A month, give'r take.

 

My 84 with the stock 2.8 and the worn out Rochester was pretty close to that! Almost 24 seconds to 60. You had to be very careful how you pulled into traffic. It required a lot of planning! However, with the 3.4, 4bbl, the intake, electric fan and the 3.42 locker it only takes like a week now! Actually about 12 seconds now, which is a HUGE improvement, but if you are really looking for speed, I'd look elsewhere. Needless to say, I have a LOT of money in it now too.

 

atleast 90 seconds with mine,

 

about 3 beers, 2 sandwhiches, one episode of American chopper and Storm chasers, then maybe a bathroom break depending on wind direction.

 

my ex ole ladys thunder chicken did better than that with the cats clogged

 

lol mine ain't bad with a few things done to her but it ain't nothing to brag about

 

I find 20 + secs to 60 to be a wee bit rediculous personally. Old vw bug with 70hp does better than that

 

apples and oranges bud. HP to weight ratio is way different.

 

Never rode in wat slug?

 

yea u are right it does. simply because there is no way in hell nor has any vehicle ever been made that takes that long to get to 60. now if ur runnin a 5 hp briggs under the hood with the ebrake on u can try not to get up there by the 20 sec mark

 

BS aside, a good running 2.8 should have no problem getting to 60 in under 10-12 seconds I'd imagine.

 

Ummm, you guys have obviously never ridden in a 82-85 S-10 with a carbureted 2.8. About 110hp at best with the factory carburetor and mine was SHOT. All this with a truck that probably weighs closer to 4000lbs with my toolbox. Considering truck gearing...it ain't gonna be fast! I swear by all that is holy it was every bit that slow.

In a top condition truck? Regular cab, unloaded, one gallon of gasoline in the tank with an 88 lb Prince driving it......16-18 seconds might be possible, but highly, highly unlikely.

Now, if you are talking EFI trucks? That's a different story. They are much more capable and run far far stronger.

 

My blazer it Throttle body and it take forever to get to 60. Maybe 15 seconds? Idk I wanna time it now lol

 

Yep...try about 15 less horsepower on the carbed version. Trust me, it hella sucked!!!

 

I agree, my mechanic called my engine lathargic and anemic.
God, what I would do for a V8 swap.

I would say my 0 to 60 time would beat my 60 to 80 time. My truck is horrid once it gets up there.

 

You'd find the 3.4 a very good alternative to the V8 swap. Just right on power to weight. Very happy with the swap so far. With the 4bbl and other mods, I am guessing about 195-200 hp. I am gonna dyno it soon and see.

 

You dont wanna go his route. If I recall he went thru hell n back 4 times to make his motor the way it is now. Am I right? Honestly Im thinking a 4.3 swap would be a more productive route. Which if things keep looking up I may have a donor 4.3 blazer to swap all the 4.3 stuff into my 86

 

Yea, if I do anything I would just get something new and keep the blazer for a project for when my boy gets older.


I still hate the ole' reliable 2.8L though. It will take a beating but its just not there with the balls.

 

Hell mine that blew up had the cam from LMC truck in it. Made no difference what soever other than the lopy idle lol I dont think there is enough parts to make a 2.8 fast......

 

Nope...not me. Got mine right the first time. I had some stumbling blocks here and there, but it wasn't bad. Bullbear is the one that had the problems. I feel for that guy. GM replaced the motor twice and it's still not right. I don't think the motor is the issue really...you can't have 3 bad engines. All with the same issue. Mine has no problems other than sucking gasoline more than I'd like. 4.3 is a good option on an 88+ though. I might have went that route if my truck had been newer. I like the 4.3.

 

Correction, I am on my third engine. Picked it up Friday the 10th at 4 oclock at 4:15 it was blowing blue smoke. Monday on my way to work the exhuast came loose. I'm in counseling now. My loner car this time is an HHR. **** hot rod. I have $6000 into the engine and tranny now and no way out. I'll be looking for a new dealer and releasing the name of the current one as soon as they fix the exhuast. I imagine that will take them several weeks also. Can you hear me screaming.

 

Something very odd is going on there man. Doesn't sound impossible, but certainly improbable. I'd suspect that intake. I have a bone stock one you are welcome to for free considering what you have been through and it's never going back on my truck. Let me know.

I understand @$$h0le Chevy dealers too. A certain service manager at Ivan Leonard in Alabama almost got punched in the face for renegotiating a lifetime warranty for parts and labor on a fuel pump last year. I understand....

 

Ya I suppose I overlook the carbed 2.8's, I had a 92 2.8 125hp beast. Still a slow vehicle but 0-60 was reasonable.

 

Yessir! I had an 86 Jimmy and a 91 S-10 at one time too. No rocket, but tons faster than the carbed 84.

