Pontiac G6

2456748

Comments

  • breetai52breetai52 Member Posts: 91
    Actually they are both pretty unimportant. It doesn't really matter where the curves peak but how wide the peak is. Remember the engine is tied directly to the tires via the transmission so as you accelerate your RPMs are always going up (until you downshift) so if the torque is very "peaky" you won't benefit from a very high torque rating. Ideally you want a torque peak that is as wide as the transmission step. So when you downshift you'll still be in the most powerful part of the torque curve. This will give you the best acceleration and ultimately the best 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. Of course you need a good MT to really have the control necessary to hit those correct RPMs.
  • breetai52breetai52 Member Posts: 91
    Yeah the s2000 is a great example of this. You really need to see the shape of that torque curve to know how the thing is going to accelerate.
  • breetai52breetai52 Member Posts: 91
    http://media.gm.com/events/sema/sema03gm/

    There's alot of stuff in there, just do a find for "g6"

    So it sounds like the 2005 g6 is going to get the 3900 v6 instead of the 3500. Maybe the 3900 will be on GTP edition or "sport" something or other and the 3500 on the base model.

    Now click on "powertrain" on the right and "3900" for more info on the engine.

    Sounds like the 3900 will have DOD and VVT for 2005 which means it should put out as much power as the Altima's 3500 with SUBSTANTIALLY better mileage. Also 90% of peak torque from 1800 RPM to 5800 RPM. That's an insanely wide power band. The only problem... I doubt they'll have a cheap MT available to slap in there. Maybe the one from the 3.6 CTS, which puts out a comparable amount of torque...

    The fact that the 3900 will have DOD for the first model year makes me think the 3500 will definately be available on a base model. I think people will give DOD a wide berth the first model year. If its reliable, I think they'll start to flock to it. Same power better mileage? Sounds good to me.

    There's also rumor that she'll get 3 valves/cylinder for 2006 uping the horsepower to 270.

    All the g6 needs is an AWD option and I'm there in 2006.
  • 02lssport02lssport Member Posts: 75
    Gunit - Don't waste your time with reg. He doesn't understand what you are talking about.

    You are right on the money with everything you say. Another common misconception is that OHV is the older technology. I recently found out that OHV was designed AFTER OHC.

    I can't wait to see what the G6 is gonna be like with the 3900 engine. Its gonna be real tempting. With the gas mileage close to one of those litte go-kart hybrid cars and faster then the Altima / Accord / Camry. LOOK OUT!!!
  • 02lssport02lssport Member Posts: 75
    REG - "According to this article though there is no DOHC. LOL imagine a manual tranny on an OHV sport sedan! Woohoo rev to that 5500 RPM redline! Guess they are not trying to attract import sport coupe buyers"

    You are so misguided son.

    The article states that "90 percent of peak torque is available from 1800 rpm to 5800". The redline would have to be somewhere around 6500 RPM give or take a few, same as the 3800 engine.

    LOL. LOL LOL LOL
  • breetai52breetai52 Member Posts: 91
    They'll also be adding an extra valve per cylinder which should help with the max HP. That's mainly for the people who don't understand torque. But it should also raise the redline.
  • treehumpindogtreehumpindog Member Posts: 22
    i'm so disappointed that the gorgeous G6 concept car that i was drooling over is just another pipe dream. can you believe that GM was telling us that the G6 was pretty much what the next production car would look like? what a bunch of liars! the spy shots of the "new" and very blah G6 show me that GM has no guts, no vision, and no business asking for my business if this is the best they have to offer.
  • regfootballregfootball Member Posts: 2,166
    wow, that's more harsh than me even......
  • theo2709theo2709 Member Posts: 476
    You're on about the 3900:

    http://media.gm.com/events/sema/sema03gm/

    I'll cut right to the chase:

    "The 3900 V-6, the latest in GM’s longstanding family of 60-degree V-6 engines. The 3900 will be the first GM overhead valve engine to use variable valve timing, and it will be GM’s first V-6 to use DOD. Its first application will be on the 2005 Pontiac G6."

