Zapata

Intelligence? Baha, so what makes you and expert on the issue? This thread wasn't started to say that the GTP is a piece of crap. I keep repeating myself. Please read the entire post from the first post in the threa!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Iron blocks are notrious for the amount of abuse they can take. Look that i6 supra engine people are putting out 800HP?? Don't gimmie the 3800 is so great because it can take abuse just because of the material it is made of.....sure material has ALOT to do with it's design but aside from the engine taking the abuse of the S/C what does the 3.8L do that is so spectacular??



What about the n/a 3.8L v6 engine that GM has?????? 3.8L still doesn't reach the trq and HP #'s that the honda 3.2L engine is putting out.

widerGTP

FI can be offset if increase in flow and high compression is put to use. Certain measures should be adressed before converting an engine designed for n/a to FI. Personally I wouldn't use an aluminum block for the job. It inherintly retains more heat and doesn't hold up to high pressures as well compared to an iron block. Aluminum is lighter though.

Zapata

It is WEAK........you got it right. Aside from the S/C what does that 3800 produce that the 3.2 doesn't???????? Look at the numbers.....3.2L n/a engine against the 3.8l n/a isn't even a comparison!

Acura CLS:
Horsepower: 260 hp
Max Horsepower: 6100 rpm
Torque: 232 ft-lbs.
Max Torque: 3500 rpm

Pontiac Bonneville SE

Horsepower: 205 hp
Max Horsepower: 5200 rpm
Torque: 230 ft-lbs.
Max Torque: 4000 rpm


Pontiac GT:

Horsepower: 200 hp
Max Horsepower: 5200 rpm
Torque: 225 ft-lbs.
Max Torque: 4000 rpm

Zapata

I agree with you.

GeTePe

Must be such a piece of shit then. Lets not speak to the fact that it will get 32+ MPG on the freeway and run 300,000+ miles before any major problems. You are just plain ignorant and misled if you cap on the 3800 as a bad motor. It is respected world over for its efficiency and reliability.

widerGTP

Those number don't tell the whole story. The N/A 3.8 has a much broader range of useable power. Broad powerband. This isn't to say the CL-S is a slouch. Bottom line. Torque moves mass. It's the actual twisting force on the crankshaft. Horsepower is the rate that work is applied at a given rpm. The N/A is simplistic in it's design. Aside from being very reliable, when a problem does occur the cost is less. JD Power and Associates have ranked it in the top ten for the last one hundred years. Maybe they see it the wrong way to?

Punk em all 733

Zap a potato is a dumbass......

widerGTP

This wan't adressed either. For arguement's sake the high 13 is a given. O.K. By adding a supercharger to the equation doesn't neccessarily mean you knock time off automaticly. Depends on the boost. To accomodate the extra psi (especially considering the material) The high compression used to achieve the original figure should be lowered. I see people say this kind of stuff all the time. "just slap a SC on it" It don't work that way. Additionally the boost can't be turned up too much unless you want a grenade under the hood.

Punk em all 733

"Spark plugs".......AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA

Where do you guys come up with this shit!!!?

Scrib

OK, I'm gonna chime in.

There is so much shit being slung in this thread it's incredible. While it's going to sound like I'm taking sides... But why are you GTP owners going after Zapata like he's a marked man? I'm not sure what gives you people the right to jump down his throat; i.e. I don't see anything in this thread that gives you a reason to be rude towards him...

Ok... So this discussion is on who's faster, the GTP or the CL-S. Stock for stock, auto vs. auto it's a driver's race. If it's a 6spd CL-S versus a GTP, I'd give the nod to the CL-S all day long. This is stock for stock.

Now, taking about mods... I'm going to try to stay out of this part of the conversation, because I'm not all the educated on the GTP in terms of mods. I know they can be made fast. That's about it...

Now, on to motor reliability. If I had a choice between a GM and a Honda powerplant, I'd take the Honda all day long. 32+mpg and 300,000 miles. Yeah and when hasn't Honda done that? The 3800 series is a solid motor, there's no doubt about it. But if for one second you don't think that the CL-S doesn't have a decent motor, you're all certainly nuts.

