how hard would it be for me to take and put a 3.8 in my car a have a 93 cavalier so if u know anything let me know
Let me save others from commenting and put it to you in one word: Hard! There are no mounts made for it that are available, the harness needed will be a nightmare of electrical spaghetti to remove and install, and the weight of the engine (even with aluminum heads) will practically crush the front springs. Not to mention how the transaxle (if you're usung the original from behind the factory 4-cyl, I assume) will need to be beefed considerably to stand up to it & the CV shafts that will need to be made. In short: A lotta money, a lotta effort, and a lotta torque goin' to the front wheels only that'll spin and slip like crazy once the weight transfer on such a short wheelbase is incurred under hard acceleration even with the tail jacked-up to try to counter it. Don't believe me on that last one? Ask yourself from a serious engineering perspective why the pre-'79 Eldorado had such a long wheelbase with a 500ci (Yes, 500ci!) V-8 under the hood and you'll get the idea.
Go beyond the "bolt-on".
^^^^
To the OP, I think you would be much better off asking this question on V6Z24.com and getting an answer from someone who actually knows wtf they're talking about. This swap has been done, several times in both 2nd and 3rd gen cars. The V6z24.com guys know a lot about your particular year of car, and will know what things need done.
It's been done. It works. It makes the car faster, and no... it doesn't crush the suspension.
Some things I know. To use it on a 5spd tranny, you need to get a 3800 Camaro/Firebird flywheel and have it machined down to the stock thickness of the 2.2/3.1 flywheel. It will bolt to the transmission. The CV shafts probably will not break (they're actually fairly strong), and the transmission may be alright as the older Isuzu (if you have a 4cyl) is stronger than what's in the 3rd gen cars. However, it will be suggested to you to use the 3.1 V6 transmission as it's tried and proven to hold massive ammounts of power.
Cliffs notes:
V6z24.com
knowledgeable people
car goes faster
previous swaps
no broken suspension
3800 F-body flywheel + machine shop
can use a stock transmission
can use stock axles
Also I'd like to note that older V8 cars suck balls. That's why they don't make them anymore.
The 3800 fits the getrag, but that's pretty much all (on your car). I'm sure you'll be happy with the results, but it is a lot of time and money.
_________________________
Nickelin Dimer wrote:Let me save others from commenting and put it to you in one word: Hard! There are no mounts made for it that are available, the harness needed will be a nightmare of electrical spaghetti to remove and install, and the weight of the engine (even with aluminum heads) will practically crush the front springs. Not to mention how the transaxle (if you're usung the original from behind the factory 4-cyl, I assume) will need to be beefed considerably to stand up to it & the CV shafts that will need to be made. In short: A lotta money, a lotta effort, and a lotta torque goin' to the front wheels only that'll spin and slip like crazy once the weight transfer on such a short wheelbase is incurred under hard acceleration even with the tail jacked-up to try to counter it. Don't believe me on that last one? Ask yourself from a serious engineering perspective why the pre-'79 Eldorado had such a long wheelbase with a 500ci (Yes, 500ci!) V-8 under the hood and you'll get the idea.
yeah dont listen to him.
swapping in a V6 such as a 3.8 has been done in both 2nd and 3rd gens. the info is out there
Im a Xbox 360 fanboy...and damn proud of it!!
wow so many opinions from people who obviously don't have a clue. Anyway personally I would recommend the 2000+ getrag, I think I have proven over the years that it can handle a ton of power thrown at it and IMO it's geared better than the older ones.
Quoth the Raven 'Nevermore
raven@accesswave.ca
Raven Autosports
55 McQuade Lake Cres,
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
(902) 850-3330
10.82@132
Crushing the springs eh... weird, mine as well as quite a few others like Raven's are holding up just fine..... must be lucky or something.
Would be helpful to know your current engine and trans, as well where the 3.8 is coming from (mostly year)
There are a few things i do remember about this swap off the top of my head, sold my 2nd gen 4years ago. For the flywheel, as said already, comes from a 3.8 F-body- machined down to "0.840 (same thickness as your stock one) The 2nd gen engine bay is very similar to the late 80's grandam, and they ran a 90* v6 (33oo) i have heard that you can use the front and rear engine mounts from that, and when i looked at them they appeared right but i havent actually tried to fit them up so no garantees.
