corey27 Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 How reliable was this engine/transmission setup? I know the 5spd were RARE, but I've never heard much of the Quad 4. I'm about to purchase one, but didn't know much about them. Anyone care to advise........ Thanks, -Cor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GPRACER Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 rare as hens teeth around here would love to find one. I have never seen one in person, only pictures. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Posted February 12, 2005 Report Share Posted February 12, 2005 I've only seen one quad 4 W, it was an automatic 4 door Prix. It was in the shop, not running. I like to keep far away from the quad 4s, mainly the earlier (2.3) ones. I think GM got the bugs pretty much worked out when the 2.4 hit. If you're looking for a reliable car, I'd maybe look for a 2.8 or 3.1 car instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corey27 Posted February 13, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2005 cool....from what the seller told me, he's done these repairs so far: engine top end and timing chain overhaul. Five speed G/B overhaul for oil leak. Engine and G/B/ overhauls done before needed as precaution. Replaced: 1 rear caliper, O2 sensor, Cat. converter and muffler, water p/p, A.C.p/p, battery,steering p/p,gear change and parking brake cables,engine mounts( G.M. recall). it's got 143k..... i've never owned an american car before so i'm kind of leary about the mileage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbtk2 Posted February 13, 2005 Report Share Posted February 13, 2005 I know its not a w-body, but I have a '90 Cutlass Calais with the Quad 4 HO 5 Speed and it has 188k on it and runs VERY well. It idles smooth and pulls hard (for a 2.3L) once it hits about 4k and does so throughout the rest of the powerband. The only thing that I've heard bad about them is the headgaskets. I've not had a problem with my headgasket, but I've only had the car 4 months or so. I wouldn't worry about 143k, thats not really that bad. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White93z34 Posted February 13, 2005 Report Share Posted February 13, 2005 i like the Quad 4 myself, as others mentioned is the head gasket problems. i really like the power they have, i drove a 2.4 grand am that i put an engine in awahile back and it pulled like a mother, i loved every minute of it, so i can imainge how much more fun the HO 2.3 with a 5 speed would be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joberlee Posted February 14, 2005 Report Share Posted February 14, 2005 http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7953656110&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT Here's one for ya. It's posted in the auction watch section too. 8) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5speedz34 Posted February 14, 2005 Report Share Posted February 14, 2005 corey27, Did you find the car on autotrader? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corey27 Posted March 1, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2005 Does the 2.3 have potential for additional horsepower? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bossman429 Posted March 1, 2005 Report Share Posted March 1, 2005 Does the 2.3 have potential for additional horsepower? Very much so.... First thing I would do if I had a Quad, is get a set of W41 cams, you can get a set from http://www.mantapart.com THey also sell many other parts for the Quad, but prices are steep, I think. The W41 was the HIGHEST output Quad 4 made. It was available from 1991-1993. Oldsmobile used the cars for road racing I believe. The 93s had de-tuned cams because of a rough idle. I always get a little jumpy when I listen to Rex's Quad 4. He's on Beretta.net's board, I'm pretty sure those cams are more radical than W41's. http://www.beretta.net/behind_the_wheel/big_cam_idle.rm mmmmmmmm.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoroCorona Posted March 1, 2005 Report Share Posted March 1, 2005 The 2.3 HO is a PRIME candidate for a turbo setup. High revs + a small quick spooling turbo = Shit dawg that thing could smoke the tires faster then you could roll a flat spliff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corey27 Posted March 1, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2005 Does the 2.3 have potential for additional horsepower? Very much so.... First thing I would do if I had a Quad, is get a set of W41 cams, you can get a set from http://www.mantapart.com THey also sell many other parts for the Quad, but prices are steep, I think. The W41 was the HIGHEST output Quad 4 made. It was available from 1991-1993. Oldsmobile used the cars for road racing I believe. The 93s had de-tuned cams because of a rough idle. I always get a little jumpy when I listen to Rex's Quad 4. He's on Beretta.net's board, I'm pretty sure those cams are more radical than W41's. http://www.beretta.net/behind_the_wheel/big_cam_idle.rm mmmmmmmm.... see i'd be down w/swapping the cams, but i DON'T want that "burble" the beretta made. i'm really not into the "loud" exhaust thing. i'm more of the silent sleeper type......ya'know?!? LoL........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slick Posted March 1, 2005 Report Share Posted March 1, 2005 Don't worry about that burble sound Rex's car makes. It would be the last thing on your mind once you realize how fast his car is. BTW, you better buy that Cutlass!! I would love to own a Quad 4/ 5 speed. Those engines have a ton of potential. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5speedz34 Posted March 2, 2005 Report Share Posted March 2, 2005 Don't worry about that burble sound Rex's car makes. It would be the last thing on your mind once you realize how fast his car is. BTW, you better buy that Cutlass!! I would love to own a Quad 4/ 5 speed. Those engines have a ton of potential. I would agree, the thing is, how fast would it move in a 3500 lb W? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corey27 Posted March 2, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 2, 2005 Don't worry about that burble sound Rex's car makes. It would be the last thing on your mind once you realize how fast his car is. BTW, you better buy that Cutlass!! I would love to own a Quad 4/ 5 speed. Those engines have a ton of potential. I would agree, the thing is, how fast would it move in a 3500 lb W? that's a good question? i wonder b/c it's no LIGHT WEIGHT!!! i'd imagine 0-60 would be somewhere in the 7.0 - 8.0 sec range Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slick Posted March 2, 2005 Report Share Posted March 2, 2005 Don't worry about that burble sound Rex's car makes. It would be the last thing on your mind once you realize how fast his car is. BTW, you better buy that Cutlass!! I would love to own a Quad 4/ 5 speed. Those engines have a ton of potential. I would agree, the thing is, how fast would it move in a 3500 lb W? that's a good question? i wonder b/c it's no LIGHT WEIGHT!!! i'd imagine 0-60 would be somewhere in the 7.0 - 8.0 sec range I bet quicker than most of the 60* pushrods on this message board. They are pretty sweet engine/tranny combo's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cutlsp Posted March 3, 2005 Report Share Posted March 3, 2005 the 5spd quad4 cutlasses had the 180hp quad4 ho so it is a faster car then the 3.1 5spd cutlasses i still want one just haven't found one in the right color yet 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.