First mass-produced domestic DOHC 24V V-6?

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: A_Harman

You're not allowed to exclude the GMC truck V6 because it was so awesomely large that any fan of American engines HAS to like it.

Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: Spazdog

The Ford MustangII solid lifter 2.8 V6 predates it. But it was made in Cologne (Koln) Federal Republic of Germany.


My Mom had a 78 Mustang 2 with the 2.8 V6 with a 4 speed stick. Sounded like it was going to blow up past 3k RPMs.

The Cologne V6 turned into a 4.0 for the Explorer/Ranger and a 4.0 SOHC version for the Explorer/Ranger/Mustang. It had a long run until the 3.7 showed up in the Mustang a few years ago.


I always thought the MustangII (and a few Pintos) with the 2.8 sounded kinda' mean. There was some valveterain noise but it was a solid lifter engine.
It was choked out by '70s US emission standards and watered down US unleaded gas compression ratios from the 130 hp versions the Europeans got.

The right rear end ratio with an OHC 2.3 and a 4spd seemed quite nearly as quick as the V6.

Some of the early Fox bodied Mustangs got the 2.8 V6 also. (and the 3.3 L6)I think in '83 it was just the 2bbl Essex 3.8 for 6 cyl options (might have been '82)
My early Fox body Mustang "L" had a 2.3. It was as quick as a 3.3 with automatic but got beat soundly by the Essex/automatic.

 

[Spazdog]

I couldn't find a picture of the 2.8 in a Fox body Mustang...but if you are used to seeing V8s in those cars, the 2.8 looks funny. It's stuffed all the way at the back of the engine compartment, the top radiator hose looks like it's 4 ft long and the accessories stick out wider than the engine. Like the alternator is a ft. to the right of the engine.

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
4.3? That engine is as old as it gets, LOL.



No, its not. I remember when the 4.3 was introduced in the 80s... but I wasn't even alive with the GMC 305 came outin ~61, and was still riding in the car-seat in Mom's 62 Olds 88 when the Buick odd-fire came out.

So, let's exclude the GMC 305 for a minute (as a heavy-truck only engine) and I'll ask another question: what and when was the first mass-produced American v6 of the modern era (post WWII) that was not a [censored] v8 (IOW, a 60-degree v6, not a 90-degree made on a V8 block design).




You're not allowed to exclude the GMC truck V6 because it was so awesomely large that any fan of American engines HAS to like it.

I can and will exclude it from the question... but I also DO like it because its so awesomely tough. Its a beast, a brute, a bear, a monster on steroids. And pound for pound and dollar for dollar will outwork a 454 10 times over. Just a little slower ;-) But YOU know that way better than anyone else on this board, right???? ;-)

Originally Posted By: A_Harman


But if you want to talk about cars:
The 2.8L V6 introduced in the GM X-cars in the 1980 model year. As a pushrod engine, that basic design survived all the way to 2011 in displacements up to 3.9L. It's still being produced in China.
But Ford was selling the European 60-degree V6 in Mercury Capri's before then. I think that was referred to as the Cologne V6.


Agreed on all. IIRC the 2.8 v6 came out first, but I don't know whether the Chrysler 3.3 or the Ford Vulcan came out next. Without googling it up, I want to say Vulcan around '86 or 87, Mopar 3.3 around '88 or 89. Something like that. And of course the Mopar 3.3 family line survived on as the Jeep 3.8 up until its replacement with the Pentastar just this model year.

I always liked the pre-Fox Capri ("The Sexy European") a lot. There were still a lot on the road even when I was in college in the 80s, but dang its a rare sight to see one now, even at car shows.

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog
and the accessories stick out wider than the engine. Like the alternator is a ft. to the right of the engine.

That comment makes me think of the way the generator (and starting in '61, alternator) was mounted on the early Chrysler big-blocks. It doesn't look so goofy on a Max Wedge where the cross-rammed carburetors hang out even further, but on a base grocery-getter with AC, that belt pair that turns the compressor andthe genny is just stupid LOOOOOONG!

 

[Kruse]

Originally Posted By: Ben99GT
Originally Posted By: itguy08
The V6 SHO was a Yamaha engine.


Not exactly, it was a Yamaha-ized Vulcan V6.



IIRC, the block was cast in the U.S., but the machine work was done in Japan. It was then shipped back to the states. No wonder those cars had a high price tag.

 

[Kruse]

Originally Posted By: flacoman
The GMC V-6 was "doubled up " into a 702 V-12!


There is a GMC V-12 block sitting in the local machine shop that's been there awhile. Seems the block owner couldn't afford the final cost of machine work and is still trying to come up with the money to get it out of hawk.

