You certainly can tell the difference between a 3800 and a typical dohc 6 immediately as soon as you are behind the wheel. But the typical japanese sedan driver is probably not that comfortable with the feel -- too different from what they are used to.

I think GM has finally figured out that the marketing realities are that its foolish to swim against the stream with these torquey pushrod engines. Thats why everything new coming out has the OHC 3.6.

 

A major difference is having that 3800, NA, in a car that already weighs upwards of 3800lbs, EMPTY...now throw in 4 or 5 passengers, some luggage and start on a trip somewhere!
What do you think the acceleration curve will look like, compared to one with just the driver?????
Hence, "the 197hp 3800 is underpowered for this car"....and since sedans in the early '90's averaged as much or more HP, it again takes aim at an older lower mark on the "bar".
And Supercharged Regal GS's rock!, but out-running LS1's Stock for stock is not believeable, with track times for the GS at around low 14's, LS1's low 13's....not happening, unless the LS1 is lame.

 

People used to (and still do, rightfully so) bash some of the denser gearheads out there that couldn't seem to understand how a car (including family sedans!) could possibly be judged on any other merit beside flat out performance. I can't tell you how many guys I'd hear asking why anyone would want a V6 Accord when it 'only' runs mid 14s and for the same price you could have something that runs high 13s. Some people just can't seem to see past power as the sole qualifier of the value of a car... even with a family sedan.

Is it a worthwhile measure and quality to consider for a family sedan? Sure. But is it the only or primary measure that should be used? No...

It lacks in both power and fuel economy. That's never good no matter what class of car you're speaking of. It doesn't need to be a rocket ship, but in this day and age pretty much ALL of the competing cars on the market are running 0-60 in 5.2-6.8 second range and it's way back there at 9 seconds, and even with the premium V8 engine and a near 40k dollar price tag it's stuck somewhere in the 7.x second range... that's a big difference.

Sure power isn't the #1 priority in a premium sedan like this, but it's expected at this price point, for sure... and if it's not there, I'm sure many (though of course not all) consumers will consider it a detracting point when they're shopping for competing cars.

 

Alright now that I have more time to I can dissect this post:
I don't know what year Avalon your mom has but the newer Toyota 260+ hp 3.5 V6 the current one has isn't a slouch down low like the older Toyota 3.0 V6 was. It has plenty of torque for most people, although be real here your comparing a LARGE OHV V6 with a blower to a middle of the segment n/a V6. Which one do you expect to have more torque?

I have driven a 3800 n/a and actually loved it, much better than the 3.4 DOHC in my former 97 MC Z34, but that isn't to say that the 3.9 OHV and for that matter the 3.5/6 DOHC V6 motors are weak.

And I am totally calling BS on you having 280 hp and outrunning LS1 cars.

Actually the n/a 3800 4 speed combo is pretty much unstoppable (with many high mileage examples running around today). The problem is the supercharged 3800 cars make so much torque down low and the cars themselves have such high weights that the transmission just will not hold up to any non stock abuse (and maybe some stock abuse).

 

I think when judging the 3800, its important to look at its life span

debuting around '86 150hp
Updated in '88 165hp
Updated in '91 175hp series 1
Start of s/c 205hp/225hp
Updated in 95/96 200hp s/c 240hp series 2
...
No refreshes/updates until '05? Small refresh i think. NO hp increase.

So basically, the 3800 in todays sedans is the same one for the last 10 years. GM has all but killed this engine by letting it sit. They've invested in the 3400/3900 family and decided to let the 3800 rott.
With the proper updates, the 3800 could compete with the best v6's out their, having an incredible following of people who know its reliabilty, and performance...however GM has chosen not too update it for whatever reason.

Imagine if the Ls1 was still being used in brand new cars instead of Ls2/Ls3....it would still be a great engine, but way out of place.

 

I was thinking the exact same thing> If only GM would give it Alum. cylinder heads (maybe block too?) bump the compression to 9.5:1 and put a 6spd behind it. Also, its hasn't had any major update in 12 years (series II debuted in 95').

EDIT: The MPG ratings for the Lucerne seems awfuly low to me, and it runs on 97 vs. what I am geussing it 91/93 for the Toy? I can't tell for sure because they don't say on their crap website.

 

I think it's called a "Series III" now, vs a "Series II," which is what I had in my 1997 Camaro, rated at 200hp. The NEW one is also rated at 3 hp less, for a total of 197. Not sure why that is. Problem is...The engine is probably the best thing about that car even though it's a 10-year old design.

 

Series II - III saw upgraded internals ( foged ) and an aluminum upper intake manifold. The Pontiac has the same power rating (205hp) but the Buick is lowered to 197. My geuss is the Buicks have a more restrictive exhaust.

 

ik I hate my car.

 

The big differences with the last "series III" Supercharged motor is nearly 300lbft of torque across a wide useable powerband, vs the 227lbs in the current N/A version.

Translation:
Using 1/4 of the throttle pedal(SC), compared to over 1/2(NA) to get out in traffic, pulling the heavier sedan way more easily.
Increased fuel milage by a more efficient motor, supercharging can exceed 100%.
A quieter more refined feeling motor.
Adding a pulley and programing = 300 easy HP!...

Drawbacks:
The SC version requires Premium Unleaded fuel $$.

New SAE ratings are dropping HP numbers too...more realistic.
(Oh, and ALL GS's since '97 were Supercharged...)

 

I thought they only required premium the way the LS1 requires premium...