Noticed something wierd

[ToniCipriani]

http://apps.gmcanada.com/app/GMCanada/offe...es&b=&oid=45123

When did the 3.8L get VVT?

Edited April 4, 2006 by ToniCipriani

[Drew Dowdell]

http://apps.gmcanada.com/app/GMCanada/offe...es&b=&oid=45123

When did the 3.8L get VVT?

typo

but hey, on the GM US website they say that over 25 million 3800s have been sold. Must be a really sucky engine.

[Croc]

Must be a really sucky engine.

It is now, compared to the competition.

See, it's a moving target. What was great and class-leading even 5 years ago is just average now. It says a lot, though, that GM has had an engine since the 1960s that is only uncompetitive 40 years later...how many automakers can claim that?

[Flybrian]

Its not a sucky engine by any means. 'Sucky' would imply the engine is just plain lousy. Look to Daewoo I4s for evidence.

The fuel economy and emissions are still incredibly impressive for such an old dog, no doubt about it.

[mute]

the 3.3L chrysler engine has been around for 60 yrs and its still an amazing engine its just not in a lot of vehicles

[trinacriabob]

It is now, compared to the competition.

See, it's a moving target.  What was great and class-leading even 5 years ago is just average now.  It says a lot, though, that GM has had an engine since the 1960s that is only uncompetitive 40 years later...how many automakers can claim that?

Crocmeister, don't get me going. I'm with Flybry on this one.

There is nothing nicer than getting into a car, day after day, year after year, knowing that it will crank over and take you where you need to go safely, economically in terms of consumption and ease of service and without any hassles whatsoever. For a quarter of a million miles and then some, if the oil is changed every 3000 miles or so.

If it works, don't fix it. (In fact, the Series I to Series II transition with the attendant changes to the manifolds caused problems. I would even wait a couple of years for Series III drive-by-wire to be ascertained as being trouble-free rather than having purchased in 2004 when it came out). Leave the 3800 around for those of us who want it as a base engine. For you boys (and girls, such as newbie Lauren or our Stace) who need DOHC/VVT/HF and higher repair bills, go for it...check the option box for the other engines.

Edited April 4, 2006 by trinacriabob

[04monteintimidator]

im with fly and bob... i love the 3800 II in my monte... such an awesome sound for a v6... not to mention its been proven reliable over and over again... so i dont ever have to worry about it all that much... saying its sucky just isnt fair... let me put it this way... torque... a very very important thing for us car guys because we know... torque means more than horsepower... torque in a 2004 M3... 262 ft/lbs... torque in my 2004 Monte... 280 ft/lbs... id hafta say thats a bit more than average...

[Croc]

Crocmeister, don't get me going.  I'm with Flybry on this one.

There is nothing nicer than getting into a car, day after day, year after year, knowing that it will crank over and take you where you need to go safely, economically in terms of consumption and ease of service and without any hassles whatsoever.  For a quarter of a million miles and then some, if the oil is changed every 3000 miles or so.

If it works, don't fix it.  (In fact, the Series I to Series II transition with the attendant changes to the manifolds caused problems.  I would even wait a couple of years for Series III drive-by-wire to be ascertained as being trouble-free rather than having purchased in 2004 when it came out). Leave the 3800 around for those of us who want it as a base engine.  For you boys (and girls, such as newbie Lauren or our Stace) who need DOHC/VVT/HF and higher repair bills, go for it...check the option box for the other engines.

I really don't give a rat's ass about the DOHC/VVT/HF etc...But the 3800 isn't the only stellar GM engine that lasts and lasts. The 3800 simply has inadequate power and a lack of refinement for the class of cars it is placed in. The refinement is the real kicker here, as I would otherwise be fine with it being a top engine in the compacts. With the new, more refined, V6 out, GM should switch over to it as the new base engine. If they want to make the 3800 a no-cost option, fine, but it should not be standard in any vehicle as it is just not competitive with the competition's V6s.

[The O.C.]

For you boys (and girls, such as newbie Lauren or our Stace) who need DOHC/VVT/HF and higher repair bills, go for it...check the option box for the other engines.

Show me something.....ANYTHING to suggest that an engine has higher repair OR maintenance bills just because it's a multi-valve/multi-cam engine.......

[Drew Dowdell]

Show me something.....ANYTHING to suggest that an engine has higher repair OR maintenance bills just because it's a multi-valve/multi-cam engine.......

Two words: Timing Belt

[The O.C.]

im with fly and bob... i love the 3800 II in my monte... such an awesome sound for a v6... not to mention its been proven reliable over and over again... so i dont ever have to worry about it all that much... saying its sucky just isnt fair... let me put it this way... torque... a very very important thing for us car guys because we know... torque means more than horsepower... torque in a 2004 M3... 262 ft/lbs... torque in my 2004 Monte... 280 ft/lbs... id hafta say thats a bit more than average...

......and torque doesn't mean everything either......

That M3 revs so much quicker and slicker, it's into it's powerband just as fast as that low-rev torquer 3800.....which doesn't rev anywhere near as fast or as smooth...

And, that flexible of an engine is EASY to keep in its powerband. We're not talking niche vehicles like the S2000.....

That's why you have to look at the TOTAL package. Horsepower, torque, gearing, powerband, etc.

[Paolino]

My God, this discussion comes up EVERY time.

[frogger]

Two words: Timing Belt

OHC/DOHC does not imply a timing belt.

[z28luvr01]

The vast majority of them are, but I think GM uses chains, at least they do on the Ecotec and Northstar. Not sure about the HFV6s, though.

[frogger]

The vast majority of them are, but I think GM uses chains, at least they do on the Ecotec and Northstar. Not sure about the HFV6s, though.

