Username or Email Address
Do you already have an account?
Forgot your password?
  • Log in or Sign up

    VWVortex


    The Car Lounge
    Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
    Results 36 to 70 of 172

    Thread: WORST V6 Engines Ever Made.....

    1. Member Broduski's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 18th, 2008
      Location
      Central NC
      Posts
      4,487
      Vehicles
      My driveway looks like a shady used car lot
      08-10-2012 11:58 AM #36
      Quote Originally Posted by tjl View Post
      The Peugeot - Renault - Volvo V6 engine was not known for durability. It is why old Volvo 260-series cars are very rare compared to 240-series cars which used the durable "red block" 4 cylinder engines.

      /thread. We're done here.
      77 F100, 83 244, 94 540i

    2. Member SLC_Punker's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 1st, 2002
      Location
      Philly 'Burbs
      Posts
      1,049
      Vehicles
      2013 WRX; Hyundai Veracruz
      08-10-2012 11:58 AM #37
      Quote Originally Posted by benjaminobscene View Post



      Came for this exact post; leaving satisfied.

    3. 08-10-2012 12:06 PM #38
      Quote Originally Posted by Egz View Post
      I'll see your Sebring, and raise you a K-car. The 3.0 Pentastar engine, with the valve guides made out of wax.
      That engine is/was not called the Pentastar; you're thinking of Chrysler's current 3.6L DOHC V6.

      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.
      Dempsey Bowling
      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

    4. Member 1985Jetta's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 11th, 2012
      Location
      The Land of Carolina Girls
      Posts
      11,336
      08-10-2012 12:13 PM #39
      The Duratec V6 used in Contours/Mystiques.

    5. 08-10-2012 12:22 PM #40
      Quote Originally Posted by 1985Jetta View Post
      The Duratec V6 used in Contours/Mystiques.
      On what grounds?

      THat actually is a pretty decent engine.
      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.

    6. 08-10-2012 12:26 PM #41
      yes, it has been mentioned in here, but this engine really deserves a giant trophy made of poop and dongs.

      Quote Originally Posted by wiki
      The longitudinal LR2 was a truck version ("B-code") produced from 1982 to 1990. It used a 2-barrel carburetor and produced 115 hp (86 kW) and 150 lb·ft (203 N·m). This engine is often revered as the most unreliable version. It's plagued with bottom end issues which range from spun bearings to compression loss related to engineering flaws in the lubrication system. Many auto parts stores sold crankshaft kits for this motor due to its original popularity and likelihood of failure. Many people claim this to be one of the worst engines ever made taking into account the power output, longevity, and terrible fuel efficiency.


      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...













      Quote Originally Posted by patrikman
      You sound like a man who would appreciate an upper decker.

    7. Member 1985Jetta's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 11th, 2012
      Location
      The Land of Carolina Girls
      Posts
      11,336
      08-10-2012 12:27 PM #42
      Quote Originally Posted by GolfVIDriver View Post
      On what grounds?

      THat actually is a pretty decent engine.
      Hard to work on.

    8. Member
      Join Date
      Jun 22nd, 2006
      Location
      Edgewood, MD
      Posts
      3,688
      Vehicles
      Euro Ford junk collection
      08-10-2012 12:28 PM #43
      Quote Originally Posted by 1985Jetta View Post
      The Duratec V6 used in Contours/Mystiques.


      Quote Originally Posted by 1985Jetta View Post
      Hard to work on.
      That's because of what they're installed in. The motor itself does not belong on this list.
      It's easy to work on in the Escape, or in RWD applications.
      Last edited by saron81; 08-10-2012 at 12:30 PM.

    9. Member MAG58's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 14th, 2011
      Location
      Indy
      Posts
      1,298
      Vehicles
      It's broken.
      08-10-2012 12:29 PM #44
      Quote Originally Posted by 1985Jetta View Post
      Hard to work on.
      By those grounds there are a significant number of good V6's that equally qualify for worst.

    10. Member IridiumB6's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 29th, 2010
      Location
      Toronto, Canada
      Posts
      2,155
      Vehicles
      2014 Rogue SL, 2008 XC90 3.2
      08-10-2012 12:37 PM #45
      Quote Originally Posted by 1985Jetta View Post
      Hard to work on.
      Pretty weak excuse there, mate
      Quote Originally Posted by DRUB View Post
      What just cause Im new.

