Talk:General Motors 60° V6 engine

Errors

I applaud whoever wrote this entry, however I noticed some serious mistakes which I will attempt fix. Anyone else attempting to edit this should probably start thier research at 60degreev6.com, domesticcrew.com, or V6Z24.com. I have found that those sites contain the most useful information regarding the 660 (as it's known in enthusiast circles).

Edit: After rereading the original entry, the mistakes were worse than I thought.

Much of the information is presented in a confusing manner, some of it is just very incorrect.

The 60°V6 was designed from scratch. It shares nothing in common with the 90°V6 except the number of cylinders. It is not in anyway based on the 90° V6, nor could any it be considered the 660s predecessor.

This would be my first wiki edit, so I appologize if I make any formatting errors, please bear with me. My main focus though is to correct the misinformation.

Toastysoul 23:46, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Buick 3.2?

"The General Motors 60° V6 family of engines engines began with the 1978 Buick 3.2 L V6" Since when? Nothing I've ever read suggests it, & my issues of CC, HR, & C&D from when the 2.8 was intro say it was a brand-new design. In fact, as I recall, the Buick was a 90°V6... Can somebody confirm? Otherwise, I'm changing it. Trekphiler 08:18, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

You're absolutely right on this one. Nobody's changed it yet, though, so I changed it to 1980, Chevrolet, and 2.8L. --King V 14:33, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

No interchangeable parts?

"no interchangeable parts between this DOHC engine and any other members of the 60° family"? Really? The 3.4/12v slugs, the 3.1's crank, the ignition, all were designed new & N fit? Fat chance. Confirm, or I'm changing that, too. Trekphiler 08:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Trekphiler, the 3.1 crank casting is used but the throws are further machined for the DOHC. The 3.4/12V pistons are completely different. Electronics are identical. Internal stuff, no. The rods and main bearing caps are really the only things that didn't change. Series8217 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.179.80.43 (talk) 19:21, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Dating the 3.1

OK, dating the 3.1's wrong, too. The aluminum head & front cover were '86 ('87 model year), the 3.1 the next year, as I recall (without sources in front of me), not '90 as the article suggests (unless it meant "next year" to mean '88, which is neither clear from context, nor correct...). Can somebody confirm & correct? Trekphiler 08:29, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

There seem to be a lot wrong on the dates on the LG8 It says the earliest applications where in 1999, when I know that a 1995 Grand Prix has a 3100 Engine in it (or a 3.4) and so dose the Cutlass Supreme. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.11.191.90 (talk) 17:55, 3 November 2006‎

No need for speed

I deleted the 0-60 & 1/4 times as meaningless drivel. Obviously, the original poster had no conception of testing: unless the results were in the same car, by the same driver, at the same place, on the same day, or with suitable correction factors (which I suspect yon poster never heard of, let alone took account of), the results are about as valuable as a $3 bill. Trekphiler 08:47, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

The '78-79 3.2 litre V-6 was a debored 90 degree Buick engine, which was discontinued because it was seriously underpowered and consequently unpopular with buyers. It has the same crank as the 3.8/231 and is in no way connected with the later 60 degree V-6. I agree that 0-60 and quarter mile times are irrelevant for this article. (Jonathan Versen 08:21, 12 February 2006 (UTC))

Agreed. The references to Buick V6s and the 3.2 litre from 1978-1979 more appropriately belong on the GM_3800_engine page, and I make mention of it on that entry's discussion page. This page should probably be called something else, since the 3200 designation never existed. (King_V)

Whoops, rather, the redirection should simply be removed (I didn't realize that GM_3200_engine redirected to GM_60-Degree_V6_engine. --King V 23:16, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

L body 2.8 engines?

from 1987 to 1990, the corsica and beretta used a 2.8, but which one was it? and where does it belong in this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RCHM (talk • contribs) 23:09, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

87-on 2.8 should be Gen II. Toastysoul 06:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

F body 3.4l engines

I added a bit to the 3.4l section. it mentioned there were two variants and went on to describe three, so I cleaned that up a bit. I'll add more to the L32 section eventually. (I have one myself :) ) -notsonic — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.251.44.214 (talk) 03:45, 17 November 2006‎

I've got a question..

