what is the best v6 ever made?

[GearheadTool]

Originally Posted By: 301
i had great service with the gm 4.3 in blazers which i used as rural route vehicles delivering mail,,,tough,,,dependable,,


Q1. Vortec?

Q2. VIN "W", or VIN "Z" ? ?

Q3 (redundant S-10 Blazers/1993 and 1994 S-10 Tahoe LT, also S-15 Jimmys?

^^ VIN "W" in the 1993 and 1994.. Outstanding.
VIN "Z" in 1991 and 1992.. Nice, but you want a "W". Vortec.

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: lexus114
Originally Posted By: chevyboy14
just V no inlines if we did inlines the answer is obvious. the 300 i6 lol



What the [censored] is so terrific about the 4.9L Ford inline? It`s a gas guzzler, huge, and power isn't all that great either. So please enlighten me here.


I really don't think it's any better than the 250 Chevrolet, Chrysler Slant Six, Toyota F Inline sixes...etc...

Relatively low compression, low revving engines with perhaps overly robust castings.

For every ballast resistor a Slant Six would puke, a 300 would vomit up it's blue grommet Duraspark module.
The Carter 1bbl wasn't really any better on a 300 than it was on a Slant Six. Then the 80's came and ruined both carbs with add ons that reduced driveability and probably didn't make one ppm less HC.

But then the Ford got fuel injection and the Chrysler joined the Chevrolet 250 and Toyota F series at the retirement home. Replaced by the Magnum 3.9

So the 300 wins in longevity based on how far into the '90s it was produced. But it got replaced with the Essex 4.2 which was a terrible motor in it's first few years. Whomever Ford purchased the gaskets from for the 4.2 did not do them any favors. Perhaps we remember the 300 being better than it really is because it didn't start leaking from the timing cover a week or two after we purchased it. (unlike the early 4.2)

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: KD0AXS
Look up the word "indestructible" in the dictionary, and I think you'll find a picture of a 300 I-6.

I did manage to blow a head gasket in one, but that was because I forgot I had put mostly water in the radiator and it froze. Overheated and puked all the water out the overflow on my way to work. I drove it a good 15 miles back home with no coolant and the temp gauge pegged out. Any other engine would have been destroyed but not the 300. New head gasket was dirt cheap and an easy afternoon job and it ran like new again.


+1 to your post and Clevy's

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: lexus114
Originally Posted By: chevyboy14
just V no inlines if we did inlines the answer is obvious. the 300 i6 lol



What the [censored] is so terrific about the 4.9L Ford inline? It`s a gas guzzler, huge, and power isn't all that great either. So please enlighten me here.


I really don't think it's any better than the 250 Chevrolet, Chrysler Slant Six, Toyota F Inline sixes...etc...

Relatively low compression, low revving engines with perhaps overly robust castings.

For every ballast resistor a Slant Six would puke, a 300 would vomit up it's blue grommet Duraspark module.
The Carter 1bbl wasn't really any better on a 300 than it was on a Slant Six. Then the 80's came and ruined both carbs with add ons that reduced driveability and probably didn't make one ppm less HC.

But then the Ford got fuel injection and the Chrysler joined the Chevrolet 250 and Toyota F series at the retirement home. Replaced by the Magnum 3.9

So the 300 wins in longevity based on how far into the '90s it was produced. But it got replaced with the Essex 4.2 which was a terrible motor in it's first few years. Whomever Ford purchased the gaskets from for the 4.2 did not do them any favors. Perhaps we remember the 300 being better than it really is because it didn't start leaking from the timing cover a week or two after we purchased it. (unlike the early 4.2)


The 300 saw significant use in gensets, irrigation pumps and the like. It was more than just a basic truck engine and that's likely why its durability/longevity is so often touted around here. It was produced long after its use in anything automotive had ceased, I believe you can still purchase a 300 powered irrigation pump. Not so sure about gensets though

 

[Mau]

VQ30

 

[Jarlaxle]

Id rather have TBI...no weird fuel spider.

Originally Posted By: GearheadTool
Originally Posted By: 301
i had great service with the gm 4.3 in blazers which i used as rural route vehicles delivering mail,,,tough,,,dependable,,


Q1. Vortec?

Q2. VIN "W", or VIN "Z" ? ?

Q3 (redundant S-10 Blazers/1993 and 1994 S-10 Tahoe LT, also S-15 Jimmys?

^^ VIN "W" in the 1993 and 1994.. Outstanding.
VIN "Z" in 1991 and 1992.. Nice, but you want a "W". Vortec.

 

[Jim Spahr]

The new GMC/Chevy SUV and light truck lineup has been revealed. What are the engines in those new trucks? The 4.3L V6, the 5.3L V8, and the 6.2L V8. New touches are Direct Injection for all of the above.

read about it here:

http://www.chevrolet.com/2014-silverado-pickup-trucks.html?seo=goo_|_GM+Chevy+Awareness_|_GG-AWR-Chevy-Silverado-K2XX-BP-SN-Exact_|_Chevy+Silverado+2014_|_2014%20chevy%20silverado

 

[HerrStig]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: lexus114
Originally Posted By: chevyboy14
just V no inlines if we did inlines the answer is obvious. the 300 i6 lol



What the [censored] is so terrific about the 4.9L Ford inline? It`s a gas guzzler, huge, and power isn't all that great either. So please enlighten me here.


I really don't think it's any better than the 250 Chevrolet, Chrysler Slant Six, Toyota F Inline sixes...etc...

Relatively low compression, low revving engines with perhaps overly robust castings.

For every ballast resistor a Slant Six would puke, a 300 would vomit up it's blue grommet Duraspark module.
The Carter 1bbl wasn't really any better on a 300 than it was on a Slant Six. Then the 80's came and ruined both carbs with add ons that reduced driveability and probably didn't make one ppm less HC.

