Our Friends at www.clubgp.com have recognized us

[3100 MPFI]

I think I handled my view of it pretty maturly, but there are some that are plain haters and don't know why, and don't want to LEARN about it. If I am going to HATE something, then I HAVE to have a good reason too. I don't hate the L67. I hate the attitudes of the people that think it is the end-all of all engines.

Like I said in my post, I took those numbers as the LISTED HP and TQ numbers from a well known car source. I KNOW that GM underrated their numbers. I drove a 1990 TGP for a couple of months, and I was REALLY impressed with it. A lot more than with a 1993 Grand Prix SE with the twin cam,

The formula I used is simple. If you get DYNO NUMBERS to base it on, then use your numbers. In my case, I am going with an AVERAGE. Just because you have a TGP that makes 272 WTQ, that does not mean that ALL of them come that way.

The formula I used to do all of this is E = HP/D or in other words, EFFINENCY = Horsepower (or torque) divided by the DISPLACMENT in LITRES.

To estimate the revised displacments to determine what the car WOULD be making is HP = E x D (or HORESPOWER/TORQUE = EFFENENCY x DISPLACEMENT.

As to wether this is a good way of going about this, I am sure that there is a lot better, but it gives me a good baseline to go by when deciding what engine I want to mess with.

Going from the list I did in my previous post, I would want a MORE HP/TQ EFFICENT engine, so I would use the 3.4 DOHC, or the newer 3100 (which the newer LG8 3100 SFI is what I DID use in my 1988 Cutlass Supreme when a lot of the schmucks on W-body.com were telling me it was not near as good as the buick engine). It is more effecient than the NA 3800 in both HP and TQ.

[SappySE107]

oh god, I can't sleep unless I am respected in the L67 community. HA HA HA! I didn't care in 2000. I didn't care in 2003. I don't care in 2007. This thread is far more mature than the ignorant babbling of L67 owners on clubgp.

[Lysander]

Come on guys, a little maturity would go a long way to gaining respect from the L67ers. The reverse is true as well, of course, there are some folks on CGP with a serious lack of respect for just about everybody.

[dbtk2]

I'm all for the 3800, I'd rather have one than a 60* just because IMO and in my experiences with them they are more reliable and easier to work on, and CURRENTLY they have a better aftermarket and can be made quicker easier. From the way things are going it probably wont stay this way much longer, but for now thats how it is.

However, whats really impressive about those numbers is how horribly underrated the turbo 3.1 is. (although you could say the same about a lot of those) 5 speed swapped ones with just a chip are making like 330+ WHEEL tq. My auto turbo 3.1 stock made 178whp, 272wtq....

Although now that I actually think about it, fwiw, my N/A 3.8 made those same HP numbers (178.3whp) with only 4 MINOR mods....but torque was nowhere near the same (227 instead of 272).

[3100 MPFI]

I LOVE boredom. Just for shits n giggles, I decided to look up the POWER NUMBERS for some of the basic 60* engines, and compare them to the buick numbers. I took the HP, and TQ numbers, and divided them by the DISPLACEMENT to find out about how much power it makes PER LITER. I then put them on a spreadsheat to see WHICH ENGINES ARE MORE EFFICIENT STOCK FOR STOCK. These are my results (HP and TQ numbers were taken from MSN AUTO's).

the 3.1 MPFI in a 1990 Pontiac Grand Prix makes 140 HP and 185 TQ
HP PER L: 45.16
TQ PER L: 59.67

The 1995 Cutlass Supreme with a 3100 makes 160 HP and 185 TQ
HP PER L: 51.61
TQ PER L: 59.67

The 2000 Pontiac Grand Prix with a 3100 makes 175 HP and 195 TQ
HP PER L: 56.45
TQ PER L: 62.90

The 1993 Cutlass Supreme with the 3.4 DOHC makes 200 HP and 215 TQ
HP PER L: 58.82
TQ PER L: 63.23

The 1997 Chevrolet Monte Carlo with the 3.4 DOHC makes 215 HP and 220 TQ
HP PER L: 63.20
TQ PER L: 64.70

The 2000 Grand Am with the 3400 (normal Grand AM) makes 170 HP and 200 TQ
HP PER L: 50.00
TQ PER L: 58.82

The HIGH OUTPUT 2000 Grand Am makes 174 HP and 205 TQ
HP PER L: 51.47
TQ PER L: 60.29

The 2000 Grand Prix with the 3800 makes 200 HP and 225 TQ
HP PER L: 52.63
TQ PER L: 59.21

now here is some FUN information.

