View Full Version : Coming home with a Buickload


TUD1
12-17-2016, 03:26 PM
Visited Danny today and picked up my 1966 RCA CTC-25 Dorrance. Also found a 1985 Panasonic 4 head VCR at an estate sale for 5 bucks, and it works. On the way back from Atlanta now, in the rain. The Dorrance cabinet is in the trunk covered in plastic.

Jon A.
12-17-2016, 06:04 PM
Good haul!

One question about the Buick: does it have the nearly-indestructible 3800 engine?

TUD1
12-17-2016, 06:56 PM
It is a 1998 Buick LeSabre Custom with 166,500 miles on the clock. It has the 3800 Series II.

Kamakiri
12-18-2016, 08:19 AM
Funny anecdote.....I had a picture tube shield just like that sitting in my garage from a parted out God knows what from years ago. I used it to make a new lower quarter panel for my '62 Mercury a couple months ago :D

hi_volt
12-18-2016, 10:53 AM
Would love to see pictures of the cabinet when you get everything unloaded.

SpaceAge
12-18-2016, 11:26 AM
Is this the one that someone bleached the cabinet?

Jon A.
12-18-2016, 11:35 AM
It is a 1998 Buick LeSabre Custom with 166,500 miles on the clock. It has the 3800 Series II.
Takes a licking and keeps on ticking. The Buick 3800s are probably the finest American-built engines in my opinion.

Electronic M
12-18-2016, 12:20 PM
Funny anecdote.....I had a picture tube shield just like that sitting in my garage from a parted out God knows what from years ago. I used it to make a new lower quarter panel for my '62 Mercury a couple months ago :D

Hope you remembered to degauss it before painting it so that light blue paint job don't develop pink and green blotches. :D

mstaton
12-18-2016, 12:35 PM
The buick 3800 is probably the best V6 GM ever made hands down. They're reliable(aside from intake leaks). There a LOT of well made american engines(most are not made anymore) :( I drive Ford trucks and the best ones were built in the 90's(300 sixes) were bullet proof but we dont make inline 6's anymore. I have an 06 with a 3 valve 5.4, so far so good at 163K MILES. People will poo poo them but maintenence is the key.

TUD1
12-18-2016, 12:48 PM
Here is the Dorrance in its new home. Had a mishap when putting the tuner in, it somehow got crooked and the knobs wouldn't go on straight. Ended up breaking a small piece of the plastic on the mask. I stuck it back in and it was fine. Unfortunately, that's not the only casualty. The top left coil on the convergence board snapped off, but the wires are still attached, so it still works.

hi_volt
12-18-2016, 01:19 PM
Very nice. I bought and sold a boatload of used CTC25's back in the late '70's when I was in college.

stromberg6
12-18-2016, 05:00 PM
I and a friend actually managed to put two console sets into the trunk of my 1964 Coupe deVille. I repaired them and sold them. Ah, the olden days when I could get away with such crazyness...:D

Jon A.
12-18-2016, 06:29 PM
I drive Ford trucks and the best ones were built in the 90's(300 sixes) were bullet proof but we dont make inline 6's anymore. I have an 06 with a 3 valve 5.4, so far so good at 163K MILES. People will poo poo them but maintenence is the key.
Amen to that. Most people think "Ford" and "lemon" are synonymous. Our 1984 Mercury Lynx went through two abusive owners before we got it in 1992. By the time we got it there was a leak in the oil pan, the brakes needed a lot of work, a driveshaft had broken and the parking brake was toast. Seems counter-intuitive that the clutch was fine; perhaps it was replaced shortly before the car was parked. Once fixed up it ran just fine while we had it, powered through snow like a 4x4 and was great on gas. The only problem we had with it was the brakes on the left rear wheel seizing once. One quarter panel had a lot of Bondo and the edge of the hatch was rusted through, but I saw cars like it in great shape years later. As you said maintenance is the key.

I and a friend actually managed to put two console sets into the trunk of my 1964 Coupe deVille. I repaired them and sold them. Ah, the olden days when I could get away with such crazyness...:D
I still do and have no plans to stop. :D For instance, yesterday I hauled a 25V set 2.73 miles (4.4 kilometers)* on a four-wheel dolly before I caught a ride the rest of the way. Tomorrow I'm going to the same place to get another big set!

* I always plug my return route into MapQuest or Google to get the distance when hauling something big on foot. The dolly is a convertible unit and easily toted around by bus.

Electronic M
12-19-2016, 07:56 AM
I and a friend actually managed to put two console sets into the trunk of my 1964 Coupe deVille. I repaired them and sold them. Ah, the olden days when I could get away with such crazyness...:D

I had an entire tube era electronic organ in the trunk of my 78 Lincoln Mark V....And The trunk lid was an inch or two shy of latching. :banana::D

zeno
12-19-2016, 09:37 AM
Had 48 cases of empty Bud tall boys in my 76 Coupe Deville.
Had to put some on the back seat. All N.H. cans that didnt
have deposits & the beer was cheaper also. Turned them
in in Mass. Pure profit.:thmbsp:

73 Zeno:smoke:
LFOD !

dieseljeep
12-20-2016, 02:04 PM
Had 48 cases of empty Bud tall boys in my 76 Coupe Deville.
Had to put some on the back seat. All N.H. cans that didnt
have deposits & the beer was cheaper also. Turned them
in in Mass. Pure profit.:thmbsp:

73 Zeno:smoke:
LFOD !

When did they start marking the cans with the state that deposit was paid.
Our taxes in Wisconsin are high enough without that!
Around here, very few aluminum cans go the the landfill. :thmbsp:

nasadowsk
12-20-2016, 10:18 PM
Got 247,000 out of an '06 V8 Mustang. Stick. Still has its original clutch. Coworker's got it - 285,000. Still goes :)

Most cars these days will last a good long time if you maintain them.

As for inline sixes - were there any bad ones from anyone? It seems pretty much any inline 6 out there was just a good motor. Toyota got them right, Ford did, AMC, BMW, Jaguar.

zeno
12-21-2016, 09:12 AM
When did they start marking the cans with the state that deposit was paid.
Our taxes in Wisconsin are high enough without that!
Around here, very few aluminum cans go the the landfill. :thmbsp:

Mass cans had several states carved into top, bottles printed
on labels. Then they came out with can eating machines that couldnt
tell anyhows. I think they finally changed the UPC on deposit cans.
N.H. used to be a dirt cheap place to live but a lot of what are called
Massholes took over the south half & wrecked everything. Still only
have a few taxes.
Sin
real estate
timber sales
buisiness profits

73 Zeno:smoke:
LFOD !

dieseljeep
12-21-2016, 11:24 AM
Got 247,000 out of an '06 V8 Mustang. Stick. Still has its original clutch. Coworker's got it - 285,000. Still goes :)

Most cars these days will last a good long time if you maintain them.

