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 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.
They are getting very marginally better in terms of refinement - there's only so much you can do with a four cylinder. I once had a 4 cylinder BMW X1 and a Mazda 3 with the Skyactiv 4 cylinder engine, and the Mazda engine felt more refined than BMW. Of course the BMW engine was a lot more powerful at WOT, but felt cheap and trashy at idle and cruising. Absolutely no comparison to the excellent NA inline-6 engines that BMW used in the past.
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.
Grand Nationals were seriously quick and powerful, there was so many modifications to the 3.8 that i don't know if I would say it is that related to the 90's 3.8 most of us are talking about. GN's eventually become quicker then Corvettes and just about every muscle car at the time, at the end of their production they were making pretty serious power, 235hp and 330ft lb, then 245hp and 355lb ft, GNX which were under rated really made around 300hp/420lb ft or torque, the later gens made a lot more torque then even a Supra Turbo in 1993 which only made 315ft/lb of torque. GNX's were one of the quickest cars available at the time, they beat most supercars in the quarter mile.
I have owned all kinds of cars including 8 cylinders and I was still impressed with the 3.8 in my uncles/grandmothers Bonneville when it come to low end grunt and smoothness, it was a good engine, car was pretty mediocre but I had a lot of nice memories of that car, my uncles Grand Prix GT 3.8 was pretty good too. I would take that GM 3.8 over most turbo 4's available now, especially in a larger heavier vehicle, I would love a Grand National/GNX, that is a whole different ball game though.
That 3800 motor was low tech but it did the job very well. That engine had the torque where you needed it the most - in city driving. When you look at how a Chevy small block idles and how this particular engine sits there and idles, you know it's a very solid well designed engine. Having had a beater Olds with this very motor, I can tell you it's a great engine. It was on Wards list for 20th century engines.
Of course, what let GM down was their transmissions (I can personally attest to that), and the fit/finish and other assorted nickel/dime things.
The GNs and GNXs are absolutely the Darth Vader of that era's collector cars. Love them. And don't forget the handling king of the bunch with the 3.8 - the Trans Am turbo from 1989.
Of course, after so many GM disappointments, we all move on. But there is some fun nostalgia to be had with the heart and soul of a good car. The 3800 absolutely deserves some love. Low tech can be a good thing sometimes.
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.
Lol I own a vehicle that does 0-60 in 4.9 seconds, I know what quick is. And yes, I can still say, a 3800 has solid torque and is a satisfying engine. I don't disagree with the highlighted statement in my OP.
Trust me, I don't disagree with you that our Lexus V8s are basically perfection. However A 3800 car from '89-94 would give the first gen LS a run for it's money, at least at city speeds. A 3800 supercharged would give both your and my LSs a run for their money at any speed.
I agree it's low tech, but tried and true and it worked.
And also lol I agree with the consensus, I never said GM's cars back then had great quality otherwise, although that '88 Toronado we had did go 170,000 miles with minimal issues, was sold, and we saw it driving around for years after my Dad sold it.
01-25-19, 12:05 PM