I've raced a a GTP once, and it was bone stock. And all I have is a CAI which adds MAYBE 8hp. The results... I won by 1.5 car lengths AT THE TRACK. Would the results be the same if we raced again, I don't know. But again, don't come in here and say we can't hang with you poeple, because we can.

I'm really glad that some of you can get those times out of a GTP. It's really awesome, don't get me wrong. But not giving props the CL-S... That's just ignornant...

How does Grand Prix GT perform modded? I'm asking this because I actually don't know the answer. The S/C is your saving grace...

GLAZARwannabe

I can't believe you guys rag on GTPs like "uhhhh...I don't see any modded GTPs out there, stop acting like they're fast!". Oh yeah, I see tons of supercharged H/A family cars out there...

Personally, I think the GTP has found its' niche...I've seen dozens of modded GTPs running 12s and 13's. Supercharged CL-Ss? ZERO. A CL-S that's even had the balls to step to me? ZERO.

No it's not. I don't give props to the CL-S because no one has ever proved me wrong about them. Not giving props to an Audi S4 is ignorant...

The fact is, if it's made by Honda, people are bound to modify it. Aftermarkets will appear out of nowhere, for no reason. Fuck, I talked to a kid whou wanted to modify the Insight! Riiiiiight...

Just because you can mod it doesn't mean you should.

I'll be back.

www.angelfire.com/ct3/talon92fwd

widerGTP

He's been the only one speaking up. Albeit with some contested comments.

Zapata

name calling........very mature........


also with the spark plug comment....................people on the clubgp.com board list these same mods in their sigs so why exactly is it sooooo funny?????? They are listed as mods you can purchase on many GTP performance websites. So again i ask you what's so funny. Interesting that these plugs are made for FI applications because the material they are made of allows for a cooler burning flame with helps to offest the higher combustion temps caused by the heat of a S/C or a turbo.


GeTePe,
I never said that it was unreliable motor....did i???????? NO..... LIke i said those iron blocks are noted for the reliability and strength.

Widegtp,
Ok can we quit with lessons? I'm very well aware of trq and what it is needed for and power bands etc., Honda engines with the VTEC technology are noted for their flat trq curves. Yes, those engines lack in the measurable out put. However, the output of trq has a direct correlation with the displacement of an engine.

GTP4UNME

I'm not getting into this debate on any topic other than the 3.8L engine. People that complain about it and say "200 HP out of a 3.8 is pathetic" are truly ignorant. You are basically saying that you don't think GM has the ability to design an engine that can put out a high HP/Liter ratio.

If GM wanted to create a DOHC engine or a high tech engine that was about 3.0L and still made 200+ HP then they would have. But this is what they did; they looked at the fact that 95% of people who are buying the car aren't very concerned about high end HP. So they built an engine that would conservatively, reliably and CHEAPLY make around 200HP with loads of low end torque. They weren't concerned with how many liters it was and neither am I. GM has had no problem making engines with good HP/Liter ratio (I6 4.2L, LS6 5.7L, etc.), however it isn't what they are looking for in most of their main stream vehicles. Most people that buy a car with the 3800 engine are looking for a reliable vehicle with decent power and good torque, and thats what it is.

GM didn't set out to make the 3800 series engine 300HP or whatever and then fail miserably when it was only a little over 200HP. They set out with a goal in mind and made an engine that has worked extremely well and has been very reliable for several decades.

If you are a little punk in a pissing match then yea "Only 200HP out of a 3.8L is pathetic!" is a great argument for your dumb ass to use. Since you aren't looking to make any sense.

Lastly, my comments have nothing to do with the CL-S or its engine, so please don't try to retort with a challenge comparing its engine to the 3.8.

Tim

Zapata

Tim,
Thanks for coming over to discuss this topic!!!! It's always good to have different points of view

You are correct this topic has nothing to do with the CLS.

Let's keep the dicussion mature and leave out the name calling. However, I see that you have already started down that road. Also, no need to get all worked up over this topic. I'm not taking food out you or your families mouth.......this is car talk!!

No it's not ignorant a statement. It's a statement that you don't like. Majority of honda engines are SOHC!!!!! Honda like all other companies is concerned about cost. Get the notion out of your head that all import engines are high reving DOHCs because they aren't. True some of the legendary engines like the b16 4 cyclinder that put out approximately 200hp and the new ivtec i4 in the s2k revs high but it's not the norm.

