As a retired Service Director in a Buick Olds dealership, I lived through seeing customers and technicians being tortured by the 3.0 V6, LK9. Can't think of anything positive to say about it. Didn't even make a decent boat anchor.
I was fortunate enough in the early 2000s I had a 1985 Buick century custom with a 3.0L LK9 carbureted V6 and I never had any trouble out of it although I drove the car for a little and only had it for a couple of years.
@@misskittycalais7300 I’m sure there were a good number that were relatively trouble free. I believe that the oil pump was the greatest determining factor in whether they lasted the typical 100k or not. The rest of the problems were probably carburetor related.
I was a mechanic at a Pontiac, then Buick dealer during this time. I don't remember ever seeing a 3.0 in a C body, and I know I never saw a 2.2 in an A body. The carbs were adjusted at the factory, and the screws were covered with plugs. Almost all of them were out of adjustment, but with the right tools and skills, we could get them running right. A bigger problem, that you didn't mention, was cracked blocks. The water jacket would crack along the bottom, usually near the front, usually on the left bank. Under warranty, we were required to replace it with what was called a "Fitted block". This was a new block, pistons, pins, and rings. That's it. That required total disassembly of the engine, pressing the old pins out of the rods, pressing the new pistons and pins on the old rods, then re-assembly. I did so many of them I used to be able to tell where every nut, bolt, clip and wire was supposed to be, and what order it had to be in.
Nightmare fuel. This engine in an Olds Cutlass is the reason my normally quiet and reserved father lost his shit, got in a huge argument with my grandfather about the shit quality of Oldsmobiles and permanently decamped to Mercedes and Toyota as his and my mom's vehicles of choice. His 91 Toyota SR5 V6 pickup is still on the road today.
I have all the tools for working on those Carburetors, Both 2 and 4 barrel versions. Big Fun if there were other problems like Vacuum leaks from the rats nest of hoses that would rot or get oily swell up and fall off. Thanks EPA!
I had an elderly neighbor that in 1983 bought a 6 Month old Cutlass with 8.000 miles with this engine. Living in the Northeast she had this Habit of starting the Car & to warm up the engine would Floor the gas pedal over & over for 5 minutes. I remember this so well cause in the Summer wen I was on School Summer Break she would wake me up as my bedroom was 15 feet from her Driveway. This was her 1st Non V8 engine & it only took about 6 Month before the engine made a Horrific sound. Luckily the Warranty Covered the Repairs. Halfway through the Brutal Winter & only 300 miles after Repair the Car was Flat bedded away to Dealership. After the 2nd Repair she Drove Directly to the Chevrolet Dealership just a few miles away & Traded it in for a Brand New 1985 Impala, the Bare Bones Model with the V8. She Continued Her warm up method Successfully until 1987 wen she passed away. Sadly she had no children & No Will. I remember wen the State came in to asses the asset's & I walked over to look at the car before being towed away & I saw the odometer was 919 miles.
The 3800 is a beast. I'll keep having new metal welded into my 2008 Grand Prix for as long as the motor keeps running. When I was a dealer tech I saw many with close to 300,000 miles on them still running fine.
I was an outlier. The 3800 in my 1981 Century leaked oil from every gasket. When I took it in to the Buick dealer for service, they returned it with a quart of oil in it. I didn't want to know more; I added some oil and immediately traded it in for a Honda Accord. Last domestic brand vehicle I ever bought.
@@bzzcks’81 was before the redesign. The designation was 3.8 instead of 3800, improved oil pump designs helped with it’s reliability. The same can’t be said for the intake gaskets though..
My Mom had a 83' Century and it drove fine until the 1st cold snap. It wouldn't stay running after it fired. The dealership mechanic came to the house with another guy. He said, "Here we go again with the 3.0." They couldn't get it to run and ended up towing it in. They had to adjust the throttle body to run for the higher elevation. It ran fine after that. It was a nice car from what I can remember.
My parents had a 1983 Buick with the 3.0 V-6. I remember my dad being so proud of purchasing that car. He was a Methodist minister so we didn’t have much money but he loved that Buick. He kept up the maintenance on it because I remember it being a good car. He drove like a grandma so he was always gentle with every car he drove. If I ever drove it above 60 he’d flip out.
Here are my memories of this engine in a 1985 Cutlass Ciera I drove in the late 1990s. A friend owned the car and asked me to do some repairs to it. The car had just over 100,000 miles, and it did not run well cold. My friend gave me the car to repair but also let me use the car for several months since they did not need it back right away. What I noticed was the oil had not been changed in a very long time and was black - the way oil gets when people neglect to change it. I changed the oil, the PCV valve, and PCV filter. I remember the PCV valve must have been stuck, because the crankcase was developing pressure and would push the oil dipstick out an inch. As far as I was concerned - this was due to owner neglect, not a fault of the engine. The cold running problem I solved by rebuilding the carburetor on - which was the Rochester DualJet (E2ME). The main issue was that the choke angle was too wide when the vacuum break pulled the choke off when the engine started. The engine ran too lean and the car would stall out when put into gear unless it was warmed up for several minutes. I fixed this - but decided to do a full rebuild on the carburetor anyway since the car had 100,000 miles and the carburetor had never been rebuilt. I remember on the mixture control solenoid you could adjust how rich the rich setting was by adjusting a little screw on it, but the lean setting you could not adjust. I remember thinking this was not a very difficult carburetor to work on, it was just different in that it had a throttle position sensor and a mixture control solenoid, which older carburetors did not have. After making these repairs, I drove the car for 10,000 miles over the course of 6 months, so it had 110,000 miles on it at that time. I don't remember any strange vibrations at 1200 rpm or anything like that. It was actually a smooth and quiet engine. It didn't have a great deal of power, but it seemed acceptable to me. I enjoyed driving the car in the time I had it. I believe I also changed the transmission fluid in it, which again had never been done in 100,000 miles. I returned the car to my friend, who had it a while longer. I don't remember hearing what ultimately happened to it. I think they were surprised I was able to get the car to run very well again and they were able to use it again regularly without having to warm up the car for several minutes each day. Since you mentioned the even firing 3.8L V6 in your video, we had an 81 Buick Century Limited (which was rear wheel drive) with the 3.8L V6 which we bought new and drove for many years. We really liked that car. It was smooth, quiet, it rode well, and was very comfortable. Definitely no vibrations from the engine. It ran smoothly at any rpm. My recollection is the car had good off-the-line and good mid-range power, but if you really pushed it, it didn't have good power at high rpms. But this was common for cars during that time period which had so much emissions equipment at the time. We drove it until it had 125,000 miles on it with very few problems. The timing chain eventually stretched enough that it finally broke and needed to be replaced. I don't recall it breaking a tooth on the cam gear - the timing chain itself broke. We got it fixed - but what I can't stress enough is - when the timing cover is removed to work on the timing chain, the oil pump is disturbed because the oil pump is mounted on the cover. When everything is put back together, you have to prime the oil pump before you start the engine! If you do not, the engine will not build oil pressure and you will damage the engine! Maybe some technicians out there do not/did not know this. As long as this is done you'll be fine. But again this is on the 3.8L V6, not the 3.0L V6. The engines are related but they are not the same - the 3.0L V6 may be different. In general, the cars, American and foreign, simply got better as the 1980s progressed and fuel injection and distributorless ignition were introduced, and emissions controls improved (fewer were needed as we moved away from carburetors, and more were electronically controlled and were not vacuum controlled any longer). I have driven X cars, rear wheel drive A cars (1978-81), front wheel drive A cars (1982 and later) with the 2.5L, 2.8L, and 3.8L engines - they were all fine. By 1989/1990, the A cars (Century/Ciera) had the 3.3L V6, which I drove and found that that was an engine with a LOT of power - much better than the older ones with carburetors. The 3.0L I had the one experience with for 6 months/10,000 miles - it seemed to be fine to me - though I did not drive one for 100,000 miles. I do not think people in that time period followed the "change your oil every 3 months / 3000 miles" mantra like they did years later. They waited until their cars broke down and then they got them fixed rather than being good about maintenance. The 3.0L may have had problems, but a lot of the problems with the cars also came from owner neglect and lack of care. I can say this because I worked in an auto shop at a community college in the mid to late 90s and I remember the cars that came in, the problems they had, how the owners did not take care of them, which resulted in various problems. It isn't clear to me why the 2.8L was offered only in the Celebrity/6000 and the 3.0 in the Century/Ciera early on - why not just offer the 2.8L V6 in all of them from the beginning - which is ultimately what happened after 1985 anyway? My philosophy was, and is, if you take care of your car, it will take care of you. So I always did things like changed the oil in my cars, changed the coolant, filters, tires, brakes, etc - and I never had many problems with my cars, even during the time period of the 1980s when people were complaining. Maintenance does go a long way - it's your choice whether you do it or not. Just sayin'!
According to the dealership shop manual if you do mostly stop and go driving or idling it's every 3 months/ 3k miles for oil changes and if you do mostly highway driving every 6 ( maybe 7) months / 7k miles.
Pretty much the same here. 85 fwd LeSabre I think it was. Had a 3.0l. it wasn't no sports car, but it was a very reliable engine, just like the 3.8l. The only thing that needed replacing was the crappy nylon timing gear. New timing set and it was good to go.
I had an '82 Cierra with the 3.0. You are dead on about the cold drivability problems. Very hard to get out of my development on a cold morning. I was a field rep for Atlantic Richfield and In 5 years I accumulated 150, 000 miles on mine. I used ARCO Graphite oil and turned the car over to my wife as a grocery cart and sold the car with 175K. The tranny would no longer shift into lockup, but other than that, I had no internal problems with the engine. Enjoyed your video.
[in an elated tone] Aaaahhhh! I haven't heard the name "Atlantic Richfield" in decades! In the late '60s to the mid-70s the Atlantic Richfield/Arco brand premium gasoline was marvelous; with a minimum amount of engine ping and always the best fuel mileage with the vehicles I drove.
I was a fan of Arco Graphite as well. I was a mechanic for a private company that had a fleet of chevy malibus. 1978-1984 with 200 cid v6, 229 v6 and 267 v8's. The 200's and 229's were gutless junk engines. The 267 was a sweet powerplant. On each of them, upon reaching 12,000 miles, we changed oil over to Arco Graphite. Every 6000 miles, new oil and a new Hastings filter. The guys who drove the cars were absolute idiots. They only knew two throttle positions, idle and full. Never had a problem that could be traced to lubrication. When one of them turned 200,00 miles, the boss sidelined the car. We pulled the engine, did a teardown and found NO wear. The boss told us that he wanted to do the teardown to show us why we were using Arco Graphite. Made me sad when it disappeared from the market.
@@beenbeatenbybishops5845 When the Arco Graphite motor first available about Spring 1976, I really want to get it since the oil could last 1.5K between oil change interval. My mother brought a brand new 1974 Plymouth Duster in October 1973 and when I put Arco Graphite in the engine with oil filter, the oil pan gasket began to leak and we had a oil drop in front of the drive way. My parents car has 8.4 K in speedometer in 3 years.
Excellent video!! When I built my first engine (1973Dodge 318) I had to order the printed factory manual to get the specs and was shocked as to the tolerances that were used to build engines that made it 100k to 150k miles without exploding. Even with just hand tools, a calculator, and calipers I realized how many engineered defects of the engine were easy to avoid. That engine made its way into three different vehicles before I retired it. And it still ran when taken to the dump. The GM3ltr could have been a good motor and the fact that it was built with so many side loads and offset center points, while still being an functional engine, shows that the engineers were sht but the craftsman that built the motors were very skilled. Very informative video, Thanks!!!
