Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 110
Like Tree1Likes

Some insight into the 3.4L OHV Motor...

This is a discussion on Some insight into the 3.4L OHV Motor... within the V6 forums, part of the Vehicle Specific category; Hi there. My name is Russell and I have been here for a while now, posting here and there when ...

  1. #1
    3.4 Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Lomita, CA
    Age
    37
    Posts
    52

    Black
    1994 Camaro

    Some insight into the 3.4L OHV Motor...

    Hi there. My name is Russell and I have been here for a while now, posting here and there when I feel that I have information to contribute. I have owned a 3.4L Chevy Camaro since 1996 and have been on a "quest for more power" since I bought it. It's peppy enough from the get go with a manual transmission but the automatic is lacking a little bit. Even with the manual, it still has issues putting out enough power to push the massive 3250lbs that is the car itself. When you add speakers or anything else this becomes a serious hinderance to the car in terms of performance.

    I have seen posts regarding the 3.4L engine, and I have seen both facts and fiction on this motor thrown around in an attempt to sway people one way or the other. Thats not what I'm trying to accomplish here. Here is my honest opinion about the 3.4L OHV (204ci) RWD engine that comes in the 1993-1995 F-body (Camaro/Firebird). Most of you will be like "oh great whatever". Those of you that know that I have been here and most often won't post in a thread unless I have something important to voice on the matter will stop and read this. And a few of you will be genuinely curious to know what it is I'm trying to convey. Pull up something to drink and some popcorn, this promises to be a long thread.
    --
    I have done my share of research on this engine. I even contacted GM and asked them for any information they had on the car. They promptly sent me the GM Rebuild Kit for the 1994 Chevrolet Camaro. It didn't cost me a thing and this little packet included every bit of information, original brochures from 1994, a full detailed listing of all options and factory information on every part of the engine, car, chassis, etc.

    It was here that I began, studying and calculating and realizing the first thing about the motor. GM Lied. It wasn't a big lie. The motor is advertised at 207 Cubic Inches, but using valid formulas for calculating CID I came up short at only 204. I rechecked several times and came to the conclusion that GM rounded up the engine size because in reality, the "3.4L" engine is really only 3.35 Liters. Now .05 Liters isnt a huge deal..but when you start with so little, every bit counts.

    Armed with this information I began signing up to different boards and clubs with the hopes of finding people who had begun to modify the car and make it work better. I came across a lot of owners who were frustrated because they hadn't found anything created by the aftermarket and had given up and advised me to do the same. My Camaro, is honestly my first car. It's the first car I ever purchased and still runs strong to this day. I didn't let anyone's dismay sway me from my goal of making my car work better for me, and not go out and try to win any awards for the most horsepower or torque or anything like that. When I discovered RKSport and their aftermarket products for the 3.4L, my hopes perked up because I realized that if I saved up enough money I could make my car work better. I began to research different engine shops in the area and stumbled across Norris Racing Tech (NRT) with their 3500 package which promised to make the engine a 3.5 Liter and give you the best performance you could get. But at 3000.00 for the engine package + shipping/handling I wrote that off.

    Now I have to digress a little because I realize I skipped a very important point. Most 3.4L owners try too hard. You think that you can take your 3.4L V6 and run out and make it faster than any car on the road. That’s not going to happen. There will always be, whether you own a 3.4L v6 - a 3.8L v6 - a LT1 - LS1 – Vette – Viper – Porsche – Ferrari, a car faster than yours. The thing I realized that if I built the car for me, if I did things I wanted and questioned the conventional wisdom of “that won’t work” I would stumble across the magical mod that would give me a massive boost in the right direction. I stayed on these boards for years, watching people come on and ask, “what’s the best intake, what’s the best exhaust...” and all those things. I watched people rise and get incredible gains and saw people I knew push the limits of the engine and develop supercharger and turbocharger kits for the 3.4L, as well as take and add nitrous to it. There were a couple of “loch ness” stories about a mythical 3.4L out there running 9’s in the ¼ mile, but that person never signed up to this board or any others that I have visited, so that person remains a mystery as to whether or not they really exist.

