What did GM do wrong with our cars?

[JbrownGTP]

So i was reading the newest import tuner today that my buddy picked up and in it they modded a 2009 eclipse with the 3.8l v6. Bone stock it put 250horses and 250torque to the wheels. With the addition of an intake, headers and cat-back it put 290horses and 286torque to the wheels. So my question is why the hell can my SUPERCHARGED 3.8 liter put just a little over 200 to the wheels? Idk it kinda makes me mad that all of these new naturally aspirated engines are putting more to the wheels than my supercharged engine can. Anybody agree or am i being a little overdramatic?

[flash527]

fu** the eclipse. Enough said.

[04GTP956]

fu** the eclipse. Enough said.

X2

[00gpgtp]

you are aware that 3800's are capable of going >300,000 miles right?

i kinda disagree with everyone saying its old technology. they used these engines through 2008... using that reasoning, LSx's are old technology too since they were developed in 1997, yet they are still going strong and still make gobs of power, can handle tons of boost in stock form, all while retaining reliability.

so get off it with old technology, it works, so dont fix it. sure 240 hp from a supercharged v6 is not very impressive. but keep in mind that gm is VERY conservative with their tunes, in just about every vehicle. you can easily pick up 30whp from an ls car just from a tune.

that being said, leaving out an intercooler is the only thing gm did wrong, imo.

for christ's sake, they held a damn ceremony on the last production day of these engines in flint. hahaha. wouldnt have done that if it was a poor engine.


oh, x3. f*ck that ugly pos eclipse. my gf has an 04 gts, i think its the only decent lookin eclipse made.

[Sabrewings]

you are aware that 3800's are capable of going >300,000 miles right?

So are many other engines.

i kinda disagree with everyone saying its old technology. they used these engines through 2008... using that reasoning, LSx's are old technology too since they were developed in 1997, yet they are still going strong and still make gobs of power, can handle tons of boost in stock form, all while retaining reliability.

The LS4, LS6, LS9, LS7, LS3, etc have so little in common with the LS1, they're practically new engines. Sure, they're in the same V8 family, but that doesn't mean they are largely unchanged. The 3800 II/III were largely unchanged from 1996.

but keep in mind that gm is VERY conservative with their tunes, in just about every vehicle. you can easily pick up 30whp from an ls car just from a tune.

And I can get 40WHP from a Stage 1 tune on my 4-banger. All manufacturers are conservative with their tunes. It promotes reliability.

The 3800 was great back when it was the "new" hotness. It was on the top ten engines of the 20th century list, and in the top ten engines for three years in a row in the 90s. It's known as being a trusty workhorse, but not as being a power house. It's been a decade. Things change, and they're changing faster every year. GM is getting over 300 horses from a 3.6L N/A DI V6. That is the new par for the course, so to speak. The 3800 can't keep up with that, and it is indeed old technology.

[00gpgtp]

never said 3800's were the ONLY engines that lasted so long, just making it known to the op that they do have decent power for how long they last.

those engines are still based off 1997 technology. theres not many differences in them either.

why do people come on a gp forum to bash the engines? retarded

[BwolfGT]

Because it's a 2009. A 1997-2003 eclipse couldn't do that.

[99prixgt]

Anyone who buys the new eclipse like men

[rojo grandprix]

Anyone who buys the new eclipse like men

[00obgtp]

because its 09 and there making everything na to get good gas milage and still have sum good hp.... the G8 V6 makes more hp out of a 3.6l than the gtp's 3.8l sc which is sad but i guess if they really wanted to they could of up the hp more on the gtp by changing sum stuff. like the cobalt ss that lil 4banger sc or turbo puts more than the gtp maybe not the sc but close but its a lil car and thats a reason why its a bit faster. i think the gtp would of been sweet with 295hp stock not to far off from the gxp

[Sabrewings]

Hmm... Well, let's look at this. The 3800 is a pushrod V6. 2 valves per cylinder, no adjustable valve timing, and 90* requiring a balance shaft. The Mitsu's 3.8 (just guessing, but going off the norms for V6s these days) is probably DOHC (4 valves per cylinder), variable intake and exhaust valve timing, and is probably around 60* making it smoother, which is less power lost to vibrations. It may even have direct injection, but I'm not sure.