As for inline sixes - were there any bad ones from anyone? It seems pretty much any inline 6 out there was just a good motor. Toyota got them right, Ford did, AMC, BMW, Jaguar.

Mopar slant sixes, International six truck engines. GMC made their own inline sixes.

Captainclock
01-13-2017, 10:41 PM
Speaking of Buicks I'm now the Proud owner of a 2003 Buick Regal LS which also has the 3800 Series II engine in it with only 107,000 I bought it after my 2000 Chrysler Cirrus LX got wrecked by ironically enough a 2000 Buick Century (which is basically the sister car to the Buick Regal)anyways I've been pretty happy with it so far except for the fact that the driver side heated seat didn't work when I got it because the switch was bad and when I finally replaced the switch assembly on it the seat works now but its not nearly as warm as the passenger seat is for some reason. also it was in a wreck at some point in time in its life and the previous owner had the front end completely replaced but whoever did the replacement didn't do it right as the grille wasn't attached properly (because they left the original fiberglass mounting bracket in place which was broken and because of that the grille wasn't mounted properly), also they replaced the driver side headlamp assembly with one that wasn't for the correct year or the correct car (it was a head lamp assembly from a 2000 Buick Century which was slightly different from the 2003 Buick Regal Headlamp assembly, even though they're technically the same car) and it didn't have the curblight in it which is what the orginal had because that's how it was originally ordered according to the original window sticker from the car that I found in the owner's manual packet) also when they installed the new front end on the car they didn't line up the passenger side fender properly so because of that the gap between the hood and the passenger side fender where they're supposed to meet is a lot larger than its supposed to be and also there's a large crease in the fender because the mounting brackets that mount the fender to the frame was pulled in too far (which is why there's too much of a gap in between the hood and the fender.) Anyways other than that its been a pretty good car it runs well and has disc brakes all around. Also I was wondering but how common is it for the console on these Buick Regals to get broken? I'm wondering because when I got my Regal the cup holder assembly was broken and the wood trim piece that goes around the shifter was broken off for some reason and also I've noticed that if you try to shift the car into 2nd or 1st gear the shifter is hard to get into those gears and it jerks the shifter box to the point that its almost like its going to come loose out of the console. Anyone on here had any experience with the Buick Regals and specifically with some of the issues I'm having with mine?

Also I just remembered, but how common is it for the catalytic converter to go out prematurely on a car? I'm wondering because right after I had bought my car the Service Engine Soon light came on and I checked it with a OBD II Test Tool at Auto Zone and it said that the Catalytic Converter was failing which to me doesn't seem right considering the car only has 107,000 miles on it and from what I've read the catalytic converters are supposed to last the lifetime of the vehicle, and I took the car to the mechanic and he said that sometimes the rear Oxygen sensor goes out and triggers the Service Engine Soon light but he said that the rear oxygen sensors are supposedly nearly impossible to get out and so because of that they have to replace the whole catalytic converter assembly which they quoted would be about $600 which I really am not ready to plunk down that kind of money on repairs yet for the car, although I think the car's fuel economy is kind of suffering because of that because I can only go about a week on a tank of gas on the car and I've kept track of the trip-odometer reading between fill ups and I'm only averaging about 215 miles on a tank of gas.

Anyways I would love to hear what you guys have to say about what I'm experiencing here, as this is only my second car I've owned that's had a V6 in it and both cars had the 3800 in it (my first car which was a 1988 Oldsmobile Delta 88 which had a first Generation 3800 in it, and I know that was able to go about 2 weeks on a tank of gas and went about 300 miles on a tank) and now this Buick which has a 3800 Series II Engine.

TUD1
01-14-2017, 01:42 AM
Yep, when my engine light is on (it comes and goes) it always reads catalytic converter. I replaced the first OČ sensor a little over a year ago, and it didn't help. This is the sensor right on top of the engine. In March last year, the engine light started flashing, and it started running like a pile of crap. Replaced spark plug wires, problem solved. All I have to do now is fix the oil leak, power steering fluid leak, catalytic converter, right rear window motor, and rear brake shoes.

Is your car auto or manual? If the former, I don't know why you'd be trying to force it into 1st or 2nd gear. I have a column shifter, which I WAAY prefer over console shifter.

Marco-nix
01-14-2017, 10:37 AM
Takes a licking and keeps on ticking. The Buick 3800s are probably the finest American-built engines in my opinion.


For a V6 ... Yes but i had a 3.8 in my Ford LTD 1986 ( the small model with a V6 with a carburetor) Never seen the end but i scrapped it because too much rust on the body ..On GM models this is the 283 V8 . nothing was better than this motor..

Captainclock
01-14-2017, 04:29 PM
Yep, when my engine light is on (it comes and goes) it always reads catalytic converter. I replaced the first OČ sensor a little over a year ago, and it didn't help. This is the sensor right on top of the engine. In March last year, the engine light started flashing, and it started running like a pile of crap. Replaced spark plug wires, problem solved. All I have to do now is fix the oil leak, power steering fluid leak, catalytic converter, right rear window motor, and rear brake shoes.

Is your car auto or manual? If the former, I don't know why you'd be trying to force it into 1st or 2nd gear. I have a column shifter, which I WAAY prefer over console shifter.
My car is an Automatic and I was trying to use the lower gears for driving in the snow but like I said when I tried shifting down to those gears with my shifter the shifter felt like it was going to pull right out of the console.
Also my car supposedly has a leaky valve cover gasket, because every once in a while you'll get a whiff of burning oil from the car when I'm driving it because oil is getting onto the exhaust manifold somehow, although I think what really is going on is that the dealer that I got the car from had changed the oil in the car before I had gotten it and they ended up over-filling the engine with oil by a quart of oil so because of that I think the excess oil is leaking out of the engine onto the exhaust manifold where it then burns off causing the burned oil smell every once in a while, kind of like what happens with a lawnmower when you over fill it with oil. As to whether or not I prefer Console Shift Automatic vs Column Shift Automatic,the reason I went with a vehicle with a console shift automatic is because my previous car I drove that got wrecked was also a console shift automatic and I had driven that car for several years (way longer than my Olds that I had which was a column shift automatic) so because of that I was just used to driving a console shift automatic and it would of been kind of hard to get used to driving a column shift automatic again after driving a console shift for the longest time. Anyways that's what the deal is.

