Buick Technology

[Kevin Turch]

Ive had numerous discussions with ppl about the technology of the buick 3.8 back in 87. How much technology advanced was this engine back then?, these people seem to think, that it was just your normal run of the mill 3.8 with a turbo slapped on.

Please help me enlighten them.
Kevin

[DCEPTCN]

Here's a good example:
My boss just bought 2 of the new Audi TT's, one roadster and one coupe. These are very nice cars (and quick as a mutha f****) I think he paid something like 35k each. If that technology wasn't anything special, then howcome tons of new sports cars haven't screwed with the recipe in 17 years? SFI, as far as I've heard, was a new and exciting thing at that time. Also, when looking at the December 1997 issue of Car Craft the other day, I was looking at their 10 yr anniversary special and even then they said "see that radiator looking thing, that's an intercooler worth 45 horses."

I think most of us have given up on trying to enlighten others of the power of the dark side...when I was 18 or so, I used to have magazine clippings in my wallet that I would immediately tear out and throw in the face of those who called me a liar, but you know what.....they would always try and argue anyway.

[jmidolo]

I think Buick was way ahead of the curve back then... In 86, who was using sequential fuel injection?? Mostly everybody was using Fuel injected carbs... SFI? nope. I think the camaros and vettes were using tuned port injection, actually, I'm 99% sure my buddys 85 Vette is TPI.

[Kevin Turch]

thanks guys

[Slow91z]

In the 80's everything was batch fire...no one used SFI until the early 90's, except the TR's.

[jmidolo]

Originally posted by Slow91z
In the 80's everything was batch fire...no one used SFI until the early 90's, except the TR's.

I wanna say Olds used it towards like 88-89 or so. My mother in law had an Olds Wagon..think it was Cutlass wagon..woodgrain and all...that was SFI, just dont remember the yr.

[victa1]

The 86-87 turbo Buicks were very advanced for their time in most areas. The 231 turbo 6 pushed a 3400-3700 lb. car to 100 in 14-16 seconds. More overall power than the typical big blocks of the musclecar era.

Strictly from the factory look at the stats....

86-87 Buick GN, 14.0-14.7 at 94-100

383 Road Runner, 15.0-15.6 at 90-93

440 Roadrunner/GTX ect, 14.2-14.8 at 95-99

426 Roadrunner/Satellite ect., 13.5-14.2 at 97-105

390 Torino, 14.8-15.8 at 88-95

396 Chevelle 14.9-15.5 at 89-94

427/454 Chevelle, 13.8-14.4 at 96-103

The typical "regular" big blocks (383/390/396) in a 3600-4000 lb. car averaged low-mid 15s

The heavy hitters (426 Hemi,427/454 Chevys, 427 Fords) averaged low-mid 14s.

Of course, these are all straight from the factory. Some tweaking can do wonders, but the same for the little 231 turbo.

Now, lets look at the cars of today.

The Corvette, with the 346 ci LS1, is doing mid 13s at 105+ off the showroom floor.

The low end Mustang GT, with the SOHC 281 ci, low 14s

The normally asperated(sp?) Porsche 220 ci flat 6 is doing mid -high 13s, in a car only a few hundred pounds lighter than a GN.

The average family car has a 3 liter (about 181 ci) V6, rated at 180-230 hp. In 1987, the average family car with the same size engine, had about 130-140 HP. In 1968, the average family car with a small block V8 (318,327,302) had about 130-160 HP.

Technology kick ass.

[fitz3820]

I agree with what everyone else said but the motor itself wasn't anthing special, just a solid, proven design that had already been around for years. Other than some strong internals there isn't anything special about the motor itself.

Electronics were state of the art for the time. As someone else pointed out, technology rules! My brother's minivan has 240 hp! A 'Vette had about that 10 years ago!

Mark F.

87 GN 11.9 @ 115

[Kevin Turch]

heres the post from this moron ive been arguing with.


