which is cheaper to build: SBC or 3.8 turbo

tracy

New Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2003
I got into a heathy debate over what is cheaper/faster to build. A SBC or our turbo Buick motor.

My contention is that for 11-12 second street cars, the turbo cannot be beat.

IMO if you want to build a SBC to run solid mid 12's, you need heads, cam, intake, carb, headers, stall, and gearing. Plus you will need a shortblock healthy enough to support all of that.

A Buick or TTA can be in that range for under a couple grand.

This person went on to claim how Buicks will grenade much sooner, which may or may not be true. There are plenty high mileage turbo motors living a hard life on the track and seemingly holding up well.

what's your opinion on this??
 
Yo Tracy, I LOVE the 3.8 but the SBC is hard to beat. Parts and Knowledgable people are more readily accessible for the SBC.

The SBC runs can stomp some Azz all buy itself. The Buick does need a power adder to be competitive. Add a Turbo, Supercharger or Nitrous to a SBC and its tough one to overcome.

One advantage of the 3.8 is the higher rear gearing helps streetability.

The SBC has a great Rep, but that Little Six strikes fear in most!
 
sbc

I'm a hardcore buick fan, but i would have to say the ubiquitous sbc, for the simple fact that they are so mainstream, not a niche engine. A friend of mine was builiding a smallblock at the same I was building the buick, and stuff was more available and generally cheaper. I guess that would really depend on the builder and type of build.
 
Hmmm....

I don't know the answer to this debate, but I do know this much: it's amazing to go to a buick meet (Like the Vegas meet I have to miss this weekend:() and watch a bunch of "run-of-the-mill" grandma cars run 11's & 12's effortlessly...meanwhile, most of the noisy V8's (and I LOVE noisy V8's!) that obviously have lotsa bucks in them, go tear-assing down the track and barely run 13's!?

With $2000- to spend on either engine, I can *almost* guarantee the buick can be made to make substantially more power than a smallblock...

(almost!) ;)
 
SBC , I just dropped $4,000 in my buick on short block and turbo. That smame amount could build 2 sbc, debending on what you were doing of course.
 
Into the 10 sec range, turbo6 hands down. Even when I had a stock motor with boltons on my hotair, noone believed I didn't have a fully built bottom end with good heads, etc. I would venture to say there's no SBC powered production car that will hit 11s as cheap as the turbo 6. I remember back in the days of the 5.0 and LT1 cars how much it took to get them to run like a TB with $500 into it. Once you need to upgrade to stageII specs, I would say the SBC is cheaper. I watched my dad do the stageII buildup and the parts for the longblock were about double the price as the equivillent SBC parts. Just so many more Chevy parts out there and they're still in production.
 
I think when people think about a SBC, they are thinking and open engine bay without all the electronics. Begin with a car that is not set up for anything, and the carb'd SBC is MUCH cheaper than a EFI turbocharged V6. No comparison. But we have 2/3 of what is necessary from the factory so it is an unfair advantage when talking w/ a traditional gear head. Apples and oranges, IMO.
 
I'll go with a mixed opinion. Bottom end wise the buick is a clear winner into the 11s, hands down. Stock short blocks have proven to take insane abuse. For instance, look at the rod on a Buick and a SBC rod. The point the buick starts costing you money is when you get into the idea of block girdles and billet caps. To a large degree this means that instead of spending money on a high bucks rotating assembly you're putting it into getting the block stiffer so it won't twist.

The valvetrain parts definitely go to the SBC. Buick rockers, shafts etc. tend to be a niche market and things are harder to get and more expensive. The minute you utter "roller cam" on a Buick you're talking $1200 if you want it to last at all. The other thing is that even though people don't end up with things like headers, inakes carbs etc. the cost is offset with a bigger turbo, etc.

Labor wise, I'd go with SBC hands down too. I'd bet there's a max of one person and/or shop to 30 in a Buick:SBC expertise ratio if that.

The still in production point is a good one too. As far as it goes, JY wise it's a trade off and dependant on your yard but here's my thought; To a typical rodder a 350 is a desireable engine, they get snatched up in a hurry. A 3.8 Buick is just not desiarble to the aggreate hot rodder population. This means you can have a pick and choose of a 3.8L block. The fact that heads are avalible easily and cheaply allows a person who's unfamiliar with it to attempt home porting a lot easier too; Which are you gonna be comfortable porting, a set of Brodix heads or a set you can pull offa a JY car for a Ben Franklin? What about the fact you can pull things like massive intercoolers off of diesels and fit em to the Buick for massive power gains.