@@sean7134 Ah! Yes! Replacing the water pump. I've yet to own a vehicle where the water pump lasted 100K miles. They could always be counted on to leak by 80K ~ 90K miles. When I had the timing belt with my Toyota pickup truck replaced, I instructed the repair shop to replace the water pump, too, as the labor cost would be the same. It made little sense at 75K miles to pay for all that labor expense for the belt replacement, only to shoulder the same expense at 90K miles to have the water pump replaced.
You could say the exact opposite that engineering wasn't the problem but the guys who put it together were. Reality is in the middle, not being engineered to be able to be slapped together without care and to keep running and not put together with that care. Engineering includes though including what you can get manufactured within (union included) corporate politics which probably explains the spec tolerances. Knowing what they should be is far easier than coming up with the spec the manufacturing can hit without bankrupting the company that will still work well enough so it doesn't bankrupt the company (and that will still keep your department from being cut!)
Many would argue that the 3.8 had already attained excellence, before it became the 3800. That Chevy 2.8 was a rather peppy engine, especially with the EFI. I drove an '87 S10 with one, and it was a ripper - at least until you crossed the intersection and it started running out of breath... I drove an early '80s carb'ed one too, and I don't remember thinking it was peppy, but it wasn't underpowered either. Hot Rod had a few hop-up articles featuring the Chevy V6 in the early '80s. I remember one host was a late second generation Camaro...👍
I was a Buick Heavy Repair Tech in the 80s and 90s. We had 2 techs at a large dealership dedicated to 3.0 engines. We loved them. Many failed just outside warranty and we made money on them. We had a repair lot with dozens stacked up waiting for us. Under warranty, the most common issue was loss of coolant caused by seeping metal one piece head gaskets. We often used 2 head gaskets stacked and copper spray on them to resolve. Cracked blocks inside the lifter galley were common on earlier models as stated in other comments. Connecting rod failures were second most popular as you stated. You made it clear, but commenters are still somewhat confused. This 3.0 has nothing in common AT ALL with the 3800. In my 10 dealership years at GM, no other engine failed as frequent or catastrophic as the 3.0 Junk.
I noticed that the 3.0 had ALL the weaknesses of the 3.8 with less power and worse serviceability because of the transverse installation. As you stated, the oil pump was notoriously trouble prone. When they got rid of the distributor in the 3.8 and redesigned the oil pump, it changed it from a 125,000 mile (if you were lucky ) to a 200,000 mile engine (provided you replaced the timing chain at near 100k) . This was even before they further improved it with the 3800. The redesigned oil pump was the SINGLE GREATEST IMPROVEMENT to these engines.
The grand nationals (corvette killers) never benefitted from the oil pump redesign, seems the fwd vehicles were the engineering priority. The cyclone was another under the wire skunk works success.
My friend had 3 Buick centurys in highschool. The rust is what took them but they always drove. I feel like we are in the 80s again. We are stuck with few choices. Even the cars and crossovers share the same engine. 3 cylinders today have power but are loud and vibrate everything.
It's making me realize ,yeah we had limited choices back then but nothing compared to now like you said. And now this "old stuff" is praised. Not this model in particular, but some of the stuff that was junky back then now has some credibility and it makes me chuckle
My first car was a 1983 Cutlass Ciera with the 3.0L engine. Worst. Car. Ever. That thing had so many issues and caused so many headaches that I practically did a happy dance the day I got rid of it. Not to mention the electronic carburetor was a joke and no tech who looked at it could figure out how to fix it or why it would only run normal when the check engine light was illuminated. But on the flip side, my folks purchased a 1986 Olds with the 2.5L 4 cyl and that car was an absolute gem with never any issue.
I remember that engine. It was in a 1984 Buick Century station wagon that my parents had. Very problematic engine at the time but who knew because the automotive world was transitioning to modern electronic fuel injection.
I had a late A body car (96 olds) woth a 3100 and 4 speed auto. What a fantastic car. It was quiet, comfortable, good on gas, cheap and easy to repair, and cheap to insure. I would definitely buy another in a heartbeat. I always wondered how the early versions of the A bodies were.
Thank you Adam. Very educational and quite interesting information. I now know why this engine went way. I guess the later 3300 V6 made up for this engine. Too bad the 3300 did not stay around with the 3800. It was also informative hearing the connection to the 3800 V6. It would nice to see and hear the story on the 3300 V6 and the 3800 V6.
@@mainebigfoothunter7088 The GM3300 and 3800s were G rotor crank oil pump engines, with rod offset removed, and had a bunch of development. Love to hear about it. That Flint built engine was exported to Australia for years and got built into rear drive V car Commodores and Statesmans and Caprices for years. It may have had main seal leaks, but I've personally driven 125000 miles from 1993 to 2000 in one GM3800. GM sure learned their craft well on that engine.
The 3300 V6 went away because the A body carline was the only carline using it by 1993. Other carlines were using the 3100 V6. The A bodies were supposed to be discontinued after the 1993 model year, but GM kept them for 3 more years because they were still selling well. To do this though, they made updates, like in 1994 adding anti-lock brakes and airbags as standard equipment to keep them competitive in the marketplace. The 3300 V6, even if it was a good engine - why have it for one carline when there was another similar displacement V6 available used in many carlines? It was a cost saving measure.
@@judethaddaeus9742 I’ve had and still own some 3300s, and they’re good engines. That said, they idle rougher and have less power than the 3100….I own one of them, too,
Thanks Adam for finally doing this! And you are totally right about the cold mornings, poor carb set up, nylon timing gear, oil pump clogging, and adding zinc additive to the oil! I rebuilt my entire 3.0 engine and it runs flawless now with no problems.
As a former ASE Certified Master auto technician who was apprenticed and coming into my own at about the time these cars were around, I completely agree with this assessment. While not every one of these engines failed on people, they were very finicky and prone to mechanical failures. I agree that it was also depending on how hard they were driven, and how well they were maintained. Great video. 👍🏻
I HAD A 84 BUICK LASABRA NICE LOOKING CAR BUT IT HAD ONE OF THOSE ENGINES UNDER THE HOOD. I DID A LOT OF DRIVING BACK THEN. ALWAY CHANGED MY OIL WHEN NEEDED TO GOOD CARE OF THE ENGINE, BUT I WENT THROUGHT TWO TRANSMITTION FINILLY BLEW A CYLINDER ,AND THAT WAS IT FOR ME ..TIME FOR THE JUNK YARD...THANKS FOR READING...TAKE CARE AND GOD BLESS..
My Dad owned a junkyard which I worked at as a kid in the '80s, so these videos bring back memories. Escort 1.6 and 1.9 engines/heads, Cadillac 4.1's, Olds diesels, Chrysler/Mitsubishi V6, and these 3.0's. They were all moneymakers if you had a good one.
Ah! Chrysler/Mitsubishi . . . I recall in the 1980s into the '90s of seeing plenty of those late model sedans on the road in California. But, five years later they all seemed to disappear.
@@bloqk16I've got the Chrysler/Mitsubishi 3L V-6 in my 1996 Plymouth Voyager base model. 241 000kms and counting knock on wood. My Oldman had a 1996 Dodge Caravan base model, same engine, with 370 000kms (abused kms) before being sold for scrap in 2011. Last time I saw it someone else was driving it in the summer of 2013, with a cloud of blue smoke out the exhaust!
Had one of these. Parents bought it new in the 80's. Had its share of problems. Luckily we had a good mechanic who recognized the timing gear issue and replaced it before it destroyed itself. Transmission was always a problem. I got the car as a teenager and always thought the engine power was strange in comparison to other cars I drove. It was a nice car, engine was very smooth, especially compared to the 4tech - iron duke i4. If you pushed it too hard, it almost started loose power vs pulling more - about 3/4 way into the throttle. It felt like hesitation, but it was not a hesitation like bad gas, it was just a noticeable power loss. There was a sweet spot to drive the car. The advanced carburetor system was crazy and the electronics were always a problem. I traded it in on a new car when it had about 187,000 miles. Nice car, great condition, full of electronic and mechanical bugs.
I think the LK9 was a 90 degree design, which means that it was part of the Buick 3800 program. It's amazing how much different two "children" from the same family can be-
Hi Adam, I used to work as a mechanic at a Chevrolet dealership in the late 1990s, and the Chevrolet 2.8L 60 degree V6 engine had a major oil pressure issue. On a hot summer day sitting in traffic with the air-conditioning on, the oil pressure would drop to zero, or near zero. These engines did not last very long. GM came out with a larger oil pump that did not correct the issue. Most V6's do not last as long as a V8 does. My favorite V6 is a Chevrolet 4.3L which is a Chevrolet small block 350 V8, with two cylinders cut off. Please reply. Dave...
Mr. Dave, didn't certain 4.3 litre V6s bite it prematurely that came with the oil filter mounted off the block on the inner fender well? I saw quite a few Blazers/S-10's (and GMC equivalents) die due to not priming the oil filter.
@@douglasb.1203 I realize what your talking about, but I was talking about low oil pressure in general, maybe the oil filter location was a large issue. Thank you! Dave...
I had a 2.8 in a 1980 Citation and liked it, ran great even though the car gradually fell apart around it and the fins corroded off the radiator and the cooling system had a few parts held together with JB weld. The car lasted until 1999 and 200k miles with lots of downright neglect.
Cars from the 60's seemed so simple and EZ to maintain. We have a 65 El Camino that still has the original engine, it has never been pulled. Now engines and transmissions seem to come and go every few years. Thanks for another fine watch of American automotive history.
Yes, due to CAFE and federal emissions requirements, precise fuel metering and high-technology is required to make engines perform properly. The 1980s was a learning curve (thus, "peak malaise" around 1983)
I seem to remember my grandfather talking about someone who bought one of the new downsized '85 Olds 98's with the 3.0 when they came out and couldn't make it run at all. I think the dealer blamed and kept working on the carburator. I also think she gave up and traded for a new '85 or '86 Mercury Grand Marquis 8 or 9 months after buying the Olds.
@@gregorymalchuk272 If your referring to the 3.0 GM used what they called the EST spark control module that was mounted outside the distributor usually on the firewall. It was used with the MAP sensor and the TPS sensor to control ignition timing. On those old pre OBD II engines you had to jump 2 terminals on the ALDL connector and count the flashes on the Check Engine light to get trouble codes. By unplugging the module it would allow the engine to run plenty good enough to get you home. Without the spark advance it would not have the Oomph it had before but with a scantool you could read those sensors and find which one had the problem. I forgot to mention the coolant sensor too... My bad. I haven't seen any of those since the 90's and I did not have a Scantool at my disposal either.
In 1986, I was shopping for 4 year old Cutlass Cierras. I wanted to get a diesel, but Dad insisted I get a 3.0 V6 because "it would be more reliable." I experienced lots of carburetor issues, coolant leaks, and ultimately a spun rod bearing at 99,000 miles. Guess i was fortunate to make it that far. Mine was a Broughm package. So comfortable, but the engine was truly awful. Only car I ever owned that didn't make it past 100,000 miles.
Back in HS in the early ‘90s, my buddy got his license and we were allowed to take his mom’s Century to the mall. We got halfway there, stopped at a light, and the car suddenly made a loud bang noise and stalled. We pushed it off the side, called his dad. He got grounded and we both got chewed out for hot doggin as his dad put it. Honestly, we weren’t, we were stopped at a light and it friggin blew. All I heard about it was they got rid of it, wasn’t worth fixing.
We had several a body cars . 2.5 ,2.8, and one 3.0 buick century. The buick would not run no matter how we tried. The others gave many miles of dependable service. I was especially pleased with the 4 cyl
Small correction: the photo you have when mentioning the A bodies is of a Pontiac Pheonix, not a 6000. I think you might have also referred later to the Pheonix when you meant 6000. Interesting video, though!
