GM Inside News Forum banner

101 - 120 of 150 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
197 Posts
Ive had it, this is the last straw (this is going to be a rant, just to let you know.) Im a college student at the age of 21, Ive had my pickup (God bless that thing) since I could drive. I got this 1995 Monte Carlo 3.4L DOHC this past summer becasue i needed better fuel mileage, truthfully my mom bought it without my consent or checking it out, so I was hosed, and now im out $1500.00. What a great wrapup to 2006 and a sh*thole start to 2007 :


Ive replaced a camshaft sensor($95), 2 O2 sensors($50, second one was under warranty), 3 vaccum lines ($5), an intake gasket($20), a fuel regulator($50), PROM chip(#75), and an injector($90). This car has been nothing but trouble.

Ive been battling an idel issue with this car that is known with this engine. I solved the problem today, after 3 months of testing it. The O2 sensor went bad for the second time, and I had to update the prom chip. From what Ive read online and through many forums I am a member at, I am the only one whos solved this problem, for that I am very proud. But today a plate in the tranny went out. I cannot afford nor do I want to put any more money into this car. I was planning on getting it running and selling it this summer.

The 3.4 engine is the worst engine GM has ever built, and the T4 transmission paired with it is the weakest too. This car does not deserve the bowtie. Im so sick of this POS monte carlo.

I am a huge GM/chevy fan, I have a bowtie wrapped in barbed wire on my arm, but this series car/motor/tranny is the wost I have ever come across.

Im attending college right now, i have no money, i cant afford a new car. I have to drive the truck, at 11-13mpg im going to take a hit in gas during the school year and in summer when i drive 40miles a day roundtrip to work. 2007 is becoming 2006, a horrible year. My parents are going through a divorce, its dragged on for a year, the house is going to be sold.

DAMNIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


end of rant.

(i don't expect anyone to reply... i just needed to get this out....)
Why the hell are you people having issues with your new(er) engines, when my HT4100 Cadillac engine, in all its 200,000 mile glory, seems to be doing fine? AND THIS IS MY SECOND 1980'S CADILLAC WITH THIS FWD DRIVETRAIN!!!
My first was given to my brother with 220,000 on the odo.
In either car, tehre was no O2 sensor problems No camshaft locator problems. No vacuum line or intake gasket problems. The only issue with me was the DIC lighting that went bad at 198,000 miles, which I replaced myself (burnt out light/10-minute fix)
Is there a reason for this supposed catastrophic failure of the engine?

I just can't figure out why you ppl are having a difficut time with you newer powerplants!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
This is from Wikipedia, which is of course, subject to being completely wrong.



I believe I even read somewhere that it still has an "auxiliary shaft" in the block where the pushrod's cam would be and it drives the oil pump. The crank drives this "aux shaft" with a chain and then the "aux shaft" drives the 4 cams with a belt.

GM literally took a pushrod engine and put two gigantic OHC heads on it. I'm sure they changed a few things but not much. Its a very cool idea and the result was impressive dynamically, but the 3800 could perform just as well and was more reliable. It also made more torque at a lower RPM. It was a really big hassle for GM to be able to say "Our cars are OHC! Please don't buy an Accord!".

Your Lumina is nice, I have always liked 1st gen W-body coupes.
Thanx, but the block is totaly different. Yes it does have aux shaft but the upper valley doesnt have lifter holes and the machineing is wider than the ohv engine. But thanx for the comment hard to believe thats fifteen years old huh? Never painted.;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Not misinformation....and holy old thread dig up!

I hate to tell you, the dual cam 60*V6 drove more people away from GM than the HT4100 did, and that's not saying much!!!:confused:
Thats okay. This is the 4th 60*v6 I've owned never had touble with any though. Gm produced that 60* v6 from 1982-1996 hard to believe it drove so many away and they still producted it.:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Uh no im talking about the SS Turbo. A Cobalt is a commuter car last time i checked, but hell if youre saying you can rape base Corollas I'm very impressed!!! Lastly i don't own one....if you look at my sig or my info you would know, but i guess youre too busy getting excited about your Lumina.

