Could the 3800 remain competitive w/modern tech?

[ThirdeYe]

Originally Posted By: boundarylayer
Originally Posted By: Nick1994
If I sell the Camry, I'll definitely be considering a Buick/Pontiac with the 3.8L
They were putting those engines in Gen 4 Camaros for cheaper models, so a used '03 Camaro would have one of the last ones. They went into a few Pontiac/Oldsmobile dust-buster minivans that nobody seems to want now.

I don't know why no SUV or cross-over or pickup had them.


The last year for the 4th gen Camaro was 2002.

 

[OneEyeJack]

Originally Posted By: route66mike
Originally Posted By: yonyon
I've always been fond of the Buick V6 also, but I don't see how it would make any sense for GM to bring it back anytime soon as a car engine. If something needs more power than the HVV6 they have the HFV6. If they need that power but want to keep it simpler and more "bullet proof" there's the 4300 and the small blocks to turn to.

To continue development of an additional engine family would cost a lot of money. If that money is spent and doesn't give them any significant advantage offer what their other engines could do, it would basically be a waste.



GM presented documentation that the small block Chevy was better in every metric they presented. Well, except for the snob appeal factor and that sank the ship.



My vote is with the 3.8L V6 in pickup trucks crowd here, and as noted, the mid-size PU trucks could especially use a 3.8L, although 1/2 ton full size PUs and vans could also use them.

 

[clinebarger]

Originally Posted By: route66mike
^^^^ 3.8L had strangely awesome MPG the 4.3 couldn't match. Some kind of internal engine friction advantage. MIT did a low-friction ring research project years ago on that engine to help evolve it.


Low tension rings have been on 4.3L's for at least 15 years. The mileage difference isn't a fair comparison, Put a 3.8L in a full size truck....Then compare away.

 

[Rhymingmechanic]

Way back in 1987, the intercooled turbo 3.8 in the GNX made 276 horsepower and 360 foot-lbs of torque. (GN experts may correct me--I just found 2 articles with these numbers.) I wonder what they could do with today's turbo and engine management technology.

In comparison, the 5.3 V8 in my Chevy pickup makes 285 hp/325 ft-lbs.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: boundarylayer
I always hoped GM would put the all-iron 3.8L in pickup trucks for work trucks and low-end base models. Think about it, lots of torque, proven design and production, pickup truck market is huge, and they could market its tough image.


Yep, they did...well at least downunder

 

[ElastoHydro]

Originally Posted By: clinebarger
Originally Posted By: route66mike
^^^^ 3.8L had strangely awesome MPG the 4.3 couldn't match. Some kind of internal engine friction advantage. MIT did a low-friction ring research project years ago on that engine to help evolve it.


Low tension rings have been on 4.3L's for at least 15 years. The mileage difference isn't a fair comparison, Put a 3.8L in a full size truck....Then compare away.


There was something better in the fuel economy numbers for the 3.8L. I don't exactly know why the 3800 seemed to punch above its weight class so to speak. It goes into a truck and sure the fuel economy won't look like in a car, yet trucks only compete with other trucks, so it would be competitive.

 

[ElastoHydro]

Originally Posted By: Shannow

Yep, they did...well at least downunder
picture


Holden Ute? Pickup truck?
Edit: Thats not a truck or an El Camino. Its a VT Commodore car, rear wheel drive using the Camaro engine/transmission

 

[Chris142]

Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
Rumor (lol)has it that the Corvette has an old fashioned push rod V8. Fact is the engine is very compact for the power it produces and the push rods work well, old fashioned or not. The GM 3.8 V6 is a very good engine, then and now.

There was an engine problem with GM about 30 or so years ago. There were these various GM brands, Pontiac, Olds, Chevy and Buick. You do remember? GM started using a universal V8 for all these brands, the small block Chevy. They did not make a big deal about it but they did it just the same. Well, along came an ambulance chasing attorney and his clients and they sued GM over this policy. GM, in court spent a lot of time and energy proving that this policy gave customers a better engine, more power, better fuel economy, more reliability and longer life, common parts etc, etc. And this went on and on and on. All the ambulance chaser did was stand up in court and say when my client sitting over there buys a Buick he wants a Buick engine. When my client buys an Oldsmobile he wants an Oldsmobile engine and so on. You get the idea. The judge found in his favor and paid out a lot of money to the affected parties. GM started announcing exactly what they were doing with engines from that day on. This law suit might have changed the way GM dealt with these kinds of issues and might very well explain why some of the very good engines are not immediately put in place of other not so great engines in their production lines. The 3.8 V6 is one of the great engines of all time and should have been used in many more places.

a bunch of cadillac owners got their panties in a wad when they figured out that there caddy had a sbc in it.they should have been thrilled since a sbc was worlds better than the ht engines cadillac offered at the time

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: ElastoHydro
Originally Posted By: Shannow

Yep, they did...well at least downunder
picture


Holden Ute? Pickup truck?
Edit: Thats not a truck or an El Camino. Its a VT Commodore car, rear wheel drive using the Camaro engine/transmission


Yep, the Commodore had a utility variant, from VN, right through to now.

There's heaps with V-6s, 4L60E, and quite a few 5 speeds...able to carry a tonne, and could get a bench seat variant. Don't beleive the L67 supercharged 6 was available in ute, but I've seen a couple retrofitted.

