Jalopnik 
Enter your username and password.
Detroit, 7:15 AM
Wed Nov 11
30 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
tips@jalopnik.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Ray Wert | Email | AIM
Road Test Editor:
Wes Siler | Email
Weekend Editor:
Murilee Martin | Email
Associate Editor - Houston:
Matt Hardigree
Associate Editor - Detroit:
Ben Wojdyla
Editor-at-Large:
Mike Spinelli
Contributors:
Mark Arnold
John Krewson | Email
Andy Didorosi
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/11/09
10/11/09
10/11/09
I hope they just keep on makin em.
10/10/09
Does this mean we have a 2 for 1 EOTD?
[en.wikipedia.org])
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/11/09
*you probably don't have to hurry, AARP'ers don't move that quickly
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
I'm actually thinking "Malasian" would be a good car name. "Introducing, the Mercury Malasian!" Hey, the had the Milan. And the Montego.
10/10/09
Totally different.
10/10/09
Ditto Satan's '88 Regal Custom I drove for several years. The electrical system was an homage to Joe Lucas and the transmission felt like it was full of quicksand, but when the stars aligned and all the systems worked properly, the 3800 got on with the program.
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
"My '94 LeSabre has the 170-hp 3800 version..."
"After the wild ride a friend's father brought me on in his '94 LeSabre last night..."
You definitely ain't Jean, though.
10/10/09
And for his driving - so much so that I only hinted gently that his assumption as to its origin - Chevrolet - was incorrect.
10/12/09
10/10/09
V6's are for cars too shitty for a V8.
Inline six (or boxer!) over V6 any day of the week
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
@paulmer hates electric cars: Is that so?
10/10/09
@Tomsk sez so long Ash78, and thanks for all the fish!: No, it isn't
10/10/09
@Alfisted: +
10/10/09
@Alfisted: Cologne V6. Hmm... wonder what sort of cars this could be had in?
10/10/09
@Alfisted: No. The Cologne V6 is terrible by contemporary standards.
The little gem pictured above, however, is a different story. Having driven one in various applications, I like it.
Any guesses as to what it is?
10/10/09
10/10/09
But that's okay, it actually puts out 304 hp, so we can laugh at all those measly little secretaries with their 300 hp.
10/10/09
10/10/09
Alfa Romeo
Ferrari
Maserati
Citroen
Lamborghini
Lancia
Peugeot
Volvo
Nissan Z
Acura NSX
Mercedes
Audi
Saab
All these and more have had V6 engines. Try again.
10/10/09
I've driven a 1st generation SHO with a stick. It wasn't particularly impressive to someone familiar with the BMWs and Porsches of the day. Seems to me that the magazines thought the Maxima was serious competition for the SHO, and Maximas stink on ice.
10/10/09
10/10/09
@tonyola: I hope you aren't referring to the PRV. The PRV was a steaming mound of goat shit.
10/10/09
Seriously, why bother with anything else when you have the spectacular 60 degree V12?
Same thing with Ferrari.
I stand by what I said, I'd take a straight six over V6 any day of the week.
10/10/09
Hmmmm, hand-built inline six tuned by M..or a Yamhama engine?
lol!
10/11/09
Clearly, then the 350Z/370Z have totally compromised engines. So were the GNXs and the GTA Trans Ams.
I think you're making assertions that you can't back up here, just like those who knock the live axle in the Mustang. It really isn't so much about the hardware present so much as it is knowing what you've got and how to use it.
There are a great many brilliant V6 engines out there; something tells me that wouldn't be the case if they were the compromised engines for compromised applications that you so aggressively assert that they are.
@Paulmer Hates Electric Cars: Because V12s are mechanical nightmares.
Also, the brilliance of Lamborghini's V12 also totally explains why Lamborghini now uses a V10 as well, yet another "compromised engine design". And for all their brilliance, V12s frequently have a common failing: excessive mechanical complexity.
