When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
The way most people drive, there is probably little difference between pushrods and an OHC. All that the elimination of pushrods does is allow higher potential engine top-end RPM without the possibility of valve "float". Most people never see anywhere near that RPM, even with an OHC power plant.
OHCs allow for much easier implementation of 4 valves/cylinder which makes possible greater thermal efficiency and be extension lower emissions. And of course variable valve timing. If auto makers could have stuck with pushrod engines they would have much cheaper to build.
this article I think is at the cutoff--1988. I remember the first big boss at my first job, driving a then old I suppose Olds Cutlass, like 1987 I bet, the rear wheel drive one.
I always thought that one of the most unique things was the 5 spoke color keyed wheels--they date back to the 70's. The dimensions offset blah blah blah may be totally different, but I remember seeing the same type of rim on a 1970 4-4-2, when I worked in a Caddy dealer in college The owner displayed it and I remember thinking this guy is cool, had to be 50 and his g/f was in her 20's lol. Cool style for rims if you ask me. Actually I like the slats of the LS430 too--not star shaped, but almost rectangular slats/spokes.
Wasn't there even supercharged versions that were well regarded? It's truly difficult to make a case that complexity is better than simplicity. Not just with vehicles, but with everything around us. It is in no way strange today for strange things to happen due to software etc.
Even though it can't fit in many applications, my all time favorite will always be the inline 6, it's all about physics. My grandfather had a V6 Skylark (1964?) which he said was a bad motor, that he should have gotten an inline 6. Almost positive I looked it up, that generation had a choice of both, as well as 3 or 4 V8's. I actually had a 250 I-6 Pontiac LeMans Sport when it was 23 y.o., and that thing was a smooth as silk in the 90's.
They had a Super Charged 3800 in the sixth gen Pontiac Grand Prix and a few other cars I believe, maybe a sporty Monte Carlo.
My uncle got a Pontiac Bonneville in 87 or 88 with the 3800. When I drove it I was shocked how much power/torque it had down low and how quick it was 0-60 or 0-50, this engine only made 150-165hp, not sure which one he had but I could beat 8 cylinder Mustangs and Camaro's in a 0-60 run, once you got to around 70 or 80 it lost a lot of steam but the low end acceleration always really impressed me, smooth and powerful.
My Uncle got a 97 Grand Prix GT with the 3800, it made around 200hp but it did not feel as smooth or refined as the Bonneville, didn't feel as quick 0-50 but it felt like it had a little more power up higher, I drove both cars, Grand Prix was definitely sportier, engine did not make very good noises though, a little course and would occasionally putter back and forth when caught in the wrong gear, I think they had to replace the transmission once, then replace the car once, build quality was not very good though it was pretty cool looking. Nowhere near as refined, smooth as my parents 99 Acura TL which was also quicker.
They were good engines, I would take any decent V6 over a good turbo 4 especially in a bigger heavier vehicle where turbo 4's don't belong.
I think the worst switch from 6 cyl to turbo-4 is BMW going from amazing NA Inline 6 engine to the current crop of anemic turbo-4 that sound and feel like utter garbage.
They had a Super Charged 3800 in the sixth gen Pontiac Grand Prix and a few other cars I believe, maybe a sporty Monte Carlo.
My uncle got a Pontiac Bonneville in 87 or 88 with the 3800. When I drove it I was shocked how much power/torque it had down low and how quick it was 0-60 or 0-50, this engine only made 150-165hp, not sure which one he had but I could beat 8 cylinder Mustangs and Camaro's in a 0-60 run, once you got to around 70 or 80 it lost a lot of steam but the low end acceleration always really impressed me, smooth and powerful.
My Uncle got a 97 Grand Prix GT with the 3800, it made around 200hp but it did not feel as smooth or refined as the Bonneville, didn't feel as quick 0-50 but it felt like it had a little more power up higher, I drove both cars, Grand Prix was definitely sportier, engine did not make very good noises though, a little course and would occasionally putter back and forth when caught in the wrong gear, I think they had to replace the transmission once, then replace the car once, build quality was not very good though it was pretty cool looking. Nowhere near as refined, smooth as my parents 99 Acura TL which was also quicker.
