3900 specs ?

[razoredge]

So why do we have both a 240 & 227 HP spec for the 3900 ?

[76ChevyTrucker]

Could one be the AFM version with the lower horsepower rating due to a heavier rotating assembly?

[loki]

the HP rating is at different rpms.... i could agree w/ 76....?

[76ChevyTrucker]

Its the only reason I could think is because with the lifter being heavier in the AFM engines, along with the electronics that control the AFM system, it makes the rotating mass of the engine heavier, which sacrifices a little HP.

[intrigued]

Its becase the exhaust is much more restrictive on the g6 covertable because of hefty sway bars and crossmmbers, decreasing the power of the engine. hte AFM 3900 also has different HP at 233because of the heavy lifters and revised powerband.

[loki]

Its becase the exhaust is much more restrictive on the g6 covertable because of hefty sway bars and crossmmbers, decreasing the power of the engine.  hte AFM 3900 also has different HP at 233because of the heavy lifters and revised powerband.

166733[/snapback]

dang i forgot that was the convert rating... yeah, like the sema shows have..shown...the 3.9 can make 270ish hp w/ just breathing components revised, what was it... like a k&n air kit and i'm not sure if it was cat back or included headers...?

[76ChevyTrucker]

That's another thing I thought about, but I didn't mention a possibly more restrictive exhaust since I was thinking about the engine alone, say on a dyno.

[razoredge]

Its a different kind of engine from what I have ever driven. Its kinda lame and gentle driving slow with the R's down. But if you get it wound tight its a whole nother beast. Im sure thats the Variable intake and VVT. Mixed hilly country milage has been just + or - 25mpg so far. So its no worse than our L67 powered car.

I would like to add that this 60* V6 is not, none, notta, nil smoother than the "old" 90* Buick torque beast

[NeonLX]

I'm glad somebody else said it. The last generation or two of the 3800 WAS smooth--as well as being very torquey, reliable and fuel efficient. But Honda & Driver magazine kept making fun of it so GM tossed it into the can.

Edited July 19, 2006 by NeonLX

[intrigued]

Im sorry but as a person whos has extensive experience owning and driving 3800 powered cars as a current owner of a 3900 powered malibu SS the 3900 is signifigantly smoother and better packageddue to its 60 degree size.

[razoredge]

Im sorry but as a person that has high mileage on every version of the 38 ever made and curently one SC3800 and one 3900 on the road, I can feel the engine while sitting idleing more in the G6 than I can the L67 in our LSS. I too was surprised, even when first looking at the car while running with the hood up before the drive I thought to myself "I dont see how they figure thats smoother than a 38."

V6 has to go. Its an odd cylinder bank count - 3.

4, 8, 12, 16 and so forth is not

This 3900 does not package any better in this somewhat taller hooded G6 than the 3800 fit in my 91 Regal which was a low rider by comparision. In other words they were both tight. The 60* GM V6 is a tall engine. Ive seen them sitting next to 38's and V8's and S*. THe 90* block is shorter and because of 90* is more square. The 60 is taller than wide.

Ya want smooth, you go to a V8

Ya want unchallenged torque, you go to a V8

Ya want DOD, to shut down cylinders, do it on a V8 not something that is already 2 cylinders short with an odd firing patern.

[intrigued]

I still think the 3900 feels smoother than the 3800 in genral, my family has owned 6 3800 powered cars, both series 1 and 2 and a series 2 SC car also. The Regal SC which my aunt still has and which drive on ocassion is not as smooth. it doesnt have a rediculous amount of miles on it either and its had a recent tuneup. That being said Ive always respected the 3800 for its reliability and durability, the 3900 still has to prove itself in that respect. I feel the 3800 has a little bit deeper toruque tip in but one you hit 3000 rpm with the 3.9 it has all its torque on tap till about 5k rpm and it never gets rough all the way to redline.

[razoredge]

Once their both off idle I dont feel there is any ruffness. Its just the V6 idle quiver, they both have it.

So as for the 3900 specs Id say its safe for me to believe our GTP coupe has 240/241

[trinacriabob]

That being said Ive always respected the 3800 for its reliability and durability, the 3900 still has to prove itself in that respect. 

169166[/snapback]

True. I am wondering the same thing.

I have rented several MCs with the 3900 and the 3500. Both of them had an ever so slight quiver at idle. They only had between 5,000 and 10,000 miles. Neither the LaCrosse nor the GPs I've rented with the 3800 had an idle quiver.