 

[TFB1]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog

Some of the early Fox bodied Mustangs got the 2.8 V6 also. (and the 3.3 L6)I think in '83 it was just the 2bbl Essex 3.8 for 6 cyl options (might have been '82)
My early Fox body Mustang "L" had a 2.3. It was as quick as a 3.3 with automatic but got beat soundly by the Essex/automatic.


Yeah I owned a '79 Capri that had the 2.8 V6, plus a '80 Mustang with the 3.3L in line six with a 4 speed O/D trans... While the Capri was loaded with power everything and sun roof, the Stang was a odd duck with no power anything, not even P/S, P/B or A/C... Apparently the only options were the 6cyl and trans that was no doubt mandatory(vs std 4 speed) for the engine...

Both bought to resell, didn't have either more than a month or so...

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: TFB1
Originally Posted By: Spazdog

Some of the early Fox bodied Mustangs got the 2.8 V6 also. (and the 3.3 L6)I think in '83 it was just the 2bbl Essex 3.8 for 6 cyl options (might have been '82)
My early Fox body Mustang "L" had a 2.3. It was as quick as a 3.3 with automatic but got beat soundly by the Essex/automatic.


Yeah I owned a '79 Capri that had the 2.8 V6, plus a '80 Mustang with the 3.3L in line six with a 4 speed O/D trans... While the Capri was loaded with power everything and sun roof, the Stang was a odd duck with no power anything, not even P/S, P/B or A/C... Apparently the only options were the 6cyl and trans that was no doubt mandatory(vs std 4 speed) for the engine...

Both bought to resell, didn't have either more than a month or so...

My '80 Mustang L had AM radio, Power steering and power brakes. No A/C. Ugly steel wheels with black plastic center caps.

Like that but I remember it being more brown
I actually wanted the 3.3 L6. I thought it "more like the original Mustang" with 4 lug wheels and a 200. But after racing one, I'm glad I didn't. It kinda' lurched off the line and then didn't do much of anything.
A girl at my school had an '83 Mustang GL with the 3.8 and an automatic. I think the Essex was only rated at 110 hp but the way it rocketed away from me, I thought it was a 5.0.

Definitely faster than a 255.

I still can't find any source to indicate where the '74+ 2.8 Cologne V6 was made. I'm pretty sure it was German made and exported to Dearborn.

 

[SwampSurvivor]

I think the colognes started out being imported from Germany, then we started making them here for the Ranger, Aerostar, Exploder ...

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: Miller88
I think the colognes started out being imported from Germany, then we started making them here for the Ranger, Aerostar, Exploder ...


I'm pretty sure that every cologne ever made, has come from Germany. The 4.0L in our mustang was. And the transmission was from France. Hmmmmm, I'm pretty sure there's a joke in there somewhere....

 

[TFB1]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog

A girl at my school had an '83 Mustang GL with the 3.8 and an automatic. I think the Essex was only rated at 110 hp but the way it rocketed away from me, I thought it was a 5.0.

Definitely faster than a 255.

With their head gasket issues, I've always said the only way I'd own a Ford 3.8 was if someone gave it to me... Combined I've owned probably 25 Fox Stangs, Capri & T-Birds, excepting for the '79 Capri & '80 Stang mentioned, all were 2.3, 2.3 Turbo(Birds) or 5.0...

 

[Spazdog]

Yeah, the Essex is still one of my least favorite V6es.

Better than the 255...

that's not saying much.

It seems like they eventually ironed out the bugs with the last few 4.2s. But that's a long time to have a problematic engine.

I liked the SuperCoupe okay....prefer the TurboCoupe. I never did get my T-bird Turbo Coupe but I wanted one.

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: Nick R


I'm pretty sure that every cologne ever made, has come from Germany. The 4.0L in our mustang was. And the transmission was from France. Hmmmmm, I'm pretty sure there's a joke in there somewhere....


I don't know. I can't think of any way for an engine to invade a transmission... except maybe by first sending coolant into the trans fluid cooler. Was the trans cooler made in Poland? ;-)

 

[itguy08]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog
The right rear end ratio with an OHC 2.3 and a 4spd seemed quite nearly as quick as the V6.

Some of the early Fox bodied Mustangs got the 2.8 V6 also. (and the 3.3 L6)I think in '83 it was just the 2bbl Essex 3.8 for 6 cyl options (might have been '82)
My early Fox body Mustang "L" had a 2.3. It was as quick as a 3.3 with automatic but got beat soundly by the Essex/automatic.


You must have had a ringer of a Mustang then. I had an 86 LX with the 2.3 and 4 speed and it was a dog. But that was a good thing for a 17 year old kid. I remember getting beaten badly by my buddy with a 2.2L Omni with a 5 speed stick.

