There are more than one gen of 60 degree engines.

The ones in a s-series and f-bodys are gen one. The only one ever offered in a s-series was the 2.8. The f-body used all three. All of the gen 1 blocks share same basic outside dementions and are bolt in swaps with each other. The 2.8 and 3.1 share the same block so you can turn a (1986+) 2.8 into a 3.1. The 3.4 had a block recast for the extra bore. You can not bore a 3.1 or 2.8 out into a 3.4. After 1986 they all shared the same heads.

The gen 2 and gen 3 were all aluminum head or even all aluminum design. The heads will bolt to the gen one but the intakes and exhaust don't match up. The fwds also don't share any motor mounts with the rwd and the starter is on the wrong side.


Ran a hopped up 3.4 out of a 95 camaro in my blazer for awhile. As soon as I get done with the v8 swap and axles in it the lil v6 is gonna swap over to my noma for a daily.


S-series came with

Isuzu 1.9, 2.0, and diesel 2.2 in early models. The diesel was only offered in 84 and 85.

Chevy (actually pontiac based) 2.5 and 2.8

Chevy 2.2 and 4.3

Those were the only engine options ever offered in s-series.

 

Now the 2.8 came as a 4cyl and V6 right? Or am I wrong?

 

In a s-series (or anything else I can think of) the 2.8 was only a v6. The 2.5 iron duke was a 4 cyl and shares the same trans bell housing bolt pattern with the 60 degree family. The 2.2 gas engine does also but its the fwd style with the starter on the wrong (drivers) side in a rwd.


Now some new version might be a 4 banger as I don't keep up with new models.

 

maybe Im wrong but I could have sworn my parents old car (87 Celebrity) was a 4 banger that was a 2.8.

Now, let me ask this. Have you ever heard of a 5.9 diesel from GM?

 

GM Iron Duke engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cummins has a 5.9. The notorious 5.7 what you're thinking of?

 

87 a body either had a 2.5 i4 or 2.8 v6. I4 was throttlebody and the v6 was mpfi.


Have never heard of a gm 5.9 oil burner. Gm tried their hand at them and didn't have much luck so most all their good diesels are outsourced. Cummings did have a 5.9 6bt/6b and that's the only 5.9 I can think of.

 

Maybe I have the liters wrong but it was basically a 350 converted over to diesel. They used them in Cadillacs, Oldmobiles, etc. back in the late 70s and 80s. It was a junk motor. Only had 125hp and didnt seem to hold itself together.

 

Yeah, that would be the 5.7L

 

Oldsmobile 350. They went great but really get a bad rap. The main problem was the head bolts (torque to yield bolts). Bad idea on an engine designed to use compression as the combustion.


HP numbers on a diesel are funny. Even on big super rigs that number will be lower than you would think. They are designed more or less around pulling and that's tourqe. All produced at lower rpms, why they tend not to be spun fast. That mere 125hp engine put out over 200 lbs of torque and off the line would surprise you.

When I was little dad built one in a woods buggy on 38s and it done a pretty good job. With todays engines it wouldn't be my first choice but I wouldn't turn my nose up at one either. FIY there was a 4.3 diesel made also but had many of the same problems.

 

Right. Its all about the torque with them diesels. Thats why Cummins makes such a great working motor. Nothing but torque. I could have sworn that their diesel was a 5.9 tho. I know they used them in the Cadillacs, the Chevy G50(?vans) etc. The trucks had a 6.2 but Im not sure when they started those. My dad has a 82 Scottsdale with the 6.2 and a 3 speed. That truck will go anywhere and everywhere. I wish it was turboed tho.