Interesting video, but there was an error in it. (A rarity; imagine that!) You mistakenly associated the X-body Pontiac Phoenix with the A-bodies. Pontiac's A-body was, of course, the Pontiac 6000.
At age 47, looking back in hindsight- the most reliable engine I owned was A 1988 Chevy Beretta 2.8 multi port injection. Had it 2 years and changed the oil once or twice in 30,000 miles. Ran like a top. Hey, I was 22 years old at the time so I had other things on my mind besides maintenance. Nowadays, I change oil every 1,400 miles religiously.
My dad got a used 89 beretta in 1997 with the 2.8 multi port injection engine. We had it as a daily driver up until 2006 at which point it had over 500, 000 kilometres on it (310,000 miles). It leaked oil by then but was still running great and some loser rear ended it during the night while it was parked on the street. That was its demise.
My grandpa had a Berlinetta with the 2.8 with about 300k on it before it was stolen. Still ram like a too too. My dad would constant take it out for joy rides and beat the hell out of it but it would just take it. My dad refers to it as “the car that just didn’t die”
Stop and go driving or idles more than drives 3 months/ 3,000 miles highway driving 7 months/ 7,000 miles. You must be doing A LOT of idling to be changing it that frequently.
Back when I was in junior high during the late 80's my best friends parents bought a 1982 Buick Century used with this engine at a local new car dealership. His mom drove it until we were juniors in high school when it consumed oil, and later developed a rod knock. My mother had a 85 Century with the 2.5L Iron Duke, and I later had an 86 Century with the same engine. Both cars the engines were solid even though they had issues like cooling fan block sensors and fan relay problems which were common at the time. My last Century was the 93 with the 3.3L V6 which was the best performing of them all, but over the years rust ate it sadly.
Had an 85 v6 2.8 with port injection mated to a 5 speed. It was free revving and one of the best running engines I owned. I beat it to death for 155k miles & sold to my brother. It leaked from the seals but no indication it was burning any.
Yeah i had a 1988 2.8 liter mated to the Getrag 5 speed and it was as screamer. The manual transmission allows you to rev it to your hearts desire. Great motor transmission combo.
Dad had an 83 century limited company car. 4.3 diesel. Was reliable. Cold start cold morning would shake dash up and down dramatically. Same start would also try to loosen open door from hinges.
What did consumers think about all this? Were they disappointed in the offerings and the small engines or did they not care. Seems like such a lost decade.
Depended on your age group. If you were like me (turned 16 in 1970), the move to smaller engines really sucked. The only saving grace was that all newer cars suffered from low power so it wasn’t like everybody was speeding by you.
I wasn't even old enough to get my license till 91, but I'd say there was excitement for the "new muscle" like the pony cars ,as anyone a little older recalled the 60s glory days to us kids about hemi 454s with 600 HP and those torqueflite th-400 transmissions, from the factory that ran 9s and you could get one if you knew someone. 🤣🤣 Even though they weren't powerhouses, they were decent for the time and people figured out pretty quickly on how to get a little more from them. At least they'd do a decent powerbrake smokey compared to most of the clapped 70s junk my older friends drove at the time.
I had this same motor in my 1982 Buick Century. I could not believe how gutless this engine was. Hardly any passing power and had really horrible gas mileage. The 1.6 liter OHC for cylinder in my dad's 1984 Old's Firenza felt like it had twice the power of this V6 and got nearly 30 mpg. I was lucky to get 15 mpg out of that V6. Plus, I had to let it warm up for 20min on cold day or else it kept stalling out. One of the many reasons I got rid of that car after a few years.
When me my brother and sister were little kids in the earlier to mid 90s my Dad had an 1986 Chevy Celebrity that was a gunmetal grey metallic with matching cloth grey interior. Was a more base model had the metal vented styled chevy hubcaps but had the 2.8V6. That car was very nice when he first got it and despite it when it was older and started rusting the car still ran and serviced our family good for its lifespan. The 2.8 was a good engine and no it wasn't the fuel injected one that came out as a optional engine for the 85 and newer Eurosports. This one he had was the carbureted version which our year was the last year that GM used it in as 1987 and newer Celebrities has the 2.8 Multiport Fuel Injected version.
I had to chuckle to myself because a few months ago there was a discussion about the 2.5l iron duke 4cyl being perhaps painted negatively for some aspects on your channel.Adam , I do love the the history , I did get to to drive a rental Olds Ciera which was a pretty nice car (maybe an '84) with that engine.I was driving an '81 citation(in the shop) at the time.
I had a 1985 Olds Calais Supreme (N body) with a fuel injected 3.0 V6. Was this the same engine with modifications? It was not my favorite and was a bear to service. All the shops would charge me extra for certain repairs. Just wondering
GM dropped the 3800 because it was a 90 degree design that was too wide to fit in the upcoming engine compartments - they were trying to save weight due to the CAFE fuel economy mandate. The new motors are often difficult to work on because the car is litterally built around the motor
That was cool. I remember local auto parts stores, when they were independents, used to stock crankshaft kits for those. Those offset crank pins were pretty weak. Did the Buick 4.1 V6 have a similar crankshaft? I think it did but don't remember for sure.
I'm not an automotive engineer but that diagram of the offset connecting rod gave me the shakes. Then I can just imagine trying to merge onto a freeway and trying not use extended full throttle (when your nearly full-sized auto is being pulled by an engine transmission combo that at best you could call weak sauce).
The 3.0 injected version went on to live in the Somerset/Skylark through at least 1989 which was the last time I had one - in a 1989 Skylark with the handling and ground effects package. It wasn’t as bad as it sounds I promise.
I also had a new 3.0 Somerset in a1985. Ran great and was fuel injected, but it was not the same engine as the LK9 Adam is talking about. Was pretty much trouble free.
I had a 84 buick century 3.0 years ago, didn't have a lot of problems, but it had no power, but was a smooth driving, I've also owned 93 century wagon 3.3, 94 century 3.1, 93 olds 3.3, 88 celebrity 2.5, 88 celebrity Eurosport wagon 2.5
Adam, the A body Pontiac pic you show in the beginning of the video is actually a J body Pontiac Phoenix 4 door hatch back. Although, you don't seem to care for 80's cars, I loved them! Jay
I had a 2.8 in my 82 Citation. Great little engine, my in-laws had Cimmerian. With a 4 in it liked the car not the engine told them to get one with a 2.8 they did love it had it many years
I bought an 84 Cutlass C with this engine in 1987 low mileage, beautiful car. Power roof and every bell and whistle. It was a night mare. I had bought an extended warranty but GM dealer would not honor it. Let it go back. Only drove it a year. Bad experience.
My first car was a hand-me-down 1983 Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera. One day while driving on the freeway, I noticed that the car was losing power as I continued to press the accelerator. After managing to make it home after putting a few quarts of oil in the engine, the car just gave up. Turns out there was a hole blown through one of the pistons.
Thank you for the informative video. Thanks for caring about 1980's cars. Can you do a video on the Cavalier Z24? That was and still is my favorite car.
The 3.3 is a entire different animal. Had 3 centuries with the 3.3 2 89's and a 91. They didn't run a 3.8 in them. I am thinking of swapping a 96 3.1 Chevy in my current 89 century just because which will be fun to do electrical wise, but will sit just fine in it!
@@shawnsatterlee6035 I understand the transverse 3.8 wasn’t available in all of them but I swear SFI 3.8 (pre 3800) cars existed. And as far as 3300 conversions I’d love to find an 82-83 Omega or any Skylark and put 90s low mileage Century front cradle engine transaxle whole car right under one.
@@AlexanderWaylon my '87 LeSabre had an SFI 3.8. And yes, around 120k miles, the timing gears stopped working. Last US GM I owned. I had a Geo Prizm after that and was amazed at how much less trouble I had with that car. I've been a Toyota and Mazda guy since then.
I drive a 1988 Chevy celebrity with the V6 2.8Liter. I've got plenty of stories about that engine and it only has 179,300 on it! When I bought it 14 years ago it had 98,450ish on it. My most recent project this last weekend was replacing the original heater return hose that recently burst. This beast best as I can tell was built in early September 1987 and entered service on 14 October 1987. I found the business card of the salesman in the glove box along with some of the original paperwork.
My dad was a parts guy at a small GM dealer for many, many years. My first car was a 1-owner '85 Buick Century that was taken on trade with this very engine. I remember it was not that smooth running, and was utterly gutless, but we had great reliability, actually. Now, I was 15 years old, and I don't remember if my Dad already had the service records for this car, but he may have known work that had already been done. All I knew was he paid about $300 for it, the first owner(s) were a farmer and his wife, and the car had 165k miles on it when we got it. However, other than lots of sand/gravel dings in the paint from the dirt roads they lived on, it was an amazing car in great condition. For whatever reason, they ordered it with about every option, too (power windows/locks, tilt, big fluffy seats, level ride, vinyl roof, chrome trim, wire wheel covers, etc.). The only reason we got rid of the car was that is wasn't in condition and reliable enough to take on a highway road trip. It went on to another high school first-driver child of one of my Dad's co-workers, and I got the best car I've ever had: a 1988 Pontiac Bonneville with the amazing 3.8 Liter V6. In comparison, loads of power, and a joy to take a long road trip in. I cried when someone pulled out in front of me and totalled the car in 2004 with around 140k miles. Wish I could get her back.
Those damn Celebrities and their cousins were everywhere in NW Iowa where I grew up. Whenever I see one online, I'm immediately taken back to mid-80's small town Iowa.
I guess it all depends on what day of the week it was built like they used to say... I had a co-worker with an 85 back in the early 90s and at that time the car was approaching 300K and it was still running strong minus a small oil leak
My Dad had a long list of cars with crap engines. 65 Corvair Monza with the low end engine, a 73 VW bus the that ate 4 engines during his ownership, the 2.8 Peugeot Renault Volvo v6, the 3L v6 in an 85 Buick A body, a 3.8 v6 in a Taurus....there was, at least, an indestructible 3l Vulcan in another Taurus.
I forgot to mention that those 3.0's were real good at eating bearings and chukking rods out of the block when abused. Pontiac also used these engines in Grand Am 4 door cars too. The Iron Duke made a believer out of me when I put 450 miles on one that blew a rod. The oil pump drives would shear the retaining pin because of the chattering gear drive in front of the engine. I had to replace a few of them in my time. The old ones would just quit because of the distributor and when they did away with that it killed a bunch of those engines! In the late 80's they went to chain drive and it fixed the problem. That aluminum cam gear made a sound that you could tell what engine was under the hood before you even opened it. I even found one in a 87 S10 long WB 4WD 5 Speed truck!
As a mechanic who used to work on these cars, I would say the 2.5 4 cylinder was a much worse engine. And the carbureted 2.8 was also troublesome, with the main problem being it's variable venturi carburetor and all of it's vacuum hoses. Overall, this was a sad point in GM engine history. Luckily it got better once they started putting multi port fuel injection on the engines.
A client of mine had an 84 Celebrity Eurosport that had the 2.8, she put around 200K on it with very few issues. A neighbor had an 82 Century with the 3.0 engine, at a relatively low mileage, a spark plug broke and busted up the piston. Another neighbor and I helped with the repair and put the thing back on the road. I moved before I could find out how long it lasted.
I have a 1985 Buick Century with the 3.0, bought at an auction some 7-8 years ago, was stored in a barn due to a bad fuel pump. It had the biggest mouse nest I have ever seen in the trunk but thats another story. I dropped the tank and replaced the pump, pulled the carburetor and rebuilt it, replacing every single electronic control in the carb with new parts. All new ignition parts at the same time along with a water pump. Got it running, tweaked on the carburetor some and replaced all vacuum lines along with the PCM and the intake heater (Early Fuel Evaporation). That was 40,000 miles ago, engine runs with 5w-30 synthetic oil year round and it starts down as low as -15F. It is a little cold blooded, usually let it idle 20 seconds before taking off with it, it surely isnt a powerhouse but seems to move the car along just fine. It now shows just shy of 140,000 miles.
