dunl Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 Is there such a thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeepcoMJ Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 never heard of it...and I'm a huge fan of buick motors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunl Posted January 20, 2010 Author Share Posted January 20, 2010 never heard of it...and I'm a huge fan of buick motors. That's what I thought....possibly the ad I saw was a mistake, and it is the 4100 V8? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geonovast Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 Didn't GM have a 4.1 litre inline 6? It's been my experience that most people, especially those yahoos on CL, don't know what the 'V' in V6 means. They just think all 6 cylinders are V6s because that's the most common terminology now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunl Posted January 20, 2010 Author Share Posted January 20, 2010 Yes, they did have a 4.1 inline 6. I was trying to find an elusive 4.1 V6 to replace the 3.8 V6 in my 48 Willys, as it'd be a direct bolt in. I bet it isn't it. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeepcoMJ Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 buick 3.8's and 3.9's use the gm 60 degree bolt pattern from early 90's on up...rather than the classic buick bolt pattern from eariler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunl Posted January 20, 2010 Author Share Posted January 20, 2010 buick 3.8's and 3.9's use the gm 60 degree bolt pattern from early 90's on up...rather than the classic buick bolt pattern from eariler. My last one was a 79 Monza Spyder engine....bellhousing matching to the sm420 won't be an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeepcoMJ Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 buick 3.8's and 3.9's use the gm 60 degree bolt pattern from early 90's on up...rather than the classic buick bolt pattern from eariler. My last one was a 79 Monza Spyder engine....bellhousing matching to the sm420 won't be an issue. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunl Posted January 20, 2010 Author Share Posted January 20, 2010 buick 3.8's and 3.9's use the gm 60 degree bolt pattern from early 90's on up...rather than the classic buick bolt pattern from eariler. My last one was a 79 Monza Spyder engine....bellhousing matching to the sm420 won't be an issue. ? ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeepcoMJ Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 don't understand why it wouldn't be a problem, unless you somehow can adapt a gm 60 degree bellhousing to that trans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunl Posted January 20, 2010 Author Share Posted January 20, 2010 don't understand why it wouldn't be a problem, unless you somehow can adapt a gm 60 degree bellhousing to that trans. Because the engine isn't from the early 90's and up if it is the elusive 4.1. But now I see where you were going with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeepcoMJ Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 i confused myself. typically, i hear the "3800, 3900, etc." motors referenced as 90's or newer, while the 3.8, 4.1, etc. are older. not that the facts are any different about how many cubic centimeters are in them anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunl Posted January 20, 2010 Author Share Posted January 20, 2010 i confused myself. typically, i hear the "3800, 3900, etc." motors referenced as 90's or newer, while the 3.8, 4.1, etc. are older. not that the facts are any different about how many cubic centimeters are in them anyways. I know. I tried to give away the two dead 3.8 V6's I have here...everyone in tarnation called about them because they were free. However, they were looking for either the turbo 3.8's or the 3800's....why I would give either of those away free, I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeepcoMJ Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 i confused myself. typically, i hear the "3800, 3900, etc." motors referenced as 90's or newer, while the 3.8, 4.1, etc. are older. not that the facts are any different about how many cubic centimeters are in them anyways. I know. I tried to give away the two dead 3.8 V6's I have here...everyone in tarnation called about them because they were free. However, they were looking for either the turbo 3.8's or the 3800's....why I would give either of those away free, I don't know. lol, I need a crankshaft for a '96 3800 (naturally aspirated) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunl Posted January 20, 2010 Author Share Posted January 20, 2010 lol, I need a crankshaft for a '96 3800 (naturally aspirated) That's the 3.8, right? lol :cheers: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WahooSteeler Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 my dad had a buick regal in the late 80s or early 90s and i am pretty sure it was over 4 litres. :dunno: *edit* a quick google, it was in the early 80s in regals and other models and was 4.1L V6 From Wikipedia: In response to rising gas prices, a larger 252 cu in (4.1 L) version of the 3.8 L LD5 V6 was produced from 1980 through 1984 and marketed as an alternative to a V8. The bore was enlarged to 3.965 in (100.71 mm), yielding an output of 125 horsepower (93 kW) and 205 lb·ft (278 N·m). This engine was used in many large rear-wheel drive Buicks, and in some models from each of GM's other divisions, including Cadillac which offered the "big" Buick V6 in several models from 1980 to 1984 as a no-cost option to the troublesome V8-6-4 engine used in 1981 and early versions of the aluminum-block Cadillac HT-4100 V8 introduced in 1982. It was also the standard powerplant in the front-drive Riviera and Olds Toronado from 1981 to 1984. Additionally, the 4.1 block was used unsuccessfully at Indianapolis for racing. Its only weakness was the intake valve pushrod seals. Year Horsepower Torque Fuel System Compression Ratio VIN Code RPO Code 1980-84 125 hp (93 kW) @ 4000 rpm 205 lb·ft (278 N·m) @ 2000 rpm 4-BBL 8.0:1 4 LC4 Applications 1980-84 Buick Electra, 1980-84 Buick LeSabre, 1982-84 Buick Regal, 1981-84 Buick Riviera, 1980-82 Cadillac DeVille, 1981-82 Cadillac Eldorado, 1980-82 Cadillac Fleetwood, 1981-82 Cadillac Seville, 1981-83 Oldsmobile 98, 1981-84 Oldsmobile Toronado, 1982 Pontiac Grand Prix, 1982 Pontiac Bonneville Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
