Oldsmobile V6

Has anybody had any experience with these motors? I've got one I was thinking about swapping into the flatty. Are they the same as the Buick?

 

The 231 was used in some Oldsmobiles and Pontiacs. Should be the same as the Buick version.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buick_V6_engine#231

 

Could you be more specific as to what year and model of car you are looking at. There were some Oldsmobiles that used Buick engines but they also used the Chevy 3.8L/229 as well. The Chevy 3.8L/229 is basically a 305 V8 with 2 cyl. removed much like a 4.3 or 265 V6 is a 350 with 2 cyl. removed. The dead giveaway is whether the distributor is in the front or back. Chevy is in the back like the V8. My opinion is that the Buick 3.8L/231cu is a better engine. They both can work OK for a Jeep though. Just know what you are getting as I have seen several people confused between these two engines.
Greg

 

The Chevy v6 was 229ci not 231ci. The easiest way to tell the difference is the Buick v6 had the distributor in the front, the Chevy is in the back of the motor.

 

I am afraid so.

3.8L (229 CID)

The 229 cid engine was first introduced for the 1980 model year and was produced until 1984. This engine replaced the 250 cid in fullsize Chevrolets and Camaros as the new base V6. Additionally, the intermediate Chevrolet Malibu and Monte Carlo also used the 229 cid as a replacement for both the 200 cid V6, and the 231 cid Buick V6. Both the 231 cid Buick V6 and the 229 cid Chevrolet V6 are 90 degree V6 engines, and both are often referred to as the 3.8L V6. These engines should not be confused as being the same, and are completely unique engine designs.

The 229 cid has a 3.736" bore and a 3.48" stoke, identical to the Chevrolet 305 cid V8 engine. The 229 cid used the same 2.45" main bearing and 2.10" rod bearing diameters as the 200 cid V6 engine. Also like the 200 cid V6, the 229 cid used the same crankshaft with the 18 degree offset throws and the same 5.7" connecting rods with 0.050" narrowed ends. It came equipped with 1.84" intake valves and 1.50" exhaust valves. The 229 cid V6 was only equipped with a 2-barrel carburetor. For 1980 the 229 cid used a mechanical Dualjet. From 1981 - 1984 the electronic Dualjet was used along with the GM's CCC (Computer Command Control) system. The 229 cid was rated between 110 and 115 hp (86 kW).
Year Horsepower Torque Bore and Stroke Carburetor Compression Ratio
1980 115 hp (86 kW) @ 4000 rpm 175 lb·ft (237 N·m) @ 2000 RPM 3.736" x 3.48" 2-BBL M2ME 8.60:1
1981-82 110 hp (82 kW) @ 4200 rpm 170 lb·ft (230 N·m) @ 2000 RPM 3.736" x 3.48" 2-BBL E2ME 8.60:1
1983-84 110 hp (82 kW) @ 4000 rpm 190 lb·ft (258 N·m) @ 1600 RPM 3.736" x 3.48" 2-BBL E2ME 8.60:1

Greg

 

All 4 engines have the same stroke of 3.48" the 3.8L chevy and 305 have a 3.736" bore. 4.3L and 350 have 4" bore. 3.8L chevy is odd fire crank that shares crank throws. 4.3L chevy is a similar 90 Deg v6 built off of the 350 with the first even fire crank for the chevy v6. They have crank throws that are offset 30 deg instead of 18 deg for the crank pins to make it true even fire.
Greg

 

I had a 3.8L in my '82 Malibu wagon. Couldn't kill that sucker - and I tried HARD.

4.3L = 350 derivative
3.8L = 305 derivative

3.8L Buick = totally different animal than the Chevy whether odd- or even-fire.

Regardless, to answer the guy's question, any one of 'em would make a killer flatty engine. Distributor in back = Chevy. Distributor in front = Buick. I think packaging-wise the Buick has it better 'cause of the front-mounted distributor. If you want a wider selection of front accessory brackets/components or factory exhaust manifolds, the Chevy engine has the advantage. Pick your poison.

 

I'm going to look at it as soon as the 2 year wakes up from nap time.

 

Will not find the odd fire 3.8ltr/229 motor in automotive application, only marine. Automotive used semi even or even fire motor.

 

Has anybody done the 231 swap with an automatic?

 

It fits, just push everything forward and IIRC the driveshaft ended up being about 13" long, this was a stock wheelbase 2a.

This was with an advanced adapter, believe the novak is a little thicker but allow for the larger u-joint without grinding.
You will also have to modify the trans pan be it with a hammer or cut cutting a rewelding to clearance the driveshaft.

 

Did some figuring and decided it would be cheaper to be a v6 jeep to start with. Going to get it in the AM. Pics to follow.

 

Are there any parts from an 85' 231 that will work on a dauntless? Such as accessories, intake etc?

 

Thank you sir!

 

seems to be alot of talk about the Buick 231, i have a cj5 with a 1983 buick 231 in it, I have a question if someone might know, I have a gm 3800 sc motor out of a Bonneville i would like to replace it with, does anyone know if the motor mounts bolt up in the same place on the block as the older 3.8L? I already have the 60 deg. bellhousing because the older motor is a 90 deg. v6 and the new one is a 60 deg. just wondering if i had to relocate the mounts on the frame. any help would be appreciated.

 

IMO you should start a new thread. This is a new topic.

I don't know about this specific engine, but the 90 degree and 60 degree V6s are different engines, even if they have the same displacements. I also recall that the FWD (front wheel drive) engines have entirely different mounts from the RWD engines, and are not suitable for transplant.

 

different motor mounts. There are some great transmission choices available though but you'll have to look out for the starter placement. FWD motors have them on the wrong side.