I've got a question about the 3.1 V6 used in the Lumina APV/Pontiac Trans Sport/Olds Silouette. I was told on one internet forum that this particular version of the 3.1 in actuality has more in common with the first generation transverse 2.8 V6 than it does with the Generation II V6's. I was told the 3.1 in the U vans has iron heads like the old 2.8's, therefor they don't have the problem with headgaskets that the Gen II V6's had. Can anyone confirm that? I'm looking at buying a 94 Lumina APV with the 3.1 and I'm just checking to make sure these engines weren't the ones with the headgasket problems. 156.34.196.76 21:06, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

You are correct. The minivans used the Gen I engine until some time in the mid 90's (probably 96 or 97 when the new model was introduced). I would update the entry, but I'm not sure exactly when they actually stopped using it. Actually now that I look at it, I believe there is some other incorrect info about which cars had the Gen I cast iron vs Gen II aluminum heads, but I'm going to have to dig for more info to be sure.Sketch242 19:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Cadillac Cimarron

The Cadillac Cimarron (J body) also used the 2.8L V6 beginning in 1985, getting the Gen II as standard equipment in 1987 along with the rest of the cars that used it. The 1987 and 1988 Cimarron were unique in that they did NOT move to the redesigned J platform. 'Course nobody would know that from this article... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bizzybody (talk • contribs) 04:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Current production

The original size block 60 degree V6 is still in production, in two different forms. You can walk into any GM dealer's parts department and order the 3.4L HT. That's the complete engine minus intake manifold and oilpan. It's intended for trucks and rear-drive cars that originally came with a 2.8L or 2.9L carbureted engine. (It CAN be used with Mass Air Flow EFI but CARB, EPA and the DOT won't allow GM to market it for such applications.) It does NOT have the engine and starter mounts for transverse applications.

The other one is an aluminum block (weighs only 20 pounds bare!) with engine and starter mount points for longitudal or transverse applications. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bizzybody (talk • contribs) 04:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

3.1 problem

In the early 90's, there is a problem with many of the 3.1 engines where the camshaft timing sprocket bolts weren't torqued enough and they'll work loose. The result is a banging noise as the sprocket comes loose and eventually a scraping and squeaking sound as the bolt heads hit the inside of the timing cover. The books I have specify a mere 15 inch-pounds torque on those bolts! 15 FOOT-pounds is more like what the torque should be. I had this happen in a 1991 Oldsmobile Silhouette van and I've seen the same problem in others of those plastic vans as well as in some GM cars of the same years. Far as I know, GM has never issued a recall for the under-torqued cam sprocket bolts. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bizzybody (talk • contribs) 02:26, 13 April 2007 (UTC).

In the GM (Chevrolet Trucks) workshop manual for the 91 Lumina APV it shows 18 FT-LBS Page 6A4-46

Added by Andre Winter — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.154.137.242 (talk) 15:04, 20 July 2014‎

LB6

Someone should look carefully at the LB6. Beretta GT was added here through 90, but my understanding is that Berettas moved to Gen II design with the other platforms in 87. I added in the Cavalier for 86-87. The Gen II's were actually transitioned into 87 models mid year. Many 87 vehicles left the factory with Gen I iron head engines (i.e LB6s). Toastysoul 06:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

L-Body 91-96 V6 Vin M engines

Hi,

Just noting that the 1994-1996 Chevy Corsica had the Gen-3 L82, SFI engine (as per 1995 GM L-Body Service Manual), not the Gen-2 MPFI one. Its V6 engines were the same as the Beretta's for 91-96.