    I'll take my cookie now, please. I'll try to find something about the Ecotec tomorrow.
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    wpbharry : GM had a press release a number of months ago where they said the G6 will not have a 4 banger initially, but it may be added in future models. As far as I know (from SEMA and other stories), the 3.9L is standard and a super charged / turbo charged version will be the "GT" model. That all said, the G6 was suppose to have the 3.5L in it initially, so GM could still change it's mind. ;-)

    theo2709 : Thanx for the link

    treehumpindog : Wait till you see the finished product before you trash the car. Test cars are always disguised and covered up well. The Detriot show isn't far away.
  • montanafanmontanafan Member Posts: 945
    wpbharry, The G6 production version will make its debut at the Detroit Auto Show in January. In the past ( Aztek and Vibe) press releases with advance info started showing up in late November, early December at the GM press sites for the Detroit show cars. Untill anyone can give you proof positive, you will just have to believe that 2005 production starts with the 3.5L OHV 200hp V6, followed by the 3.9L OHV 245hp V6 for the spring and then the 2.4L DOHC 175hp L4 before summer.
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    Did you not see the link to the gm media site above?

    I can't imagine they will have 3 engines on this car.
  • montanafanmontanafan Member Posts: 945
    Imagine.
  • breetai52breetai52 Member Posts: 91
    With a 6 speed 170 HP might be plenty for a car that size.
  • z9z9z9z9z9z9z9z9 Member Posts: 101
    breetai52 wrote:
    > With a 6 speed 170 HP might be plenty for a car that size.

    Probably won't happen though, since the 3500 V-6 is the base engine in the new Malibu. You don't often see Pontiac offer a base model with less horsepower than the equivalent Chevy.
  • z9z9z9z9z9z9z9z9 Member Posts: 101
    treehumpindog wrote:
    > the spy shots of the "new" and very blah G6 show me that GM has no guts, no vision, and no business asking for my business if this is the best they have to offer.

    I like the spy shot, especially the way the belt line rises into the trunk and the roofline drops down to meet it. It's hard to tell from a front-quarter shot, but it looks like it has a longer roofline/shorter rear deck than previous Pontiacs, similar in proportion to the current Altima.
  • breetai52breetai52 Member Posts: 91
    The 2.2L is the base engine in the Malibu.
  • z9z9z9z9z9z9z9z9 Member Posts: 101
    breetai52 wrote:
    > The 2.2L is the base engine in the Malibu.

    Dang, you're right. That's got to be underpowered.
  • breetai52breetai52 Member Posts: 91
    Yeah, I'm sure it is. With a 5-spd it might be ok. I think the LS (200HP/220lbft) will be the most popular Malibu, or at least it will be more even than the 4cyl/6cyl ratios for Camcords (I've heard 4 to 1).

    Now if they drop the 2.4L in the base Malibu, I think that would be reasonable. The 2.4L will have the same HP as the current engine (2001-2003) with just a little less torque. I would be shocked and appalled if the base engine of the G6 is the 2.2L, especially considering they are saying the base g6 will start (price-wise) where the malibu leaves off. That leads me to think the base will have the 3.5 for the first year and maybe they will put the 2.4 in for the 2nd model year or late first year.
  • z9z9z9z9z9z9z9z9 Member Posts: 101
    breetai52 wrote:
    > I think the LS (200HP/220lbft) will be the most
    > popular Malibu, or at least it will be more even
    > than the 4cyl/6cyl ratios for Camcords

    Now that you mention it, it's interesting to compare the 2004 Malibu V-6 with the 2004 Camry LE 4 cyl. The Malibu is 155 lbs heavier (3297 vs. 3142), it has 43 more horsepower (200 vs. 157) and 58 ft/lb more torque (220 vs. 162), yet it achieved the same results in EPA testing -- 23 mpg city, 32 mpg highway. This additional power is produced at lower rpms with less mechanical complexity. Something to think about for those who think OHV engines should be put out to pasture! :-)
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    z9z9z9z9 : I have a 2.2L our Alero and it's more than adequate. Keep in mind most sedans only had around 140-150hp just a couple of years ago. Hopefully a 2.4L will be dropped in the Bu next fall.