They were good engines, I would take any decent V6 over a good turbo 4 especially in a bigger heavier vehicle where turbo 4's don't belong.
The older ones (series 1) made 165hp and 210lb-ft. We had an '88 Olds Toronado with that one. Plenty quick. The '94 van my Mom had I was talking about was 170/225 and like I said that thing flew, my Mother came from a much slower vehicle before and had/has a lead foot. That thing would lay rubber on accident if you goosed it too hard.
Around 95 or 96 a revised Series II 3800 came out with 205hp and 230lb-ft. That was when the monster supercharged 240hp 280lbft ones came out also. I never drove a S/C but the NA I did and it was quick as ever. I just don't think Detroit really ever had a better V6 at least in those times. The Ford 3.8 was a joke by comparison. Chrysler? The 3.3 pushrod V6 in the LH cars was faster than the "high output" 3.5 DOHC. Still wouldn't touch a 3800, though.
The way most people drive, there is probably little difference between pushrods and an OHC. All that the elimination of pushrods does is allow higher potential engine top-end RPM without the possibility of valve "float". Most people never see anywhere near that RPM, even with an OHC power plant.
I can't tell a difference. The pushrod 5.3L V8 in my Yukon rushes to redline just as eagerly and easily as any DOHC car I've ever had. It's quite smooth, too. I actually spend a decent amount of time comparing both V8s I have as they aren't far off in power ratings, and both excellent V8s.
Comfort is the name of the game for some drivers. Not everyone looks at a car as an extension of their ego or testosterone level.
This is an old argument, but the two are not mutually exclusive. You can have a great riding car that isn't floaty and sloppy, and just because somebody doesn't want a sloppy car doesn't mean they want it to be an "extension of their ego or testosterone level". I love soft, smooth quiet riding cars, but I want a car that feels confident on the road too. Those old Buicks rode well, but they didnt feel confident in any kind of hurried driving, onramps or offramps, etc. A modern Camry rides 90% as well, but has that poise and confidence.
Originally Posted by Och
Pushrods or not, but I'd take almost any modern NA 6 cyl over a turbo 4... besides maybe the 2.5 V6 in the IS250 over current turbo 4. And even then its a big maybe.
The turbo 4s are getting better in terms of refinement, but overall I agree. Helping my buddy buy a mid/fullsize sedan last month really highlighted that. When you drive an Accord, Mazda 6, etc and then you get into something with a V6 like a Camry or Avalon, the NA V6 is like a breath of fresh air.
imho just as folks "accept" a new 3 series won't have a manual, they accept V6's and turbo 4's. But at least Audi and MB have gone in the right direction with 6 cyl engines, and the new Supra did as well.
A straight 4 is a disaster from a physics standpoint, as is a V6. lol (yes I am embellishing)
Next time you have a 330i loaner, do what my buddy told me to do (sorry actually not anymore)--try launch mode. That car is going to do something like a 5.5 sec 0-60. This sells. But it's gonna shake and have a lot of noise too, which, again, people are used to. And granted, they can get used to as well. And who's gonna complain about 31 mpg on a 330i that can do that? To yesterday's 21?
Compromise, but let's not think it's better overall. Just like in 1964--conventional wisdom says the Skylark should have been ordered with the 250 I6, not the V6.
I can't tell a difference. The pushrod 5.3L V8 in my Yukon rushes to redline just as eagerly and easily as any DOHC car I've ever had. It's quite smooth, too. I actually spend a decent amount of time comparing both V8s I have as they aren't far off in power ratings, and both excellent V8s.
Absolutely, an 8 cyl. does not have primary balance, but it does have the same # of cyl on each bank and counterweights on the crank and they are smooth. V6 fans will argue until the end of time but they never seem to realize 3 cyl per bank is an odd #!
This is an old argument, but the two are not mutually exclusive. You can have a great riding car that isn't floaty and sloppy, and just because somebody doesn't want a sloppy car doesn't mean they want it to be an "extension of their ego or testosterone level". I love soft, smooth quiet riding cars, but I want a car that feels confident on the road too. Those old Buicks rode well, but they didnt feel confident in any kind of hurried driving, onramps or offramps, etc. A modern Camry rides 90% as well, but has that poise and confidence.