The buick is a clear winner in another and often overlooked category of engine building; Electronics. Don't get me wrong, Carbs are fine and everything people have gone insanely quick with them. It's just that quite frankly, a stock Buick 1227148 box will tell you more about your engine then the carb EVER will. I've never seen a carb that would pull timing if you were knocking, nor adjust for temperatures or atmosphereic conditions, nor meter fuel as preciesly as a well tuned SFI system. The fact that you have the ability to tell when you're engine's being assaulted means you can beat on it without crushing it, as well as getting a lot more feedback to tune it. a $250 datamaster or a laptop+WinALDL+>$15 home built cable does what you'd need a fortune in Autometer stuff to do on a carb'd SBC and it still would only be close.

I guess my conclusion to this term paper (AKA rant) is *drumroll* that the buick would be the winner dollar for dollar, deep into the 11s. The buick is a far better street car, for a multitude of reasons. The aforementioned 3.42 rear end gear is a biggie. The fact that Alky injection is so practical and does so much on a Buick engine also speaks greatly, not to mention where people have gone on the stock turbo, headers heads cam and so on.
 
sixgun86gn (Patrick Smith) has got a mid 10 second motor in his gn right now. Pulled it off the trailer saturday, ran a 6.88 in the 1/8th without even trying, thats about 10.6 in the 1/4th. He's got around 3500 into the motor. How many sbc's can do that with or without a power adder? you put a power adder on an sbc and dont strengthen the bottom end then its gonna grenade a lot sooner than a buick motor!
 
Well, this depends on how you want to address the question....

If you are starting with a stock vehicle, the LC2 will do well as far as bang for a buck. But if you are starting with an empty engine stand, and have to build your motor ground up, I think you'll get a built SBC and a spare for the cost of building an LC2.

Just my $.02 :)
 
Depends on how fast you want to go. On the slow end < 13 seconds the SBC wins. You can build one for $500. Once you start getting into the 12s, 11s, and high 10s I think the buick motor wins. A buddy of mine just dropped about $7k into a sbc motor including heads and is running 115 mph in the 1/4 not tuned the best on race gas (12:1) compression. My brother's 35k mile stock longblock with a te 60 and alky puts 2-3 carlengths on him on the street.

Once you get down into the low 10s or faster I think the sbc is going to take back over.
 
Everyone that said Buick v6 needs to lay down the pipe;)

For $3k you could build a nasty n20 SBC.I know my T Type with a SBC was/is faster than my bolt on GN.ALOT faster and thats w/o n2o.
 
Originally posted by broke1
Everyone that said Buick v6 needs to lay down the pipe;)

For $3k you could build a nasty n20 SBC.I know my T Type with a SBC was/is faster than my bolt on GN.ALOT faster and thats w/o n2o.

well no offense but you can add nitrous safely to a GN as well with the right tune, and run faster or as fast as the SBC you built. If we are talking about two similar regals one with a stock lc2 and the other with a GM parts 300 hp SB, the LC2 wins hands down in cost and simplicity (at least to most of us , no going under the valve covers) Heads/ cam/ intake/ carb, to put a full weight regal with the same gears into the mid 12s (depends on what equipment) but for the same money you can upgrade the fuel system, exhaust, turbo intercooler and some tuning your in the mid 11s. But if this is starting from scratch dropping a motor into something it wasn't in in the first place, then the SBC wins on all counts
 
Originally posted by cool 84
Into the 10 sec range, turbo6 hands down. Even when I had a stock motor with boltons on my hotair, noone believed I didn't have a fully built bottom end with good heads, etc. I would venture to say there's no SBC powered production car that will hit 11s as cheap as the turbo 6. I remember back in the days of the 5.0 and LT1 cars how much it took to get them to run like a TB with $500 into it. Once you need to upgrade to stageII specs, I would say the SBC is cheaper. I watched my dad do the stageII buildup and the parts for the longblock were about double the price as the equivillent SBC parts. Just so many more Chevy parts out there and they're still in production.

