Aaron Posted August 17, 2003 Report Share Posted August 17, 2003 as for my bragging, yah i do brag a lot. but most of that is becuz all the crap i got for saying i can run a new GT stang and a GTP, yet my 1/4mi WAS only 16.85 @ 84.24 cuz of our wonderful altitude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian89gp Posted August 17, 2003 Report Share Posted August 17, 2003 I'm just sick of the bragging. If you 'say' you got 210 at the wheels, props to you but I still want to see a dyno to prove it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegeta Posted August 17, 2003 Report Share Posted August 17, 2003 Why anyone wants to listen to aaron is beyond me. He doesn't know much about michael's car obviously. He is not the fastest DOHC W body NA either, which means that OMG there are more mid 14 DOHCs. If you don't know about DOHCs, then please just don't even talk about them. As much as I want to talk about them for 3 pages worth...its futile. It doesn't matter if you think the 3800 has a chance against the DOHC NA...cause the lack of aftermarket support doesn't effect me at all. The whole spun bearing thing could be from anything, as I know of other DOHCs with more miles, driven hard, and not trashed. How can someone with intake, exhaust, and chip be the fastest DOHC? Am I the only one that thinks its funny that people BELIEVE that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RedCutlassSL Posted August 17, 2003 Report Share Posted August 17, 2003 aaron, you need to shut up, your cockiness isn't charming at all. get over yourself Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian P Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 How can someone with intake, exhaust, and chip be the fastest DOHC? Am I the only one that thinks its funny that people BELIEVE that! I said that about 2 months ago, it's a stock engine that likes to breathe, so I congratulate GM for the e/t Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robby1870 Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 How can someone with intake, exhaust, and chip be the fastest DOHC? Am I the only one that thinks its funny that people BELIEVE that! I said that about 2 months ago, it's a stock engine that likes to breathe, so I congratulate GM for the e/t Robby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toastemcutlass Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 Damn You folk gotta cut the 3.4 some slack, some of us really like the motor and i have 121 miles on mine and it rides at 6 grand more then idle and no im not joking, havent taken it to the track yet but shes pretty quick(i eat alot of mustangs), and hopfully faster at the end of the week, im doing the head gasket and porting and matching the heads to the lower intake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NORBI Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 That dependes what kind of Mustangs too, 4 cylinder ones are easy to bear and 94-98 V6 little harder but still can beat them but 99+ V6 are quicker then 3.4. When i used to have my CS with 3.4 i beat couple Mustangs V6s of course but 99+ just couldnt do it, not to mention V8s. 94-98 GTs are slow for a V8s and not very much faster in stock then 3.4 but still they got more torque. But sometimes i miss my 3.4 DOHC and my good old 2.8 with now over 196k miles upsets me when i get into it after driving my GT but still i love my Cutty. 8) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
91GranSport Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 Aaron, I'm just curious about the 3.4L Twin Cam. If I'm not mistaken, the 4.6L Northstar was developed using the technology that the 3.4L Twin Cam had. Also, the 4.6L Northstar is supposed to be "almost" as bullet-proof as the L36. So, why would the 3.4L Twin Cam have so many problems? Perhaps when GM developed the Northstar they cleared up all the problems the 3.4L Twin Cam had? Unless someone here owns a Cadillac STS, we may never know. Also, you mention that the 3.4L Twin Cam has a lot more potential than the L36. I agree with you, but how about the 3.5L Shortstar? It seems unfair how GM kills their DOHC multi-valve engines prematurely. I don't care if the 3.5L Shortstar's performance was marginally better than the L36, I really feel that the W-Body platform needs a damn DOHC multi-valve motor! Finally, I'd like to know what the true problems of the 3.4L Twin Cam are. From what I understand, the motor itself doesn't have any problems other than high maintenance and perhaps an oil pump issue. Are there any problems with the motor's internals? I know changing the starter and alternator is a bitch, but those aren't really part of the motor itself. i am sitting at JUST over 127,000 right now, and that number aint gonna be getting mugh higher for quite some time. the 3.4 has way more potential, just no aftermarket to bring that out. and as for the dependability, it is no where close to a old GM pushrod motor, any size. my dads 4.3 S10 has 188,000 miles, and it has a small vacuum leak, needed a new heater core at 130k. thats all. well beside the new motor and tranny at 180k, but he didnt ned that, just needed new seals. i assume the 3.8 is just as reliable. and the reason the DOHC 6s are no longer made is simple, its not what the average person wants. people want tq, so they dont have to run real high to get anywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
