Home
About Us
Calendar
Fiero Documents
Merchandise
Tips
Links
Members
Message Board
Other Fiero Clubs
VIN Decoder
Speed Calculator
GFC Facebook Page
 

Author Topic: thought it was a 2.8 when purchased, its a 3.4!  (Read 24843 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

dgsmooth

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: thought it was a 2.8 when purchased, its a 3.4!
« Reply #15 on: October 15, 2013, 12:23:16 pm »
no niether of those gaskets you sent fierofool would work for me....the rotation is correct on the one like you pointed out but the other smaller chamber beside the main impeller chamber is the wrong shape and also in the wrong position. if you look at the second gasket kit photo i attached, the one where it shows both rotation gaskets in one kit, the gasket on the right is the one i need. the smaller chamber is square, rotation from that view is right hand and the secondary rectangular chamber is belowe/beside the main not above the inlet/outlet tube section. i'll microsoft paint an example and attach.....this making we scared wrong waterpump/ratation been on this engine, maybe cause/contribution of failure?

the oil pan photo is correct, so the first kit photo i attached shows the wrong pan as i thought. i mean i knew it was wrong for my pan, but unsure if my pan was the proper/stock pan. that part is good news. and yes those are the injectors i have, like you said all black though. thanks again guys, i'll get a better photo to show this water pump discepancy

Fierofool

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,712
    • View Profile
    • Georgia Fiero Club
Re: thought it was a 2.8 when purchased, its a 3.4!
« Reply #16 on: October 15, 2013, 01:01:47 pm »
Here are the 2.8 and the 3.4 water pumps.  It might be that they used the 3.4 timing gear cover on the engine.  That would necessitate using the 3.4 water pump, too.  And it could have contributed to early failure of the engine.

The 2.8 water pump has a nipple or pipe plug at the 10 o'clock position.  The nipple is used for 85 and 86 applications as a heater bypass.  The hoses were changed in 87 and that hole was filled by a pipe plug.

The 2.8 water pump, all year V6 applications.
(image removed by Fierofool)

The 93-95 3.4  V6 Camaro/Firebird water pump.  This is a Cardone image, so I'm not sure it's correct.


Dennis, I took those water pump pictures down because I don't believe the 2.8 pump is correctly depicted.  I'm not sure about the 3.4 pump, but the 2.8 definitely isn't the correct one I posted.  As said, the pipe plug or nipple for the Fiero application should be at 10 o'clock.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2013, 01:09:32 pm by Fierofool »
There are three kinds of men:

1.    The ones that learn by reading.
2.    The few who learn by observation.
3.    The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence and find out for themselves.    Will Rogers

TopNotch

  • The Duke of URL
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,984
    • View Profile
Re: thought it was a 2.8 when purchased, its a 3.4!
« Reply #17 on: October 15, 2013, 01:47:45 pm »
Here's a nice picture of a 2.8 (88) water pump I found on Pennock's:

The more complex the mind, the greater the need for the simplicity of play.

TopNotch

  • The Duke of URL
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,984
    • View Profile
Re: thought it was a 2.8 when purchased, its a 3.4!
« Reply #18 on: October 15, 2013, 01:56:52 pm »
Here's a water pump R&R procedure on Pennock's. The pictures are gone though, at least for me (they may be blocked by my work system).
The more complex the mind, the greater the need for the simplicity of play.

Fierofool

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,712
    • View Profile
    • Georgia Fiero Club
Re: thought it was a 2.8 when purchased, its a 3.4!
« Reply #19 on: October 15, 2013, 02:06:42 pm »
The pictures are gone for me, too.  Probably his host site dumped them after a while.  I did some investigation, too and found that TopNotch's photo is correct for the 2.8 water pump and the one I posted is also correct.  Here it is again.  It's just oriented differently.  You can see the long pipe nipple that's used in the 85 and 86 application.  It enters down near the impeller shaft instead of out on the end of a runner.  If you have to replace the water pump, by all means get one with a steel impeller.  Fiero owners have learned that the plastic impellers will come loose from the shaft, causing the engine to overheat.
There are three kinds of men:

1.    The ones that learn by reading.
2.    The few who learn by observation.
3.    The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence and find out for themselves.    Will Rogers

dgsmooth

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: thought it was a 2.8 when purchased, its a 3.4!
« Reply #20 on: October 15, 2013, 03:30:33 pm »
yes that very last picture by fierofool is the water pump i have, same one as topnotch showed in his photo. i attached another pic, shows the water pump i have, and the next two gaskets below are the tow from the two kit examples fierofool showed (one for each rotation). but as you can see niether will work on that pump. the very bottom gasket is the one i originally posted and the one i have on the way....

here is the pic showing the pump and all three gaskets:



somthing is askew.....