Every beloved V12 engine, from the early Ferraris right up to contemporary offerings from Aston Martin, BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Ferrari, and Lamborghinis all share this problem, which has frequently wreaked havoc with the reliability of the cars. Not for nothing are such cars renowned for their delicacy.
V12s are certainly great. But if you can't bring yourself to appreciate an excellent engine that was well-engineered simply because it is a V6 and not an inline six, then I hate to break it to you, but you aren't a car guy. You're just a knowledgeable fanboy.
It's easy to know and recognize the strengths of your favorite type of engine. Believe me, I am a Chevy small-block kind of guy myself. The hard part is recognizing that there are other ways to skin the cat, so to speak.
It doesn't matter what the engine configuration is or whether or not it uses forced induction, etc. As long as it is a well-engineered and well-crafted piece of work that does it's job and does it well, regardless of the application, it is a great engine.
10/11/09
10/11/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
Not to mention the GMC V6 of which it's based is also a dead-on reliable motor.
10/12/09
10/12/09
Starting with the Corvette:
It is a unique platform shared only briefly with the Cadillac XLR, and it is also a more expensive car with more expensive chassis components. The Corvette also makes use of an entirely fiberglass body, something that the 350/370Z does not. So, yes, it is somewhat lighter.
Moving on the the RX-8:
Again a unique platform, and also one that is fitted with a vastly smaller and consequently vastly lighter engine. So, yes, it is somewhat lighter. And yet, the 350/370Z are still the faster cars both in a straight line and around a road course. Why? The RX-8 rotary doesn't have quite enough power to match the power/weight ratio of the 350/370Z.
Moving on to the Tacoma X-runner:
If you'll do a quick fact check, you'll note that the Tacoma actually weighs 700lbs more than the 350, which kind of kills your point that V6s are flawed engines in flawed applications. You should also note that the reviews of the Tacoma indicated that it did perform well, but was not a particularly comfortable truck, which indicates that despite the performance they managed to wring out of with their TRD components, they didn't address the ride/handling balance at all. Also, it lost to a 350Z fitted with a Nismo suspension.
Finally, what class does it belong in? Sporty, non-luxury RWD coupes. I'll let you figure out what falls under that category.
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
I can't think of another $33K 2 seater coupe. Everything is better or more utilitarian or both.
10/12/09
10/12/09
1) Balance shafts are not a crutch, they are simply improvements to the basic design. V6s are more compact and frequently more powerful than their flat or inline equivalents due to the fact that they can fit more displacement in less room.
2) Very carefully. I would further address your point, but I want to wait until you've actually read the post. Judging by your response, you clearly didn't.
3) An important note in your comment: "..of comparable displacement." Too bad most V6s displace more than most inline and flat sixes, and so frequently overpower them in stock NA applications. As for turbos, having gone through the painful process of learning how to install and tune a turbo, I can tell you that there is nothing at all about them for "beginners".
Finally, as for your opinions that inline sixes and V12s are the only worthwhile engines and that everything else is trash including Nissans, turbos, V6s, Hondas, V8s, V10s, BMWs....
Well, there's no accounting for taste. It's fine to be a fanboy, but try to broaden your horizons a little bit and appreciate a nice piece of engineering for what it is. I promise it doesn't hurt too much.
10/12/09
1) How are balance shafts an improvement? They consume energy(power and fuel) and add complexity and weight. You'd think it would be an improvement to remove them, unless they're there to mask a significant flaw.
2) No idea what you are talking about.
3) Not sure what you're on about here. How many inline 6s are on the market? BMW, GM, and Cummins? IIRC, that is 3 liters, 4.2 liters, and 6.7 liters. Those are pretty big displacements relative to the V6s out there. BMW used to make bigger inline 6s than they do today, but they replaced them with V8s rather than V6s. I can't be bothered looking for the Subaru flat 6 displacement. It is at least 3 liters. The only reason Porsche makes a flat 6 smaller than 3.8 liters is to protect the market for their most over priced models. I don't think there are any naturally aspirated V6s that challenge the 3.8 liter Porsche flat 6 for power production. The inline BMW M3 engine had higher specific output than any naturally aspirated V6 has achieved in the US market as well.