Ever see a nitrous'd LS1? Many go 11's with just spray, and some go 10's with bolt ons and spray.
 
It's funny how some of you guys turn a simple question into something complex.
The buick is stronger than the chevy, thats why the 4.3 turbo guys drop cranks.
I think this question gets brought up when you are looking for more than 700 HP.
At that point a turbo SBC will be cheaper to build and make more HP. (more CI = more HP)
 
Originally posted by Turbo-Archie
It's funny how some of you guys turn a simple question into something complex.
The buick is stronger than the chevy, thats why the 4.3 turbo guys drop cranks.
I think this question gets brought up when you are looking for more than 700 HP.
At that point a turbo SBC will be cheaper to build and make more HP. (more CI = more HP)

Did you just seriously imply that a buick V6 stock block is stronger than a sbc? Not a 4.3 V6, a sbc is V8 block.
 
Yes, by design, a buick is stronger than a chevy. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong but, if you look at the centerline of a buick crank compaired to a chevy, it's even with the pan rail (half the crank is in the block, half is in the pan). A chevy crank centerline is much lower. It's more like 1/4 in the block and 3/4's in the pan.
The 4.3 is the same block as a 350. From what I understand, the 4.3 turbo guys can't even think about making more HP with out upgrading to a bowtie block or they will start to drop cranks, where as a stock turbo 3.8 can make well over 500 HP.
Now when you talk about chevy v8's, you have the same problem as the 4.3 but you don't need to make as much power/ CI. A stock 3.8 can handle close to 2.4 HP / CI which is about 555 HP. A stock 350 can not handle 2.4 HP/CI which would be 840 HP. So yes a stock little buick v6 is stronger than a stock SBC.
Now, no one in there right mind would pull their turbo V6 out in faver of a SBC unless they are looking for more than 700ish HP. At that point, you need to get bowtie blocks, cranks, rods, ect.. and there is nothing you could build cheaper than a chevy.
I wonder how much HP a stockish 455 would make with a turbo?
 
Originally posted by turbosam6
Ever see a nitrous'd LS1? Many go 11's with just spray, and some go 10's with bolt ons and spray.

Yeah ls1s are nasty and is a small block chevy, but i think the main focus was about your basic gen 1 chevy small block that parts are dirt cheap and everywhere
 
As with all engines, it has more to do with the builder and the tune, many guys are flying on very cheap small blocks, and many guys are going very slow on blown big blocks. My buddy just built a brick sh!thouse of a small block for about $2200 including machine work. If you stuck a turbo (or spray) on it, it would make 700 horse very easy, and take it. It can spin to 8500, but he doesn't. You cannot build even a stock block buick with the same type internals for that price. The crank alone is very expensive. He got a forged crank, h beam rods, forged pistons, sfi balancer and flexplate, blah blah blah, and had the nerve to complain about spending just over $2000. Wussy. The main difference I noticed was he made one call to summit and all the parts were there in 3 days. That will never happen with a buick.

But, theres something to be said about still blowing his doors off with my 6 cylinder........:D
 
Please!

Put the pipes down for real. Are some of you forgetting that Chevy produced factory engines that came with steel cranks and 4 bolt main blocks? These stock bottom end parts make Buick parts look like sh!t. I like GN's and I am currently building a GN engine. While they can hold up to impressive power, they will most certainly not take the abuse of a stock 4 bolt block and a stock steel crank. Even with their joke a$$ rolled fillets. Guys some of you need to be engine builders before you speak. While everyone has a right to their opinion, some of these just make you look very ignorant. Also whoever said that stock Buick rods and cranks will make 2.4 hp per cubic inch is not smoking crack, but crack laced with meth. Unless your talking about at the crank. No way at the wheels without stepping up to stage II and having it stay together. Maybe one season tops, then they will be replacing the crank. I have afriend who has replaced 2 stock cranks due to cracking, and he is running 6.40's and 50's in the 1/8th in an all out back halfed race car. I have seen stock 2 bolt, cast piston, 350's hold up to constant abuse with a 200 shot of nitrous. I have seen LT-1 Camaros with nitrous run 11's. Now unless your considering the price of the cars. You will not get a GN into the 11's for the cost o a $450 nitrous kit.
 
Top