your opinion man...

MustangEater8251
11-02-2003, 09:41 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by speedracer95v6:
Not to beat the thread to death or anything (i think that already happened) but I am swapping my 3.4L for a 3.8L. I got a 3.8L with everything (53k miles) for $610 shipped. I couldn't rebuild my 3.4L worth a crap for that (it has 130k miles). But on another note, 200hp with a 3.4 is possible easy without power adder. Just have to swap cam, header and the rest of exhaust, etc.<hr></blockquote>

You got a PCM, motor all working accessories, brakcets(powersteering, AC), crossmember, and tranny for $610 shipped?

Equis
11-03-2003, 01:17 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Camarorulz:
Imagine a V8 guy browsing this board and reading the ridiculous arguments about which V6 is better... :rolleyes: I agree with Magnus' comment about constructive criticism: if a 3.8 swap can be done for the price he says, then that's the best thing if you want power/dollar.

If you want to be unique, then the 3400 can be made quicker (as in low-15s, high-14s), for a pretty high price.

Just give the turbo 3.8s some time, they will leave the competition in the dust. I think what we've seen from them (low-14s) is only the beginning of their potential.<hr></blockquote>

I'm a V8 guy ;) but I used to have a 3.4...and it is a superior engine...the end

low 14's does not impress me at all...wait till someone finishes their 3.4 ;)

[ November 03, 2003: Message edited by: Equis ]</p>

93v6firebird
11-03-2003, 02:08 AM
I think the point I was making before - before Russell had to be a huge toolbox - was that the 3.4L engine sucks as a stock engine. Yeah if you wanna put tons of money into an engine maybe you can get better results dollar for dollar than you can w/ the 3.8.
no need to defend an engine like its your baby
and if you can acknowledge that the 3.4 sucks, youre lost. I mean thats not to say that the v6 fbody isnt a cool/nice/fun car, but its not a dragster - never will be a dragster and if you wanted a car w/ huge output you bought the wrong one.

This doesnt mean that people that invest a lot of money/time into making a fast 3.4 or 3.8 are worthless or losers or whatever - to each their own and everyone does different things to have fun. But dont come on here trying to pretend that either engine is an awesome ****ing engine.

[ November 03, 2003: Message edited by: 93v6firebird ]</p>

HAZ-Matt
11-03-2003, 10:24 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 95Batmobile:
This is a discussion that will never come to an end, everybody is too stubborn to admit one is better than the other or come to a compromise on opinion so why not just let the thread die?

There are some fast 3.8s and some fast 3.4s...

The price of a 3.8 and the work involved in swapping one is not the best thing you can do with your money for the 3.4.

Bottom line is, if you pick up a 3.4 f-body and a 3.8 f-body straight from the dealership, the 3.8 will win. That doesn't mean much on this board because almost NOBODY has a stock car on here! I will whoop up some stock or mildly modded 3.8s but a lot of you guys will leave me in the dust... who the hell cares?

If somebody likes their car and wants to put money into it, who are you to tell them what to do with their money? The guy asked how to get 200hp out of his 3.4 and ppl suggest putting in a 3.8 ... how does that even relate to the topic?

Let this thread die already.<hr></blockquote>
A post that actually is not completely idiotic in this thread!

This has become the stupidest thread that I have ever seen on the board. Here are the facts:

1. You can make a 3.4L hit 200rwhp w/o power adder.
2. Russell does not have a stock engine, or a factory engine, or an engine that was ever designed by GM Powertrain.
3. Swapping a 3.8L into a 3.4L car is not too bright, unless you blew up the 3.4.
4. All engines are phased out as better units replace them. The L36 is superior to the L32 just as the 3.9L HV will be better than the 3800SII and SIII.

Magnus
11-03-2003, 10:37 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by speedracer95v6:
Not to beat the thread to death or anything (i think that already happened) but I am swapping my 3.4L for a 3.8L. I got a 3.8L with everything (53k miles) for $610 shipped. I couldn't rebuild my 3.4L worth a crap for that (it has 130k miles). But on another note, 200hp with a 3.4 is possible easy without power adder. Just have to swap cam, header and the rest of exhaust, etc.<hr></blockquote>

What more can you ask for Eric.

