Real tech discussion on design, fabrication, testing, development of custom or adapted parts for Pontiac Fieros. Not questions about the power a CAI will give.
Shaun41178(2) wrote:Keeping the 3400 alt in the stock location would require trimming of the underside of the decklid. One guy on Old Europe had to actually cut a hole in his decklid as there wasn't enough clearence.
It will fit WITHOUT trimming the decklid, but you have to cheat a little...
... BUT, I had to install 1" spacers between the rear cradle mounts and the chassis in order for it to work. This, coupled with lowering the engine/trans down as far as possible (without the oil pans being lower than the bottom of the cradle) give me about 1/4" clearance between the deck lid and alternator. But there are a few spots on the alternator that could be trimmed a little to give more clearance.
FYI: Spacing the rear of the cradle down will affect rear suspension geometery a little bit. But I did this 7 years ago on my 3800 Fiero swap and have been driving it ever since with no problems (after an alignment).
But aren't you missing the point? Lowering the cradle and fabrication of special mounting is cost prohibitive if you don't have a welder or the skills to use one. Gooch and I are trying to minimize expenditures by using parts we already have on hand. I'm sure others would like to see there are swaps that use existing accessories with minimal mounting modifications. It would surely lower the overall cost of the swap. Who knows, maybe the 3x00 swaps will become more accepted and documented in the fiero community. A viable alternative to the 3800 swap, without cutting the decklid.
flimbob wrote:But aren't you missing the point? Lowering the cradle and fabrication of special mounting is cost prohibitive if you don't have a welder or the skills to use one. Gooch and I are trying to minimize expenditures by using parts we already have on hand. I'm sure others would like to see there are swaps that use existing accessories with minimal mounting modifications.
Not missing the point at all. Shaun said the stock alt location couldn't be used without cutting the decklid and I showed evidence to the contrary. That was my point. I never implied that doing the swap my way would be cheaper or easier than using stock Fiero parts. But I think my way is better. The stock Fiero assy. drive setup has many flaws. The water pumps crack easily due to a design flaw in the timing cover where if the person installing the pump isn't very careful when tightening that one top bolt; and the slipping alternator belt always seems to be a constant problem unless someone addresses that by installing another pulley (tensioner or idler) or making sure the belt is properly tightened. Doing it your way still requires modification that not everyone with basic shop tools can do. And I just feel that if one is going to go to the trouble of doing a swap, why not go full bore and use as many modern parts as possible? Just look how much room I have now to work around the 3100 swap I posted pictures of. There is a TON more room between the belt and frame rail / battery tray now vs. what the stock Fiero setup gives you.
But in all honesty, I would like to find a way to low mount the alternator on this 3100 engine. The one that came with it didn't look like it was going to work in a low-mount capcity so I just left it in the stock location. However, a low mount solution would be necessary in a manual trans application if one wanted to use a dog-bone up in the upper right rear corner of the engine. But since that was not necessary for this swap, I didn't spend much time on it.
Yes your pictures show that it is possible to use the stock location without cutting the decklid. I commend you for your creativity. I am not a full time mechanic, just an enthusiast. I've never done a swap, but I believe I have the skills to do so with help from the community. I chose the 3500 swap because I believe the 3x00 platform has many merits. I would love to use the newer components instead of the old. All the lx9 motors in my price range do not come with an alternator or compressor. That means extra funds to purchase these. A low mount alternator bracket would be very beneficial, but would likely cost $300 or more. On another note, if the 2.8 dampener could be modified for 7x as a member from Old Europe has already done and documented, that would save big bucks as the wot-tech external crank trigger is roughly $155. I wonder if the 3500 dampener could be modified in the same way as the 2.8. Ac is another story altogether. If I could lower the cost of my swap by $200 - $300 that would just about cover the costs associated with tuning the swap.
I'm not trying to say your way is not the correct path. Just trying to say money.
I'm not trying to say your way is not the correct path. Just trying to say money.
Don't misunderstand, I'm not knocking your way of doing things at all. I think all we have here is a difference of opinion. If your goal is an ultimate low-buck swap, then by all means use what you need to use to get your project within your budget. I just wanted to state my opinion about why I don't like to reuse the stock Fiero parts, that's all; and to show a way you could do a swap so they wouldn't be needed. I am also aware there is a 7x reluctor setup (made by TCE) that can be used with the Fiero balancer on the LX9.
flimbob wrote:Lowering the cradle and fabrication of special mounting is cost prohibitive if you don't have a welder or the skills to use one.
Keep in mind you're likely one of only two or three here in this situation. If I were you, and had never completed a swap, ...or know how to weld..., I'd be considering all alternatives, and collecting every last detail I could find. And I would NEVER tell Ryan Gick he didn't get the point. This is Real Fiero Tech, not Old Europe.
The "real" information I've already dispensed to you. From a technical perspective, I recommend you pick up a book on welding, a skill advantageous to the enthusiast, particularly you.
I don't presume to understand your circumstances, and so I demur to share any further information with you on the bases I will likely miss the point.
The early Fiero rear suspension doesn't simply recycle parts from the front end of a GM A-body, it *IS* the front end of an A-body. This means that it still has anti-dive geometry. When used in the rear this becomes pro-squat geometry.
The rear control arm pivot is higher and inboard of the forward pivot. Being higher gives it anti dive. I'm not sure why it's inboard (packaging around the powertrain is always a possibility), but that makes the caster change less as the car dives under braking, so it may be to make the steering feel stay the same under braking. Obviously this is not an enthusiast car.
Lowering the rear end of the cradle lowers the rear pivot of the cradle, which reduces the pro-squat. Lowering the inner pivots of the control arm *at all* makes the camber curve worse. It also changes the bump steer relationship of the toe link, although it's hard to make that worse and it needs to be fixed anyway.
On my white '84 Fiero, I drilled new holes in my aluminum cradle bushings, the front ones, directly below the center holes. Then in the Fiero, I drilled the brackets directly above the existing holes. so now the front of the cradle can be an inch higher, to match the rear getting dropped an inch. Thus my camber curve remains stock, especially since the stock rear springs haven't been replaced or cut, but my anti-squat is improved. And don't forget the bumpsteer mod., and the poly bushings for the rear lower control arms.
This might not be for you, but it seemed relevant.
Honest Don wrote:So dropping the rear improves squat characteristics, but screws up camber?
Just the camber curve. That is, the change in camber during body roll. You will into positive camber sooner with the lowered pivot points than you would with them higher. Static camber can still be set how you want it.
What are the options on making one launch relatively well, yet still be stable at highway speeds & up?
Camber doesn't really affect straight-line stability at any speed.
Honest Don wrote:So dropping the rear improves squat characteristics, but screws up camber?
What are the options on making one launch relatively well, yet still be stable at highway speeds & up?
As long as bump-steer is under control within the normal range of suspension motion, geometry doesn't affect stability NEARLY as much as alignment and damping do.