"wow you obviously don't have much automobile history knowledge, and i may not either, but i do know that the sfi system was nothing state of the art in 1986. toyota, honda, ford and mazda all used a similar "SFI" system, it was nothing special. Todays fuel injection systems aren't even really similar (only in theory and defination) to the ancient buick systems in 1986, bosch developed workable digital FI systems starting in the 1960's, so its not like the GM team was a bunch of ingenious pioneers on top of the latest technology. Nope that SFI was old news then and is older news today. The gn was fast out of the box in a straight line, but thats about it, there is nothing to brag about for its technological advances."

any truth to what he saying

[Slow91z]

Nothing was digital in the 60's...There WERE fuel injected cars, but it was manual injection, not electronic, totally different setup.

[MeanBuicks]

Actually Buick began using the distributorless, SFI system on 1984 production vehicles. This technology was lifted from their Indy car development program.

Don't know about the imports but Chevrolet didn't employ distributorless, SFI systems until the 1993 LT-1 using the beloved Optispark...almost a decade later.

[BuickMike]

Obviously this guy thinks fuel injection is fuel injection and has no idea how different systems work. You need to educate him on Sequential vs Batch fire systems. Not only that but the Japanese auto makers were still using air flow meters instead of MAFs or speed density back then. There's alot more to Buicks engine management that just being Fuel Injected. You've got variable fuel pressure for boost, spark retard, distributorless ignition, etc. Most other Turbo cars are managed completely different than the TR's and are very limited in what can be done to them. That's why almost all the other fast Turbo cars out there are running aftermarket fuel / ignition systems. People who don't know TR's look at me like I'm insane when I tell them I have no desire to get a DFI or do any ignition upgrade over plugs and wires. I say we just leave them confused. It's more fun that way.

[86brick]

Originally posted by MeanBuicks
Actually Buick began using the distributorless, SFI system on 1984 production vehicles. This technology was lifted from their Indy car development program.

Don't know about the imports but Chevrolet didn't employ distributorless, SFI systems until the 1993 LT-1 using the beloved Optispark...almost a decade later.

Yup back in the 80's Buick was the pioneer of the DIS (Distributorless Ignition System)......

[Kevin Turch]

damn you guys are smart

Thanks for all the info..

[Bens87tr]

Originally posted by jmidolo
I think Buick was way ahead of the curve back then... In 86, who was using sequential fuel injection

****, these cars are still ahead of the curve IMO. Guys like Bob Bailey and all the other innovators keep these things not only fast, but more versitile than ever.

[1badTTA]

Not exactly what you are looking for but some good relevant info

Linky

[victa1]

"Nothing was digital in the 60's...There WERE fuel injected cars, but it was manual injection, not electronic, totally different setup...................."

Not true.

Bendix electronic fuel injection was tried out in a very few '58 Chrysler 300Ds, and I believe 327 Ramblers.

Of course, it had many bugs, and most of the 392 Hemi Chryslers were converted to dual 4 bbl carbs. But, it WAS electronic with a crude computer.

[Slow91z]

I stand corrected....I had no idea about that.

But their still wasn't anything digital in the 60's..no even Military Aircraft.

[KEVINS]

I remember reading in '87 that the GN motor technology was about 10 years ahead of the rest of the factory autos with its intercooler and SFI.. I'm sure this doesn't help but I do remember reading it..

k

[victa1]

I don't know what you consider "digital", but........

The "ENIAC" computer from the 40s was "digital". It took up a whole big room, used vacumm tubes witch failed about every 5 minutes, and had computing power less than a Commodore VIC20 from 1982, but used binary code. It was digital, zeros and ones.

I don't know the state of electronic engine control in the late 50s, but transistors came about in the mid 40s. Not wide spread, but they were there. ICs came about the late 50s. A vacuum tube or a transitor is basically a switch. Just like the millions of things in a modern computer chip. Just a bunch of switches.

Military aircraft has had "digital" computers since the late 40s.
Very crude and limited, but definatley digital.

[Slow91z]

All of my instructors led me to believe that digital comps didn't come around until the 70's...I DO know that the auto-pilot system on B-52's and C-5's wasn't digital and auto-pilot was the most advanced system on those airframes...C-5's came out in the late 60's or so.

Either way right or wrong lets stop highjacking, and talk buicks.