razoredge

Its 3/10 of a second on a family sedan. I actually cant invision or feel 3/10 of a second, its kinda a small fragment, I believe people make to much of this, unless GM has something fast like the GXP, or the comp G then its not worth mentioning the 10ths of a second faster. Im willing to bet this Camry is geared much lower than the OHV 3.5 Gear ratios gain alot of time fast. When GM gets its 6 sp for FWDs done, they could use lower final drive, thereby helping acceleration and 6th could acheive = final ratio at tires to the current 4 sp. It could help if ti doesnt consume power, but it wont help milage as everyone thinks or hopes for. My opinion of course. Time will tell. Mercedes own write up on thier 6 or 7? stated that it did little for mileage but mainly helped overall performance. I wish GM would put slap shift in all these autos on that 6sp. That way in hilly areas like mine you could pick that pulling gear, instantly, before the dog down and... the ... pedal adjustment to get the kick down and... then it upshifts again but your really not ready... with more hill to come.... it really is a problem. I think engines breath better and run more effeciently when pulling at steady unlabored higher RPM's than dogged down in the wrong gear being fed way more gas then needed to get the job done.

point me to what was better in 2000 and not some high 30's Audi or whatnot. And your "move on " is nothing more than another typical Reg dig. They have been doing R & D elsewere for a long time. Some funds that came from sales of multiple vehicals that utilized this engine. SO ONCE AGAIN THE L67 AT 240/280 & THE L32 AT 260/280 ARE STILL VERY MUCH UP TO PAR... AT THEIR STOCK TUNING LEVEL THEY ARE VERY CONSERVATIVE AND MANY ARE PUTTING UP TO AND OVER 300hp DOWN ON THE ROAD FOR A FEW MORE THOUSAND AND SOME FUN TINKERIN IN THE SHOP GET OVER IT REG, YOU HAVE NO SOLID FOOTING UNDER YOUR NEGITIVE STATEMENTS ON THE 38. SORRY FIGHT A MORE IMPORTANT BATTLE.

yo Vips, I think Im going to have to start calling you Rice :) Some of them I dont like much, they all have good to great points but I dont think they come together well, the rear quarter ridge in the Skyline doesnt fit my eye, wings make it hard for me to evaluate from that angle especially. The Z with the wedge front {red car} I didnt like because to me it was a corruption of the origional, a step back rather than different. Its nice enough though. What model was that called ? What about the 3000GT ? I think they came together nice. What car is this ? I get confused :blink: 300ZX or is that the red one ? I like these, but in this pic it looks high and not so crafted somehow.

So sad for the 90's, no one picked. Engines and systems got much better. GM had some nice cars in my opinion. Sure their all FWD but lets make the best of it. The Seville SLS/STS was the most handsome car. Aurora was very interesting, kinda racy or futuristic and unique Riviera was the prettiest car from GM, yet, my opinion of course, I know some dont like it but I think it might be, because its kinda perty and not "manly" Eldorado was love or hate unique, kinda edgy, full fastback, excellent taillamps, also with others packin GM's most advanced engine GP - may have been the nicest of the FWD GP's, there all kinda cool I think. The recent car has grown on me now that I adjusted. Camaro - eh, kinda, sorta, maybe, engines were getting better, it just lost the edge in styling PA, Regency & Deville were quite the luxury rides Olds LSS & Bonneville SSEi were packing some sleeper performance in a luxury package Aurora DOHC engine dominates IRL for a few years {Im weak on the stats, sorry} Aurora body itself in a tube frame, with RWD, 4 litre IRL Aurora engine was very successful 2 Aurora Indy pace cars ! BRAVO ! Lincoln Mark VIII Loved the look of the Thunderbirds, never even sat in one though then there the finer European cars The 90's gets much approval from me, it just doesnt over rule any other generation.

No ! Now, stop! Breath through the nose. They wont let me have a gun :AH-HA_wink:

Now, you all know Im big on conspiracies I trully believe this was the sole inspiration for the movie Jaws scroll untill only the tail fin is visible of the picture....then..... .....just....breath....very.....slowly....and.....stare....into.....its.....mout h....you .....will.....see....it....becomes.....a......Jaw......leaping....from.....the.. ..water Cool....ey ?

