Was lookin at these new engines and wondering why GM made two new V6s. What are the big advantages and disadvantages to these bad boys?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
3.9 vs 3.6
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
Ones a DOHC, the other is a pushrod...-Brad-
89 Mustang : Future 60V6 Power
sigpic
Follow the build -> http://www.3x00swap.com/index.php?page=mustang-blog
-
You are right, Ben..the new 3.6 is a clean sheet design.
Marty'99 Z-28 - Weekend Driver
'98 Dodge Neon - Winter Beater
'84 X-11 - Time and Money Pit
'88 Fiero Formula - Bone stock for now
Quote of the week:Originally posted by AaronThis is why I don't build crappy headers. I'm not sure, I don't know too much about welding.
Comment
-
So the truth comes out... most of the stuff Colin says really does come straight from his ass!!-Brad-
89 Mustang : Future 60V6 Power
sigpic
Follow the build -> http://www.3x00swap.com/index.php?page=mustang-blog
Comment
-
So smart asses. explain to me this:
SPECIFICATIONS:
2004 Buick Rendezvous - AWD document ID#1493939
Engine Mechanical Specifications
Application
Specification
Metric
English
General
Engine Type
V-6
Displacement
3.6 Liter
217 cu in
RPO
LY7
VIN
7
Bore
94 mm
3.7008 in
Stroke
85.6 mm
3.37 in
Compression Ratio
10.2:1
2004 Cadillac CTS Document ID#993183
Engine Mechanical Specifications
Application
Specification
Metric
English
General
Engine Type
V-6
Displacement
3.6 Liter
217 cu in
RPO
LY7
VIN
7
Bore
94 mm
3.7008 in
Stroke
85.6 mm
3.37 in
Compression Ratio
10.2:1
Hmm. same bore same stroke, same displacement, and same RPO code..
now maybe i worded the "Family"thing wrong for the 3.6L but as far as i was told it was a continuation of the 3.2L engines...Colin
92 Sunbird GT, 3200 Hybrid 13.99@ 95.22 (2004)
90 Eagle Talon TSi AWD 10.54 @ 129mph.
Comment
-
hahahahaI was pretty sure it wasnt based on the current 3.2. Thats what threw me off last year at the car show cause I was taking pics of the 3.2 stuff cause I knew there was a 3.2 version of the 3.6 mentioned. Of course they didnt have a 3500 there or a 3.6 DOHC to look at.
Ben
60DegreeV6.com
WOT-Tech.com
Comment
-
Originally posted by SappySE107um colin, they are the same engine only different variations (the engine is available as FWD, RWD, or AWD). Thats like saying the 3900 is based off the 3900....Colin
92 Sunbird GT, 3200 Hybrid 13.99@ 95.22 (2004)
90 Eagle Talon TSi AWD 10.54 @ 129mph.
Comment
-
Originally posted by SappySE107The 3.2 is 58 degrees I thought, or something like that. Its an opel design.Colin
92 Sunbird GT, 3200 Hybrid 13.99@ 95.22 (2004)
90 Eagle Talon TSi AWD 10.54 @ 129mph.
Comment
-
Its actually a 54º with an RPO of LA3. So Colin is... WRONG!
HAHAHHAHA!!!!
-Brad-
89 Mustang : Future 60V6 Power
sigpic
Follow the build -> http://www.3x00swap.com/index.php?page=mustang-blog
Comment
-
Man, I get in late on the Colin bashing party...you guys need to invite me sooner next time.
The 3.0/3.2 Catera engines are the Opel 58 degree design, like Ben says. Is the CTS even available with the 3.2? I thought it was only the 3.6. BTW, I got a chance to drive a new CTS-V last month...pretty freakin sweet car.
Marty'99 Z-28 - Weekend Driver
'98 Dodge Neon - Winter Beater
'84 X-11 - Time and Money Pit
'88 Fiero Formula - Bone stock for now
Quote of the week:Originally posted by AaronThis is why I don't build crappy headers. I'm not sure, I don't know too much about welding.
Comment
-
Marty... look at the above PDF. The 3.2 (listed for the 03 CTS) is a 54º, not 58º.-Brad-
89 Mustang : Future 60V6 Power
sigpic
Follow the build -> http://www.3x00swap.com/index.php?page=mustang-blog
Comment
Comment