3.0 V6 vs 3.9V6

From: Scott Drega (sdrega@yahoo.com)
Date: Wed Feb 07 2001 - 19:39:29 EST


I could not resist adding my $0.02 on this thread as I
am pretty involved with FWD mopars as well.

The 3.0 V6 is well known for the fact that its valve
guides tend to drop, causing a great deal of smoking.
The early ones are especially problematic. I believe
they remedied this problem around 94 or so, but not
certain on the year they made changes.

My family's own 3.0V6 91 Daytona ES lost the engine at
around 131k. This car was driven easy and regularly
maintained. The A604 trans also went around 110k and
those transmissions are known to be problematic. In
my opinion the 3.0V6/A604 ultradrive combo is probably
the least desirable drivetrain you could get in an
89-95 FWD mopar.

As for the 3.9, my understanding is that this engine
is basically a 5.2 (318) with two less cylinders. The
318 has proven to be a great engine, I would think the
same holds for the 3.9 since it is based on the 318
design. I almost bought a new 96 Dakota Sport 3.9 5
speed in 1996 when I decided to buy my Shelby Dakota.

Scott
89 Shelby Dakota #894 (For Sale)

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 11:59:11 EDT