Captainclock
01-14-2017, 04:35 PM
For a V6 ... Yes but i had a 3.8 in my Ford LTD 1986 ( the small model with a V6 with a carburetor) Never seen the end but i scrapped it because too much rust on the body ..On GM models this is the 283 V8 . nothing was better than this motor..

I think you mean 283 V6? as V8s started at 318 CID (like the famous Chrysler 318 which was also another rock solid engine that was built to last but sadly was discontinued when Chrysler discontinued their A-Body cars like their New Yorkers and Diplomats and the Gran Furys in 1989 and replaced them with the M- and K-Bodies which used V6s and 4 Bangers.) Interestingly enough All three car makers had a 3.8 Litre V6 engine of some sort Ford like you said had one, Chrysler had one and GM had one, although GM was first I believe and GM's is more famous.

consoleguy67
01-14-2017, 04:45 PM
No, I think he means the Chevrolet 283 V8.

Captainclock
01-14-2017, 06:09 PM
No, I think he means the Chevrolet 283 V8.

OK, I didn't realize V8s went down that small in CID. :scratch2:

Titan1a
01-14-2017, 08:41 PM
How about a 229/231 V6?

MadMan
01-15-2017, 02:00 AM
/wall of text

Also I just remembered, but how common is it for the catalytic converter to go out prematurely on a car?...

...although I think the car's fuel economy is kind of suffering because of that because I can only go about a week on a tank of gas on the car and I've kept track of the trip-odometer reading between fill ups and I'm only averaging about 215 miles on a tank of gas.

As a rule of thumb, cars are designed to get roughly 200 miles per tank. However, if you are absolutely certain you were getting more mpgs before the catalytic problem, the reverse of what you said is likely true. That the converter is suffering because of the mileage problem. Ask a real mechanic to do a good tune up and see that the motor runs right first.

Captainclock
01-15-2017, 08:03 AM
As a rule of thumb, cars are designed to get roughly 200 miles per tank. However, if you are absolutely certain you were getting more mpgs before the catalytic problem, the reverse of what you said is likely true. That the converter is suffering because of the mileage problem. Ask a real mechanic to do a good tune up and see that the motor runs right first.

OK, that's interesting because everywhere I read online said that a failed rear Oxygen sensor (which is part of the catalytic converter assembly) would cause a car's fuel economy to drop off.

Also why would it be a "general rule of thumb" that cars only get 200 miles on a tank of gas (which for me is only about a week) when my old car which had a 4 cylinder engine in it could easily get 300+ miles on a tank of gas which was about 3 weeks on a tank of gas and my Oldsmobile I had before that which also had a 3800 like my Buick I have now got pretty close 300 miles on a tank of gas which was roughly 2 weeks on a tank of gas?

Also I don't understand what you mean by However, if you are absolutely certain you were getting more mpgs before the catalytic problem, the reverse of what you said is likely true. That the converter is suffering because of the mileage problem. Ask a real mechanic to do a good tune up and see that the motor runs right first. because like I was saying above I had read in several online forums pertaining to car maintenance that said that the rear oxygen sensor (which is part of the catalytic converter assembly) is what causes poor fuel economy because the sensor isn't able to send the ECU the right fuel/air mixture information so then the engine actually ends up burning more fuel than it needs to, because its not getting the proper amount of air mixing into to fuel.
And actually I have had a mechanic look at the car already and he said that I needed the whole catalytic converter replaced because that's the code my car's OBD II is throwing for the Service Engine Soon Light which he also said that's the same code for the rear oxygen sensor but because the rear oxygen sensor usually gets seized onto the catalytic converter making it impossible to remove he just replaces the whole catalytic converter assembly and is done with it. As far as any other engine problems go supposedly the valve cover gasket is shot but I'm not sure if that's actually the case or not because the engine does leak a little oil every once in a while which then gets onto the exhaust manifold which then causes a burned oil smell every once in a while because the oil is being burned off the exhaust manifold, but I'm also wondering if it isn't just because the engine was filled too full of oil and because of that some of the excess oil is being sprayed out of the engine onto the exhaust manifold which is similar to what a lawnmower does when its overfilled with oil, I say this because the dealership I got this car from had changed the oil on my car before I had bought it and they had filled the engine too full by a quart, inspite of the "oil leak" the oil level has stayed pretty consistent since I've had it.

Ed in Tx
01-15-2017, 08:51 AM
OK, I didn't realize V8s went down that small in CID. :scratch2:

Look up 221 c.i. Ford Windsor V-8... :yes:

Are you really expecting good gas mileage in the winter? A cold engine is the worst case for efficiency. Especially if the o2 sensor isn't working right and not keeping the air-fuel ratio correct. Or your thermostat isn't letting the engine get fully warmed up, or just not driving long enough to get it warmed up.

zeno
01-15-2017, 11:05 AM
Your Buick should get low-mid 20's mixed driving. My squaw
had a '99 LaSabre & got mid 20's. She bagged a dear so
only got abt 150K on it. Never needed "tune up" type stuff
but that engine was a leaker !
Assuming 18 gals that would give about 400 miles.
Either engine isnt running right or cat is plugged, O2
filthy etc. IF you need a cat price it at a custom exhaust shop.
One on my crown vic was rattling & got it changed for <$250.
Whatever u do be damn sure its running right when done
or you will wreck everything again.

73 Zeno:smoke:
LFOD !

zeno
01-15-2017, 11:55 AM
For snow driving most cars if you put it in "2" you lock out
low gear & make it much easier to get traction & avoid
downshifts going up hill.
On RWD it also eases you down hill with very little braking.
Just avoid sudden downshifts or you get spin out.
With FWD there are a few more rules. Biggest thing with FWD
is if you HAVE to go out in snow storms get snow tires. You
may not need them but it makes a HUGE difference.
My 1st FWD car was one of these.

https://www.cargurus.com/Cars/1972-Oldsmobile-Toronado-Pictures-c8925#pictureId:11444845

About 3000 lbs sitting over the front wheels made it go in snow even
with bald bias ply tires. Added snows the next year & you could
go almost anywhere a big 4WD truck can.

73 Zeno:smoke:
LFOD !

TUD1
01-15-2017, 01:25 PM
One of my dream cars (among many) is a Jeep Grand Wagoneer. My favorite SUV ever. I would love to have one, but they're getting so darn expensive. Put snow tires (or chains) on that, and you can go anywhere. Only problem is that since Grand Wagoneers are getting so rare, you would have to be careful of all the road salt.

