Anti 3.0 people

[Shadow24V]

rides in the turbo 3.0? im THERE! (ill give rides in mine too....:-p)

[Gutfeeling]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadow24V to be honest, i havent come across many if any anti-3.0 people. mostly those that dont like it rarely come here or so ive seen. Actually there seems to be more 3.0 traffic here than the other two sites, at least in my experience. btw gtufeeling, you dont think my motor sounds better than the 12v? :-p

You're not stock!

[Shadow24V]

hey! your not supposed to tell!

i do know what you mean though, cant wait to hear it with a magnaflow and the 2.5" exhaust...

[phantomrt]

A water pump on a 3.0 is hard to replace? Thats a gravy job, unless it is in a Stealth/3000GT. And if you don't know about that one screw on the backside that also holds the pump in place.... or do the 12 valves not have that? I can't remember since its been sooooo long since I've had to touch anything on one,

[Reaper1]

Danristheman, you honestly thought that doing a water pump and timing belt on the 3.0 was hard!? Honestly?! REALLY!? Umm..you clearly have NEVER worked on a truly mechanically challenging piece of machinery then, 'cause I can do that job in a few hours(and I've only done it TWICE in 13 years)!! The hardest part? Supporting the engine so you can take the front motor mount plate off. Once that is done, the rest is cake!


As for the 3.3 being a "better" engine, that debate has been going on ever since I can remember. I only know of a few 3.3's that have been modded to any degree(NOT reffering to the Shelby CanAm engines...those don't count IMHO). The thing that speaks volumes to me is the fact that Shelby was doing testing for Chrysler for a turbod V6, the 3.0 was the only one that held together! The 3.3 and 3.8 would spill their guts all over the place! I've personally seen the insides of 3.3's(3.8's are nearly identical), and the 3.0 is by FAR more beefy. I'm not saying the 3.3 is a terrible engine, that is far fromt he truth, but IMHO the 3.0 offers more performance for less work. BOTH engeins have been proven to hold up well over time and milage(complain about dropped valve guides if you like, it has absolutly NO bearing on the longevity of the engine).

Going a little off topic here:
As for the GM 3.4...THAT was a POS engine IMHO. What in the world were they thinking with that monstrosity!? Honestly...bore and stroke an engine that was desinged to be a 2.8L OHV, then stick a balance shaft that is driven by a chain where the cam should be that drives the DOHC cams with a belt, then shove it in places that it doesn't belong so you can't work on it. Nice. Good going there GM...EPIC FAIL!

[DaytOmni]

Again, Doesn't the GM 3.4 have a weird tensioning system on the cam gears to allow you to adjust the timing belt more easily? I remember doing timing belts on this engine in school (Aswell as the 3.0 for that matter, and a NSX 90 degree V6). I found the GM to be second easiest only to the NSX... But um, Sorry for deviating from the topic once again.

[turbokid]

I like the 3.0. Good motors. Hooked up to a 5 speed (pitch the a604 pos) and they roll out awesome!

[Polygon]

Mine might not be in a TD but I love my 3.0L.

On a side note, I was also looking at the engine bay of a 2002 Stratus R/T today, and it looks VERY familiar.

[anokabball24]

I have nothing bad, and nothing good to say about the 3.0L. However, this thread is kind of weird. What are you looking to prove? Do you want an apology from people who have an opinion?

Why not pool some 3.0 guys together and pitch in for a 3.0 forum, separate from TD or TM.com. Like turbo3.0.com or something...

[mmtphoto]

we had a 93 LeBaron with one of those vinal (spelling, sorry) roofs and a 3.0 in the late 90's-it smoked on startup and after sitting at lights, and the trans was weird too-it would sometimes not shift, and you had to pull over and shut it off, and restart it. It's looks kind of grew on me and, cleaned up, was a nice car, and I thought it was a pretty good runner, could smoke the tires from a standstill. I know they had lots of problems with valve seals, but since they were in late Daytonas and I had one in a LeBaron (we called it 'herbie' since it was a 'herbert' car-kind of an old-man car) I read the 3.0 section just to read what I wished I would have known then-how to correct it's problems. I was glad to get rid of it, but it got us through tough times, and except for the engine smoking, I always thought it was a decent engine.

[92lebaronGTC]

I don't have the original engine in my lebaron but the one I got it with was rebuilt recently before I bought the car. Had 113,500 miles on her and now she has 171400 over 4 years later. No engine or a604 related trouble at all. Soon though I'd like to get my new a543 installed with a pretty fresh 3.0 attached to it. Knock on wood for my a604 being reliable, I only changed the filter on it once so far My 3.0 has almost always smoked a little here and there, a little more so lately, but always passes emissions no problem. Must be that I have a california car with all sorts of crazy EGR and emissions crap under the hood. I wonder if I have a special ECU cause of that too.

The 3.0 however I love, always seemed strong and I can't wait to find out what a difference going 5 speed makes for it.


Somewhat current under-hood photo.


Out with the old, in with the new!
Likely going to replace the water pump, timing belt, valve cover gaskets, oil pan gasket, new serp belt, tensioner, idler pulleys, thermostat, and spark plugs before putting in the car though. Gotta keep saving my money!!!

[speedfreek09]

the only thing i have ever heard go wrong with a 3.0 was the valve seals which makes them smoke and burn oil. i guess it was chryslers way of telling you to keep fresh oil in it. they last forever though.

sometimes i would rather have the 3.0 in my car because i have been stranded by the 2.2 a few times because of the stupid hep, keep a spare in the glovebox so when it goes out, your prepared.

in conclusion, build a car that suits you, not someone else, and have fun doing it. kill a honda now and then to build confidence and self esteem.

p.s. the 3.4 dohc gm was a piece of shit.
if you ever get the chance to work on one of those start a fire in the car, its easier to deal with.

[mark joseph]

i have no problem with the 3.0. Just wish the factory had experimented with turbo's and rwd on these cars. Imagine a shadow 3.0 turbo with a 5 gear melting the skins off the rear. Coulda put the fear of god in a gn or 5.0 pony. At least it isn't a 2.7 with an internal water pump. Who the hell thought that was a good idea? Blow a seal and the crankcase gets filled with green koolaid.

[Ondonti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by anokabball24 I have nothing bad, and nothing good to say about the 3.0L. However, this thread is kind of weird. What are you looking to prove? Do you want an apology from people who have an opinion? Why not pool some 3.0 guys together and pitch in for a 3.0 forum, separate from TD or TM.com. Like turbo3.0.com or something...

That is the kind of Spirit that created this beef.
Why would we want our own forum? We have the same damn cars. Thats like telling the TIII guys to take a hike.

[Ondonti]

I was all over the junkyards the last two days looking for AWD parts, and also a motor.

Funny thing is this. All the clean motors were high mileage, between 170,000 and 230,000 miles.

Al the dirty motors had around 100,000 miles on them. Obvious that nobody ever changed the oil in them etc etc etc. I am amazed what I high percentage of cars in the junkyard have abused 3.0's.

Then the few good motors I found, all had been ruined. I found a 2000 caravan motor that some jerk removed the cam caps from (not swappable between heads!) so he ruined two motors with one fell swoop :P
A 62k mile 94 motor looked great except someone decided to remove the plenum for fun. Nobody seems to molest the dirty motors.