Q451990 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 17, 2025 1:00 pm
It would have been difficult to swap a 90-93 engine in to a 94 due to the different electrical connectors. In 2000 used engines for both series were readily available, so I can't imagine they would have taken the time to retrofit a 90-93 into that car. I think you can safely assume that you have a 94+ engine. The easiest telltale sign is the rocker cover (valve cover) design. 94+ is held down with acorn nuts, and uses an actual rubber gasket. 90-93 used small bolts, and the gaskets were made of liquid gasket. If you'd like to post a picture, that would give us a little more to go on - but I best you're safe.
Thanks for the help.
I didn't know that there were electrical connector differences between the two engines, so that knowledge, and the fact that mine does have the acorn nuts, gives me confidence that the chain tensioners should be reliable. BTW, the six digit number that I found on the block ends with "96", possibly indicating a 96 engine? But, the 96 engines did not have Variable Valve Timing. So, as with the 93 engine, will a 96 not be a direct replacement? Thanks.
Do you also know of any reports of engine vibrations with these engines? Mine has a vibration at 1500rpm. It is not caused by any of the accessories, and it is there in neutral and all gears. The vibration is not severe, but is enough to be noticeable. The only thing that I can think of that has enough mass to cause a vibration is the torque converter. Any thoughts?
The car has always had the vibration since I've owned it.