    Getting back to my topic – When I realized that I would have to work harder and think more because the things that people were doing weren’t really accomplishing much, I turned to the actual engine design and I looked at several options. I then realized, in 1999, that Pontiac’s Grand Am GT was making 175hp/205tq from a 3.4L OHV FWD motor. I did research into this engine and found that GM had worked a different path on this motor and it was better than the 3.4 RWD. I did more research into engine design and found that runner lengths help determine how much power and torque the engine gets. I looked at the plenum and runner design on the “3400” engine as well as the 3.4 RWD and realized that the RWD runners were jokes. At only 2” long and without any type of airflow acceleration present, they looked like all they served was a means to get the air from the Y shaped plenum, which once I saw a cross section – laughed at, to the cylinders. That was when I decided then and there that the plenum and air intake system was the 3.4L’s weak point. GM had spent money into making the 3.4 into a “Race style” motor. At 60 degrees the Angle of the V shape is natural. EXACTLY replicating the letter V, the angle between cylinders is 60*. The crankshaft in a six cylinder v-type engine has three throws of 120 degrees. With this combination, it makes the engine perfectly internally balanced. No bad vibrations, hence the lack of balance shaft that the 90 degree 3.8 or 3800 series II engine needs to employ to keep the motor from rubbing things the wrong way.

    With that in mind, I kept looking into what I could do to increase the natural power of the engine. And I realized that the FWD heads and intake manifold were direct bolt-on parts. The holes all lined up, and they were aluminum which would shave weight off of the engine. Combined with their increased flow (I had no idea how much at the time) they would add a lot of power to an engine that was struggling. So I did more research and found that the iron heads that came with the RWD engine had been used since the original 2.8L engine came out. No changes had been made by GM. Not till they tried to use the 3.4L as a viable engine for the FWD cars did GM even consider making the 3.4L into a “performance” engine. Because of that the 3.4L has become the laughing stock of the F-body world. Many people have tried to make this engine perform better and succeeded, and many more have failed. Simply because they aren’t thinking before they throw parts at the motor. Most people think, “I can get an exhaust or intake and it’ll make the car work great!” This isn’t always the case. Most often it requires planning to increase the airflow of the engine to efficiently use such parts. Why? Because the 3.4L is anemic to begin with – GM thought that they could simply increase the bore and stroke of the engine and throw a “performance cam” into it and it would work fine. This isn’t the case because the plenum and air intake and exhaust systems are so poorly designed that it suffocates the motor without anyone giving it a second thought. While everyone is putting bigger throttle bodies and porting and polishing heads, they are neglecting the most important idea – “you engine only flows as well as the worst bottleneck.” With that in mind, ponder this thought: I asked James Montigny for his flowbench data from Norris Racing Tech on his heads. And then I asked a good friend of mine who specializes in the FWD 60 degree motor for a stock flowbench of the “3100” heads I had pulled from a 1996 3.1L engine and put on my car.

    The results shocked me. The stock heads from a 1996 FWD 3.1L engine flowed as good as the heads that were bolted to Tiago’s car (many of you know him as the one who developed a turbocharger for the 3.4L and pushed it to the edge). Tiago had gotten his heads from James Montigny previously and James had the NRT engine package. I went to NRT’s site to learn that the full engine package came with the 900.00 option full port/polish and valve job. You can digest that for a minute before carrying on. GM had managed to work the heads on the FWD engines so perfectly that they flowed as well as taking a set of the iron heads and paying someone to R&D a perfect portjob on them. 900.00. Using the aluminum heads means you have 900.00 to use elsewhere.

    FWIW: I make as much power as a "stockish" 305 V8. Not bad for a 207cid V6 imo.

    West Coast F-Bodies || WCFB Forums

  2. #2
    3.4 Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Lomita, CA
    Age
    37
    Posts
    52

    Black
    1994 Camaro

    (cont...)

