Tje replacement engine is the LZ4 3.5 engine. I have one in my 2008 Impala and it runs as well (211HP) and gets better fuel economy (33-34 vs 30-32 in the highway). I hope it is half as good as the 3.8.
If you look at the 3.5 and the 3.9, they look just like the old 3100 and 3400 V6's.
__________________
2003 F250 SD 4X4 5.4L 4:10 Arizona Beige
1987 Mustang GT
09 Challenger RT
A bunch of motorcycles, other cars, and a Quad.
If you look at the 3.5 and the 3.9, they look just like the old 3100 and 3400 V6's.
They ARE the 2.8/3.1/3.4!!!
We all know how exceptionally well-built THOSE engines are! Get rid of a GREAT 2-valve (albeit 90 degree) in favor of the engine that has given GM nothing but trouble over the last 20+ years. Makes one wonder why GM is in the toilet.
I agree completely. The last 3.8 engine was produced (plant closed) on August 22, 2008. It was last used in the 2009 Buick Lacrosse. The cars with the 3.8 were not junked because of the engine. The cars were junked when the transmission died or the rest of the car just fell apart. I gave my daughter my old 93 Park Avenue and it still uses no oil at 200,000 miles. I just gave her my 98 Town Car with 125,000 miles on it as a replacement (much nicer car) but I think they will keep the old Buick because it has been so good to them. The only real problem with the 3.8 was a problem with cracked intake manifolds for several years that allowed antifreeze into the intake.
Tje replacement engine is the LZ4 3.5 engine. I have one in my 2008 Impala and it runs as well (211HP) and gets better fuel economy (33-34 vs 30-32 in the highway). I hope it is half as good as the 3.8.
I bought a new Buick Allure (LaCrosse in the States) sedan with the Buick 90 degree 3800 V6. The primary reasons I bought it were #1 because I wanted the BUICK 3800 engine and the Buick was comfortable. It has been a tremendous engine, much, much better than the terrible GM 60 degree V6, which I had three and was not happy with that engine.
I've really enjoyed driving the car with the 3800 V6. Very torquey, rarely do I have to take it past 2500 rpm, very rarely full throttle, due to the rich low and mid range torque band. It's effortless power and the mileage ain't bad.
I rented a 2009 Impala with the GM 60 degree V6 and although it's rated at 11 more hp, in driving the two cars the 3800 cc seems to have scads more power, probably I'm thinking due to the power characteristics and emphasis on lots of torque in the design of this engine.
If my Buick was written off, I would not replace it with a new Buick sedan as the standard engine, now is the GM 60 degree V6. GM has the 60 degree V6 throughout the line of cars that I would consider and I would not own another GM 60 degree, so that means no more GM cars for me.
We all know how exceptionally well-built THOSE engines are! Get rid of a GREAT 2-valve (albeit 90 degree) in favor of the engine that has given GM nothing but trouble over the last 20+ years. Makes one wonder why GM is in the toilet.
Exactly. As mentioned in my previous post if I had to replace my Buick for any reason, I would not buy another GM car with the 60 degree GM. Worst engine (I had 3 of them-didn't learn I guess) I have ever had in 43 years of driving. As said, I'm also astounded that GM dropped the Buick 3800 90 degree V6 that was rated as one of the top engines of the 20th century by JD Power. They drop the best engine in their line and keep on turning out the awful 60 degree. As a GM owner I'm not impressed.
You guys dont give the 3.8 litre ford v6 enough credit, after ford got the head gasket fiasco done this is a VERY dependable motor. Maybe it doesnt make the HP claims GM does with their 3800 but millions of T birds/ tauruses cant be wrong!
__________________
FORCE IT!,IF IT BREAKS IT NEEDED REPLACED ANYWAY!
IF IT CANT BE FIXED WITH A HAMMER, ITS A ELECTRICAL PROBLEM!
Still bitterly clinging to guns and religion.
Dave
Oregon Assistant Chapter Leader: To join the Oregon Chapter, click HERE
The 3.5 and 3.9 are other versions of the 60 degree V6....all from the same family as the 2.9, 3.1, 3.4, 3.5, 3.9.
I had two 2.8's, one 3.1. They all had multiple and expensive head gasket repairs- most out of my pocket, they all had engine knocks or piston slap.
That's my sorry experience.
Had a buddy who bought a 88 Grand Prix a few years back, talk about a absolute pile, every possible thing that could go wrong with that car went wrong with it. Sure the car was 7 or 8 years when he bought it, but the body/paint was flawless, and it was relgiously maintained with the records to prove it, only had 80,000 miles on it if I remember right.
It had a 2.8, you could floor it from a dead stop and you wouldnt see 60mph until 20 or 25 seconds later. This in a little tiny 2 door "sporty car", it was a guttless turd. The head gasket went at around 110,000 miles, he got it fixed, then at around 130,000 miles the tranny started slipping pretty good. Got the tranny repaired, then at 137,000 miles the head gasket went again.
Kinda sad, the car still looks brand new, interior is in nice shape, but the stupid thing just keeps dying.
__________________
96 F150 Eddie B. Edition, 302/E4OD 52,000 mile gem
94 F150 XLT 4x4, 302/E4OD. 3 inch lift, 4.10s, 32X11.50 BFG TA-KOs, E-lockers, Warn Premium hubs
79 Mustang w/ built 347/C4 - 86 F150 351/C6 - 82 F100 undergoing a 460/ZF5 swap
You guys dont give the 3.8 litre ford v6 enough credit, after ford got the head gasket fiasco done this is a VERY dependable motor. Maybe it doesnt make the HP claims GM does with their 3800 but millions of T birds/ tauruses cant be wrong!
Not being an a**, but the Ford 3.8 is a pile compared to the buick 3.8. It took Ford a long time to fix the 3.8 and it's gutless as well.