Marco-nix
01-15-2017, 04:16 PM
I think you mean 283 V6? as V8s started at 318 CID (like the famous Chrysler 318 which was also another rock solid engine that was built to last but sadly was discontinued when Chrysler discontinued their A-Body cars like their New Yorkers and Diplomats and the Gran Furys in 1989 and replaced them with the M- and K-Bodies which used V6s and 4 Bangers.) Interestingly enough All three car makers had a 3.8 Litre V6 engine of some sort Ford like you said had one, Chrysler had one and GM had one, although GM was first I believe and GM's is more famous.

It seems you are a younger boy . i'm 60 years old and a 283 was a small V8 chevy block I had in a Chevrolet Impala 1967. Later , I had a 318 is a small V8 in a ( Dodge Aspen 1977 ) . Not the same .. GM is GM and Chrysler is Chrysler my cap'tain ...

tom.j.fla
01-15-2017, 04:36 PM
Before the Chevy 283 V-8 there was the 265 V-8. And before FORDs' 289 V-8 there was the 260 V-8, don't know what Chrysler had before the 318. All the best,Tom.J

Captainclock
01-15-2017, 05:10 PM
One of my dream cars (among many) is a Jeep Grand Wagoneer. My favorite SUV ever. I would love to have one, but they're getting so darn expensive. Put snow tires (or chains) on that, and you can go anywhere. Only problem is that since Grand Wagoneers are getting so rare, you would have to be careful of all the road salt.

I too would also like to have a Jeep Grand Wagoneer but like you said they're rarer than hens teeth now and because of that they are getting extremely expensive now, last time I looked one up on ebay motors one was going for nearly $80,000 and it was in mint condition and only had 20,000 miles on it or so. That's about like the original Dodge Challengers and Chargers which can go for as much as $120k in mint or restored condition.

Captainclock
01-15-2017, 05:24 PM
It seems you are a younger boy . i'm 60 years old and a 283 was a small V8 chevy block I had in a Chevrolet Impala 1967. Later , I had a 318 is a small V8 in a ( Dodge Aspen 1977 ) . Not the same .. GM is GM and Chrysler is Chrysler my cap'tain ...

Yes I'm only 28 years old, plus ontop of that my mom's dad's family were into Mopar because my grandfather's dad owned a Chrysler dealership out in Myerstown, PA years ago so I'm not as familiar with the GM and Ford Engines but as far as I know Chrysler never had a Small Block V8 engine smaller than the 318 because the 318 was their workhorse engine for years (besides their Big Blocks like the 360, 440 and the 426 Hemi) I know that Chryler's original Hemi which came out in 1955 with the first Chrysler 300 was a 331 CID engine, and apparently according to what I was reading GM at least (don't know about Ford) was trying to limit its V8s to less than 400 CID which is why GM had their V8s in the 200s and 300s as far as CID went whereas Chrysler didn't operate with such limitations which is why they had two extremely powerful V8 engines at over 400 CID (the 426 Hemi and the 440). So that's what I know.

Captainclock
01-15-2017, 05:31 PM
Before the Chevy 283 V-8 there was the 265 V-8. And before FORDs' 289 V-8 there was the 260 V-8, don't know what Chrysler had before the 318. All the best,Tom.J

Chrylser only ever had the 318, because it was an engine that just worked and it was the workhorse engine that was put in just about every Chrysler car that wasn't a muscle car (like the New Yorkers, Newports, the Darts, the Diplomats, the Furys, Volares, etc.) My guess is that because of the fuel crisis of the 1970s GM and Ford decided to downsize their V8 engines whereas Chrysler didn't and that probably explains why Ford and GM had such small V8 engines compared to Chrysler, either that or they just were wusses and just weren't daring enough to try and experiment with engine sizes that went over 300-400+ CID like Chrysler did. Either way, its not really something worth arguing over.

Captainclock
01-15-2017, 05:44 PM
Your Buick should get low-mid 20's mixed driving. My squaw
had a '99 LaSabre & got mid 20's. She bagged a dear so
only got abt 150K on it. Never needed "tune up" type stuff
but that engine was a leaker !
Assuming 18 gals that would give about 400 miles.
Either engine isnt running right or cat is plugged, O2
filthy etc. IF you need a cat price it at a custom exhaust shop.
One on my crown vic was rattling & got it changed for <$250.
Whatever u do be damn sure its running right when done
or you will wreck everything again.

73 Zeno:smoke:
LFOD !

Hmm, interesting my car as a 17 Gallon Gas Tank and it goes through that tank of gas in a about a week or so, and I do do mixed driving (I mostly drive on county roads to get to work but then I drive on a couple of different highways to get around to different parts of town like when I need to go to college classes or go to church or go to my parents house.) So yeah I definitely should be getting about 22-23 mpg or so but that seems to be not the case, I did have a mechanic check the car out and they didn't seem to find anything mechanically wrong with the engine they just said that the catalytic converter needed to be replaced, but like you said what exactly caused the Catalytic converter to fail in the first place especially since that part is supposed to last the life of the car if the car is properly maintained and running properly. Which like I pointed out earlier the valve cover gasket seems to be a bit leaky on my car but I don't know if that would cause the catalytic converter to go bad.

jr_tech
01-15-2017, 07:31 PM
Before the Chevy 283 V-8 there was the 265 V-8. And before FORDs' 289 V-8 there was the 260 V-8, don't know what Chrysler had before the 318. All the best,Tom.J

IIRC, 273.
The smallest V8 that I recall was the aluminum 215 Buick, Oldsmobile, Rover engine of the early 60s. Fun to work on as one could easily pick up a bare block and set it on a workbench.

jr

Electronic M
01-15-2017, 08:33 PM
My guess is that because of the fuel crisis of the 1970s GM and Ford decided to downsize their V8 engines whereas Chrysler didn't and that probably explains why Ford and GM had such small V8 engines compared to Chrysler, either that or they just were wusses and just weren't daring enough to try and experiment with engine sizes that went over 300-400+ CID like Chrysler did.

My 1978 Lincoln Mark V has a 460 V8 (Ford/Lincoln/merc's second biggest) in it. They offered that engine in a variety of cars through the 70's and in trucks through the 90's. It supplanted their biggest the 462.

Cadillac had 500 CID engines in the late 60's and early 70's...I've been tempted to buy Eldorados with that engine.

If you did not have a V8 back in the day it probably seemed a bit cheap....I'd imagine the small ones were the fuel savers for the people that did not want to be accused of being fuel savers.

consoleguy67
01-15-2017, 10:04 PM
The 215 aluminum Buick motor was a V-6. Buick did have a 300 V-8.

jr_tech
01-15-2017, 10:24 PM
The 215 aluminum Buick motor was a V-6. Buick did have a 300 V-8.