comanche09 Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 buick 3.8's and 3.9's use the gm 60 degree bolt pattern from early 90's on up...rather than the classic buick bolt pattern from eariler. Actually, the GM 3.8L (3800) is a 90 degree V6 and its at least as legendary as the 4.0L I6s. Pushrods with cast iron block and heads. Great motor, until they tried using thermoplastic intake manifolds on the Series II and had some issues with warpage in the early-mid 2000s. They did go back to aluminum on the latest Series III. Supercharged variants could be modded for serious power. IIRC, there are Grand Prix's running 10s in the quarter mile. Impressive, especially with FWD. GM Pushrod 60 degree V6 = 2.8L (early Comanche), 3.1L, 3.4L and more recently 3.5L and 3.9L with aluminum heads. It would be cool to see a 3800 Supercharged Comanche Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeepcoMJ Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 buick 3.8's and 3.9's use the gm 60 degree bolt pattern from early 90's on up...rather than the classic buick bolt pattern from eariler. Actually, the GM 3.8L (3800) is a 90 degree V6 and its at least as legendary as the 4.0L I6s. Pushrods with cast iron block and heads. Great motor, until they tried using thermoplastic intake manifolds on the Series II and had some issues with warpage in the early-mid 2000s. They did go back to aluminum on the latest Series III. Supercharged variants could be modded for serious power. IIRC, there are Grand Prix's running 10s in the quarter mile. Impressive, especially with FWD. GM Pushrod 60 degree V6 = 2.8L (early Comanche), 3.1L, 3.4L and more recently 3.5L and 3.9L with aluminum heads. It would be cool to see a 3800 Supercharged Comanche actually, it's a 90 degree block, with a 60 degree bolt pattern. you're talking to a guy who put one in his 86 comanche to replace the crappy 2.8.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunl Posted January 21, 2010 Author Share Posted January 21, 2010 Well, it IS the 4.1l V6 engine that I am looking for....or should I say, unfortunately, the engine block. No valve covers, intake manifold, oil pan, etc.....just the block only. :roll: I could move everything from the 3.8 over to the new overbored block, except the 3.8 intake (unless I wanted to be real silly). Finding 4.1's can be real difficult....I would probably have the same luck finding the intake as I would have finding a whole engine. I found two engines on car-part.com in Western Canada, both in other provinces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnj92131 Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 As has been posted, the 252 Buick V6 was offered in 1980-84 and as a big bore version of the 231/3800 of the Buick V6. In addition there are a number of later changes in the Buick V6 that could be interesting. Another closely related engine that used to be a hot swap to a Jeep in the 60's and 70's is the aluminum 215 cubic inches Buick-Olds-Pontiac V8 that the Buick V6 came directly from. This 215 cu. in. engine was later purchased for use in the Land Rover. It evoloved to a total displacement of 4.6 liters in Rover form and up to 5.2 liters in modified form. Another variation of the same engine took place in Austrailia. This started out as a raised block version of the same engine and has been stroked with a Buick 350 crank to over 340 cubic inches with a total engine weight of near 350 lbs. Yes, lots of work needed. But lots of cubic inches for very little weight. Add modern EFI for a great perfomance improvement A long time friend has a 66 Corvair with this 215 V8 engine in the rear and I can tell you it moves the 2700 lbs Corvair very well and can get 25 to 27 mpg on the road. (Yes, I have driven on a 1600 mile trip with him and actually got 27 mpg for the entire trip many years ago). This could be a VERY interesting swap into a Comanche. Get 250 plus lbs off the front end, add 90 to 100 cubic inches to displacement, all with small valve low end torque heads. Did I tell you that the cast iron version of this V8 was offered in the 1970's as a Jeep factory option? It is true. Would this be as good a swap as an aluminum block late model Chevy? Not sure. Would have to look hard at an all aluminum, 6 speed , 4 x 4 automatic. Perhaps a 4.8 Chevy v8???? Anyway, Food for thought if you are looking at a 90 degree Buick V6. Still, the best choice may be a Supercharged V6 with an R700-4 automatic transmission. JJ JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunl Posted January 21, 2010 Author Share Posted January 21, 2010 Remember that I was looking at this engine for a replacement for my 1948 Willys....a V8 will not go into that engine bay without removing either the grill or the firewall.....exhaust spacing issues aside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geonovast Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 Firewalls are overrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunl Posted January 21, 2010 Author Share Posted January 21, 2010 Firewalls are overrated. You think? That's my 54 CJ3B after someone stuffed a 350 into it. :fs1: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunl Posted January 22, 2010 Author Share Posted January 22, 2010 I found a new 4.1 V6 donor vehicle....found an old ad from last fall.... The 1981 Mary Kay pink Cadillac Deville Coupe. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now