As to the Gm 60 deg V6, I used to have one in a 1990 Grand Prix. It ran great with 140K on it, never been apart. Thing would flat out fly also, could burn the tires of it. I really like that car, it even had the origional plug wires on it when I sold it last year. Current owner is getting almost 30 MPG out of it right now,, it looks like butt though as the pain peel from that oh so wonderful primer problem they had.
__________________
2003 F250 SD 4X4 5.4L 4:10 Arizona Beige
1987 Mustang GT
09 Challenger RT
A bunch of motorcycles, other cars, and a Quad.
I've always liked the Small block Olds motors best of all.
They all lasted great (excluding diesel) and ran very well compared to their competitors even the much maligned smog models. I've always been of the opinion that the Olds v8 should have been the engine GM standardized in the early 80's
The 260 was slow but when properly tuned would get gas mileage that would make many 4cyl engines envious
the 307 just ran FOREVER and was much better than the 305chevy or smogged 302 ford
the 350 had lots of torque and pulled great as a replacement engines for 5.7diesel equipped trucks.
the 403 was a screamer with only a few mods in spite of the low CR ratio. And it fit right in place of a 260 in a 3200lb Cutlass
By a weird quirk of design all these engines used the same crankshaft and bigblock heads would fit with a ported intake
__________________ "It's good to be the king!" ...
The main problems with the Olds V8's was that the rocker arms and fulcrums alwaus wore out early causing lifter ticking. They were also very wide.
But, usually very dependable and ran pretty good. Had an 76 Olds Omega (nova) with the 260V8 and it had well over 200K on it when we gave it to a needy nephew.
The 2.8L-3.4L GM engines are crap. Gutless anti-freeze eating waste of cast iron.
The 3300 Olds V6 was very dependable with good economy. It was a smaller version of the 3.8L.
Yes, the 70 GSX Buick stage 2 with over 500lb/ft of torque was quite fast!!
That Olds 5.7 diesel is a good engine for the racers that run alky from what I have been told. Change the heads etc and drop a distributor in if I remember right(may be more changes but I am not sure). Just a weak design diesel wise.
__________________
Jim "Iron Giant" Fahlin ~ A high performance car is like a guitar, you have to tune it to achieve your best operation and pull ahead of the competition.
The 1949 Olds Rocket V8 was the first mass-produced OHV V-8. The design was shared with Cadillac. Coupled with the Hydramatic, also an Olds invention, it was the future of the American car as we knew it in the decades that followed. Ford/Mercury/Lincoln kept the antiquated flat head design for a few more years.
Jim
The "1949" Cadillac 331 cid OHV was running on engine stands in 1936. It as supposed to be installed in the 1942 Cadillac's but with the US entry into WWII, the project was postponed till the 1949 models.
The Cadillac engine beat the Olds engine (303 cid) to the market by one month, the two engines are not the same and were developed by different GM Divisions.
First Motor Trend Car of the Year: 1949 Cadillac.
The Studebaker V8 of 1951 (232 cid) was almost a direct copy of the Cadillac V8. The Cadillac's intake manifold will fit a Studie engine, but a Studebaker manifold won't fit the Cadillac.
The 1955 Packard V8 was a close copy of the Cadillac V8.
Olds was known within GM as their test division. Many of the innovations were first installed on Olds' before other GM cars used them.
Enamel paint in 1924, chrome plating in 1925 and Hydra-Matic in 1940 are three examples, as Olds was the first car to use them.
btw: Not all the innovations were installed on Oldsmobiles. The first car to have turn signals was the 1938 Buick.
__________________ Bill / Retired Ford Partsman 1962-1997 / Ford Historian / SoCal Chapter Member.
Part Number Research: Trucks: 1928/2002 / Cars: 1928/1979
1963 Galaxie 500XL / 1965 F100 Styleside Pickup ~ Original Owner / 2008 Fusion S / 2008 Edge SEL
In 1979 any mid/full size buick old or pontiac could have any V8 in them, olds, pontiac, chevy, buick. I had a '79 Olds 98 with an OLDS 350, a buddy had a '78 Delta 88 with a Ponitac 301 in it. That was a WIDE engine.....
__________________
1977 F350 Crew Cab, 460, C6 and 4:10 posi.
Life is like a roller coaster, Live for the ups.
Negativity begets hate, hate begets ignorance, ignorance begets stupidity. Don't be stupid.
If you have to ask "Will this hurt?" do not proceed!
Did you like my post or response? Shoot me some love! Click the http://www.ford-trucks.com/user_gall...id=208503&.jpg beside my user name!
In 1979 any mid/full size buick old or pontiac could have any V8 in them, olds, pontiac, chevy, buick. I had a '79 Olds 98 with an OLDS 350, a buddy had a '78 Delta 88 with a Ponitac 301 in it. That was a WIDE engine.....
GM lost a large lawsuit slipping Chevrolet 350 engines into Oldsmobiles with no disclosure. At the time, GM pushed their different brands as having different engines (and they were). Ford and MOPAR made no attempt to represent their different models as having different engines (and they weren't). Where GM got in truble was that the Chevolet 350 and the OLDS 350 had different fuel mileage ratings during a gas shortage and the Chevy had a lower rating. People would order a new OLDS thinking expecting one fuel mileage rating and got one with another. Since that time, every sticker on a GM vehicle proclaims that the engine may be from any division.
__________________
2004 XLT Regular Cab, Short Bed, 4X4 with 5.4 and 3.73.
The Cadillac engine beat the Olds engine (303 cid) to the market by one month, the two engines are not the same and were developed by different GM Divisions..
they were not the same block casting, but they did share the design (not only on this but also the northstar programme many decades later)
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.
/ 2008 Fusion S / 2008 Edge SEL