I rented a '83 Century V6 for a week while on vacation. One thing I remember is when I took my foot off the gas the car did not initially slow down. It seemed like there was a delay in the engine braking action. Overall it seemed like a decent car but not very exciting. Before today I did not know about the offset connecting rods.
That is done on purpose on modern fuel injected cars. Dropping the throttle plate instantly causes a momentary rich condition that the EFI system cannot react to quickly enough and causes bad emissions for a few moments. Thus, modern cars have a little device on the throttle linkage [or software, with an electronic throttle] that causes it to close over a time period of about 1.5-2 seconds. As to that '83, I have no idea since those were carbureted. The throttle linkage on that car was probably sticky for some reason, that wasn't normal.
@@Flies2FLL nah they still did that throttle closing delay on em for emissions stuff ,same reasons. Those carbs had a million vacuum hoses and dashpots for stuff like that (if it didn't also have some electric feedback garbage I can't recall) They did that alot back then , as in alot of manufacturers using that trick.
Your driving tips sound very similar to my little 21rc engine in my 83 celica. Really does not like to be revved out and I hardly push it pat 3k. It happily pulls itself along at 2k rpm all day.
I had a 84 Camaro with the 2.8 last year for carb. Random stalling issues from day one dealer never was able to resolve then at 65,000 head gasket blew. Traded it in on a Mazda and never stepped into a GM dealership again.
Hi Adam, This is a really interesting post for me as an Australian as one of the little known facets of GM history is that its Australian Divisions 6 cyl engine had reached the end of the road due to its inability to be converted to unleaded. GM-H looked around world wide externally and internally for a replacement to power the Commodore. Your description here explains why the replacement engine came down to the Nissan RB-30 and believe it or not the Jaguar AJ-6 with the Nissan RB-30 getting the gong.
@@mrspandel5737 It was an economic decision not an engineering based one as the $A dropped significantly against the yen causing GM-H to loose money on every RB-30 brought. The VN commodore was originally designed for the RB-30 and had to be re-engineered for the 3800 v6
The wider 3.0L and 3.8L were only offered in the Ciera and Century because their front clip was longer than the Celebrity and 6000. I measured them when I worked in a GM dealership in 1984. The 3.0L was a nightmare of customer complaints (shake the fillings out of your teeth.) That was most likely why GM started telling service managers to refer to them as customer comments instead of calling them complaints. And you probably already know you show an X body Phoenix at :37 instead of a 6000.
They used then in pontiac grand am 4 door cars too. I upgraded an 85 grand am to a 3800 and it was no small feat! The 3.0 self destructed and even knocked the starter off the engine. It lost 5 rods that made short work of the block itself. I had to graft the wiring from the donor car and use the ecu too. after all that work I turned the on and the engine light flashed twice, cranked it and it fired right up. No codes. The next to go was the transmission.
I've had well over 30 A-Bodies (Currently have four and the Century diesel shown early in the video was one of mine LOL!) and can verify that the engine compartments are all the same. There is no size difference. You can even bolt a Century/Ciera front clip onto a Celeb or 6000 although the body feature line under the beltline is different.
My cousin gave me one of those cars about twenty years ago and we could not kill it, we drained the engine oil out and ran it for about fifteen minutes and it still ran so we put the old oil back in and run the crap out of it until we scrapped it.
I would like to interject a little information concerning 1982-85 Buick 183 C I 3.0V6 , this info would cover all front wheel drive Buick engines from 1982-92 includes early 3800sfi TPSFI 88-92 the 3.0 will have better oil pressure if you change the screen for the oil pump inside the pan the pickup screen used on early engines the screen has small holes that get plugged easily, to remedy that problem use the pickup screen from a 1993 and later series 2-3 3800 engines the new screen is has a smaller circumference but larger holes than the early screens,if you change the screen and have a good oil pump the engine will maintain higher oil pressure,P. S in early engines use a 4 quart oil pan 93-97 engines use a 5 quart oil pan series 3 use a 6 quart oil pan 1998-09.
Oh boy, you don't need to tell me about that awful engine. My grandparents bought a decently loaded 1985 Cierra. It had that awful 3.0 2V engine. When the thing was brand new it stalled about 5 times just getting it out of their garage. They gave me the car when it had 75k miles on it (they'd already had head gaskets done). It also had the digital cluster which was a cable driven digital speedometer and the speed would jump all over the place. I tried several different rebuild clusters from the dealer, and all had their own issues. Long story, crappy car. Too bad it didn't have the 3.8 and analog gauges, that would have been a step up. But on another note, that was one of the most comfortable cars one could imagine.
I compare the difference between the 3.8 and the 3.0 Buick to the difference between the Ford 302 and 255 v8. Similar but different enough to feel totally weak.
You mentioned the 3.0 liter being offered in the C body cars for 1985 but you failed to mention is was the base engine for the all new redesigned Oldsmobile Delta 88 and Buick Lesabre for the 1986 model year only. I know this because it's first in the sales literature but also i had a friend of the family that had that engine in their base model Oldsmobile Delta 88 Royale sedan in 1986. It might have been fuel injected at that point but it was still the standard engine in that model/year.
I guess I was a lucky one. Had an '85 Ciera with the LK9 from 2011-2018, and it was never problematic aside from occasional issues with the choke sticking. The car would probably still be running to this day, but it was wrecked then rigged back together by the next owner, then he passed on and it has likely been junked by now.
I had a 1983 cutlass ciera with a 3.0 litre buick motor in it and that thing lasted forever. It rusted out to the point I had holes in the floor board but that engine ran like a top. I don't know how many miles that car had on it when I totaled it but it had at least 4 different owners before I got it and by the time I recieved it, it had developed a slip in the transmission but it never failed and I know I put at least 50k miles on it myself. odometer only went up to 99k so hard to say how many miles it had but I was still driving it in the 1997 when I graduated highschool. I loved that car and it was very reliable. That thing still ran even after I got broad sided and had a foot and a half deep dent in the the passenger side of it. I drove it around behind my grandparents house after that accident with the hole side smashed in and it still ran good. Only thing that I found bad about it was that it ate starters as the starter was wrapped by the exhuast and it cooked them. I probably put at least 4 starters on it when I was driving it and had 2 batteries in it just to make the starter last a little longer.
Mid 90's I bought an '82 Chevy Celebrity cheap because it had an audible knock. I ran 50 weight oil in it, then 70 weight, then went to 90 weight straight gear oil. I never changed it just kept on adding. It lasted about a year and went 10k miles before it stopped. It was the 4cyl..
My dad had an 85 Oldsmobile cutlass Cierra with the 3.0. we actually had good luck with it. He put over 200k on it. I remember riding from El Paso to Baton Rouge in the back seat back in 92. Long trip.
I had a 1980 Malibu with the Chevy 229ci V6 (a semi-odd fire V6 derived from the 305ci V8). That engine was such a pile... noisy, vibrational, couldn't get out of its own way. For years I fought with it to resolve the idle vibration, and finally someone with some GM dealer experience told me that all the 229s vibrated. It was just inherent in the design. Could not believe GM put that on the market.
The 2.8/3.1/3100/3400 60v6 had a decent niche following. I did a lot of tuning on my modded 2.8 :) I even mapped out the $DF tuning file to like 99.9% completeness.
Haha ,I remember my buddies 84 GMC s15 with a 2.8 v6. The exhaust rotted off behind the cat,and all that was laying around was some pipe and an old cherry bomb. So the 'bomb went on and a pipe went out the back. It sounded like a Detroit 2 stroke almost, well, like a brother to one at least. Used it as a landscaping truck hauling a 52" scag for 5-6yrs and took quite a beating.
Those additives you suggested don't really work with today's oils because of the large percentage of detergents in the oil. These detergents will clean most of the additives off what ever the oil is lubricating.
As a retired Service Director in a Buick Olds dealership, I lived through seeing customers and technicians being tortured by the 3.0 V6, LK9. Can't think of anything positive to say about it. Didn't even make a decent boat anchor.
No they didn’t. So many problems, as I’m sure you witness first hand.
@@RareClassicCars the best thing about this engine is that it was much less common than the 2.8. So i didn’t have to deal with them that often.
A handful of BB’s were the best thing for these 3liter bombs to put them out of there misery.
I was fortunate enough in the early 2000s I had a 1985 Buick century custom with a 3.0L LK9 carbureted V6 and I never had any trouble out of it although I drove the car for a little and only had it for a couple of years.
@@misskittycalais7300 I’m sure there were a good number that were relatively trouble free. I believe that the oil pump was the greatest determining factor in whether they lasted the typical 100k or not. The rest of the problems were probably carburetor related.
I was a mechanic at a Pontiac, then Buick dealer during this time. I don't remember ever seeing a 3.0 in a C body, and I know I never saw a 2.2 in an A body. The carbs were adjusted at the factory, and the screws were covered with plugs. Almost all of them were out of adjustment, but with the right tools and skills, we could get them running right. A bigger problem, that you didn't mention, was cracked blocks. The water jacket would crack along the bottom, usually near the front, usually on the left bank. Under warranty, we were required to replace it with what was called a "Fitted block". This was a new block, pistons, pins, and rings. That's it. That required total disassembly of the engine, pressing the old pins out of the rods, pressing the new pistons and pins on the old rods, then re-assembly. I did so many of them I used to be able to tell where every nut, bolt, clip and wire was supposed to be, and what order it had to be in.
Why couldn’t they put a nice v8 in it
Nightmare fuel. This engine in an Olds Cutlass is the reason my normally quiet and reserved father lost his shit, got in a huge argument with my grandfather about the shit quality of Oldsmobiles and permanently decamped to Mercedes and Toyota as his and my mom's vehicles of choice. His 91 Toyota SR5 V6 pickup is still on the road today.
I have all the tools for working on those Carburetors, Both 2 and 4 barrel versions. Big Fun if there were other problems like Vacuum leaks from the rats nest of hoses that would rot or get oily swell up and fall off. Thanks EPA!
0:37 Funny how much the hatchback version of the Pontiac 6000 looked like the Phoenix! ;-)❤
I know. I goofed. Brain fart.
Adam, I hope you are satisfied with the job you have done retraumatizing all these victims of GM's mendacity
I had an elderly neighbor that in 1983 bought a 6 Month old Cutlass with 8.000 miles with this engine. Living in the Northeast she had this Habit of starting the Car & to warm up the engine would Floor the gas pedal over & over for 5 minutes. I remember this so well cause in the Summer wen I was on School Summer Break she would wake me up as my bedroom was 15 feet from her Driveway. This was her 1st Non V8 engine & it only took about 6 Month before the engine made a Horrific sound. Luckily the Warranty Covered the Repairs. Halfway through the Brutal Winter & only 300 miles after Repair the Car was Flat bedded away to Dealership. After the 2nd Repair she Drove Directly to the Chevrolet Dealership just a few miles away & Traded it in for a Brand New 1985 Impala, the Bare Bones Model with the V8. She Continued Her warm up method Successfully until 1987 wen she passed away. Sadly she had no children & No Will. I remember wen the State came in to asses the asset's & I walked over to look at the car before being towed away & I saw the odometer was 919 miles.
Wow 919 miles 😲
Good story !!!
The 3800 is a beast. I'll keep having new metal welded into my 2008 Grand Prix for as long as the motor keeps running. When I was a dealer tech I saw many with close to 300,000 miles on them still running fine.