    11. Member 200HP4dr's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 21st, 2001
      Location
      NE. OH
      Posts
      8,269
      08-10-2012 12:38 PM #46
      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 | 2006 Charger R/T |

    12. Member Toaster29's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jan 19th, 2000
      Location
      Birmingham, Al
      Posts
      4,569
      Vehicles
      997TT, F80 M3
      08-10-2012 12:40 PM #47
      Quote Originally Posted by tjl View Post
      The Peugeot - Renault - Volvo V6 engine was not known for durability. It is why old Volvo 260-series cars are very rare compared to 240-series cars which used the durable "red block" 4 cylinder engines.

      My parents bought a Volvo 760 in '85 or so, when I was about 3. I barely remember them buying it, but I do clearly remember my Dad replacing the cams in the back yard over a weekend when I was in about the 3rd or 4th grade. They got the V6 because they wanted a reliable, resilient drivetrain over the turbo 4


      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, GIAC flash, 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

    13. Member Cousin Eddie's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 17th, 2005
      Location
      Ontario, Canada
      Posts
      15,023
      Vehicles
      That there's an RV, Clark
      08-10-2012 12:51 PM #48
      Quote Originally Posted by 200HP4dr View Post
      The reason they blow gaskets is an accounting problem, not a design problem.
      Have you seen the amount of silicone you bridge across the gap when doing lower intake manifold gaskets? It's not exactly the best design. Sure they're powerful but they're still gasket eating junk.

    14. Member 200HP4dr's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 21st, 2001
      Location
      NE. OH
      Posts
      8,269
      08-10-2012 12:58 PM #49
      Quote Originally Posted by Adam144 View Post
      Have you seen the amount of silicone you bridge across the gap when doing lower intake manifold gaskets? It's not exactly the best design. Sure they're powerful but they're still gasket eating junk.
      Oh yeah, are you using the updated gaskets? Once repaired, if done properly will last another 100k. You have to catch them early though. Before they start smoking. That's the thing, is that by the time the symptoms are serious enough for the average person to care about them, its already too late.

      Chris
      | 2012 Nissan Leaf | 2006 Charger R/T |

    15. Member CWDave's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 8th, 2009
      Location
      Huntersville, NC
      Posts
      610
      Vehicles
      A Ford, a Honda, and two Dodges.
      08-10-2012 01:01 PM #50
      Quote Originally Posted by tjl View Post
      Early 1990s 3.8L "Essex" V6 engines in the Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable had a reputation for frequent head gasket failures.
      That engine bay brings back nightmares. Then they decided to pair it with the most unreliable, clunky, and grenade prone auto transmission.
      2013 Ford Focus ST3 // 2013 Honda CR-V EX // 2004 Dodge Stratus // 2000 Dodge Neon Highline

    16. Member geofftii2002's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 6th, 2001
      Location
      Lehigh Valley, PA
      Posts
      13,500
      Vehicles
      2008 Mini Cooper S Clubman, 2006 Forester, 1972 BMW 2002tii, 93 W124 gone to the glue factory
      08-10-2012 01:01 PM #51
      Quote Originally Posted by OldsPowered View Post
      I'll also nominate the 3.0L L81 found in the Catera and some Saturns:
      Is that the one they put in the Saturn L300? Had a friend who worked for a Saturn dealer in MN when these wretched piles of dooo were new - they would unload them from the truck, park them out back and wait for a shipment of new engines to arrive a few days later. Such junkola!
      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!

    17. Member Cousin Eddie's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 17th, 2005
      Location
      Ontario, Canada
      Posts
      15,023
      Vehicles
      That there's an RV, Clark
      08-10-2012 01:03 PM #52
      Quote Originally Posted by 200HP4dr View Post
      Oh yeah, are you using the updated gaskets? Once repaired, if done properly will last another 100k. You have to catch them early though. Before they start smoking. That's the thing, is that by the time the symptoms are serious enough for the average person to care about them, its already too late.

      Chris
      Yeah the last one I did (GF's dad's car) I used the good Fel-Pro gaskets. The silicone across the bridge is ridiculous. It was a minor leak in the intake which was no big deal, I fixed it and it will be fine for quite a while longer now.

      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.

    18. Member asadjewonxmas's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jan 24th, 2007
      Location
      Oak Forest, Illinois
      Posts
      3,798
      Vehicles
      2001 Audi A4 TQM (mine), 2008 Mazda CX-7 (Hers), 1992 Kawasaki Ninja 600R (Toy)
      08-10-2012 01:05 PM #53
      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.
      Need repair work in the suburbs Contact: J'S REPAIR AND PERFORMANCE
      Plainfield, IL VAG-COM EQUIPPED 815-556-0027 http://www.jrpshop.com/

      Need detailing or United Motorsport Flashing in the Chicago area Contact: Luis (nkgneto)
      http://www.AutomobileDaySpa.com https://www.facebook.com/AutomobileDaySpa

    19. 08-10-2012 01:47 PM #54
      Quote Originally Posted by mm3 View Post
      In the late 80's, Nissan offered their Hardbody pickup with the VG30E V6, Ford had the 2.9 V6 and later 4.0 V6 in their Ranger, and GM had the 2.8 V6 and later on the 4.3 V6. Toyota needed a V6 to compete with the other trucks.