91GranSport Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 The reason why I bring up the 3.4L Twin Cam is because I would like to know more about it. Why be left in the dark? I'm a true fan of DOHC multi-valve motors such as the LT-5 and 4.6L Northstar, and I've always felt that GM's W-Body platform needs a damn DOHC multi-valve motor. However, I know there are numerous 3.4L Twin Cam owners on this forum that hate their motors. I have yet to find someone with the L36 motor that feels the same way. As for high performance W-Body vehicles equipped with the 3.4L Twin Cam, I'd definitely like to see more myself. You mention that there are lots, well where the hell are they? They're definitely not on this forum. With the exception of Aaron, and perhaps a few others, most 3.4L Twin Cam owners on this forum are merely trying to keep their vehicle running rather than bring out more horsepower. Why anyone wants to listen to aaron is beyond me. He doesn't know much about michael's car obviously. He is not the fastest DOHC W body NA either, which means that OMG there are more mid 14 DOHCs. If you don't know about DOHCs, then please just don't even talk about them. As much as I want to talk about them for 3 pages worth...its futile. It doesn't matter if you think the 3800 has a chance against the DOHC NA...cause the lack of aftermarket support doesn't effect me at all. The whole spun bearing thing could be from anything, as I know of other DOHCs with more miles, driven hard, and not trashed. How can someone with intake, exhaust, and chip be the fastest DOHC? Am I the only one that thinks its funny that people BELIEVE that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
91GranSport Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 Let's get something straight here before we go any further: I don't hate the 3.4L Twin Cam motor, I'm merely comparing it to the 3800 Series II. I actually like DOHC multi-valve motors and I've been dying to see one in the Gen2/Gen3 W-Body for a while now. The 3.5L Shortstar was short-lived and in my area they're quite rare. I would like to see GM build more DOHC multi-valve motors for the W-Body, L/N-Body and H-Body. The only OHV motors they should keep are the Vortec series for the trucks. Honestly, DOHC multi-valve motors are the way to go for cars. With the exception of the LS1/LS6, GM should start building more DOHC multi-valve engines for all their vehicles, including minivans and such. Damn You folk gotta cut the 3.4 some slack, some of us really like the motor and i have 121 miles on mine and it rides at 6 grand more then idle and no im not joking, havent taken it to the track yet but shes pretty quick(i eat alot of mustangs), and hopfully faster at the end of the week, im doing the head gasket and porting and matching the heads to the lower intake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
91GranSport Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 Oh yeah, this is already getting off-topic but I must ask one final thing to the 3.4L Twin Cam owners with stock engines. One of my previous employers had a Lumina Z34 with the 3.4L Twin Cam and 5-speed stick. He claimed that he couldn't beat a 5.0L Mustang GT, but he can easily keep up to one. He said that his Z34 would be side-by-side with the Mustang once he got up to speed. His vehicle was bone-stock. Now, does this sound believable or is it over-exaggerated? I know the 3.4L Twin Cam has very good power at higher RPM but can a W-Body actually hold it's own ground with a 5.0L Mustang GT? I've driven a Monte Carlo Z34 but I wasn't able to see what it's performance is like. I have, however, driven a 5.0L Mustang GT and I know for a fact those things are pretty damn fast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian89gp Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 The reason why I bring up the 3.4L Twin Cam is because I would like to know more about it. Why be left in the dark? I'm a true fan of DOHC multi-valve motors such as the LT-5 and 4.6L Northstar, and I've always felt that GM's W-Body platform needs a damn DOHC multi-valve motor. However, I know there are numerous 3.4L Twin Cam owners on this