_
Now with northstar V8, IRS, 20's n 22's
SHOoff: If they suck so much, how come there's a bigger aftermarket for them and their modern desendents than anything? And following? And more mods done over the years to them than you may ever see for anything else outside of off-road & show trucks? Comments like that make you look like an "A". Why don't you look in an area of a performance catalog other than "Sport Compact" and see what I mean.
Isaak: Excuse me but from all my recollections of swappin' a larger and/or heavier engine into something that didn't come withsprings that were rated for it, the end that it was put in sagged under the extra weight. Now I don't know what the deal is with Mac strut fronts, other than the non-modified design version makes for questionable geometry when it comes to handling, but if the springs hold all the extra weight okay (As in an engine with full accessories & add-ons) then I guess you'll be in the clear. At least 'til you take a turn.
As for all the other stuff I wrote: Well, I guess I let my head get a 'lil too big & tried too save others the effort of typing. I just tried to tell this nubie what I knew from what little I've gathered here lately on it. I'm gonna walk away from this now, but before I do, I ask just one thing from all of you: Prove me wrong about the stuff like weight transfer & counter measures and CV shaft survival when it does hook, torque-steer related control problems that'll be encountered under full power, and how much of a headache dealing with matching an entirely new harness & management to the intendent recipient car. If you can't, over even one of these subjects, then how wrong am I?
Go beyond the "bolt-on".
Nickelin Dimer wrote:As for all the other stuff I wrote: Well, I guess I let my head get a 'lil too big & tried too save others the effort of typing. I just tried to tell this nubie what I knew from what little I've gathered here lately on it. I'm gonna walk away from this now, but before I do, I ask just one thing from all of you: Prove me wrong about the stuff like weight transfer & counter measures and CV shaft survival when it does hook, torque-steer related control problems that'll be encountered under full power, and how much of a headache dealing with matching an entirely new harness & management to the intendent recipient car. If you can't, over even one of these subjects, then how wrong am I?
Well I have been runing mine now for about 5 years, still on the same set of Sprint 1.8" drop springs with KYB GR2 shocks (being swapped out in a few weeks for a whole new coil-over suspension). I don't have any issues with the front end sagging, no issues with weight transfer (other than at the track but spring helpers are you friend there) or with it pushing in the turns. Car actually handles just as well if not better than it did before the swap. CV shaft, yup I am still on the same set that I used from the original swap, so close to 5 years on the same axles. I have never broken one, never had torque steer (athough I credit that to my upper dog bone mounts). Now you say the wiring is a headache, well sure for someone who has never delt with wiring in depth then yeah it will be. But I offer premade plug and play harnesses here at my shop so if it is that big of a deal then you pay me some money and I will make you a harness that will work. So I guess I have just proved you wrong on all of your points.
I am not trying to pick everything you say apart but I am speaking from experience in everything I say, not just what I have read somewhere. You may think your right in what you say and I can even see your reasoning but what you say is incorrect. If you stil don't believe what I'm saying watch the following video, do you see excessive weight transfer? Do you see any torque steer? and better yet do you see any axles breaking?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoBmKNfTl70
BTW, that was an 11.5 sec pass.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Tuesday, February 05, 2008 6:03 AM
Quoth the Raven 'Nevermore
raven@accesswave.ca
Raven Autosports
55 McQuade Lake Cres,
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
(902) 850-3330
10.82@132
wow u owned that 5.0! and on that note it looks like u owned nickelin dimer too
My point was that you spew words out that you know very little about obviously. And seriously, who would go through all the hassle of putting a 3.8L engine into their J and leave stock suspension in? Sure, you can, but is it advisable? Ofcourse not, throw some aftermarket ish in there and your set... think alittle before you give your opinion, that is all
Has anyone noticed this I've stopped listening, or are you like Burt Renolds on-screen & just too wrapped-up in youselves to pay attention to what all is said & going on? I've walked away, so I'm obviously not listening. Geez, I feel like Kennedy or King or Gahndi here. Try to help, look what it gets me: A serious headache. Thanks for caring (Gone).
