Need help identifying an engine

[Fierofool]

The engine came out of a Fiero.  It is a remanufactured engine, so it wasn't original to the particular Fiero.  Starter is on the correct side.  It has a knock sensor and crankshaft sensor.  It isn't a 3.4 from a Camaro or Firebird.  In the side of the block where the 3.4 has an "F" cast into the block, there is a "T" and the side of the block is smooth, unlike the 3.4 that is ribbed.

[TopNotch]

Can you find the casting number of the block?

[GTRS Fiero]

So it's an '89 3.1?

[Fierofool]

The 88 Beretta 2.8 had a crankshaft and knock sensor and it's companions, the Cavalier and Cimmaron  There was a 2.8 used in the 6000 and several other cars.  This is apparently a FWD engine.  It hs all the mounting points on the block for the torque shock beside the oil filter. 

I'm having my 2.8 injectors refurbished and don't want to put them into a bigger engine. 

[GTRS Fiero]

Look up the transverse LH0.  Likely what that engine was.

[Fierofool]

Fierosound thinks it may be a 3.1.  Gonna check for other numbers on the block today. 

I thought 3.1's had roller lifters, so it might be a 2.8 from an 88, 89 or 90 vehicle. 

[GTRS Fiero]

The LH0 is a "T" engine.  There were 2 LH0 engines.  One was transverse, the other longitudinal; one was Gen I, the other Gen II.

[Raydar]

I saw this engine today. It has iron heads. Unless they were transferred to a Gen II, it's a Gen 1 block.
It has a crank with a trigger wheel (including the requisite notches), and a crank sensor, that apparently was not used in its new Fiero home.
Strangely enough, it also has an externally balanced (weighted) flywheel along with the neutrally balanced crank. No doubt that it was transferred from the old (86?) Fiero engine to this one. I can't believe this thing didn't shake like a paint mixer, but... oh well.
The engine appears to not have many miles on it. It's fairly clean inside, and the cylinder bores look clean, according to Charlie.
We still can't tell if it's a 2.8 or a 3.1. At least *I* can't. Someone else may be able to. Probably need to get a number of some sort off the pistons or crank, or maybe just measure the stroke.   

[Raydar]

Borrowed from a Pennock's post. That was borrowed from elsewhere. (Emphasis is mine.)
----------------------------------------------
"With the introduction of an all new V6 engine GM had to give this special engine a new crankshaft. The first 60 degree V6 crankshafts were all cast nodular iron. The 6 crankpins and the 2 center main feature deep rolled fillets making the crank very durable. The early cranks from 1980 until 1986 are all externally balanced, meaning they require additional weighting on the rear flexplate/flywheel to achieve a balanced assembly. The rotating assembly must be balanced with the flexplate/flywheel attached. Early cranks can be brought into internal balance by adding Mallory weights to the rear counterweight and using a neutral balance flexplate/flywheel. In 1987 some S-10 and Camaro's still used an externally balance crankshaft. 1987 was the first year internally balanced crankshafts were introduced. The addition of a reluctor wheel into the center of the crankshaft and the addition of a counterweight between the number 5 and 6 rod journals provided the needed mass for the crankshaft to be internally balanced. The reluctor wheel was machined with notches which provided the signal for the crankshaft position sensor. In rear wheel drive vehicles the reluctor wheel was not machined with notches because it was not required for the fuel delivery and ignition system.
Early production crankshafts use 63.35mm (2.494) main bearing diameters. For comparison the first Small Block used 58.42mm (2.30") main bearings later changed to 62.23mm (2.45") in 1968. Even with main journal diameters larger than a Small Block the 60 degree V6 was still prone to bearing failure. Beginning in 1985 the main bearings were increased in size to 67.25mm (2.648"). When selecting a crank for rebuild or replacement always seek out the later cranks. All fuel injected engines in 1985 have large main bearings but some S-10's in 1985 may still have small main bearings. In order to use a large main journal crankshaft the engine block must also be of the same style. All crankshafts since the beginning of production used a 50.7mm (2.0") crank pin diameter, the same as early Small Blocks.

