Last post on Mar 07, 2011 at 3:52 PM
You are in the Chevrolet Malibu
What is this discussion about?
Toyota Camry, Chevrolet Malibu, Honda Accord, Car Comparisons, Sedan
#215 of 804 Re: The Shadow Knows [captain2]
Mar 26, 2007 (5:09 pm)
The Camry 3.0 v6 was known for oil sludge in the early 2000's. Instead of redesigning the engine, Toyota slapped undersized head gaskets on it to raise the head temperature for a more efficient burn, trying to gain fuel efficiency and a ULEV rating, causing the problem and then denied it was their fault. GM re-engineered the 3.8 in 1996 and it was voted one of the ten best engines in the world. Smoothness, refinement and willingness to rev were necessary to get that award from Ward's. Torque is what you feel when you slam the gas pedal and that is the force that rotates the tire in that engine. You sound like your talking about engines you haven't driven. I have a 3.8, test drove a 3.9 last week and rode 800 miles in a 3.5 in October. They are all very smooth, economical, powerful, and they will be very reliable as is the 3.8. It took well over a hundred thousand miles before you could even hear my 3.8 idling from inside the car. At 156k, you still can't tell if it's running or not without a tach peek. Get with the program? You make it sound like you would buy GM if only they had OHC. "The 3.9 is part of an all-new family of advanced overhead valve, 60-degree V-6 engines. The engine is designed new from the block up and in addition to variable valve timing, incorporates a host of advanced, premium features, including a variable intake manifold, piston-cooling oil squirters, and an advanced 32-bit engine controller. The variable valve timing system incorporates a vane-type camshaft phaser that changes the angular orientation of the camshaft, thereby adjusting the timing of the intake and exhaust valves to optimize performance and economy, and helping lower emissions. Within its range of operation, it offers infinitely variable valve timing in relation to the crankshaft. The cam phasing creates "dual equal" valve timing adjustments. In other words, the intake valves and exhaust valves are varied at the same time and at the same rate." (Popular Mechanics) It is also Displacement on Demand.
The biggest impediment to GM not turning around their market share erosion is misperception that Japan is offering something better. Many people buying a new car judge the engine by a test drive. The 2005 numbers on this 3.9 DoD engine are 240 horsepower at 5,900 rpm and 245 pound-feet of torque at just 2,800 rpm, which are commendable. What really makes the engine satisfying is that 90 percent of that peak torque is available from 1,800 to 5,800 rpm, since torque is what you need in the daily duels of urban driving. The 265 HP 3.9 I test drove didn't have an instantaneous mileage readout but the 5.3 liter did. The 5.3 gave about 35 mpg criusing at 50-60 mph and gave 31 mpg at 70 mph. In the 2005 trucks, the all-aluminum V8 will be rated at an estimated 290 hp and 325 lb-ft of torque. The 2007 Impala I drove had 303 HP as well as Hwy mileage possible in the 30's. With leather and sunroof and lots of other options, sticker was 30,200 for the SS. Rebate and a little haggling bring that down to 27,300 USD, which is even with the Accord V6 with auto and leather after a little haggling. GM needs no Japanese 'program'.
#216 of 804 Re: The Shadow Knows [dave8697]
Mar 26, 2007 (6:19 pm)
GM re-engineered the 3.8 in 1996 and it was voted one of the ten best engines in the world.
Sure that wasn't "ten oldest engines in the world?" Just messin with ya.
You say $27,300 for an EX V6 Accord after you haggle and get rebates on the impala. How come you don't give Honda the same benefit in your post? I saw just today an internet quote of $23k and change for an Accord EX-V6 on the Accord prices paid forum. The Accord has factory incentives going on right now. You may not have known all of this, which is why I'm filling in your holes.
#217 of 804 Re: The Shadow Knows [dave8697]
Mar 26, 2007 (6:56 pm)
But they did not change the intake manifold in 1996 on those 3.8 engines which can fail at just past 70,ooo miles. Pity. Other than that, the old boy is not a bad work horse engine. Not the equal of the Honda or other top line V6 engines however. GM has the 3.6 DOHC V6, so give it a try. Try it - you'll like it! Same for the new 3.5 OHV V6 from GM, which is good enough, but not all that great.
Unless you have a serious need for torque steer excitement, there is little need for the Impala V8; certainly not for over $27K = ouch!
#218 of 804 Re: The Shadow Knows [thegraduate]
Mar 26, 2007 (6:58 pm)
That depends on which country's dollar you are both speaking of
#219 of 804 Re: The Shadow Knows [shadow5599]
Mar 26, 2007 (7:54 pm)
When I drive my 03 Accord V6, I can feel the refinement. From the way the doors close, to the solid feel of the controls. When I drive down the road I feel the way the suspension soaks up the bumps without complaint, handles curves with precision, and stays steady as a rock at speed. The engine is quiet and effortless as it propels you with smooth power. Unfortunately, my wife was rear-ended, and I had to drive an 06 Impala for two weeks. The doors and controls are not nearly as solid feeling, and some controls are hard to see, much less operate while driving. While the Impala soaks up bumps very well, there is significant body roll when cornering. The highway ride is giggly, like the car is nervous, or cold (brrr). The interior feels much smaller than a large car should. I keep hearing that the quality of GM products has improved, but I did not see, or feel, the big improvements.
#220 of 804 Re: The Shadow Knows [dave8697]
Mar 26, 2007 (8:02 pm)
Get with the program? You make it sound like you would buy GM if only they had OHC.
the Toyota 2GR is easily the best engine available in this class - and is wonderful - great FE, extremely powerful, smooth and willing, it is very easy to get it up to 6000 rpm without even knowing it (or feeling it), and further, thanks to its advanced intelligent continuously variable valves on both intake and exhaust it does a pretty fair job providing that flat torque curve you are talking about. Comparable engines at this point the VW 3.6, the Nissan VQ, and that great Honda V6 - although only SOHC. Does the GM 3.6 or the Ford 3.5 come close, on the spec sheets yes - in terms of refinement - have a sneaking suspicion they are both short on those refinement issues that I value so highly. Would I buy a pushrod V6 specifically, not a chance, because look at those alternatives available - I submit to you that there never has been or will be a refined pleasant pushrod V6 or I could challenge you to name even just one? And BTW those gimmicky 'instanteous' FE readouts are about the most worthless info you can find - that old Aerostar I was talking about could show 100 mpg! The truck actually did about 15 and was, of course, slow as molasses with that fine pushrod V6.
Detroit pushrod V8s, OTH, I have no problem with and is representative of that 'Detroit' approach, attack the problem with displacement - been going on ever since they slapped a small block V8 in a Ford Falcon back in 1964 and called it a 'sports car'.
And those V8s have no business in FWD cars - too much weight, torque steer, and understeer. GM may have an alternative if they can properly build that Impala in Australia and still manage to put a trunk in the car. If GM (or the other two) are ever going to build a competitive (and pleasant) sedan I'm afraid its 'back to the future' with RWD and torquey V8s (ala the Chrysler 300/Charger), and then all they need to worry about is if the market for them still exists when gas hits $4 or $5/gallon. Or they could learn to build proper smaller engines, that indeed, don't have those precious pushrods, or DOD either - you wouldn't perchance remember Cadillac's flirtation with this back in the early 90s, lead to a recall (and forced warranty extensions) on every car so equipped.
#221 of 804 Re: The Shadow Knows [dave8697]
Mar 27, 2007 (7:37 am)
misperception that Japan is offering something better.
IMO, don't believe there is any question about this today or for the last 20 years or so. I think the real question is whether those 'expensive' Japanese makes can justify those extra $ over a defineable period - something that, at least, to this point, they can. And you should also consider the financial efficacy and engineering acumen of the cos. involved - areas in which the Toyotas/Hondas/Nissans have it all over the US brands. As long as GM/Ford continue to lose money faster than they can print it or borrow it, they will have a helluva time developing anything innovative or competitive and will continue to sell what amounts to 20 year old+ cars. Maybe what GM 'needs' is to learn that 'Japanese program' called making money - done by developing products they can make money on instead of selling everything to the lowest bidder...
#222 of 804 Re: The Shadow Knows [thegraduate]
Mar 27, 2007 (8:07 am)
My Indy Honda dealer sent me this along with internet quotes of about 1100 off of the 25,895 LX. (USA dollars)
The LX is not leather and you can't just add it as an option. You have to bump up to 28,095 for leather and automatic trans. Take off 4% for internet price and you are at 26,901 for the Accord in the US. That is with the same amount of haggling as the Impala SS at 27,300. Looks like more haggling could be done on both prices. The difference here is $400 more for a monster engine that is conservatively rated at 27 mpg hwy -vs- a much lower 'real driving Torque' Honda. There would have to be $5000 in incentives on the Honda EX for $23,000. It may not have been a V6? It may be Canadian $?
LX V6 $25,895.00
EX V6 6-SPEED $28,095.00
EX V6 $28,095.00
EX V6 6-SPEED NAVI $30,095.00
EX V6 w/ NAVI $30,095.00
#223 of 804 Re: The Shadow Knows [dave8697]
Mar 27, 2007 (8:15 am)
They should be able to offer more than 1,100 off. Should be more around 1,600 off in US dollars. Some people are doing better than that. Depends on the area you live. Don't know your area in Canada. In USA they sell the SE model, which is a really good deal.
#224 of 804 Re: The Shadow Knows [dave8697]
Mar 27, 2007 (9:28 am)
Those are high prices! You have to grind them! See the negotiation thread! See how Jeffyscott got a great deal. Your beginning offer sb Dealer cost less 3% holdback less all incentives to dealer= starting point offer. "Your mission,should you decide to accept it,"is to let the dealer make no more than 75% of the holdback. See edmunds for Dealer costs and Mfg. to dealer incentives and rebates. Don't pay more!