Go beyond the "bolt-on".
Personally, I wouldn't put the time and effort into this swap. It's a pushrod, iron-block, iron-head engine. I can understand the advantages versus the stock 4-cyl. for drag, but that's not what I'm interested in. admittedly, I have no personal experience with this swap. It just doesn't seem worth it to me for anything but drag racing.
the key to speed in FWD cars is not high power, but low weight.
Nickelin Dimer wrote:Has anyone noticed this I've stopped listening, or are you like Burt Renolds on-screen & just too wrapped-up in youselves to pay attention to what all is said & going on? I've walked away, so I'm obviously not listening. Geez, I feel like Kennedy or King or Gahndi here. Try to help, look what it gets me: A serious headache. Thanks for caring (Gone).
LMAO...it's people like you who make me want to change my email address. You are the one who challanged anyone in this thread to prove you wrong. Then when I do just that you come back with a stupid childish reply like the one above....oh man. I guess it would be better if you took your ball and left the playground. It's people like you spewing out @!#$ that you have no sweet clue about that gives people who are actually interested in learning the wrong ideas. You have your opinion on the swap and thats fine but it is an uneducated one at best so in the future maybe it would be a good idea to only comment on things you actually know about first hand. End rant!!!
To the OP, if your really interested in this swap just email me and I will point in the right direction. Don't listen to the idiot above as he obviously doesn't know what the hell is talking about.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Wednesday, February 06, 2008 9:34 AM
Quoth the Raven 'Nevermore
raven@accesswave.ca
Raven Autosports
55 McQuade Lake Cres,
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
(902) 850-3330
10.82@132
^^^ well said sir! well said.
James, you know..... stuff? Hmm.......... o'realy?
Turbo charge it instead and save the headache. Just imitate the Mclaren Turbo V6, 3.1 set-up. I had a 1992 RS that I used to baby. Only if the car is solid though. If yours gets the same sickness, lift up the trunk material around the rear wheel wells and make up your mind after that. Now I had them re-welded, but that car started coming apart and it made me buy my 2000 Z24 in 2002. Oh yeah, and keep pouring oil down the front clip steel that angles backwards on the firewall. That got so rotten so fast, water started coming in under the dash. ABANDON SHIP when it rains. That 3.1 sounds deadly though.
Spark*
The idea of keeping almost all the weight on the front wheels is what's important in the FWD cars. With that monster engine in the front, the weight distribution is more frontward now. You see how hard that car hooks up?
Raven, your JBO is a BEAST!!
------------------------------------
We all drive in a yellow Cavalier...
im thinkin about doin that swap this summer raven, doin alot of research now and im sure i'll be needin your advice, but first and foremost what do you think is the best J to start with, i have an 05 lookin to buy an older 97ish for this swap
hop on in i've got a J
raven wrote:Nickelin Dimer wrote:Has anyone noticed this I've stopped listening, or are you like Burt Renolds on-screen & just too wrapped-up in youselves to pay attention to what all is said & going on? I've walked away, so I'm obviously not listening. Geez, I feel like Kennedy or King or Gahndi here. Try to help, look what it gets me: A serious headache. Thanks for caring (Gone).
LMAO...it's people like you who make me want to change my email address. You are the one who challanged anyone in this thread to prove you wrong. Then when I do just that you come back with a stupid childish reply like the one above....oh man. I guess it would be better if you took your ball and left the playground. It's people like you spewing out @!#$ that you have no sweet clue about that gives people who are actually interested in learning the wrong ideas. You have your opinion on the swap and thats fine but it is an uneducated one at best so in the future maybe it would be a good idea to only comment on things you actually know about first hand. End rant!!!
To the OP, if your really interested in this swap just email me and I will point in the right direction. Don't listen to the idiot above as he obviously doesn't know what the hell is talking about.
