peeeot Posted February 11, 2007 Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 I bought some new tires for my 'vert today, and though I've been wanting to get a different car for a while, I've decided to stick with it indefinitely. I don't think I can find a better car for the money. My one complaint with it has been and still is its lethargic performance. Handling is fine, stopping is fine, but it really doesn't enjoy accelerating. In all probability, I'll stick it out with the 3.1 and not doing anything because it still has under 91k miles and doesn't have any problems. But I've been thinking about options to get the car's 3600 pounds moving a bit better, and the most obvious ones to me are swapping in a 3.4 DOHC, swapping in a 3.8 series I (if that's even possible), or turbocharging my 3.1 (my least desired option). Were there any changes made to the convertible structure in 1993 to accomodate the increased power supplied by the 3.4, or should my '91 be able to handle it as-is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremy Posted February 11, 2007 Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 as is would be fine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psych0matt Posted February 11, 2007 Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 i dont think there was anything 3.4 specific at all. I've done a few mods here and there, and although I do have the 3.4, it seems to get out of it's own way fairly decently (at least with stock wheels, i need to figure out the weight differences). Unless you do a swap though, you're not going to get any huge performance boosts, but there are all the little things you can do, like FFP stuff, CAI, etc. I have the dogbone, a K&N (opened the airbox a bit), and an underdrive pulley on the way, and each are slightly noticeable, but probably only to me. Hopefully sometime in the next few years I hope to turbo her, but that's not exactly a bolt on job Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeeot Posted February 11, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 Okay, thanks for the info. I doubted they would have made any major changes, but I figured it was worth checking into. I think that the real issue is the 3.1's torque output. Both the 3.8 and the 3.4 DOHC offer at least 30 lb-ft more torque. Would that be enough to notice? I think so. The 3.8 makes more torque at lower rpms, too, which is what I really want. I think I prefer lazier engines that don't have to work as hard to get the job done. The 3.8 L27 was only availabe in the Regals from 1990-95 according to this site. I can get hold of one with similar mileage to my current drivetrain for very cheap. I assume a 3.4 would be an easier swap, but that the 3.8 shouldn't be hard if I have a donor Regal. I get the impression that the 3.4 is a bit more finnicky about service too, with the timing belt to deal with and its tight fit under the hood. Would either of these swaps be worth my while? Which would make more sense (cheapest, easiest, least customization, most low-midrange performance improvement, most reliable)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy K Posted February 11, 2007 Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 what about a 3400 swap? I would run it as an OBD 1 on the existing 3.1 harness seriously, I thinkg a 3800 vs 3.4 would be equally difficult. althgouh I think they both were standard with the elctronic tranny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeeot Posted February 11, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 Is the electronic tranny something to be avoided? If a 3400 can use the 3.1 harness, that could be good. What would I have to do to calibrate the computer for the different dynamics of the larger engine? Surely it wouldn't run very well under the 3.1 parameters. Would it produce enough extra low end-midrange torque to be worth the effort? Haha, I'm probably trying to get this thing to drive like a normal 3.1l coupe would. I dunno, I've never driven one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bake82 Posted February 11, 2007 Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 I think the EASIEST swap if you could find all the parts would be a 3.1 Turbo and HD trans. All would bolt right in and all you would need to do is change the harnes, and swap out the MEMCAL. IMO would be the easiest and coolest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeeot Posted February 11, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 You know, I figured that would be really hard to find the parts for, but there are 3 turbo 3.1 engines within a reasonable drive. One of which only has 83k miles. What would I need? Memcal, engine, trans, exhaust piping? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bake82 Posted February 11, 2007 Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 I'd grab EVERYTHING in the engine bay, rad, intercooler, turbo, transmission, wiring harness, memcal absolutely everything. It'd be pretty much a direct swap into your car and would be easier than going with any other engines. The memcal, you'd want either a Topgun chip or KAZ motorsports chip if not for performance, but for driveability factors. If you have any questions, there are a few guys around who have done the swap and are very knowledgable when it comes to this stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremy Posted February 11, 2007 Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 a 3.8 series I would be a waste of time IMHO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeeot Posted February 11, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 Well, if I do this, it looks like I'll go Turbo. Found