Identify this V6

GM? I figure someone here will know instantly by the intake manifold.

It's in a '77 Spitfire that I absolutely do not want to go buy. At all. You can't make me.

Oh man, that looks like fun... http://portland.craigslist.org/wsc/cto/4347161333.html

Thats a GM 60 degree V6 as used in Fieros and S10s and such.

Yeah, 2.8 I think. They can be lifted by hand with three guys on a dark NY winter night. And thrown onto the yard unceremoniously to make room for a 400.

Looks like the Camaro version by the intake pattern.

Awesome, thanks!

I'd ask whether that's particularly good or bad, but I'm pretty sure it'd be enough thrust to be fun in a Spitfire regardless of details... But at least I have something to Google now.

Supposedly the later 4.3 is the better engine, but for a Spit the 2.8 is more than sufficient.

What you'll want to find out is if it's '85-earlier or '85-later, that's when there was a design change to the bottom end.

And then you swap in a healthy cam, grab a '00 3100-3400 and swap its heads and intake on, run race fuel for the 13:1 compression, and really have some fun. The late style 3100/3400 heads are supposed to flow more than fully ported iron heads, stock.

2.8 GM.

3.4 is pretty much identical but with more power.

Lots of support on the MG forum for swapping these into the MGB. As in "Headers are available". And motormounts, end EFI tunes ect ect ect

The have been put into sprites also, not as common and no kits available.

2.8 for certain. aka ticking time bomb.

if it was pulled complete from the donor Camaro/Firebird, it's an 85 or later. Earlier cars had carbs. The 85+ had bigger rod journals and better heads/cam. MPI motors like this one 135-140hp and 165-170lbs torque out of the box. Had these engines in several cars with tons of miles and no issues.

GM is the only people stupid enough to put a distributor in the back of the engine making it the one thing you need to touch often but its crammed back in the firewall.

That looks like a 3.4—2.8s usually had a TBI setup from the factory.

fidelity101 wrote: GM is the only people stupid enough to put a distributor in the back of the engine making it the one thing you need to touch often but its crammed back in the firewall.

Ever seen an Audi 100, AMC PAcer or Porsche 924 2.0L motor? GM aren't the only companies dumb enough to do that.

The 60 degree 2.8/3.4 liter V6 engines were popular for swaps into small British and others sports cars because they are pretty narrow compared to the 90 degree V6's like the Buick.

There is some high performance parts availible for the 60 degree engines notably the Edlebrock four barrel manifold and a pretty good selection of cams. This company still sells parts and does some rotating assembly work as well as porting and polishing, balancing, etc. http://www.engine-parts.com/GMV6/gm28stroker.html

The cast iron heads don't breathe as well as the aluminum heads. Never the less some people have got some pretty good horsepower out of them. GM used to sell a inexpensive crate engine version of the 3.4 V6 and you can still get a crate engine through Summit or Jegs don't remember which.

FWIW the 4.3 is a completely different animal - a 90 deg. V6 derived from a V8 with two cylinders chopped off. The 60 degree V6 is easier to transplant.

The early 2.8 had a weak crank. The ones after 1985 had better crankshaft design and didn't suffer the problems the earlier engines did. They came with both carbs and injection and were used in everything from Fieros to the S10 Blazers

The one in the picture is an injected one, probably 2.8, from a Camaro.

The best one to use for an in line transplant is the 3.4 out of a Camaro/Firebird, 1993/4. They use a different upper plenum and have DIS instead of a distributor

I ran a 2.8 stroked to 3.1 for many years at around 300 bhp (turboed to 13 psi) and it was dead reliable.

I also use one without turbo, a 3.4 with about 200 BHP, masquerading as an MG engine in my Jamaican-MGA. They are lighter than the MG motor and produce a lot more power, obviously. For even more power, you want to choose one of the later alloy head engines as they flow much better for higher power tuning.

fidelity101 wrote: GM is the only people stupid enough to put a distributor in the back of the engine making it the one thing you need to touch often but its crammed back in the firewall.

They aren't the only people to do it. Every other GM that wasn't Buick or some Caddies did it too.

Packaging, packaging, packaging. To fit in a GM chassis the oil pump had to be at the back of the engine. Or if it was in the front, it had to be external like a Buick, but Buicks had their own special problems. (Ever try to get one to make oil pressure after you lose oil pump prime? Good luck!) I forgot what Caddy did on the 472/500/425/368.

Mopar's the same way - rear oil pump or external. Ford's the opposite - oil pump has to be in the front due to the way they made their chassis.

Tom Suddard wrote: That looks like a 3.4—2.8s usually had a TBI setup from the factory.

Nope, definitely a 2.8L. The truck engines got TBI, but the cars got MFI. Even the FWD cars got this style intake in '85 and '86, then went to the newer flat style intake.

The intake reminded me of Fiero for some reason. But IIRC Fiero intakes were red and Camaro were black or natural.

The real test would be, which side is the starter on? Left side = FWD block, right side = RWD block.