Raydar

  • Paid Members
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,016
    • View Profile
Re: thought it was a 2.8 when purchased, its a 3.4!
« Reply #21 on: October 15, 2013, 08:13:45 pm »
Charlie asked me to weigh in, here.
One thing that I seem to remember was that Felpro got it wrong. The 87-88 Fiero gasket kit had the wrong water pump gasket.
I don't recall if it also had the correct one, or if I had to buy a separate water pump (and maybe timing cover) gasket kit. Seems like I had to buy a separate water pump gasket, at least. (Sorry... It's been 5+ years.)

Edit - The gasket that you have on the way, at the bottom, above, is the right one.

Regarding casting numbers...
The iron 2.8, 3.1 and 3.4 heads are completely interchangeable. They are all an identical casting, even if the numbers are different.
The only difference is that the 2.8 NON-HO heads (which came on carbureted engines) have smaller valves.
Any head that came from an EFI engine, including TBI EFI, should have the big valves.
The heads that came on the X11, should also be the HO heads, even though it was carbureted.

The 3.4 block is its own beast.
The 3.1 is a stroked 2.8. It has a different crank and different pistons from the 2.8, but it has the same bore size.
The 3.4 uses the 3.1 crank with a larger bore. All rods, for all displacements, are the same. This supposedly includes the rods in the 3.4 DOHC.
The 3.4 Camarobird block (the one that "shipped" with iron heads, that we are concerned with) can be identified by a large "F" cast into the side of the block. This may hold true for the HT 3.4 crate motor, too, but I've never seen one of those up close, so I can't say for sure. It will have a cast pad on the right (trunk) side, that would usually mount a crank sensor. It's unused on the Fiero, so you may find a sensor with clipped off wires, or it may have a metal plug driven in. Same with the cam sensor. On the F-body, it was located on the horizontal surface, just above the timing cover. On the Fiero, it will either be plugged or "clipped", as before.

Since you have an aftermarket cam, you probably don't care about this, but it's probably worth mentioning. The 3.4 Camarobird cam has the identical specs to the stock Fiero cam. IIRC, it's .394(I), .410(E). The only difference is that it has a tab to trigger the cam sensor on the F-Body. 

If your block has provisions for a roller cam, it is a FWD block. NO RWD applications of the 3.4 came with a roller cam.
The FWD block might seem like a good idea, but the FWD pistons (which were designed to work with the aluminum heads) will yield about a 7.5:1 compression ratio. The correct 3.4 pistons should be mostly flat topped, or have a moderate (~1/8" dish.)

Lou Dias on Pennocks is using a converted FWD block in his Fiero, in the event that you want to search out his threads. It sounds like it was a bunch of trouble to do.
In reality, that's probably NOT what you have.

If you have any specific questions, please feel free to ask. It's been a while since I did mine, but I still remember a few things about it.
If I don't answer, please feel free to PM. Sometimes it takes me a day or two to come back here. I'll get notifications of PMs.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2013, 08:18:24 pm by Raydar »
...

dgsmooth

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: thought it was a 2.8 when purchased, its a 3.4!
« Reply #22 on: October 15, 2013, 10:52:05 pm »
well thats all great news to me.....i knew those gaskets in the other mentioned kits were not the proper gasket for my water pump, but that scared me in the sense that maybe my water pump may be wrong one or something to that effect....the wrong gasket in those kits sounded like a long shot but that is what i was hoping the case was, am sure relieved to hear that from you raydar.

my block definetly does have the big F stamped on it as well.....i remember because as i was stripping this down and found the cam missing lobes and rod and main bearings full of the debris i saw the F and thought, "i know what that stands for - F'd cause thats what this this thing is".

well sounds like i'm on the right track with everything then....just waiting for some parts to show up so i can get started! thanks again guys

Raydar

  • Paid Members
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,016
    • View Profile
Re: thought it was a 2.8 when purchased, its a 3.4!
« Reply #23 on: October 15, 2013, 11:09:26 pm »
Good luck with your rebuild.
Do you know how many miles are on that engine?
If they're going to wipe cam lobes, it usually happens fairly quickly, unless it was just horribly neglected. 

Be sure to get everything clean. I'm not very familiar with the oiling system on the engine. Mine was never disassembled further than to the short block.
If you can get all the threaded(?) plugs out of the ends of the oil galleries, I'm thinking that a gun cleaning kit might be useful for cleaning out all the passages. Just a thought. 
...

dgsmooth

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: thought it was a 2.8 when purchased, its a 3.4!
« Reply #24 on: October 16, 2013, 12:43:13 am »
exactly right, all plugs did come out nicely and I thoroughly blasted it all out....engine supposedly had about 65000 on it, and owner I got it from who owned it at that time was a very meticulous type....although he also didnt know it was a 3.4. I may end up dying of old age and never knowing the answer to this one

dgsmooth

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: thought it was a 2.8 when purchased, its a 3.4!
« Reply #25 on: October 26, 2013, 07:06:19 pm »
well finnaly got my parts order in. today put my short block chevy cam bearings in, so i made a thread on how to do that. tomorrow to hone cylinders, put new crank timing sprocket on and hopefully put crank and pistons in. all parts look good/correct so far