Best GM Auto V6?

[Greg]

My son has decided on getting either a 93-95 V6 Camaro or a 95-96 Monte Carlo.  The powertrains include 3.1, 3.4, and 3.8 V6s.  How would you rank these three engines for service life?

[LarryE]

3.8 all the way

 

if they haven't improved the 3.4's since 1997 they aint work a holy s*%t.

 

Mine was into service for 137 times for missing issue's  every time they would replace the plugs and wires

 

One #### of a fast car after I did alot of work on it  but we traded it to my silverado

[miclri]

I think the 3.8 V6 has been around since the early 60s. It was a Buick motor featured in the Skylark. So I'd have to believe that it would have the best service life just because it's been around so long.

 

The 3.4 V6 in our 99 Olds minivan has been less than stellar. We just paid $1K for engine repairs (80K miles).

 

Edit: back in 1962 the displacement was not 3.8L but 3.2L. I found this article on the Buick V6

[Shaners]

I agree with Larry. The 3.8L is the way to go...  It is a great pushrod V-6 with good power and reliabillity.  It has been around for a long time...  It came out in the mid 80's with about 160 HP with EFI and has been refined to be a smooth and potent power plant.  It also delivers very respectable milage!!!  It was around alot longer with a carb on it...

 

The 3.1L was a punched out 2.8L and anyone who had an earlier S-10 with one of those knows they weren't the greatest.  I had one in a '98 Malibu and it was nice, but I didn't keep the car long, because shortly after we bought the car, my wife became pregnant with our third child.

 

Which leads me to the 3.4L.  I had 2 GM minivans with the 3.4L and it was a decent motor.  It had decent power, and delivered very good MPG's in the van.

 

However, if I had the choice between the 3 engines, I would definatly look for the 3.8L!!!  :thumb:

[JonesNTN]

Check for the leaking antifreeze on the 3.8's. They are notorious for having bad intake manifold gaskets.

[GM GIMP]

Definitely 3.8! Had one. No trouble. Loved it. :thumb:

[Black02Silverado]

Check for the leaking antifreeze on the 3.8's. They are notorious for having bad intake manifold gaskets.

The intake gasket leak is on the 3.4 as well. I'm finding that out with our Venture. I got on one of the forums with Venture owners and that is a big issue now. I just hope that ours lets go before the warranty. I'm running oil analysis every 6k and the first sign of antifreeze in the oil it is going to the dealer.

 

The way the wife drives it, the warranty will be out by October. It will be a year old in April and it already has close to 21K.

 

I'm not familiar with the 3.8 but this 3.4 really has some Kahunna's. It surprised me a couple of times pulling out in traffic.

 

[CMNTMXR81]

You guys are confusing 3.4's.  The 3.4's used in 95 & 96 Monte Carlo's (which is a GREAT power engine) is NOT the same 3.4L V6 used in the minivans.

 

I have owned both a 95 Lumina with the 3.4L DOHC V6 and still currently own a 1996 Monte Carlo Z34 (with the same 3.4L DOHC V6).

 

This is the Same motor that came in the earlier generation Lumina Z34's that are common on the street.

 

It is a 4 cam (DOHC), 24 valve V6 based off the 60 degree V6 architecture, I.E. 2.8 and 3.1L V6's.  As I previously mentioned, it is a GREAT power motor for it's size and displacement, however, after 1996, it was dumped for one primimary reason in favor of the 3.8L 90 degree Buick V6.  It is a tempermental and difficult to work on engine.  It is dubbed the dreaded "X" motor amongst service departments due to the 8th digit in the VIN denoted this engine.  These engines are very hit or miss in terms of qaulity and extremely difficult to work on due to being shoehorned into such a small FWD chassis.  I'll explain more in a second.

 

There were minor packaging differences between 95 and 96, but overall they are the same.  For instance, in 96, the intake plenum and intake plenum runner that the TB is in, was seperated for easier removal of intake plenum in order to service the back of the engine.  The D.I.S. ignition coils were moved from just below the front (left) side of the engine's header in 95, to up next to the intake plenum above the pulleys.

 

Onto servicing this S.O.B.  Believe it or not, I am more intimate with the 3.4 in the Monte than I am with my LS1 or my Vortec 8100.  Why?  Because I'm working on it at least once a day.  Converesly, my 95 Lumina with the same engine was flawless.  In order to get to the back of the engine in order to replace plugs and or the faulty stock plug wires that short out to the heads, you need to remove the intake plenum as I previously mentioned.  In order to replace B1S1 O2 sensor, requires removing the intake, "rotating the engine" forward, removing two heat shields, and at which time, just enough room is present to slip an O2 socket on just to break it loose, from there one must remove the socket and manully thread out (and subsequently thread in the new one) by hand.  You can't just get under the #### vehicle and work from below.    It essentially is in the rear header!