Comments: Yes Balthy, but you are so .....so.........just........so ..........you know...... Not all sharks have the same fin. Love that 70? Mr Earl ! The late B Regencys still had some fin action going on with the tall thin taillamps too. Now thats something Caddy could go along way with the tall thin cats eye tailight, we must have them back ! No, the CTS STS does not have subtle fins, its simply got an edge with a small amount of character, more of a kick back to the 67 Eldorado in my opinion. A&S taillamps need help ! yessir I shure LUV dem wings ! yummy ! Id luv to crawl under there on my back and check out the undercarraige

I didnt read this whole page but there are a few things I wanted to comment on. [QUOTE] has GM? Dumb statement [QUOTE]its ass is getting kicked around in the v6 department. what GM car under 30 grand can you get a COMPETITIVE v6 in? Yes the competitions HO engines have finally gotten to the level of the HO SC L67/L32, bravo, bravo :rolleyes: . They have also just finally surpassed its fuel mileage, which they do deserve a Bravo for. I have seen a few sedan tests and sorry but the competition isnt all that.... So the Camry's a hot rod is it ? [QUOTE]He said a competitive V6. The 3800 is no longer competitive because it lacks refinement. It might be reliable as anything out there, but it is rough. Correct, the 38 has been overdue refinement by 5 years. Its been ten years now since the intro of the Series II {95} and OBD II {96} Rough? BS, behind is correct, but rough is simply BS, its over the dam anyhow but calling it rough is just BS and will only lead to many wasted hours on this forum when presented to me. [QUOTE]Gas mileage is also less than impressive. No, gas mileage is impressive but has just now been surpassed by a few of the others. [QUOTE]Agreed, but "good enough" isn't enough to win back buyers. People who have been jaded against domestics NITPICK the hell out of them while ignoring and rationalizing problems with the foreign car they are comparing it to. My mom does this. If GM wants conquest sales it needs to be as close to perfect as possible. This is true. The 38 was GM nearly perfect V6 and only recently has been surpassed by a few of the competition..in its NA form not its forced form. [QUOTE]Lucerne should have the 3.6 in it as the base engine, if only so it is as refined as the powerplant in the Avalon. Agreed but there seems to be some problem with an abundance of this engine still. Perhaps GM would be wize to get them on production line in AMERICA {where the market is !} utilizing some of that stagnent helps its paying anyhow ??????????? !!!!! Naw we'll wait on that too. :unsure: [QUOTE] powerplant in the Avalon. Come on whats that Avalon got ? [QUOTE]My local Buick dealer told me that they get NO action on LaCrosses. He says IF Buick would give him more CXSs with the 3.6L, leather buckets, etc., he'd do much better. Apparently his Buick rep will not allocate him CXSs....he says they are in short supply. He has maybe one CXS on the lot at a time.[/QUOTE] Correct, somethings wrong with the 3.6 as I just stated, we need to build them here for this market, I dont care what anyone says. Its like GM needs 300,000 of them yesterday. [I/] [QUOTE] Even the 80-year-olds in Leisure World/Laguna Woods drive Accords and Camrys here.... Of course they do, its Lagunafornia where you are shuned for driving American built cars. W bodies - I know I had a 91 Regal Limited, great little personal car, wouldnt want to sit in back seat, I tried it, Im long legged and showing wear. Seat was nice enough for comfort but hey its a small car. My daughter liked it but her other choice at that time was the big LSS and theres just no comparision for back seat room. She did say the older 90 Regency was the best we've had yet. She was origionally spoiled by two NYers and the 86 LeSabre Limited, while being a two door it does have ample rear room. Wonder how that back seat of one of them 90's Accords was ? :lol: :AH-HA_wink: One can see from the styling how Toyota accomplished great rear head & leg room. Id be happy with a compromise, I dont like the styling results much. [QUOTE] The 3800 is old, dated, unrefined, and should be put to bed. It was great in its time....15-20 years ago.....when the imports weren't focusing on V6 or bigger engines. once again its currently 10 years old, it is not primitive by construction or refinement, its just been ignored because they have spent the R&D elsewhere. It is being retired and we need not listen to a bunch of you degrading it like it came from the dark ages. So long as you do we will continue to waste all this space on the forum. GM made piles of money selling - great and highly appreaciated cars with that engine. Do not degrade it, it has only recently been surpassed and that is in its NA form, not its SC form, which is the equivelent of the refinement others have done to get to that level....Problem ? 92 octane gas $ [QUOTE]Now, however, it's completed overshadowed.....by the competition. BS same as above : 260/280 - 21/28 - 200,000+ is not an overshadow by any means. [QUOTE]nice. it don't even crack 200 hp in the lucerne. how the hell are you supposed to sell that car with a 50-70hp deficit and expect any market impact? bo log na , so whats in that Camry again ? 190. Whats in the Ford ? What one is it that has like 225 but only 215 TQ or something kinda wimpy like that. BS, BS, BS ! So where these 50-70hp surplus engines :blink: 350Z ? Oh, did you forget that the L32 was 260/280 :unsure: :rolleyes: to quote my Man Robert Plant "talk , talk, talk " So just leave it alone. Its an old hard worked man, going into retirement and it deserves respect. Calling it for what it is, is one thing but calling it what its not is another. You cant back it up, you can only spout exagerations, insults and obvious predjudice. It has not been perfect, it has not been flawless, it has been retooled radically 3 times since 85 with a few upgrades midterm . It has not been retooled or recieved any real developement in 10 years. Its HO version will run against your favorite V6 and hold its own. So really whats the point ? Really ?

