Tonight my son's looking at an '05 Pontiac Montana with the 3.6L V-6. This car is NEW, with only 30 miles on it. Dealer has 3 of them in stock. The other two have the 3.4L engine. Anyone have any experience with the 3.6, or know of any inherent problems with it? would appreciate your comments. I am concerned that car is still at the dealer, especially since dealer has been paying "flooring" interest on each car since they arrived. General comments ont he Montana model would be appreciated. Thanks, as always.
Any thoughts on Pontiac's 3.6L v-6 engine?
- Thread starter rotorray
- Start date
- Status
Suprised no comments? ANYTHING would be appreciated. Thanx, again.
I thought these had the 3.5? Now they have a 3.9 I think.
JTK
$100 Site Donor 2025
Per GM, only the 3.4L and 3.5L V6's were avail in 2005: http://media.gm.com/division/2005_prodinfo/powertrain/index.html
Joel
Joel
At no point in time was the 3.6L offered in GM's minivan's. 3.4, then the 3.5, and more recently the 3.9.
The Amsoil site lists a 3.4L V-6 for a 2005 Pontiac Montana only.
Well, if you do buy a GM with the 3.6, my experience with it is: the demo Saturn Aura XR would smoke the tires right off the line and would stop only when I let up; the same engine in the 07 Caddy CTS felt much less powerful, sorta doggy actually.
The 3.6 is a corporate engine that started out in Europe. It has around 260 hp depending on application. It is a 4 valve engine compared to the others with 2.
It's available now in G-6, Rendezvous, LaCrosse, Buick Enclave, and GMC Acadia. Also the Pontiac Torrent. It's a cleaner burning engine, easier to pass emissions tests.
It's available now in G-6, Rendezvous, LaCrosse, Buick Enclave, and GMC Acadia. Also the Pontiac Torrent. It's a cleaner burning engine, easier to pass emissions tests.
An '05 Montana would have ONLY had the 3.5L available. It's an OHV, 2 valve/cylinder engine with 200 hp/225 lb. ft. I have an '05 Buick Terraza with the same motor. You're not going to be racing 'vettes with it, but it's got plenty of power for the application. Mine is smooth and quiet, burns absolutely no oil and gets right around the rated gas mileage (18/24). The intake manifold gasket problems that sometimes plagued the 3.1 and 3.4L V6's are supposed to have been fixed in the 3.5 and 3.9L motors. Overall, my wife and I are very happy with our choice.
are montana's plagued with electrical problems like the ventures and other products?
Dont determine a vehicle purchase strictly on driveability. alot of people do and they dont realize the long term maintenance aspect.
I have a couple of montana customers and they regret buying it. They dont have the budget to buy a sienna or oddysey. NO vehicle is perfect but it sure seems the oldschool astro/safari 4.3's work primitive work horses with more reliability than the newer chevy platforms. Sienna's and oddyseys have by far less issues and the tranny issues in the honda is covered by the dealerships.
To my knowledge GM still uses the plasticy composite intake gaskets and not even the updated felpro type steel backed rubber seal versions.
Dont determine a vehicle purchase strictly on driveability. alot of people do and they dont realize the long term maintenance aspect.
I have a couple of montana customers and they regret buying it. They dont have the budget to buy a sienna or oddysey. NO vehicle is perfect but it sure seems the oldschool astro/safari 4.3's work primitive work horses with more reliability than the newer chevy platforms. Sienna's and oddyseys have by far less issues and the tranny issues in the honda is covered by the dealerships.
To my knowledge GM still uses the plasticy composite intake gaskets and not even the updated felpro type steel backed rubber seal versions.
Montana's and Ventures should have almost identical electrical problems for the same year models.
Unfortunately, the GM minivans are the worst of the current GM vehicles according to quality scores and warranty work rates. I've read that it mostly has to do with design issues; new models were designed with reducing manufacturing defects in mind compared to older models. Because of this, the GM minivans are complicated and difficult to manufacture with a low defect rate. I'll see if I can find the article, IIRC it was in Automotive News a few months ago. It looks like the original post was a while ago, but in any case, I would not buy these vans unless an extended warranty was part of the deal.
I don't doubt you, DMC, but that's not been my experience. Quality-wise, I've had a very good experience with my Terraza.
JTK
$100 Site Donor 2025
Different MV, but same experience for me. In 4yrs of ownership, my Windstar has been one of the best vehicles I've ever owned. Most of the quality/reliability complaints you see stem from vans with power everything. With all those electric motors, actuators, switches and associated hardware, things are going to break after some years of service. A more basic van is going to be a more reliable van.
Joel
JTK
$100 Site Donor 2025
That crash test clip has been played on here before. I'm not sure of the vintage, but I'm thinking it's old.
Joel
Joel
- Status