Lets go over some figures:
Stock Lumina Z34 5 speed 0-60: 8.1 seconds 1/4 mile: 16.1 seconds @ 89 mph
Stock Cobalt SS Turbo 0-60: 5.5 seconds 1/4 mile: 14.0 seconds @ 102.5 mph

Haha right you could totally take him dude!!!! I dont care if youre tuned, I highly doubt you've made up 2 seconds in the quarter.
First of all stock 3.4 dohc is 7.2 actual period. There's no way a supercharged cobalt is turning in 1/4mile times nearly as fast as the LS1 powered F-bodies sorry that dog don't hunt. I also own a Camaro too it's the blue car in my profile so the Lumina is not the only car I like.
I know for a fact that there is no supercharged Cobalt putting out 260hp at the wheels the crank hp would have to be over 300hp to accomplish that. Trust me it's not! My hp dyno tested 264.6hp at the wheels. Like I said before I can break traction @ or between 30-40mph. Pretty good for a heavy car huh? No Cobalt is doing that without being tuned. Sorry but I can only take so much BS! Aswell like I said Cobalt would have me to 150ft because I'm much heavier. Also does that Cobalt have fully independant suspention? I don't know really! My Lumina does. Just wondering. And the time I made up in the 1/4 was only 1sec not 2! But as long as it's a Chevy, Cobalt is a good car in my book too! Just not a fan of 4cyl. Don't get ruffled dude it's not that important. I just like the 60*v6 dohc because it's rare to see one custom tuned.:drive:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,186 Posts
First of all stock 3.4 dohc is 7.2 actual period. There's no way a cobalt is turning in 1/4mile times nearly as fast as the LS1 powered F-bodies sorry that dog don't hunt. I also own a Camaro too it's the blue car in my profile so the Lumina is not the only car I like.
I know for a fact that there is no Cobalt putting out 260hp at the wheels the crank hp would have to be over 300hp to accomplish that. Trust me it's not! My hp dyno tested 264.6hp at the wheels. Like I said before I can break traction @ or between 30-40mph. Pretty good for a heavy car huh? No Cobalt is doing that without being tuned. Sorry but I can only take so much BS! Aswell like I said Cobalt would have me to 150ft because I'm much heavier. Also does that Cobalt have fully independant suspention? I don't know really! My Lumina does. Just wondering. And the time I made up in the 1/4 was only 1sec not 2! But as long as it's a Chevy, Cobalt is a good car in my book too! Just not a fan of 4cyl. Don't get ruffled dude it's not that important. I just like the 60*v6 dohc because it's rare to see one custom tuned.:drive:
Ok the Lumina numbers i got from this video:
And the Cobalt numbers were taken from the latest Motor Trend which i have in my hands.

So dont say I'm lying, all I'm doing is reporting the facts. If you have a timeslip I'll believe you, but you havent even given us a 1/4 mile figure yet. I'm not trying to be a **** here, but you cant hate on the SS if you cant beat it ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
My recollection is that the Twin Dual Cam (terrible name, that!) made something north of 275 hp in development. The issue was that GM Powertrain did not have a FWD transmission at the time that could cope with the high hp (and high rev torque) this engine was capable of dishing out.

The engine was heavily detuned to match the available transmissions, but at that point it was an expensive engine that made no more power than the cheap and available 3800.

If GM had had a transmission that could deal with the potential output of this engine, perhaps it would have been viewed in a different light.

I also wonder whether the OP is talking about 265 hp at the wheels ... if so, this engine is likely making north of 300 hp at the flywheel, which would make for one quick Lumina, although that's a huge jump in output from more fuel, and a high-flow air cleaner and exhaust (and, yes, a computer tune). That would only make sense if GM really strangled the engine in those areas to "detune" it.
Yes they did drasticly detune the dohc the test engine @265hp had mild factory port and polish. Mine is fully port and polished and has a none restrictive 3.5in cat because I still need to pass inspections. The stock cat was only 2.5in. Trany had to be over hauled with a tow kit and better clutches. The stock trany actually spit out the right inboard cv joint which then proceeded to rip out the inside tie rod on that side too. Luckily I was just doing a burnout in my own lot when it scattered. Also the test engine was makeing more hp then the tuneported 5.7L v8s Hard to sell TAs and Z28s if the family coupe is pounding on it!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Ok the Lumina numbers i got from this video:
And the Cobalt numbers were taken from the latest Motor Trend which i have in my hands.