The SUPERCHARGED 2000 Grand Prix 3800 makes 240 HP and 280 TQ
HP PER L: 63.15
TQ PER L: 73.68

The TURBOCHARGED Pontiac Grand Prix 3.1 makes 205 HP and 220 TQ
HP PER L: 66.12
TQ PERL: 70.96

I also did the 3500 and the two different 3900's from a 2006 Pontiac G6.

3500:
HP PER L: 57.62
HP PER L: 63.42

The GT 3900:
HP PER L: 58.20
HP PER L: 60.25

The GTP 3900:
HP PER L: 61.53
HP PER L: 61.53

When I did this, I just used the windows calculator and I did NOT round up the second digit, so do the math yourself if you are in dispute of this.

FIRST OF ALL, comparing NA TO NA (not counting the 3500 and 3900, but the engines that are in dispute here), the MOST EFFICIENT ENGINE (according to HP) is as follows:

3.4 DOHC
3100 SFI (newer)
3800 NA
3100 SFI (older)
3400 HO
3400 SFI
3.1 MPFI

The MOST EFFICIENT engine according to TORQUE is as follows:

3.4 DOHC
3100 SFI (newer)
3400 HO
3.1 MPFI and 3100 SFI (older) are TIED
3800 NA
3400 SFI

NOW
Comparing the NEWER engines, and the FORCED INDUCTION engines are as follows:

The MOST EFFICIEND newer/Forced according to HP are as follows:

3.1 TURBO
3800 SC
3900 GTP
3900 GT
3500

and the most efficiend of the newer/forced according to TQ are as follows:

3800 SC
3.1 TURBO
3500
3900 GTP
3900 GT

So to RECAP, the ONLY way the L67 is QUOTE/UNQUOTE "better" than the 60* is in the fact that it is the most efficient as far as the TORQUE OUTPUT PER LITRE.

I did two last little calculations. Since the 3.4 DOHC is the MOST EFFICIENT in the NA engines, if it was a 3.8 litre instead of a 3.4 liter, it would be making:

HP: 223.516 (224 HP)
TQ: 240.274 (240 TQ)

So the 3.4 DOHC at 3.8 litres would make 24 HP, and 15 HP MORE than a STOCK, NA 3800).

In the same sense of FORCED INDUCTION, if the 3.1 TURBO was made as a 3.8 litre, then it would make:

HP: 251.256 (251 HP)
TQ: 269.648 (270 TQ)

Meaning a 3.1 TURBO with a 3.8 litre displacement would make 11 HP MORE, and 10 TQ LESS than the 3800 SUPERCHARGED)

These last numbers are not meant to mean that if you overbore a 3.4 DOHC or a 3.1 TURBO to 3.8 litres that you would immediatly get these power numbers. It is just a referance towards EFFICINCY. If the 3.1 TURBO was made with the SAME EFFICIENCY but at 3.8 LITREs, then it that would be the power output, etc.

Reguardless of all the way I seperated the numbers, 3.4 DOHC is still more efficient than the 3800 SUPERCHARGED (albeit not by much), as far as HORSEPOWER goes. Most people only talk about the HP numbers, so there ya go.

I just wish that people would do some number crunching like this before they just start a BLATANT hating thread. It did not take me long for figuring out the easiest way to figure out effiency by dividing the HP and TQ numbers by the displacement to give me the power per litre. I think that is probably one of the best ways to determine how efficient the engine is.

If you are going to go head to head with a STOCK engine, you have to know as much about it as you can. If you want to hate the STOCK 3.1 MPFI for being slower than a STOCK 3800, then prehaps you should do what I just did, and figure out that if the 3.1 MPFI was made as a 3.8 MPFI, it would make:

172 HP, and
227 TQ.

In the same sense, if the NA 3800 was REDUCED in displacment all the way down to a 3.1 litre, then it would make:

163 HP, and
184 TQ.

That means that a SMALLER buick 3.1 would be only 23 HP more, and 1 TQ LESS than a STOCK chevy 3.1

When you get the 2 cars on those terms, then it makes you realized that as far as power goes, they are pretty close to being matched.

Also, keep in mind that in my example, I used the 3.1 MPFI instead of a newer 3100, in which the 3100 made with the larger displacement would be:

215 HP, and
239 TQ. Meaning a NEWER (LG8 ) 3100 at 3.8 displacment (chevy LG8 style 3800 60* V6) would have 15 HP and 14 TQ MORE than a BUICK 90* 3800.

I could go on forever like this, but if you have read all of this, then you can follow the trend that I am making.....

God, I need a life.

