Vortec repower

greencom · Post by **greencom** » Sun Sep 21, 2008 7:27 am

Hi everyone,
I recently picked up a '94 GMC Sierra with a 4.3 Vortec V6. I was toying with the idea of installing this setup in my beater M37. It looks like the engine and automatic tranny is short enough to fit with enough room left to fabricate a driveline coupler to the transfer. The engine has about twice the horsepower than the old 230 and is a lot happier at hi revving. Any thoughts about this?
Thanks,
Greencom

Post by **Cal_Gary** » Mon Sep 22, 2008 6:02 am

My 95 S-10 has the 4.3 Vortec. I can't see putting it in my M37 since the M weighs 4 tons empty=at least twice or three times as much as my S-10. The purists will insist you go Mopar in Mopar, but it's your M and you can do as you wish with it. I know of nobody who has installed the 4.3 in an M-most go with the diesel conversion, or V-8 power.
Gary

Lifer · Post by **Lifer** » Mon Sep 22, 2008 7:53 am

I'm one of the "purists," to an extent. That said, I see no reasxon why you couldn't put the Vortec in your truck if you want. You'd lose your waterproof fording capability, but if you don't go "swimming" that shouldn't be of any great concern. Like I always say...it's your truck and you should be allowed to play with it any way you like as long as it's legal.

greencom · Post by **greencom** » Mon Sep 22, 2008 8:39 am

I am a purist as far as my restored M37 is concerned. I want it as close to issued configuration as possible. As for my beat around truck with a bad engine is concerned I'd like to get creative. I agree that the Vortec is not a big gutsy engine meant to go into a 6000 pound truck, but like I mentioned earlier it has double the power of the original 230 Dodge mill which I will keep in my restored truck only because it came with it. Thanks for the thoughts guys.
Greencom

pfrederi · Post by **pfrederi** » Tue Sep 23, 2008 4:24 am

I have a GMC Sonoma 95 bought new. About the only thing on the truck that hasn't been a problem is the engine. However it isn't any power house. It is only 262 cu inches so you aren't gaining much there. Torque is only about 250ft-lbs and I can't find the curve but based on experience it is NOT at the low end of the rpm range. Long stroke in-line engines are good producers of torque. Short stroke V6s are not. When I bought my M274 I rented a Uhaul trailer to pick it up as it wouldn't fit in the tuck box. Even hauling it empty on the interstate it was noticeable. Loaded with the mule on the return was painful in the the I-81 hills in PA. Even 3rd gear at times...

But hey if it is free and you got the time try it.....

amanco · Post by **amanco** » Tue Sep 23, 2008 4:25 am

The 4.3L may certainly be double the HP, but not double the low RPM torque. The 230 has a very long stroke and old Chrysler flatties in general have the largest ratio of length of stroke vs bore of any regular mass production engine made which = lots of torque. You may be surprised at how little you gain by the conversion. I wouldn't do it.

greencom · Post by **greencom** » Tue Sep 23, 2008 9:55 am

That's why I belong to this forum, you guys brought up great points about the torque curve. I really didn't take that into account. Thanks for your time, gives me a lot of mental meat to chew on.

Tom @ Snake River · Post by **Tom @ Snake River** » Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:52 pm

If you do the conversion, I sure would try to stay with a married transfer case, no way would I bust a gut trying to couple up to the origional transfer case.
I did it with my 360 V8, 435 tranny, and it is my weak spot.

poor rich · Post by **poor rich** » Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:03 pm

this is especialy interesting to me now that my engine died. In reguard to the low speed torque has any one considered your talking about hooking this engine to a substantialy lower gear range.
I submit, think about If you took that same antique 230 and installed it into your 1995 pickup, talk about a gutless wonder.
When Dodge went to fuel injection, the v6 in the Dakota had more HP and torque than did the 318 with a carberator the previous year.
I'm seriously thinking a mid sized v6 with fuel injection that can spin 3 or 4,000 rpm to give you better road speed without changing the diffs. may be the way to go.

Lifer · Post by **Lifer** » Thu Sep 25, 2008 4:59 am

That's one way to look at it, but here's another. The old engines have a longer stroke and a bigger bore than the new ones. Each piston in either engine provides a certain amount of "push" on the power stroke. By reducing the bore and stroke you increase the RPM, which means that each cylinder has to "push the piston down" more often to get the same effective "work" out of the engine in the same period of time.

What I'm suggesting here is that increasing the RPM does not increase torque or applied horsepower. Once the vehicle is in motion, it may well increase your speed on a level road, but it will require more effort (i.e. fuel consumption) to break inertia and get the truck moving and to overcome the effects of gravity on uphill grades. The hills aren't that much of a problem if you build up enough momentum on the preceeding downhill grade, but doing that can get you a speeding ticket. I know! The Iowa state cops busted me once for doing that. The only speeding ticket I ever got!

anthony manzella · Post by **anthony manzella** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:32 am

Short and Sweet of it all is Horse Power may sell motors BUT Tq always winns the race !

greencom · Post by **greencom** » Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:29 pm

I was looking at the torque curves for the 230 Dodge and the 4.3 Vortec V6. The Dodge torque was listed as 177 foot pounds at 1200 rpm. The V6 puts out around 210 foot pounds at 1200 rpm. In fact it puts out between 200 and 230 foot pounds all the way to 4500 rpm (where it is generating 165 HP. It seems to me that it has both low and high end performance that far outstrips the 230 which should be expected in an engine that was produced 50+ years after the 230 was designed. Like I said earlier, I want nothing but the original 230 in my restored M37 but I'm kind of anxious to see what the Vortec can do in my beater. I was surprised to see those torque values for the Vortec.
Greencom

Lifer · Post by **Lifer** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 3:48 pm

What can I say? Give it a shot and let us know how it turns out!

poor rich · Post by **poor rich** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:42 pm

if you do decide to repower please keep us updated.
I expect to be doing the same thing, but I dont have an engine yet.
I went hunting and found a web site http://www.allpar.com/mopar.html there are great articles on all mopar engines, check it out and if any one knows of simular sites for ford, GM or others, let us know, these could be great tools when reserching repowering.
Rich

greencom · Post by **greencom** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 8:58 pm

Thanks for your input guys. I was going to take the V6 out of my Sierra and use it in the M and put a 350 in the Sierra. The deal I was working out for the 350 fell through so it will take a while. I'll use that time to pull the sick engine out of the M. Take care all and thanks for all of your thoughts on my "musings".
Greencom

Vortec repower

Vortec repower

Vortec

Vortec

vortec

vorteck / 230ci

Vortec V6