2.8 liter V6 in GMC Jimmy
Dan Dickson
it an I expect it to croak soon due to the inherent unreliability of this
engine.
I bought the Jimmy new and from the start, the engine was severely lacking
in the power and torque department (in '88 they came out with the 4.3 liter).
When the engine gives up its last breath, I would like to explore alternative
power/torque enhancements. The local machine shop has advised me to stay away
from rebuilding the 2.8 due to its reliability factors, so I am in a quandry
as to what to do.
I have heard that it is possible to put a V8 into one of these, but that
requires both engine/transmission swaps as well as suspension and cooling
components.
The other method is to swap to a 4.3liter engine/transmission setup. This
may be costly since I would have to find a 88 or later model that had been
wrecked.
One final note: The automatic transmission that is in the Jimmy will not
mate to anything other than a 2.8 liter engine.
What would you do? What are your experiences? Any constructive and
sympathetic input would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks
Dan
The view/opinions expressed above are solely my own; not my employer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Test Engineering Department |
| Intergraph Corporation |
| Huntsville, Alabama |
| (205) 730-6576 |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Upchurch
In article <1992Mar26....@b21.b21.ingr.com> dic...@b21.b21.ingr.com (Dan Dickson) writes:
>I have a 1987 GMC Jimmy with a 2.8 liter V6 engine. It has 82K miles on
>it an I expect it to croak soon due to the inherent unreliability of this
>engine.
>may be costly since I would have to find a 88 or later model that had been
>wrecked.
I am interested in an engine alternatives as well. I have an 86 4wd Blazer with a
2.8 and no power to speak of. I have wanted to replace the engine since new but
it now has 178.000 miles in it and I have replaced the water pump once. It can't
last forever but it still goes more than 3,000 miles on a quart of oil.
I have thought of trying to buy a wrecked Blazer of Jimmy with the 4.3 in it but the
price is scarey.
Steve
wil...@scivax.stsci.edu
> ... my 88 Beretta ? ... the 5 years I've had it.
> ... This engine will easily last well beyond 200k miles. u
>>What criteria did you use to project with certainty during April of >>1992
>>that your 1988 engine will "easily last well beyoud 200k miles?"
I pretty certain the engine in my >>1988 Beretta which was built and
bought in Feb >>>1987 will last beyond 200k miles due the maintenance
schedule and proven track record. Chevy engines are top-notch.
David E. Wilcox
Walter A. Koziarz
[ someone else wrote ]
>>>What criteria did you use to project with certainty during April of >>1992
>>>that your 1988 engine will "easily last well beyoud 200k miles?"
> I pretty certain the engine in my >>1988 Beretta which was built and
> bought in Feb >>>1987 will last beyond 200k miles due the maintenance
> schedule and proven track record. Chevy engines are top-notch.
as a counter-point, one of my co-workers' *1988* 2.8 liter Berettas has already
had a new engine (cracked block under warranty) and a new transmission (cracked
case, not under warranty). while i wish you continued success, chevy engines
are *far* from 'top-notch'. the best that can be said of them is that a small
block chevrolet engine will run with *more problems* than any other engine i
have personally ever seen. chrysler engines are closer to 'top-notch'...
walt k.
Martin Linsenbigler
In a previous article, koz...@halibut.nosc.mil (Walter A. Koziarz) says:
>In article <1992Apr3...@scivax.stsci.edu> wil...@scivax.stsci.edu writes:
>
> [ someone else wrote ]
>
>>>>What criteria did you use to project with certainty during April of >>1992
>>>>that your 1988 engine will "easily last well beyoud 200k miles?"
>> I pretty certain the engine in my >>1988 Beretta which was built and
>> bought in Feb >>>1987 will last beyond 200k miles due the maintenance
>> schedule and proven track record. Chevy engines are top-notch.
>
>as a counter-point, one of my co-workers' *1988* 2.8 liter Berettas has already
>had a new engine (cracked block under warranty) and a new transmission (cracked
>case, not under warranty). while i wish you continued success, chevy engines
>are *far* from 'top-notch'. the best that can be said of them is that a small
>block chevrolet engine will run with *more problems* than any other engine i
>have personally ever seen. chrysler engines are closer to 'top-notch'...
>
>walt k.
>
I have a 1983 S-10 2wd chevy blazer with the 2.8 liter V6. It has
106,000 miles at the present time. I have had this vehicle from the
very first. With regular maintenance ( all by myself ) it uses just
a little oil, very little. I have had NO problems with this vehicle.
I also have a 1980 Olds 98 Regency. Bought from the original owner
whom I know. It has 110,000 miles now and has performed flawlessly.
Even better than the V6. This 98 has the 350 5.7 liter Olds V8 with
the Turbo 400 trans. Excellent engine!
Both vehicles are carburated not fuel injected.
C-ya..... /\/\artin
--
This communication is sent by /\/\artin University of Arizona Tucson
=========================================================================
ak...@cleveland.freenet.edu mlin...@ccit.arizona.edu mlinsenb@arizvms
DEATH HAS BEEN DEAD FOR ABOUT 2,000 YEARS ****** FOLLOW THE KING OF KINGS
Scott P. Toenniessen
>
>>case, not under warranty). while i wish you continued success, chevy engines
>>are *far* from 'top-notch'. the best that can be said of them is that a small
>>block chevrolet engine will run with *more problems* than any other engine i
>>have personally ever seen. chrysler engines are closer to 'top-notch'...
>>
as far as being reliable, but chrysler doesn't make too many cars with
its own engines anymore. They seem to like VW's and Mitsubishi's better.
The only Chrysler I ever owned was a Plymouth Horizon TC-3 with a
1.7L VW. I wasn't impressed to say the least.
Overall, I've been happy with most GM or Ford engines that I've ever had.
Scott
Walter A. Koziarz
>I'll agree that Chrysler has made some good engines (slant six, 318, etc.)
>as far as being reliable, but chrysler doesn't make too many cars with
>its own engines anymore. They seem to like VW's and Mitsubishi's better.
>The only Chrysler I ever owned was a Plymouth Horizon TC-3 with a
>1.7L VW. I wasn't impressed to say the least.
ummmm, not to be obnoxious, or anything, but you *do* realize that the 2.2 and
2.5 four cylinder engines are Chrysler's as is the 3.3 V-6 and *all* the
fullsize truck engines except the Diesel... the 3.0 V-6 is Mitsubishi and
(other than in the Mitsubishi-captive-imports) I don't recall any other
Mitsubishi or othe non-Chrysler engine in the offerings... I think the
Mitsubishi 2.6 is no longer used (yes, it was for several early years of K-Car,
as was VW and Peugot -- late 1970s)...
Walt K.
> Scott