I'm a mopar guy, but my wife had a 97 LeSabre with 3800 Series 2 and I was really impressed by that thing. especially with it having iron heads.
I have a 99 Supercharger 3800, has about 362,000 miles on it. Still runs like a top.
I love GM V6s, my friends 4.3 has 800k miles sits outside with the hood off and still starts every time
That 3800 was and still is BULLETPROOF ! I've known several at well over 300,000 miles and higher that are still going strong !
They are simple and do not make much power for their displacement. That is a recipe for reliability, yes.
My 2000 impala 3800 hit 300,000 with ease. Sadly the rest of the car didn't.
If the 3800 had better intake manifold gaskets, it would have been 100% flawless.
I was an outlier. The 3800 in my 1981 Century leaked oil from every gasket. When I took it in to the Buick dealer for service, they returned it with a quart of oil in it. I didn't want to know more; I added some oil and immediately traded it in for a Honda Accord. Last domestic brand vehicle I ever bought.
@@bzzcks’81 was before the redesign. The designation was 3.8 instead of 3800, improved oil pump designs helped with it’s reliability. The same can’t be said for the intake gaskets though..
My Mom had a 83' Century and it drove fine until the 1st cold snap. It wouldn't stay running after it fired. The dealership mechanic came to the house with another guy. He said, "Here we go again with the 3.0." They couldn't get it to run and ended up towing it in. They had to adjust the throttle body to run for the higher elevation. It ran fine after that. It was a nice car from what I can remember.
My parents had a 1983 Buick with the 3.0 V-6. I remember my dad being so proud of purchasing that car. He was a Methodist minister so we didn’t have much money but he loved that Buick. He kept up the maintenance on it because I remember it being a good car. He drove like a grandma so he was always gentle with every car he drove. If I ever drove it above 60 he’d flip out.
Here are my memories of this engine in a 1985 Cutlass Ciera I drove in the late 1990s. A friend owned the car and asked me to do some repairs to it. The car had just over 100,000 miles, and it did not run well cold. My friend gave me the car to repair but also let me use the car for several months since they did not need it back right away. What I noticed was the oil had not been changed in a very long time and was black - the way oil gets when people neglect to change it. I changed the oil, the PCV valve, and PCV filter. I remember the PCV valve must have been stuck, because the crankcase was developing pressure and would push the oil dipstick out an inch. As far as I was concerned - this was due to owner neglect, not a fault of the engine. The cold running problem I solved by rebuilding the carburetor on - which was the Rochester DualJet (E2ME). The main issue was that the choke angle was too wide when the vacuum break pulled the choke off when the engine started. The engine ran too lean and the car would stall out when put into gear unless it was warmed up for several minutes. I fixed this - but decided to do a full rebuild on the carburetor anyway since the car had 100,000 miles and the carburetor had never been rebuilt. I remember on the mixture control solenoid you could adjust how rich the rich setting was by adjusting a little screw on it, but the lean setting you could not adjust. I remember thinking this was not a very difficult carburetor to work on, it was just different in that it had a throttle position sensor and a mixture control solenoid, which older carburetors did not have. After making these repairs, I drove the car for 10,000 miles over the course of 6 months, so it had 110,000 miles on it at that time. I don't remember any strange vibrations at 1200 rpm or anything like that. It was actually a smooth and quiet engine. It didn't have a great deal of power, but it seemed acceptable to me. I enjoyed driving the car in the time I had it. I believe I also changed the transmission fluid in it, which again had never been done in 100,000 miles. I returned the car to my friend, who had it a while longer. I don't remember hearing what ultimately happened to it. I think they were surprised I was able to get the car to run very well again and they were able to use it again regularly without having to warm up the car for several minutes each day. Since you mentioned the even firing 3.8L V6 in your video, we had an 81 Buick Century Limited (which was rear wheel drive) with the 3.8L V6 which we bought new and drove for many years. We really liked that car. It was smooth, quiet, it rode well, and was very comfortable. Definitely no vibrations from the engine. It ran smoothly at any rpm. My recollection is the car had good off-the-line and good mid-range power, but if you really pushed it, it didn't have good power at high rpms. But this was common for cars during that time period which had so much emissions equipment at the time. We drove it until it had 125,000 miles on it with very few problems. The timing chain eventually stretched enough that it finally broke and needed to be replaced. I don't recall it breaking a tooth on the cam gear - the timing chain itself broke. We got it fixed - but what I can't stress enough is - when the timing cover is removed to work on the timing chain, the oil pump is disturbed because the oil pump is mounted on the cover. When everything is put back together, you have to prime the oil pump before you start the engine! If you do not, the engine will not build oil pressure and you will damage the engine! Maybe some technicians out there do not/did not know this. As long as this is done you'll be fine. But again this is on the 3.8L V6, not the 3.0L V6. The engines are related but they are not the same - the 3.0L V6 may be different. In general, the cars, American and foreign, simply got better as the 1980s progressed and fuel injection and distributorless ignition were introduced, and emissions controls improved (fewer were needed as we moved away from carburetors, and more were electronically controlled and were not vacuum controlled any longer). I have driven X cars, rear wheel drive A cars (1978-81), front wheel drive A cars (1982 and later) with the 2.5L, 2.8L, and 3.8L engines - they were all fine. By 1989/1990, the A cars (Century/Ciera) had the 3.3L V6, which I drove and found that that was an engine with a LOT of power - much better than the older ones with carburetors. The 3.0L I had the one experience with for 6 months/10,000 miles - it seemed to be fine to me - though I did not drive one for 100,000 miles. I do not think people in that time period followed the "change your oil every 3 months / 3000 miles" mantra like they did years later. They waited until their cars broke down and then they got them fixed rather than being good about maintenance. The 3.0L may have had problems, but a lot of the problems with the cars also came from owner neglect and lack of care. I can say this because I worked in an auto shop at a community college in the mid to late 90s and I remember the cars that came in, the problems they had, how the owners did not take care of them, which resulted in various problems. It isn't clear to me why the 2.8L was offered only in the Celebrity/6000 and the 3.0 in the Century/Ciera early on - why not just offer the 2.8L V6 in all of them from the beginning - which is ultimately what happened after 1985 anyway? My philosophy was, and is, if you take care of your car, it will take care of you. So I always did things like changed the oil in my cars, changed the coolant, filters, tires, brakes, etc - and I never had many problems with my cars, even during the time period of the 1980s when people were complaining. Maintenance does go a long way - it's your choice whether you do it or not. Just sayin'!
According to the dealership shop manual if you do mostly stop and go driving or idling it's every 3 months/ 3k miles for oil changes and if you do mostly highway driving every 6 ( maybe 7) months / 7k miles.
Pretty much the same here. 85 fwd LeSabre I think it was. Had a 3.0l. it wasn't no sports car, but it was a very reliable engine, just like the 3.8l. The only thing that needed replacing was the crappy nylon timing gear. New timing set and it was good to go.
Man I’m gonna give you a thumbs up just for taking the time to write all that info. I had an ‘88 S-10 2.8. I had my local tow company on speed dial.
@@AyeCarumba221 lol. The 2.8l was a far crappier engine than the Buick 3.8/3.0, that's for sure.
@@JohnDoe-ml8ru no way !! I have the H.O. carbie in my 6000 and it's been good to me. They also got way better with MFI.
I had an '82 Cierra with the 3.0. You are dead on about the cold drivability problems. Very hard to get out of my development on a cold morning.
I was a field rep for Atlantic Richfield and In 5 years I accumulated 150, 000 miles on mine. I used ARCO Graphite oil and turned the car over to my wife as a grocery cart and sold the car with 175K. The tranny would no longer shift into lockup, but other than that, I had no internal problems with the engine. Enjoyed your video.
[in an elated tone] Aaaahhhh! I haven't heard the name "Atlantic Richfield" in decades!
In the late '60s to the mid-70s the Atlantic Richfield/Arco brand premium gasoline was marvelous; with a minimum amount of engine ping and always the best fuel mileage with the vehicles I drove.
I was a fan of Arco Graphite as well. I was a mechanic for a private company that had a fleet of chevy malibus. 1978-1984 with 200 cid v6, 229 v6 and 267 v8's. The 200's and 229's were gutless junk engines. The 267 was a sweet powerplant. On each of them, upon reaching 12,000 miles, we changed oil over to Arco Graphite. Every 6000 miles, new oil and a new Hastings filter. The guys who drove the cars were absolute idiots. They only knew two throttle positions, idle and full. Never had a problem that could be traced to lubrication. When one of them turned 200,00 miles, the boss sidelined the car. We pulled the engine, did a teardown and found NO wear. The boss told us that he wanted to do the teardown to show us why we were using Arco Graphite. Made me sad when it disappeared from the market.
@@beenbeatenbybishops5845 When the Arco Graphite motor first available about Spring 1976, I really want to get it since the oil could last 1.5K between oil change interval. My mother brought a brand new 1974 Plymouth Duster in October 1973 and when I put Arco Graphite in the engine with oil filter, the oil pan gasket began to leak and we had a oil drop in front of the drive way. My parents car has 8.4 K in speedometer in 3 years.
Excellent video!! When I built my first engine (1973Dodge 318) I had to order the printed factory manual to get the specs and was shocked as to the tolerances that were used to build engines that made it 100k to 150k miles without exploding. Even with just hand tools, a calculator, and calipers I realized how many engineered defects of the engine were easy to avoid. That engine made its way into three different vehicles before I retired it. And it still ran when taken to the dump. The GM3ltr could have been a good motor and the fact that it was built with so many side loads and offset center points, while still being an functional engine, shows that the engineers were sht but the craftsman that built the motors were very skilled. Very informative video, Thanks!!!
Ummm the Phoenix was not an A Body. It was a X Body introduced in 1980. 6000 was the Pontiac entry.
@@sean7134 Ah! Yes! Replacing the water pump.
I've yet to own a vehicle where the water pump lasted 100K miles. They could always be counted on to leak by 80K ~ 90K miles.
When I had the timing belt with my Toyota pickup truck replaced, I instructed the repair shop to replace the water pump, too, as the labor cost would be the same. It made little sense at 75K miles to pay for all that labor expense for the belt replacement, only to shoulder the same expense at 90K miles to have the water pump replaced.
@@78logistics Before 1980, Phoenix shared RWD bodies with Nova, Apollo and Omega - would that have been the A body of its day? Dunno.
You could say the exact opposite that engineering wasn't the problem but the guys who put it together were. Reality is in the middle, not being engineered to be able to be slapped together without care and to keep running and not put together with that care. Engineering includes though including what you can get manufactured within (union included) corporate politics which probably explains the spec tolerances. Knowing what they should be is far easier than coming up with the spec the manufacturing can hit without bankrupting the company that will still work well enough so it doesn't bankrupt the company (and that will still keep your department from being cut!)
My grandma had an 85 Cutlass Cierra brougham. Harmonic balancer came off the engine when the car was about 1 year old. I'm betting it was the V6...
Many would argue that the 3.8 had already attained excellence, before it became the 3800.
That Chevy 2.8 was a rather peppy engine, especially with the EFI. I drove an '87 S10 with one, and it was a ripper - at least until you crossed the intersection and it started running out of breath... I drove an early '80s carb'ed one too, and I don't remember thinking it was peppy, but it wasn't underpowered either. Hot Rod had a few hop-up articles featuring the Chevy V6 in the early '80s. I remember one host was a late second generation Camaro...👍
Great video! Sometimes it's a good thing that they don't build 'em like they used to.