      What they came out with was bad, really bad. The 3VZE was a 3.0 liter SOHC V6, the only non-DOHC V6 Toyota has sold, which makes it an oddball. However this motor became notorious for blowing head gaskets (repeatedly), which resulted in multiple recalls, plus the engine was underpowered, lord help you if it was automatic. Plus this engine boasted the fuel economy of a V8 engine, without the power or torque of said V8. Not that it mattered because plenty of these engines blew themselves to pieces. The 3VZE is more then likely Toyota's most hated engine, one that is best avoided.


      I was subjected to the 2.5L version the 2VZ-FE head gasket failure in this


    20. Member
      Join Date
      Nov 26th, 2011
      Location
      Lancaster, PA
      Posts
      393
      Vehicles
      2007 Passat 2.0T
      08-10-2012 01:49 PM #55
      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?

    21. 08-10-2012 01:52 PM #56
      Quote Originally Posted by ZachSav View Post
      Same engine, same problems, but in the mustang v6 (94-98)

      Wow didn't know the stang had the same exact manifold in its 3.8L, any rednecks upgrade to the windstar manifold

    22. Member 2000JettaGLXVR6's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 17th, 2002
      Location
      Southern California
      Posts
      9,094
      Vehicles
      65 Volvo 1800S, 12 GLI Autobahn
      08-10-2012 01:55 PM #57
      Quote Originally Posted by Impeccable View Post
      Can include low on power or crappy reliability, GIVE ME YOUR EXAMPLES.

      I have to say the Audi 2.8L things drank oil like no tommorow. Engine cover was so bulbous it made it look big as a 6.0 small block. This thing was slow as s*** on the low end of the power band getting the 5 speed manual didnt help that (I can only imagine how painful a C4 100 series with an auto would be).
      I have to totally disagree with this. I drove around a 1994 100 S that I picked up on CL for $600. It was solid and peppy. I sold it after a week for $1,700


    23. 08-10-2012 01:55 PM #58
      Quote Originally Posted by mx5er View Post
      It was supposed to be in the new Oldsmobile Intrigue. But that was canned since the new V6 version of the Northstar V8 was about to be introduced. So initially, the Intrigue was equipped with the 3800.
      Who also remembers the Shortstar V6???



      I believe it was only offered on the 2nd gen. base Aurora and the Intrigue.
      I remember reading back in the day that GM tried the dual cam and other engines but decided against them because of they're high nvh levels. Remember Oldsmobile was trying to redifine itself in this era Come to think of it Intrigues are pretty much extinct around here.

    24. 08-10-2012 02:05 PM #59
      Quote Originally Posted by OldsPowered View Post
      I'll also nominate the 3.0L L81 found in the Catera and some Saturns:
      Most L-series and cateras I drove shivered at idle(lumpy idle), only ones that didn't were super low mileage cateras.

    25. 08-10-2012 02:08 PM #60
      Quote Originally Posted by TurboMinivan View Post
      That engine is/was not called the Pentastar; you're thinking of Chrysler's current 3.6L DOHC V6.

      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.
      I take v6 engines have never been a mitsu strength , I remember in the late 90's walking into shops and seeing plenty of head gasket failures in 3000GTs and Diamantes

    26. 08-10-2012 02:09 PM #61
      Quote Originally Posted by GolfVIDriver View Post
      On what grounds?

      THat actually is a pretty decent engine.
      Still makes me break neck when i hear a duratec paired to a 5-speed

    27. 08-10-2012 02:09 PM #62
      Quote Originally Posted by Impeccable View Post
      Can include low on power or crappy reliability, GIVE ME YOUR EXAMPLES.

      I have to say the Audi 2.8L things drank oil like no tommorow. Engine cover was so bulbous it made it look big as a 6.0 small block. This thing was slow as s*** on the low end of the power band getting the 5 speed manual didnt help that (I can only imagine how painful a C4 100 series with an auto would be).
      i disagree with this too.. not sure about the 12valve one.. but i had the 2.8 30valve..

      i drove it from 120k to 310k with out a single problem..

      even at 310k miles engine was strong and smoth as butter..