The OP hasnt replied since the first post so i wonder if he is even reading anymore? Either way the second gen and third gen engine beys are very much different from eachother, so his mounting setup would be quite a bit different than ravens- although the same bracing concepts could be used. Since we are still missing any info on the car other than the year wiring is hard to give any advice on. Years ago (probably more than 3 years) i had sorted out a way to run the 3.8 on the stock J-body 3.1 wiring harness- running a modified crank trigger wheel- with a removed 3X sync, and all but 7 of the 18X rings windows filled, running a VR sensor (i cant seem to find my old drawings or diagrams anymore) I dont remember what injectors i found for it or any other details like that either.
_
Now with northstar V8, IRS, 20's n 22's
Nickelin Dimer wrote:SHOoff: If they suck so much, how come there's a bigger aftermarket for them and their modern desendents than anything? And following? And more mods done over the years to them than you may ever see for anything else outside of off-road & show trucks? Comments like that make you look like an "A". Why don't you look in an area of a performance catalog other than "Sport Compact" and see what I mean.
As for all the other stuff I wrote: Well, I guess I let my head get a 'lil too big & tried too save others the effort of typing. I just tried to tell this nubie what I knew from what little I've gathered here lately on it. I'm gonna walk away from this now, but before I do, I ask just one thing from all of you: Prove me wrong about the stuff like weight transfer & counter measures and CV shaft survival when it does hook, torque-steer related control problems that'll be encountered under full power, and how much of a headache dealing with matching an entirely new harness & management to the intendent recipient car. If you can't, over even one of these subjects, then how wrong am I?
Nick - If they're such wonderful vehicles, why aren't they still running off of the GM assembly lines? I'm sorry if you get butt-hurt from my opinion of that, but seriously. That's what happens to a car when they're either not selling them or not making a profit off of them anymore, or both. Just like the Cavalier. Yeah, they sold a ton of them but they weren't making any profit off of them, so they had to go.
Why is there so much @!#$ available for them? Well..... lets just say that there is a lot to improve on. I mean, you're talking about cars made back in the day where people would buy a Chevy or a Ford or Dodge, just because of the name brand on it. And now we all see exactly how far GM, Ford, and Chrysler have gotten themselves in todays market where there is no brand loyalty anymore, by keeping that same thinking that people just want their vehicles. I mean, with the obvious possibilities why weren't the vehicles engineered even a little better? But I'm not one to sit around and argue back and forth with you about the wonders of a 400 cubic inch V8 engine that only makes between 220 and 250hp and wastes enormous amounts of fuel in doing so.
Prove you wrong on CV shaft survival. I'm pretty sure numbers of people have. I think you need to stop looking at the Honda section of these parts cataloges an see what I mean. GM's cars do not have a problem with breaking shafts. This has been known in the j-body world for YEARS. Look at Raven's car for example. As far as traction, there are a number of ways to combat this. You can stiffin up the rear suspension to help, or you can go with bars hanging out the back of your car if you're so inclined. Really you can't stop weight transfer... that's just a fact of life. But the underlying problem here is that you're saying that the L67 is going to break the axles, and unless they're already damaged, the OP is not. So... how bout we all point out CV shaft survival to you. And how to Mustang guys handle so much power with their IRS's? Isn't that pretty much just a Diff in the center of the car and a couple of half-shafts? That's certainly what it looks like to me.
Torque steer? There have been a number of ways this has been combated over the years. Gm started putting equal length halfshafts into the Beretta years ago because it helps out. You can also load up the transmission with an LSD. Another thing you can do, and I believe new FWD cars are being designed this way, is slightly lower the drivetrain so that the axles sit lower than the center of the wheels. Upon full power acceleration and that wonderful weight transfer that you seem to want to point out to me, your engine/transmission will lift (dont believe me... .punch it in a RWD car and feel how the front end feels like it lifts up) and then become inline with everything else. The engine can also be in front of the drive wheels some to put the center of gravity farther forward. Basically on a RWD setup you want to do things so that the weight will transfer more to the rear wheels, on FWD you do the opposite. I'm sure some torque steer will still be there, but you act like it's hazardous to the point where you can't drive it.
