aka... GM didn't want to spend the money to make them reliable and good (or just wasn't able to)

you'll never pull a muscle if you never get off the couch, there's nothing impressive about an engine that lasts awhile simply by being heavily de-tuned... the updated 1UZ in 1997 made 300 hp, over 300 ft lbs across a very wide rpm range, and is basically indestructible while also getting great fuel efficiency from not even 4 liters

 

Actually, a special kind of mid-engine-RWD/AWD. Like the old Chrysler Slant-Sixes, the Previa's in-line engine was tilted over at an an angle to lower its height in the engine compartment...but even more so than with the Chrysler straight-sixes.


Not unusual with FWD vehicles. Sudden acceleration shifts the weight and center-of-gravity back, taking weight (and traction) off the front wheels. That's one reason (among several) why high-performance vehicles tend to use RWD.

 

well since you bring up the northstar, allow me to bring this thread full circle and post a northstar video courtesy of mr. car wizard himself!


this guy is great btw, i wish i lived closer to him lol

 

not to mention an open differential makes it very easy to get one of the wheels spinning, if any of those vans had some kind of competent LSD i guarantee there'd be no tire spinning

 

don't follow what you're saying. if you have a gutless car, you have little choice but to floor it in certain situations, so that "lower power" car undergoes more stress. i was always impressed how a corvette can lope along at 70 at 1500rpm - THAT is not stressed but it obviously has gobs of power...

 

Still a great engine at the time. People apparently love to lease So the longevity of the Northstar is a irrelevant for some.

 

I mentioned that....people flooring it to make up for a wimpy power-level. But, most people, even with low-powered engines, don't drive like that, and the engines last longer, assuming they keep the oil and other fluids changed.

 

well an engine that can only make good power by eventually blowing itself up is no more impressive than an engine that can only be reliable by making no power at all lol

 

Leasing wasn't as popular back then as it is now. And, back then, many did it primarily for business/tax-deductions rather than for typical daily driving. Today, more people lease because they want a new vehicle every couple of years, don't want the hassles of private ownership, and don't want to face the inevitable repairs as a car ages.

 

One could argue that engines like the 3800 actually spelled the demise of GM. When Japanese automakers first started in the US market they were selling small engines that were down on power compared to the big 3800, so GM did not bother updating it with new tech. It's primitive design dated back to the 60ies, with not much room for improvement by mid 90ies. In the meantime the Japanese and European makers were introducing new tech - overhead cams, aluminum blocks, variable valve timing. Keep in mind, the 3800 was positioned as GM's top of the line V6 - they also had the 3.1 and 3.4 that were truly awful. It was positioned as their top of the line V6 engine through the 90ies and into mid 2000's when it was no longer competitive even with most basic Japanese V6 engines and was absolutely laughable compared to their premium V6 engines. At that point GM had to scramble and come up with a modern V6 engine, and from what I gather their 3.6 has been less than stellar.

Of course pretty much everything else about GM vehicles was even worse than their engines. Much worse. Eventually they had to be saved by the government bailout, but their future is still unclear. I think their Cadillac brand might soon fold.

 

Leasing has actually been very popular for several decades. My dad leased cars in the 80s, and luxury car ads were full of leases, etc in the 90s.

Northstar was a great engine at the time. Obviously...nobody new what a horror show they would be as they aged.

 

They weren't that much in the dark. The public knew, even back then, that Cadillac reliability had been declining for years (just ask the people that bought Cimarrons, Cateras, models with the variable V8/6/4 engine, the horrendous diesel V8s, and many other unreliable Cadillac/GM components). The problem was that the auto press (which often has little regard for long-term reliability), even before the engine was introduced, was hyping the Northstar for its new OHC design, comparing it to the existing Cadillac push-rod 200 HP V8s.

 

I wonder how come there wasn't some kind of a lawsuit against GM for the Northstar engine.

 

I think people’s expectations were a lot lower, and most of them sold were leases and it was the second and third owners who had issues and they had a lot weaker case for that sort of thing.

 

I don’t agree. People didn’t buy American cars because they last longer than Japanese cars. They bought them at the time because of features, design, power and performance. American cars were always larger than Japan designs at the time. Better priced too.