The latest Lacrosse, even with the standard 18" wheels and minus the adaptive-suspension option, despite its comfort, is surprisingly quick (for a large Buick) on its steering response and handling. Too many people think of Roly-Poly 1991 Roadmasters when they associate the name Buick. That car was so boat-like that its handling scared even me LOL. So did the 1Gen Kia Amanti....which was essentially a straight-line car (at moderate speed) and nothing else.
The best example of comfort combined with outstanding control I've ever sampled, without doubt, had to have been the last hydraulic-steer BMW 335i.....even came in an AWD format for bad weather. I don't know how the engineers did it...but somehow they worked what was close to magic in the underpinnings, tires, and steering. Even with the Sport-Package 35-series rubber, the suspension was reasonably soft over bumps, yet provided compliance in the corners and, of course, the magic-feel BMW steering. Even considering its (at the time) 45-50K price, which I could afford, I seriously considered taking one home with me.....but the crappy roads in this area (little pothole-impact-protection for low sidewalls), snooty/aristocratic dealerships, arrogance of the BMW forums, horror-stories of 335 unreliability (particularly with the fuel pumps, which quit and leave you stranded), sky-high prices for parts/service if not free or warranty-covered, high insurance premiums for a 3-series, and number of other factors worked against it. I'll admit, that, yes, that car, with low-profile rubber, was comfortable......but vehicles like that are quite rare, and few manufacturers really have gotten the formula down pat. The M3, of course (which I also sampled), was sharper in handling than the 335i, but that particular generation M3 paid a big penalty in ride-comfort....to my backside, it was almost like a kidney-pounding Mitsubishi Evo. This was the same M3, BTW, that I've written about earlier (you'll probably remember it)...where I mentioned the big assembly-defects/goofs in both the front and rear seats.
The 2Gen Hyundai Genesis rode surprisingly soft with 45s (more so, oddly, IMO, than its successor G80)...but it was obviously no 335i in the handling department.
Back on topic, did you ever own a vehicle with the GM 3.8 V6? At one time, I considered a (what else?) a big Buick Lesabre or Park Avenue with it, but GM was still in its dark days of El Cheapo Playskool-plastic interiors, indifferent assembly-quality (something they still haven't entirely licked), second-class dealer service, and many other factors working aganist it. Like it or not, there is more to a vehicle than simply a nice engine.
The best example of comfort combined with outstanding control I've ever sampled, without doubt, had to have been the last hydraulic-steer BMW 335i.....even came in an AWD format for bad weather. I don't know how the engineers did it...but somehow they worked what was close to magic in the underpinnings, tires, and steering. Even with the Sport-Package 35-series rubber, the suspension was reasonably soft over bumps, yet provided compliance in the corners and, of course, the magic-feel BMW steering. Even considering its (at the time) 45-50K price, which I could afford, I seriously considered taking one home with me.....but the crappy roads in this area (little pothole-impact-protection for low sidewalls), snooty/aristocratic dealerships, arrogance of the BMW forums, horror-stories of 335 unreliability (particularly with the fuel pumps, which quit and leave you stranded), sky-high prices for parts/service if not free or warranty-covered, high insurance premiums for a 3-series, and number of other factors worked against it. I'll admit, that, yes, that car, with low-profile rubber, was comfortable......but vehicles like that are quite rare, and few manufacturers really have gotten the formula down pat. The M3, of course (which I also sampled), was sharper in handling than the 335i, but that particular generation M3 paid a big penalty in ride-comfort....to my backside, it was almost like a kidney-pounding Mitsubishi Evo. This was the same M3, BTW, that I've written about earlier (you'll probably remember it)...where I mentioned the big assembly-defects/goofs in both the front and rear seats.
Man I wish you had gotten a 335i--I ordered mine and got it 12/2/06, still have it--it was hot that December, like 60F? Everywhere I drove I got thumbs ups, a E46 M3 driver simply stopped in traffic and asked me about the car. Reception to 3 coupes were once like that (not anymore starting with the F series). There's a reason why the former editor of C&D chose a 335i for his personal car, it was in the sweet spot for a lot of criteria. Nobody cares but imagine BMW put a true dual exhaust on it, when it's an inline 6, and the base was $40,600.
