2.6 V6? is that an oem Engine?

[Rambo]

2.6 V6? is that an oem Engine?, a friend my be picking up an old xj, and the owner said it had a 2.6 v6. 80's xj.

Can someone confirm this for me?

Thanks

:repair:

[RichP]

If it's a V6 it will be the 2.8L GM engine. I had one in my 82 S-10 and it lasted 680,000mi, some here don't like it, me, I never had any trouble with it. Granted it is a gutless wonder but it did give me 25mpg in the S10...

[Rambo]

thanks Rich... thats what he said also that it was in s-10's

i didnt know if he did a swap or was original .

Thanks for clearing it up...

[Yucca-Man]

Additionally, the gutless (115hp @ 4800rpm) and leaky (like the Exxon Valdez, but less capacity) 2.8L V6 was only used in the 84-86 model year XJs before it was replaced with the 4.0L I6.

The 4.0L can be made to fit into the earlier model year XJs, but there's a decent amount of fabbing that has to take place to do it - it's not a drop-in.

[Atl XJ]

Yeah, the GM 2.8l V6. Great engine, I had two S10 Blazers with that engine that were still going strong after 300K miles. I drove both of them really hard too. I know a lot of other people that had them in their S10s that also got a really long life out of their 2.8ls. They got great gas mileage too, I got 25 mpg on the hwy, around 20 around town. They werent the most powerful engines, but they did just fine with a 5 speed. The key for the 2.8l is to keep the oil changed every 3000 miles, if you do that, they'll treat you right.

Mine never leaked vey much btw, a few minor leaks, but nothing out for the ordinary. Especially not for engines with that many miles on them.

GM still uses a variation of them today. The 3.4l V6 is nothing but a stroked 2.8l.

[RichP]

GM still uses a variation of them today. The 3.4l V6 is nothing but a stroked 2.8l.

It is also a good swap into the XJ too....almost a drop in...

[Sarge]

I know a lot of folks here don't like 'em but I had a Cherokee once with that motor and abused it terribly and it never gave me a bit of problems. I used to run the dunes outside of Yuma in it and jump it down on the river. Managed to bend the front axle but never had a bit on engine problems. It liked to be reved rather than crawled. The runs from LA to Yuma and back were always done as fast as I could get away with. Pulled good mpg while doing it also. It did like fairly frequent oil changes. A chevy mech I knew claimed that was the secret to long life on those motors. I really suck at the PM thing so mine was never on schedule and it didn't seem to bother it.

Sarge

[5-90]

GM still uses a variation of them today. The 3.4l V6 is nothing but a stroked 2.8l.
Bored and stroked, actually. As I recall, the 3.1 was a "stroked" 2.8L, and the 3.4 was a "bored" 3.1L.

The 3.1 and 3.4 weren't bad engines - and the 2.8L had some potential (unlike the 3.8L, it was designed from the ground up as a six-cylinder. The 3.8 was a SBC less two cylinders, and that's why there was an "odd-fire" and an "even-fire" version of the thing.) However, it's probably easier to get a 3.1 or 3.4 and build it up than to overhaul the 2.8L.

RWD V6-60's can be found in S-10/S-15 and F-Body cars, and the "Goodwrench Service Replacement" blocks would go into FWD or RWD cars - they can be identified by finding starter mount pads on BOTH sides of the engine, look for one toward the rear in FWD cars, as mounted.

5-90

[TiRod]

"The 3.8 was a SBC less two cylinders," and I've always wondered why the 4.3 wouldn't bolt in, too. Same bellhousing pattern?

Hmmmm, cheap chevy hot rod parts! And a "stroker"! Hmmmm? I'm sure it would take some interesting fabbing, but enough for here.

[5-90]

"The 3.8 was a SBC less two cylinders," and I've always wondered why the 4.3 wouldn't bolt in, too. Same bellhousing pattern?

Hmmmm, cheap chevy hot rod parts! And a "stroker"! Hmmmm? I'm sure it would take some interesting fabbing, but enough for here.

I believe so. The bellhousing pattern between the V6-60* and V6-90* (modified SBC) is different, as I recall - and the engines don't run as smoothly as they could (which is another reason they came out with "odd-fire." "Even fire" required serious modifications to the crankshaft casting, and "split" crankpins. Damn thing just looks weak - all the really strong 3.8's, and the GN Turbo, were odd-fire, as I recall.)

Granted, there's no reason you couldn't do a 3.8/4.1/4.3, use a SMChevvy mount kit and gearbox/slushbox. Anything is possible, given time and money...

5-90

[TiRod]

I think we may be pushing this to the mod section, but was there a GM patterned AW4 bellhousing - stock? Probably grasping at a straw, aftermarket could address it anyway.

[TiRod]

whoops double post on my 200th.

[5-90]

I think we may be pushing this to the mod section, but was there a GM patterned AW4 bellhousing - stock? Probably grasping at a straw, aftermarket could address it anyway.

I don't know, but I think AA makes an adapter plate. The SBC bellhousing can be found for the THM700R4, and both the THM350 and THM400 (both stronger!) can be found in SBC bolt patterns.