forum that hate their motors. I have yet to find someone with the L36 motor that feels the same way. As for high performance W-Body vehicles equipped with the 3.4L Twin Cam, I'd definitely like to see more myself. You mention that there are lots, well where the hell are they? They're definitely not on this forum. With the exception of Aaron, and perhaps a few others, most 3.4L Twin Cam owners on this forum are merely trying to keep their vehicle running rather than bring out more horsepower. Venture over to a fiero board, they seem to think the 3.4 is god re-incarnated (except those that are fond of the N* and 350 ). I probably won't be the first to say it but the 3.4 is one finicky son of a bitch, either it is running great or horribly and one little thing can throw everything out of whack. The 2.8 and 3.1 are somewhat alike in this manner, but the symptoms are far less severe (probably because the 3.4 needs 6.8k or whatever just to move ) Also, most newbe's would consider the 3.4 pure hell to work on but after they have enough confidence to actually tear into it then its just a matter of a little extra time spent fixing things. It has a huge oiling system (6 quarts in all) and it is a high revving motor so reliability is not going to be as great. Now for some speculation. Before 1997 when the GTP had the option of the L67, the 3800 engine family was not really considered a performance engine. Now, just by association, the L36 has quite a following. Also before 1997 the Grand Prix and whole w-body line was not really considered a sports car (loosly said here) but maybe a sporty looking family car. Then in 1997 there was this 3800 engine that had a ROOTS blower on top of it and overnight the Grand Prix became a top seller. To the selling public boosted = sports car, just look at history and which non sports cars still have a following. The Syphoon and Typhoon, the Regal T Type, the TGP to some extent, and now the new GTP. If GM had shoved a M90 onto a 3400 or even a revised version of a 3.4 DOHC things may be much different because the blower is what sold the car. The 3.4 never caught on because it was being sold to the wrong people, Mr. and Mrs. newborn baby do not want a high revving high maintenance engine. Had the 3.4 DOHC been a base engine in the camaro or firebird or had the fiero not been discontinued (there is a 90 Fiero prototype with a prototype 3.2 DOHC engine) things might have been different. Gm is comming out with the new Globay V6 (60* engine) platform which should be interesting to say the least, a NA version would give the L67 a run for its money and there are plans for a turbocharged Global V6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
91GranSport Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 Brian, thanks for the info. It's good to see veteran members on this forum that know what they're talking about. You mention both the 2.8 MPFI and 3.1 MPFI had similar problems to the 3.4L Twin Cam. My first W-Body had the 3.1 MPFI, it was an '89 Regal coupe. The problems were the coil packs, some solenoid, fuel injectors and some other miscellaneous problems. Most failures were due to electrical malfunctions. I don't know if the 3.4L Twin Cam had these problems as well. 6 quarts of oil? That's around 5.7L of oil! Christ, that's a lot! I never knew that they require that much oil. Damn, it would be expensive running synthetic oil in that bugger. Given my own personal experience I think I can easily tackle most problems the 3.4L Twin Cam would have, but since you mention that it's a tricky bugger to keep running well, I think I'd want an engine that's almost always running perfectly. I do miss having a high-revving DOHC multi-valve motor though, like I did with my old Honda. (Don't ask...) I think one of the main reasons the L36 has a strong following is that it's easy to work on, it's reliable, has decent fuel economy and it has decent power. Also, did I mention it was cheap? I'm sure an L36 would be less expensive than a 3.4L Twin Cam at an auto recycler. At least in my area it is. If I had more money hell I'd drop one of those babies into my car! You do mention that GM is building a global V-6. I just hope it's a true DOHC multi-valve engine. It must have four valves per cylinder. Not this SOHC 2-valve garbage. DOHC 24-valve V-6, a displacement of around 3.6L and power at around 240HP or so. I hope they don't build a turbocharged version, but a supercharged version instead. I can see the turbocharged version running into problems and becoming another engine that they kill prematurely due to added expensive and reliability issues. Venture over to a fiero board, they seem to think the 3.4 is god re-incarnated (except those that are fond of the N* and 350 ). I probably won't be the first to say it but the 