How can you say its not worth the $$$... if you can sell ANY of your 3.4 stuff to bring the cost of the swap down its even more worth it. A stock 3.8 vs a stock 3.4 should be about 1-1.3 seconds faster imho. Many people race at different tracks and have different results, I've seen enough 3.8 vs 3.4 races with different cars to know how they perform.

There are several 3.8's now in the 13's NA.. Current 3.4 record is 15.4 NA. Even IF a 3.4 goes 15.0 NA with stock bottom end (or even modified one) thats still 1.4 seconds behind a 3.8. That is a LOT!

12.2-&gt;13.6 is much less of a noticeable difference than 13.5-&gt;15.0

3.4's may be a good reliable engine, but stop denying facts.

A 3800 series II car is in the 10's. What more proof do you need? Stock elim guys do 12's NA with the 3.8's... WHat do stock elim guys do with 3.4's NA?

[ November 03, 2003: Message edited by: Magnus ]</p>

Tiago
11-03-2003, 11:31 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Magnus:


What more can you ask for Eric.

How can you say its not worth the $$$... if you can sell ANY of your 3.4 stuff to bring the cost of the swap down its even more worth it. A stock 3.8 vs a stock 3.4 should be about 1-1.3 seconds faster imho. Many people race at different tracks and have different results, I've seen enough 3.8 vs 3.4 races with different cars to know how they perform.

There are several 3.8's now in the 13's NA.. Current 3.4 record is 15.4 NA. Even IF a 3.4 goes 15.0 NA with stock bottom end (or even modified one) thats still 1.4 seconds behind a 3.8. That is a LOT!

12.2-&gt;13.6 is much less of a noticeable difference than 13.5-&gt;15.0

3.4's may be a good reliable engine, but stop denying facts.

A 3800 series II car is in the 10's. What more proof do you need? Stock elim guys do 12's NA with the 3.8's... WHat do stock elim guys do with 3.4's NA?

[ November 03, 2003: Message edited by: Magnus ]<hr></blockquote>


I dunno someone should look it up for us.

the only reason why tehre is a 3.8 in teh 10s is because someone put money into it , plain and simple. If someonme puts money in a 3.4 it will go fast too. yay.

Magnus
11-03-2003, 05:23 PM
I don't disagree with that. A 3.4 can definately go fast, you're proof of that Tiago... I'm just saying that a 3.8 is a better base engine to start with than a 3.4 and has more potential.

There are 4 13 sec NA 3.8's now... thats bad *** .

MustangEater8251
11-03-2003, 06:00 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Tiago:



I dunno someone should look it up for us.

the only reason why tehre is a 3.8 in teh 10s is because someone put money into it , plain and simple. If someone puts money in a 3.4 it will go fast too. yay.<hr></blockquote>


Exactly!

Same resaon why the Mustangs are faster then the 3.8L series II, more money and time has been invested.

I am not stupid stock for stock, the 3.8L is somewhat faster, the same timelist you boast has
15 people running 15.9s and higher, and I know for a fact there are more people like that just don't have there times posted. 15.9, I hit with my intake and exhaust, 15.913, to be exact. I have seen in person, many upon many 3.8Ls running low 16s. Actually I can say out of all the 3.8Ls I have seen, they about 20 of them have run 16+ 1/4 miles some with mods, some stock.

My argument, is not that the 3.4L is the end of all engines, its not, cam in it is garbage, pistons are pretty dumb as well. But side by side with a 3.8L, I don't think there is that much of a difference. And definitely not enough of a difference to warrant a motor swap to a 3.8L.

Maybe a 3.8L swap is an idea, if you blow your motor, but I still think even then its a bad idea.

I don't believe the guy got every thing he needed for the swap for $610. What is that a $250 tranny, $250 motor, $110 PCM, All with 50k on them? Which is still not everything he needed. I think that kind of cheap assuming he had not hook up.