Granted, if I was going to go serious with an SBC conversion, I'd be thinking "Muncie Top-Loader" over any slushbox - but I'm funny that way...

5-90

[Atl XJ]

The automatic 2.8l S10s used 700R4s. They were POSs though, as were all the early 700R4s. The later 700R4s were good transmissions and you could rebuilt the early ones much stronger than OEM.

[Matthew Currie]

The automatic 2.8l S10s used 700R4s. They were POSs though, as were all the early 700R4s. The later 700R4s were good transmissions and you could rebuilt the early ones much stronger than OEM.

Well if you rebuilt them any weaker you wouldn't be able to back them out of the freakin' shop!:gonnablow

You know those window stickers people have with Calvin peeing on some manufacturer's emblem, like the chevy with Calvin peeing on a ford lozenge? I really want to go to some custom shop and get one with Calvin wearing a Chevy bowtie T-shirt and peeing himself. I'd put it on my beloved K2500.

[Atl XJ]

They werent that bad, they just didn't stand up very well to much abuse or heavy towing. Much like Chrysler transmissions, a transmission cooler helped them out tremendously.

The original transmission (700R4) in my '86 S10 Blazer went 180K miles. My father had an 89 Chevy 1500 that the original transmission went 200K and was still okay when he sold it. Both of those vehicles didn't tow anything more than a few thousand lbs, were maintained properly, and had transmission coolers. The one in my Blazer would have lasted longer if I didn't redline it all the time. :rolleyes:

[Rambo]

hey guys, does that 2.8 v6 come with the (700R4) tranny? and a 231???

we have a head gasket leak or a cracked head, so you think its worth fixing??? or whats the best swap for its transmission bolt on preferred).

thx

[Atl XJ]

The 2.8l XJs came with a Chrysler 3 speed auto. A 2.8l 700R4 woudl work, but it would take some modifications to mount it to the vehicle, transfercase, etc.

How many miles are on it? If its just a head gasket and the rest of the engine is in good shape I'd say its worth fixing, but its it has a cracked head, I'd swap in a 3.4l. They're pretty much bolt in on the 2.8ls and a big improvement powerwise.

[Rambo]

thanks atl, we are gonna take the heads off today after work,, its a 2.8 , i just dont know what the model is of its auto transmission...

what is the 3 speed auto called?


thanks

[dfreeman616]

torque flight 904.

[Ghost]

I have a set of heads I'd sell cheap + shipping if you need them. But be forwarned the best swap is the 94-96 (I think that is the years.) 3.4L out of the camaro. JMHO. But you will have to get a wireharnes made. There was a guy that did it. The harness was close to $500 imsc. Oh yea and it will be a 207 not a 231 tcase. And there are 2 different trannys the 904 lockup and non lock up. They have different TConverts and different input length. Kudzu ran into this problem with there 86 2.5L.

[Rambo]

I have a set of heads I'd sell cheap + shipping if you need them. But be forwarned the best swap is the 94-96 (I think that is the years.) 3.4L out of the camaro. JMHO. But you will have to get a wireharnes made. There was a guy that did it. The harness was close to $500 imsc. Oh yea and it will be a 207 not a 231 tcase. And there are 2 different trannys the 904 lockup and non lock up. They have different TConverts and different input length. Kudzu ran into this problem with there 86 2.5L.


thanks for the info , ghost, and thanks for the bolt i needed at the crawl. did you get the strap i tied on your hitch???

what shape are the heads in and how much? his heads seem ok so i dont know which way he wants to go with it yet... gaskets vs. new etc...

later
alberto

[Root Moose]

"The 3.8 was a SBC less two cylinders," and I've always wondered why the 4.3 wouldn't bolt in, too. Same bellhousing pattern?

Hmmmm, cheap chevy hot rod parts! And a "stroker"! Hmmmm? I'm sure it would take some interesting fabbing, but enough for here.

IIRC, the Buick 3800 uses the BOP bolt pattern, the 2.8 Chev uses the Chev 60 degree pattern, the 4.3 Chev uses the 90 degree pattern (SBC).

I am not certain if the old odd-fire Buick 3.8 and the Buick 3800 use the same bolt pattern. Probably but confirm.

[87manche]

http://lunghd.com/Tech_Articles/Project_XJ/Project_XJ.htm
page on the 3.4L swap.

[Rambo]

http://lunghd.com/Tech_Articles/Project_XJ/Project_XJ.htm
page on the 3.4L swap.

dude you hit the nail on the head!!!!

thanks:thumbup:

[Ghost]

thanks for the info , ghost, and thanks for the bolt i needed at the crawl. did you get the strap i tied on your hitch???

what shape are the heads in and how much? his heads seem ok so i dont know which way he wants to go with it yet... gaskets vs. new etc...

later
alberto
No worries! TY for the straps too. Hey case of beer and shipping works for me!

[87manche]

dude you hit the nail on the head!!!!

thanks:thumbup:
no problem, I've got a pretty big bookmark list.
I'm a webwheeler