So yah, Fieros don't have rev limiters...

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » Thu Aug 04, 2005 6:49 pm

Well some lady was pissing me off otday, and I found the perfect route around her, which would allow me to make sure my brakes worked, and allow her insurance company to buy me a new bumper.

That wasn't my exact thought process, I honestly believed I was in danger behind her, and felt I'd be in a much safer position ahead of her. So I put it into first, crank it to 5550, and oops, missed second! It didn't grind thank God, but the tach shot up to where 7k would be, and a red light flashed on (It was either on the voltage gauge or oil pres). After catching my error, I found second and continued to make my pass.

Yah, 2.8ls don't really sound good at 7k, and I am honestly shocked it could even rev that high!

Shaun41178(2) · Post by **Shaun41178(2)** » Thu Aug 04, 2005 7:23 pm

88's dont

Post by **eHoward** » Thu Aug 04, 2005 11:15 pm

2.8s don't like revs.

Ask me how I know.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » Thu Aug 04, 2005 11:43 pm

Oh God...

Mine didn't do anything, it still runs normal thank God...

The Dark Side of Will · Fri Aug 05, 2005 12:21 am

That piston had the FUCK abused out of it BEFORE it came apart.

Fast88Fiero · Post by **Fast88Fiero** » Fri Aug 05, 2005 1:04 am

The Dark Side of Will wrote:That piston had the FUCK abused out of it BEFORE it came apart.

No way. Looks about normal. :la:

p8ntman442 · Post by **p8ntman442** » Fri Aug 05, 2005 11:58 am

looks more like a lean condition causing it to melt more than a valve hitting and doing that much damage. I had a duke piston that looked like that.

Also you may think your engine is fine, but at 7000 rpm, the oiling isnt sufficient and you may have just toasated your mains without even knowing it yet.

z.MacK · Post by **z.MacK** » Sat Aug 06, 2005 12:48 am

my 86 got a rev limiter

it does the bouncin cuz of fuel cut off at about 6500.

I like bouncin it off the limiter, when shifting into second,
sound cool.... the bitch is screamin like its bein gang raped

The Dark Side of Will · Sat Aug 06, 2005 8:58 am

The 2.8 isn't making anything but noise at 6500 RPM, though.

You'll go faster shifting at 5500.

I_wear_pants · Post by **I_wear_pants** » Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:25 pm

The Dark Side of Will wrote:The Boat Anchor isn't making anything but noise at 6500 RPM, though.

You'll go faster shifting at 5500.

agreed

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » Thu Aug 11, 2005 3:18 pm

Now if it isn't I wear pants, our winner!

It is still acting normal, so I'm not thinking it did any damage, thank God!

Kohburn · Post by **Kohburn** » Thu Aug 11, 2005 3:23 pm

there was a guy a few years back that autocrossed his 2.8 and swore up and down that he woulc drop a gear and rev it to 7K as he was entering a turn and never blew his up.. maybe he got lucky but I spun the bearings in two pushrod v6's

Formula69 · Post by **Formula69** » Fri Aug 19, 2005 1:22 am

I had the trottle stick on my Formula a couple of times and the revs jumped to about 7000 before I could kill the ignition. 155,000 miles and it still runs great. Don't know how much life I took off the engine doing that, though.

BigRedDeckSpoiler · Post by **BigRedDeckSpoiler** » Fri Aug 19, 2005 1:00 pm

Don't the 88 2point8s have the same bottom end pieces as the 3.4 DOHC? (Stroke notwithstanding.) Those things rev to 7K all day log. Right?
I've seen bunches of pre-88 2point8s eat the #3 and 4 rod bearings, but it seems like the later ones were better.
I understand that the 88s got better oiling. Maybe even the 87s. Anybody?

The Dark Side of Will · Fri Aug 19, 2005 1:22 pm

The factory 60 degree V6 rods are forged and good for 7,000 RPM. The Gen I engines did not have very good rod bearing lubrication.

Gen II engines had better oiling. The '88's got the Gen II crank machining (but no reluctor wheel).

I've got a Gen II 3.1 in my beater with 208K on the clock and no reservations about planting my foot into that baby. We had it apart to repair a spark plug hole about 175K and it had no ridges at the tops of the cylinders and original hone pattern was visible.

Other than uninspiring performance, it's a pretty solid engine.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » Fri Aug 19, 2005 1:41 pm

Yah they are essentially the same. The 3.4 DOHC also has problems with the #4 rod bearing, that is the one I spun on my Z34.

But the 3.4 DOHC also has a much higher volume oil pump.

Chase Race · Post by **Chase Race** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 2:05 am

The Dark Side of Will wrote:The '88's got the Gen II crank machining (but no reluctor wheel).

They still don't oil for 360 degrees of rod rotation, but that can be fixed by a competent machine shop.

And they have the wheel, but no notches cut in it.

Series8217 · Post by **Series8217** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 5:30 am

Chase Race wrote: They still don't oil for 360 degrees of rod rotation, but that can be fixed by a competent machine shop.

What about the 3.4 DOHC? If not, what do I ask them to do at the machine shop? Any reason I shouldn't?

The Dark Side of Will · Sat Aug 20, 2005 8:35 am

I guess I got spoiled working on Cadillac stuff... never occured to me that they wouldn't be fully cross-drilled.

Unmachined wheel? Interesting...

Series8217 · Post by **Series8217** » Sun Aug 21, 2005 1:07 am

So the crank needs to be fully crossdrilled? I think I remember reading something about in GM's 60 degree V6 performance book. Definitely going to get this done if there isn't a reason not to.. any disadvantages? Factory didnt do it because the tooling was too expensive or what?