A version of the 3800 never made, why not? - Page 4 - GM Forum - Buick, Cadillac, Chev, Olds, GMC & Pontiac chat


Lounge For casual talk about things unrelated to General Motors. In other words, off-topic stuff. And anything else that does not fit Section Description.

Reply
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-29-2007, 01:34 PM   #31
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
95naSTA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Philly
Posts: 4,508
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
95naSTA is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by toastedoats
arent the caddy 2.8, 3.2 and 3.6 all OHC motors?????



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_High_Feature_engine#LP1
Thats an example of how GM isn't back in the stone age.

And why keep rolling your eyes at us?
This is a Bonneville forum.
Do you expect us to just bow down to everything that isn't GM and/or cam in block?
95naSTA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2007, 02:03 PM   #32
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: In your garage, swipin' da lug nutz
Posts: 3,067
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
sandrock is on a distinguished road
Default

Now children, play nice....or I will have to beat you with my camshaft.

Oh...that didn't sound right.

GM, it seems, is trying to keep an old, proven technology and give it updates. Take a look at the current 3500 and 3900, as well as the DOD 5.3 V8. If you think about it, GMs customer base really could care less about HP....it'* the torque that they are after, and cam-in-block engines, as old as that tech is, can still do the job more cost-effectively.
sandrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2007, 02:50 PM   #33
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
toastedoats's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Fitchburg Ma _ToastedRice_
Posts: 6,837
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
toastedoats is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 95naSTA
Quote:
Originally Posted by toastedoats
arent the caddy 2.8, 3.2 and 3.6 all OHC motors?????



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_High_Feature_engine#LP1
Thats an example of how GM isn't back in the stone age.

And why keep rolling your eyes at us?
This is a Bonneville forum.
Do you expect us to just bow down to everything that isn't GM and/or cam in block?
back halfway through page one we were comparing OHV vs OHC motors... i was using some examples to show that many manufacturerers are getting higher HP and TQ ratings from OHC motors than OHV motors which i feel have begun to meet the top of their capabilities.

I thought that was the direction that the thread was taking... apparently i was wrong...
toastedoats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2007, 03:06 PM   #34
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Climax Springs, Missouri
Posts: 2,493
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
LittleHoov is on a distinguished road
Default

I do agree that torque is what most people are after, especially the low-end torque, because not everyone drives like we do

Which is why I understand when people that drive 3100, 3400, etc engines brag about how "fast" their car is, because they have that low down grunt. I was even surprised at how much grunt my ex'* old Lumina with the 3100 had, was it fast? no, I absolutely obliterated her on the highway one night, but did it feel like it was fast and get up to traffic speed pretty quick? yes it did.

And as was said, its easier to get that low-down torque feeling with the OHV engines than the OHC engines. Plus keep things simpler, theres nothing wrong with simplicity, complexity tends to just have more things to go wrong.


Keep playing nice or Ill have to beat you with all four of my camshafts!
LittleHoov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2007, 03:58 PM   #35
Senior Member
Posts like a Northstar
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Memphis,TN Originally from MA
Posts: 571
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
roadtech195 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleHoov

Keep playing nice or Ill have to beat you with all four of my camshafts!

Don't make me break out my intake valves to keep you all inline
Mr. toasted is right on track... I was only wondering if the 3800 would gain more power with DOHC. I never realy intended it to be a debate on what valve train setup works better on engines other than a 3800.
roadtech195 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2007, 05:58 PM   #36
Senior Member
Posts like a Turbo
 
bigerik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 442
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
bigerik is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by roadtech195
Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleHoov

Keep playing nice or Ill have to beat you with all four of my camshafts!

Don't make me break out my intake valves to keep you all inline
Mr. toasted is right on track... I was only wondering if the 3800 would gain more power with DOHC. I never realy intended it to be a debate on what valve train setup works better on engines other than a 3800.
I guess the answer to this is.....

Maybe.

More than likely a well designed, 4 valve per cylinder, DOHC set up would have produced more power. More valve area would have equaled more air coming into the engine, which, of course, means more power. It would have moved peak power and torque higher up the RPM range.
Instead they chose a different tack, and bolted up a supercharger. End result was the same, but I would guess the cost was lower, packaging was easier and it ended up producing a more "american" powerband.
E
bigerik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2007, 06:11 PM   #37
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Delaware & Long Island NY
Posts: 3,239
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Shadow is on a distinguished road
Default

Oh come on guys what looks better on the engine cover 3800 or 3.5 DOHC lol
Shadow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2007, 06:39 PM   #38
Senior Member
Posts like a Camaro
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Jenison, MI (Near Grand Rapids)
Posts: 1,070
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
theJMFC is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow
Oh come on guys what looks better on the engine cover 3800 or 3.5 DOHC lol
Eh, we just take those off anyway.

But to add an answer to the original question: Sure, a DOHC 3800 would probably make more power. It just would have cost more, weighed more, possibly drank more fuel, and been a tighter fit under the hood. I have my doubts that one would have fit in a W-body, which made up for a good portion of 3800 sales.

And to clarify what I said earlier about the new Caddy engines being good examples of what GM can do: I wasn't saying that they were cam in block. The High Feature OHC engines, I'm saying, are a good example of GM using the DOHC technology only where it makes sense in their model lineup. In high-end models, not Malibus.
theJMFC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2007, 06:51 PM   #39
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Delaware & Long Island NY
Posts: 3,239
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Shadow is on a distinguished road
Default

I think it all come to cost. OHV is cheaper and less complex to build. GM dropped the 3.5 shortstar due to costs to build it. 3800 has been around so long cause its cheap to make and pretty dependable.
Shadow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2007, 06:56 PM   #40
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Purgatory
Posts: 0
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Bonneville92V688 is on a distinguished road
Default

Also don't forget, IF they made a DOHC 3800, it would have most likely had aluminum heads, due to their size, thus most likely making it unreliable, as iron block/aluminum head engines tend to eat head gaskets, think about that. Even if GM did make one, it would have died off within 5 years of production.
Bonneville92V688 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Never, I mean NEVER, swim in a southern lake.. MOS95B Lounge 1 10-03-2007 07:26 AM
Why Did Bonneville never get a coupe version (87s-91s) BonnevilleLErocks General GM Chat 10 04-13-2007 02:21 AM
Never NEVER do this! Custom88 Lounge 10 04-20-2004 11:20 PM
why !!! why !!! why !!! rrounds 2000-2005 18 03-03-2004 01:39 PM
WHY WHY WHY?? bonnie94ssei Lounge 36 09-25-2003 05:53 AM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:57 AM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.