My wife's 2015 Chrysler 200C has the 3.6l V6, which makes 295hp. What's the point here?
At the time of production, the 3.1L made 160-180 hp. The 3.8L made 195-240 hp. The predecessor to the engine in my wife's car, the 3.3L and 3.8L 60° V6, made 150- 210 hp. Same time frame as the 3.1 and 3.8.
According to the information listed above, the 3.1 made very similar power to other similar sized engines. But technology has advanced a lot in the past two decades, and modern V6's are guaranteed to make more power. The main reason is because 20 years ago, the main concern for an automobile engine wasn't how much power it could make, but how low they could make emissions and fuel consumption while still keeping decent performance. Nowadays, the focus has shifted.
And if you've kept up on modern vehicles, you know there is now a production car that can lift the front tires off the ground straight from the factory. It has 840 hp. (hint: it's called the Demon)
My point is, comparing the 3.1 to a modern V6, or even the 3.8, is pointless. For one, there's no replacement for displacement. Two, boost makes everything better. And three... It's an old engine, designed with old technology, and found in cheap cars. It's ok for what it is, but it's not a performance engine. (Unless you own and drive a McLaren Turbo GP, in which case the 3.1L 60° V6 IS a performance engine.) (If you own one, but don't drive it, you are a disgrace to all car enthusiasts everywhere.)