    breetai52 : No 4 bangers for the G6, initially anyway. I hope it only comes ever with a V6. I always thought the Mazda "6" with a 4 cyl motor was a bit strange.
  • breetai52breetai52 Member Posts: 91
    Gm is squeezing every ounce of efficiency out of these engines. I can't wait to see how DOD works out on the 3.9, although I think GM has said to only expect an 8% improvement in fuel economy. So if the 3.9 in the G6 gets 29-30 highway, thats only an improvement to 31-32, but thats nothing to scoff at. I just hope the engineers get it right this time. I have faith in them, or rather the computers in cars that will be controlling the DOD.
  • breetai52breetai52 Member Posts: 91
    Agreed,

    They claimed it was called G6 because it had a 6 cylinder, let's hope they don't back down from that. Less engine choices should keep prices down and since I would probably opt for the 6cyl anyway...

    That being said I wouldn't be too surprised/disappointed to see the 2.4L in the 2006 model, although I hope the 2.2 is only used for the Cobalt/Solstice and equivalent small cars. And if I could handle driving a stick everyday it would probably be a pretty fun car.

    Anyone have any news on whether the G6 will have an automanual? Will it only be available on the top trim like the GTP Grand Prix?
  • z9z9z9z9z9z9z9z9 Member Posts: 101
    dindak:
    Adequate is such a relative term. I have a 2003 Accord with a 240 hp V-6, and I also find it to be adequate. ;-)

    breetai52:
    The status of the 3900 DOD in the G6 seems a little vague at this point. The media link above says:

    "The 3900 will be the first GM overhead valve engine to use variable valve timing, and it will be GM’s first V-6 to use DOD. Its first application will be on the 2005 Pontiac G6."

    But it you click on powertrains->3900 V-6 it says:

    "GM will first launch the technology on the Gen IV Vortec 5300 V-8 engine and will add it to the 3900 V-6 in 2005. The 3900 will debut without DOD in the all-new, midsize Pontiac G6."

    So it seems that there may be two versions of the 3900 in the G6, or more likely, a running change at some point.

    For a 6 to 8 percent improvement in fuel economy it doesn't interest me that much. Certainly not as much as the VVT and 240 hp!
  • breetai52breetai52 Member Posts: 91
    Yeah I don't think it will be out until 2006, I was surprised to even hear they were doing it for a 6cyl so early. I would tend to think the big advantages would be in the huge 8cyls in GMs trucks.

    I think the engine compares favorably to the Accord V6. The same power, 30 more lbft of torque and probably similar mileage, I'll predict 20/29. The specs so far seem to match up the the Altima V6 and the mileage on the G6 should smoke the Altima. A friend has the 3.5 and she routinely gets below the city mileage of 19 and has never gotten above the highway of 26 (although she drives pretty aggressively). Add DOD and it will beat the Accord. I'm not a "econut" (here come the flames), but increasing a car's range (without adding extra fuel capacity) and bringing up GMs CAFE numbers are always good things.
  • breetai52breetai52 Member Posts: 91
    And yes, I know I am being very optimistic. :)

    But why not? Shouldn't we be excited about the future?
  • theo2709theo2709 Member Posts: 476
    Pontiac has said the 2.4L Ecotec will find it's way into the G6 in a few years. The 3900 in the G6 (at least in its first year) will have DoD, but it will be deactivated. Don't ask me why. But once all these technologies come together (VVT, DoD, 3-valve technology), then the G6 will be a touch act to beat. Let's hope GM gets these out on the market quickly.
  • rctennis3811rctennis3811 Member Posts: 1,031
    ...would be the 3.5L V6 DOHC 24V that WAS used in the Oldsmobile Intrigue...it was pretty efficient and made 215HP
  • logic1logic1 Member Posts: 2,433
    did not meet the latest California air quality standards. Bringing it up to standard would have made it more expensive than the product it would be used in could support.