The Ford Duratec, Nissan VQ and Toyota 3.5L employ chains IIRC.

[Drew Dowdell]

......and torque doesn't mean everything either......

That M3 revs so much quicker and slicker, it's into it's powerband just as fast as that low-rev torquer 3800.....which doesn't rev anywhere near as fast or as smooth...

And, that flexible of an engine is EASY to keep in its powerband.  We're not talking niche vehicles like the S2000.....

That's why you have to look at the TOTAL package.  Horsepower, torque, gearing, powerband, etc.

What does an M3 engine cost again? What does a 3800 cost?

Oh... yeah... right. *sips Kool Aide*

The M3 engine is the ROXARS! It should be in every car EVAR!

Face it, for loafing along on the freeway, efficiently, cleanly, cheaply, quietly, there are few V6 engines that can beat the 3800 in ALL of those aspects.

[trinacriabob]

Show me something.....ANYTHING to suggest that an engine has higher repair OR maintenance bills just because it's a multi-valve/multi-cam engine.......

I like the motto: KISS - Keep it Simple, Stupid. (Not you or anyone on C&G)

The other engines do not have the track record. We just don't know how they fare over the years. I, for one, don't like getting a new car that often...not where I choose to spend my money.

Yes, Paulie, it comes up a lot, don't it? We (C&G) have a real division on this issue. We simply have to agree to disagree.

Edited April 5, 2006 by trinacriabob

[bowtie_dude]

I like the motto: KISS - Keep it Simple, Stupid. (Not you or anyone on C&G)

The other engines do not have the track record.  We just don't know how they fare over the years.  I, for one, don't like getting a new car that often...not where I choose to spend my money.

Yes, Paulie, it comes up a lot, don't it?  We (C&G) have a real division on this issue.  We simply have to agree to disagree.

Or just agree to not give a shidoodle one way or the other.

[ToniCipriani]

My God, this discussion comes up EVERY time.

And it seems like a lot of times I just set the fire and run...

[Flybrian]

How the hell does the M3 get brought into a conversation about the 3800 series being simply good V6s? And what?

[Cory Wolfe]

Um... the 3800 is nice, but uncompetitive. You see... GM makes another V6 engine that is competitive. The 3.6L HFV6. Oh... and I, personally, prefer DOHC engines. They're just... better.

[Sixty8panther]

Two words: Timing Belt

Three words: RUBBER timing Belt.

MUTE:

Who told you the Mopar 3.3 was 60 years old?

[Sixty8panther]

and I, personally, prefer DOHC engines. They're just... better.

Tell that to the guy who just blew the doors off of a DOHC V12 Ferrari with a pushrod 16valve V8.

[Cory Wolfe]

Yeah... well... my Quad4 just got it's ass whooped by snail. Say what?

[Sixty8panther]

......and torque doesn't mean everything either......

That M3 revs so much quicker and slicker, it's into it's powerband just as fast as that low-rev torquer 3800.....which doesn't rev anywhere near as fast or as smooth...

And, that flexible of an engine is EASY to keep in its powerband.  We're not talking niche vehicles like the S2000.....

That's why you have to look at the TOTAL package.  Horsepower, torque, gearing, powerband, etc.

Let's discuss this "total package" shall we. Every damn DOHC car this side of 1988 that I've ever driven wiht the exception of the Northstar has had a serious lack of imediate throtle response. The last time I drove a Bimmer it was a 2004 BMW 530i and it was so god damn slugish below 3000rpm it seemed like the car had a HUGE turbo and it was actaully turbo lag.

DOHCs are NOT all they're cracked up to be. I've owned a few of both and driven hundres of both and I'll tell you one thing.... 97% of DOHC motors feel like they're lacking in torque and response. One of the more annoying featuires about my Infiniti Q45 is that the motor takes about 2.5 sec. to really start cooking after you give it WOT. If I mash the pedal ot the floor on the Camaro the car is doing a burnout about 0.25sec later. No bull$h!, no waiting, no excuses. Just instant torque. And for what it's worth the car revs to 7000. I've had it to about 7400 on a couple occasions.

[speedingpenguin]

Let's discuss this "total package" shall we. Every damn DOHC car this side of 1988 that I've ever driven wiht the exception of the Northstar has had a serious lack of imediate throtle response. The last time I drove a Bimmer it was a 2004 BMW 530i and it was so god damn slugish below 3000rpm it seemed like the car had a HUGE turbo and it was actaully turbo lag.

DOHCs are NOT all they're cracked up to be. I've owned a few of both and driven hundres of both and I'll tell you one thing.... 97% of DOHC motors feel like they're lacking in torque and response. One of the more annoying featuires about my Infiniti Q45 is that the motor takes about 2.5 sec. to really start cooking after you give it WOT. If I mash the pedal ot the floor on the Camaro the car is doing a burnout about 0.25sec later. No bull$h!, no waiting, no excuses. Just instant torque. And for what it's worth the car revs to 7000. I've had it to about 7400 on a couple occasions.

we forgetting the DOHC cobras?

[Delta Force79]

Well I have a supercharged series I 3.8 with 68K on it, and while it does have some balls to it, the midrange is very sluggish even with the supercharger....that could have something to do with the tranny, but other than a somewhat boring mid-range, I'm quite impressed with the power of the 3.8, and this is coming from a guy who only drove Oldsmobiles with Rockets in them. the 3.8 in my Riviera could stand to use a little more mid-range torque and possibly the m90 supercharger vs. the m65 I believe that is in there.

[Cory Wolfe]

That's what mechanics and fathers are for, silly.