I'm not sure what your point was........

widerGTP

"quit with the lessons"



:shakehd: I see where this is headed now :shakehd:

You ask for explanations and I tried giving them.

Zapata

It's not going anywhere. I'm just attempting to discuss a topic so it'll go wherever you want it to go.

I didn't ask for definitions.......... Everytime I asked a question you started with definitions etc., I truely appreciate the time you took to respond but it isn't needed.

GTP4UNME

Basically my point was that GM wasn't trying to pump out major HP/liter with the 3.8L. They have the ability do make an engine similar to many of the import engines (pick whatever one you want for a comparison), but they choose not to.

I'm not saying all imports are making 200 HP @ 19000 RPM and 6 ft lbs of torque. I'm just saying that on GM's engines they almost all have higher TQ numbers than HP, and they chose to do it that way, its not an accident or because of a lack of engineering knowledge. I just hate it when people say that the amount of HP/Liter is garbage when its not really relevant.

Tim

Zapata

Ok that's fine i think the facts you are stating are established and I don't believe i disagree with anything you are saying here.

I think the 3.8L isn't designed as well as the 3.2L v6; This has been my point all along. Although the 3800 may do it's job....moving vehicles well....i just don't think it's that great of an engine. Now 3.2L isn't the greatest of all time but for this comparison i think it is better than the 3.8L.

If you want to look at a nice engine check out the new 3L v6 for the '03 honda accord.

The non type S varient outperforms the 3.8L in HP and is pretty close in TRQ numbers. Now some of the numbskulls will say alomst this and almost that....... well i'll say trq per liter number show otherwise. The 3800 does not perform as well as the 3.2. Remember that TRQ has direct correlation to displacement so you need to account for displacement difference when comparing the two numbers. The TypeS varient outperforms the 3.8L in both catagories.

GTP4UNME

Thats just the thing, I'm not comparing engines. You basically said back at the begining that the 3.8L is a "WEAK" design and I just disagree.

It isn't meant to be some legendary design, its meant to get its job done which is exactly what it does, and does it well for such an old platform.

I agree its getting out-dated, but that doesn't mean you should have dismissed it as pretty much trash. Would you call an old Big Block Chevy Musclecar from the 60's trash just because its outdated?

Tim

Maximized

This has been one of the dumbest arguements I have seen in a while. The 3.8 is a great engine for its age. I hate to break it to you, but with the resources GM has they could build a much better engine than anything Acura currently makes. Of course for 10K more, Acura is going to have a more sophisticated engine than a GTP. New technology such as direct injection, variable valve timing,etc. cost money to implement. All of these technologies GM currently has and will be implementing into newer vehicles in the near future.

BTW....if you compare the 3.2 S engine up against some of its main competitors, it isnt really anything special. The VQ and BMW 3.0 are two that quickly come to mind.

Black CL-S 4-Life

:whocares: THIS TOPIC SUCKS!!!!

Sonna Magill

What do you think of the LS6 engine? Now that is pumping out a ton of power. and the only thing imports have are turbos (the saving grace). What is with that? Those 3.0s are slow as balls without those turbos. what do you have to say to that? How about the engine in the ZR1? Man, Gm has no clue how to build an engine. You pro-honda people make me sick.

widerGTP

Zapata - What criteria is required for your definition of a well designed engine?

Maximized

I think Wards Ten best engines is a good source. Theres a couple GM engines there, but only 1 Acura and its not the 3.2.

GTP4UNME

I'm sure he's looking at HP per Liter more than anything else even though he'll say he's looking at good technology, HP, weight, construction.

And look what I found, I didn't even know this:

Wards Auto World 10 Best Engine's of the 20th Century

The 3800 Series II 3.8L was picked as one of the 10 best engines of the 20th Century yet you say it isn't very well designed, hahahahaha.

Tim

Zapata

It is weak IMO. The engine does less with more. I'm not talking just HP per liter, I'm also talking trq/per liter, i'm also talking emissions, i'm also talking innovation (vtec, ivtec, IMA, vanos, double vanos, vvti)., etc., SOOO even though you don't think i'm looking at the whole picture, I am.


Trash no...not because it's outdated, trash because anybody can take 500 cubic inches and make oddles of HP/TRQ.