I was a Buick Heavy Repair Tech in the 80s and 90s. We had 2 techs at a large dealership dedicated to 3.0 engines. We loved them. Many failed just outside warranty and we made money on them. We had a repair lot with dozens stacked up waiting for us. Under warranty, the most common issue was loss of coolant caused by seeping metal one piece head gaskets. We often used 2 head gaskets stacked and copper spray on them to resolve. Cracked blocks inside the lifter galley were common on earlier models as stated in other comments. Connecting rod failures were second most popular as you stated. You made it clear, but commenters are still somewhat confused. This 3.0 has nothing in common AT ALL with the 3800. In my 10 dealership years at GM, no other engine failed as frequent or catastrophic as the 3.0 Junk.
How about the Cadillac 4100?
I noticed that the 3.0 had ALL the weaknesses of the 3.8 with less power and worse serviceability because of the transverse installation. As you stated, the oil pump was notoriously trouble prone. When they got rid of the distributor in the 3.8 and redesigned the oil pump, it changed it from a 125,000 mile (if you were lucky ) to a 200,000 mile engine (provided you replaced the timing chain at near 100k) . This was even before they further improved it with the 3800. The redesigned oil pump was the SINGLE GREATEST IMPROVEMENT to these engines.
The grand nationals (corvette killers) never benefitted from the oil pump redesign, seems the fwd vehicles were the engineering priority.
The cyclone was another under the wire skunk works success.
My friend had 3 Buick centurys in highschool. The rust is what took them but they always drove. I feel like we are in the 80s again. We are stuck with few choices. Even the cars and crossovers share the same engine. 3 cylinders today have power but are loud and vibrate everything.
It's making me realize ,yeah we had limited choices back then but nothing compared to now like you said. And now this "old stuff" is praised.
Not this model in particular, but some of the stuff that was junky back then now has some credibility and it makes me chuckle
@MrHillfolk Nostalgia makes people forget how crappy alot of things were. I don't miss old cars nor having to repair them constantly.
My first car was a 1983 Cutlass Ciera with the 3.0L engine. Worst. Car. Ever. That thing had so many issues and caused so many headaches that I practically did a happy dance the day I got rid of it. Not to mention the electronic carburetor was a joke and no tech who looked at it could figure out how to fix it or why it would only run normal when the check engine light was illuminated. But on the flip side, my folks purchased a 1986 Olds with the 2.5L 4 cyl and that car was an absolute gem with never any issue.
I remember that engine. It was in a 1984 Buick Century station wagon that my parents had. Very problematic engine at the time but who knew because the automotive world was transitioning to modern electronic fuel injection.
I had a late A body car (96 olds) woth a 3100 and 4 speed auto. What a fantastic car. It was quiet, comfortable, good on gas, cheap and easy to repair, and cheap to insure. I would definitely buy another in a heartbeat. I always wondered how the early versions of the A bodies were.
Had a 94 Buick Century with this engine. powerful, good on gas and ran smooth for years until I sold it to someone
Thank you Adam. Very educational and quite interesting information. I now know why this engine went way. I guess the later 3300 V6 made up for this engine. Too bad the 3300 did not stay around with the 3800. It was also informative hearing the connection to the 3800 V6. It would nice to see and hear the story on the 3300 V6 and the 3800 V6.
I had the 3300 in an Oldsmobile Ciera. One of the best motors I have owned over 4 decades of autos
@@mainebigfoothunter7088 The GM3300 and 3800s were G rotor crank oil pump engines, with rod offset removed, and had a bunch of development. Love to hear about it. That Flint built engine was exported to Australia for years and got built into rear drive V car Commodores and Statesmans and Caprices for years. It may have had main seal leaks, but I've personally driven 125000 miles from 1993 to 2000 in one GM3800. GM sure learned their craft well on that engine.
GM never should have replaced the 3300 with the thrashier 3100 in the N and A-bodies.
The 3300 V6 went away because the A body carline was the only carline using it by 1993. Other carlines were using the 3100 V6. The A bodies were supposed to be discontinued after the 1993 model year, but GM kept them for 3 more years because they were still selling well. To do this though, they made updates, like in 1994 adding anti-lock brakes and airbags as standard equipment to keep them competitive in the marketplace. The 3300 V6, even if it was a good engine - why have it for one carline when there was another similar displacement V6 available used in many carlines? It was a cost saving measure.
@@judethaddaeus9742
I’ve had and still own some 3300s, and they’re good engines.
That said, they idle rougher and have less power than the 3100….I own one of them, too,
Thanks Adam for finally doing this! And you are totally right about the cold mornings, poor carb set up, nylon timing gear, oil pump clogging, and adding zinc additive to the oil!
I rebuilt my entire 3.0 engine and it runs flawless now with no problems.
Well now I didn't know that a Pontiac 6000 was actually a Pontiac Phoenix.....
[Sorry Adam, just cracking on you!]
Great video!
I was about to post the same thing.
My bad. I goofed.
@@RareClassicCars yep. I guess you are slipping in your old age . LOL
Well it did start out that way didn’t it? Aren’t the A bodies basically X bodies with some extra added to the front and rear?
As a former ASE Certified Master auto technician who was apprenticed and coming into my own at about the time these cars were around, I completely agree with this assessment. While not every one of these engines failed on people, they were very finicky and prone to mechanical failures. I agree that it was also depending on how hard they were driven, and how well they were maintained. Great video. 👍🏻
I HAD A 84 BUICK LASABRA NICE LOOKING CAR BUT IT HAD ONE OF THOSE ENGINES UNDER THE HOOD. I DID A LOT OF DRIVING BACK THEN. ALWAY CHANGED MY OIL WHEN NEEDED TO GOOD CARE OF THE ENGINE, BUT I WENT THROUGHT TWO TRANSMITTION FINILLY BLEW A CYLINDER ,AND THAT WAS IT FOR ME ..TIME FOR THE JUNK YARD...THANKS FOR READING...TAKE CARE AND GOD BLESS..
My Dad owned a junkyard which I worked at as a kid in the '80s, so these videos bring back memories. Escort 1.6 and 1.9 engines/heads, Cadillac 4.1's, Olds diesels, Chrysler/Mitsubishi V6, and these 3.0's. They were all moneymakers if you had a good one.
Ah! Chrysler/Mitsubishi . . . I recall in the 1980s into the '90s of seeing plenty of those late model sedans on the road in California. But, five years later they all seemed to disappear.
@@bloqk16 They all had a cloud of oil smoke coming out of the tailpipe if I am remembering right.
@@bugdrvr Poor exhaust valve stem seals
@@bloqk16I've got the Chrysler/Mitsubishi 3L V-6 in my 1996 Plymouth Voyager base model. 241 000kms and counting knock on wood. My Oldman had a 1996 Dodge Caravan base model, same engine, with 370 000kms (abused kms) before being sold for scrap in 2011. Last time I saw it someone else was driving it in the summer of 2013, with a cloud of blue smoke out the exhaust!
Had one of these. Parents bought it new in the 80's. Had its share of problems. Luckily we had a good mechanic who recognized the timing gear issue and replaced it before it destroyed itself. Transmission was always a problem. I got the car as a teenager and always thought the engine power was strange in comparison to other cars I drove. It was a nice car, engine was very smooth, especially compared to the 4tech - iron duke i4. If you pushed it too hard, it almost started loose power vs pulling more - about 3/4 way into the throttle. It felt like hesitation, but it was not a hesitation like bad gas, it was just a noticeable power loss. There was a sweet spot to drive the car. The advanced carburetor system was crazy and the electronics were always a problem. I traded it in on a new car when it had about 187,000 miles. Nice car, great condition, full of electronic and mechanical bugs.
I think the LK9 was a 90 degree design, which means that it was part of the Buick 3800 program. It's amazing how much different two "children" from the same family can be-
It would be cool to resurrect one from a certain corporate, chain, you-pull-junkyard, and dub it the LKQ9!
Yea look at the Chrysler V6s in the 90s. The 2.7 was garbage but the 3.5 and 4.0 weren’t bad engines.
«It's amazing how much different two "children" from the same family can be». True. One of my children is gay and the other is not.
Hi Adam, I used to work as a mechanic at a Chevrolet dealership in the late 1990s, and the Chevrolet 2.8L 60 degree V6 engine had a major oil pressure issue. On a hot summer day sitting in traffic with the air-conditioning on, the oil pressure would drop to zero, or near zero. These engines did not last very long. GM came out with a larger oil pump that did not correct the issue. Most V6's do not last as long as a V8 does. My favorite V6 is a Chevrolet 4.3L which is a Chevrolet small block 350 V8, with two cylinders cut off. Please reply. Dave...
Mr. Dave, didn't certain 4.3 litre V6s bite it prematurely that came with the oil filter mounted off the block on the inner fender well? I saw quite a few Blazers/S-10's (and GMC equivalents) die due to not priming the oil filter.
@@douglasb.1203 I realize what your talking about, but I was talking about low oil pressure in general, maybe the oil filter location was a large issue. Thank you! Dave...
I had a 2.8 in a 1980 Citation and liked it, ran great even though the car gradually fell apart around it and the fins corroded off the radiator and the cooling system had a few parts held together with JB weld. The car lasted until 1999 and 200k miles with lots of downright neglect.
Cars from the 60's seemed so simple and EZ to maintain. We have a 65 El Camino that still has the original engine, it has never been pulled. Now engines and transmissions seem to come and go every few years. Thanks for another fine watch of American automotive history.
Yes, due to CAFE and federal emissions requirements, precise fuel metering and high-technology is required to make engines perform properly. The 1980s was a learning curve (thus, "peak malaise" around 1983)
@@scottwagner3214 Sounds good unless we get hit by a EMP...... lol
I seem to remember my grandfather talking about someone who bought one of the new downsized '85 Olds 98's with the 3.0 when they came out and couldn't make it run at all. I think the dealer blamed and kept working on the carburator. I also think she gave up and traded for a new '85 or '86 Mercury Grand Marquis 8 or 9 months after buying the Olds.
Unplug the spark control module and they will run. Instead of a cam angle sensor they used this crap.
@@billchildress9756 How will unplugging it fix it? You mean the GM 4 or 5 pin electronic ignition module on the distributor?
@@gregorymalchuk272 If your referring to the 3.0 GM used what they called the EST spark control module that was mounted outside the distributor usually on the firewall. It was used with the MAP sensor and the TPS sensor to control ignition timing. On those old pre OBD II engines you had to jump 2 terminals on the ALDL connector and count the flashes on the Check Engine light to get trouble codes. By unplugging the module it would allow the engine to run plenty good enough to get you home. Without the spark advance it would not have the Oomph it had before but with a scantool you could read those sensors and find which one had the problem. I forgot to mention the coolant sensor too... My bad. I haven't seen any of those since the 90's and I did not have a Scantool at my disposal either.
In 1986, I was shopping for 4 year old Cutlass Cierras. I wanted to get a diesel, but Dad insisted I get a 3.0 V6 because "it would be more reliable." I experienced lots of carburetor issues, coolant leaks, and ultimately a spun rod bearing at 99,000 miles. Guess i was fortunate to make it that far. Mine was a Broughm package. So comfortable, but the engine was truly awful. Only car I ever owned that didn't make it past 100,000 miles.
Ok, now I want a car with this 3.0 in it. I'm fascinated.
No you don’t. Trust me.
Back in HS in the early ‘90s, my buddy got his license and we were allowed to take his mom’s Century to the mall. We got halfway there, stopped at a light, and the car suddenly made a loud bang noise and stalled. We pushed it off the side, called his dad. He got grounded and we both got chewed out for hot doggin as his dad put it. Honestly, we weren’t, we were stopped at a light and it friggin blew. All I heard about it was they got rid of it, wasn’t worth fixing.