I've watched Raven's youtube video where he pulls 11.5 and it doesn't appear that he's having a problem with a 3800 s/c (well, turbo now) giving too much torque steer, and breaking the STOCK axles. I also have driven my car several times. Though with a less powerful 3400 and no sort of boost. I do not have a problem with torque steer or breaking the stock 2.2 axles. In fact, the only time it's given me torque steer is when I'm on ice/snow and IIRC, an old RWD V8 car doesn't get around in the snow so well, probably a lot worse than a swapped cavalier that has problems with torque steer and breaking CV shafts, right?
1997ztwo4 - I'm not sure if you could use a 3.1 ECM on a 3.8. Wire harness maybe, but I don't see the 3.1 ECM running it. The 3.8 v6 is a 90 degree v6 which makes it an odd fire engine. The 3.1 is a 60degree v6 and is an even fire engine. I'd almost be sure that it would be easier to use the wire harness and PCM out of an older OBD-I car that came with the 3800 series 1 in a 2nd gen Cav.
SHOoff wrote:
1997ztwo4 - I'm not sure if you could use a 3.1 ECM on a 3.8. Wire harness maybe, but I don't see the 3.1 ECM running it. The 3.8 v6 is a 90 degree v6 which makes it an odd fire engine. The 3.1 is a 60degree v6 and is an even fire engine. I'd almost be sure that it would be easier to use the wire harness and PCM out of an older OBD-I car that came with the 3800 series 1 in a 2nd gen Cav.
Depends on application. The 3.1 ecm wouldnt plug into the 3.8 harness, besides that would defeat the whole purpose. The plan was to keep the 3.1 harness as it was already setup for the car- some of the vehicle wires run in the harness- and they are chipped ecm= easy to burn a custom tune. As far as firing order etc, it is really irrelevant, the 3.1 injectors are batch fired, so its just a matter of plugging injectors in. For spark you run the plug wires to the proper plug- bearing in mind that they wont be the same as they are for a 3.1 (at least i dont think they were, its been years since i have even thought about this) Yes you lose your cam sensor and thus sequential injection but i was more after the cheap easy tunability at the time with big plans for high boost. This is all paperwork theory as i never actually got around to doing it as the car was written off in a pretty bad accident, but i dont remeber finding anything in my research that showed i would be missing any signals the ecm would need to make its decisions.
_
Now with northstar V8, IRS, 20's n 22's
The thing about odd-fire vs. even fire though. On the 60 degree engine, a spark plug is going to fire every 120 degrees of crankshaft rotation. On the 90 degree v6 you do not have that evenly spaced firing event. Hence why it's an "odd-fire" engine. You might have a firing event at 90 degrees of crankshaft rotation, then the next event comes at 150 degrees then 90 then 150 and so on. The 3.1 ECM expects the firing pattern to be even. Seriously, you're going to need a 3.8 ECM in order to run it.
Sequential injection isn't really that big of a deal. After a certain point even with SFI you'll be MPFI anyways. The idea of SFI is to spray fuel when the intake valve is open. But, if you get enough throttle the duty cycle on the injectors will go up. Say at full throttle your duty cycle goes to 85%. You can't get 85% into 30% of open valve.
SHOoff wrote:The thing about odd-fire vs. even fire though. On the 60 degree engine, a spark plug is going to fire every 120 degrees of crankshaft rotation. On the 90 degree v6 you do not have that evenly spaced firing event. Hence why it's an "odd-fire" engine. You might have a firing event at 90 degrees of crankshaft rotation, then the next event comes at 150 degrees then 90 then 150 and so on. The 3.1 ECM expects the firing pattern to be even. Seriously, you're going to need a 3.8 ECM in order to run it.
Sequential injection isn't really that big of a deal. After a certain point even with SFI you'll be MPFI anyways. The idea of SFI is to spray fuel when the intake valve is open. But, if you get enough throttle the duty cycle on the injectors will go up. Say at full throttle your duty cycle goes to 85%. You can't get 85% into 30% of open valve.
Gotcha, i should look into it again, since i was rather young at the time, i doubt i would have thought of that. Thanks for pointing that out. And i do know about the SFI
but thanks anyway.
_
Now with northstar V8, IRS, 20's n 22's
