Could the 3800 remain competitive w/modern tech?

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted By: 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


Uhh...WHAT?!

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted By: redhat
I'm the complete opposite in some areas, I'd prefer a pushrod OHV engine, but I do love my rear disc brakes.


In most applications (ESPECIALLY a truck), I would pay a premium to NOT get rear discs. I converted my Caddy to discs, and honestly wish I had not.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Agreed, a hilarious comment. So many wonderful designs, some of the "old" style pushrod motors are quite sophisticated these days.


And there's one thing overhead cam engines don't have: roller lifters.

My Buick 3800 has roller lifters and roller fulcrum rocker arms.

As I recall, Ford used roller cams in the 2.3/2.5 4-bangers as far back as the mid-80's.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: MarkM66
Originally Posted By: kschachn
What do rear disc brakes get you in most cars other than more complication?

Originally Posted By: HosteenJorje
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.


They don't fade as fast when you're doing laps at Road America, lol.

I agree, most "daily driver" cars don't need them.


Sad story on same was the Mitsubishi Magna in Oz (early variant)...the marketters wanted four wheel disks as standard (Commodore and Falcon they were an option), and went out to tender.

One of the tenderer's offered 3 set-ups, and an optional disk/drum, all of varying levels of performance.

Mitsubishi wanted the price of the disk/drum, but four wheel disks, and successfully negotiated a sub par braking system for their marketting people.

IMO, tht was an appalling outcome, less safety sold as more...

 

[Tzu]

As a current owner of a 3800 in our Impala, I can say that it has been a great engine. No matter how cold our winters have gotten, the Impala always started and sounded good doing so at 0 degrees or below. Currently getting an average of 28.4mpg with 231,000 miles on it.

I agree with Trav that car companies don't want engines like this anymore. A little maintenance and they went forever. Not so much for engines today. Probably the only reason for me to own the Impala is for the 3800. Aside from the upper/lower intake gaskets I fixed at home on a weekend, this is one tough engine that has proven it's worth time and again. Our Impala's original tail pipe shows almost no soot, so I can tell it burns clean.

The new engines from GM are definitely more powerful and a lot more complicated, but I don't think they will be remembered like the 3800 when they are replaced. How long did the 3.9L hang around for? It would have been nice to see GM transform the 3800 into a more current design, but now the 3.6L is pretty much the only V6 they use.

I could only imagine what direct injection could do for that engine. My dad's 2012 4 cylinder Malibu gets about 2 mpgs more than our Impala does with a smaller car. Whatever Buick did designing it, they got it right.

 

[Drew99GT]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4

And there's one thing overhead cam engines don't have: roller lifters.



Oh really??? Might want to do a "bit" of research on that one...

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: 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


Uhh...WHAT?!


But, I'll give him credit for a whole post without ONE mention of "graphene"!

 

[artificialist]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: 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


Uhh...WHAT?!

Sure, for many reasons an inline 6 is better than a V6. However, having one in a longitudinal vehicle means the hood has to be extra long to fit the engine, and have a good size crumple zone. Making a transverse I6 is difficult, look at what Volvo had to do to their engine to fit it to the S80 and similar cars.

That is why even though V6 engines have several disadvantages over inlines, they still get produced.

Also, some V6 engines exist simply because having a common 90 degree V8 and cutting off 2 cylinders is cheaper than making a V6 and V8 that are far different from each other.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: redhat
I'm the complete opposite in some areas, I'd prefer a pushrod OHV engine, but I do love my rear disc brakes.


In most applications (ESPECIALLY a truck), I would pay a premium to NOT get rear discs. I converted my Caddy to discs, and honestly wish I had not.


Yep, I still have an 05 Silverado with rear drums and it has excellent brakes. The nice thing about drums is they seem to go a LONG time between service here...

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4

And there's one thing overhead cam engines don't have: roller lifters.



Oh really??? Might want to do a "bit" of research on that one...

Perhaps roller followers...

 

[clinebarger]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: clinebarger
3.8L Buicks are great little engines, But why bag on the 4.3L?
What does the 3.8L have that makes them so much better?


The ability to balance a coin on the intake manifold while it's running!


I will give you that, 3800's are smoother!


Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle

A 3800 in a 3900lb car used less gas than a 4.3 in a 3900lb car!


My first car was a New '86 Monte Carlo with a 4.3L/200-4R, Dad wouldn't let me have a V8....I tried to slip a Grand National in there, It did NOT work! I test drove a Buick Regal with a 3.8L/TH200C, I don't see how anybody would buy that slug. The A/C compressor would not stay engaged because you had to floor it everywhere you went. The TBI 4.3L was a better motor at the time.

Time marches on, The 3.8L turned into the 3800 & 3300 that helped them a lot, Then the series II & III.

I'm sure in a fullsize truck pulling max GCRW....The 4.3L will win.