We had several a body cars . 2.5 ,2.8, and one 3.0 buick century. The buick would not run no matter how we tried. The others gave many miles of dependable service. I was especially pleased with the 4 cyl
Small correction: the photo you have when mentioning the A bodies is of a Pontiac Pheonix, not a 6000. I think you might have also referred later to the Pheonix when you meant 6000. Interesting video, though!
I did. Mistake.
Thank you I went looking for somebody mentioning that.
By they way the 6000 was the best looking of the bunch
Interesting video, but there was an error in it. (A rarity; imagine that!) You mistakenly associated the X-body Pontiac Phoenix with the A-bodies. Pontiac's A-body was, of course, the Pontiac 6000.
I did. Brain fart. Oops!
At age 47, looking back in hindsight- the most reliable engine I owned was A 1988 Chevy Beretta 2.8 multi port injection. Had it 2 years and changed the oil once or twice in 30,000 miles. Ran like a top. Hey, I was 22 years old at the time so I had other things on my mind besides maintenance. Nowadays, I change oil every 1,400 miles religiously.
My dad got a used 89 beretta in 1997 with the 2.8 multi port injection engine. We had it as a daily driver up until 2006 at which point it had over 500, 000 kilometres on it (310,000 miles). It leaked oil by then but was still running great and some loser rear ended it during the night while it was parked on the street. That was its demise.
Hope you meant 1400 mi. 14000 is way too long!
My grandpa had a Berlinetta with the 2.8 with about 300k on it before it was stolen. Still ram like a too too. My dad would constant take it out for joy rides and beat the hell out of it but it would just take it. My dad refers to it as “the car that just didn’t die”
Stop and go driving or idles more than drives 3 months/ 3,000 miles highway driving 7 months/ 7,000 miles.
You must be doing A LOT of idling to be changing it that frequently.
I change my oil every 3 miles
Back when I was in junior high during the late 80's my best friends parents bought a 1982 Buick Century used with this engine at a local new car dealership. His mom drove it until we were juniors in high school when it consumed oil, and later developed a rod knock. My mother had a 85 Century with the 2.5L Iron Duke, and I later had an 86 Century with the same engine. Both cars the engines were solid even though they had issues like cooling fan block sensors and fan relay problems which were common at the time. My last Century was the 93 with the 3.3L V6 which was the best performing of them all, but over the years rust ate it sadly.
Had an 85 v6 2.8 with port injection mated to a 5 speed. It was free revving and one of the best running engines I owned. I beat it to death for 155k miles & sold to my brother. It leaked from the seals but no indication it was burning any.
Yeah i had a 1988 2.8 liter mated to the Getrag 5 speed and it was as screamer. The manual transmission allows you to rev it to your hearts desire. Great motor transmission combo.
I noticed your picture of the 3.0 V6, fittingly appears to have been taken in a junkyard.
Dad had an 83 century limited company car. 4.3 diesel. Was reliable. Cold start cold morning would shake dash up and down dramatically. Same start would also try to loosen open door from hinges.
What did consumers think about all this? Were they disappointed in the offerings and the small engines or did they not care. Seems like such a lost decade.
- I think it helped push many away from vehicles made by the Big 3 and towards more reliable alternatives such as the Honda Accord & Toyota Camry.
Depended on your age group. If you were like me (turned 16 in 1970), the move to smaller engines really sucked. The only saving grace was that all newer cars suffered from low power so it wasn’t like everybody was speeding by you.
I wasn't even old enough to get my license till 91, but I'd say there was excitement for the "new muscle" like the pony cars ,as anyone a little older recalled the 60s glory days to us kids about hemi 454s with 600 HP and those torqueflite th-400 transmissions, from the factory that ran 9s and you could get one if you knew someone. 🤣🤣
Even though they weren't powerhouses, they were decent for the time and people figured out pretty quickly on how to get a little more from them. At least they'd do a decent powerbrake smokey compared to most of the clapped 70s junk my older friends drove at the time.
I had this same motor in my 1982 Buick Century. I could not believe how gutless this engine was. Hardly any passing power and had really horrible gas mileage. The 1.6 liter OHC for cylinder in my dad's 1984 Old's Firenza felt like it had twice the power of this V6 and got nearly 30 mpg. I was lucky to get 15 mpg out of that V6. Plus, I had to let it warm up for 20min on cold day or else it kept stalling out. One of the many reasons I got rid of that car after a few years.
When me my brother and sister were little kids in the earlier to mid 90s my Dad had an 1986 Chevy Celebrity that was a gunmetal grey metallic with matching cloth grey interior. Was a more base model had the metal vented styled chevy hubcaps but had the 2.8V6. That car was very nice when he first got it and despite it when it was older and started rusting the car still ran and serviced our family good for its lifespan. The 2.8 was a good engine and no it wasn't the fuel injected one that came out as a optional engine for the 85 and newer Eurosports. This one he had was the carbureted version which our year was the last year that GM used it in as 1987 and newer Celebrities has the 2.8 Multiport Fuel Injected version.
I had to chuckle to myself because a few months ago there was a discussion about the 2.5l iron duke 4cyl being perhaps painted negatively for some aspects on your channel.Adam , I do love the the history , I did get to to drive a rental Olds Ciera which was a pretty nice car (maybe an '84) with that engine.I was driving an '81 citation(in the shop) at the time.
I had a 1985 Olds Calais Supreme (N body) with a fuel injected 3.0 V6. Was this the same engine with modifications? It was not my favorite and was a bear to service. All the shops would charge me extra for certain repairs. Just wondering
Yes
GM really got the 3800 on point . . .then dropped it for some rubbish that hadn't finished alpha testing.
GM dropped the 3800 because it was a 90 degree design that was too wide to fit in the upcoming engine compartments - they were trying to save weight due to the CAFE fuel economy mandate. The new motors are often difficult to work on because the car is litterally built around the motor
That was cool. I remember local auto parts stores, when they were independents, used to stock crankshaft kits for those. Those offset crank pins were pretty weak. Did the Buick 4.1 V6 have a similar crankshaft? I think it did but don't remember for sure.
Yes
I'm not an automotive engineer but that diagram of the offset connecting rod gave me the shakes. Then I can just imagine trying to merge onto a freeway and trying not use extended full throttle (when your nearly full-sized auto is being pulled by an engine transmission combo that at best you could call weak sauce).
Eventually every 90 degree V6 from the 1990s and up had the split crank. Including the PRV V6 and the Audi V6.
@@macmanipowermacbookprair4110 With or without offset connecting rods and non-staggered bores?
The 3.0 injected version went on to live in the Somerset/Skylark through at least 1989 which was the last time I had one - in a 1989 Skylark with the handling and ground effects package. It wasn’t as bad as it sounds I promise.
I also had a new 3.0 Somerset in a1985. Ran great and was fuel injected, but it was not the same engine as the LK9 Adam is talking about. Was pretty much trouble free.
I have a 3.0 Somerset MPFI now
@@michaelkehm3663 - LN7
I had a 84 buick century 3.0 years ago, didn't have a lot of problems, but it had no power, but was a smooth driving, I've also owned 93 century wagon 3.3, 94 century 3.1, 93 olds 3.3, 88 celebrity 2.5, 88 celebrity Eurosport wagon 2.5
So many had no power had an olds no power.
Best advice in the 80's....buy a Camry or Accord😃😀👍
The picture you used for the Pontiac A6000 was actually an X-body Phoenix, 38 seconds
Adam, the A body Pontiac pic you show in the beginning of the video is actually a J body Pontiac Phoenix 4 door hatch back. Although, you don't seem to care for 80's cars, I loved them! Jay
I had a 2.8 in my 82 Citation. Great little engine, my in-laws had Cimmerian. With a 4 in it liked the car not the engine told them to get one with a 2.8 they did love it had it many years
I bought an 84 Cutlass C with this engine in 1987 low mileage, beautiful car. Power roof and every bell and whistle. It was a night mare. I had bought an extended warranty but GM dealer would not honor it. Let it go back. Only drove it a year. Bad experience.
Why wouldn't they honor the warranty??
My first car was a hand-me-down 1983 Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera. One day while driving on the freeway, I noticed that the car was losing power as I continued to press the accelerator. After managing to make it home after putting a few quarts of oil in the engine, the car just gave up. Turns out there was a hole blown through one of the pistons.
Thank you for the informative video. Thanks for caring about 1980's cars. Can you do a video on the Cavalier Z24? That was and still is my favorite car.
Was always curious as to why this engine existed with a fine 2.8 and 3.8 available. The later 3300 was a fine motor however
The 3.3 is a entire different animal. Had 3 centuries with the 3.3 2 89's and a 91. They didn't run a 3.8 in them. I am thinking of swapping a 96 3.1 Chevy in my current 89 century just because which will be fun to do electrical wise, but will sit just fine in it!
@@shawnsatterlee6035 I understand the transverse 3.8 wasn’t available in all of them but I swear SFI 3.8 (pre 3800) cars existed. And as far as 3300 conversions I’d love to find an 82-83 Omega or any Skylark and put 90s low mileage Century front cradle engine transaxle whole car right under one.
@@AlexanderWaylon my '87 LeSabre had an SFI 3.8. And yes, around 120k miles, the timing gears stopped working.
Last US GM I owned. I had a Geo Prizm after that and was amazed at how much less trouble I had with that car. I've been a Toyota and Mazda guy since then.
In high school I had a 2.8 in a 6000, was a zippy little car until it blew a head gasket. I had one of the 2-door 6000's which was sort of rare.
I drive a 1988 Chevy celebrity with the V6 2.8Liter. I've got plenty of stories about that engine and it only has 179,300 on it! When I bought it 14 years ago it had 98,450ish on it. My most recent project this last weekend was replacing the original heater return hose that recently burst. This beast best as I can tell was built in early September 1987 and entered service on 14 October 1987. I found the business card of the salesman in the glove box along with some of the original paperwork.
My dad was a parts guy at a small GM dealer for many, many years. My first car was a 1-owner '85 Buick Century that was taken on trade with this very engine. I remember it was not that smooth running, and was utterly gutless, but we had great reliability, actually. Now, I was 15 years old, and I don't remember if my Dad already had the service records for this car, but he may have known work that had already been done. All I knew was he paid about $300 for it, the first owner(s) were a farmer and his wife, and the car had 165k miles on it when we got it. However, other than lots of sand/gravel dings in the paint from the dirt roads they lived on, it was an amazing car in great condition. For whatever reason, they ordered it with about every option, too (power windows/locks, tilt, big fluffy seats, level ride, vinyl roof, chrome trim, wire wheel covers, etc.). The only reason we got rid of the car was that is wasn't in condition and reliable enough to take on a highway road trip. It went on to another high school first-driver child of one of my Dad's co-workers, and I got the best car I've ever had: a 1988 Pontiac Bonneville with the amazing 3.8 Liter V6. In comparison, loads of power, and a joy to take a long road trip in. I cried when someone pulled out in front of me and totalled the car in 2004 with around 140k miles. Wish I could get her back.
Those damn Celebrities and their cousins were everywhere in NW Iowa where I grew up. Whenever I see one online, I'm immediately taken back to mid-80's small town Iowa.
0:39 Not a Pontiac 6000 a body picture. But you know I loved the video. 🥝✅. How could the team downgrade the stirling, age old 231 V6 reliability?
Oops!
@@RareClassicCars Looks like my old 1980 Pontiac Phoenix 2.8 v6 a rare car here in the UK .
@@peterfox3989 It is a Pontiac Phoenix SJ, Pontiac's version of the Chevrolet Citation X-11.
I guess it all depends on what day of the week it was built like they used to say... I had a co-worker with an 85 back in the early 90s and at that time the car was approaching 300K and it was still running strong minus a small oil leak
My Dad had a long list of cars with crap engines. 65 Corvair Monza with the low end engine, a 73 VW bus the that ate 4 engines during his ownership, the 2.8 Peugeot Renault Volvo v6, the 3L v6 in an 85 Buick A body, a 3.8 v6 in a Taurus....there was, at least, an indestructible 3l Vulcan in another Taurus.
