3.8L Intercooled Turbo

[aschroeger]

I have a stupid question/comment.

I love the GN's and the Turbo T/A's.. that motor was wicked to say the least. But why didn't GM build on that success and put a motor like that in the 4th gn Fbody RS's? Really, what a perfect motor for the V6 Camaro/Firebird.

I know they went with the 4.3 in the Syclone and Typhoon's in the early 90's, but that was its final resting place.

[TraceZ]

I have a stupid question/comment.

I love the GN's and the Turbo T/A's.. that motor was wicked to say the least. But why didn't GM build on that success and put a motor like that in the 4th gn Fbody RS's? Really, what a perfect motor for the V6 Camaro/Firebird.

I know they went with the 4.3 in the Syclone and Typhoon's in the early 90's, but that was its final resting place.

Because then the V6 RS would had been beating the Corvette and Z28.

[Joe 1320]

The biggest problem was that emissions were tightening and many turbo configurations went away. GM went with the supercharger for the later variants of the 3.8 liter. The Turbo T/A was indeed a wicked ride.

[pwmin]

Because then the V6 RS would had been beating the Corvette and Z28.

you mean like the typhoon/syclone did?

[TraceZ]

you mean like the typhoon/syclone did?

yeah... the difference is that the Typhoon and Cyclone were special limited production trucks.. The V6 F-body was the base model intended to be sold to the non-entusiast crowd as a sporty small car, not a high end performance offering.

Traditionaly the performance cars have had to be V8. The turbo V6's are definitely great, but dont appeal to as many people. It would had been cool to offer the Z28 with 2 engine options... turbo 6 or NA 8. GM never did a very good job of marketing the F-bodys. Hopefully when it comes back they do a better job by offering more options and keeping it affordable, but I doubt it. They should take a clue from Ford... Look at how many different models of Mustang they sell... V6, GT, Mach1, Cobra.... All with different motors. from the V6, to a SOHC V8, a DOHC V8 and the supercharged DOHC V8. All the F-body ever got was the V6 or V8... with no forced induction (except a very few limited TAs).

[ryan34]

I know the 20th anniversary T/A was 3.8 turbo and intercooled. It ran low 14's. Like 14.1 or so, that was damn near a second faster then the 5.7. (If the facts are right) Maybe they'll have something like that for the 40th anniversary. Can't wait to see...

[gimp19]

I have always thought the exact same thing, think of how much the 3.8 would have evolved by now I dont understand GM. I gues they didnt want to put a V-6 in the Vette so it could keep up.

[Rob]

I know the 20th anniversary T/A was 3.8 turbo and intercooled. It ran low 14's. Like 14.1 or so, that was damn near a second faster then the 5.7. (If the facts are right) Maybe they'll have something like that for the 40th anniversary. Can't wait to see...

The TTA ran low to mid 13's. Which was a second faster than the low to mid 14's of the 350.

[Z Ya Later]

Tracy hit it right on the nose. Look at why there are no more GNs made after 87. You could go pick up a Grand National for $18k before markup from a dealer that would spank most anything on the road, including GMs prized Corvette at the the time (ugh), for a lot cheaper than most other performance vehicles on the road. Having a car faster than the Corvette, esp. one that is cheaper, is heresy at GM and the dream ended pretty quickly. As far as emissions go, I have to disagree with Joe. We've had a very good emissions history with the GN, so I can't quite see how that would have played a role. Fuel economy, on the other hand, I could see. Once you start tinkering with that motor, power comes on fast and fuel goes faster lol Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong Joe (I know its coming lol ).

[Joe 1320]

Tracy hit it right on the nose. Look at why there are no more GNs made after 87. You could go pick up a Grand National for $18k before markup from a dealer that would spank most anything on the road, including GMs prized Corvette at the the time (ugh), for a lot cheaper than most other performance vehicles on the road. Having a car faster than the Corvette, esp. one that is cheaper, is heresy at GM and the dream ended pretty quickly. As far as emissions go, I have to disagree with Joe. We've had a very good emissions history with the GN, so I can't quite see how that would have played a role. Fuel economy, on the other hand, I could see. Once you start tinkering with that motor, power comes on fast and fuel goes faster lol Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong Joe (I know its coming lol ).

The problem was indeed the cold start emissions. GM felt that it wasn't going to be able to meet the newer federal emissions limits and internally made a the decision to change configurations. It was fine when it was designed, but the rules changed. The 3.8 has evolved quite nicely, the big difference is that the superchargers don't have an adjustable wastegate. That and there is zero lag with a blower. A great motor that should have found it's way into a 4th gen.

[Z Ya Later]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't cold-start emissions only be detected if you get it smogged either at your house or around the corner? And, aren't you supposed to have the motor warmed up anyways before a smog? I still stick with the Corvette-getting-smacked-Chevy-is-a-baby theory lol

[Rob]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't cold-start emissions only be detected if you get it smogged either at your house or around the corner? And, aren't you supposed to have the motor warmed up anyways before a smog? I still stick with the Corvette-getting-smacked-Chevy-is-a-baby theory lol

This is true if "you" are getting tested. But with a manufacturer, its total on time. Whether its start up, idle, cruise, etc.

That's why lean cruise isn't enabled in the chip. You get better gas mileage, which GM would have loved since CAFE standards were a big thing, but higher emissions killed that. With that enabled, I got 30mpg on stock injectors and 29mpg on 50# injectors

[Joe 1320]

This is true if "you" are getting tested. But with a manufacturer, its total on time. Whether its start up, idle, cruise, etc.

That's why lean cruise isn't enabled in the chip. You get better gas mileage, which GM would have loved since CAFE standards were a big thing, but higher emissions killed that. With that enabled, I got 30mpg on stock injectors and 29mpg on 50# injectors

Bingo.

[Z Ya Later]

Alright, I gotcha. Now, about this "lean cruise" feature. Are there any disadvantages to it? Would it pass the new Smog 2 test? And, how would one go about getting it enabled? Thanks.