3.4 is one finicky son of a bitch, either it is running great or horribly and one little thing can throw everything out of whack. The 2.8 and 3.1 are somewhat alike in this manner, but the symptoms are far less severe (probably because the 3.4 needs 6.8k or whatever just to move ) Also, most newbe's would consider the 3.4 pure hell to work on but after they have enough confidence to actually tear into it then its just a matter of a little extra time spent fixing things. It has a huge oiling system (6 quarts in all) and it is a high revving motor so reliability is not going to be as great. Now for some speculation. Before 1997 when the GTP had the option of the L67, the 3800 engine family was not really considered a performance engine. Now, just by association, the L36 has quite a following. Also before 1997 the Grand Prix and whole w-body line was not really considered a sports car (loosly said here) but maybe a sporty looking family car. Then in 1997 there was this 3800 engine that had a ROOTS blower on top of it and overnight the Grand Prix became a top seller. To the selling public boosted = sports car, just look at history and which non sports cars still have a following. The Syphoon and Typhoon, the Regal T Type, the TGP to some extent, and now the new GTP. If GM had shoved a M90 onto a 3400 or even a revised version of a 3.4 DOHC things may be much different because the blower is what sold the car. The 3.4 never caught on because it was being sold to the wrong people, Mr. and Mrs. newborn baby do not want a high revving high maintenance engine. Had the 3.4 DOHC been a base engine in the camaro or firebird or had the fiero not been discontinued (there is a 90 Fiero prototype with a prototype 3.2 DOHC engine) things might have been different. Gm is comming out with the new Globay V6 (60* engine) platform which should be interesting to say the least, a NA version would give the L67 a run for its money and there are plans for a turbocharged Global V6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegeta Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 http://discussions.gmforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=535 Forum for the LY7 (3.6 DOHC). Yes, they are making a turbo version. Why do you forsee problems with a turbo? id rather have the turbo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmokesGTP Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 People get all uptight when they think of a turbo because the first thing that comes to mind, at least my mind is those damn JDM Mitsubishis and all their problems. A turbo would be much better in my opinion it's much easier on the tranny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian89gp Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 And easier to package and easier to do major upgrades on. With a SC you are pretty much stuck with whatever SC came stock. The 3.4 is finicky but it isn't hard to keep running, just time and money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skalor Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 Look, I've always liked the 3.4 for it's potential as a DOHC engine. I also love the L36/L67. I think that for reliabilty there is no GM V6 that can compete with the Buick V6. It's reliabity comes from it's simplicity, and that is not a bad thing. Sure, roots blowers suck for efficiency, but the average american wants an engine that has grunt, and a roots blower delivers that. Looks at the turbo 3800 that intense racing is making...It's running 10s already, and keep in mind that there is not aftermarket for the crank or rods as of yet. I just think that the 3.4 will never be as reliable as the 3800. http://www.intense-racing.com/GTP/TurboGP.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 stock i ran dead even with 5.0 GTs. now, i run right beside the new 4.6 GT. as for the Star motors, they are updated from the 3.4 and LT5, GM learned from their mistakes. the 3.4 is definately high maintenance, and i did all of mine and will build the motor too. and trust me, the LT5 was no where near bullet proof. my dad has records from every ZR1 he sold(3), and all three were back in the dealer within 10k miles, 2 with god awful electrical problems, the last one had a cam break with 3600 miles on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NORBI Posted August 19, 2003 Report Share Posted August 19, 2003 When i used to have my 3.4 CS i raced with a 89 Camaro with 5.0 and i was right next to him all the time till about 115mph when we had to slow down, now my friend has a 92 CS with 3.4 and i raced him with my 4.6 Mustang which is auto and i kill him on the start like 4-5 cars but when i let him catch up to me and go same speed and both floor it i have problems loosing him them. I move ahead of him but slowly so i give a lot of credit to those 3.4s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
