Which 3.8 is more powerful?

[Mighty Thor]

Our engine has been around since '95. Our 3.8 has been a very good engine. Very few V6 back in the 90's were ever rated to go beyond our engine. We were even close to some of the V8's.

[TheGreenPunisher]

One of those being the pathetic mid-90's GT's.

[img]graemlins/rofl.gif[/img] 215HP [img]graemlins/rofl.gif[/img]

[V8 Killer]

or the 90-92 TBI motors....170 HP [img]graemlins/rofl.gif[/img]

[shenanigans]

Originally posted by LD:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Shane:
But so far its proven the stock 3.8 Mustang motor can handle more power.

what was that for? just to rag on the board?
nobody has went to the extreme that that one mustang did, once equal mods have been done then a statement like that can be appropriate
but actually I think it would be more appropriate on a mustang forum </font>[/QUOTE]ehh I would have to agree with shane on this...


Forget the guy that built the turbo for the Mustang also did a huge chunk of the work on shane's setup as well.

and shane is still the fastest non-juiced v6 f-body.

[Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by shenanigans:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by LD:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Shane:
But so far its proven the stock 3.8 Mustang motor can handle more power.

what was that for? just to rag on the board?
nobody has went to the extreme that that one mustang did, once equal mods have been done then a statement like that can be appropriate
but actually I think it would be more appropriate on a mustang forum </font>[/QUOTE]ehh I would have to agree with shane on this...


Forget the guy that built the turbo for the Mustang also did a huge chunk of the work on shane's setup as well.

and shane is still the fastest non-juiced v6 f-body. </font>[/QUOTE]Well this can be true. The weakest part on our engine are the Piston Rings. But everything else is stronger. But block for block, our engine is the stonger than a Mustang V6. Which their engine suffers from weak Crank. V6 Stangs have more aftermarket stuff than we do. Every 3 months I get Brother's Perf. catalog. It has 2 pages mods devoted to the V6 Stang. We only get our mods from each other and from our V8 brothers.


Our engine is even stronger than an aluminum LS1. Now I'm not talking about performance. Check Hemming's Magazine March '02 issue. Excellent write up on Buick's 3.8. It tells you everything about it's history, performance potential and such. "The Little Engine From Flint."

[ June 08, 2005, 01:26 PM: Message edited by: Mighty Thor ]

[1DangerousV6]

Originally posted by camaroincal:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Shirl:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />The '06 Eclipse has a 280 HP(?) 3.8 motor.

260hp I think... </font>[/QUOTE]And also they get that number with a large compression ratio. I bet they don't even get as good of gas mileage....? </font>[/QUOTE]i LOVE the new Eclipses..they're hotter and have less of a ricer look..imo..and with that power..id love to see what happens when people start modding them

[Tyler]

Originally posted by LD:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Shane:
But so far its proven the stock 3.8 Mustang motor can handle more power.

what was that for? just to rag on the board?
nobody has went to the extreme that that one mustang did, once equal mods have been done then a statement like that can be appropriate
but actually I think it would be more appropriate on a mustang forum </font>[/QUOTE]the truth hurts huh?

The question shouldnt have been asked if this board cant handle the answer..

there are more mustangs in the 11s than camaros and firebirds in the 13's..

[Fbody3400]

Originally posted by Tyler:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by LD:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Shane:
But so far its proven the stock 3.8 Mustang motor can handle more power.

what was that for? just to rag on the board?
nobody has went to the extreme that that one mustang did, once equal mods have been done then a statement like that can be appropriate
but actually I think it would be more appropriate on a mustang forum </font>[/QUOTE]the truth hurts huh?

The question shouldnt have been asked if this board cant handle the answer..

there are more mustangs in the 11s than camaros and firebirds in the 13's.. </font>[/QUOTE]Yeah, but I'd rather have my 3.4 any day then a V6 Mustang. Hell, there are TONS more CRX's and Civic Hatchbacks in the 10s, 11s, and 12s then there are mustangs and f-bodies.

As for the 2006 Eclipse, I heard its gonna be rediculously expensive, and it only runs mid to high 14s with all that hp.....damn front wheel drive, oh yeah, the curb weight is in the upwards of 3500 lbs... :rolleyes:

[Mu]

Originally posted by Fredless:
A4 Mustang vs any 3800 Fbody, the 3800 should win easily, hands down.

My auto vs a 00 auto...I lost. I had one more person in the car than he did (a girl)

[Mighty Thor]

You guys are not even considering the GTP 3.8 block?

The reason why there are alot of fast V6 Stang is because that's the only real sportcar V6 that Ford has.

What does GM has. F-cars, Buicks, Pontiac's GTP, Chevy's Monte Carlo, Impala. Let not exclude the 3.4 DOHC V6 on the rooster. Plenty of fast cars to mod.

The reason V6 F-cars are not there anymore is because every performance nuts jumps on the LS1. The top of the food chain.

But it's nice to know we have 2 11sec. NA V6 Firebirds and 4 12sec. NA V6 Firebirds and Camaros. So all is not lost.

[Mogobs30th]

Originally posted by Mighty Thor:

Let not exclude the 3.4 DOHC V6 on the rooster.

Mods are limited to this engine, but right from the box it is moderately fast. I have beaten quite a few Mustang 3.8l's, and my Monte defintely has a weight disadvantage.

[silverV6firebird]

I've driven both v6 mustangs and f-bodies, and to me the f-bodies seem much more responsive. Even if the mustangs have more power, our f-bodies look so much better. But I have found the ultimate 3.8l! Porsche 911 Carrera S, it has 355hp 0-60 in 4.6. Just a little out of reach at $79,100.