ThunderBat Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 check out this link about the 3.4DOHC... http://www.angelfire.com/ca2/34Performance/dohc.html its a bit of a lengthy read but a good one...obviously someone who knows his cookies about the LQ1...this one really seperates the men from the boys and I'm afraid I fall into the latter category here...I do love a hi-performance car and I do like modding them and doing the occasional tinkering and maint... but this is definitely one racy hi-maint baby! So given this info, does anyone here have a hot rod 3.1 under the hood of their "W"?...and if so what mods did you make to it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bolt_Crank Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 someone posted a scanned pic of the prototype Lumi Z34s 285HP and like 285 - 300ft/lbs of torque it was a 5.0L V8 not a super V6... guy likes to over exaggerate the maintenance, though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbtk2 Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 I guess you could say I have a "hot rod" 3.1, but it really isn't that fast. It'd be nice if it had an L67. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KING JOKER Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 im sorry but hot rod and 3.1 dont mix. i have a 3.1 and have done some serious work to it but that is not the one in the car. i got a 3.1 from the junkyard and im buildin it up. port and polish heads,intake,exhaust, had the heads shaved and i have 23lb. injectors in her. thats just the start of the list but i wouldn't say the 3.1 is a hot , it is a beast Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
excelsior Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 my dad said i had a hot rod. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrandPrix34 Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 Jesus I wish i had access to that guys traffic! Old website and many of those things have been debunked MANY times before *Edit* I just notice that it has been changed AGAIN! Well, that's good because some of the stuff it was promoting was junk. One thing I remember was about the sodium-filled valves. ANother about NOT putting headers because the exhaust manifolds were perfect and "i couldn't imagine putting headers into this beast" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 That guy is generally conceived to be a dumbfuck. Nearly everything he said was wrong. I'll take a few right now... Trannsmission the cause of 210 not 285hp-Not at all. GM can build a tranny for anything. If they wanted it to have 285hp, it would have, just not in 1991, but in the later years after they have developed a tranny. it was becuz a 5-speed 285hp Z34 would have beaten their Corvettes. How does your company look when your V6 family grocery getter can beat your 2 seater sports car? The oil cooler only came on rare 3.4s, not nearly all. He still says the valves are sodium filled. IIRC, downpipe is 2.5", not 3". Our intake is a tuned tunnel ram? Yah right. Tuned maybe, for 5500rpm max power and 200-210 of it. Tunnel ram? I guess...But by those standards any intake on a car is a tunnel ram in one way or another. 7,000rpm screamer? No, more like 5500. They dropped off bigtime after 6, the 5-speeds can barely redline 3rd gear stock becuz power falls off. This becuz of the "tuned intake" EH then says it has a 6500rpm redline, its 7. And he says the 70hp cutback was in fuel tables and spark, which we have proven could only take out about 10hp, not 70. 91 models aren't really scarce by any means... the intake manifold DID NOT change every year after 1992. There were 3 setups, not 5. 91-93(MAP), 94-95(No MAP but same design), and 96-97. At this time I think i have proved my point and am sick of reading his article. He knows his general motor information, but not in terms of the 3.4L. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremy Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 it was becuz a 5-speed 285hp Z34 would have beaten their Corvettes. How does your company look when your V6 family grocery getter can beat your 2 seater sports car?. I AGREE WITH AARON!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ....same reason the GM killed the Fiero, the 1990 prototype put the vette to shame.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitaloutsider Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 ...but i wouldn't say the 3.1 is a hot , it is a beast That's extreme sarcasm, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegeta Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 actually aaron, the intake runners are tuned, and tunnel ram. Its the plenum area and the transition from TB to plenum, then plenum to runners that is choking the motor. The runner length is tuned for 7200 RPM, hitting the 3rd and 4th harmonics at lower RPM. The 3.1 can be built up, but the majority of people on this site don't know how to do anything to it other than swap it out for something else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TurboSedan Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 The oil cooler only came on rare 3.4s, not nearly all. i've seen oil coolers on 3.1 W-bodies before in the j/y, and they looked exactly like the DOHC W-body oil coolers to me. the oil coolers weren't a DOHC only thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loominaz34 Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 My car has an oil cooler. according to the window sticker it cost 75 bucks. Does this make my car rare? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderBat Posted November 10, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 given the fact that I have no personal experience with the 3.4 I cant refute anything thats been said here...I'll assume that you guys do know better since many of you do own and have turned the wrenches on these cars. While I can easily see how a lot of the particular tech points (redline,intake runners,valves) can be in error, I noticed nobody disputed the amount of maint this engine requires or the difficulty in performing that maint...which to me would be the major discouraging points of owning one...I suppose I just dont it being worth the time and effort when there are other engines that make just as much power, more bottom end torque and are more reliable. There also seems to be a fair amount of aftermarket for the pushrod 60degree engine and if the stone stock 3400 makes 185 then 225-250 doesnt seem like a huge stretch...I wish GM would try their hand at say a 4.0L 60degree V8...I think that would be a compact engine that would make great power, be light in weight and reliable to boot (didnt someone say the Z34 prototype was a V8?