So dont say I'm lying, all I'm doing is reporting the facts. If you have a timeslip I'll believe you, but you havent even given us a 1/4 mile figure yet. I'm not trying to be a **** here, but you cant hate on the SS if you cant beat it ;)
Thats real nice but also the prototype. If you go to a actual GM site that covers the 92'-94' z34 You'll see some refinements were made and 0-60 slightly increased to around 7.1-7.5sec. The car in this video don't even have ABS and mine does. Second again I'm not stock! I don't need to prove anything to you or anyone else. What I say is how it is period!
Also the Cobalt I raced said Supercharged on its front quarter. You can believe it or not don't really care at this point!:drive:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
GM still makes the 60* V6! It's even the base engine in a 2009 Lucerne (in 3.9L form)

It 1st appeared in 1979 as the optional engine in the 1980 GM X-car...

Just because one version of it was likely one of GM's worst engines in recent history, it doesn't mean that a few good ones didn't make it off the line...as well as the vast majority of the rest of the 60* V6 engine family...(despite the intake leaks, which can be fixed right)

For the record, based on my 2+ decades in a GM dealer parts department selling...

worst GM engines

#1: 60* DOHC V6---all years
#2: 82-87 Cadillac HT V8 family
#3: Tie: 78-83 Olds V8 diesel & 88-95 Quad OHC & DOHC 4 cyl
#4: last several years of the Olds 307V8...should have been made into a TBI engine...also known for ovalling of the cylinders
did'nt know that I only heard of the 3500 now thats something to consider!
Oh yeah I remember that it was the 2.8 two barrel in the X-11 Citation right?
That thing was one of the worst cars GM ever producted if I recall. The 3.4L dohc came out in 1990. Sorry I get my stuff mixed up sometimes.:D My wife had a 1996 z24 cavalier with the 2.4 dohc 4cyl, the only dif was the coil cover did'nt say quad four but it was still basicly the same engine with less power then the older one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,186 Posts
Thats real nice but also the prototype. If you go to a actual GM site that covers the 92'-94' z34 You'll see some refinements were made and 0-60 slightly increased to around 7.1-7.5sec. Second again I'm not stock! I don't need to prove anything to you or anyone else. What I say is how it is period!
Also the Cobalt I raced said Supercharged on its front quarter. You can believe it or not don't really care at this point!:drive:
Alright, your car is fast. But go to the track and get us some 1/4 mile times, im intrigued.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
It can get into the 6000's with some vavletrain improvements :D Just gotta watch and make sure those valves arent floating...
I think it may have to do with the 3800 also being a 90*v6 and uses counter balance shafts to keep it from flying apart. But you may be able to eliminate valve float with heavier springs or even move the effect further up the rev cycle with spring spacers.:drive:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,435 Posts
First of all stock 3.4 dohc is 7.2 actual period. There's no way a cobalt is turning in 1/4mile times nearly as fast as the LS1 powered F-bodies sorry that dog don't hunt. I also own a Camaro too it's the blue car in my profile so the Lumina is not the only car I like.
I know for a fact that there is no Cobalt putting out 260hp at the wheels the crank hp would have to be over 300hp to accomplish that. Trust me it's not! My hp dyno tested 264.6hp at the wheels. Like I said before I can break traction @ or between 30-40mph. Pretty good for a heavy car huh? No Cobalt is doing that without being tuned. Sorry but I can only take so much BS! Aswell like I said Cobalt would have me to 150ft because I'm much heavier. Also does that Cobalt have fully independant suspention? I don't know really! My Lumina does. Just wondering. And the time I made up in the 1/4 was only 1sec not 2! But as long as it's a Chevy, Cobalt is a good car in my book too! Just not a fan of 4cyl. Don't get ruffled dude it's not that important. I just like the 60*v6 dohc because it's rare to see one custom tuned.:drive:
That is a realistic time for the Cobalt SS/Tc. Also 14.0 @ 102 is no where near LS1 F-body times, most LS1 Fbodies were mid to low 13s stock, and trapped 105-108, a big difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Alright, your car is fast. But go to the track and get us some 1/4 mile times, im intrigued.
I will do that just for you. I live in PA never raced in winter but I don't think it's open till spring time. I will check though. I'm a member of this site for the long haul. I'll be here when I do and I'll post it ok?:drive:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
That is a realistic time for the Cobalt SS/Tc. Also 14.0 @ 102 is no where near LS1 F-body times, most LS1 Fbodies were mid to low 13s stock, and trapped 105-108, a big difference.
Um it's the other guy who's talking Cobalt. I also said nearly as fast not as fast. Just used LS1 for example thats all. I also belong to the LS1 site some guys there say they gettin around high 13s. Don't know figures for all cars so I used what I've heard from others.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
That is a realistic time for the Cobalt SS/Tc. Also 14.0 @ 102 is no where near LS1 F-body times, most LS1 Fbodies were mid to low 13s stock, and trapped 105-108, a big difference.
OMG guys I'm talkin supercharged! I don't think I even seen the turbo model yet!:fall:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,231 Posts
GM still makes the 60* V6! It's even the base engine in a 2009 Lucerne (in 3.9L form)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the HV engines were "all new".