Yep, I've got 361,000 on the Vulcan in my Taurus
@@jamesengland7461 Me...on the other hand....1200 Honda, 2.8 Cologne, 327 Chevy, 400 Pontiac, Slant 6, 289 and 5L Fords, 1500 Honda, 2.3 Turbo Ford, 4.3 Chev, 3.8 Buick, 5.0 Coyote, all bomb proof.
I forgot to mention that those 3.0's were real good at eating bearings and chukking rods out of the block when abused. Pontiac also used these engines in Grand Am 4 door cars too. The Iron Duke made a believer out of me when I put 450 miles on one that blew a rod. The oil pump drives would shear the retaining pin because of the chattering gear drive in front of the engine. I had to replace a few of them in my time. The old ones would just quit because of the distributor and when they did away with that it killed a bunch of those engines! In the late 80's they went to chain drive and it fixed the problem. That aluminum cam gear made a sound that you could tell what engine was under the hood before you even opened it. I even found one in a 87 S10 long WB 4WD 5 Speed truck!
As a mechanic who used to work on these cars, I would say the 2.5 4 cylinder was a much worse engine. And the carbureted 2.8 was also troublesome, with the main problem being it's variable venturi carburetor and all of it's vacuum hoses. Overall, this was a sad point in GM engine history. Luckily it got better once they started putting multi port fuel injection on the engines.
A client of mine had an 84 Celebrity Eurosport that had the 2.8, she put around 200K on it with very few issues. A neighbor had an 82 Century with the 3.0 engine, at a relatively low mileage, a spark plug broke and busted up the piston. Another neighbor and I helped with the repair and put the thing back on the road. I moved before I could find out how long it lasted.
The later 3.3 was good. Felt like a revvy 3800.
Hey Adam, thanks for sharing this informative video!!! 👍🙂👍
I have a 1985 Buick Century with the 3.0, bought at an auction some 7-8 years ago, was stored in a barn due to a bad fuel pump. It had the biggest mouse nest I have ever seen in the trunk but thats another story. I dropped the tank and replaced the pump, pulled the carburetor and rebuilt it, replacing every single electronic control in the carb with new parts. All new ignition parts at the same time along with a water pump. Got it running, tweaked on the carburetor some and replaced all vacuum lines along with the PCM and the intake heater (Early Fuel Evaporation). That was 40,000 miles ago, engine runs with 5w-30 synthetic oil year round and it starts down as low as -15F. It is a little cold blooded, usually let it idle 20 seconds before taking off with it, it surely isnt a powerhouse but seems to move the car along just fine. It now shows just shy of 140,000 miles.
I rented a '83 Century V6 for a week while on vacation. One thing I remember is when I took my foot off the gas the car did not initially slow down. It seemed like there was a delay in the engine braking action. Overall it seemed like a decent car but not very exciting. Before today I did not know about the offset connecting rods.
That is done on purpose on modern fuel injected cars. Dropping the throttle plate instantly causes a momentary rich condition that the EFI system cannot react to quickly enough and causes bad emissions for a few moments. Thus, modern cars have a little device on the throttle linkage [or software, with an electronic throttle] that causes it to close over a time period of about 1.5-2 seconds. As to that '83, I have no idea since those were carbureted. The throttle linkage on that car was probably sticky for some reason, that wasn't normal.
@@Flies2FLL nah they still did that throttle closing delay on em for emissions stuff ,same reasons.
Those carbs had a million vacuum hoses and dashpots for stuff like that (if it didn't also have some electric feedback garbage I can't recall)
They did that alot back then , as in alot of manufacturers using that trick.
Your driving tips sound very similar to my little 21rc engine in my 83 celica. Really does not like to be revved out and I hardly push it pat 3k. It happily pulls itself along at 2k rpm all day.
Amazing what GM offers up to the public.
That's not a 6000LE, it's a Pontiac Phoenix X body.
Yeah, I noticed that .. why did someone make this mistake ?? An X body is not the same as an A body
I had a 84 Camaro with the 2.8 last year for carb. Random stalling issues from day one dealer never was able to resolve then at 65,000 head gasket blew. Traded it in on a Mazda and never stepped into a GM dealership again.
Hi Adam, This is a really interesting post for me as an Australian as one of the little known facets of GM history is that its Australian Divisions 6 cyl engine had reached the end of the road due to its inability to be converted to unleaded. GM-H looked around world wide externally and internally for a replacement to power the Commodore. Your description here explains why the replacement engine came down to the Nissan RB-30 and believe it or not the Jaguar AJ-6 with the Nissan RB-30 getting the gong.
But it didn't take them long to switch to the 3800 anyway
@@mrspandel5737 It was an economic decision not an engineering based one as the $A dropped significantly against the yen causing GM-H to loose money on every RB-30 brought. The VN commodore was originally designed for the RB-30 and had to be re-engineered for the 3800 v6
The wider 3.0L and 3.8L were only offered in the Ciera and Century because their front clip was longer than the Celebrity and 6000. I measured them when I worked in a GM dealership in 1984. The 3.0L was a nightmare of customer complaints (shake the fillings out of your teeth.) That was most likely why GM started telling service managers to refer to them as customer comments instead of calling them complaints. And you probably already know you show an X body Phoenix at :37 instead of a 6000.
Yes. I goofed. Thx!
They used then in pontiac grand am 4 door cars too. I upgraded an 85 grand am to a 3800 and it was no small feat! The 3.0 self destructed and even knocked the starter off the engine. It lost 5 rods that made short work of the block itself. I had to graft the wiring from the donor car and use the ecu too. after all that work I turned the on and the engine light flashed twice, cranked it and it fired right up. No codes. The next to go was the transmission.
I've had well over 30 A-Bodies (Currently have four and the Century diesel shown early in the video was one of mine LOL!) and can verify that the engine compartments are all the same. There is no size difference. You can even bolt a Century/Ciera front clip onto a Celeb or 6000 although the body feature line under the beltline is different.
I think you were just wanting to see if we were paying attention.... @ the 38 sec time stamp that's not a Pontiac 6000 but a Pontiac Phoenix..!
You’re correct. I goofed!
I always liked the Phoenix dash though with the gages in the middle with the round air vents.
My cousin gave me one of those cars about twenty years ago and we could not kill it, we drained the engine oil out and ran it for about fifteen minutes and it still ran so we put the old oil back in and run the crap out of it until we scrapped it.
I would like to interject a little information concerning 1982-85 Buick 183 C I 3.0V6 , this info would cover all front wheel drive Buick engines from 1982-92 includes early 3800sfi TPSFI 88-92 the 3.0 will have better oil pressure if you change the screen for the oil pump inside the pan the pickup screen used on early engines the screen has small holes that get plugged easily, to remedy that problem use the pickup screen from a 1993 and later series 2-3 3800 engines the new screen is has a smaller circumference but larger holes than the early screens,if you change the screen and have a good oil pump the engine will maintain higher oil pressure,P. S in early engines use a 4 quart oil pan 93-97 engines use a 5 quart oil pan series 3 use a 6 quart oil pan 1998-09.
Oh boy, you don't need to tell me about that awful engine. My grandparents bought a decently loaded 1985 Cierra. It had that awful 3.0 2V engine. When the thing was brand new it stalled about 5 times just getting it out of their garage. They gave me the car when it had 75k miles on it (they'd already had head gaskets done). It also had the digital cluster which was a cable driven digital speedometer and the speed would jump all over the place. I tried several different rebuild clusters from the dealer, and all had their own issues. Long story, crappy car. Too bad it didn't have the 3.8 and analog gauges, that would have been a step up. But on another note, that was one of the most comfortable cars one could imagine.
You showed a picture of a Pontiac Phoenix (X-body), not a 6000.
I compare the difference between the 3.8 and the 3.0 Buick to the difference between the Ford 302 and 255 v8. Similar but different enough to feel totally weak.
Great analogy!
You mentioned the 3.0 liter being offered in the C body cars for 1985 but you failed to mention is was the base engine for the all new redesigned Oldsmobile Delta 88 and Buick Lesabre for the 1986 model year only. I know this because it's first in the sales literature but also i had a friend of the family that had that engine in their base model Oldsmobile Delta 88 Royale sedan in 1986. It might have been fuel injected at that point but it was still the standard engine in that model/year.
I think ALL c bodys got the LN7 - 3.0L MPFI version
@@jakeballard7999 and H bodies too for 1986.
Mom had a Celebrity with an Iron Duke engine. I thought that was horrible but I guess it could get worse.
I guess I was a lucky one. Had an '85 Ciera with the LK9 from 2011-2018, and it was never problematic aside from occasional issues with the choke sticking. The car would probably still be running to this day, but it was wrecked then rigged back together by the next owner, then he passed on and it has likely been junked by now.
I had a 1983 cutlass ciera with a 3.0 litre buick motor in it and that thing lasted forever. It rusted out to the point I had holes in the floor board but that engine ran like a top. I don't know how many miles that car had on it when I totaled it but it had at least 4 different owners before I got it and by the time I recieved it, it had developed a slip in the transmission but it never failed and I know I put at least 50k miles on it myself. odometer only went up to 99k so hard to say how many miles it had but I was still driving it in the 1997 when I graduated highschool. I loved that car and it was very reliable. That thing still ran even after I got broad sided and had a foot and a half deep dent in the the passenger side of it. I drove it around behind my grandparents house after that accident with the hole side smashed in and it still ran good. Only thing that I found bad about it was that it ate starters as the starter was wrapped by the exhuast and it cooked them. I probably put at least 4 starters on it when I was driving it and had 2 batteries in it just to make the starter last a little longer.
Mid 90's I bought an '82 Chevy Celebrity cheap because it had an audible knock. I ran 50 weight oil in it, then 70 weight, then went to 90 weight straight gear oil. I never changed it just kept on adding. It lasted about a year and went 10k miles before it stopped. It was the 4cyl..
My dad had an 85 Oldsmobile cutlass Cierra with the 3.0. we actually had good luck with it. He put over 200k on it. I remember riding from El Paso to Baton Rouge in the back seat back in 92. Long trip.
I had a 1980 Malibu with the Chevy 229ci V6 (a semi-odd fire V6 derived from the 305ci V8). That engine was such a pile... noisy, vibrational, couldn't get out of its own way. For years I fought with it to resolve the idle vibration, and finally someone with some GM dealer experience told me that all the 229s vibrated. It was just inherent in the design. Could not believe GM put that on the market.
The 2.8/3.1/3100/3400 60v6 had a decent niche following. I did a lot of tuning on my modded 2.8 :) I even mapped out the $DF tuning file to like 99.9% completeness.
Haha ,I remember my buddies 84 GMC s15 with a 2.8 v6.
The exhaust rotted off behind the cat,and all that was laying around was some pipe and an old cherry bomb.
So the 'bomb went on and a pipe went out the back.
It sounded like a Detroit 2 stroke almost, well, like a brother to one at least.
Used it as a landscaping truck hauling a 52" scag for 5-6yrs and took quite a beating.
I have a Honda Civic and I change it every 3000...km., not miles.
I don't care if people tell me that's too much.
And I run synthetic
Those additives you suggested don't really work with today's oils because of the large percentage of detergents in the oil. These detergents will clean most of the additives off what ever the oil is lubricating.
Pretty certain that was a Pontiac Phoenix at the beginning and not a 6000. Enjoyed the video as always.
So glad to have a 1985 Toronado and a 1984 Buick LeSabre Limited Coupe, each with the Olds 307 V8.