Buick indeed made a 215 aluminum V8...early 60s.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rover_V8_engine


jr

Electronic M
01-15-2017, 10:47 PM
The 215 aluminum Buick motor was a V-6. Buick did have a 300 V-8.

I believe you are mistaken.
Buick Special and Oldsmobile F-85 for all three years shared an aluminum block 215 cubic-inch V8 engine featuring cast-iron liners to prevent overheating and block warpage problems common with aluminum block engines. Although Buick and Olds shared the same basic engine design, both divisions used different cylinder heads, camshafts, carburetors and compression ratios. The 215 V8 was also available on the Pontiac Tempest for 1961 and 1962 and used the Buick version, but very few Tempests were so-equipped.
For 1962, Buick introduced a new 198 cubic-inch V6 engine for the lower-line Special models in order to allow for a lower base price. That V6 shared many parts and dimensions with the aluminum V8 engine but featured a cast iron block. From here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_Y_platform

I read a fascinating article on a car site (wish I could find it) a few months back on the engines of GM's 60's 'Senior Compacts'. That explained the history of that engine well...In that block's original form it was an aluminum V8 that was shared (with tweaks) between divisions of GM...There were casting issues with the aluminum that resulted in reliability issues. An engineer at Buick told his boss that he could saw off two cylinders from the V8, switch to a normal cast iron block, do a few other changes and make a V6 that would be better than the V8 it was derived from. After GM was done with it Jeep bought it and used it (due to it's power and reliability), Buick later bought it back from AMC/Jeep in the 70's and kept improved versions in production through the opening years of the millennium.

The aluminum V8 was popular with speedboaters and when Land Rover representatives were in the states they got interested in the engine and bought the rights to it, and used it for a long time.

Captainclock
01-16-2017, 11:44 AM
I believe you are mistaken.
From here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_Y_platform

I read a fascinating article on a car site (wish I could find it) a few months back on the engines of GM's 60's 'Senior Compacts'. That explained the history of that engine well...In that block's original form it was an aluminum V8 that was shared (with tweaks) between divisions of GM...There were casting issues with the aluminum that resulted in reliability issues. An engineer at Buick told his boss that he could saw off two cylinders from the V8, switch to a normal cast iron block, do a few other changes and make a V6 that would be better than the V8 it was derived from. After GM was done with it Jeep bought it and used it (due to it's power and reliability), Buick later bought it back from AMC/Jeep in the 70's and kept improved versions in production through the opening years of the millennium.

The aluminum V8 was popular with speedboaters and when Land Rover representatives were in the states they got interested in the engine and bought the rights to it, and used it for a long time.

Yes the engine you are referring to in your post that was basically a cut down V8 was what later on became the known as the 3800 (back then it was known as a 3.8 litre or a 231 CID originally) GM had the 3.8 Litre V6 since the late 1960s.

Kamakiri
01-16-2017, 11:50 AM
The 231 "A" rear wheel drive motor that Buick mass produced up through the 80s and was found under the hoods of most Skylarks and Regals shares no lineage with the 3800 FWD motor which first appeared in the 1986-7 FWD Buick Park Ave.

Captainclock
01-16-2017, 12:08 PM
The 231 "A" rear wheel drive motor that Buick mass produced up through the 80s and was found under the hoods of most Skylarks and Regals shares no lineage with the 3800 FWD motor which first appeared in the 1986-7 FWD Buick Park Ave.

No, but that motor is what inspired them to create the FWD 3800 V6 though because they share the same displacement just the mounting was different because once they changed their "Big Cars" over to smaller cars (like what Chrysler did right around the same time period when Chrysler introduced their FWD K-Cars) they had to design a FWD engine and the only engine they had at the time that they thought would of worked best in their redesigned Regals, LeSabres and Park Avenues would be a V6 engine hence they redesigned their RWD 3.8 Litre Engine and came up with the 3800. If you don't believe me look at the wikipedia article about the 231 (3.8 Litre) V6 also known as the Buick V6 Engine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buick_V6_engine

Kamakiri
01-16-2017, 12:14 PM
I have owned both....the 231A motor in a '76 Century, a '79 Skylark, and a '79 Pontiac Sunbird....and the 3800 in an '87 Lesabre. The only thing they share in common is the displacement.

Man, we got way off track here, didn't we Dave? :)

Captainclock
01-16-2017, 12:21 PM
I have owned both....the 231A motor in a '76 Century, a '79 Skylark, and a '79 Pontiac Sunbird....and the 3800 in an '87 Lesabre. The only thing they share in common is the displacement.

Man, we got way off track here, didn't we Dave? :)

I was only going along with what others were doing on here sir, so don't go putting all the blame on me here, also as I recall there were some members on here that took one of my threads that I started way off track as well and they said that the only reason why they did that was because things were getting "dry" around here and they needed more interesting things to discuss.

Anyways my post on here reguarding Buicks was asking about some issues that I was having with my car which is a Buick Regal from 2003 and there was some dragging that off topic as well. And if you would look at the link I posted from the wikipedia in my post that was before your post I just replied to you'll see that the original 231 RWD V6 is indeed somewhat related to the 3800.

dieseljeep
01-16-2017, 12:44 PM
I have owned both....the 231A motor in a '76 Century, a '79 Skylark, and a '79 Pontiac Sunbird....and the 3800 in an '87 Lesabre. The only thing they share in common is the displacement.

Man, we got way off track here, didn't we Dave? :)

How long did the first ones last? Many died with 25, 30K on the clock.
Another one of their gems was the 2.8 litre V6 they used in the "X" cars, another one of GM's poor excuses of a car.
They even sold them to AMC for some of the Jeeps and none of those stood up very well. :thumbsdn:

Kamakiri
01-16-2017, 12:58 PM
I was only going along with what others were doing on here sir, so don't go putting all the blame on me here, also as I recall there were some members on here that took one of my threads that I started way off track as well and they said that the only reason why they did that was because things were getting "dry" around here and they needed more interesting things to discuss.

Dude, relax.....it's all good :) . I was saying that in jest....nobody swings a ban hammer around here :smoke:

Kamakiri
01-16-2017, 01:00 PM
How long did the first ones last? Many died with 25, 30K on the clock.

Been my experience that they were 80-90K and done motors at best, but I've seen some go 120K or more. The one in my Sunbird gave up the ghost with about 35K on it which was a shock. Oil pumps and water pumps on them were every 40K it seemed. By the mid 80s with all the evap controls those things were a nightmare of vacuum hoses under the hood......

Captainclock
01-16-2017, 01:04 PM
Dude, relax.....it's all good :) . I was saying that in jest....nobody swings a ban hammer around here :smoke:

OK, sorry, I didn't know. Anyways I have owned 2 cars now that have had 3800 V6 engines my first car which was a 1988 Oldsmobile Delta 88, and now my current car which is a 2003 Buick Regal LS.