Can get in various performance levels, right up to the Maloo

www.hsv.com.au/Gen-F/see/Maloo-R8/

http://www.topspeed.com/cars/car-news/holden-ss-v-ute-sets-a-new-record-at-nurburgring-ar158614.html

US nearly got them as the El Camino (you got the GTO, the G8 and the Caprice)...and the SS

 

[actionstan]

The could only remain competitive with modern tech if they fixed the LIM issue

sorry I had to be "that guy"

 

[Corvette Owner]

In a word, no.

I had a 2001 Chevy Impala with a 3.8 liter. I liked it, it had plenty of pickup. I put 177,000 miles on it.

I now have a 2014 Impala with the 3.6 liter engine. 305 hp on regular gas, vs 205 hp for the 3.8. Direct injection, variable timing, integrated manifolds, all the tricks.

Time and technology marches on!

 

[sciphi]

Originally Posted By: actionstan
The could only remain competitive with modern tech if they fixed the LIM issue

sorry I had to be "that guy"


The Series III 3800's had that issue licked when they went back to the aluminum UIM along with aluminum LIM gaskets.

The 3800 could have been a very competitive engine if GM had blessed it with modern 6-speed transmissions and cam-in-block VVT. I bet it could have broken 40 mpg in the hands of a careful driver, as I routinely got 36-38 mpg in my 3800 Series II powered LeSabre. V6 power and 30+ mpg highway EPA would have been a fantastic selling point.

 

[Trav]

The 3800 was nowhere near the end of the road. 400HP is easy enough to get out of one without going broke.

 

[Merkava_4]

The 3800 is better than new technology for what it doesn't have:

1. No ridiculous overly complicated unreliable variable valve timing
2. No overhead cams with a 16ft. long timing chain slapping around
3. No rubber band timing belt to snap in two
4. No electric water pump to burn up
5. No direct fuel injection to contaminate your valves filthy carbon buildup

 

[yvon_la]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
The 3800 is better than new technology for what it doesn't have:

1. No ridiculous overly complicated unreliable variable valve timing
2. No overhead cams with a 16ft. long timing chain slapping around
3. No rubber band timing belt to snap in two
4. No electric water pump to burn up
5. No direct fuel injection to contaminate your valves filthy carbon buildup

So we re at what's best now?best !1:inline 6 diesel !big rig tried v6,v8,v12 etc .we be been using inline 6 for what ?since big can one from cummins!?that was in the 80s been almost 40years of inline 6.I bet a lot of corp would love to convince us that V ENGINE are awesome .but the fact is i6 is an iinsanely simple and yet effective strategy to get a good car out fast.you are a new Chinese car corp ?want a reliable engine ?just do an inline 6 .even in car or 4x4 i6 where annoyingly good !slant 6 ?became so noisy it was ridiculous(winking a redfoo)the various i6 in jeep gm probably ford also were also good .they could have shrunk the i6 and turbo it .they didn't.now a days not many have inline 6 in cars or 4x4 .BMW have some.dodge have the cummins)(wish those Cummins were an option in the good old jeep (not the SUV)THE JEEP

 

[The_Eric]

It's my understanding that it's weight and width (90*) didn't do it any any favors. I believe all the other passenger car V6 engines are 60*.

They can package a smaller, lighter, and equally (or more so) powerful engine in increasingly tighter places.

That's not to say I'm a detractor of the 3.8... Cause I'm not. Not by a LONG shot. I'm a big supporter of it... One of my favorite engines.

 

[Trav]

Your right it was a physically large engine but only 10 pounds heavier than the 3.6.

 

[Win]

Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
.... Well, along came an ambulance chasing attorney and his clients and they sued GM over this policy. GM, in court spent a lot of time and energy proving that this policy gave customers a better engine, more power, better fuel economy, more reliability and longer life, common parts etc, etc.



That's not ambulance chasing, it was outright fraud on the purchasers, regardless of the alleged benefit.

People have a right to know what they are purchasing. If it's such a great change, why not just tell them in the first place and let them make their own decision?

 

[route66mike]

About all the weight/power/shape differences between the old 3.8L and GM's new 3.6L, the simplicity of the 3.8 wins in a lot of applications. Trucks were mentioned, and around the world the 3800 is a perfect size/simplicity combination. Problem with the new 3.6 is complexity and expense to manufacture. 3.8L is easier to work on, which benefits anyone, especially third-world country buyers.

Also remember much is made about comparing the Corvette/CadillacCTS-V's latest V8s with other V8s and boosted large V6s globally, and the size/packaging/small-heads of the pushrod V8 often wins. Same comparo can be made 3.8L-3.6L. Also look at the raging debate over the GM 5.3L V8 vs. Ford's Ecoboost 3.5L V6, some want the simplicity and reliability of less parts count on the V8, and both deliver similar power.

 

[Yah-Tah-Hey]

I won't purchase any vehicle that doesn't have a dual overhead cam,four valve per cylinder engine with variable valve timing.. Also won't look at anything that has rear drum brakes. GM's problem has always been the bean counters being in charge. Like a GM CEO once said, we aren't in business to make cars, we are in business to make money.