It was tough as nails though - climbing hills was pretty much foot to the floor with the engine screaming along at 4-5k RPMs until the speed just maxed out. I bought it with 58k and crushed it at 175k with the original engine. Only reason was the car was rusting out and we got emissions testing and the only thing left of the emissions system was the cat. Since I already had a new car and didn't need a 3rd the wife made me get rid of it.

 

[TFB1]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog


I liked the SuperCoupe okay....prefer the TurboCoupe. I never did get my T-bird Turbo Coupe but I wanted one.


I've owned, uhh, well a few...

Here's a small sample, something like 14 in all... The White one has had a Trick Flow headed 5.0 in it since '99... All that are left is it and the blue one in middle that's a parts car... Getting hard to find...

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
The right rear end ratio with an OHC 2.3 and a 4spd seemed quite nearly as quick as the V6.

Some of the early Fox bodied Mustangs got the 2.8 V6 also. (and the 3.3 L6)I think in '83 it was just the 2bbl Essex 3.8 for 6 cyl options (might have been '82)
My early Fox body Mustang "L" had a 2.3. It was as quick as a 3.3 with automatic but got beat soundly by the Essex/automatic.


You must have had a ringer of a Mustang then. I had an 86 LX with the 2.3 and 4 speed and it was a dog. But that was a good thing for a 17 year old kid. I remember getting beaten badly by my buddy with a 2.2L Omni with a 5 speed stick.

It was tough as nails though - climbing hills was pretty much foot to the floor with the engine screaming along at 4-5k RPMs until the speed just maxed out. I bought it with 58k and crushed it at 175k with the original engine. Only reason was the car was rusting out and we got emissions testing and the only thing left of the emissions system was the cat. Since I already had a new car and didn't need a 3rd the wife made me get rid of it.


'86 had a Carter feedback 1bbl IIRC. Up to around '83 they had 2bbls that looked like they were double the size of the 1bbl Carter.

The '80 was probably about as quick as my 20R powered Celica had been. The Celica felt more responsive but I bet the old Pinto engine could give it a close run.

That was relative to the time, a 20R Celica would probably get beaten pretty soundly by a lowly 2012 Kia Rio.

 

[silverrat]

Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Originally Posted By: silverrat
I had a Monte Carlo Z34

Why the frown face? Are you sorry you owned it or sorry you got rid of it?


I had one and loved it but spent a ton on it including a transmission rebuild, two alternators, intake gaskets, radiator, strut mounts, power steering lines, timing belt, tensioner, etc. all at around the 8 year 70,000 mile mark.

Couldn't get local indy mechanics to work on the engine so had to take it to dealer, now defunct North York Chevrolet Oldsmobile, to get all of the above done. But at least I had a third party warranty that I paid $1000 at purchase and ended up using about $7000 worth of repairs on it, just paying a $100 deductible each time.

When the dealer did the timing belt, the new OEM tensioner they had installed failed during the test drive and damaged the timing belt so they had to the 8.8 hour job over again but ate the cost.

Other stories involve an alternator replacement that get charged at 4.4 hours book, because you have to undo some of the suspension to get to it.

Transmission was going again 15,000mi after rebuild. Apparently in 1995 4T60 was okay for the 160 hp 3.1 V6 but couldnt handle to increased power from the 210 hp 3.4, esp when driven hard (ie. WOT shifts). This was fixed I believe in 97 when they went to 4T65.

Sold it and bought a 1991 Civic CX with no factory passenger mirror and no factory clock. I learned to go simple after the Monte Carlo.

I should say that if I could find a 98/99 with 3800 and 4T65 thats good I may go back.

 

[Norm Olt]

Originally Posted By: Nick R
Originally Posted By: Miller88
I think the colognes started out being imported from Germany, then we started making them here for the Ranger, Aerostar, Exploder ...


I'm pretty sure that every cologne ever made, has come from Germany. The 4.0L in our mustang was. And the transmission was from France. Hmmmmm, I'm pretty sure there's a joke in there somewhere....


Actually the 1st cologne was 4711 and it still smells great!

 

[Spazdog]

The DeLorean had an OHC V6.

I don't think it counts as a domestic though....it was made in Ireland and had mostly the same engine as the Volvo 260 series(pretty sure it's a 12valve)

 

[artificialist]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog
The DeLorean had an OHC V6.

I don't think it counts as a domestic though....it was made in Ireland and had mostly the same engine as the Volvo 260 series(pretty sure it's a 12valve)


It was an SOHC 12V as you said. It was called the "PRV" engine because Peugot, Renault, and Volvo built it.
I heard that engine was terrible.