Malibu temperature

[boris makriniotis]

I would like to know what is the working temperature and the timing advance for a V6 262 CI Chevrolet engine.

[Speedy_1234]

what year is the malibu I'm thinking it 180'f I know it too high

[boris makriniotis]

Originally Posted by Speedy_1234

what year is the malibu I'm thinking it 180'f I know it too high

The Malibu is '79 but the engine is a V6 262 CI from a Chev. Blazer 1996

[jyount]

That is better known as the 4.3

I don't know exactly because it is computer controlled. You put the distributor in straight up on #1 and the ecm does the rest. It is installed at #1 tdc on that year, don't know your setup though. I am assuming you redid the malibu since it has the new engine in it, did you swap the entire harness from a donor or just the bottom end of the engine?
Do you have the new computer system or did you put mechanical stuff on it from an 80's vintage 4.3?

[jyount]

reread... As far as the timing advance, see above post.....
as far as temperature, depends on what you're wanting, the 4.3 thermostats range anywhere from 160 to 195. The colder ones theoretically make more power (negligible at best in my opinion), and I had one in my 87 s10 2.8 when I was younger plus a hypertech chip, blow of them sucked hard. The chip didn't help a bit, I took the fan off and installed electrics and helped more, and the heater sucked with the 160 thermostat, and the hotter ones make better fuel economy, so it depends on what you want.

[boris makriniotis]

Originally Posted by jyount

That is better known as the 4.3

I don't know exactly because it is computer controlled. You put the distributor in straight up on #1 and the ecm does the rest. It is installed at #1 tdc on that year, don't know your setup though. I am assuming you redid the malibu since it has the new engine in it, did you swap the entire harness from a donor or just the bottom end of the engine?
Do you have the new computer system or did you put mechanical stuff on it from an 80's vintage 4.3?

I installed the fuel and ignition systems from the original engine, a 200 ci v6 (3.2 l.)
Do you think is enough fuel for the 4.3 ?

[jyount]

Oh. Ok. Yes, it should feed the 4.3 fine. In 86 they had carbed 4.3 engines in 1/2 tons. I would think it would. If there is any question put an aftermarket carb on it, but I would think it would be fine. If you are running it lean you should see it in the plugs, and the temps might be hot too. As far as the timing I'm not real sure. What was the original set at? Also, a 96 4.3 is a vortec engine, considerably different engine than the original if you used the vortec heads.
The vortec engines are made for sequetial port fuel injection. The port engines have smaller valves than carb engines. Carb feeding these heads could indeed starve it for fuel but not because of the carb, because the area to draw the fuel/air mix into the cylinder is smaller, port engine inject the fuel, they just draw air.

[boris makriniotis]

Originally Posted by jyount

Oh. Ok. Yes, it should feed the 4.3 fine. In 86 they had carbed 4.3 engines in 1/2 tons. I would think it would. If there is any question put an aftermarket carb on it, but I would think it would be fine. If you are running it lean you should see it in the plugs, and the temps might be hot too. As far as the timing I'm not real sure. What was the original set at? Also, a 96 4.3 is a vortec engine, considerably different engine than the original if you used the vortec heads.
The vortec engines are made for sequetial port fuel injection. The port engines have smaller valves than carb engines. Carb feeding these heads could indeed starve it for fuel but not because of the carb, because the area to draw the fuel/air mix into the cylinder is smaller, port engine inject the fuel, they just draw air.

Thank you, good information. About the overheating, you think it`s a good idea to remove the thermostat, to increase the water flow ? The engine gets hot at higway speeds specially uphill.

[jyount]

Originally Posted by boris makriniotis

Thank you, good information. About the overheating, you think it`s a good idea to remove the thermostat, to increase the water flow ? The engine gets hot at higway speeds specially uphill.

No, I wouldn't take it out. Put the right one back in it. If you stilll aren't cooling look at something else.

Wether or not to run without a thermostat is a heated topic. Some say the water cycles through the system too fast to pick up any heat. I say it flows the same water through that many more times so it doesn't matter in the end. Bottom line is that the engine is designed to run at thermostat temps, if its getting hot, maybe the radiator isn't up to the task or your fan setup on the swap in doesn't work effectively or something, I say don't run without it.

[boris makriniotis]

Originally Posted by jyount

No, I wouldn't take it out. Put the right one back in it. If you stilll aren't cooling look at something else.

Wether or not to run without a thermostat is a heated topic. Some say the water cycles through the system too fast to pick up any heat. I say it flows the same water through that many more times so it doesn't matter in the end. Bottom line is that the engine is designed to run at thermostat temps, if its getting hot, maybe the radiator isn't up to the task or your fan setup on the swap in doesn't work effectively or something, I say don't run without it.

OK, I'll check everything again and let you know the good news .