    28. Member Broduski's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 18th, 2008
      Location
      Central NC
      Posts
      4,487
      Vehicles
      My driveway looks like a shady used car lot
      08-10-2012 02:38 PM #63
      Quote Originally Posted by TurboMinivan View Post
      That engine is/was not called the Pentastar; you're thinking of Chrysler's current 3.6L DOHC V6.

      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.
      The DOHC 3.0's of the same family are quite good too. I dunno why they have a bad reputation. They're not bad.
      77 F100, 83 244, 94 540i

    29. Banned
      Join Date
      Mar 8th, 2011
      Location
      Bellevue Hospital Center
      Posts
      8,720
      08-10-2012 02:41 PM #64
      Quote Originally Posted by Impeccable View Post
      Can include low on power or crappy reliability, GIVE ME YOUR EXAMPLES.

      I have to say the Audi 2.8L things drank oil like no tommorow. Engine cover was so bulbous it made it look big as a 6.0 small block. This thing was slow as s*** on the low end of the power band getting the 5 speed manual didnt help that (I can only imagine how painful a C4 100 series with an auto would be).
      As an owner of one as my DD, I concur. Kicker: it's an auto.

    30. Member kraut_pauer79's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 27th, 2004
      Location
      behind the Orange Curtain, CA
      Posts
      4,608
      Vehicles
      a 1966 air cooled VW
      08-10-2012 03:01 PM #65
      Quote Originally Posted by worth_fixing View Post
      Worst ever? I don't know, but this one is rated pretty poorly. Many many of them seize at one of the main bearing for lack of oil. These engines aren't typically pushed very hard, given the vehicles they're put in, yet their failure rate is pretty high. They're also bad with engine sludge (probable source of lack of oil on bearings) and have problems warming up.

      2.7L V6 Sebring. They sound good though.

      let me be the 18589203847509th to post this, what a truly miserable turd that Chrysler 2.7 is, in every spectrum: power, reliability, and fuel economy.
      Quote Originally Posted by Swallow Doretti View Post
      You bitches fight more than a bunch of high school girls at the clearance rack of the local Forever 21.
      Quote Originally Posted by emmettlodge View Post
      Japanese dicks are too small to trip over

    31. 08-10-2012 03:03 PM #66
      Quote Originally Posted by BRealistic View Post
      As far as just bad v6s..


      Ford sold some hodge podge European market sourced 2.8 v6 in the Ranger for one year in the 80s due to an engine shortage.
      I know somebody that had one - it was weak, thirsty, and unreliable. A carb'd 302 swap would have improved the fuel economy. Seriously.
      I think you mean the Cologne V6

    32. Member HerrGolf's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 30th, 2002
      Location
      Columbus, Jugoslavija
      Posts
      5,851
      Vehicles
      2000 Civic D16Y7
      08-10-2012 03:06 PM #67
      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.


    33. 08-10-2012 03:08 PM #68
      Quote Originally Posted by juice View Post
      Duck and run...

      The 80s GM 2.8l V6 may have been the worst SOUNDING engine. It was "tuned" but ended up sounding like it was gargling.
      I remember in the late 80s early 90s all you would hear was 2.8Ls taking off, can't say i hated how they sounded
      Last edited by Impeccable; 08-10-2012 at 03:13 PM.

    34. 08-10-2012 03:15 PM #69
      Quote Originally Posted by GLgod View Post
      Not sure if this was already mentioned...

      But GM's LR2 2.8 V6 was the biggest pos that I can remember. Had one in a Cherokee and when it wasn't broken, the thing could barely reach 65mph in stock form.
      This 2.8 POS was used in S-10's and Blazers right? That is what came to mind for me- weren't these also NOTORIOUS for carbon build up everywhere? I def remember scraping insides of valve covers with screwdrivers for hours...

      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.

    35. Member turbinepowered's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 18th, 2007
      Location
      Southeastern US of A
      Posts
      5,879
      Vehicles
      '86 Interceptor 700, '82 Quantum Coupe
      08-10-2012 03:31 PM #70
      Quote Originally Posted by OldsPowered View Post
      BEHOLD! The Olds 4.3L diesel!
      Quote Originally Posted by atomicalex View Post
      Honestly, this is probably the winner. No V6 singlehandedly killed an entire market like this one did. This was the copper-cooled of the Diesel world.

      Eh, I'd lay that at the feet of the V8 version. There aren't/weren't nearly enough of those things around to have done that sort of damage, whereas the "350 diesel" was shoved into far more things and peddled harder.
      Quote Originally Posted by zukiphile View Post
      There is an area of a normal brain that lets the owner know the object works and needs to be left alone. Not all of us have it. It is like being colorblind.

    Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •