In article <eucVh.14414$GV5.10562@edtnps89>,
"Victor" <vmark(nospam)99 (AT) telus (DOT) net> wrote:

So the similar GM stuff isn't any more reliable and I know how poor the
handling and responsiveness of those GM products is. OK for level
straight roads. IMO those GM cars are of 80s design.

The 3.8 upper intake fails near the EGR tube and leaks coolant into
the intake air stream, not the oil. Been there, done that. The
3100/3400 had the intake gasket failures, which leaked coolant into
the oil and/or the driveway. In either case, a 2000 model is likely
to have already suffered the failure and been repaired. The concern
would be by whom and how well.

the 300's have trans issues and rack issues, and the evap coils fail alot. the
motors are bullit proof
the grand prix has intake gaskets issues with either the 3.1 and 3.4 and the
intakes leaking coolant on the 3.8's but the trans are good and the a/c
evap.coils also have a high failure rate
i work on both cars almost daily
also the grand prixs have a high wheel bearing failure rate

who wrote:

Yeah, I thought GM made reliable transmissions but not in my case.
After I experienced my transmission failure I read the Lemon Aid book and it
mentions that 2000-2003 GM 4T65E having premature failures.
The GM 3.8L also sounds thrashy at higher RPMs.




"philthy" <dbrider (AT) cac (DOT) net> wrote

philthy wrote:
People already get confused about 300 and 300M. I think you mean the 300M.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

Victor wrote:

I first started working on cars in the 70s when the words "reliable" and
"GM transmission" didn't exist in the same universe, let alone the same
sentence. My wife's Cavalier she had when we got married did nothing to
change that opinion.

Its still hard for me to get my brain around the idea that GM ever made
an automatic transmission more reliable than a Chrysler auto tranny, but
in the case of 90s vintage front-drives, its probably true. I can tell
you that comparing the latest GM to Chrysler shift quality in the scads
of rental cars I've had over the last year, Chrysler has moved FAR far
ahead. The new electronic throttle control that throttles the engine
back during shifts is much better programmed on Chryslers than GMs.

yes i did but i figured since the post was about the 300m it would be assumed the
post would be about it and not the 300

Bill Putney wrote:

philthy wrote:

A reader might have assumed you didn't know the difference.


--
Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

BTW, I went and picked up the 300m yesterday. So far, so good! *knock on
wood*

Did a 2 hour return trip in it from it's previous home, and all went well.
The kids loved the sunroof, having their own windows (until mean ol' Dad
locked them), and being able to put in multiple hours of "Crazy Frog" CD's.
Dad loved the cushy interior, decent performance, and 29mpg @ 75mph. I'll
see how it does on my commute tomorrow.

I know I've got some upcoming maintenance issues, like new spark plugs and
timing belt. But the previous owners sunk $900 (CAD) in the car since
October of last year, doing full fluid flushes, replacing the battery, etc,
so I should be pretty good. No major work on their last invoices, just
maintenance. And the rear brake pads need to be done...

Thanks again for the input!

Clint

"Clint" <cneufeld (AT) mysocks (DOT) shaw.ca> wrote

On 04/17/07 10:50 am I wrote:

I may have misremembered on this point: looking at the book to see what
is needed at the next service (60K miles), I noticed that changing the
transaxle fluid is recommended at 48K miles, so perhaps it did get done
as a routine matter and I forgot about it.

Perce