why DOHC to pushrod?

[thunder57]

Why did the 3.4L DOHC engine end in 1998, it has more power than the pushrod right? Did they redesign the pushrod 3.4? Any help or comments would help. Thanks

Jake Martens

[brian89gp]

They put it into a family car. Soccar moms do not like the powerband, the added maintenance, and higher cost of general maintenance.

[Lyle's GTP]

No body really knows. Politics maybe. And yep plenty more. The 3.4 now I think is doing 190Hp and the DOHC had 215HP when it was dropped in 97'. I don't know if the pushrod 3.4 was even available while the DOHC was around. I think it was just a pumped-up version of the 3.1 that GM had out for years. But there are guy's around here that know more than me so I will let them take over.

Lyle

[dykz34]

I agree with Brian. The "maintenance" scared people away. Just like it does now. Also, I think GM realized their mistake on the alternator placement...

[RidgeRunner]

I don't know if the pushrod 3.4 was even available while the DOHC was around.

Yeah, in '97.

[Rhedalert]

and '96 (He He Yeah) plus the iron headed ones earlier yet

[Lyle's GTP]

Your talking about the ones in the S-10's and Camaro's. That was a different engine, wasn't it?

Lyle

[Rhedalert]

'96 Lumina vans have the 3400 aluminum head thats about the same as current.

[bud36light]

Why did the 3.4L DOHC engine end in 1998

great question maybe someone on here might know somebody from GM on another board or whatever to get this answered?? Be interesting to know why.

Also, I think GM realized their mistake on the alternator placement...

This has to be at least partly true
fucking aternator

[Anonymous]

Brian had ti right. The biggest reason was the odd powerband. Your average person would rather punch it and just take off even if it is slightly slower in the long run. Also people don't liek having to go to 5000 in order to get somewhere fast. With the 3800/3400, you only need to go to 3000. From a race car's point, the 3.4 is much better, but for everyday driving, the 3.4/3.8 are just easier. Just slightly hit the gas and you go.

[gpse3400]

Why the 3.4tdc was axed might quite possibly be due to the advent of the series2 3800. 6 reasons...

3800:
1-Better everyday powerband(customer influenced)
2-Cheaper to Build/Refit/Service
3-Better economy
4-Emmisions
5-One of GM's "More Reliable" engines
6-Quieter(Definately one of the main reasons 3800 chosen in favor to the 3.4tdc in Olds Intrigue till the ShortStar)


As far as the GEN3 goes, since the engine family's first day from 2.8L, it has been there to power the smaller cars....Well now I'd say that FINALLY GM has given them enough to power bigger cars. Almost 3800 like with all the aformentioned 3800 features, but just better and smaller(smaller acutal size/weight/displacement)...

[Anonymous]

Your reasons are dead on except both motors have really close fuel economy.

[dykz34]

I don't know about you, but I only get 17-18 city and 25 on the highway. My best EVER was 29mpg on the highway. In the winter, I've seen single digits before.

[bluegtp]

holy, that's pretty bad. I have a 1995 GTP, and my 3.4 gets normally about 31MPG highway and about 21 in the city. My mom has an 00 GTP with the series 2 3.8l supercharged, and her fuel mileage is a little less, about 29 highway and 19 city, figure that one out

[gpse3400]

Your reasons are dead on except both motors have really close fuel economy.

The 3800IINA I believe is posted about 18-20 city 29-32 mpgHWY. The 3100M and 2.8/3.1 I believe was posted the same in passenger cars all of this depending on vehicle. The 3.4tdc auto posted at about 16-17city 26-27 hwy . I never saw an epa readout for the tdc in the 30's. If you add it up, that's not too close.