Criteria for a good engine?? It has to have a good design, implement technology that optimizes to the greatest extent possible the resources that are present, some form of innovation, low emissions. Basically, I want to see that the manufacturer is doing more with less rather than less with more.


Maximized,
I didn't compare the 3.2 to everything else. Read my posts. Like everybody else says, woulda, coulda, shoulda.....the fact remains that most domestics haven't done it even while they have more resources than the imports.


Sonna Magill,
Again read the posts and stop witht he domestic rule and import rule and the others suck arguement. IF you would've read my statement a while back you would've seen that i love the new engine in the z06 and ya that zr1 was badass as well. I think the focus of this discussion is the 3.8L engine so let's stick to it.

caddyman

LOL, damn people CHILL OUT!

The statement that the 3.8l n/a is not as strong as the 3.2l n/a, it is true from stock to stock. But the 3.2 has an unfair advantage, variable valve timing and lift! I'd bet that if the 3.8 had VVTL it would make a lot more power. Also, I think that another thing that doesnt really make this comparison equal is 4 speed auto ys 5 spd auto (with manual control). I give props to the 3.2, 3.0 these are strong engines. But I settle with the assurance of the 3.8s.

Name calling is just childish.

We are all car nuts, and we should act that way, and keep the chit chat healthy, and about cars. Just acect what is and be done with it!

GTP4UNME

Ok, so YOU personally like Import style engines, VTEC, iVTEC and so forth better, but who says one is actually better than the other? If nobody told you what was under the hood when you were driving a car with the 3.8L in it would you still think its trash? You wouldn't know whether it was doing less with more or more with less.

I've driven many cars with these DOHC or VTEC high revving type engines and I don't like the lack of low end power, but that doesn't mean I'm going to call them trash.

I know the 3.2L isn't as high revving as some, but compared to the 3.8L it is still much higher revving and makes its peak torque 1500 RPM's later.

You say that anyone can just throw big displacement around and make power. My question is what is the huge problem if GM uses a little more displacement to get its power in a different way. Tell me that you prefer power in the upper RPMs and not the lower, not that the engine is trash.

Tim

GTP4UNME

Lets try to stay away from those "ricer" excuses. "You have more cylinders", "You have a Supercharger", "You have VTEC". The engine is what it is, compare it that way.

I never wanted to get into a 3.2L vs. 3.8L debate, that wasn't my point. My point was LOOK AT THE ENGINE FOR WHAT IT WAS BUILT FOR. Do you think GM really can't get any more HP out of the 3.8L? If you have ever seen the heads/cam then you would know they could very easily. But they choose to have it this way since it works and does what they want. If they wanted more top end HP out of it then they would open up the intake and exhaust valves and give it more lift with an aggressive cam. This is why with Intake/Exhaust and rocker arms for more lift there are many Grand Prix GT's in the 14's. But the point is that this isn't what GM was looking for.

And the 3.2L makes good HP and TQ, revs pretty high and does its job well, its a good engine.

Both engines are working just as designed, there's nothing to debate.

Tim

Punk em all 733

That is the only reason I was talking trash, he (zapta) has no respect for these engines, by calling them weak, so I have no respect for him. He could have said that he prefers vtec over the 3.8, but no he calls it weak, and I have a problem with that. Because if you know anything about engines that's the last thing you would say about the 3.8, and that is also the reason I called him ignorant in the first place.

widerGTP

I just want to say - Beer always tastes better on Sundays

Scrib

Punk em all 733

Yes it does Wider.

And the 3.8 is better then the 3.2......

With that said I'll drink to that...

Sonna Magill

hey how about this, I think high reving engines are junk becuase they don't supply the torque when I want it. I want it down low. Vtec can't supply that so it is garbage. I have no respect for ignorant simpletons like yourself. I don't like turbos, but you don't see me being INCREDIBLY IGNORANT and saying they are trash. Hey on a less personal note: You resememble a mongoloid when you type. and of course no offense.

Zapata

Name calling

Who said anything about turbos??

I refer you to the 3.5L coversion available for the CL. PLENTY of trq available down low. In fact much much more than the 3.8L gives.

PUnk em all,
It's not that i prefer vtec to the 3.8L.........i never ever said that...... People from the GTP board need to learn how to read.

