And speaking of Chrysler, they didn't make the 3.0L you mentioned--it's a Mitsubishi engine. While I'm no fan, but I will be honest: if you rebuild the heads and installed better valve guides, it's actually an acceptably decent engine.
Sales Consultant at Doug Smith Dodge/Chrysler/Jeep/Ram/Subaru/Kia/used
My fleet: 91 Miata, 98 Wrangler Sport, 01 Suburban 2500 8.1L, 14 Impreza Limited, 03 Protege LX
2012 Toyota Prius 3, Blizzard White/Gray
2014 Volkswagen Jetta GLI Edition30, Pure White/Black V-tex/carbon
Son of a gun / Master of fate / Bows to no god, kingdom, or state.
yes, it has been mentioned in here, but this engine really deserves a giant trophy made of poop and dongs.
Originally Posted by wiki
after spending a few years sweating away in the automachine shop, i could say - without a doubt - the most common work we did was rebuild lr2 v6's. the heads alone would show up in rows, all from overheated engines - warped, cracked, and miserable. we tried to get smart about it, so we pulled sets of heads from the junkyard with the idea of having them set up & ready to go. at least half the heads we pulled were already cracked to some extent. these were from vehicles that had accident damage or roll-overs (they weren't in the junkyard because they had engine trouble).
we ended up with a huge pile of lr2 v6 parts in the corner. blocks, heads, cranks, entire engines. customers would drop it off, we worked up estimates, then call back later and say forget it, keep the parts. so then came the guy who loved lr2's more than we did:
SCRAPMETALMAN...these guys alone deserve their own thread. anyone who has ever worked in a tradepark-type office park is familiar with the pioneers of lurk...
Originally Posted by patrikman
Last edited by saron81; 08-10-2012 at 12:30 PM.
Some of these engines, while having their faults, are far from a terrible engine. The GM 3.4 is not a bad engine. They make decent power and get pretty good fuel economy. The reason they blow gaskets is an accounting problem, not a design problem. That engine is in everything and has been around forever. Its powered "sporty" sedans to minivans.
As for the Chrysler engine, when the 2.7 came out in the Intrepid, I thought this engine was a beast! It had to rev for you to go anywhere, but it was hauling a massive car! I bought a brand new Intrepid in 2000 and loved it. I ended up trading it for a Camry less than a year later after my wife got tired of driving such a big car. I had no idea that they just weren't very durable and had all the timing chain and bearing issues. However, I had this engine in an 05 Sebring Sedan and thought it was fine. Had awesome power in a smaller car, but only average fuel economy.
The mitsu 3.0 was a beast when it came out too. It would power the Chrysler minivans to stoplight victories against many a stock import. Smoked like a freight train though.
When I think of a truly bad V6, that Audi 2.8 comes to mind. It had no redeeming qualities whatsoever. After driving several 10 and 20V turbo Type 44's, I just couldn't bring myself to "upgrade" to the C4 chassis. They got crappier mileage and were so slow!
| 2012 Nissan Leaf | 2005 Chrysler T&C |
Also, I believe the 2.7L motors in the all the chrysler products was a rebranded Mitsu. That whole generation is known for being light on power, and heavy on burning oil due to a myriad of issues. My Dad had a first gen Montero with the 2V version that would occasionally burn enough oil to see a blue cloud float by while you were at a stop light. It would mysteriously stop for a few thousand miles, then return. We actually hardly ever had to add oil and it was pretty reliable other than the super annoying belt squeak and lifter tick endemic in that model.
'07 997.1 TT 6MT: Arctic Silver / Sea Blue. AWE exhaust, Cobb Stage 2, GT2RS Intercoolers, H&R, BBS CH-R in widebody fitment.
'15 F80 M3 6MT: Alpine White / Sakhir: Exec pkg, LEDs, carbon roof, Harman Kardon, black 19s, etc
Past: 300 hp B5 A4, 500 hp Evo 8, 2 450 hp E92 335s, 520hp C6 Z06, and a 750 hp CBA GT-R
| 2012 Nissan Leaf | 2005 Chrysler T&C |
Classicmotoringllc.com - my new brokerage and consulting business based out of a lavishly converted first floor bedroom in Allentown, PA. I am always looking for quality enthusiast cars to consign, research projects or consultation opportunities. Keep an eye on my page as you can see my blabberings about cars and other such junk in the blog section!
Ours on the other hand (the ugly Teal car) just drank a resevoir of coolant out of nowhere and then proceeded to smoke. I parked it and checked the oil, full of coolant. Once that has happened there really isn't much sense in taking the time to repair the head gaskets. The crank bearings have been washed and it just makes everything a mess.
gm cant design a good gasket. i did my 3.4 and 20k later it was shot again. it had the 3rd or 4th revision of the gasket too. at that point i sold it for my vw. i also had a lim gasket blow on a olds bravada with the 4.3 engine. same ****ty design at least that one didnt need to remove push rods to pull the gasket.
I'll also nominate the GM L81 motor but this time its the "turbo" version that resides in the Saab 9-5 ARC 3.0t. My buddy used to drive one and it was slow and full of problems. You can find Saabs with this engine and low miles for dirt cheap...solely because of the terrible powerplant under the hood. An engine that sounded promising turned out to be complete crap. Who thinks an asymmetric turbo that powers 3 of the six cylinders was a good idea?
The 3.0 18-valve that Mazda put into MPVs and 929s is a nice "why did they bother" engine, and compared to Nissan's 12-valve VG, it came up short. I'm not sure how many of these there are left, but when they were around in greater numbers, they eventually all developed a distinct valvetrain noise which developed after 5 or so years.
I also vote for the Ford 3.0 used in Rangers in late 90's. They had zero power, but were extremely noisy and whiney.