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegeta Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 I havent read that site in a long time and the maintenance to me isn't difficult. Other people bitch and moan about having to change their oil so it really depends on who you ask. If you pay a shop to do your work, don't get a DOHC. The power potential of the DOHC is far greater than the pushrods right now, minus the 3900 coming out which may come with a 3 valve per cylinder setup down the road. 60 V8 is no good, same as 90 V6. Yeah, you can do it but I wouldn't want it. The V8 lumina was just for testing. There was an AWD beretta as well I think. If you want a 4.0, get the 3900 and bore it out to a 4.0. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bolt_Crank Posted November 11, 2004 Report Share Posted November 11, 2004 the maintenance isn't really any harder on a 3.4 than a 3.1, it just takes a little extra time.... the only real major difference is the timing belt and alternator... the rest is pretty much the same... at least it was in my brothers 3.1... hell, the longest part about changing the water pump on the 3.4 is draining the coolant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfewtrail Posted November 11, 2004 Report Share Posted November 11, 2004 So given this info, does anyone here have a hot rod 3.1 under the hood of their "W"?...and if so what mods did you make to it? I've got a factory "hot rod" 3.1 in my TGP. Search the Turbo part of the forum if you want to see how to make itl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White93z34 Posted November 11, 2004 Report Share Posted November 11, 2004 it was becuz a 5-speed 285hp Z34 would have beaten their Corvettes. How does your company look when your V6 family grocery getter can beat your 2 seater sports car?. I AGREE WITH AARON!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ....same reason the GM killed the Fiero, the 1990 prototype put the vette to shame.... yeah i'll agree to a point here as well, thats one of the reasons the grand national was killed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EurosportZ34 Posted November 11, 2004 Report Share Posted November 11, 2004 ok...for the record the n/a 3.1 is not in any way a hot rod! the 3.4 DOHC is by far a more advanced engine and has alot more potential than the 3.1 ever will the n/a 3.1 is sluggish, slow, and pretty much nothing more than a really reliable engine now the 3100 and 3400 have more to say about being a hot rod if your going that route but anyways...woohoo for the 285HP Z34...I wish GM woulda had their $hit together and actually produced it, that woulda been kick ass!!!! 8) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
93CutlassSupreme Posted November 11, 2004 Report Share Posted November 11, 2004 the n/a 3.1 is sluggish, slow, and pretty much nothing more than a really reliable engine yup. i don't think it's enough engine for a heavy w-body. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White93z34 Posted November 11, 2004 Report Share Posted November 11, 2004 the n/a 3.1 is sluggish, slow, and pretty much nothing more than a really reliable engine yup. i don't think it's enough engine for a heavy w-body. i've drove an iron duke lumina, it is seriously not enough engine for the car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveFromColorado Posted November 11, 2004 Report Share Posted November 11, 2004 I do believe they orignially were able to get 300 HP out of the 3.4 DOHC engine, but because of transmission building costs (making all new tooling, and a sepperate transmission for ONE car) the costs far outweighed the need/want for it. There's ALSO the problem of it kickin' the shit outta the corvette's I don't know if it'd have gone as far as to kick the shit outt them, but even if it could've kept up with them, it'd have been a huge red mark against GM for that manuver. I found a listing somewhere of the GM prototype engines, and some of their designs - I'll see if I can't find that book again. Aaron ... I'm suprised you didn't call this guy an idiot for his headers comment - he says the cast manifolds are good enough to move the exhaust ... where this is true, it does not mean that the manifolds are good at sepperating the exhaust pulses to offer the best available performance. --Dave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeJay3800 Posted November 11, 2004 Report Share Posted November 11, 2004 I know that GM has or used to have an "unofficial" rule that no GM car could have a higher power rating than that year's Corvette. Hence the reason that the '89 25th anniv TTA with turbo 3.8 was only rated at 250HP (more like 300 in actuality). Guess what the HP rating of the Vette's TPI was that year? I would hardly consider the 3.4 DOHC to be anything in the Vette's league however....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegeta Posted November 11, 2004 Report Share Posted November 11, 2004 Well, in 91 they had 245 hp and 345 torque torque. Had GM made a 285 hp V6 that year, how hard would it be to run with the corvette at a fraction of the cost? Sure, the torque wouldnt' be there but with the close ratio 5 speed, it wouldn't be getting its ass kicked either at the 285 hp/tq mark. Granted the rest of the car wasn't going to be on teh same level, but the motor surely could put out more hp than their V8. In 91, what other motor in a GM car was over 200 hp? Im just curious...but you say it wasn't in the same league...only if you compare it to the LT5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeJay3800 Posted November 11, 2004 Report Share Posted November 11, 2004 All I meant was that I've never considered ANY FWD V6 car to be in the same league, performance-wise, as RWD V8 muscle...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderBat Posted November 11, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2004 I think the manufacturers have come to realize that the performance car purists almost always demand RWD/AWD...thats why cars like the Miata have survived all this time...they arent particularly powerful but they are lightweight and fun to drive (and they get huge aftermarket support) The Miata is the very reason Pontiac green-lighted the Solstice. Getting back on topic tho...a couple of previous posts stated that the n/a 3.1 is no hot rod...I have no arguement with that at all...what I was after was there anyone who had modded a n/a3.1 to make comparable power. Kind of like the old Chryco 318, in stock trim it was a reliable engine with ho-hum performance...but a few simple mods could make it a serious performer...am I correct in assuming that the top end of the 3100/3400 will swap onto the 3.1 short block?...the turbo idea sounds interesting but cobbling together the parts could be a major task all its own...Lastly I think the one thing I dread most about the idea of owning a 3.4 is the timing belt...especially since the cams aren't clearly marked or keyed. Granted I've never done this job before and maybe if I did it one time with someone who knew his stuff I wouldnt be so intimidated by it...I was reading over on 60degreeV6 that a simple cam adjustment (6 degree advance on the intake, 7 degree retard on the exhaust...I think) brings a pretty substantial power boost...I gotta admit, go fast mods dont get much cheaper than that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.