• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

The worst engine ever?

I might be wrong about the sizes. I was thinking they were 2.4, 2.8, and 3.1.

But it might have been 2.8, 3.1, and 3.4. The 3.4 had a weird SFI and computer system on it, iirc.

There was two different 3.4 GM engines. One was an OHV design very similar to the 3100 found in damn near every fwd GM car, the other was a DOHC design that found itself in the Lumina Z34 and the go-fast Monte Carlo. The OHV engine suffered from leaky intake gaskets and blown head gaskets, and the DOHC design was just a pile to begin with.
 
Here's one, a 3.4L V6 from a '95 Camaro. I also had a T5 with the 2.95 1st gear (good with the MG's 3.91 rear). I chickened out on the conversion because the engine and trans both came from ebay and I'd never been around either when it was running.
 
I'm pretty sure you need to put a hole in the hood. Can't say for sure, it's been many years since I was looking into it.

maybe, but the only way I would be messing with all the fuel injection is if it was going right back in the a camaro where it came from

I don't know how tall the carb is, but the way the 2.8, 3.1 and 3.4 stack both upper and lower plenums on top of each other, it would shock me if it was taller than that
 
The car runs fine, and if I'd started that project I never would have finished, so I reconsidered and bailed.

I do remember selling the intake and computer for $100, I think to a guy who puts all that stuff in MGB's.

And with the carb, you have to rig up an air cleaner...maybe just dent the hood, I forget.
 
I'll chime in on diesels.




It made by Navistar, to start, and put in Ford trucks. Like Isuzu makes the Duramax Chevy puts in their truck. Also, after 2004, it had the kinks worked out and was just fine. My friends in industry all run 2005-2007 6.0 engines in F4-550 trucks and they're fine.

Navistar 6.0 Powerstroke-Tons of injector problems, EGR, overpressure and overheat due to EGR, those engines were a mess. I had a 2003 F450 service truck with one for... Six months before I had all those issues which were common for those years of that engines. They were designed for medium duty trucks, not pickups. The dynamic from medium duty to pickup engines changes massively. There's a reason the ones in the F450 and F550 chassis cabs, even in between have their engines rated 325/625 instead of 400/800.

Cat 3208. It's a great marine or water pump engine, but it can't cope with spurts of high RPMs or torque requirements. It's a large displacement V8, which is always a no-no. It was very underpowered for trucks. The cylinders were sleeveless, which meant no in-frame rebuilds. These things lead to short life. As in 80,000 mi in a dump truck.

And as much as the 7.3 Navistar is revered, before it was a turbo diesel with the HUEI injectors, was essentially a slightly smaller 466 which was a tractor/bulldozer engine. It was terribly unsuited to be a pickup engine.

And finally, the Chevy 6.5... Dear god. No. The worst diesel engine ever made. Ever. Ever.

And while I seem to be a Ford/Navistar hater, I can assure you I'm not. I have a 2002 F350 with a 7.3, a 2010 F550 with a 6.4 and now a 2013 F450 with the 6.7. And they're all great. I don't one anything else. And I probably won't

+1 to all of this. Glad to see another diesel guy on here.. My 02 7.3 has treated me wonderfully. Its not the fastest but it'll pull anything anytime.
 
Maybe on the early 2.8, but after about 85 they figured out the weak points, and they turned into very good engines. Mine in my camaro has over 200K on it, and I know several others that have made it past 300K in them
Whatever version that was in the early S10/Blazer pre-4.3 liter. No idea if it was improved upon later or a different platform... I just remember seeing small truck 2.8's come through the shop daily with low miles and catastrophic failure.
 
The 4.9 that came in my 79 Regal was a great engine. All kinds of power and easy on the fuel. Had one in a Parisienne too. Not as peppy with all that car around it, but still respectable.

Buick was stolen in Detroit, Pontiac was t-boned in a snow storm.
 
There is a perfect trinity of evil involved with the Vega motor that no other engine has.

THAT aluminum cylander bore was never going to last in a common production car, given the average joe's attention to maintanance. Bad valve guides/seals. Overheating problems. And the accelerated rust problems of the car the engine was installed in.

Being voted Car Of The Year mislead people into thinking that this pile that looked like poo, smelled like poo, felt like poo, would not taste like poo.

It was an immensly poplular vehicle. The roads were covered in this poo. This is possibly the most popular turd ever.
 
There is a perfect trinity of evil involved with the Vega motor that no other engine has.

THAT aluminum cylander bore was never going to last in a common production car, given the average joe's attention to maintanance. Bad valve guides/seals. Overheating problems. And the accelerated rust problems of the car the engine was installed in.

Being voted Car Of The Year mislead people into thinking that this pile that looked like poo, smelled like poo, felt like poo, would not taste like poo.

It was an immensly poplular vehicle. The roads were covered in this poo. This is possibly the most popular turd ever.

Read post #39 concerning the Vega.