Performance, Brainstorming & Tuning Talk about modifications, or anything else associated with performance enhancements. Have a new idea for performance/reliability? Post it here. No idea is stupid! (please use Detailing and Appearance for cosmetic ideas)
View Poll Results: Best option for fuel economy with 1990 3.1 V6 w/ok acceleration? (I think option 5)
3.33 final with 33/37 chain
0
0%
3.33 final with 35/35 chain
0
0%
3.06 final with 33/37 chain
0
0%
3.06 final with 35/35 chain
0
0%
2.84 final with 33/37 chain
0
0%
2.84 final with 35/35 chain
0
0%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 0. You may not vote on this poll

3.1 V6 performance specs

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jul 2, 2014 | 11:48 AM
  #1  
Airplanemech's Avatar
Thread Starter
Junior Member
 
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Airplanemech is on a distinguished road
Default 3.1 V6 performance specs

Hello everyone. I have an '89 Corsica with a 2.8 and the crankshaft broke in half the other day. I'm looking to put in a 3.1 with a 4T60 transmission. I'm going for fuel economy more than acceleration.

My main question is this: does anybody have a BSFC chart for this engine? I can't find one anywhere. I just want to get an idea of what I'm going to be looking at. I also need to find out if the 3.1 can pull the car along at 70MPH at 1700 RPM. The transmission I want is the 33/37 (or 37/33, but the point is that the ratio is .89). According to my calculations, with my tire size, the engine RPM I mentioned is accurate. I'm told that in lower gears, I should be good to go as well (the car should be able to get out of its own way).

So, I'm just looking for that chart, and if anybody things this is an awful idea, please feel free to chime in! Thank you!
Reply
Old Jul 2, 2014 | 03:12 PM
  #2  
jwfirebird's Avatar
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,616
Likes: 594
From: western,ny state
jwfirebird has a reputation beyond reputejwfirebird has a reputation beyond reputejwfirebird has a reputation beyond reputejwfirebird has a reputation beyond reputejwfirebird has a reputation beyond reputejwfirebird has a reputation beyond reputejwfirebird has a reputation beyond reputejwfirebird has a reputation beyond reputejwfirebird has a reputation beyond reputejwfirebird has a reputation beyond reputejwfirebird has a reputation beyond repute
Default

i had a 90 GP with that engine and trans not sure about the ratio but with 225-65-16 tires, it was about that rpm and speed. i always got over 30mpg at 70 all hwy. if i keep it to the speed limit 33-34. i had a 2.8 firebird and 2.8 cutlass they all had about the same power. basically nothing to be proud of but if you need to go it would shift and not going to get run over. they were made for fuel economy and designed to run properly at that low rpm, saves gas
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
classicrocker883
Performance, Brainstorming & Tuning
6
May 21, 2013 01:12 PM
harofreak00
Performance, Brainstorming & Tuning
90
Feb 9, 2007 07:19 PM
jonmykel
1992-1999
2
Mar 11, 2003 12:30 PM
Phantom
General GM Chat
5
Feb 16, 2003 12:47 PM
willwren
1992-1999
0
Feb 7, 2003 05:09 AM




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:13 PM.