From LEASECOMPARE.COM: The 2007 Buick LaCrosse returns this year
available in three models: CX, CXL, and CXS. These three models are equipped
with a four-speed automatic transmission in a 3.6-liter V6 engine for the
CXS, and a 3.8-liter V6 engine for the CX and CXL. HTH, s. BTW, I wanted
to know also!
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
I would buy the Lacrosse with the 3.6L DOHC engine if he can spend the
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.
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.
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.
...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
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.
Coincidance, bore stroke variations for the same displacement change output,
cam timing, cylinder head design and so on come into play, too much of a
generalization here. Look at all the cubic inch variations of the SBC and
you will see the theory is flawed. 283 cubes 220 hp, go to 327, 340 hp., as
a common example, do the math. I understand to the laymen this is a midline
issue, but it can be misleading ( not meaning you are the laymen here)
This is true. I have a 2000 Impala with the 3.8 and it runs very well. I
have more than adequate acceleration; and before ethanol blended gasolines
took over the market, I could get 33 mpg on the highway. So far, I've had
no coolant leaks, and the car has 75k on it.
The Buick or Impala would be a tough choice, but my service writer bought an
Impala just before the 3.9 came out to get the 3.8. So, I would go with the
Buick also even though I am a Chevy fan.
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.