91GranSport Posted August 19, 2003 Report Share Posted August 19, 2003 Turbos are complicated, I think they should stick to superchargers. I can see a lot of people messing around with those turbos and blowing their engines and them GM gets pissed off and halts production of those engines. On the L67, as far as I know, most of the problems people encountered when tuning their L67 is actually with their 4T65-E/HD burning up because it couldn't handle the extra torque. If they can build a turbo set up that's as reliable as the L67 then go for it. I'd like to see them do it. Just please, please, GM must build a Goddamn DOHC multi-valve V-6 for the Gen3 W-Body! http://discussions.gmforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=535 Forum for the LY7 (3.6 DOHC). Yes, they are making a turbo version. Why do you forsee problems with a turbo? id rather have the turbo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
91GranSport Posted August 19, 2003 Report Share Posted August 19, 2003 I can't speak for the rest of the "supercharger" preferred people, but I'd say the only reason I prefer a supercharger is because it's much simpler. Nowhere near as complicated. The more parts there are, the greater chance of failure. With a DOHC multi-valve motor, GM already has enough moving parts to deal with. People get all uptight when they think of a turbo because the first thing that comes to mind, at least my mind is those damn JDM Mitsubishis and all their problems. A turbo would be much better in my opinion it's much easier on the tranny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
91GranSport Posted August 19, 2003 Report Share Posted August 19, 2003 I agree. Most Americans want that OHV torque monster. However, I do think these new "Gen-Y" people are looking for lower displacement L4 engines with turbos and shit like that. Oh well, you can't satisfy everyone, eh? The 3.4L Twin Cam will never be as reliable as the L36, but I would like to see more aftermarket parts available for it. It seems like everyone has to be custom made for that engine, which is a shame. I know that GM could easily have tuned that engine to be a monster producing around 240HP or so. Look, I've always liked the 3.4 for it's potential as a DOHC engine. I also love the L36/L67. I think that for reliabilty there is no GM V6 that can compete with the Buick V6. It's reliabity comes from it's simplicity, and that is not a bad thing. Sure, roots blowers suck for efficiency, but the average american wants an engine that has grunt, and a roots blower delivers that. Looks at the turbo 3800 that intense racing is making...It's running 10s already, and keep in mind that there is not aftermarket for the crank or rods as of yet. I just think that the 3.4 will never be as reliable as the 3800. http://www.intense-racing.com/GTP/TurboGP.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
91GranSport Posted August 19, 2003 Report Share Posted August 19, 2003 I know that the LT-5 was unreliable as well, although it was my favourite GM motor. Hell, the ZR-1 is my favourite GM vehicle! If the 3.4L Twin Cam can stay dead even with a 5.0L Mustang then why the hell soup it up? Shit, that's fast enough as it is! BTW: Aren't the 5.0L Mustangs faster than the 4.6L Mustangs? stock i ran dead even with 5.0 GTs. now, i run right beside the new 4.6 GT. as for the Star motors, they are updated from the 3.4 and LT5, GM learned from their mistakes. the 3.4 is definately high maintenance, and i did all of mine and will build the motor too. and trust me, the LT5 was no where near bullet proof. my dad has records from every ZR1 he sold(3), and all three were back in the dealer within 10k miles, 2 with god awful electrical problems, the last one had a cam break with 3600 miles on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
91GranSport Posted August 19, 2003 Report Share Posted August 19, 2003 Christ, if a stock 3.4L Twin Cam is actually that powerful, I can only imagine what Aaron's car is capable of. You guys brought new-found confidence in the 3.4L Twin Cam. Shit, now I want to go out and find one to drop in my Buick. It'd be kind of weird though, a Buick with a DOHC multi-valve motor. When i used to have my 3.4 CS i raced with a 89 Camaro with 5.0 and i was right next to him all the time till about 115mph when we had to slow down, now my friend has a 92 CS with 3.4 and i raced him with my 4.6 Mustang which is auto and i kill him on the start like 4-5 cars but when i let him catch up to me and go same speed and both floor it i have problems loosing him them. I move ahead of him but slowly so i give a lot of credit to those 3.4s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.