There is no question quality filters make a difference. However in the
case of your 3.4L, there is a recall on this issue. The problem is
referred to as I believe "piston slap" and GM dealers will listen to
the engine for about 60 to 70 sec. If the sound goes away before that
period, it is normal. If it lasts longer, they will rebuilt the
engine. I'm not 100% sure if they notified all owners or not, but go
to a dealer with your VIN and ask. Other than that, there is head
gasket issue. Look on the web for 3.4L cooling and gasket issues.
The engine is also noted for a rather "near-rough" idle condition that
all N.American GM V6 engines have had on and off for about 10 or 12
years now. This engine is still in wide use, the newest application is
in Chevy Equinox, in this application it is made and assembled in
China.
> There is no question quality filters make a difference. However in the
> case of your 3.4L, there is a recall on this issue.
There is "no" recall on this issue. There is a "bulletin", but no
recall. So if you are out of warranty, you are basically..."out
of luck".
> The problem is
> referred to as I believe "piston slap" and GM dealers will listen to
> the engine for about 60 to 70 sec. If the sound goes away before that
> period, it is normal. If it lasts longer, they will rebuilt the
> engine.
Try 2-3 minutes. And they don't rebuild the engine, we install
new pistons...only...no new rings, and no new rod bearings.
And it fixes the problem for a few kilometers.
> I'm not 100% sure if they notified all owners or not, but go
> to a dealer with your VIN and ask. Other than that, there is head
> gasket issue. Look on the web for 3.4L cooling and gasket issues.
What head gasket issue? Intake gasket issue, no head gasket
issue.
> The engine is also noted for a rather "near-rough" idle condition that
> all N.American GM V6 engines have had on and off for about 10 or 12
> years now.
"Near-rough" idle condition? Interesting....never heard
of that, and I've been a GM dealer tech for 24+ years
now. Where do you get your information?
Ian
Fred - 20 Jun 2004 11:26 GMT
Yes, you're absolutely right. It's the intake not the head gasket. As
for the "near-rough" idle, this is my description of all 2.8, 3.1, 3.4
engines. They seem to have been programmed to idle so lean that the
engine's idle quality is ok at the time of show room delivery, but
5000 miles down the road, things drift and depending on quality of
gas, air temp, atmospheric pressure, phase of the moon, ... etc. they
all tend to idle rough at stop lights with transmission in "D". I've
noticed this only on two brands of cars, GM from after about two or
three months of service and Nissan/Infiniti brands after about 100,000
miles or so. Compare this to the idle quality of a Honda 1.6, 1.8,
2.0, 2.2, from show room floor to the end of life, they usually run
great.
Was there a recall on the coolant flow issue? What year was it
actually fixed in production? I know a friend of mine who had 38,900
miles and his 3.4 in a Pontiac Montana had that problem. Cost was
$3100 and it was not covered
> > There is no question quality filters make a difference. However in the
> > case of your 3.4L, there is a recall on this issue.
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
>
> Ian
shiden_Kai - 20 Jun 2004 16:56 GMT
> Was there a recall on the coolant flow issue? What year was it
> actually fixed in production? I know a friend of mine who had 38,900
> miles and his 3.4 in a Pontiac Montana had that problem. Cost was
> $3100 and it was not covered
"Coolant flow issue"? I'm going to assume that we
are again talking about the intake manifold gasket
leak issue. It's an ongoing problem, with ongoing
gasket updates. The latest gasket on the 3.4 engines
in 2004 has had an additional metal pellet inserted
into the gasket in the middle section, and also has
re-designed rubber inserts around the water ports.
Basically, they now have two inserts at that point,
one to seal the water port, the other as a sort of
"backup" gasket to prevent coolant leaking into
the lifter valley. Whether it will actually work remains
to be seen.
Ian
JazzMan - 20 Jun 2004 20:44 GMT
> > Was there a recall on the coolant flow issue? What year was it
> > actually fixed in production? I know a friend of mine who had 38,900
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> the lifter valley. Whether it will actually work remains
> to be seen.
How closely is this 3.4 related to the 3.4 used in the
90-95 F-body cars?
JazzMan

Signature
**********************************************************
Please reply to jsavage"at"airmail.net.
Curse those darned bulk e-mailers!
**********************************************************
"Rats and roaches live by competition under the laws of
supply and demand. It is the privilege of human beings to
live under the laws of justice and mercy." - Wendell Berry
**********************************************************
shiden_Kai - 20 Jun 2004 21:10 GMT
> How closely is this 3.4 related to the 3.4 used in the
> 90-95 F-body cars?
Well, that engine is from the same family, but I
think that at that time it had the cast iron heads.
That was pretty rare to see one of those engines
in the F-bodies, at least up here. Obviously, it
was also different simply because of the RWD
orientation as opposed to the FWD orientation.
Ian
Ian