The first crankshafts used in 2.8L engines had a 76mm (2.99") stroke. This stroke would remain the same until the 3.1L appeared in 1989. The stroke in the 3.1L was increased by 8mm (0.315") to 84mm (3.307"). This size of crankshaft would continue all the way through to the 3400 motor. The crank was never changed after 1989 until the 3500 motor was introduced.

Several internally balanced crankshafts featured lead in grooves on the number 2 and number 3 main bearings. These lead in groves help increase oil flow to the rod bearings. Some 1987 or later engine without lead in groves have a crank with modified oil holes that do not require lead in grooves to provide adequate rod bearing lubrication.

In 2004 GM introduced a 3.5L engine that saw an increase in the bore to 94mm (3.70") but the crankshaft retained the 84mm (3.307") stroke. However this new crank was forged in some applications and can be identified by its rougher shape and wide parting lines. The other interesting feature was its large 57.125mm (2.249") main journals which would allow for offset grinding to increase the stroke of an engine when using rods for a 50.7mm (2.0") rod journal. This new crank saw the introduction of a new trigger wheel in the center of the crank. In applications where the old style reluctor wheel is required an external trigger wheel will have to be used. On applications that use a distributor then this change in design is not a concern.

Modifications to the stock crank are not necessary on stock or mildly modified engines. However for higher performance the regular slew of aftermarket crank modifications can be performed such and profiling the leading and trailing edges of the counterweights, lathe machining the counterweights to balance instead of drilling, polishing the casting to reduce windage and several coating options to shed oil and reduce friction. The stock cast cranks perform well in applications in the 400hp range and the forged 3500 version will handle almost anything you can make out of a 60 Degree V6."
-------------------------------
The Readers' Digest version... It should be easy to measure the stroke, and figure out what it is.
We might be able to find a casting number or part number on the crank.

[GTRS Fiero]

Still guessing LH0.  Gen 1, internally balanced, transverse.

Everything prior to '87 was eliminated.  The 2.8 doesn't have a letter cast into it.  The 3.4 block has an "F".

[NoMad]

We were able to use the bore scope and pull "H5611" as writing on the top of the pistons. A quick search didn't turn up anything that linked to right away though.

[GTRS Fiero]

Fierosound thinks it may be a 3.1.  Gonna check for other numbers on the block today. 

I thought 3.1's had roller lifters, so it might be a 2.8 from an 88, 89 or 90 vehicle.

I just read through that thread, and the linked thread.  Very annoying.  A definitive conclusion was not really reached.  So, here we are, again.

[GTRS Fiero]

Behine the timing cover, near where the coolant return is, is there a bypass hole?  You should be able to see it, without pulling the timing cover.

[Fierofool]

The T block casting was used in FWD "W" body cars.  Some of them were as low as 110 HP and as high as 135.  That was with their heads and intakes.  So, If the Fiero heads were such a great improvement over the old S10 and X body heads, we should be OK.  I didn't check the head casting numbers, but will when I return. 

Best I have been able to determine, the pistons may be Sealed Power HyperEutectic, but I can't determine the bore.  Just gonna go with what I got. 

[Raydar]

The T block casting was used in FWD "W" body cars.  Some of them were as low as 110 HP and as high as 135.  That was with their heads and intakes.  So, If the Fiero heads were such a great improvement over the old S10 and X body heads, we should be OK.  I didn't check the head casting numbers, but will when I return. 

Best I have been able to determine, the pistons may be Sealed Power HyperEutectic, but I can't determine the bore.  Just gonna go with what I got.

The 2.8 and the 3.1 had the same bore size. The increased displacement was achieved by increasing the stroke length.

What did the tops of the pistons look like? Flat? Recessed?
My largest concern (being that I can always find the dark cloud within any silver lining) would be that they took a Gen 2 engine and dropped iron heads on it. Would yield a 7.something compression ratio.

In reality, my gut feeling is that it's probably a(n early) 3.1 minivan engine. That being the case, it probably has the "good" heads. (All the iron heads were essentially the same casting. Even the carbed S10 heads. The EFI heads just got larger valves.) The minivan also had a bit milder cam. Bad for power, but good for torque.
Ed Parks used to swap these engines into Fieros, before the 3.4s came along.