As far as the front suspension goes, take a look, you can basically replace the entire front OE, for this amount. Add the cost of an indie to install. People who think German means $$$$$ really should have a look.
Man I wish you had gotten a 335i--I ordered mine and got it 12/2/06, still have it--it was hot that December, like 60F? Everywhere I drove I got thumbs ups, a E46 M3 driver simply stopped in traffic and asked me about the car. Reception to 3 coupes were once like that (not anymore starting with the F series). There's a reason why the former editor of C&D chose a 335i for his personal car, it was in the sweet spot for a lot of criteria. Nobody cares but imagine BMW put a true dual exhaust on it, when it's an inline 6, and the base was $40,600.
I agree it was the almost ideal combination of ride/steering/handling/power, but, for me, there were a number of factors working against it.
I have never driven a Regal Grand National, my loss lol Those have this engine we're talking about, right?
Early Grand Nationals used a N/A 4.1L V6. Most of them, however, used the boosted 3.8L.
I agree it was the almost ideal combination of ride/steering/handling/power, but, for me, there were a number of factors working against it.
Early Grand Nationals used a N/A 4.1L V6. Most of them, however, used the boosted 3.8L.
Which turned out to be the better of the two, the boosted 3.8? (years from now I bet there will be Ford debates on the V8 vs. Ecoboost, my brother has the latter in his new Raptor
edit: p.s. for me, it was tough to order the BMW. The main factor was I was a fan of the Nissan VQ, so it was only natural for me to move into a G35S sedan with a manual--stay within my comfort zone. The BMW was $8,100 more--I was having a very hard time with that #, even though it was all stock gains I was using (remember it would be another 12 mos. from when I placed the order, until they would start to decline). Looking back I don't regret it, but I totally bought into the you can't drive a BMW out of warranty, which also concerned me. I would have to do it to realize that's false...been out of warranty 5 years now.
The latest Lacrosse, even with the standard 18" wheels and minus the adaptive-suspension option, despite its comfort, is surprisingly quick (for a large Buick) on its steering response and handling.
Agreed, another example of a modern car that isn't sloppy while still riding well. Thats exactly my point, the ride of these old cars...theres nothing there to be nostalgic about, what we have today is much better.
The 2Gen Hyundai Genesis rode surprisingly soft with 45s (more so, oddly, IMO, than its successor G80)
They're exactly the same car with new badging.
Back on topic, did you ever own a vehicle with the GM 3.8 V6? At one time, I considered a (what else?) a big Buick Lesabre or Park Avenue with it, but GM was still in its dark days of El Cheapo Playskool-plastic interiors, indifferent assembly-quality (something they still haven't entirely licked), second-class dealer service, and many other factors working aganist it. Like it or not, there is more to a vehicle than simply a nice engine.
No, but I've driven many cars with that engine, and my sister in law had a Grand Am with that engine when my wife and I first knew each other. She had that car until it was ancient and a disaster everywhere else but the engine was always solid.
probably the only V6 powered buick i've ever wanted was the grand national GNX
now this is actually a quick car with loads of tuning potential, the 3800 is not quick or torquey by any means
idk how anyone here on the lexus forum can claim that an engine nearly 4 liters in size that barely makes over 200 ft lbs is quick or has grunt... i'd understand if this was the 1989 civic forum, but basically everyone who's commented here currently or at some point at least has owned a V8 or 6 cyl car with genuine performance...
and yes i suppose it's a "reliable" engine the 3800, but in the same way that if one never gets off the couch, they'll never pull a hamstring lol... people will tell you that the 4.6 liter V8 in the crown vic is reliable, but when an engine that size with 2 valves per cylinder and no VVT produced up until 2011 makes THAT little power, of course it'll be reliable!
i mean that engine barely made 50 hp per liter... the 1UZ-FE from 15 years earlier made over 75 hp per liter, while incorporating VVT-i, twice the number of valves, and all aluminum construction still manages to be even more reliable than the 4.6 ford V8, while also having better fuel efficiency. so for reasons like that, i really don't see why engines like the 3800 or modular V8 should be celebrated.
01-24-19, 12:07 PM
