|
Make that engine go away. Whoever told you those engines last needs to be shot (yes they can last if you babysit it and have lots of disposable income, but at that point it's still a horrible engine on a good day). LM7/LQ4 it, or 6.2/6.5 or Duramax if you wanna stay Diesel. Olds gas 350 or 455 if you don't want to gently caress with adapter plates. If you don't want to do any of that sell the car. Turbo Fondant fucked around with this message at 03:00 on May 20, 2014 |
#
¿
May 20, 2014 02:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2024 00:39 |
|
|
Vim Fuego posted:Can't you rebuild those diesel blocks as high compression gas engines? At least that is what I have read is/was popular with the oldsmobile diesel. Surely that would cost less than 20k, even at shop rates. It's possible but it takes some pretty extreme ($$$$) machine work and you still wind up with an engine that's way too heavy for what it is. I looked into this route when I was looking into swaps for my 307 powered B-body many years ago.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2014 02:56
|
|
|
Remains Unseen posted:
The Detroit 6.2/6.5 would be easiest to fit since they're mechanical injection (no extra wires over what the Olds Diesel takes), they fit anywhere a SBC does, and they use the SBC trans bolt pattern. Adapters are readily available to go from SBC to the BOP pattern your Olds uses. They're generally regarded as gutless (but depending on which one they make between 10 and 90 more horsepower than your Olds and between 10 and 300(!) lb-ft more torque) and it's a little tough to milk big power out of them but fuel mileage and reliability are very good on these. I would almost go with a 6.2 if you're not looking to go Ricky Bobby fast, that way there's no turbo to worry about and outputs are going to be comparable so you won't have to worry about breaking stuff. Turbo Fondant fucked around with this message at 04:12 on May 20, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 20, 2014 04:09
|
|
|
It's actually a pretty drat stout drivetrain in those. But I wouldn't *quite* trust it enough to run 525 lb-ft (the highest stock 6.5 torque) through it without some modification.
Turbo Fondant fucked around with this message at 04:42 on May 20, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 20, 2014 04:36
|
|
|
What's all this talk of computers? 6.2/6.5 was pure mechanical injection, same as your current engine (I believe they used different variations of the same injection pump as well). The only electrical stuff that either engine has is the starter, fuel cut solenoid and glow plugs since both are IDI. So like 4 wires total (plus ground strap) and the car already has them. I think the later 6.5 had some extra electrical stuff but that's a non-issue on a 6.2.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
Yeah either the service writer in that shop is horrendously unfamiliar with '80s GM stuff, or they're making up reasons to turn that job down because doing an undocumented conversion in a shop situation can get messy. Like I said both engines are mechanically injected, the closest thing to a computer in your car is the radio. Plus it's not like cars in the '80s had any sort of fancy electronic fun going on, the procedure for installing an engine that doesn't need an ECU into a car that has one is to simply cut all the unneeded wires out of the engine harness at the firewall plug and rock out. For alternatives, G and B bodies are going to be comparable to your Caddy. Regal is probably the closest thing to what you have. Avoid 307 powered cars, they're slow and expensive to fix. Try to find an SBC powered example (all the G bodies and most B bodies had a 305 or 350 option). Turbo Fondant fucked around with this message at 02:49 on May 22, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 22, 2014 02:47
|
|
|
Psycho Donut Killer posted:All this car needs is a head gasket job, right? Why not have the head gaskets replaced and get new grade 9 head bolts? Talk about scope creep. Because at the end of the day you still have a terrible engine. Also, the 20k figure was one man's estimate thrown in the circle early in the thread, it's not the absolute set-in-stone figure for accomplishing this. OP: I don't know any specific RPO codes but you absolutely want something '88 or later ('88 was the year they got all the reliability issues worked out), and '90-up will get you a little better performance and fuel economy. Turbo Fondant fucked around with this message at 15:30 on Jun 14, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2014 15:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2024 00:39 |
|
|
leica posted:Surprised no one has suggested an LSx swap yet. Tommychu posted:Make that engine go away. Whoever told you those engines last needs to be shot (yes they can last if you babysit it and have lots of disposable income, but at that point it's still a horrible engine on a good day). LM7/LQ4 it, or 6.2/6.5 or Duramax if you wanna stay Diesel. Olds gas 350 or 455 if you don't want to gently caress with adapter plates. It was literally the first thing I suggested.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2014 16:38
|
|