Then, take into account that in general the 3800 Series II is using 1996 technology, with a limited engine management system. Modern ECUs from all the manufacturers these days have ten times the processing power and around ten to twenty times the memory for storing more tables with more detailed values. The PCM for the 3800 Series II has 512kB of programmable memory to store calibration tables for the engine and transmission. The ECU for my boxer engine in the STI has 16MB available of programmable memory and only needs to control the engine. It makes 305HP (2 more than the 5.3L LS4 V8) out of a 2.5L turbo 4-cylinder boxer.

The 3800 in general is fighting about 14 years of progress since its last major refresh. It's a great engine that I will always love, just for its underdog-ness and reliability, but things change and you can't expect it to keep up with today's cutting edge technology.

[Planeboy18]

Not to bring up my GTI again, but from factory my N/A 2.8L with only 12 valves puts down 170 hp to the wheels and 180 lb/ft, and that engine design is from the early 1990's and wasn't changed until 2002 when when they put in 24 valves and it got 200 hp and 210 lb/ft. The GM 3.8 is a bulletproof engine, but doesn't make very much power for the displacement, N/A or supercharged, but the 3.8 is a pushrod engine, unlike the eclipse or GTI.

[FoSHO99]

The series 2 3.8L from 10 years ago still makes 20 ft. lbs. of torque more than the 3.8L 2009 eclipse motor... These cars aren't dyno queens, I've seen gtp's/regals pull on cars that have a 100whp advantage over them.

[Sabrewings]

The series 2 3.8L from 10 years ago still makes 20 ft. lbs. of torque more than the 3.8L 2009 eclipse motor... These cars aren't dyno queens, I've seen gtp's/regals pull on cars that have a 100whp advantage over them.

This is true. Something to be considered is how flat is the torque and power curves.

[PH04GTP]

Yep, very true. Most Mitsu and Japanese engines don't come into good hp and tq until they reach the upper rpms and even then it seems to be a very limited torque curve. Although the new VVEL engines they are using in the Infinitis show promise. They almost resemble a pushrod engine with 90% of their peak torque available at 2400 rpm.

[Sabrewings]

Yep, very true. Most Mitsu and Japanese engines don't come into good hp and tq until they reach the upper rpms and even then it seems to be a very limited torque curve. Although the new VVEL engines they are using in the Infinitis show promise. They almost resemble a pushrod engine with 90% of their peak torque available at 2400 rpm.

That's what I like about the STI's boxer. Torque comes on as soon as the turbo spools (so about 3000RPM). Still has decent torque out of boost, even more than my L36 had stock.

[Gregorius]

This is true. Something to be considered is how flat is the torque and power curves.

Yup. Torque baby. From start to finish. Something crappy low tech American engines have always made in gobs. Something is just wrong when your torque curve doesn't start peaking until 4000 RPM. It should be fat by 2500.

[01gtspecial]

The series 2 3.8L from 10 years ago still makes 20 ft. lbs. of torque more than the 3.8L 2009 eclipse motor... These cars aren't dyno queens, I've seen gtp's/regals pull on cars that have a 100whp advantage over them.

true that.

[pontiac88]

The nissan 3.8 pushes 480hp.

[Durk Diggler]

What did GM do wrong?
Well, they were a couple years too soon with the EV1 electric car that no one cared about. Then they focused their efforts on lobbying congress against fuel efficiency instead of developing modern engines like the foreign automakers. Hence why they made the 3.8L 10 years longer then they originally planned. And engines aside they gave the public 2 decades of pure crap (80s-90s), body cladding, and they tried to reinvent antifreeze all the while ruining the Pontiac nameplate and then when they turned Pontiac into American Holden everyone had pretty much abandoned Pontiac or GM altogether.