Shadyman (talk) 04:07, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

where is da crankshaft sensor? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.32.120.137 (talk) 00:28, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

LQ1 vin x engines

Hi,

I noticed that they claim the engine was used only in 1st gen w-body cars, but i know as fact they came in some Pontiac Grand Ams97.114.9.56 (talk) 07:22, 14 March 2010 (UTC)Josh

93 cutlass olds supreme convertable pace car

Would like to know a ball park figure what these car,s are worth and where all the fuel filter,s are. call 602-499-0947 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.208.71.56 (talk) 23:59, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit to LQ1, last line.

I edited the last line in the LQ1 section that suggested that it was the favorite swap for Pontiac Fieros. Though there were many swapped into the Fiero, there are far more 3800 SII engines swapped into Fiero's My source is www.fieroforum.com , the 1st and largest Fiero forum with 20k + members and a search there would find countless 3800 swaps and yet only a hand full of LQ1s —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.58.5.242 (talk) 23:00, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

L44 and LB6

Mr Grim Reaper undid my revision regarding the years the A platform cars used the L44 and LB6 engines. Why? The L44 was a Gen I iron head engine, which was only used in the Fiero and F platform cars after 1987. All front wheel drive cars that used the Chevy V6 switched to the aluminum head LB6 starting in '87, including the A cars. Exception: U platform vans used a 3.1L iron head from 1990-95. 68.108.180.134 (talk) 19:46, 23 May 2011 (UTC) Left Ventricle

Gen I and Gen II mixup

I moved the LG6 entry from the Gen II section to Gen I. The LG6 was indeed a 3.1L engine, and uses the same bottom end as the Gen II LH0, but it uses throttle body injection and a distributor, whereas all Gen II engines have multi-port injection and DIS. The LG6 is also based on the Gen I 2.8, with iron heads and non-splayed valves. 68.108.180.134 (talk) 03:07, 19 July 2011 (UTC) Left Ventricle

Engine output ratings

There seems to be a lot of popular disagreement about peak torque and power numbers on the 60V6 engines. If you see some numbers you disagree with, please find some evidence to verify that you are correct before editing them. If you believe something is incorrect but can't verify it, it would be better to ask for a reference or remove it without replacement. The L44 numbers at one time were only slightly wrong (correct for a non-L44 application), but were changed to very wrong in a recent edit. I imagine similar problems may be occurring in other sections of the article. Please try to check your numbers before adding or changing them.Shamino22 (talk) 06:24, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

I have edited the peak torque and power ratings in the L44 section, and added a source for them. Unfortunately all sources are for the Fiero, I couldn't find a downloadable manual for any A-Body or X-Body cars equipped with this engine. Presumably they are the same but it would be nice to confirm. Also, I had an error when I tried to put the source footnotes at the bottom of the article so they are at the bottom of the L44 section instead. I don't know if this is considered bad form, if it is, somebody who knows Wiki-Fu better than me can please fix it.Shamino22 (talk) 06:24, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on General Motors 60° V6 engine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20040427171000/http://www.media.gm.com:80/division/2003_prodinfo/03_powertrain/03_car_engine/index.html to http://media.gm.com/division/2003_prodinfo/03_powertrain/03_car_engine/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081009032533/http://media.gm.com:80/us/pontiac/en/product_services/r_cars/r_c_torrent/08index.html to http://media.gm.com/us/pontiac/en/product_services/r_cars/r_c_torrent/08index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:34, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Years?

Are these Model Years or Calendar Years? Because if CY, then production of the 60 deg V6 started with the GM X-Bodies in 1979 (spring - dunno the month). --plaws (talk) 19:57, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on General Motors 60° V6 engine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131002141257/http://www.greencar.com/articles/cars-alcohol-part-1-m85-methanol-emerges.php to http://www.greencar.com/articles/cars-alcohol-part-1-m85-methanol-emerges.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131002140820/http://www.greencar.com/articles/cars-alcohol-part-13-gm-supports-flexfuel.php to http://www.greencar.com/articles/cars-alcohol-part-13-gm-supports-flexfuel.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:09, 9 January 2017 (UTC)