    The first bottleneck is the plenum. While it looks pretty decent, being that the outer size is 3 inches wide by 2.5 inches tall (or somewhere around there – I forget) where the inside is really only like 1.5 – 1.75 inches wide x one inch tall! The plenum has an incredibly thick construction (why I have no idea, its not like you are boosting the motor from the factory) and it makes for very little space for the air to travel inside. Then on top of that the airflow has to split, make two 45 degree turns in order to get to one more 45 degree turn down into the engine. This equates to a lot of bad sharp angles that the airflow has to navigate – effectively slowing it down. The fact that the runners are super short makes for more problems being that there is no way the engine is capable of any top end power, hence the problem with the engine “dying” at 4500 rpm. Ask any 3.4L owner and they will tell you that the engine seems to top out around 4500 rpm. While most people are ok with this, the tachometer shows that the engine has a rev potential of 5500 rpm and a redline of 7k. This is due to the forged steel connecting rods in the engine that can take more abuse than most. The other thing GM didn’t think of – fuel supply. While 16lb injectors come stock on the 2.8-3.4L engine, they are only capable of supplying the engine with enough fuel for a max of 160 hp. (sound familiar?) After you go past 160 hp, the injectors begin to become less and less efficient, costing the driver more in terms of gas mileage and not really working to their full potential. Putting larger injectors helps a good deal.

    All this said, it seems to be that the 3.4L engine is a stout powerplant with untapped potential. I proved this when I bolted the aluminum heads to the block itself. Using a stock 3.4L RWD engine block I mated the Gen III aluminum heads and 3100 intake (1996 model year) along with the fuel rails and larger injectors, the stock 3400 throttle body (50mm, just like the RWD stock tb) and adding RKSport headers (due to the fact that nothing else fit that would work in the RWD engine bay, pacesetter headers would work just as well) I realized a gain in the form of 27RWHP and 30RWTQ. (thats from 140rwhp -> 167rwhp and 183rwtq -> 203 rwtq). Once I took the cutout plate off to open the exhaust fully, it gave me another 3 horsepower and 3 torque (both rearwheel) taking me to 170RWHP and 207RWTQ. That’s a 30 RWHP gain and 24 RWTQ gain. Factor in 15% drivetrain loss and that comes to 200 horsepower at the engine. Now when I started, stock engine save for the 3” catback exhaust and K&N FIPK – I had dynoed at 140RWHP and 183RWTQ – that’s 164 HP and 215 TQ at the crank. Just updating the heads and intake from the restrictive version that GM put on there in 1993-1995 to the ones they were currently using in 1996 gave me an increase of 36 hp and 30 tq (170rw=>200c / 207rw=>245c) over what came from the factory. Then I decided to upgrade to the “3400” parts. I made sure I got a set of heads used on the 1999+ Grand Am GT, which featured bigger valves and roller rocker arms built in, as well as larger runners and ports on the plenum as well as an increased plenum size. I still haven’t dynoed the current setup that I’m running, but it’s enough that to date I have beaten a 1996 Convertible Z28 that was going all out to catch up to me and couldn’t until I decided to let off the gas a little. A 3.4L with parts from GM’s factory shelves, complete with casting flaws – keeping the car from being caught by a stock 1996 Z28. To me that’s a major achievement. I can get the owner of the Z28 to come on here and back me up if you need proof, I’m sure he would help me out. He’s one of the members of my car club.

    I guess the point of all this is that I’m tired of people giving up on this engine. Its got a lot of potential but it is a challenge. You can’t just slap parts on it like you can with the V8. Even the 3.8 is a challenge but the 3.4 has so many design flaws that it comes across as a failure when it simply needs to be “woken up”. I’m tired of hearing that making the 3.4L perform is impossible – it isn’t. If it was then neither myself or Tiago would have gotten any results from our testing and working so hard. It is a challenge though. And it’s not an easy one at that. Lots of time and effort have to be put into it. So if you think you are up to the challenge of making something cool and custom, then stay with the 3.4 and realize your own personalized car at the end. If you want an easy way out, sell your car and buy a V8. I really don’t care either way. But sooner or later everyone will realize that the 3.4 isn’t as bad as they think. If GM had put a little more thought into the 3.4L like they did with the 3800 Series II – then the 3.4 would have been rated in the top 10 engines of all time. 200 hp is achievable in “stock” form. I’ve done it. Can you?

