The story about the "drawing error" is entertaining, but it is hard to believe. The V6 started out in 1960s. It was made for a number of years, but demand was not high, so the design was sold to Jeep in 1967. Then, GM bought it back, in 1974. It was retooled at that time, so that it would share an assembly line with the Buick 350. Since it shared the assembly line, it also shared the machine tools, which used gang drills to make the bore for the lifters. Same assembly line, same tools, same lifter bore spacing.
Then, because of the odd firing order, Buick (and Chevy) redesigned the V6s to an "even fire" configuration. Different camshaft, but same assembly line.
So, in order for the "drawing error" to be true, there not only had to be an error, but it had to somehow escape all the chances of being caught, and corrected, that the sequence above lists. It had to be there when GM made the engine prototypes, and ran all the tests that are needed to: A) Qualify the engine for Federal Motor Vehicle Emissions Certification, and B) Qualify the engine for GMs warranty program. They don't generally just make an engine and then stick in thousands of cars, without doing a LOT of preliminary testing.
Just sounds like another "myth" to me.
Then, because of the odd firing order, Buick (and Chevy) redesigned the V6s to an "even fire" configuration. Different camshaft, but same assembly line.
So, in order for the "drawing error" to be true, there not only had to be an error, but it had to somehow escape all the chances of being caught, and corrected, that the sequence above lists. It had to be there when GM made the engine prototypes, and ran all the tests that are needed to: A) Qualify the engine for Federal Motor Vehicle Emissions Certification, and B) Qualify the engine for GMs warranty program. They don't generally just make an engine and then stick in thousands of cars, without doing a LOT of preliminary testing.
Just sounds like another "myth" to me.