2005 (Impala)3.4 or 3.1(century)

[Buick92]

Is the 3.4 more or less prone to the intake manifold gasket leak than a 3.1?

Two Choices:
2005 Buick Century (11,000 miles) 3.1
asking $11,999

2005 Chevy Impala (18,000 miles) 3.4
asking $11,999

Both cars are in good condition, but are not the high end models. If you had to choose which one is the better buy and why? Thanks

 

[Kenw57]

both 3.1 and 3.4 engines were prone to the intake manifold gasket failure, however the gasket and bolts were changed in mid-02 which dramatically reduced the failures...

2005 models use a 3.8 V6 which is a different design??

 

[GoldenRod]

The 2000-2005 Buick LeSabre with its 3.8L V6 would be a much better choice.

 

[c502cid]

They are both great cars with good engines. However, if you could pay just a little bit more for one with a 3800 you'll be dollars ahead in the long run in reliability, power, and surprisingly enough, fuel economy too.

 

[DJ]

My wife has an 03 Impala with the 3.4l, been great too her and has maybe 55-60K sofar. She drives hard and still manages over 30mpg on 55mph roads dotted with small towns she has to slow down for so I wouldn't call it highway. The 3.4L has adequate power, I say this as someone who has LT1s in both HIS cars. Heck my slow car is faster than the '04 supercharged 3.8L Impala SS, raced a friend with one at the dragstrip last spring.

 

[Buick92]

The LeSabre is a nice car but they are much more expensive than a used impala or century (at least where I live.) I wouldn't mind finding a used impala with the 3.8 in it, but most of the ones I run into are the 3.4

 

[JTK]

They are both a lot of car for the money. My parents had a 1997 century. It was a good car for them- even though that had the IMG done around 60Kmi. Some family members have impalas. All happy. Go with whichever is more comfortable for you. I'd go with the impala for more room. The IMG replacements are not too costly and most shops are very proficient in doing them if you don't wish to tackle the r/r yourself. The transaxles and drivetrains are pretty solid on these cars.
G/luck
Joel

 

[jamesn]

the 3.8L is an incredible engine. great highway mileage. i had a regal for 3 years as a company car and regularly got into the low 30's loaded down with 500-900 pounds of paperwork. never ever had a problem even using the cheapest kwikie lube oil and filter and crap 87 octane gas.

 

[The Critic]

IIRC, there was a UOA posted here from an 04 Pontiac 3.4 that had the infamous leak. I think 2005 and over should be okay, but do periodic UOAs and keep a close eye on it. Yes, the new 3.5 and 3.8 are better choices.

 

[GoldenRod]

Buick92, I picked up my 2000 LeSabre for $5000 from an old preacher man who was the original owner. The only reason he sold it is because his church bought him a new 2006 Ranier.

It had 82k miles on it, absolute pristine condition with leather, full power accessories, and brand new Michelins. The only thing that doesn't work is the CD player.

What I like most about this car is the leg room. I can stretch out in this thing like I'm in my living room. The other stuff I like about it are: ultra smooth powerfull 3800 Series II V6 motor, firm shifting transmission, full instrumentation, automatic level control, marvelous sound system (minus CD player) and as I already mentioned, the comfort.

The car now has a little over 84k miles on it, but can easily do 300k if not 400k (especially with 3k OCI's). Serviceability is easy too.

The best thing about the 2000-2005 series: they are all identical!

 

[Pluto5]

m2200b, GM is a big bureaucracy and bureaucracies are loathe to admit mistakes.

 

[m2200b]

If you are trying to miss the intake problem,
you need a 2005 or newer 3800 or a 2003 or newer 3.1 or 3.4. I think the GM 3800 is GMs best motor -quieter, more power but its usually in more expensive models. The transmission is the same great 4t60e but don't believe a word of your service manual that you can go 100K on it without changing its fluid or the radiator's.

I know its a rant but I still can't understand how GM could produce all three engines for 10-15 years with such fixable defects and knowledge of its fault without expecting to lose those GM owners to other manufactures forever.

 

[BatmanLS1]

I think I would go for the 3.4 Impala myself. I ride in my friend's 2005 Impala quite frequently. Very smooth car on the highway. He claims low to mid 30's MPG on the highway. He hasn't had the car in for anything since new. Only the standard 5k oil changes. Has about 25k now.

 

[FL-400S]

Ive seen new Malibus in the paper advertised for $11,700. They come with a 2.2L ecotec, like my cavalier. Its got good torque and hp, timing chain, DOHC, etc. Did I mention brand new? And I havent heard of any major problems with ecotecs yet.

 

[The Critic]

quote:

---

Ive seen new Malibus in the paper advertised for $11,700. They come with a 2.2L ecotec, like my cavalier. Its got good torque and hp, timing chain, DOHC, etc. Did I mention brand new? And I havent heard of any major problems with ecotecs yet.

---

I've NEVER seen a new Malibu advertised in the paper for $11.7K. Must've been used. I do see Cobalts advertised for that amount of money all the time. I'd be quite suprised, actually, if I see a 2.2L Ecotec advertised in the paper as an ex-rental, as most rental fleets opt for the 3.5L 6-cyl Malibus.

I was just talking with my quick lube buddy Andy (who is on this site as well) about some of the fleet cars he services in Fargo. He says that he has one customer who had 140K or more on her Ecotec before return it for another one. (Fleet Vehicle) Also, he hasn't seen any Ecotecs come into the shop with low oil or oil leaks yet.

Most of his fleet customers get oil/filter changes every 5K and a transmission fluid/filter change every 30-50K, and their cars often make it past >100K if they're kept that long.

 

[brianl703]

The Chevrolet Malibu Classic produced in 2004/2005 for fleet useage came with an Ecotec (and only the Ecotec).

I had assumed that was because the rental companies were more likely to order the 4-cylinder instead of the 6 (if it had been available).

I'm pretty sure fleet cars get better maintenance than the average privately-owned vehicle. btw, My mom's Ecotec uses no oil between changes (which I do between 3K and 4K because she drives barely 750 miles a month).

 

[Matt_S]

I've driven cars with both engines. I'd take the 3400 over the 3100. More power and torque and you'll still get 30 mpg on the highway. The engines are the same basic design (60 degree V6) and I'm almost positive they even share castings. My inlaws have an '02 century with the 3100. It's a nice car, but fairly gutless.

 

[m2200b]

I'd choose the 3400 as more power in a slightly bigger car ( inside). Enough's been said on 3.8 being the best of these three choices.