  3. #3
    Member dreaded_hope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Age
    31
    Posts
    121

    Black
    97 Firebird

    Very impressive write up!

  4. #4
    I swear it's just a v6!
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Westwood, NJ
    Age
    38
    Posts
    127

    Silver
    1997 Firebird V6

    Good lord...... lots of reading

  5. #5
    Awaiting Activation kaos2700's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Phx,AZ
    Age
    31
    Posts
    18

    silver
    95 camaro

    WOW.... i just got a comaro,i love it to death,but i noticed it really didnt move around 4500 like u said at first i thought it was cus it was running too lean but now that ive read this i know what the problem is and how to solve it. i will take ur advice and just stick with the 3.4L. also i have a automatic trans and i was wondering would it be wise to get it swapped out for a man. any advice would be good thx

  6. #6
    Alcohol Injected PaganEgyptian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Knoxville,Tn
    Age
    38
    Posts
    139

    Black
    1999 Pontiac Firebird

    You are definately a Gentleman and a scholar for posting this. Thank You. -Tim

  7. #7
    Member bbfirebird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    AZ
    Age
    35
    Posts
    113

    Navy Blue Metallic
    2000 Formula hardtop

    awesome post!

  8. #8
    Alcohol Injected PaganEgyptian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Knoxville,Tn
    Age
    38
    Posts
    139

    Black
    1999 Pontiac Firebird

    I just noticed, look at kaos2700 and my avatars. Kinda neat posted next to each other...... BTW, I have friends trying to contact you Black34v6. -Tim

  9. #9
    3.4 Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Lomita, CA
    Age
    37
    Posts
    52

    Black
    1994 Camaro

    yea i know -- workin on communicating with him

    and as i said to him, if anyone has trouble getting in touch with me, it's only because im so busy and haven't had time to check the boards. feel free to come to wcfb's board and say "whassup" and "why are you ignoring me??" lol. ill respond as soon as i can.

    sorry for that tho hope i havent upset anyone.

    -R

  10. #10
    95birdman
    Guest
    Didnt upset me, i just wanted to let you know that there were some ppl excited about your research, glad to see u got my message tho..

    -James

  11. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Maryland
    Age
    27
    Posts
    1

    green
    95 camaro

    russel i work on the same engine people talk down upon the fact that im upgrading a 3.4. before i read yer forum i had put rk headers on, and put the k&n set up on, but i still felt there wasn't any air getting to the combustion chambers, id really appreciate if you were able to tell me what vehicles you took the cylinder heads off of and the intake off of, what are you refering to when saying Gen 3 heads, and i have a broken down 97 chevy malibu with the 3.1 L engine, will that due?

  12. #12
    3.4 Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Lomita, CA
    Age
    37
    Posts
    52

    Black
    1994 Camaro

    3.1 is where i started. got all my parts from a 1996 Grand Am GT first (3100) stuff and that got me from 140 / 185 RW to 170 / 207 RW. just from changing to the 3100 stuff. the 3400 stuff is even better...

    i've since added a cam, and with a bad tune (10:1 A/F ratio) the car is at 185 rwhp / 212 rwtq. im hoping to push that number higher, but as of right now im on par with a 5.0L V8 thats in my club...very cool tidings

    Let me know how it works out.

    -R

  13. #13
    Super Senior Member derrinx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Age
    27
    Posts
    2,712

    Black
    2000 Trans Am WS6

    Quote Originally Posted by Black34v6 View Post
    If GM had put a little more thought into the 3.4L like they did with the 3800 Series II – then the 3.4 would have been rated in the top 10 engines of all time. 200 hp is achievable in “stock” form. I’ve done it. Can you?