TUD1
01-16-2017, 04:27 PM
Man, we got way off track here, didn't we Dave? :)

I hadn't noticed...

stromberg6
01-16-2017, 05:30 PM
Maybe a little off track, but as one who has owned 4 1966 Wildcats, I am really enjoying where this has gone. :thmbsp:
Kevin

Marco-nix
01-16-2017, 08:31 PM
Before the Chevy 283 V-8 there was the 265 V-8. And before FORDs' 289 V-8 there was the 260 V-8, don't know what Chrysler had before the 318. All the best,Tom.J

You're right but the 283 V8 was the best small block on a Chevrolet ;) . However, i don't know for Chrysler

Captainclock
01-16-2017, 09:15 PM
You're right but the 283 V8 was the best small block on a Chevrolet ;) . However, i don't know for Chrysler

Well Clearly since it was their only small block V8 the 318 was the best Small Block V8 Chrysler ever made, it was built like a tank and they used it in practically every non-muscle car that they ever built that had a V8 in it, if they would of continued making the 318 with modern components like fuel injection and what not, that engine probably would of been just as solid of a performer as any of the V8s made now, including on fuel economy because the 318 was designed to be an economy V8. Now as far as the Best Engine Chryler ever made period, it would have to be the Hemi, which originally started out as a 331 CID V8 back in 1955 when it first debuted in the 1955 Chrysler C-300 and then got a huge CID boost in the mid 1960s when it then became the now famous 426 CID Hemi that first debuted in the 1966 Challenger, and then saw a revival in 1999 when they revived the Hemi for the re-release of the Chrysler 300 Line starting with the 1999 Chrysler 300M which was starting back up where the original 300 series line left off in 1968.
Which interestingly enough the new Hemi is a 5.7 Litre engine which is actually a lot smaller than the the 426 Hemi and is actually a lot closer to the same size as the original 331 CID Hemi was. Which the 331 CID Hemi is equal to about 5.4 litres and the new Hemi is a 5.7 litre engine which is about a .3 litre difference between the original Hemi's displacement and the modern Hemi's Displacement. So not bad considering the Germans were the ones that decided to Bring back the Hemi after they forcefully took over Chrysler. :scratch2:

dieseljeep
01-17-2017, 10:56 AM
Before the Chevy 283 V-8 there was the 265 V-8. And before FORDs' 289 V-8 there was the 260 V-8, don't know what Chrysler had before the 318. All the best,Tom.J

There's a great source for information on the evolution of Mopar engines,the Allpar website. Look under the engines heading. :thmbsp:

Kamakiri
01-17-2017, 11:03 AM
Now as far as the Best Engine Chryler ever made period, it would have to be the Hemi, which originally started out as a 331 CID V8 back in 1955 when it first debuted in the 1955 Chrysler C-300 :scratch2:

My '54 Desoto Firedome had a 276 Hemi V8......

Marco-nix
01-17-2017, 12:31 PM
My '54 Desoto Firedome had a 276 Hemi V8......

Nice one anyway ;) :thmbsp:

jr_tech
01-17-2017, 02:51 PM
My '54 Desoto Firedome had a 276 Hemi V8......

I'm confused... are these early hemi engines with small displacement not considered to be "small block"? Does "small block" also imply lightweight thin wall casting as seen in the LA series?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_LA_engine

jr

Captainclock
01-17-2017, 11:01 PM
I'm confused... are these early hemi engines with small displacement not considered to be "small block"? Does "small block" also imply lightweight thin wall casting as seen in the LA series?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_LA_engine

jr

With the Hemis the term "hemi" referred to the fact that the engines had hemispherical combustion chambers as opposed to cyindrical combustion chambers, as far as I know none of the Hemis were considered "small block" engines they were always considered big block engines.

wkand
01-18-2017, 01:29 AM
Takes a licking and keeps on ticking. The Buick 3800s are probably the finest American-built engines in my opinion.

Great haul tud1 and could not agree more with the GM 3800 engine comments. Had a 2001 Regal, perfect 3800, that got totaled in 2015. We now have a 2013 Impala with the 3.5 VVT engine in it. I like it just as well.

MadMan
01-18-2017, 03:15 AM
Ok, Captainclock. There are all sorts of things wrong with what you are saying here. *sigh*

OK, that's interesting because everywhere I read online said that a failed rear Oxygen sensor (which is part of the catalytic converter assembly) would cause a car's fuel economy to drop off.

A downstream oxygen sensor will not (on most vehicles) mess with fuel economy, or how the engine runs. The downstream sensor exists only to monitor the performance of the catalytic converter. The upstream oxygen sensor, however, exists to monitor the fuel/air ratio at which the engine is running, giving the input to the computer so it can adjust how much fuel it injects, and also to provide a baseline for the calculation of converter efficiency, which then also uses input from the downstream sensor.

Also, it is not 'part of' the converter assembly. It's probably just rusted stuck in the bung, and that mechanic you talked to recommended just changing the whole shebang to make things easier for everyone. I would recommend the same thing.

Also why would it be a "general rule of thumb" that cars only get 200 miles on a tank of gas

Because it's a regulation for cars sold in the USA. Any car must be capable of going 200 miles on a tank of gas. But you do realize that maybe different cars get different gas mileage? And have different sizes of fuel tanks? That's why it's a guideline, not an immuteable law.

because like I was saying above I had read in several online forums pertaining to car maintenance

Exactly. There's your problem. You haven't talked to a real mechanic about the subject. You are now. That one guy you talked to, well, I would recommend the same thing he did, but I would additionally advise you as I am now, about this predicament, to get you completely informed about the matter at hand before you start throwing money at it. Because, if all you say is correct, you're gonna replace that converter and sensor, and the car won't run any better, or improve the fuel economy, and you're gonna think that mechanic did something wrong, when in reality, you're just not fully informed of the situation. Read what I said again:

However, if you are absolutely certain you were getting more mpgs before the catalytic problem, the reverse of what you said is likely true. That the converter is suffering because of the mileage problem. Ask a real mechanic to do a good tune up and see that the motor runs right first.

You have a converter efficiency problem (or so I gather). But you also have, with it, a fuel economy problem. Likely, what is actually happening here (as I've been trying to explain) is that because the engine is running poorly, too rich most likely (using too much gas), the catalytic converter will not be able to keep up, thus giving you a code for converter efficiency. Which, btw, I'm only guessing that's the code you had, because you never actually said, only implied. In many scenarios, the engine computer will not really 'know' that the engine is running too rich or not firing right or what have you, it simply thinks it is making the appropriate corrections, and for some reason the catalytic converter isn't doing its job. When in reality, this might not be the case at all.

but I'm also wondering if it isn't just because the engine was filled too full of oil and because of that some of the excess oil is being sprayed out of the engine onto the exhaust manifold which is similar to what a lawnmower does when its overfilled with oil

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/37540750/_ponies/twifacehoof.gif
Facehoof.