GTP4UNME,
I'm sure GM can build the engines........they did in the z06 but they haven't done it for anything else. I'm not talking what GM CAN do and IF they wanted to....i'm just talking about what they've done with the 3.8L. Once domestics start to innovate a little then I'll give them a little respect........not like my opinion means anything. I have not inherent preference for imports.

Ah the 3.2 non S variant make the trq a little higher but with less displacement and less emissions to bot

The S variant makes more trq lower although the emissions rating suffers a little.

Sure, the 3800 does what it's meant to do but i don't think just fulfilling one's repsonsibility some how quafilies them for extraordinary status.


It's not that i prefer upper RPM's to lower but I see something with more resources not doing as much as something with less resources. I am a huge fan of efficiency. I agree i don't want this discussion to become 3.2 v 3.8.


Btw, thanks for keeping the discussion civil unlike some of the other clubgp members who have made their way over here.

GTP4UNME

I agree the 3.8 isn't extraordinary per say, but it also isn't trash. I guess it was considered extraordinary because it has been used successfully for so long in so many cars and has excellent reliability.

I also don't really think it has more resources simply because it has more displacement. Why couldn't I say a VTEC engine has more resources because it has variable valve timing or an overhead cam or two? Just different engines made differently.

Tim

ThoroDredCLS

Sorry Zapata, I was on vacation this weekend otherwise I would have been here for back up. You guys are lame with this gtp superior talk. Yes you are faster modded but who cares. 92% of GTP owners do not reside on your boards. I see countless GTPs on the road but none of them are modded, lowered, tinted and even on stock rims. Most of the races i have with you guys are usually some college kid from University of MD running up and down college park looking for action. My car is not superior by NO means but i haven't lost to one yet.

About modding the GTP, First of all, you guys are .....LET SAY IT... REPEAT AFTER ME...... SUPER CHARGED!!!! OBVIOUSLY, you are going to get more out of your motor than we are. So the 70 or 80 buck pulley kits story are out the window. If we had a supercharger don't you think if we change the pulley kit and put on a CAI we would get more pull. How about our supercharger and we turn up the boost. Stock for stock we are about even give or take driver. I don't care about everyone on your board running 13s 12s or 11s. I just don't see it in my everyday driving. And i don't always go to the track. Zapatas same theory still stands. CLS S/C versus GTP S/C I give it to the litte displacement CLS S/C. Now if you guys love spending 6000 - 8000 on modds go modd shopping as far as we care. I rather add that money into a S4 or m3 and beat you guys stock. I don't even know how all this started, but when certain people ***Cough*** Cough**** "jim" claims you guys are superior and shit we are going to defend the CLS especially when no one has posted a CLS kill to a GTP. Personally I can name a whole bunch of 11 sec car that tickle my insides but, I be damn if its a GTP or CLS This thread needs to move on. WHO CARES!!!

GTP4UNME

Will people please stop saying "if we add a SC to the CLS.......", the GTP's supercharger comes stock, with a warranty, non intercooled. A CLS with a supercharger is a highly modified car technically, so as much as you want to compare the two you can't. By the same token I could say "If my car had VTEC" or "If my car had more lift", its stupid.

I think the thread has moved past "My car is better than yours" so we shouldn't need to talk about that anymore. I don't even know who started this thread but it never should have been started with "The GTP's are faster". There also have been alot of Immature comments from GTP advocates as well, I must admit.

Tim

ThoroDredCLS

Well not to keep adding to this thread but, as i read the beginning it was about jim saying somone from you guys board ran a 11 sec quartermile. Now with that statement alone and if he were to ask us to go visit. That would have been fine. But when he puts little comments behind it like the CLS ain't shit or we can never be that fast then we get a little uptight. Most of you guys are cool and seem to know your stuff. No bashing from us is intended. But have you noticed that all the GTP bashing and negative threads have ALL STARTED with JIM. Hey Jim! Why is that?! Do you guys have your site on a Event procedure so that everytime the word CLS and GTP are in the same thread, an alert pops up and then we get a GTP invasion? Oh and GTP4UNME, S/C for the CLS is full warrantied by acura, well at least my dealership. AND I WOULD RATHER HAVE A SUPERCHARGER THAN VTEC! SOME may not agree with me. :o