[3100 MPFI]

well, I was bored, so I read all of what they have to say. Okay. My 1990 Grand Prix STE is WAY underpowered. My GRANDMOTHERS 1999 Grand Am with the 4 banger is faster. BUT..... She only gets 25 MPG on the highway. I am currently getting an average of 42 MPG on the highway.

That is my only real complaint. STOCK FOR STOCK, the 3.1 is slow. The 3.4 is faster, but there ya go. I don't understand how those people can IN GOOD CONSCIENCE compare a BLOWN 3.8 V6 to a NA 3.1. Even if you compare it to the 3100, or 3400, I just can't compare a BLOWN engine to an NA one.

I am one of the people that trash the L67, but for me, I do it for the SAME REASON that THEY trash the 660. I HATE the way that they feel the L67 is the greatest engine ever created. It is their ATTITUDE that pisses me off. To be honest, I would not mind getting a 2000 Buick Regal GS, but I would ONLY get it with the SUPERCHARGED engine. It is a big car, so it needs a strong engine, and in STOCK FORM, the L67 is the most powerful engine that it came with. I also would not mind having a 1999~ish Buick Riviera, but likewise, I would only get it with the BLOWN engine.

There. I said it. I am a KNOWN hater of the L67, but I just confessed to liking 2 cars that came with that engine. The world is still spinning. W-body.come still sucks. Dr. Pepper still taste better than Pepsi (damn you taco bell). I am still rebuilding a 3.4 DOHC for my 1995 Cutlass Supreme (I am not interested in an L67 swap).

There is someone over there that said it right. The way GM is heading right now, ALL divisions of GM should be PULLING TOGETHER. I HONESTLY feel that if the 660 had as big of an aftermarket as the buick POS, then the situations would be reveresed.

Also, it takes a LONG TIME for an aftermarket to happen. It took several years for the buick engine to get an aftermarket (I can remember before W-body.com was it's own site looking for aftermarket parts, and the buick engine had just as small of a following as the 660). Now that GM is killing off the buick engine, and the 660's take off, then it is only a matter of time before we start seeing just as strong of an aftermarket for the 60* as the 90*.

[SappySE107]

Id almost want to do the LS1 into the 74 cutlass, but its keeping an olds motor in it.

With that new diesel 60V6, we can easily out torque the L67:P Thank you GM, for backing and expanding the best V6 platform available No bias here...I swear! hahaha, ok a little

So who can do some graphics? Im serious about the shirt.

[patgizz]

i wont even touch this one. 3900 = 240hp n/a, L67 = 240hp w/ blower. sounds simple to me.

and BTW = LSx for the biggest win of all time. i'm doing 2 or 3 swaps this year. the wagon is getting a 4.8 first as a step up to a 6.0 with the new 6.2 heads, we're doing a carbed 6.0 with the 6.2 heads and gm HOT cam for my buddy's auto-x camaro, and when i build my 6.0 the 4.8 is going into my dad's 48 chevy or the 40 chevy pickup i've got a line on.

[bszopi]

The 2004 cross-site arguement (ie, when we first made the shirts) : http://60degreev6.com/showthread.php...ghlight=CLUBGP

Too bad they removed their version of the thread from their forum...

[sil]

660's sound sexy 690's sound like asshole

haha thats great, allmost sig worthy

[Carlspike]

Let them whine and drive their buicks.

[93ztwo4]

n/a 3500 200 hp n/a 3800 200hp and way heavier. and i dont car what they say 660's sound sexy 690's sound like asshole. if anythin we have that

[bszopi]

It seems this has become an annual thing. Some newb over on ClubGP browses over here, sees some trash talk or whatever on the L67, then decides to post a thread about it over there. Do these people not understand that the shirt was created over 3 years ago as a joke, and has since sold a whopping 10 shirts!! Big flippin deal...

To counter their comment about locking threads dealing with the L67, I will say that yes I do lock the threads, but only after I point the person to www.l67swap.com . Being as this site is for 60šV6 engines and performance, why should we keep posts open that deal with getting rid of the engine that this site is based on?!?! Only make sense to me... Maybe one of them should create 90šV6.com and then they can bash on us. Until then, its something that is annoying because its always someone on ClubGP that has to bring it up.

[sprucegagt]

"Well, that makes sense since the 60° motors are gutless garbage and the 90° ones seem to run forever and make power at the same time. There is a reason GM decided to dump the 60° motors and run with the 90's. Just ask all the 3800 Fiero owners."

Talk about stupid! The 90° is going "bye bye" while the 60° is going strong.

[Z3R0]

"I bet they hate the LS1 too"
"They are just jealous"
"3.4 DOHC is impossible to work on"

Everyone who talks like that prolly thinks their 3800 IS a LS1 or LT1...LS2 FTW