Housing in its entirety is one of the largest job markets. Paid alot of bills and put food on alot of Americans and Canadians tables. Many of these people are self employed and when they have no work they have nothing. 800,000 jobs is nothing to make lite off. Since the last housing slow down this country has lost many many other industries people could get jobs at. While I would like to see housing and suburban sprawl slowed way down I am aware that with the job loses, things could get ugly for many many familys, because theres nothing else left to do. You can bet if these were 800,000 health care or insurance industry jobs they would all be screamin the second great depression. Maybe this phony economy is all about to hit the wall. In ways I hope it does because people need to open their eyes, but so many hard working lower income familys will be devastated. That boom town economy just clouds everyones reality. Slow, smooth growth is the best, one in which you dont export many of your job sources because you think you dont need them. Only time will tell tic toc tic toc

OK first of all if someone runs into the back of a regular car they may be disabled for life, this costs money. If they run into the back of a 61 Caddy and become "impaled"......one less mouth to feed. Personally Id prefer to get them with the front of a 66 Toronado, they could then be put in a smaller box, thereby saving virgin forests. Seriously, for above stated reasons we know it will never happen, it would never be allowed. Arent they about to destroy auto design again by applying some form of crumple area so that idiots that dont look both ways before stepping off the curb are put in wheel chairs rather than taking their rightful place, elsewhere ? The only reason I talk like this is because of how foolish these regulations are getting. Insurance companys are ruleing the world. I think there is a lot stylisticly that could be done by the use of more creases and flods in the metal but I dont think we will see that either. These manufacturers are not going to put that kind of work into the sheet metal.

You are correct GM's "new" cloth does suck. It didnt used to, it was quality, soft, durable velour available in a multitude of colors. But some idiots decided "new" was better because it was different that "old" and now for something like 10 years we have had this weird "cloth" in all of two colors, shades of gray and baby poop. Well at least it doesnt remind youngsters of the velour that was in mommy and daddys car. :rolleyes: w body proportions - well somewhere in this topic is stats from two competitors that show the Buick within an inch on most areas so I dont see whats dated except for the knowledge that its "old" In some instances the Buick had the best area. What took you so long to get in on this GM bash fest Reg ? You missed out on at least 3 good days worth of GM bashing. Im see however your ready willing and able to make up for lost time by starting up your bashing of the best production automobile engine thus far in history because of the location of its camshaft. Right on ! Well Im sure you think your Ford has quite the engine in it but you know what ? I know my cars have the best, with over 30 years of continous technology and reputation to prove it. Other manufacturers needed to reengineer because they just couldnt get it right. Has Ford made a good V6 ? Has Ford made a great V6 ?

