• Nov 4, 2008
If current rumors prove accurate, General Motors has big plans for its line of high-feature V6s, and with good reason. These six-cylinder engines make class competitive power and are very smooth. Thanks to direct injection, the engine range also offers excellent fuel efficiency when mated to GM's equally new six-speed automatic transmission. We recently heard that a new 3.0-liter version of this powertrain duo would make an appearance in the new 2010 Buick LaCrosse, and now we're hearing the engine will also be optional in the upcoming Chevy Equinox and standard in Cadillac's new SRX. Expect the new 3.0-liter V6 to offer around 250 horses and fuel efficiency slightly under 30 mpg on the highway. The Equinox's standard engine will be a new 2.3-liter direct-inject inline four-cylinder unit making something north of 200-horsepower, while the uplevel Caddy SRX should get the optional 300-plus horsepower 3.6L powerplant as found in the CTS.

[Source: GM Inside News]


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 9 Comments
      • 6 Years Ago
      Why won't they put this engine in the Chevy Colorado? Somehow I think it would be better than the five-banger the truck currently has, with better fuel economy. Rework it for RWD. Something.

      I never asked for an eight cylinder, I don't need that much power in a compact truck. I'm asking for a six.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Putting the 3L into the compact trucks sounds like a good plan. But GM shouldn't need to rework the engine for RWD- the 3.6 already has variants for both FWD and RWD applications. If the 3.0 is based off the 3.6, shouldn't a RWD-capable variant be a given?
      • 6 Years Ago
      Yeah, cause SRX buyers are buying a perfromance CUV, and only RWD will do!

      I think a FWD SRX will be ok.

      You know, I'm willing to bet that GM will have an XFE version of these cars with the 3.0, will put it over 30mpg. Just change up the final gear ration, low-rolling resistance tires. Set.
      • 6 Years Ago
      I think this was a good move from GM

      I also think they should offer this in the CTS wagon
      so 3.0L DI or 3.6L DI - maybe a $32k base model, that would be awesome (or bring the G8 wagon state side for $28k)

      I been saying Infiniti should offer the 2.5L V6 they offer in Japan, in the G35 as a base model, and it would have come handy as it'd save some gas plus lower hte base G35 $$ back down to about $31k since the G37 will now cost $33.5k
      • 6 Years Ago
      I like the 3.6 DI a lot, so I think this should be as good, if not better. I like the fact that it gives the same power and better fuel economy as the non-DI 3.6 (and is a smaller engine than the 3.6, resulting in weight savings, and possibly even better fuel economy).
      I liked the past SRX because it was RWD. I hope GM doesn't screw up and make the new one base FWD (instead of base AWD).
        • 6 Years Ago
        I don't think its a screw up to offer the new SRX base FWD, AWD is not needed here and is considered a waste to a lot of buyers. It just means added weight, cost, and maintenance as well as worse mpg to most here.
        • 6 Years Ago
        The outstanding feature of the 3.6 - with DI and without - is its best in class low end torque.

        That won't show up with a 3.0 no matter how well it breathes over 6000 rpm.

        As far as a smaller, lighter engine... it's the same block whether it's bored and stroked to 2.8, 4.0, or anywhere in between.