Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[elltee]

Im new to this V6 game but there seems to be alot of talk about swapping heads manifolds and the like to produce the 'Ultimate V6'

Is there a reason nobody has actually put the suggested complete setup together? or have i just missed it?
It seems parts would be be relativity easy to source and at a decent price are the power gains and effort just not worth it?

[steve6367]

Im new to this V6 game but there seems to be alot of talk about swapping heads manifolds and the like to produce the 'Ultimate V6'

Is there a reason nobody has actually put the suggested complete setup together? or have i just missed it?
It seems parts would be be relativity easy to source and at a decent price are the power gains and effort just not worth it?

I think some have - my take would be small benefits for loads of work and GM did a pretty good job with the standard engines, certainly good enough for my driving.

[annihilator]

I'm thinking about it just need a 3.2 short motor.got the rest. 
John.

[TheBoy]

The 3.0l is pretty OK as-is. As I don't drive the inferior 3.2 - she tends to nick that car - I suffer CBA. She wouldn't use the power anyway (in my dreams, the mad cow)

[elltee]

I'm thinking about it just need a 3.2 short motor.got the rest. 
John.

I'm seriously considering it as it's going into a classic Opel. Long term I'd love throttle bodies. But that's ££££

[biggriffin]

The gain is about 10bhp, which on a road car isn't really noticeable, you may notice it revs slightly easier, it will accelerate better, due to exhaust gases flowing better due to manifolds, and downpipes.

Basically if you have a 3.2 just put 3.0L downpipes on,   

[anV6]

Im new to this V6 game but there seems to be alot of talk about swapping heads manifolds and the like to produce the 'Ultimate V6'

Is there a reason nobody has actually put the suggested complete setup together? or have i just missed it?
It seems parts would be be relativity easy to source and at a decent price are the power gains and effort just not worth it?

I guess you are talking about the list of mods which has been floating around for a while?

I myself asked several times if anybody had done it or if anyone would be aware of the power gains if done. So far I found nobody who has actually done it.

[anV6]

The gain is about 10bhp, which on a road car isn't really noticeable, you may notice it revs slightly easier, it will accelerate better, due to exhaust gases flowing better due to manifolds, and downpipes.

Basically if you have a 3.2 just put 3.0L downpipes on, 

Are you talking about 10bhp for the manifolds exchange only or for this whole list:

"3.2 inlet with injectors or fit 3.0 and the FPR from a 2.6/3.2 (slight increased rail pressure, worth having as it costs nothing)
3.2/3.0 inlet divider plate
2.5/2.6 heads which must be ported to match the inlet divider (2.5/2.6 heads have smaller ports than the 3.0/3.2) and 3.0/3.2 exhaust valves (sodium filled)
3.0 cams
3.2 bottom end
2.6/3.2 exhaust manifolds
2.5/3.0 front pipes and cats
3.0 electronics including DIS pack ecu etc with EGR blanked/removed and SAI removed"

If for the whole list then it's definitely not worth it. But have you done the mods yourself or are you guessing?

If really 10bhp only for all that, I think it would be just better to swap the engine for the GM High Feature V6 from the Vectra C or Saab. That gets you around 280bhp or even go up to 320 like the one in the Insignia, which are all based on the same engine as far as I'm concerned. Of course I have no idea what the trouble to swap that engine into an Omega would be. But at least we would be talking about real power gains.

[Nick W]

Ultimate V6 is a misleading description for a list of the "best" factory components. Some of them should be considered as different rather than better - the later injectors and Fuel Pressure Regulator  aren't  going to add any extra power when used in a different combination. Some of these parts are required to correct other problems, yet bring further issues; the 2.6 heads are used as the cheapest way(the correct way would be several hundred pounds worth of custom pistons in new bores) of raising a 3.2's compression ratio to what a 3.0 has as standard BUT you then have to port them to retain adequate gas flow.

Even with parts like later exhaust manifolds that do "work better", the improvements are small and their value needs to be carefully considered. I have them on my car, but the hassle and cost of fitting them outweigh the gains unless done with other work - head-gaskets in my case, so actually fitting them was no different to bolting the originals back on. I spent about £65 on the parts, and that is probably the cheapest actual gain you're likely to see on these engines.

As has been mentioned before, doing this would require a large pile of parts, including several engines, and that is why the list is more of a pub game than an actual recipe for an Ultimate V6

[GastronomicKleptomaniac]

FWIW the later 2.8 V6 as seen in the Insignia etc, has a totally different bellhousing bolt pattern and would take a huge amount of extra work to fit.

[korum]

Always been a shame GM stopped production of the Omega as some interesting engines popped up afterwards, The 3.0 v6 diesel or the 2.8 v6 turbo would of been an interesting combination.

I suppose you could look at seeing if the engine and gbox would fit out of one of these

http://www4.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201612170680378?radius=1500&make=CADILLAC&model=CTS&advertising-location=at_cars&onesearchad=Used&onesearchad=Nearly%20New&onesearchad=New&sort=price-asc&postcode=de757hj&page=1

[Doctor Gollum]

You'll need the whole Cadillac as a donor in order to simplify the wiring, but a more practical idea than the 2.8 turbo...

That said, I wonder if the 2.8 would respond to a custom manifold and supercharger to replace the impossibletofitinarwdchassis turbo

Gearbox needn't be a big problem, especially if that Cadillac is available with a manual box... 2.8/3.6 are related so probably share bellhousing bolt pattern

[korum]

You'll need the whole Cadillac as a donor in order to simplify the wiring, but a more practical idea than the 2.8 turbo...

That said, I wonder if the 2.8 would respond to a custom manifold and supercharger to replace the impossibletofitinarwdchassis turbo

Gearbox needn't be a big problem, especially if that Cadillac is available with a manual box... 2.8/3.6 are related so probably share bellhousing bolt pattern

The caddy in usa was available with a getrag 260 5 speed manual dont know if it made it over here though.

the holden in 200/2001 had a 3.8 ecotec v6 with a supercharger now that would be interesting 

[Doctor Gollum]

Not the most powerful lump in the world but fitted to everything from compact coupes to mpvs so readily available 

[Doctor Gollum]

Thinking about this...

Actually GM built a version of it... the facelift Catera was fitted with a dbw 3.0... essentially a 3.0 block with 3.2 heads and crank and 3.2 electronics