But then the Ford got fuel injection and the Chrysler joined the Chevrolet 250 and Toyota F series at the retirement home. Replaced by the Magnum 3.9

So the 300 wins in longevity based on how far into the '90s it was produced. But it got replaced with the Essex 4.2 which was a terrible motor in it's first few years. Whomever Ford purchased the gaskets from for the 4.2 did not do them any favors. Perhaps we remember the 300 being better than it really is because it didn't start leaking from the timing cover a week or two after we purchased it. (unlike the early 4.2)
I saw in a European shop manual for the 70's Dodge Dart what the Ozzies did to versions of the slant 6 produced there. Webbers, split exhausts and even an OHC head, all "factory".

 

[HerrStig]

Remember when Pontiac put an OHC head on the GM six and sold it in the "Tempest". If they had stuck WITH it.... but in typical GM fashion they used buyers to do their final testing and dumped the thing as soon as trouble began.

 

[chestand]

The toyota 3.4 IMHO. The one in my pickup has been pulling me down the road for 442,000 miles now and still runs great.

Half a million miles? Not a problem. I'll be there inside of 12 months from now.

 

[Dakota1820]

i would agree the 300 is one [censored] of an engine as far as its tough. some guys in auto tech give me [censored] jokingly because i have a 302 and not a 300 in my truck but i honestly believe the 302 is on par with the 300. i have seen them get the snot kicked out of them and still go back for more.

 

[cchase]

Originally Posted By: chestand
The toyota 3.4 IMHO. The one in my pickup has been pulling me down the road for 442,000 miles now and still runs great.

Half a million miles? Not a problem. I'll be there inside of 12 months from now.


I'm not one to call people out, but 442,000 miles? Is that 442,000 miles minus 250,000 miles when you got the block replaced under an extended warranty?

Originally Posted By: chestand
My 1995 Toyota T100 blew a head gasket 10 years ago with 250k on the clock. Toyota not only relaced the HGs under recall, they bucked up for a new short block due to cylinder pitting from coolant ingestion.

 

[chestand]

True that. So...the "new" short block only has 190k on it. But, everything else above it has 440k. Heads, water pump, alternator, etc. Plus, it has the original auto trans.

If I mislead anyone, my apologies.

 

[Artem]

I vote on Nissan's VQ series engine which was produced from 1994 +

It's been around for a decade now, used in dozens of vehicles over the years and is used ALL OVER THE WORLD.

It ranges in Displacement from:

2.0L
2.3L
2.5L
3.0L
3.5L
3.7L
4.0L

It lives on today is Nissan's and Infinity's which use the V6.

The VQ series engine was honored by Ward's 10 Best Engines list almost every year from the list's inception.

I honestly don't think it can be beat.
I haven't went through all 9 pages but i'm sure it's been listed before.

 

[afoulk]

From personal experience, I'd have to go with the ford 3.0/4.0 ohv V-6's. I think they sound pretty good with a glass pack on them for a relatively unrefined engine. If were talking straight sixes, again, my personal experience says the "leaning tower of power", but I've had good luck with the Jeep 4.0 too, just havnt put many miles on them. My heart really wants to say the VW VR6. Nothing sounds better when your winding the snot out of it

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

The 300 saw significant use in gensets, irrigation pumps and the like. It was more than just a basic truck engine and that's likely why its durability/longevity is so often touted around here. It was produced long after its use in anything automotive had ceased, I believe you can still purchase a 300 powered irrigation pump. Not so sure about gensets though

The Chrysler slant six saw service in Massey Ferguson farm equipment, Champ forklifts, Hobart welders, Vermeer Wood Chippers, heavy trucks, buses...etc...

I'm sure some company used the 250/292 Chevrolet in similar applications, but you know when you see a Chrysler slant six that it's a Chrysler slant six.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

The 300 saw significant use in gensets, irrigation pumps and the like. It was more than just a basic truck engine and that's likely why its durability/longevity is so often touted around here. It was produced long after its use in anything automotive had ceased, I believe you can still purchase a 300 powered irrigation pump. Not so sure about gensets though

The Chrysler slant six saw service in Massey Ferguson farm equipment, Champ forklifts, Hobart welders, Vermeer Wood Chippers, heavy trucks, buses...etc...

I'm sure some company used the 250/292 Chevrolet in similar applications, but you know when you see a Chrysler slant six that it's a Chrysler slant six.


And the slant 6 has a similar reputation to the 300, LOL

It just saw a much shorter production run, as you pointed out.

 

[Dakota1820]

didn't the slant six just have 4 main bearings? 300 has 6 right? my grandpa wore his 225 out 2 times in the time he owned it. rebuilt it each time. and the third time it died my dad blew it up racing a mustang. the ford lived to see another day but the mopar was dead.

 

[TFB1]

Originally Posted By: chevyboy14
didn't the slant six just have 4 main bearings? 300 has 6 right? my grandpa wore his 225 out 2 times in the time he owned it. rebuilt it each time. and the third time it died my dad blew it up racing a mustang. the ford lived to see another day but the mopar was dead.


The big Ford six(240/300) have seven main bearings... The small Ford 200 I6 was redesigned to include seven main bearings in the mid '60s, it's big brother the 250 (introduced '69) all have seven mains...

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: chevyboy14
didn't the slant six just have 4 main bearings? 300 has 6 right? my grandpa wore his 225 out 2 times in the time he owned it. rebuilt it each time. and the third time it died my dad blew it up racing a mustang. the ford lived to see another day but the mopar was dead.


Ford 300 bottom-end:

Chrysler Slant-6 bottom-end:

Pretty easy to see which one has the advantage here.....