    The new high output 3.6 which is now in the '04 CTS will probably find its way into some high end version of the G6. It is better in every way than the old 3.5.
  • regfootballregfootball Member Posts: 2,166
    Honda can seem to update their v6's for SLUEV etc. no problem......

    its not that GM couldn't have...it's that they were too cheap to and diverted their money elsewhere.
  • vcjumpervcjumper Member Posts: 1,110
    Is it safe to assume the G6 will have a manual transmission? Surely they won't try to market it as a sport sedan without one. Otherwise my next car will probably be a TSX or S40 since the 9-2 seems to be wagon only. Now that I'm out of the big city and in a spread out little suburb with less than 800,000 people its time to go back to a manual. Besides that I'm tired of being mocked by my colleagues from oversees about having an automatic transmission :-).
  • vcjumpervcjumper Member Posts: 1,110
    Seems redundant now. 215hp is just average at best these days anyway. 3.6L seems better all around.

    Unfortunately you can't get it in any car even close to the price the Intrigue was.
  • ehaaseehaase Member Posts: 328
    The G6 will not have any version of the CTS' 3.6L V6. The G6 will use a 200 hp 3.5L OHV V6 and a 245 hp 3.9L OHV V6; eventually it will probably have a 170 hp 2.4L DOHC 4 cylinder. I doubt that either V6 will be available with an automatic because only a very small percentage of the public want manual transmissions.
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    Reg : The Shortstar was too expensive to build in the first place and to upgrade for California made now cents. The 3.6L in the CTS is cheaper and better than the 3.5L. That make sense.

    z9z9z9z9 : I have mostly driven V6 cars and the 2.2L is more than adequate. It does 0-60 in 8.4 seconds in the Alero, only a touch slower than a 2.3L Accord.

    theo : No idea how you know the 2.4L will go into the G6 unless you work at GM, but I'll take your word for it.
  • rctennis3811rctennis3811 Member Posts: 1,031
    GM could make a shorter version of the 3.6L like a 3.2L or sumthin..

    they successfully did it with the Vortec 4200 in the TrailBlazer for the Vortec 3500 in the Colorado
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    "later on" could mean a year or never. If they do put a 4 in it, it have better be a very strong one, maybe a 180 hp version of the 2.4.
  • tomcat630tomcat630 Member Posts: 854
    With technology changing all the time, who's to say DOHC is the "be all end all" anymore?? Hybrids, hydrogen and others will come into being making the DOHC "perfect" V6 look old.
  • treehumpindogtreehumpindog Member Posts: 22
    gm is full of crap. the new g6 is the same old same old. if gm really wants to earn back the business of disenchanted consumers and car enthusiasts, why doesn't gm have the guts to build a car that looks like the g6 concept car inside and out? i've seen the spy shots of the production g6, and it doesn't matter if the car's been camouflaged because the elemental cut lines, waist line, and wheel well cut outs of the vehicle are easily discernible despite the disguise. my main beef is with the design of the wheelbase and chassis. in the concept car, the wheels were stretched out to the corners of the car, giving it a taut athletic look. but in the production car, the wheels have been moved back in giving the car a weak stance. in addition, the muscular rear haunches of the concept car have all but disappeared, leaving it with the same back end as the pontiac sunfire/chevy cavalier. i think gm only spends time and money on designing their top end models like the cadillac xlr or corvette. they treat people buying lower to mid-priced models as though they were suckers. i just want to see gm GENUINELY try to make good, reliable, stylish cars with modern, rich-looking, elegant interiors. but i still think they're mostly concerned about everything except the product and what the customer wants.
  • lash92sseilash92ssei Member Posts: 35
    Treehumpindog, did you tell us how you really feel?
  • montanafanmontanafan Member Posts: 945
    Transmissions: What I have seen, surfed and read, the 2.4L DOHC 175hp 4 Cylinder will be auto only, the 3.5L OHV 200hp 6 cylinder will also be auto only but will offer the option of TapShift like the current Grand Prix, and the 3.9L OHV 245hp 6 cylinder will be auto/tap shift or 6-speed manual.
  • z9z9z9z9z9z9z9z9 Member Posts: 101
    treehumpingog wrote:
    "in the concept car, the wheels were stretched out to the corners of the car, giving it a taut athletic look. but in the production car, the wheels have been moved back in giving the car a weak stance."

