z34_nut Posted March 15, 2005 Report Share Posted March 15, 2005 aaahhh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoroCorona Posted March 15, 2005 Report Share Posted March 15, 2005 Hey, would that 3900 swap into cars with the 3X00 series? They are built off the same design right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RacerX Posted March 16, 2005 Report Share Posted March 16, 2005 Check out the specs for that 3.9. 231CI/3791cc. It's a damn 3.7, or 3.8 if you round up. I suppose it's easier to sell the engine if they say "But it's bigger than the 3.8!" Somebody goofed. Bore and stroke are listed as 3.90 and 3.31 in inches respectively, or 99 by 84 millimeters, so it's 237ci/3880cc. Do the math. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THe_DeTAiL3R Posted March 16, 2005 Report Share Posted March 16, 2005 Well at least the 3800 is finally gone... as with the 3100 and 3400 they were putting in the damn things. the 3500 even looks respectable with near 300ft/lbs of torque! As for the design... well I guess they HAD to mess around with it, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RacerX Posted March 16, 2005 Report Share Posted March 16, 2005 Only 220 lbs.ft. of torque for the 3500. You read the Metric Nm rating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manitcor Posted March 16, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2005 Hey, would that 3900 swap into cars with the 3X00 series? They are built off the same design right? the 3900 should technically mount into a w-body however you have to deal with the electronic throttle body and electronic powersteering you either have alot of wiring or some serious computer tuning todo. Yeah I noticed the misprint of the size of the 3900, the second poster is right, a little math shows the reals displacemnt which is damn near 3.9. not to mention 240hp/245tq, thats as much power as an l67 with only .1 more literes. Thats a 60v6 design for you. Personally Id love an SS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWeb80 Posted March 16, 2005 Report Share Posted March 16, 2005 :| why oh why do they need to mess with perfection. Yeah......the Montes now are sooo sweet looking....if i had money, i'f buy one over a GTP anyday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RacerX Posted March 16, 2005 Report Share Posted March 16, 2005 Yeah I noticed the misprint of the size of the 3900, the second poster is right, a little math shows the reals displacemnt which is damn near 3.9. not to mention 240hp/245tq, thats as much power as an l67 with only .1 more literes. Thats a 60v6 design for you. And it does this on 87 octane. A good thing with rising fuel prices. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EurosportZ34 Posted March 16, 2005 Report Share Posted March 16, 2005 looks as if the instrument cluster and guages went back a couple years...otherwise they look alright. about f-ing time for the V8. now that 3.9L, is that going to be the same as the 3.9L VVT as in the G6? holy hell...240HP :shock: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manitcor Posted March 16, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2005 looks as if the instrument cluster and guages went back a couple years...otherwise they look alright. about f-ing time for the V8. now that 3.9L, is that going to be the same as the 3.9L VVT as in the G6? holy hell...240HP :shock: yeap, same engine, I noticed in the spec sheet that VVT was not listed as a feature, I dont know if thats a mistake or if they are leaving VVT out on the MC. It would be possible to have 2 sligtly different versions of the engine, but Im not sure why they would do such a thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z34_nut Posted March 16, 2005 Report Share Posted March 16, 2005 the 3.9 is supposedly based of GM's GEN III platforms. similar block design. that info came straight from GM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RenegadeZ Posted March 16, 2005 Report Share Posted March 16, 2005 We wait 6 years to get a "WTF" design from GM, & they wonder why sales are falling. My feelings are hurt by that front clip... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tenacious84 Posted April 15, 2005 Report Share Posted April 15, 2005 am i the only one that noticed from the front of the doors on back, the car is exactly the same as the previous 6 years? honeslty, and the front ALMOST looks the same as well! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnatGoSplat Posted April 15, 2005 Report Share Posted April 15, 2005 I think we all noticed it, it's just so obvious it goes without saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cutlsp Posted April 15, 2005 Report Share Posted April 15, 2005 i like the redesigned monte i had a problem with the way they looked a few years ago now that they are changed i WOULD buy one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solid_raiden223 Posted April 15, 2005 Report Share Posted April 15, 2005 i give it a 5...just because its a monte carlo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z34_nut Posted April 16, 2005 Report Share Posted April 16, 2005 whats so wrong about that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Rockstar Posted April 16, 2005 Report Share Posted April 16, 2005 whats so wrong about that? Jeff Gordon is in it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z34_nut Posted April 16, 2005 Report Share Posted April 16, 2005 Jeff Gordon is in it ok, i see your point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnatGoSplat Posted April 17, 2005 Report Share Posted April 17, 2005 I would like it a lot better with squintier headlights and without the indentions in the sides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z34_nut Posted April 17, 2005 Report Share Posted April 17, 2005 i dunno, i like the creases on the side. in the photochop, it looks like a lexus to me. good job on the photoshop btw. I think the problem is the grill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EurosportZ34 Posted April 17, 2005 Report Share Posted April 17, 2005 whats so wrong about that? :fruity: :fruity: :fruity: :fruity: :fruity: :fruity: :fruity: :fruity: :fruity: :fruity: :fruity: :fruity: :fruity: :fruity: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnatGoSplat Posted April 17, 2005 Report Share Posted April 17, 2005 i dunno, i like the creases on the side. in the photochop, it looks like a lexus to me. good job on the photoshop btw. I think the problem is the grill. I like a clean, smooth look so I'm not a big fan of the creases. 90's Lexus's had squintier headlights, but all the current ones have big giant googly lights like the Monte does. It's the style of the day. I would like the grille if the car had squinty headlights like my photochop. My taste is just old-school 90's. I like 90's short squinty headlights. I don't like today's super tall headlights. Maybe it's because I'm Asian and people say we have squinty eyes so I can identify better with squinty-eyed cars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z34_nut Posted April 17, 2005 Report Share Posted April 17, 2005 i dunno, i like the creases on the side. in the photochop, it looks like a lexus to me. good job on the photoshop btw. I think the problem is the grill. I like a clean, smooth look so I'm not a big fan of the creases. 90's Lexus's had squintier headlights, but all the current ones have big giant googly lights like the Monte does. It's the style of the day. I would like the grille if the car had squinty headlights like my photochop. My taste is just old-school 90's. I like 90's short squinty headlights. I don't like today's super tall headlights. Maybe it's because I'm Asian and people say we have squinty eyes so I can identify better with squinty-eyed cars. LOL As for the design, I think thier aspect is to, and I quote, "improve" upon what they already have. Porsche/BMW/Mercedes and so on, have always had this mentality, thus the reason for not changing the modles radically.They just keep improving small "problems" in past generations. You don't make progress by completely redesigning a modle every 5 years. GM has me worried with all these new platforms coming out. It could be a good thing, it could be a bad thing, but who knows, GM sounds like its on peril. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.