Gen V 4.3 - other applications? Lambdas?

[Michael_S]

With all the upgrades, it's likely the new 4.3 V6 will have output similar or better than the soon-to-die 4.8 liter Gen IV V8 in a slightly smaller, cheaper package.

Would it make sense for this to become a new optional or standard engine in the Lambdas (Chevrolet Traverse, Buick Enclave, GMC Acadia)? I realize the 4.3 is a 90 degree bank angle V6, versus the 60 degree bank angle V6 currently used in those SUVs. But at their lightest the Lambdas are around 4800 pounds, so something with more torque would be good. I believe some insiders have already confirmed the Lambdas can't handle the engine size or torque of a full V8 with their transverse transmissions.

[Z284ever]

As an Acadia owner, I'd appreciate and engine with more low end torque. I'd be all for it.

[91fairladyZ]

As an Acadia owner, I wouldn't mind more power and torque, but what I want is the new transmission from the 2013 model.

[dslay04]

I don't think GM's FWD transmission can handle the transmission. The Regal GS is clearly the FWD torque limit

[germeezy1]

I don't think GM's FWD transmission can handle the transmission. The Regal GS is clearly the FWD torque limit

Keep in mind that GM is developing as we speak FWD transaxles for engines that should come very close to or meet the typical 350 lb ft torque limit for these type of transmissions.

[T'Cal]

The 4.3L for the lambdas? Not a chance. I'll bet they go the same route that Ford did with the successful Explorer: an AWD twin turbo version of the standard V6.

[andretti]

Keep in mind that GM is developing as we speak FWD transaxles for engines that should come very close to or meet the typical 350 lb ft torque limit for these type of transmissions.

When did GM forget how to make FWD automatic transaxels that can handle more than 350 ft-lbs of torque? GM used to sell FWD cars with more than 500 ft-lbs and they were not prone to early failure. Why the big "development" required to remember how to make them?

[germeezy1]

When did GM forget how to make FWD automatic transaxels that can handle more than 350 ft-lbs of torque? GM used to sell FWD cars with more than 500 ft-lbs and they were not prone to early failure. Why the big "development" required to remember how to make them?

The transaxle is only a variant of the existing transaxle that will be required with the 3.6 Twin Turbo engine.

[dslay04]

Keep in mind that GM is developing as we speak FWD transaxles for engines that should come very close to or meet the typical 350 lb ft torque limit for these type of transmissions.

I hope not. They need to be aiming higher than that with AWD

[Tomko]

When did GM forget how to make FWD automatic transaxels that can handle more than 350 ft-lbs of torque? GM used to sell FWD cars with more than 500 ft-lbs and they were not prone to early failure. Why the big "development" required to remember how to make them?

Do you mean the Turbo-Hydramatic 425?

[Michael_S]

The 4.3L for the lambdas? Not a chance. I'll bet they go the same route that Ford did with the successful Explorer: an AWD twin turbo version of the standard V6.

The Explorer is lighter than the Lambdas and has a 2.0 liter inline four with turbocharger, a 3.5 liter V6 as the main engine, and a twin turbo 3.5 liter V6 as the high performance model.

I think the Lambdas should have the 4.3 as the base engine to compete against - and presumably, handily outdo - the Ford 3.5. I wasn't suggesting the 4.3 could or should go up against the twin turbo 3.5 liter V6 in the Explorer Sport.

[sfbreh]

The transaxle is only a variant of the existing transaxle that will be required with the 3.6 Twin Turbo engine.

The 3.6TT is only putting out ~350 lb ft..?

[germeezy1]

The 3.6TT is only putting out ~350 lb ft..?

I would assume that a Lambda variant would be significantly detuned from an XTS variant, and even Ford's FWD transaxle is limited to 350 lb ft.

[T'Cal]

The Explorer is lighter than the Lambdas and has a 2.0 liter inline four with turbocharger, a 3.5 liter V6 as the main engine, and a twin turbo 3.5 liter V6 as the high performance model.

I think the Lambdas should have the 4.3 as the base engine to compete against - and presumably, handily outdo - the Ford 3.5. I wasn't suggesting the 4.3 could or should go up against the twin turbo 3.5 liter V6 in the Explorer Sport.

I'm very familiar with the Explorer as I own an '11. My point was that GM will go the same route as Ford by staying with the competent 60 degree V6 that's already in there for most models and turbocharging it for sportier models, not spending a lot of money unnecessarily to adapt a wider engine to gain a few HP and a bit more torque. That doesn't make fiscal sense.

[andretti]

Do you mean the Turbo-Hydramatic 425?

I mean whatever they put in a '69 Cadillac Eldorado. Is that the TurboHydromatic 425?