    I hope I dont come off as sounding ignorant by saying this, but I am in no way an expert on engines and I just dont understand how you can say that. I never understood why american v6's were always so underpowered as compared to certain Japanese counterparts. The 3.5L v6 in a G35 and 350Z produce 300hp and around 284 tq, the 3.2L v6 in an 04 acura TL produces 270hp and 250tq, and the 3.0L v6 in an 06 accord makes 244hp and around 220tq...and all these engines are single cam (not sure about the nissan 3.5)
    All these engines are a lot newer granted, and technology has improved, but japanese engines have always been producing more power than comparable american v6's. I know tuning, timing etc is all different, but why would american car manufacturers insist on producing engine that aren't comparable to other manufacturers instead of copying their technology and looking at ways to improve it? And i know american engines are tuned more for torque etc, but doesnt it make american cars seem inferior to japanese cars when honda squeezed out 170 hp and like 120 tq from the b16 dohc 1.6L inline four in the early 90's, which is more hp from LESS THAN HALF of the diplacement (yes, i know a lot less torque). How could you consider a stock 3.4L v6 making 200 hp a top ten engine?
    Personally, i prefer american cars any day, but is it any wonder why ford stock is at 6 dollars a share and american car makers are loosing ground to the japanese every day? In the end i think it comes down to hp/liter which is the most important peice of information you can know about an engine. 325/5.7(LS1) = 57hp/liter...i mean come on is that the best americans can do? It becuase of stupid things liek what you described in your post that american engines jsut are not up to par with the rest of the world. We need new thinking in detroit or else soon enough we wont have any american cars left to idolize.

  14. #14
    3.4 Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Lomita, CA
    Age
    37
    Posts
    52

    Black
    1994 Camaro

    Quote Originally Posted by derrinx View Post
    I hope I dont come off as sounding ignorant by saying this, but I am in no way an expert on engines and I just dont understand how you can say that. I never understood why american v6's were always so underpowered as compared to certain Japanese counterparts. The 3.5L v6 in a G35 and 350Z produce 300hp and around 284 tq, the 3.2L v6 in an 04 acura TL produces 270hp and 250tq, and the 3.0L v6 in an 06 accord makes 244hp and around 220tq...and all these engines are single cam (not sure about the nissan 3.5)
    All these engines are a lot newer granted, and technology has improved, but japanese engines have always been producing more power than comparable american v6's. I know tuning, timing etc is all different, but why would american car manufacturers insist on producing engine that aren't comparable to other manufacturers instead of copying their technology and looking at ways to improve it? And i know american engines are tuned more for torque etc, but doesnt it make american cars seem inferior to japanese cars when honda squeezed out 170 hp and like 120 tq from the b16 dohc 1.6L inline four in the early 90's, which is more hp from LESS THAN HALF of the diplacement (yes, i know a lot less torque). How could you consider a stock 3.4L v6 making 200 hp a top ten engine?
    Personally, i prefer american cars any day, but is it any wonder why ford stock is at 6 dollars a share and american car makers are loosing ground to the japanese every day? In the end i think it comes down to hp/liter which is the most important peice of information you can know about an engine. 325/5.7(LS1) = 57hp/liter...i mean come on is that the best americans can do? It becuase of stupid things liek what you described in your post that american engines jsut are not up to par with the rest of the world. We need new thinking in detroit or else soon enough we wont have any american cars left to idolize.

    do you own a 3.8L v6? or a LT1/LS1 - either way i dont really care. the 3.4L engine is a better design than the 3.8L engine - and half of the engines out there today. save for the LSx family..those are nicely done too. the 3.4L engine, the 2.8 and 3.1 as well as the ENTIRE FAMILY that GM is currently rethinking, have a very good design in terms of how they are built, but needed a little more thought.

    Comparing Import engines to Domestic is apples to oranges. "not to sound rude", but if you dont like american production values, do something about it or stfu.