O_o That's just... I don't even. Your car is not a lawnmower. It's also not British, a tractor, or made before 1960. It's not supposed to leak oil -or- burn it. If it's overfilled, it will usually just burn the oil out, like a lawnmower, (which will damage the converter, btw). But you say it's leaking out of the valve cover onto the exhaust manifold. Which, though not terribly common on American cars, if it's bad enough, can leak vacuum as well, and make the engine run poorly.

There are all sorts of possible causes why your mpg's might be down. Converter efficiency and/or downstream O2 sensor? Not generally among those causes. 'sall I'm saying.

Electronic M
01-18-2017, 07:52 AM
With the Hemis the term "hemi" referred to the fact that the engines had hemispherical combustion chambers as opposed to cyindrical combustion chambers, as far as I know none of the Hemis were considered "small block" engines they were always considered big block engines.

Hemi Cylinders are still normal cylinders...Why they are called hemi is that the top of the chamber and the piston are domed rather than flat (which has performance advantages).

Captainclock
01-18-2017, 12:50 PM
Ok, Captainclock. There are all sorts of things wrong with what you are saying here. *sigh*



A downstream oxygen sensor will not (on most vehicles) mess with fuel economy, or how the engine runs. The downstream sensor exists only to monitor the performance of the catalytic converter. The upstream oxygen sensor, however, exists to monitor the fuel/air ratio at which the engine is running, giving the input to the computer so it can adjust how much fuel it injects, and also to provide a baseline for the calculation of converter efficiency, which then also uses input from the downstream sensor.

Also, it is not 'part of' the converter assembly. It's probably just rusted stuck in the bung, and that mechanic you talked to recommended just changing the whole shebang to make things easier for everyone. I would recommend the same thing.



Because it's a regulation for cars sold in the USA. Any car must be capable of going 200 miles on a tank of gas. But you do realize that maybe different cars get different gas mileage? And have different sizes of fuel tanks? That's why it's a guideline, not an immuteable law.



Exactly. There's your problem. You haven't talked to a real mechanic about the subject. You are now. That one guy you talked to, well, I would recommend the same thing he did, but I would additionally advise you as I am now, about this predicament, to get you completely informed about the matter at hand before you start throwing money at it. Because, if all you say is correct, you're gonna replace that converter and sensor, and the car won't run any better, or improve the fuel economy, and you're gonna think that mechanic did something wrong, when in reality, you're just not fully informed of the situation. Read what I said again:



You have a converter efficiency problem (or so I gather). But you also have, with it, a fuel economy problem. Likely, what is actually happening here (as I've been trying to explain) is that because the engine is running poorly, too rich most likely (using too much gas), the catalytic converter will not be able to keep up, thus giving you a code for converter efficiency. Which, btw, I'm only guessing that's the code you had, because you never actually said, only implied. In many scenarios, the engine computer will not really 'know' that the engine is running too rich or not firing right or what have you, it simply thinks it is making the appropriate corrections, and for some reason the catalytic converter isn't doing its job. When in reality, this might not be the case at all.



https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/37540750/_ponies/twifacehoof.gif
Facehoof.

O_o That's just... I don't even. Your car is not a lawnmower. It's also not British, a tractor, or made before 1960. It's not supposed to leak oil -or- burn it. If it's overfilled, it will usually just burn the oil out, like a lawnmower, (which will damage the converter, btw). But you say it's leaking out of the valve cover onto the exhaust manifold. Which, though not terribly common on American cars, if it's bad enough, can leak vacuum as well, and make the engine run poorly.

There are all sorts of possible causes why your mpg's might be down. Converter efficiency and/or downstream O2 sensor? Not generally among those causes. 'sall I'm saying.

OK, well then I guess that I will need to replace the valve cover gasket then because that's what the mechanic said the engine was doing (and in fact that same thing happened to my Chrysler Cirrus I had before except instead of the oil leaking onto the exhaust manifold like my Buick is it leaked into the spark plug chambers. And I'm guessing that according to what you were just saying that the engine being filled too full of oil is probably why I'm having issues with my Catalytic converter, although if that's the case I wonder why the mechanic didn't notice that... because I knew the engine was too full of oil but I didn't say anything to the mechanic about it because I thought they would of noticed that themselves, but apparently they didn't.

MadMan
01-19-2017, 12:18 AM
And I'm guessing that according to what you were just saying that the engine being filled too full of oil is probably why I'm having issues with my Catalytic converter, although if that's the case I wonder why the mechanic didn't notice that... because I knew the engine was too full of oil but I didn't say anything to the mechanic about it because I thought they would of noticed that themselves, but apparently they didn't.

Well, check the oil level. It might have leaked down to where it should be, by now. And it IS a possibility that the converter is now oil-fouled. But still, if your fuel economy is down, I'm betting there is yet still another culprit.

MadMan
01-19-2017, 12:25 AM
Why they are called hemi is that the top of the chamber and the piston are domed rather than flat (which has performance advantages).

Yes it does. You know, a lot of people say that the dome shape itself has something to do with it, and while it might, the real appeal of the hemispherical combustion chamber is that there is a lot more surface area on the underside of the cylinder head. A lot more real estate for much, much bigger valves than you'd have with a more conventionally designed head. And those huge valves allow the engine to breathe so much better. It's the same reason why 4-valve engines became a thing.

Captainclock
01-19-2017, 07:01 PM
Well, check the oil level. It might have leaked down to where it should be, by now. And it IS a possibility that the converter is now oil-fouled. But still, if your fuel economy is down, I'm betting there is yet still another culprit.

Well the last 2 times I checked the oil level the oil level was still at the same level which was a quart over so it doesn't seem like if the car is leaking oil somehow it isn't leaking very fast or not at all... and the last time I checked the oil in the car was about a week ago. And the reason why I think the fuel economy is down (and I'm guess it is but not sure as I don't have experience with the Series II 3800's just the Series I 3800's) is because my parents have a 2005 Chrysler Town & Country Limited with a 3.8 Litre V6 engine in it (which is the same size as the 3800) and they have no problems with getting around 315-320 miles on a single tank of gas (grant it they have a 20 gallon gas tank in that thing vs. my Regal's 17 Gallon Gas Tank although I would think a car would would do better on gas mileage than a minivan would) and my 1988 Oldsmobile Delta 88 with a 3800 in it did about 330 miles on a single tank of gas, but I'm lucky to get 260 miles on a single tank of gas on my Regal, which tells me something is definitely screwing up the car's fuel economy as to what, I'm not sure.