an add for a z34 Lumina for $325 OBO that's tempting though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremy Posted February 11, 2007 Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 Well, if I do this, it looks like I'll go Turbo. Found an add for a z34 Lumina for $325 OBO that's tempting though... what's wrong with it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeeot Posted February 12, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 12, 2007 I'm not sure yet. It has 182k miles. The guy says it needs plugs and wires, and if he has been servicing those pieces, that must mean the upper intake manifold is removed. Said it was running before he took those bits apart, and that he has all of the car's parts. Needs paint. He said there wasn't any rust or dents or anything. I didn't bother asking a whole lot of questions because it would be easier just to go see it in person. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slick Posted February 12, 2007 Report Share Posted February 12, 2007 Upper intake doesn't need to be removed to do plugs and wires. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psych0matt Posted February 12, 2007 Report Share Posted February 12, 2007 no, but it makes it easier Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeeot Posted February 12, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 12, 2007 Oh. Whenever I look at the pics of a 3.4 DOHC it looks like the intake covers up the rear bank or cylinders. Anyhow, he said "it was running fine until I took things apart" and "all you need is tune up. plugs and wires" I figured if all he was doing was pulling plugs out and swapping wires, he would have finished the task and kept driving. So maybe he couldn't figure out how to get to some of the plugs or something. Who knows. I'll find out if I go look at it. I wonder if the interior is all torn up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slick Posted February 12, 2007 Report Share Posted February 12, 2007 For the rear plugs, all you need to do is pull the weatherstripping at the rear of the engine bay by the cowl, then cut 3 1"x2" slots in the metal lip to allow access of the 1 billion extensions it takes to get to spark plug socket down to the rear plugs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeeot Posted February 12, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 12, 2007 Sounds like a piece of cake! Not. I can't help but think critically of a design that requires cutting holes in sheetmetal for the servicing of so basic a tuneup item. I suppose the other option is removing the upper intake manifold, but even that seems excessive for something so simple. An inevitable downside of the transversly mounted v-type engine, I suppose. Okay, not inevitable, there are plenty of cars with big hoods and easier access to both sides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slick Posted February 12, 2007 Report Share Posted February 12, 2007 It doesn't harm strutural integerity at all. Many people do it will no nil effects. Once your done, pop the weatherstripping back on, and go along your way. Hell... I know GM techs that even do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psych0matt Posted February 12, 2007 Report Share Posted February 12, 2007 I did my plugs the first time without cutting anything, i just had a flexi extension, and aside from one plug being really tight, and aside from having to have patience, it wasnt bad at all. not nearly as easy as my old 2.8 in which i changed the plugs like twice a year , but not bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtmarten Posted February 13, 2007 Report Share Posted February 13, 2007 I did my 3.4 plugs without cutting anything, and it was extremely easy. Just remove the STB, and the plugs are easy to get to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitaloutsider Posted February 13, 2007 Report Share Posted February 13, 2007 Even if I had a 91-95, I'd pull the plenum to change the plugs. Forget fucking with cutting notches in the metal. I can get my Cutlass' plenum off in five minutes. As Jeremy said, I wouldn't even bother with the L27. I'd look into the LG5, LQ1, or hell, even the L67. Those verts are heavy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeeot Posted February 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 15, 2007 The cutlass has been feeling a bit peppier lately. Maybe it's the cold weather, maybe I've just been getting on the gas more, who knows. Maybe it's just happy to be getting some attention, what with the new tires and some cleaning and stuff. Still doing exactly a steady 18 inches of vacuum at idle in park at the transmission modulator port. I've asked before, but I never got a direct answer... is that normal for a 3.1? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeeot Posted February 27, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2007 I've had a lot of highway cruising on my past two tanks of gas. Most of the time I was between 55 and 70, but a lot of it was on hilly two lane roads and I had to pass people a few times. Anyhow, my best tank average was 24.24 mpg. The best I've EVER had was just over 25. Sound normal for the 3.1 in a vert? The EPA suggests otherwise.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy K Posted February 27, 2007 Report Share Posted February 27, 2007 not horrible.... but could be better. I am going to remove and inspect all my injectors on my 93 vert next week. I know something is wrong there and it results in poor mileage for me. maybe you should remove the plenum and ohm your injectors? is there anything elose you have not done? 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.