![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#11 |
|
Ride Like an Asshole
Join Date: Feb 2008
Moto: nothing...
Posts: 11,254
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
SFL Expatriate #2
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Raleigh, NC
Moto: CBR1000
Posts: 2,043
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Pug Queen
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Moto: DR200, SV650
Posts: 2,486
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | ||
|
uncomfortably numb
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: JOH-JAH!
Moto: WR250R & Bonneville
Posts: 409
|
Quote:
The 3.1L family was plagued with intake manifold gasket failures from (I think) 94-on, but aside from that the engines were pretty bulletproof. I've owned several, but I prefer the 4-cylinder. So much easier to repair/maintain. Lifting a 3.1L off its mounts just to replace the inboard spark plugs is a bitch. Quote:
A-body 4-cylinders were all paired with non-OD, 3-speed transmissions, while all V6 models of which I am aware received overdrive 4-speeds. Fuel economy between the two is therefore almost identical. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Trip's Assistant
![]() Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Imported from Detroit
Moto: 2009 HD Street Classic
Posts: 12,149
|
Yeah my V-6 with 4 speed (OD) got great milage for being a mid size four door. Even when it had 270k on the clock. The motor or trans had never been opened short of basic maintenance.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|