Cutlass88er Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 Hi, after a really long hiatus I'm back. After a year of no car, decent car, no car and shitty F.O.R.D car, I want my W back. I had had three questions about what should be my next W. 1)Are there any perticular trannies or engines I should stay away from, or any trim models that I should not get? I'm pretty familiar with the CS trim levels and such but I'm a dunce when it comes to the other Ws. 2)I heard about the Quad 4s probs and I see plenty of old Cieras/Grand Ams to back up those probs, but is a Quad 4 really that bad? 3)My dream cars are 92+CS 2dr(aqua), bright white/red Lumina Euro/Z34 or 93+ GP 4dr(blue/green). Any problems with sunburn(peeling paint) on these cars? My CS ended up looking like it had never been painted to begin with. I'm just so excited to be able to have a real car again. This time I won't take it for granted like I did with my CS. -D
5speedz34 Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 Most W's will have the same problem as the other, and the newer ones don't have the peeling paint problem. Nice sig
Prospeeder Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 go for the Grand Prix or Cutlass, w/ the 3100, they are the least problem matic, of course w/ the Auto, and 2 door if u want, trim lvl doesnt matter, what ever u want, just stay away from teh 3.1 Turbo and 3.4 DOHC, they are the most troublesome, and 3.1 and 2.8 MPFI arnt that great either, hope that helps
digitaloutsider Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 Yeah because the 3.1 V is just FULL of problems. What the fuck are you talking about? The 3.4 is fine if you don't mind doing maitenance yourself.
Prospeeder Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 all iv heard is 3.4 having problem after problem, people swapping in 3400 because the 3.4 has so many problems, and all u people talk abut 3.4s being unreliable, thats "What the fuck im talking about"
Guest TurboSedan Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 hell i'd trust a 2.8/3.1 MPFI (and the LG5 for that matter) over a 3x00 in terms of reliability. i'm not talking shit about the 3x00s, just saying the GEN-2 660 is a very dependable motor.
Prospeeder Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 oh is it? i was just saying as how they might be the same, just 3100 has more power, and probably easier to work with, and are probably the same in terms of reliablility
GTPrix Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 I didn't know the 3.1 couild have problems other than maybe a bad o-ring... Seriously, the 3.1 might be the most dependable motor from a w-body. Drew
Prospeeder Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 hmm, gosh, why is the freaking 3.1 Turbo so bad, uhhg
Justin Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 Seriously, the 3.1 might be the most dependable motor from a w-body. I'd go 2.8. Same size, less cubes, less power, longer life. Sure, the differences are negligable, but don't leave the original out. As for the 2.8 and 3.1 vs the 3100, I'd say there is quite a difference in reliability. Lots of knocking 3100s out there, and lots of intake gasket problems too. It all really depends on what years you're looking for I guess, they're all pretty good motors.
5speedz34 Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 hmm, gosh, why is the freaking 3.1 Turbo so bad, uhhgAre you contradicting yourself? I have no idea what ur saying.
digitaloutsider Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 I'd surely like to know.. And as for the 3.4, unless you ever work on one, don't say anything about them. If you're not a complete mechanically-challenged fuckwit, you can work on 'em. Trust me.
5speedz34 Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 Also- were not all swapping in 3400's.
bluegp Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 I own a 3.1 & a 3100. I prefer the 3.1 - my '89 feels like it is a lot faster than my '96 (both stock). The '96 also makes a much worse lifter/piston slap noise (the noise most of them make) than the higher mileage '89. As for reliability, I don't think I've ever heard any proof that one was better than the other. I've also owned a '92 Quad 4. I babied it and the head gasket blew (70K miles) just like every other Quad does eventually. I don't believe any of the auto transmissions are very dependable above 100K miles. My '89 OD tranny went at around 120K miles & my '96 tranny's 1-2 shift doesn't feel too good at times. Hopefully, I can get rid of it before it goes too. As for peeling paint, my white '96 has an all primer roof & various other spots of missing paint. The primer on the roof dissolves a little each time it rains on it.
bluegp Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 Lots of knocking 3100s out there, and lots of intake gasket problems too. Yea I have one. I forgot all about the gasket problem. My wifes '01 Venture 3400 also had that problem.
TeeJay3800 Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 I own a 3.1 & a 3100. I prefer the 3.1 - my '89 feels like it is a lot faster than my '96 (both stock). The '96 also makes a much worse lifter/piston slap noise (the noise most of them make) than the higher mileage '89. My 3.1 feels stronger than the 3100 in my mom's '96 Lumina by a LONG SHOT. To cutlass88er, any of the pushrod 60 V6's are very reliable and should serve you well.
5speedz34 Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 I own a 3.1 & a 3100. I prefer the 3.1 - my '89 feels like it is a lot faster than my '96 (both stock). The '96 also makes a much worse lifter/piston slap noise (the noise most of them make) than the higher mileage '89. My 3.1 feels stronger than the 3100 in my mom's '96 Lumina by a LONG SHOT. To cutlass88er, any of the pushrod 60 V6's are very reliable and should serve you well. ^Best way to say it. OAN-Maybe your the 3100's feel slow because the newer cars are heavier?
Prospeeder Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 uhhg, u all get butt hurt cause some1 says shit about ur motor, im not talking about maintence on a 3.4, im talinmg reliablity, all i hear on here is booo hoo my 3.4 DOHC is broke down, not many people even do there own maintence, half u freakin people dont even change ur own oil
5speedz34 Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 I've never had a problem with my 3.4, but I keep up on my maintence. I would say most of us change our own oil. BTW- Please learn how to spell.
GP1138 Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 I own a 3.1 & a 3100. I prefer the 3.1 - my '89 feels like it is a lot faster than my '96 (both stock). The '96 also makes a much worse lifter/piston slap noise (the noise most of them make) than the higher mileage '89. My 3.1 feels stronger than the 3100 in my mom's '96 Lumina by a LONG SHOT. To cutlass88er, any of the pushrod 60 V6's are very reliable and should serve you well. :? :? :? My old Lumina felt much slower than the 3100 that is in my car now. Maybe I just haven't driven a properly tuned one, but I'd be pressed to say that the factory specs (140hp 3.1 vs. 160hp 3100) might help your decision. Oh yeah, Prospeeder, learn to spell and how to be more tolerant.
supreme_style21 Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 Damn I'd take the 3.1 over the 3100 any day. My '89 had SO much more spunk than my '94 and '95.. especially awesome considering the 3100's had around 90k whereas the '89 was pushing 200k. My '94 3100 had such horrid piston slap. The new '95 hasn't shown any signs of it.. yet. Whoops I just jinxed it.
GnatGoSplat Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 I would avoid 94 Cutlasses. The build quality of our 94 is so much worse than any W-body I've ever seen. Ugly welds, switch holes the wrong size, screw holes shifted a bit so parts don't fit right, wire harnesses with no slack, weatherstripping that wouldn't fit right because of a little tumor on some metal that I had to grind off... the car must have been built on a Monday or Friday.
White93z34 Posted February 15, 2005 Report Posted February 15, 2005 i'd stay away from any car with OBD 1.5, i like stuff to be standarised. so what is it 94-95 cars? anyhow any pushrod 60* will serve you well as well as the 3.4 is a great engine and mine is super relyable. but to keep a 3.4 cost effective you have to be willing to do things like timing belt and alternator changes yourself. if you get a 3100/3400 be sure the intake gaskets are changed and you should be good to go. if i were you i'd chase after your dream cutlass.
Recommended Posts