A version of the 3800 never made, why not? - Page 5 - 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, 07:16 PM   #41
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

so many opinions... and they are all intelligent answers. good to know that if I have any questions that a bunch of people with brains will respond, all you guys rock!
roadtech195 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2007, 07:24 PM   #42
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NEBF:06,07 | NYBF:06,07 | ONBF:06,07 | CNBF:06 & more............
Posts: 8,029
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
bandit is on a distinguished road
Default

all i have to say is...

Look at all the Over seas cars and look at how a lot! of them have smaller motors and are making more power then the US'* bigger motors.

The US auto makers need to start putting a little more thinking into the motors if they want to pull some of the sales back from the over seas cars
bandit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2007, 12:49 AM   #43
Senior Member
Certified GM nut
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: MI
Posts: 2,246
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Logan is on a distinguished road
Default

Toasted is right...

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigerik
Quote:
Originally Posted by toastedoats
i understand the "unfair comaparison" so lets compare the 3.5 in the altima that makes 275hp, 260tq........ vs the malibu OHV 3.5l, that is 217hp 217tq, or the 3.9 discussed above
Lets keep in mind that the Altima creates that peak torque almost 2000 rpm higher than the GM. Obviously different priorities when they were designed.
Honestly, does it really matter where the torque is made? As long as the curve is relatively flat (and making lots of power all the way through it) torque is torque. Yeah, so my little 4 banger DOHC is flat on its face at 2k, its an animal at 3....which is where it cruises on the freeway....and at those engine speeds I get better gas mileage than most cam-in-block engines. Engine speed is irrelevant as long as you have the gearing to go with it.
Logan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2007, 02:12 AM   #44
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 Logan
Toasted is right...

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigerik
Quote:
Originally Posted by toastedoats
i understand the "unfair comaparison" so lets compare the 3.5 in the altima that makes 275hp, 260tq........ vs the malibu OHV 3.5l, that is 217hp 217tq, or the 3.9 discussed above
Lets keep in mind that the Altima creates that peak torque almost 2000 rpm higher than the GM. Obviously different priorities when they were designed.
Honestly, does it really matter where the torque is made? As long as the curve is relatively flat (and making lots of power all the way through it) torque is torque. Yeah, so my little 4 banger DOHC is flat on its face at 2k, its an animal at 3....which is where it cruises on the freeway....and at those engine speeds I get better gas mileage than most cam-in-block engines. Engine speed is irrelevant as long as you have the gearing to go with it.
In a small, light, manual transmission, short geared car, it does not make much difference. However, if you have a large, heavy car, with tall gears, and an automatic, it makes a HUGE difference.
The modded 2.5 V6 in my 5 speed Contour was a blast. After the intake and exhaust were opened up, it made the most awesome wail from 4000 RPM to almost 7000. Pulled like crazy. However, the same engine, behind a 4 speed automatic, was a dog. Took forever to climb into the power band.
Hey, even my L36, pulling a 2.84 gear, is not torquey enough in my 98. Once its moving, it pulls hard, but I sure would love a bunch more torque below 2000 rpm!
bigerik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2007, 09:50 AM   #45
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 Logan
Toasted is right...

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigerik
Quote:
Originally Posted by toastedoats
i understand the "unfair comaparison" so lets compare the 3.5 in the altima that makes 275hp, 260tq........ vs the malibu OHV 3.5l, that is 217hp 217tq, or the 3.9 discussed above
Lets keep in mind that the Altima creates that peak torque almost 2000 rpm higher than the GM. Obviously different priorities when they were designed.
Honestly, does it really matter where the torque is made? As long as the curve is relatively flat (and making lots of power all the way through it) torque is torque. Yeah, so my little 4 banger DOHC is flat on its face at 2k, its an animal at 3....which is where it cruises on the freeway....and at those engine speeds I get better gas mileage than most cam-in-block engines. Engine speed is irrelevant as long as you have the gearing to go with it.
exactly...

As far as my VQ motor motor goes, YES, it makes torque a bit higher, but they put super short gears in it..
3.79:1 for automatics
3:81 for manual transmissions.

The gearing makes for more than enough low end grunt to make it move at nearly any RPM

as far as cost is concerned... how about a sub-$20,000 hyundai 3.3L that makes 235hp, and 236tq
its not as impressive, but is is a hyundai
toastedoats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2007, 02:53 PM   #46
Senior Member
Certified Car Nut
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,928
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
BonneMeMN is on a distinguished road
Default

GM needs to bring hte 2.8 Turbo from Saabs, and take off some of the power restricting parts on it..

The 2.0 Turbo SIDI Ecotec from the solstice GXP is an AMAZING motor, but needs to find it'* way into more cars IMO.. When they have a motor like that available, it'* hard to give reasons why there should be an L67/L32.

IMO GM thinks there'* too many markets, and they build too many variations on powertrains, chassis, and design combos. They're doing better aiming divisions at certain niches though. There'* 2.8, 2.8Turbo (saab) 3.5'* a few 3.6 a 3.9, etc.. There'* more but you get the idea. Nissan develops a slightly costlier engine (VQ) and crams it in everything but a Sentra, with some different powerbands based on which chassis it'* going into.
BonneMeMN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2007, 03:06 PM   #47
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 BonneMeMN
Nissan develops a slightly costlier engine (VQ) and crams it in everything but a Sentra, with some different powerbands based on which chassis it'* going into.
Very similar tactics are being persued by Chrysler, Toyota, and others
toastedoats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2007, 03:08 PM   #48
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

Quote:
Originally Posted by BonneMeMN
GM needs to bring hte 2.8 Turbo from Saabs, and take off some of the power restricting parts on it..

The 2.0 Turbo SIDI Ecotec from the solstice GXP is an AMAZING motor, but needs to find it'* way into more cars IMO.. When they have a motor like that available, it'* hard to give reasons why there should be an L67/L32.

IMO GM thinks there'* too many markets, and they build too many variations on powertrains, chassis, and design combos. They're doing better aiming divisions at certain niches though. There'* 2.8, 2.8Turbo (saab) 3.5'* a few 3.6 a 3.9, etc.. There'* more but you get the idea. Nissan develops a slightly costlier engine (VQ) and crams it in everything but a Sentra, with some different powerbands based on which chassis it'* going into.

Good engines dont need a supercharger or turbo to add power.
Shadow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2007, 03:25 PM   #49
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 Shadow


Good engines dont need a supercharger or turbo to add power.
Nothing good or bad about adding a super or turbo-charger. Just a different way to get more air into an engine. Same as adding DOHC 4 valve cylinder heads. Could just as easily say "Good engines don't need DOHC'* either". Or any kind of OHC. Just a different means to the same end.

I certainly don't hold it against Porsche or Mercedes for adding turbos to their cars.
bigerik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2007, 03:28 PM   #50
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 BonneMeMN
GM needs to bring hte 2.8 Turbo from Saabs, and take off some of the power restricting parts on it..

The 2.0 Turbo SIDI Ecotec from the solstice GXP is an AMAZING motor, but needs to find it'* way into more cars IMO.. When they have a motor like that available, it'* hard to give reasons why there should be an L67/L32.

I
I sure don't see what they have to do with an L67 or L32. Those are great running, efficient smooth torquey engines. They produce gobs of torque at low RPM and very smoothly pull big, heavy luxurious cars around with no noise or vibration. Just like they are designed to do.
Just a different tool for a different job.[/b]
bigerik 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 05:46 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.