SUPERcharging a 3.8 Lesabre!

[SinisterCRX]

Hey guys, noob here

About to purchase a 1998 Buick Lesabre 3.8 from my grandpappy

So from what I've read, everything is essentially the same? So I could take the stock supercharger unit and it will bolt on?

Questions:
1) Are there any changes to the harness needed?
2) All I'd need is the different Engine Computer?
3) I'm going to assume the injectors are a different size, so I would need those too, what size are they?
4) What have people run with this supercharger swap? (0-60, 1/4, etc)
5) What upgrades are there available for the stock supercharger? (I'm a noob to superchargers, I'm a turbo man myself... but I like OEM parts)

Thanks guys, nice forum you've got here

[DrJay]

Nope, you have a SII and it's a whole different ballgame. Check out www.intense-racing.com and www.zzperformance.com, they'll be your new friends.

[HotZ28]

It appears that my original post to this thread was misinterpreted by saying “The NA power trains are actually quite different when compared to the L67 (SC)”.

If you will read my post again (slowly) and notice, I did not specifically identify only the difference between the 1993 Series-1 (L27) & the 93 Series 1 (L67) as it seems to have been interrupted. My statement was intended to cover a vast range of changes, over several years (88-96+) in development of both the Series 1 & Series 11, N/A & S/C versions of the 3.8. My original post was simply intended to discourage “prototyping” on a limited budget.

Additionally, my comments were intended to bring attention to the fact that the donor car and the transplant car, need to be as close to the same vintage as possible to narrow down as many of the changes that took place within those few years. The Eaton M60 SC was used only on the series 1 L67 (91-95).

I am sure that you are all are aware of all the parts incompatibility between the Series 1 and the Series 11. Just about every engine part of the Series 11 engine are different from the Series 1, including but not limited to, block, crank, heads, pistons, rods, intake, valve train, SC (M60 vs. M90), wiring harness, PCM, and also, compression ratio difference.

Now, if you want to get specific about only one, or even three years (92-93-94) of the L27 & L67, we can narrow that down, but not limit it to the following.

• The block and the crank are the same.
• The rods, pistons & pins are different, not “nearly the same” and have a different GM part number. (This has been verified at the local Buick dealer). The L67 rods are beefier and similar in construction to the LT1 rods. The pins do “float” and are lighter than the N/A pins. The pistons are Hypereutectic vs. cast.
• The heads are basically the same, however in 1993, the rocker arms were changed to a roller pivot rockers with a solid tip.
• Accessory drives and mountings are all different.
• ECM/prom is different.
• SC intake, injector size and fuel rails are different, however will mount to the L27 (Injectors, TB and all accessories would need to come with the donor SC)
• Fuel line connections are different.
• Different transaxle 4T60E vs. 4T60E-HD,
• Compression ratio is the same.
• Harmonic balancer/pulley is different.
• The SC fuel pump is a higher capacity and a different part number from the N/A (ACDELCO EP339) vs. SC (ACDELCO EP311).

By the way, I just got a quote from a local wrecker on a 1996 Series 11 L67 with 82K miles from an Ultra, complete with transaxle (4T65E-HD) and all accessories, wiring harness and PCM for $1000.00. (They also have a 94 with 115K for $800.00 turnkey). It took me about 1-second to do the math on this and see what I could get for an extra 200 bucks! The 96 car was totaled from the rear and the yard man was able to demonstrate how well it ran. It sounds like a new engine. This is an option I have been considering for my Ultra, if I ever need it.


Nearly all of the Series II refinements invested in the N/A 3800 V-6 were passed on to the supercharged version in 1996. In addition, the supercharger's internal displacement was increased from “62” (M60) to “90” (M90) cubic inches. The M90 SC delivers 7.5 psi boost max in original trim and the engine is rated @ 240 horsepower at 5200 rpm and 280 lb-ft of torque at 3600 rpm. Also, these engines red line @ 6000 rpm! This option to me sounds more like a weekend project, rather than a “summer project” and I know what I will spend up front. (No unknowns or prototypes in the one)

So in conclusion, if you were to only consider the difference between the 1993 L27 & L67, “95%” of what I said, would not be “completely wrong”! If the donor car and the transplant car, are both 93’s, the project could be somewhat simplified, however if you plan to work with a limited budget, be prepared to “expect the unexpected”. I will continue to stand by my original statements;

1.Try to add one. Very expensive and labor intensive. (Time & labor is money)
2.Do a full engine/trans swap. (Engine, Trans, wiring harnesses, and PCM). Slightly Cheaper.
3.Sell your LeSabre and buy an Ultra. By far, the most cost-effective solution.

Finally, a comment for 93LeSabreLimited. If you do go forward with this project, I wish you all the luck and “may the power of the universe be with you”! Again, if you are working with a limited budget, you might want to consider the other options.

[SinisterCRX]

All this talk of L27's and L67's has me confused.

My question pertains to if I got the parts off of, say, a 1998 Buick Regal GS.