I didnt read all the post, just the first few. Congratulations first. Im a little concerned with this "aftermarket" sunroof. There may be all kinds but some are a bad deal. They are supposed to have 4 drains, one at each corner, they are supposed to have tubes running down through the front and rear pillors, draining out at bottom of the car. Any failure to do it proper will compromise the car down the road, usually not the problem of origional owner however, unless it starts leaking into the car. These new cars most likely have a dense foam sound insulation in the pillors, making it hard to run these drains after the fact. Just something to think about and maybe check up on. I would suspect that an aftermarket installer would just let the drains run off into the pillors and not tube it down to the bottom. I wanted to put a factory electric moonroof in my 86 LeSabre but cant see how I can get tubes down through front pillors with them packed full of foam ? Then at the bottom of pillors the sheet metal dead ends and its not the kind of thing you can get to to drill straight. Perhaps these people have tools for just these problems but Im rather pestimistic as to the integrity of the typical repair or aftermarket shop, multiplied by 2 for "dealerships". the front tubes on my LSS come out the very front of the rocker panel at the bottom of the A pillor behind the front fenders. The rear Im not sure about

Camry, Accord......unually stylish ? :unsure: " the best perceived quality" key word - percieved "offer less [generally] than the competition" generally ? is that in general, all the time, sometimes, maybe, not sure, could be, have to check ? :unsure: "think of any competitors and envision the levels of technology they offer" envision the levels ? Is that how you do it ? envision ? Ill have to try that. "The merits of the competitors will almost always come out on top" almost always ? as in sometimes, maybe, not sure, could be, have to check ? :unsure: Now is this margin great, small, significant or is it opinion, personal taste, and petty nit picking ? Or is it something that has been implanted into the brain from opinionated magazine reviews ?

Well I found this on Stag, dont know much about it but this engine appears to be OHC ????? Does that mean its not the Buick based eingine ? Or does that mean they were using just the block castings ? Now I wonder more about the TR8 engine, there was a convertable just recently for sale locally, Im now sorry I did not stop and check it out.

Next time Im at one of the Vintage Races I'll have to check a few of those Scarabs and see if they have the aluminum engine. They sound like a 350 or more but I have never heard a 215. With straight pipes they too probably have the low roar of the Domestic V8.

yo mister ya wanna drop the attitude, if Im not thinking of the kind of car that you are that is your problem and should not be put on me as my problem. You dont like my views and visions you stay the Fyuk off my back, your replys here have been complete bull and I was just expressing my view. Ya wanna have some kind of fight, do it face to face not what ever you have been up to here, on the other side of some phone line. Immature AH

Not making excuses just stateing a fact, this is a much larger engine guys. Supercharged V8 Displacement: 5439 cc Horsepower: 493 bhp @ 6100 rpm Torque: 516 lb-ft @ 2650 rpm Redline: 7000 curb weight: ---- Supercharged V8 Displacement: 4371 cc Horsepower: 440 bhp @ 6400 rpm Torque: 430 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm Redline: 6700 rpm curb weight: 4295 thats just over a litre larger, Id say Cadillac did really well with the 4.3 the N* reached the same power per cube as the BMW but look at the torque. BMW has a comparitively low weight which is nice to see but 4000 is still hefty. M5 $90,000 V10 Displacement: 5000 cc Horsepower: 507 bhp @ 7750 rpm Torque: 384 lb-ft @ 6100 rpm Redline: 8250 rpm curb weight: 4050 heres the $118,900 Audi A8 W12 Displacement: 5998 cc Horsepower: 450 bhp @ 6200 rpm Torque: 428 lb-ft @ 4000-7000 rpm Redline: ---- rpm curb weight: ---- this is nice ! I cant tell but this looks like a burled birdseye in spalded color, I really like all the color contrast Oh well, I think Caddy has done an excellent job and its still a Cadillac that has some of roar and vitality.