Its the fact you are swapping the entire powertrain of the car. I think it woudl be cheaper to keep the swap with a 3.4L. Or go if you want the performance upgrade go up to a 3.8L.


As for the Good times the 3.8Ls are making there are still some peopel that need to go to the track. I honestly don't think the fastest 4th gen v6 is gong to be a 3.8L shortly.

speedracer95v6
11-03-2003, 09:10 PM
Actually i got computer, all accessories, wiring harness, exhaust to the y, engine mounts with 53k on the engine. Awesome condition on all of it, nothing broke for $610 shipped. My current 4l60e mounts and works great with it.

speedracer95v6
11-03-2003, 09:14 PM
One more thing, Mustang V6s are not better than the 3800SII. I had a 2000 mustang and my 1995 3.4L camaro would smoke it. You gotta do gearing and mods to make it even keep up. (the mustang is gone, i bought a corvette..the camaro is my play car)

MustangEater8251
11-03-2003, 11:53 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by speedracer95v6:
One more thing, Mustang V6s are not better than the 3800SII. I had a 2000 mustang and my 1995 3.4L camaro would smoke it. You gotta do gearing and mods to make it even keep up. (the mustang is gone, i bought a corvette..the camaro is my play car)<hr></blockquote>

Exactly made my point... Lesser motor with money invested goes faster...

There are v6 stangs in the 11s, and a local guy running 12s off the juice.

speedracer95v6
11-04-2003, 09:19 AM
Ah graemlins/thumbsup.gif

Timbo1969
11-04-2003, 09:57 AM
Let it DIE!!!

mattsv6
11-04-2003, 04:11 PM
no, dont let this die. i have a valid question from this thread.

WHO GIVES A FACK!!

who cares what is better. this is an enthusiast website based on the v6 fbody. not the 3.8 or 3.4!

why not mod the god damn car and have fun instead of talkin a bunch of bullshat??

my 3.4 will be faster then any of the other peoples cars on this board. v6 v8 or i4. bring it if you are gonna talk shat!!!

[ November 04, 2003: Message edited by: mattsv6 ]</p>

black34v6
11-04-2003, 11:23 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by HAZ-Matt:

A post that actually is not completely idiotic in this thread!

This has become the stupidest thread that I have ever seen on the board. Here are the facts:

2. Russell does not have a stock engine, or a factory engine, or an engine that was ever designed by GM Powertrain.
<hr></blockquote>

i never said i HAD a stock engine. i said i had an engine that was similar in build to a 3400 engine. SIMILAR to a stock 3400. i never said it was a stock 3400. my engine is a hybrid of a 3.4 and gen III 60* block parts. (heads,etc) - never said it was a stock 3400.

the only thing i ever stated was that the parts are in stock condition - ie - as they came from the factory. i havent ported/polished or touched anything. i bought the parts i have from junkyards, ebay, everything as it came off of a stock Gen III 60* block. i then went to enourmous lenghts to make them perform so much better - i painted the engine. woo... then, in a fit of performance, i bought the ****tiest headers known to the performance world, and since i wanted the car to completely scream, i bolted the whole exhaust system together instead of welding it cause you know, if you bolt it tight enough, it does better than welding. o yea, and dont forget my jerry-rigged little EGR pipe thats on there, or that I went to painstaking lengths to keep the stock 50mm tb from the 3100 intake manifold i bought.

i couldnt have gotten more performance or more non-stock than that..wow...o yea..and dont forget my MSD DIS-4 - that isnt even hooked up, cause yanno, just having it in the engine bay gives me an extra 40 hp. forget all the otehr stuff i did. o yea, and i had the engine rebuilt to stock too...when i could have put in forged pistons and raised the compression, i *****ed and moaned to make sure they made it the same specs as a stock 3.4

so my engine is nowhere..i mean nowhere - ABSOLUTELY NOWHERE near any factory spec ever. i mean i couldnt even compare any of the parts to the parts that come out of GM Powertrain.

o yea -- dont hate just cause my car is better than yours.

post whatever you want, im done with this stupid fu(kin thread, and this whole stupid fu(king board
getting tired of the bickering on here.

say whatever...dont care anymore, i know the truth and i know that no 3.8 on this board will ever make it faster than the 12's. ever. unless tiago has worked on it. cause none of you know how - and all of you give up.

the 3.4 will ALWAYS be better than the 3.8. no one has looked at it long enough to realize that.

later fu(kers.

