Alright goose, you start this topic and leave us. Where are you?
GM 3.5L V6...decent engine?
- Thread starter Blue_Goose
- Start date
- Status
I like the front O2 sensor placement, and the oil filter looks accessible. but why no coil packs? and I hate all the plastic garbage they cover these new engines with -- it serves no purpose, and in this case makes for a long oil filler tube -- so you can't get a good look inside the valve covers. and this thing isn't an OHC is it? pushrods?
Quote:
Tell that to the EPA, they rate the V6 Malibu at only 1 mpg less then it's four cylinder competitors, even though they have much less usable power.
If you think that having less idlers is more important then having a servicable engine, I can see why you'd like Japanese cars.
Here's my FWD V6, more room then many four cylinder cars I've worked on:
It's was a bit dirty when I got it.
the easiest engine swap I ever did was an '86 olds 88 with the transverse 3800 V6. that was my first experience with MPFI and fully electronic ignition. just plug in a few wires, hook up the fuel line, and start it up. no fussing with ignition timing or flakey carburetors or even distributor caps. I couldn't believe how advanced it was compared to my '85 ford escort that I had just put a new engine in the week before.
well right, I guess in my mind the term coil pack implies direct placement on the plugs whereas a remotely mounted "spark box" would be connected via plug wires. my lingo could be off, though.
"The coil packs are not necessarily on the plugs. On my LS1, the coil packs are connected to the plugs by HT leads."
I'm surprised they put the coils under the engine cover.
Looks good, but I recall that some GM V-6 engines had trouble with coils getting to hot and dying.
We see.
I'm surprised they put the coils under the engine cover.
Looks good, but I recall that some GM V-6 engines had trouble with coils getting to hot and dying.
We see.
Oh my. They put the whole ECM under the engine cover on my Saab 93....
If it's made and tested reliable under there, Brian, it shouldn't be a problem.
GM ocasionally lets the consumer do their testing.
GM ocasionally lets the consumer do their testing.
After years of warrantying bad ones placed behind the glove compartment, they wanted to see if they could get them to fail even more quickly.
During my relatively short stay at the GM Parts Department in WY, I had accumulated (4) six-foot stacks of ECMs replaced under warranty, taking up space in my receiving room. Every time I turned around, there was a tech standing at the counter to hand over another fried one. Ugh.
During my relatively short stay at the GM Parts Department in WY, I had accumulated (4) six-foot stacks of ECMs replaced under warranty, taking up space in my receiving room. Every time I turned around, there was a tech standing at the counter to hand over another fried one. Ugh.
Well, I haven't heard of any ECM failures yet, and they've done this since at least 2003, so maybe they're OK there.
I know for a while there was a tendency in the auto service industry to blame the ECM for any and every problem the car had. They've gotten past that now, thankfully.
I know for a while there was a tendency in the auto service industry to blame the ECM for any and every problem the car had. They've gotten past that now, thankfully.
It was fun watching some the Grand Prixs come in with ECU problems. Either they were brought in on a flatbed or they were unruly and belching smoke. Not many happy owners there.
Call "Bill in Parts" at Barth Pontiac, Gillette WY. He's dealing with the stack now.
Isn't there a time after which this stack of ECMs should just be tossed in the trash since they're probably obsolete?
Speaking of ECM failures, who was it who recently had bad ECMs due to the usage of the special self-destructo-matic Chinese special electrolytic capacitors?
I think it was Mitsubishi? Using #@$%! capacitors is bad enough in a $40 DVD player. It's downright stupid in an ECM.
Speaking of ECM failures, who was it who recently had bad ECMs due to the usage of the special self-destructo-matic Chinese special electrolytic capacitors?
I think it was Mitsubishi? Using #@$%! capacitors is bad enough in a $40 DVD player. It's downright stupid in an ECM.
Last edited:
Came across this thread while researching oils for my GM 3.5. Figured I'd post up my experiences. At 100k miles, my 2007 3.5L is doing great. Not a single issue. I use synthetic and push the OCI about 25% past what the OLM indicates. Typically around 10k. Might try going further now that the car is past its extended warranty. It's in a Buick Rendezvous, that we get very nice gas mileage in. At low highway speeds I can cruise along at 25-26mpg.
Also, since people are griping about the serpentine belt... all I can say is, I can change the belt with a 3/8" breaker bar in 3 minutes. Nothing to unbolt, remove, move, or monkey with. It might seem complicated but the reality is it makes service very simple.
Also, since people are griping about the serpentine belt... all I can say is, I can change the belt with a 3/8" breaker bar in 3 minutes. Nothing to unbolt, remove, move, or monkey with. It might seem complicated but the reality is it makes service very simple.
We have an 07 Malibu with the 3.5L that has had the head gaskets replaced, the water crossover gaskets replaced 3 times now, and the water pump. All parts were replaced under warranty except the last set of crossover gaskets. Car is right at 100K miles.
While GM did fix the previous internal coolant leaks, the new design, while good, STILL uses absolutely cheap gaskets that can leak externally.
While GM did fix the previous internal coolant leaks, the new design, while good, STILL uses absolutely cheap gaskets that can leak externally.
Last edited:
- Status