  15. #15
    Member silverz28camaro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Washington MO
    Age
    28
    Posts
    796

    sebring silver
    2000 z28

    i really enjoyed your book you wrote up there, lol

    it would be nice to know what you run in the quarter, if you beat a stock 96 convert. z then you shoud be in the 14's right?

    i have a 96 corsica with the 3.1 and it still runs great but i never drive it, mayby i will get a 93-95 3.4 , dod what you did to the motor and strip it down to make it as light as possible and use it as a sleeper car, cause like you said no one has faith in the 3.4 but i do (after i read your post)

  16. #16
    Member silverz28camaro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Washington MO
    Age
    28
    Posts
    796

    sebring silver
    2000 z28

    oh and have you changer gear ratio?

  17. #17
    Member silverz28camaro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Washington MO
    Age
    28
    Posts
    796

    sebring silver
    2000 z28

    oh and black34 do you know if the z34 lumina is also a 3.4 liter, i do know that it has high compression and runs pretty good, my buddy has one and i may take a peak at it to see what the intake plenum looks like
    Last edited by silverz28camaro; 07-26-2006 at 06:53 AM.

  18. #18
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Eagan, Minnesota
    Age
    30
    Posts
    87

    Black/Purple Marble
    1995 Camaro

    Heard a recent rumor at least of a 3.4 top end swap and a bit higher compression with a copper head gasket to hold it, N/A drop down 239 rear wheel in a '94 Camaro M5.

  19. #19
    3.4 Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Lomita, CA
    Age
    37
    Posts
    52

    Black
    1994 Camaro

    Quote Originally Posted by silverz28camaro View Post
    i really enjoyed your book you wrote up there, lol

    it would be nice to know what you run in the quarter, if you beat a stock 96 convert. z then you shoud be in the 14's right?

    i have a 96 corsica with the 3.1 and it still runs great but i never drive it, mayby i will get a 93-95 3.4 , dod what you did to the motor and strip it down to make it as light as possible and use it as a sleeper car, cause like you said no one has faith in the 3.4 but i do (after i read your post)
    I wish I could say I have run 14's in the 1/4 -- unfortunately I am not a drag racer and therefore I am not at all good at driving on the track. I need a lot more practice. The best to date is a 16 flat @ 86 mph. (i have seen 3.8's run 15.8 @ 89-90 mph tho, so i think my trap speed is a little low)

    I have to apologise for my late reply -- I have been a little late in answering because I have had a lot of "drama" (crap) going on in my life..

    I'll try to answer quicker from now on.

    I have changed the rear gearing, but only because I got an entire LS1 Rear end (for the rear disc option) - which gave me 3.42 gearing. When I managed to keep the Z28 off of me, that was with 3.23 gearing and an Auburn Posi unit.

    and yes, the lumina Z34 is a "3.4" of sorts, but its a 3400 TDC - for Twin Dual Cam - its a DOHC motor based on the 2.8/3.1/3.4 engine and its a completely different animal than the regular OHV line...

  20. #20
    3.4 Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Lomita, CA
    Age
    37
    Posts
    52

    Black
    1994 Camaro

    Quote Originally Posted by nikos95 View Post
    Heard a recent rumor at least of a 3.4 top end swap and a bit higher compression with a copper head gasket to hold it, N/A drop down 239 rear wheel in a '94 Camaro M5.
    interesting.

    where @ ?

Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. r cutouts bad for ur motor?
    By CamaroSSx1999 in forum External Engine
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-12-2005, 07:28 PM
  2. Wiper Motor Drama
    By ossie_jr in forum General Help
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-20-2005, 09:39 PM
  3. Questions concerning Z06 motor
    By thochrun71 in forum Corvette
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-18-2005, 08:26 AM
  4. need help for motor
    By stormbringer in forum Camaro / SS
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-28-2005, 03:00 PM
  5. Questions concerning a motor swap
    By thochrun71 in forum General Help
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-15-2005, 06:44 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •