- #152 of 191
-
Re: Regarding V6 choices [jh1977]
by imidazol97
-
Apr 13, 2006 (5:55 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: jh1977 (Apr 13, 2006 10:37 am)
I don't get all the comments about the 3800. I have a leSabre with it; I don't find torque lacking and the trans is always smoooothly shifting when 3rd is needed instead of 4th. I drove from the Smokeys home today and got an indicated 34.6 mpg at 68-72 mph with a short traffic light stop off the interstate and a stop for food and a traffic backup of about 5 minutes. That's all interstate on I75 from Knoxville over the mountains to Dayton. No air conditioning until the last 70 miles.
I haven't driven a Lucerne but I'd recommend a rental or a long tes drive to see if it doesn't serve just as well. Unless you want the hotrod torque or a quick motor and the decrease in mileage.
|
- #153 of 191
-
Re: Regarding V6 choices [imidazol97]
by jh1977
-
Apr 13, 2006 (9:10 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Apr 13, 2006 5:55 pm)
The 3800 engine is a good engine but it is now dated. The new Lucerne is heavier than the LeSabre. Car buyers should have in addition to the V8 engine, 3800 engine, another V6 engine to choose in the Lucerne such as GM's 3.6 or 3.9 Liter engines. Car buyers have a choice of 4 different engines in the Chrysler 300 vehicles.
|
- #154 of 191
-
Re: Regarding V6 choices [jh1977]
by poncho167
-
Apr 14, 2006 (6:43 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: jh1977 (Apr 13, 2006 9:10 pm)
The 3800 engine is much better than good, it's the best V6 ever made (over 30 million produced) and is world renown for that. I agree it is dated and probably should be replaced, but for the most of us a V6 is all that is needed. The Lucerne is not much more in weight than the LaSabre, so again a V6 should be plenty of muscle for the average driver. I personally no longer drag race from the lights and am rarely in a hurry that I need to start passing traffic, so a V6 would be my choice for mileage and regular driving. The V8 as offered is there for those who need the extra muscle, or to help remind them that this is a premium car with a premium engine available.
|
- #155 of 191
-
Re: Regarding V6 choices [jh1977]
by sls002
-
Apr 14, 2006 (7:12 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: jh1977 (Apr 13, 2006 10:37 am)
The 3800 performance in the Lucerne is partly due to the axle gearing used, 2.85:1, while the V8 gets a 3.11:1 ratio. The 3800 used to get a 3.05:1 in most applications. I used to own an Oldsmobile diesel, which had adequate power, so using that as a standard, yes, I would say the 3800 is more than adequate, even with the economy gearing.
The basic difference between the the pushrod engines (3800, 3.9) and the DOHC V6s is that the pushrod engines are cheaper with more noise, vibration and hashness (NVH); the DOHC V6 family (2.8-3.6 liter) is a global V6 with reduced NVH (in theory). I think that the GM 3.6 is not as good as some other 3.5 liter V6's from other makers. BMW's straight 6 is the best for NVH.
Regarding the 3.9: It has more torque, see plot:
http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/product_services/HPT%20Library/HVV6/2006_39- - - L_LZ9_Impala.pdf
Note that it has more than 225 lb-ft of torque from 2000 RPMs to 5500 RPMs. This engine would be much better than either the 3800 or the LaCrosse 3.6. Note that there is a double peak in torque, this is the variable length intake manifold, which none of the 3.6 engines has as yet, although the CTS 3.6 has a variable intake manifold. The variable 3.6 has independent left and right intakes for each bank of cylinders, but at high speeds a valve connects the two banks.
For NVH, the 3.9 is probably no better than the 3800, so this engine would be good for the CX, keeping its price down. But then the LaCrosse 3.6 would not give better performance in the V6 CXL, although axle ratios or transmission choices could make a difference. The LaCrosse 3.6 gets a 3.69:1 axle ratio to give it an edge on performance, but it EPA fuel consumption is greater.
While the Chrysler 300 offers 4 engines, the 2.7 V6 is too small, and the 425 hp engine is too big. I have never been too impressed with the 250 hp 3.5's performance in the 300M either. It seemed to me that it should have done better.
|
- #156 of 191
-
Re: Regarding V6 choices [sls002]
by jh1977
-
Apr 14, 2006 (6:55 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: sls002 (Apr 14, 2006 7:12 am)
Your messages are very informative. In your last message you stated that GM's new 3.9 Liter V6 engine is probably no better than the 3800 V6 engine. The 3.9 Liter V6 engine can deliver 240 HP and 240 pounds of torque while the 3800 delivers only 197 HP and 227 pounds of torque in the Buick Lucerne. How can both engines have near equal power according to you? Please explain. Sincerely.
|
- #157 of 191
-
Re: Regarding V6 choices [jh1977]
by sls002
-
Apr 15, 2006 (5:58 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: jh1977 (Apr 14, 2006 6:55 pm)
I clearly stated that for noise, vibration and harshness, the 3.9 might not be much better than the 3800. However, the 3.9 is a 60 degree design rather than a 90 degree design, which does make some difference. But the 3800 was upgraded many times to improve the NVH. The 3.9 and the smaller 3.5 are both much better designs than the older 3800.
The Lucerne will probably continue with the 3800 for as long as it is in production, which will be through the 2008 model year. The new 2007 Saturn Aura will have the 3.5 liter as the standard engine with (surprise  )the 4 speed automatic. The 3.5 is upgraded to 220 lb-ft of torque and 224 hp. This engine might be a good base engine for the Lucerne.
|
- #158 of 191
-
Re: Regarding V6 choices [sls002]
by ab348
-
Apr 15, 2006 (7:33 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: sls002 (Apr 15, 2006 5:58 am)
The 3.9 and the smaller 3.5 are both much better designs than the older 3800.
Upon what do you base that conclusion?
I have yet to be convinced that either of these, with their 1970's 2.8 Chevy Citation V-6 origins that in turn spawned the shameful 3.1 and 3.4 V-6s known for their thrashiness, problems with leaks, and general underachievement, are superior to the timeless 3.8.
|
- #159 of 191
-
Re: Regarding V6 choices [sls002]
by b88lazer
-
Apr 15, 2006 (9:20 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: sls002 (Apr 15, 2006 5:58 am)
You predict that the Lucerne will remain in production only through the 2008 model year. Please share with present Lucerne owners and prospective buyers any hard information that you have, insider or otherwise, to substantiate your contention. Thanks.
|
- #160 of 191
-
Re: Regarding V6 choices [b88lazer]
by sls002
-
Apr 15, 2006 (10:54 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: b88lazer (Apr 15, 2006 9:20 am)
The Lucerne will remain in production through the 2008 model year and the standard engine will probably be the 3800. The 3800 is going out of production at the end of model year 2008 as part of the downsizing or cost cutting program. What happens with the Lucerne for model year 2009 is somewhat speculative at this time, but I expect it to remain in production with the V8, and perhaps no V6, or one of the alternate V6's as I outlined above.
|
- #161 of 191
-
Re: Regarding V6 choices [ab348]
by sls002
-
Apr 15, 2006 (10:56 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: ab348 (Apr 15, 2006 7:33 am)
There are many who think your discription of the 3.1 and 3.4 apply to the 3800 too. I will say that the 3.5 and 3.9 engines are all new, with a new, larger block, as the old 2.8 block was not big enough for a 99 mm bore.
|
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans 
