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?

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.

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...

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!

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

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.

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.

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.