Chrysler hemi and air pollution

Art · 2005-06-21T18:11:54+00:00

I was looking at EPA figures for mileage for the 300C (trying to convince my spouse to consider the Dodge Charger despite rising oil prices) and noticed that the hemi is a much cleaner engine than the engine in the Avalon and Ford 500.

Jun 21, 2005 30 Replies

Rate this thread:

Nate Nagel 21 years ago

There were Olds motors and there were Chevy motors, and then sometime in the 70s they started putting Chevy motors in Oldsmobiles, and at the same time you could get an Olds engine in a Firebird (of all things...)

In any case, the Olds 330/350/400/455/whatever IMHO was a hell of a lot better than the SBC... come to think of it, just about any GM engine

*other* than Chevy was better than Chevy. But you're right, SBC performance parts are everywhere while you actually have to think about what you're doing and maybe even (gasp) do some custom work to get a few more ponies out of an Olds or Caddy engine.

nate

snipped-for-privacy@telus.net wrote:

Vote

Nate Nagel 21 years ago

Ayup, at least the 4.3...

IIRC the 3800 was designed from the ground up to be a V-6 however and it's not only way older than the 4.3 but at least in its current iteration, it has a good reputation for durability...

and then there's the 2.8 family. I really don't care whether they're good engines or not, anything that *sounds* that s***ty when it's running, I don't want to drive.

nate

Vote

Nate Nagel 21 years ago

A knowledgeable buyer would have been pissed, yes, to buy a new Olds thinking there was an Olds 350 under the hood and finding a Chubby 350. Now a case could be made (and I'm sure GM tried to make it) that the Chubby motor was more than adequate for any normal driving conditions. And, of course, they're actually right - it's not a *bad* engine. It's just that every other engine that they made at the time was pretty uniformly *better...*

nate

Vote

Daniel J. Stern 21 years ago

Sure, but the threshhold of *needing* to get more ponies out of the Olds engine was much higher. A desmogged Olds 350 ran decently well for its day, and would allow the car to get out of its own way. A same-year desmogged Chev 350 had considerably poorer driveability and MUCH less punch.

Vote

Daniel J. Stern 21 years ago

That is also how Chrysler made the 3.9 (318 * 0.75).

"not".

Vote

Daniel J. Stern 21 years ago

Funny, isn't it, how there weren't any Chevrolets quietly built with Oldsmobile 350s instead of the Chev engine!

Vote

Steve 21 years ago

From all I've read, ANY 4-valve head would be hard-pressed to work as well or better than the new Hemi? head.

Or is the new Hemi? actually a

Look at that combustion chamber image I linked- its definitely a 2-valve head. Its not even really a "rule," just general usage. Chrysler just capitalized on the terminolgy- they're not the only ones to have built

2-valve hemi-headed engines (to remove all ambiguity) for street cars in the past, and may not be the only ones today, but I'm not aware of any others right off the bat.

Vote

Steve 21 years ago

Meh. Some Pontiac v8s were pretty lame. Its a little ironic that the Olds 403-powered Trans Ams are much less collectible now than Pontiac-powered ones... I'd almost prefer the Olds engine. Except the

403 was never really a performance engine like the Pontiac was. Now if it had been a Buick 455 under the hood... :-D :-D :-D

Vote

Daniel J. Stern 21 years ago

Better not let Yyoyd "4-valve is ALWAYS better than 2-valve, and disc brakes are ALWAYS better than drum" Parker hear you say that...

Vote

Steve 21 years ago

Hasn't it been PLEASANT around here without his bleating?

Vote

Daniel J. Stern 21 years ago

Surely has.

Vote

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required