[HotZ28]

When talking specifically about the “1998 Series 11" engine, you can still refer to the SC version as an RPO code (L67). Many of the differences mentioned earlier between the NA & SC engine still exist, as well as, the compression ratio being higher on the Series 11 NA engine, than the SC version. The PCM is OBD11 and does not have a “prom”, so you would need to have the PCM reflashed with a “car specific” custom program for the application. The PCM programs are not generic or interchangeable between different body styles! I.E. gear ratio, fuel curves, timing curves, knock retard etc. The Regal GS PCM would be a good foundation to start with, and then have it reprogrammed for your application.
Again, as discussed in the previous post, this conversion could be accomplished; however, it is not a cheap and easy, weekend “bolt on” & ride modification!

[DrJay]

Hotz28

You'll have to excuse me jumping on you like that. He said he had a 93, said he wanted to do the swap, and you went about explaining why it wouldn't work on a '96 as reason for him to drop it. I'm sure you can understand why I said you were wrong.

Your latest explanation seems to fairly accurately cover the bases. The only statement I take issue with is: "The rods, pistons & pins are different, not “nearly the same” and have a different GM part number. (This has been verified at the local Buick dealer). The L67 rods are beefier and similar in construction to the LT1 rods. The pins do “float” and are lighter than the N/A pins. The pistons are Hypereutectic vs. cast."

Everything I have found suggests that they are, infact, "nearly the same." This isn't to say you can swap individual pieces around, but I found them to be very close in construction. I have seen no evidence that the pistons are hypereutecic and instead have plenty of proof they are cast. Unless you're mixing SII into it again, which *are* hypereutectic. I have not noticed any difference in the rods in regard to one being beefier.

If you have proof to the contrary I'd be excited to see it. I wouldn't bet my life on my statements, but I've been around these engines for quite some time and seen more than a few piston/rod combos. If you do have more info, please email me at DrJay <at> seriesoneperformance.com and we can swap info.

[SinisterCRX]

sooo i couldn't pull off everything off a (98 ish) regal gs and stick it on a 98 lesabre?

[HotZ28]

Originally Posted by SinisterCRX

sooo i couldn't pull off everything off a (98 ish) regal gs and stick it on a 98 lesabre?

I know that it sounds simple to, “just pull everything off and stick it on”, however, in this particular case, it just simply don’t work that way! I think it would be better for you to find a donor “PA Ultra” car, rather than a Regal GS! The PA engine compartment is closer to the same size of the LeSabre and the front accessory brackets should be interchangeable. I am not sure that would be the case if using Regal parts! In addition, the PA Ultra, PCM would be better suited for the LeSabre.

[HotZ28]

Originally Posted by DrJay

Hotz28

You'll have to excuse me jumping on you like that. He said he had a 93, said he wanted to do the swap, and you went about explaining why it wouldn't work on a '96 as reason for him to drop it. I'm sure you can understand why I said you were wrong.

Your latest explanation seems to fairly accurately cover the bases. The only statement I take issue with is: "The rods, pistons & pins are different, not “nearly the same” and have a different GM part number. (This has been verified at the local Buick dealer). The L67 rods are beefier and similar in construction to the LT1 rods. The pins do “float” and are lighter than the N/A pins. The pistons are Hypereutectic vs. cast."

Everything I have found suggests that they are, infact, "nearly the same." This isn't to say you can swap individual pieces around, but I found them to be very close in construction. I have seen no evidence that the pistons are hypereutecic and instead have plenty of proof they are cast. Unless you're mixing SII into it again, which *are* hypereutectic. I have not noticed any difference in the rods in regard to one being beefier.

If you have proof to the contrary I'd be excited to see it. I wouldn't bet my life on my statements, but I've been around these engines for quite some time and seen more than a few piston/rod combos. If you do have more info, please email me at DrJay <at> seriesoneperformance.com and we can swap info.

DrJay,
No offense taken and thanks for your continued feedback! I think, “What we have here is, failure to communicate”! It just occurred to me that we could have a language barrier, since you are from the Northwest part of the US and I am from the Southeast! If you will please read my post again, I did not, simply spell out, “explaining why it wouldn't work on a '96 as reason for him to drop it”. There are enough differences, between the 1993 SC and NA alone, for this conversion not to be practical.

I suppose, if I put a rod from a L27, small block Chev, big block Chev, and a Caterpillar, side by side, you could say they “are very close in construction” or, “are nearly the same” because, they are all “rods”. My intention was to make it “crystal clear”, that the rods & piston/pins have a different part number and the various parts are not interchangeable. Yes, you can use the NA parts in the SC motor; however, that was not the original design or intent!