 

I appreciate the offer but, from what the test showed this time the rings are not seated yet and I have to get 1000 miles on it. I'm just going to drive it and enjoy. I love the power it has now and eventually will be done with all the hassles. The intake I have on there is a stock one thats been gasket ported and polished with a rebuilt roch. carb and headers with a short round glass pack and resonator and it sounds real good and tough. I must say that a small block v-8 would have been a bit cheaper. My guess however on the 0-60 times would be under 10 seconds and it does 70 to 80 mph with no problem.

 

Ok, well offer still stands if you need. I hope this works out this time, I know you have been through hell with it. Yeah, in my case too the small block might have been cheaper, but I am glad I went this way since the truck can be worked on basically as stock which I like. Putting a V8 in an S-10 isn't all that original or interesting IMO. I get lots of comments about the 3.4 and the 4bbl sitting on top of it without a doubt!

Headers are in my future too, hope to pick up another second or two on 0-60. Yeah, I like the fact too that when you step on the pedal going down the interstate there are NO acceleration issues. Just smooth power delivery, even with moderate pressure on the pedal. All around a great swap. I have no regrets.

 

you guys are talking the trucks in there current condition when they woulda had way more power i'll admit my 2.8l aint the fastest truck out there but with 4.11 gears a 5 speed standard, electric fan, no cat n performance muffler no emissions what so ever I could lay rubber from a stop with 31's

but then again i know the truck is cammed and since it was rebuilt might be bored

 

sorry made a mistake

You guys are talking the trucks in there current condition when they where new they would have had way more power.

 

I guess I'm gonna have to take my truck out to see how it does in the 0-60 race. This truck was my sisters, she put 248,000 miles on it and loves that truck still to this day. Extended cab, 5 speed, 4X4, 2.8V6. In 2005 she had me put a new engine in it for her. We bought the crate engine through our local NAPA dealer and I did the swap along with nearly every other thing under the hood to make it a dependable truck. She gave me the truck last year with only about 5000 miles on that new engine. The more I drove it on the highway it seemed to come alive. This new engine woke up like the original never did. It gets about the same gas mileage as the old one, about 20 to 26 MPG but it goes like a rocket compared to the original engine. I have been doubting that is can actually be a 2.8 with the get up and go it has now but I can't imagine the rebuild shop sent me a 3.4 by mistake? We ordered a long block and I used all the external stuff from the original engine. I meant to check the numbers on the new engine before installing it but just didn't get around to that. I need to advance the timing a couple degrees as it is just a little sluggish off the line compared to how I had it running before replacing the ignition module. I pulled the distributor to do that job this time and don't have a timing light so I just timed it by ear.

 

Well I was just out and about town. Went to a stretch of road I knew would do well for a little speed test. Using my Iphone clock app for the stop watch I did the 0-60 test in my 88 S15 4X4 2.8L. I need someone with me to get a truly accurate reading but I came in around the high 13 or low 14 second range. I am a little disappointed with how I have it running right now too. I like to advance my timing just a degree or two and I think I actually have it retarded just a smidge now as it just isn't getting off the line like it does with the timing advanced a bit. I could have hit it harder and shifted better if I wasn't holding my phone in my hand too. It's still not a hot rod but I think it's ok for a little V6 in a 4X4.

 

That's really not too bad. I'd like to see some reviews from some magazines to see what they say about stock. Yours being 4wd with bigger tires...not too bad. I think I might could probably pull 10-11 seconds if I had stickier tires and someone to really watch the clock. I verified how off my speedo is with the GPS, so I think I can get a fairly accurate time.

 

seems like all the magazines either went with base model 2.5 auto or loaded 4.3.

 

OK, now I have to do whatever little tricks to my truck to make it perform at it's best. Advance the timing like I said I like it and I know it makes a difference, even flip the air cleaner top is supposed to increase power a little. I'm not really sure it does but it sounds cool. Then I'll try to get a more accurate time.

 

People seem to get a lot of miles out of the 2.8. It seems that a decent turbo setup should offer respectable power numbers. The anemic 1991 GM 4.3 was no bullet-proof race engine, and GM got decent performance out of it with minimal mods to the actual longblock. They proved that you don't have to rev to make decent power. Just keep the fuel and detonation in check. The Syclone had crappy ports, undersized turbo and a 4400 RPM (fuel cut) rev limiter. The 2.8 has a better rod/stroke ratio..

 

People seem to get a lot of miles out of the 2.8. It seems that a decent turbo setup should offer respectable power numbers. The anemic 1991 GM 4.3 was no bullet-proof race engine, and GM got decent performance out of it with minimal mods to the actual longblock. They proved that you don't have to rev to make decent power. Just keep the fuel and detonation in check. The Syclone had crappy ports, undersized turbo and a 4400 RPM (fuel cut) rev limiter. The 2.8 has a better rod/stroke ratio..

Hmm...been interesting to have seen a mini Syclone with the 2.8. Maybe a Chevy version.