However the old "3400" OHV is (or was) in production in China and used for the 2009 Equinox.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Thanx, but the block is totaly different. Yes it does have aux shaft but the upper valley doesnt have lifter holes and the machineing is wider than the ohv engine. But thanx for the comment hard to believe thats fifteen years old huh? Never painted.;)
Sorry, seventeen years old it's like 3 am.:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the HV engines were "all new".

However the old "3400" OHV is (or was) in production in China and used for the 2009 Equinox.
Not sure what HV is but china I think, did use the 60*v6 in Isuzu suv's as far as I know. But My knowledge on the 60* seems to have ended in 1996 or there about. Some guys in here get all worked up over a car I never seen or raced.
I 'm talkin supercharged they're argueing about turbos. But sounds like GMC Sanoma is the guy to ask in here.:cool: Do you mean HV= high valve?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Chevtough is right though, these engines were always horrible.... In every vehicle they put them in. No tech i knows like working on them, parts are expensive and list goes on...

the best anyone can do with a 3.4l dohc powered vehicle is sell it....
Okay, mines seventeen years old no real trouble though. I guess some are good and some were not so good. Also parts are not that pricey. But I would'nt expect a Ford junk owner to understand! Just pokin you. My father inlaw has a Ford Ranger he say's it's the worst Ford he's ever had. He hardly drives the thing and it's always got something wrong or something breaks. He especially enjoyed the $300.00+ GEM or JEM sensor going out, causeing his windsheild wipers to constantly turn on by them selves and the ignition buzzer to buzz out off nowhere! The cab lights would turn on and off when they wanted to aswell. He used to get so mad at the time cause I used to say "Dont have that in my chevy!" LOL He left it here once to go with my wife out to eat and its alarm started to go off I called my wifes cell had them turn around to come back. Funny part was as they were pulling up it just turned it's self off LOL. Never will there be a Ford sitting in my lot! But to each his own I guess.:lmao:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,981 Posts
Discussion Starter · #120 ·
haha wow this thread is back?

This thread was constructed due to the black 1995 monte carlo z34 that I once had. Damn that car....to hell. We (family) bought 2 of them actually, one for myself and one for my sister (though I paid a lot for mine). We sold the Black one last winter, and I have been driving the red 1995 monte carlo z34 since, basically. This one was manufactured in Canada, it has more miles on it, and it seems as though this car was basically put together better. I've done routine maintenece on it, plugs wires all that fun stuff. The belt shot off about 2 weeks ago, and I had the idler tensioner replaced (kinda hard to do it myself here at college). This car has been great to me, other than the oil leak that does happen with these motors. I get around 24-26 mpg highway, which isn't great, but hey its not 12.
 
101 - 120 of 150 Posts
Top