I asked a friend of mine, who has been a GM Dealer parts specialist/manager for over 35 years, (knows most part numbers by memory), to Email me a list of the part numbers of rods & piston/pins for the supercharged vs. normally aspirated motors (L27/L67) from 1992 through 1995. Listed below, is what I received:

Description: CONNECTING ROD
Part #: 24502361
Categories:
Mechanical > GROUP 4 - ENGINE > PISTON ASSEMBLIES, BEARINGS & CRANKSHAFT
Make Model Year(s) Application
Buick Park Avenue 1991-1995 Supercharger
Buick Riviera 1995 Supercharger

Description: CONNECTING ROD
Part #: 25530920
Categories:
Mechanical > GROUP 4 - ENGINE > PISTON ASSEMBLIES, BEARINGS & CRANKSHAFT
Make Model Year(s) Application
Buick LeSabre 1991-1993 Standard-Normally Aspirated
Buick Park Avenue 1991-1992 Standard –Normally Aspirated

Description: PISTON & PIN
Part #: 24502091
Categories:
Mechanical > GROUP 4 - ENGINE > PISTON ASSEMBLIES, BEARINGS & CRANKSHAFT
Make Model Year(s) Application
Buick Park Avenue 1993 Supercharger
Pontiac Bonneville 1992-1993 Supercharger

Description: PISTON & PIN
Part #: 12537198
Categories:
Mechanical > GROUP 4 - ENGINE > PISTON ASSEMBLIES, BEARINGS & CRANKSHAFT
Make Model Year(s) Application
Buick LeSabre 1991-1993 Standard
Buick Park Avenue 1 1991-1992 -1993 Normally Aspirated

In conclusion, I have given my position on this subject and have neither the desire nor the inclination, to elaborate any further! For those of you who are willing to go forward with this project, I admire your ambition and wish you the best of luck!

[DrJay]

Whoa man, I'm not trying to bash you. You clearly have an understanding of these engines beyond most but I think anyone considering this project should hear both sides of the debate. Oh and I've been living in the south-east for a little over a year now, learning the lingo as I can.

Please also understand that there is a LOT of misinformation out there about these engines. I'm not going to pretend I have all the answers, I could be wrong on almost everything I say. I'll readily admit it if the time comes but I have done a LOT of research into these engines and have something of a duty to present my findings. I've heard everything imaginable about these engines. The pistons are forged. The rods are forged. The rods are "at least" shot peened at the factory. The water pump cavitates. The pistons are hypereutectic. Which of these statements do you believe? They've all been presented by more than one person.

That aside, and I don't expect you to reply to this, but what you've shown is a different part number between SC and NA. This is a known and I've run into the press vs. floating pin issues before. I mentioned that previously in this post. What you didn't prove is any difference in manufacturing procedure, and beyond making them look the same. As for them being interchangable, I'll be happy to sell you the same piston for all S1 SC engines and I bet they'll bolt right in. Same for the NA. I won't, however, sell you a SC rod to go in a NA but that's not because I think they're beefier.

What I'm debating is that they're beefier and/or hypereutectic and/or forged. Some time ago I took an SC piston and rod combo and sent it to three different shops for their thoughts, along with my own. Every one of them said they're standard cast. Of course since hypereutectic is a form of casting, who knows maybe they are, but I highly doubt it as the hypereutectics in the SII were touted as an upgrade by GM. You can read about it on their media archive website yourself. Why brag about hypereutectics in the SII when they've had them in there all along? Marketing gimmick or was it really an advancement? Along the same lines why brag about hypereutectic when they used to be forged?

Here, for your reading and I'll post a few quotes about the rods:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...28/ai_88130081

"GM switching to p/m connecting rods for popular V-6 powertrain"
"The decision by GM to replace the cast iron rods in its Series 3800, 3.8-liter V-6s represents another victory by the powder metal industry, which is battling precision-forged rods made from steel bar stock for future connecting rod applications in the domestic automotive engine market."

There's a few more good bits in there for you to read. Of course a press release by GM doesn't automatically mean I'm right, but it surely can't be ignored.

One of your statements leads me to believe we're working on two completely different playing fields. "however, that was not the original design or intent!"
Of course not! But neither was a higher duration camshaft, or roller rockers, or a smaller SC pulley, or ported heads. Heck not a single performance upgrade was their original "design or intent" but should that stifle the performance community? Would the 350 design have died off years ago if people only followed the design intent of the factory? The word "stroker" would surely never have been coined.

As for it not being practical, that statement doesn't really fit in light of the people that HAVE done it. If you give me your email I'll send you video of a conversion driving around. Sure it still has a lot to prove in terms of reliability, but who upgrades their engine with only reliability in mind? Ask anyone at the track if "stuff breaks."

My thought is if you think you can do it, and want to, do it! Ask the community for whatever help they can provide but I think the community has a responsibility of sorts to provide the best information possible and not just say "no" based on a personal thought. If you're going to stand up and say something, be sure you're on a firm ground.

[TheSonofCassius]

hey i have a 98 lesabre and ive been wanting to supper charge it. what do i need and is it possible? or should i just buy an ultra

[Tech II]

Ultra.....

[TheSonofCassius]

i emailed a company and they emailed me this https://zzperformance.com/3800/super...arger-kit.html im not sure what i should choose for the options but the kit isnt as expensive as i was thinking. plus im looking for drop in suspensions that will ride at stock height. does anyone know where i can find some cheap ones?

[maxwedge]

The s charged engine has a different short block, look into the differences first. I believe the axles were different also? Look at the above post, very thorough!!

[Stealthee]

People "top swap" the NA engines all the time. You can get everything you need WAY cheaper than you get it from ZZP.