Lacrosse vs Impala

My father is debating between either a 2007 Buick Lacrosse with 3.8 engine or a 2007 Chevy Impala with the 3.5 or 3.9 engine. He keeps car for more than ten years. Which one of the two will likely have less maintanence problem ? Thanks for sharing your knowledge.

Reply to
Jack
Loading thread data ...

That 3.8 motor is pretty damn good. That's the route I'd pick if I had to buy one of those two cars.

b
Reply to
Brent

I've had three Buicks with the 3.8 and I'd buy it again and again. Unless the Impala has some overwhelming feature I'd go with the Lacrosse.

Reply to
Edwin Pawlowski

It's hard to loose with the 3.8. A "tried-and-true workhorse." And it gets exceptional fuel economy for it's size (typically exceeding 30MPG highway for most people)

Reply to
jcr

Reply to
Shep

Reply to
sdlomi2

The 3800 is over-rated. I had a 01 Impala with the 3.8L and it had a coolant leak at 10K miles. At full throttle the 3800 sounds rough and very little performance after

50mph. I would buy the Lacrosse with the 3.6L DOHC engine if he can spend the dough.

Reply to
Vaughn

You must have had the worst 3800 ever built. They are one of the higest rated engines. I have owned 2 3800 Series I's, 1 Series II and now a Series II Supercharged, and all have been awesome engines. Plenty of power, and awesome on gas.

Reply to
80 Knight

I had one in my '91 Regal that was still going strong when I sold the car with 150k. I found it interesting that both my '97 and '01 LeSabre with the updated version got both better mileage and better performance in a heavier car. At 120k, I've never had to add oil between changes and I change at

7500 miles. I put new plugs in at 110k, but it was still starting and running as smooth as the day I bought it.
Reply to
Edwin Pawlowski

A lot of 3800 fans on this forum. You can even ask the GM tech "ian" and he will tell you that the series I engine was better than the series II. He said that the small block V8's are GM's best and the 3.6L DOHC V6 to be the better engine because very little repair work is being done.

Coolant leaks were actually very common from 2000-2003 for the 3.8. The walnut shells "fix" didn't work for me.

The supercharged version is better because of the heavy duty tranny and the no plastic intake manifold but the newer 3800's have an aluminum intake manifold even in the NA version. For performance drivers the regular NA 3800 is a weak performer but for a senior it is adequate. You name me a V6 engine larger than 3.0L for the year 2007 that has less than 220 HP, 197HP for 231 ci is pathetic.

Reply to
Vaughn

...another 3800-lover, I admit (but do NOT like the coolant leak!). Doing a little math, the 3800(231cu. inch) yields considerably more power per cubic inch than the 3.0 at 220 hp you mentioned. At that rate, if the

3800 increased its size to 3.0-L, it would put out like 255 hp--hate to say, but probably still w/the leak!!! s
Reply to
sdlomi2

Say what? If the 3800 increased its size to 3.0L??? You mean if the 3.8L (aka 3800) decreased its size to 3.0L its output would be 3.0/3.8=0.79 So, if you go 197HP x 0.79= 156HP.

">

Reply to
Vaughn

Reply to
Shep

I was giving a generalization. If displacement is smaller HP and Torque go down.

Reply to
Vaughn

Give you an example of the SOHC Chrysler 3.5L which has 250HP. In 2001-02 Chrysler sold both the 3.5L and 3.2L (225HP) SOHC in the LH cars. They are both identical engines except in displacement. Look it up.

3.2/3.5 = 0.914 x 250 HP= 228.5 HP which is very close to the 225HP rating.

Reply to
Vaughn

Reply to
Shep

Reply to
ROY BRAGG

Hey, Vaughn, even I had to laugh at that one. Bet you will catch me doing the likes again! sam

Reply to
sdlomi2

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.