Marco-nix
01-19-2017, 07:33 PM
Losing engine oil is one thing, but in the US you chill for nothing on gasoline because you pay the gasoline quite a bit cheaper than we in Canada ... you pay your gasoline to the gallon we pay almost $ 1.25 Sometimes $ 1.45 per liter in the province of Quebec and even elsewhere in Canada! .

So I understand the problem of oil that gets lost or when the engine burns the oil and it's normal when an engine starts to age or when a person does not take care of its mechanics but I see Many Americans complain about the price of gas. Say you are very lucky to pay your gasoline to the gallon while we here we pay it to liter ..

Marco-nix
01-19-2017, 07:41 PM
This is at least what I found when speaking with Americans of my acquaintance To follow up my comment I sent too fast lolll

Captainclock
01-19-2017, 08:22 PM
This is at least what I found when speaking with Americans of my acquaintance To follow up my comment I sent too fast lolll

Yes, i'm very much aware of the per liter vs per gallon difference when paying for gas, which paying 2 or 3 dollars per liter I realize you pay a lot more to fill up your car than if you pay 2 or 3 dollars per gallon, but you also have to realize where we American's come from when we complain about how much we pay for gas, you guys on one hand have been paying $2-3 per liter for gasoline for the past 30+ years or so, whereas us Americans have only been paying $2-3 per gallon for about 10 years now and before that we paid between $0.80-$1.50 a gallon which works out to roughly about $15-20 for a fill up of your avarage gas tank, whereas now with $2-3 a gallon your avarage gas tank costs about $30-$50 to fill up, that's a huge expense when you think that that's about how much you could pay for a grocery run at Aldi...

Ed in Tx
01-19-2017, 08:26 PM
That's the price you pay to live in Canada. :D

You pay about 4X the taxes for your gasoline in Canada.

Ed in Tx
01-19-2017, 08:32 PM
Well the last 2 times I checked the oil level the oil level was still at the same level which was a quart over... I'm lucky to get 260 miles on a single tank of gas on my Regal, which tells me something is definitely screwing up the car's fuel economy as to what, I'm not sure.


What does the tailpipe look like? All carboned up, black soot? Might be running so rich because it's cold or not getting up to temp there could be so much blowby past the piston rings of unburned fuel it's adding to the oil in the crankcase. It can happen.

Captainclock
01-19-2017, 08:34 PM
Losing engine oil is one thing, but in the US you chill for nothing on gasoline because you pay the gasoline quite a bit cheaper than we in Canada ... you pay your gasoline to the gallon we pay almost $ 1.25 Sometimes $ 1.45 per liter in the province of Quebec and even elsewhere in Canada! .

So I understand the problem of oil that gets lost or when the engine burns the oil and it's normal when an engine starts to age or when a person does not take care of its mechanics but I see Many Americans complain about the price of gas. Say you are very lucky to pay your gasoline to the gallon while we here we pay it to liter ..

Also when your car isn't using your gas as efficiently as it should then yes it does hurt you when you have to make a run for gas more often than you need to, because if you have to make that $30 gas fill up run 5 times a month when it should only be 2 or 3 times a month then you're basically wasting your money. As for the oil bit, a car that has only a little over 100,000 miles on it shouldn't be having issues with with oil leaks and or terrible fuel mileage or a bad catalytic converter, especially not the later because its supposed to last you the entire life of the car, at least as long as the engine's maintenance is kept up properly, and going by what I've always been told about the GM 3800s they're supposed to go to at least 300,000 miles before needing any major work done on them as long as they have been regularly maintained.

Captainclock
01-19-2017, 08:39 PM
What does the tailpipe look like? All carboned up, black soot? Might be running so rich because it's cold or not getting up to temp there could be so much blowby past the piston rings of unburned fuel it's adding to the oil in the crankcase. It can happen.

Well I haven't taken a look at the tailpipe recently but according to my mechanic it has a large hole the size of a monster cookie rotted into the side of the muffler which he says will need to be replaced. It does have a single twin tailpipe though if that helps any.

Ed in Tx
01-19-2017, 08:50 PM
Well I haven't taken a look at the tailpipe recently but according to my mechanic it has a large hole the size of a monster cookie rotted into the side of the muffler which he says will need to be replaced. It does have a single twin tailpipe though if that helps any. Doesn't tell me if it's all black carboned up sooty and running too rich.

A hole the size of a monster cookie tells me that car has not been maintained properly.

A thermostat can go bad any time or mileage. And some of those 3800s have a bad reputation for head and manifold gasket leaks.

Have you considered taking it to an actual GM Buick dealer?

Captainclock
01-19-2017, 09:26 PM
Doesn't tell me if it's all black carboned up sooty and running too rich.

A hole the size of a monster cookie tells me that car has not been maintained properly.

A thermostat can go bad any time or mileage. And some of those 3800s have a bad reputation for head and manifold gasket leaks.

Have you considered taking it to an actual GM Buick dealer?

No, I haven't actually thought about taking it to a dealer. But I guess I ought to consider talking to my dad about that possibility.

Marco-nix
01-20-2017, 03:15 PM
That's the price you pay to live in Canada. :D

You pay about 4X the taxes for your gasoline in Canada.

Unfortunately yes, i'm born in Canada and i will die here .. ...that's why we have more small cars than the big cars..some exceptions for rich people ... :D but i'm not rich i only have a Hyundai . :thmbsp:

Captainclock
01-20-2017, 09:14 PM
Unfortunately yes, i'm born in Canada and i will die here .. ...that's why we have more small cars than the big cars..some exceptions for rich people ... :D but i'm not rich i only have a Hyundai . :thmbsp:

That somewhere on earth you mention in your location on your posts is I'm guessing Somewhere around British Columbia, like maybe Vancouver?

Captainclock
01-21-2017, 11:51 AM
Doesn't tell me if it's all black carboned up sooty and running too rich.

A hole the size of a monster cookie tells me that car has not been maintained properly.

A thermostat can go bad any time or mileage. And some of those 3800s have a bad reputation for head and manifold gasket leaks.

Have you considered taking it to an actual GM Buick dealer?

Well I took a look at my tailpipe and there is a little bit of a black sooty residue inside the tailpipe but as far as around the outside edge of the tailpipe goes its pretty clean and looks normal so I don't think the car is running too rich or burning off any of the excess oil in the engine.