Magnus
11-05-2003, 09:29 AM
If the 3.4 is better, let me see a 3.4 do 13's NA with a stock bottom end., hell let me see a streetable 3.4 do 13's NA period.

Tiago
11-05-2003, 10:00 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Magnus:
If the 3.4 is better, let me see a 3.4 do 13's NA with a stock bottom end., hell let me see a streetable 3.4 do 13's NA period.<hr></blockquote>


thats more of an overall car/driver package issue then just the motor.

if you wanna compare solely motor to motor, lets see dynos, thats the onlything that ccan compare just the motor to another.

not saying one is better then the other but still going by the same logic you are in a way. Who has beat my dyno numbers? noone ;) 3.4 must be better then eh?

Timbo1969
11-05-2003, 10:05 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Tiago:



thats more of an overall car/driver package issue then just the motor.

if you wanna compare solely motor to motor, lets see dynos, thats the onlything that ccan compare just the motor to another.

not saying one is better then the other but still going by the same logic you are in a way. Who has beat my dyno numbers? noone ;) 3.4 must be better then eh?<hr></blockquote>
Nope the TURBO OWNSJOOO.. smile.gif

Magnus
11-05-2003, 10:31 AM
plenty of 3.8's beat your #'s man.

97 30th RS
11-05-2003, 11:22 AM
This is outta control. I think that both are equal IF you look at Tiago's turbo 3.4 and look at Shane's turbo 3.8 you will see that both have good performance. If you compare a basic bolt on 3.8 to a 3.4, the 3.8 will be superior because the 3.8 makes more power to start with.

HAZ-Matt
11-05-2003, 11:25 AM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Russell:
i never said i HAD a stock engine. i said i had an engine that was similar in build to a 3400 engine. SIMILAR to a stock 3400. i never said it was a stock 3400. my engine is a hybrid of a 3.4 and gen III 60* block parts. (heads,etc) - never said it was a stock 3400.<hr></blockquote>
Thanks for agreeing with me. What is sad is that I thought your hybrid engine was one of the coolest things on this site. It's ashame that you come off as arrogant as you say the 3.8L guys are.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Russell:
my car is a stock "hybrid" 31/3400. when i get the 3400 intake and plenum (+10 hp diff. - bigger plenum and intake runners) i will have a STOCK 3400 sitting in my car with the only difference being the more radical camshaft from the RWD engine. now, my engine will be a stock 3400 engine making 200 hp (210?) and 245+ tq - stock. just like the stock 3.8L (3800) makes 200 / 225. so.. if a STOCK 3400 with a rwd cam in it, makes 200 hp, the same as a stock 3.8L...why is the 3.8 better?<hr></blockquote>
You keep emphasizing that you have a stock 3400 then add a disclaimer.

Let's pretend that you started off with a stock 3400. In the Monte Carlo it is rated at 180HP and 205ftlbs. So it starts out 20HP and 20ftlbs behind the 3800SII's rating. So you have added a cam, headers, and increased compresion from 9.5 to 9.6. Oh I have seen the light! The L32 is superior to the L36 based on the output of a modified 3400.

[ November 05, 2003: Message edited by: HAZ-Matt ]</p>

Magnus
11-05-2003, 11:34 AM
This is so silly.

graemlins/fluffy.gif

Timbo1969
11-05-2003, 12:21 PM
Somebody please lock this thread, it's way out of hand.

mattsv6
11-05-2003, 01:19 PM
no it isnt, i think this is funny. i have 3 message boards that i go to everyday and lmfao at the drama. this is one of them. keep the poo flying guys.

navyblue2000
11-05-2003, 01:49 PM
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Magnus:
This is so silly.

graemlins/fluffy.gif <hr></blockquote>