The intake gaskets were never a wide spread problem with the 3800. The Series III 60*V6 engines, the 3100 and early 3400's suffered from this defect; one which has since been remedied. The 3800's did have a very small number of intake related failures, but these did not involve the gasket. Furthermore, if you're going to drag old news out of the closet, I'm willing to wager there are less 3800's (thats thirty EIGHT hundred, not the 3100 or 3400) on the road that even required service at all due to this defect compared to the number of Toyota engines driving around filled with sludge.
Compare GM's V6, e.g. 3.4, 3.5, 3,8
- Thread starter 06RANGER
- Start date
- Status
The intake gaskets were never a wide spread problem with the 3800. The Series III 60*V6 engines, the 3100 and early 3400's suffered from this defect; one which has since been remedied. The 3800's did have a very small number of intake related failures, but these did not involve the gasket. Furthermore, if you're going to drag old news out of the closet, I'm willing to wager there are less 3800's (thats thirty EIGHT hundred, not the 3100 or 3400) on the road that even required service at all due to this defect compared to the number of Toyota engines driving around filled with sludge.
Not to mention the fact that spending $500 is spending $500 any way you slice it. At least, even with the defective 3100 and 3400's, if you replace the gasket with the updated design you won't have to replace it again. On the timing belt engines you'll have to keep replacing the belt at a set interval. Not to mention the often hard to access water pump driven by said belt, a terrible design, IMO, which many manufacturers are choosing to implement.
Well speaking of keeping facts straight:
1) The supercharged 3800 powered cars will NOT "blow the doors" off of Toyotas powered by the 2GR 3.5L V-6. I owned a Regal GS, powered by the blown 3800, and still recall it's advertised 0-60 time: 6.6 seconds. So, with 0.3L less displacement, and no supercharger, the DOHC & VVT-i Avalon and Camry are at least fractionally quicker than the the supercharged Regal GS.
2) In case this is still a confused point, the current 2GR-FE V-6 (Camry, Avalon) has chain driven cams -- no timing belt involved. The previously used V-6, the 1MZ/3MZ was a belt-drive engine (and does still appear as a "lame duck" engine only in the Solara and Highlander Hybrid).
3) Your earlier assertion that variable valve timing is not effective in increasing engine output is simply wrong. Consider the above-mentioned 1MZ-FE V-6 from Toyota. When the last gen Camry was introduced in 2002, they were still installing the non-VVT version of the 1MZ. In early 2003, they switched to the VVT-i version, and the rated hp and tq both increased substantially (by roughly 30 peak hp and 20 ft-lb, IIRC). I've driven both versions, and the most noticeable effect of the change to VVT-i is much better torque off the line/at low rpms.
"Actually it gets 28 mpg on the highway, as per new EPA testing. Can the naturally aspirated GM 3800 do the same?"
Yes it can. The stickers on the windows of new GMs with the 3.8 list 28 Hwy.
It was 30 under the old EPA protcol.
Yes it can. The stickers on the windows of new GMs with the 3.8 list 28 Hwy.
It was 30 under the old EPA protcol.
Just to throw my 2 cents into this thread, I'm a BIG fan of the 3800; it's been the smoothest, best sounding engine I've ever owned in a car. I've got the 3800 Series II in my 2000 Buick Lesabre and I've got to tell you, I rarely ever listen to the radio because I'm always enjoying the sound of the powerful free revving V6.
Now I'm reading the 3.5l LZ4 is an antiquated design.
I thought it was just introduced in 06.
I thought it was just introduced in 06.
Ignorant people like to badmouth the 60*V6's and call them antiquated because the cam is in the block instead of above the cylinder heads. If you're into that kind of mindless bickering and stupidity, by all means, please don't buy a car with the LZ4.
Does the 3.5l have a timing belt?
No it has a timing chain which during the normal life of the engine never needs replacement (i.e. is easily good for 250K+ miles).
From my perspective, the cars normally wrapped around them are not my cup of tea, but there's nothing inherently "wrong" or even "antique" about them, except from a fairly narrow point of view. In truth, overhead cam designs date as far back as the several variations of cam-in-block designs. Each has it's own characteristic advantages and disadvantages. Cam-in-block designs would typically be more compact for a given displacement, and lighter too, if machined from aluminum. OHC designs make multi-valve setups easier, and are easier to make smooth, having less parts reciprocating (vibrating and shaking) and articulating to one another.
Personally, I think the GM pushrod V-6s are perfectly good, serviceable engines. It is lamentable, however, that GM has treated these designs the way they have (still cast from iron, the long period of knowing refusal to do anything about the unsatisfactory intake gaskets, less-than-adequate attention to NVH issues, etc). That said, if a car I wanted had one of these engines, I would not hesitate to buy one.
The 1911 Fiat Grand Prix car was SOHC, in 1912 they moved on to DOHC. The Peugeot Grand Prix car was DOHC in 1913.
My dad got a 07 Malibu Maxx SS model. It's got the 3.9L engine, more power and torque than the Supercharged 3800. It is really sharp looking, and he got quite a deal on it.
Aren't the G6 and the Malibu built off the same platform, probably at the same plant? I doubt there's any difference in quality.
Aren't the G6 and the Malibu built off the same platform, probably at the same plant? I doubt there's any difference in quality.
"I doubt there's any difference in quality. "
Maybe not in fact, but perception wise there is/could be.
The Oldsmobile version of the S-10 Blazer/Jimmy was thought to be a notch up quality wise.
Buick versions of Chevy or Pontiac vehicles are thought to be higher quality and some are rated higher by J.D. Powers, or other rating organizations and auto magazines.
Of course, the level of care and maintanence for these 'higher' level models may be better, too.
Maybe not in fact, but perception wise there is/could be.
The Oldsmobile version of the S-10 Blazer/Jimmy was thought to be a notch up quality wise.
Buick versions of Chevy or Pontiac vehicles are thought to be higher quality and some are rated higher by J.D. Powers, or other rating organizations and auto magazines.
Of course, the level of care and maintanence for these 'higher' level models may be better, too.
The 3.4 intake manifold problems were corrected for the 2004 model year, but many 2003's had the improved gaskets too. FWIW I'm still using the Dexcool in my 3.4 Impala, but will be changing it every 2 years or so. Mine is a 2004 and I changed the antifreeze as soon as I got it 6 months ago just to play it safe. Supposedly there are no other issues with the 3.4 and have seen a couple with over 200K miles on them at the auction, but not too many folks around here will keep a car that long (including me). The gas mileage is really good considering the Impala is a fullsize car. I consistently get 27-28 mpg to and from work, with at least 30 mpg on a trip. Best ever 34 mpg, but can expect 32 on any interstate trip.
Anyone know the status of the odd-ball in the family, the Chinese-made 3.4L that's still installed in the Chevy Equinox Sorta-SUV? Did they get the updated gaskets along with the domestic production engines?
I may be wrong in saying this, but it was my understanding that the 3.5 & 3.9 had nothing in common with the earlier generation 60degree V-6, other than having pushrods & 60 degrees between the cylinder banks. I'm under the impression the design was from a clean slate.
- Status
