what do you think about these?

[topless94style]

As of right now, im still waiting to hear from 4spdz34 about the $500 heads he owes me. In the mean time, i pulled my heads off the motor and brought them to Napa Machine shop. I have delt with the guys there before, and have brought heads and blocks to them with good results. Well, turns out when the engine overheated last summer, i warped the heads and pushed a few of the valve guides down. So, to make these heads usefull again, they want $475-500 to pressure check them, replace all the guides, 5angle job, some bowl work and port work, machining, and beed blasting. Not a bad deal, but i dont want to spend ANOTHER $500 on the heads. So I, or someone else needs to this guy and get my damn heads......thats another matter not to be discussed here.

 

 

So, we started bullshiting around about the idea of the 2.8L crank inplace of the stock LQ1 crank. I never have seen hard evidence that this would work, and knowing from what other people say, the blocks are the same. So we matched a 3.1L head gasket to my 3.4L head, and the bolt holes lined up, and we checked part numbers on the 2.8L crank bearings from a 1988 Blazer and the 3.4L crank bearings from a 1994 cutlass. they matched up. So i guess that is enough proof for me that it would all work. Concerning the stock crank, he said that polishing cleaning and making sure the crank is within specs would be $45, and then ball honing the cylinders to create a new crosshatch pattern for the new rings to seal was around $30 or something.

 

Since I am turbo charging this setup, what would the benefit of adding the 2.8L crank be...besides destroking the engine and pulling higher rpms????

 

We then talked about work done to the block. He said, with an all stock bottom end, it wouldnt have to be balanced, that it should be pretty close to perfect. I figured it would be wise to replace the bearings, and piston rings since im this far into the engine already.

 

Adding the 2.8L crank would require new balancing then correct?

 

He reccomended replacing the stock pistons with aftermarket ones if I put in the 2.8L crank. He also said that shot peening the rods wouldnt do alot for this engine being that its a later model engine compared to old V8s and stuff. That to me sounds like he is contradicting everything i have read and been told about the rods. He said being that its newer, there shouldnt be very many casting flaws to deal with.

 

Is he correct about this?

[GPRACER]

I know that serious power can be made from de-stroking an engine but I've only seen it with V-8 engines. I have not had good experiences with the 2.8 especially the crank, in the past.

 

Also, love the Sig, Funny I am driving a 1993 Dodge Caravan with 220K and no tranny problems as my winter beater.

[NOHC_WBody]

Dosen't the LQ1 have larger rod bearing journals than it's pushrod cousins?

 

[edit] Checked my factory manual....they're damn close..it's calling the 3.4 1.9987 to 1.9994 and the 2.8/3.1 1.9983 to 1.9994

[topless94style]

That is pretty close, the part numbers are the same, 88 blazer compared to my 94 cutty.