Harrys my father..........from a different mother

Supercharged V8 4371 cc Horsepower: 440 bhp @ 6400 rpm Torque: 430 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm Redline: 6700 rpm Do Cadillac drivers do this :metal: hammering down the hilltowns crankin Black Dog. This is Cadillacs first ever car in this arena. Bravo Caddy :metal:

and thus we see how four year political terms accomplish nothing and then the cycle begins again, and so on and so forth

Great post guys, awsome cars too. I like the 80's as well Vips but it just cant 1 up the sixtys for me, but thats when I was growing up, sometimes I think that inspiration pulls strongest, the young one. Also great points about the level of engineering today. Our road cars are getting the power of yesteryears HO cars running 87 Octane, better milage, awsome durability, low maintainence, turn key automobiles. Compared to how choked down cars became with changes in the 70's, now power has climbed back up {per cube}. So this is how we have come to today. To bad that styling frontier was closed by the mid 70's. Theres still creativity but...

RKM, love that Aceca, have never seen one. Tell me about this Buick powered one. Was than an available engine option ? There is a guy locally that has an Ace Bristol, I just love that car. All aluminum with the little 2 litre I6. Guess Shelby saw something in them also. The rest is history. This 215 powered one is interesting. I think that engine got quite a bit of use in road racing from bits and pieces Ive heard. I believe that is the same/similar engine used by Leyland in the TR8 and I also wonder about what other sports cars Leyland put that engine in ? The Stag ?

oh, and the BS about a V8 needs to be large and produce large or its loosing face is some kind of hang up I do not have. I rarely think about piston count having any kind of special meaning. Its the displacement and technology thats applicable to results, only. If its 3 litre and it produces 225 thats pretty damn good in typical cars, so what if its a 4, 6 or 8, whats that got to do with a 225 hp 3 litre. Sound and smoothness, thats it. The rest is some form of housewifes mentality or something. I dont know what it is but I dont subscribe to it. Perhaps you are suggesting its better to cater to the ignorance of the mechanically challenged that think number of pistons = power. Be that the case then Ferrari and Jag must be the all time power leader with all their little V12 and flat 12 usage. Back in the 50's before everyone caught up, Ferrari was destroying much larger engined cars with little 2.6 & 3.0 litre V12's.

fellas, fellas, fellas, I put that engine up to show the power that could be made, no way in hell would I think of wasting an engine the equivelant of the Modena in a stupid Malibu or Impala. Im not a Chevy guy OK, Chevy makes great trucks, an awsome sports car and at one time a really cool American Pony car. Outside of that I could care less what Chevy makes so long as they dont get funding that should be at Buick and dont build cars that compete with Buick. After all it was Buick and their great V6 engine that kept GM somewhat in the car market. Those 2.8, 3.1, 3.4, Chevy powered cars did little for GMs rep. Thats why Buick needs more attention, more R&D funds, and an exciting little car. Buick towed the line through the 80's and 90's along with Olds and Pontiac but I think the profits went to saturin and Fiat. Of course I realize this engine would need to be shared but thats after the fact. I was more thinking about a state of the art 3 litre DOHC 90* V8 to power the up and comming 3000lb Wildcat sports sedan and coupe, built to compete on the market against the little BMW's, Acuras, Inifinitys and Lexus. Of course the Wildcat coupe would be much more highly tuned, personal, and quite serious, they could cam that to spin to 7000 and it would not bother me, but a Malibu?.....((NOT!!!!!!))

I like the early 70's cars Joe but they couldnt be my pick not with the Domestic and Italian cars of the 60's. Its hard for me to pick between the 50's and 60's as well but so much stuff was happening during those post WWII times. All the varity and continous change was awsome, it will never be repeated. for road cars as in not ultimate muscle cars or racy sports cars these are my picks American car my pick 66/67 Riviera Italian car my pick 330 GT 2+2 this is actually a later 365 GTC the 2+2 had a nicer front than the GTC or GTS but this is the side view of a C the 2+2 was a bit longer and had lower fender vent. The 330 cars ran from '60-'67