 

IN order to replace the alternator (WHICH IS VERY COMMON) requires dropping the front subframe/engine cradle, removing the passenger side tire, and front halfshaft.  If your A/C is on the fritz, you may as well fix that too, while you're down there cause it's the same process to get to the A/C compressor.  In 95 models, the A.I.R. pump is also pulley driven and guess where it is?  Right down there with the alternator and A/C compressor.  

 

I had to replace the catalytic converter on it last week, the 3.4L DOHC V6 has it's own specially designed cat.  The replacement cost for the stock cat is $700.  Needless to say, I went to FLP here in Naperville and had them fabricate in a regular cat all for $180.

 

By 95/96 they had put in a cam relieve mechanism where if the cam drive snaps, it'll close all valves to save from putting valves through piston tops.  Early 3.4 DOHC V6's were prone to this as mileage wore on.  The cam drive replacement is a lengthy and costly process, now add on that a replacement 3.4L DOHC V6 crate motor from GM costs more than an LS1 crate motor!

 

Well, right now I'm tired of typing!  My suggestion is if he wants a Monte Carlo, stick with the 3.1 or the 3.8 (which would be a 97+).  The 3.4L DOHC V6 is a great power motor but unless you don't mind working on it and spending twice the time and money to work on it is acceptable, then the it's right up his alley.

 

I've got 117,450 on the Monte and it still runs like a raped gorilla when it runs.    But for instance, this weekend, I have to drop the pan on the 4T60E to replace the TCC solenoid!    I swear, it never ends with this car!

[silverado3500]

Both of these engines are powerful and reliable.  The 3.8 is a tad faster than the 3.4, but both engines generate a substantial amount of power for their size.  I think that you will be happy with either of these engines, but I am partial to the 3800.

 

Hope that helps!    

[CMNTMXR81]

Here is a picture of the culprit courtesy of my Lumina.

 

 

The 3.8 is a tad faster than the 3.4

 

I will argue that with you until the cows come home!  It depends on where you are racing.  If it is stoplight to stoplight, then the 3.8 will win hands down, but on the highway, the 3.4 will flatout walk away from a 3.8.  It makes it's power similar to an LS1...all at high rpm and can wind to about 6,500 if memory serves me right.

[Greg]

Thanks for the input.  I think I'll steer him away from the DOHC 3.4, which means a Camaro is more likely with the OHV 3.4 in 93-95 or 3.8 in 96.

[CMNTMXR81]

Between those, shoot for the 3.8L Camaro.  If he gets a 3.4L OHV Camaro, it'll have low resale value and be tough to sell later down the road.

[Shaners]

The 3.8L in the Camaro is actually a very nice power to weight combo, and the car is quite quick!!!  And to top it off the insurance won't be too far out of hand...

[watz]

will argue that with you until the cows come home!  It depends on where you are racing.  If it is stoplight to stoplight, then the 3.8 will win hands down, but on the highway, the 3.4 will flatout walk away from a 3.8.  It makes it's power similar to an LS1...all at high rpm and can wind to about 6,500 if memory serves me right

 

I'll take that bet, my BUICK 3.8 will take your 3.4 and LS1 ANYTIME, of coarse the buick 3.8 does have a turbo and intercooler in an 87 Turbo T... Lol it was one tough motor many guys are pushing their GN's in the 10's on the stock bottom end motors....

 

I myself only went 12.2's with 168,000 on the clock before it's current rebuild which should put it in the 650 H.P. range should be 10. something when I'm done....

 

 

Go 3.8 TOUGH S.O.B. motors..... 30 PSI no issues....

[CMNTMXR81]

will argue that with you until the cows come home!  It depends on where you are racing.  If it is stoplight to stoplight, then the 3.8 will win hands down, but on the highway, the 3.4 will flatout walk away from a 3.8.  It makes it's power similar to an LS1...all at high rpm and can wind to about 6,500 if memory serves me right

 

I'll take that bet, my BUICK 3.8 will take your 3.4 and LS1 ANYTIME, of coarse the buick 3.8 does have a turbo and intercooler in an 87 Turbo T... Lol it was one tough motor many guys are pushing their GN's in the 10's on the stock bottom end motors....

 

I myself only went 12.2's with 168,000 on the clock before it's current rebuild which should put it in the 650 H.P. range should be 10. something when I'm done....

 

 

Go 3.8 TOUGH S.O.B. motors..... 30 PSI no issues....

Umm, apples to oranges dude.

 

Also, the 3.8L V6 in the FWD cars is really not the same as the 3.8 in your GN.

 

Did we feel the need to whip out our willie's here that you needed to pull in an entirely different vehicle from an entirely different era, with an entirely different drivetrain combo?

 

And I'm well aware of what GN's can do, I've had one and the G/F's father had an 87 T-Type.  Thanks for pointing that out for me though.