I never stated that inline 6s are the only worthwhile engines, nor did I say anything about V12s. V8s are great. Inline 4s make sense in many applications. Hondas are fantastic, although I presonally don't want one with a V6. Turbos aren't for newbies because they are easy to install and tune. They're for newbies because once you have had one, you should realize that displacement is a much better solution. I don't like Nissans because I worked as a service writer at an all makes shop and I flinched every time one came in. I knew they were much too new not to be going to the dealer, and I knew that the frustrated customers weren't going to be any happier any time soon. Nor was I going to be happy by the time I'd procured all the possible parts to compensate for running changes made by Nissan without disseminating any information to their dealers. Accept that not everyone is going to like the things that you do. Some of us learn from experience.
10/12/09
1) Do balance shafts make the engine better? If yes (and it is a yes), then it is an improvement. Also, if memory serves, balanced shafts were first introduced on four-cylinder engines.
2) Obviously not, as you didn't read the comment.
3) I was operating on the basis that we were discussing NA gasoline engines. Obviously I was wrong if you want to bring diesels into the mix. The Porsche is one example. But let's take a look at GM's new DI V6, and use that as a baseline against any of BMWs NA inline sixes. In their peak state of development, they made 333hp. The GM DI V6 makes 304 at its introduction, over a wider power band. Displacement isn't always a better solution depending on what you are looking to do.
You may not like Nissans, but don't let your poor experience get in the way and simply spout that all Nissans sucks and that the 350/370Z is a truck. A simple look at real world facts just doesn't bear your assertion out. Accept that your experiences are not representative and realize that different engines and different platforms have different advantages rather than simply write them off as crap.
10/12/09
1) How do balance shafts improve V6s? By wasting fuel? By increasing friction? By adding weight? Saying they are an improvement doesn't get you out of the hole you are in. They only improve V6s because they compensate for a glaring fault. Stick one on an inline 6 and it is as handy as your appendix.
2) If item corresponded to a numbered bullet point in an earlier post of yours, I cannot find it.
3) Isn't the GM DI about 10% larger in DISPLACEMENT than the old BMW M3 engine while making 9% less power? Also, have you read a single review of the GM DI V6 where they don't comment on the crude noises it makes? It is hardly the sort of thing you want to hang the fate of your beloved V6 format on, kind of like the Nissan. My experience with Nissans isn't representative? Whose is? Right this second the paint is falling off my girlfriends' 6 year old Nissan that she bought brand new and never wrecked. It is a quality machine. Since I started dating her, I've noticed that all the other grey Nissans in the area don't have paint on their horizontal surfaces either. Under the Goshen cost cutting regime, they've achieved the sort of workmanship that made GM such a source of national pride in the late 1970s.
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
BRILLIANT!
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
Yep, the car, while black as night, is kinda low-key.
I mean, c'mon...a haul-ass Buick from that era?
Personally, I always liked the more luxo-barge looking T-Type for hiding it's bad-assedness.
Oh, and this dyno run claims to be 1076.7 HP...it's the last frame of the vid. I think the air-cooled twin-turbos might make it a little less inconspicuous, however.
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/11/09
3800s are 90 degree sixes, lots of people confuse them with the 8 at full song.
10/12/09
10/10/09
....and being my grandma's car, she got rid of it in 2007 for a Malibu. The Buick had less than 60k on it, but was hemorrhaging fluids like there's no tomorrow, since all of the gaskets were basically shot.
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
Yeah, I bought mine with 160K on it, drove the living shit out of it for 35K more miles, and sold it at break-even.
Gotta love "free" motoring.