    My understanding is the G6 will have the same 112.3 inch wheelbase as the Malibu Maxx, which is just about as far apart as wheels get on a FWD midsize car.

    montanafan wrote:
    "and the 3.9L OHV 245hp 6 cylinder will be auto/tap shift or 6-speed manual."

    Where did you read/hear about a 6-speed manual? I'd love the have a manual G6, but I don't know if GM has a manual FWD transmission that will handle 245 ft/lb torque.

    In any case, a 6-speed seems pretty unnesessary on an engine that retains 90% of its maximum torque over a 3000 rpm range. I'd settle for a 5-speed myself.
  • logic1logic1 Member Posts: 2,433
    I do not know whether it can handle 245 lb. torque.
  • z9z9z9z9z9z9z9z9 Member Posts: 101
    This sounds hopeful:

    "A new, compact 6-speed manual gearbox, capable of handling exceptionally high torque loadings, is standard equipment on the 210-hp 2.0T variants."

    http://www.gm.com/cgi-bin/pr_display.pl?3427

    Unfortunately this is probably an inline transmission. Most of GM's FWD V-6 cars use a so-called "u-drive", with the transmision mounted behind the engine instead of inline.
  • breetai52breetai52 Member Posts: 91
    Actually, according to the press release, it maintains 90% of peak torque from 1800-5800. Thats a 4000 RPM range. :P
  • z9z9z9z9z9z9z9z9 Member Posts: 101
    Well, OK. I can get by with a 4-speed manual then. ;-)

    It doesn't really matter, since GM doesn't have even one of those. If only Ford hadn't been stupid and put a live axle on the 05 Stang...
  • tomcat630tomcat630 Member Posts: 854
    "why doesn't gm have the guts to build a car that looks like the g6 concept car inside and out?"

    Because this is the real world and customers want to be able to sit and get in their cars without bumping heads and knees. Concept cars are all fake hand built to entertain the masses who really don't know the difference between a cam or crankshaft.

    Whenever I go to Auto Shows, I don't care about concepts since 90% never get built or look like that in realtiy, so why bother geting excited?

    Those say "GM/whoever should build this car" are ones who just like to drool over pictures of cars, and not actually are going to buy any new cars ever. Just like the ones who had nervous breakdowns when the F body died, where were you when the cars needed to be sold?

    And bob Lutz has more experiance and know how in his little finger than most of the "armchair car execs" here.
  • regfootballregfootball Member Posts: 2,166
    his experience hasn't translated in superior products yet.

    "If only Ford hadn't been stupid and put a live axle on the 05 Stang..."

    yeah, it is pretty dumb and reeks of cheapness to the highest order. I actually saw some article that said Ford found potential buyers wanted it to be solid axle for drag racing and drag starts or something.

    RIIIIIIGGGGHHHHHTTTTTT.........shut up Ford. you're doing it because its CHEAP.

    for sure the svt or cobra mustang will get IRS.
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    The G6 has not been seen by anyone in it's final form and already it's getting panned for it's looks. Amazing how people can prejudge something like that?? It surely won't be exactly like the concept for many practical reasons, but let's wait and see guy, yeesh!
  • regfootballregfootball Member Posts: 2,166
    the 05 stang is a snoozer anyways. dull dull dull.
  • tomcat630tomcat630 Member Posts: 854
    Isn't this the Pontiac G6 forum?
Sign In or Register to comment.