8.8 0-60? This one must have been a press car that already had a leaky head gasket!! Even the heavier International model shown here should be well below 8 and the lighter 442 could do it in 7 sec flat if it was running right! 23mpg is about accurate tho haha.
the I-series was a 15 second flat car in the 1/4 mile, along with the GTZ. those were the heaviest cars you could get a HO Quad4 in besides the one year only cutlass supreme i-series. it was more of a touring car anyways. the Quad442 and GA GT were high 14 second cars if you could drive at all, and the 91 W41 calais was a mid 14 second car. the tester in the video is an idiot. you can clearly see him ROASTING the tires completely through first gear, lol.
Had a 90 4 door International series Quad 4 HO 5 SPEED. Had AC, but manual windows and locks. That car was quick. With a K&N filter, Hypertext chip, and Thrush mufflers, it would outrun and Iroc on the highway. Surprised a lot of Cameros and Mustangs back then. Really loved that car.
Nice! Right out of high school in ‘89 I was selling new Oldsmobiles..I remember when the first Quad 442 was brought by our dealership by the Oldsmobile rep. She let us take it out and we thrashed it hard..at first I thought it was a joke, being labeled a ‘442’ but honestly it was a very fun car to drive. I seem to remember the 0-60 time being 7.5 seconds..hearing those prices again and remembering those cars...man what a deal.
I won an Olds dealer sponsored autocross in 1990. The prize was this car for some period of time, a week maybe two. I remember how cool I thought i was driving this exotic quad 4.
@@forterierocks I'm actually complaining about the Z24 video because I have one 94 3.1. Almost same performance as the Beretta but cheaper quality hahaha. Hope to see the Cavy on Motorweek one day
I had a 1989 Pontiac Grand Am with the quad four, basically the same car. Thing was falling apart by 1999 and was mechanically totalled by 45,000 miles. It was beyond terrible.
Same as others...had the Grand Am version...paint peeled and rusted completely out. One of the last GM vehicles before switching to Toyota. I didn't leave them...they left me.
My Mom had an 89 Calais (4 door) with the Quad 4. It went like a scalded cat when it wasn't in the shop. Unfortunately it spent alot of time in the shop...
I had one of those, they are quicker then 8.8s 0-60 that is show in this review. They can Run in the 7.1 to 7.5s 0-60 and High 15 sec Quarter mile Stock.. Lol
I loved my Grand Am Quad 4 but man it was a turd with eating headgaskets at the rate of 4 per 100,000 miles, electrical gremlins and the manual transmission exploded which lead to its final death
@@chadharmon5716 My parents bought a 1989 brand new and gave it to me in 1999. Absolute POS, totally fell apart. Died at 45,000 miles and we junked it.
My 93 grand am quad 4 is what made me a believer in duralube. Blew the head gasket. Pouring white smoke. Continued to stupidly drive it 20 miles home. (I was a dumb teen) It made it the whole way without locking up. No power but it still started and ran.
I remember these cars quite well, thought this and it's cousin the Beretta GTZ exteriors looked good, and still do today. I also remember the terrible and typical GM build quality of these cars and the dubious reliability of the HO Quad 4 when it came to blowing head gaskets.
@@Jackmerius_Tacktheretrix It's a twin to the Beretta/Corsica and the Grand Am, as well as the Skylark. They're all N-body cars. They're all mostly rusted and gone by now. Good luck finding a Turbo Grand Am or a Quad 4-powered Skylark or Cutlass Calais.
@@jessebrook1688 incorrect, the Beretta/ Corsica were the L body cars, the Buick Skylark, Buick Somerset, Chevrolet Malibu/Classic, Oldsmobile Achieva, Oldsmobile Alero, Oldsmobile Calais/Cutlass Calais, Oldsmobile Cutlass, Pontiac Grand Am were the N body cars. One of my friends had a quad 4 grand am and that thing was quick (for its time). We had a blast in that thing.
@@Jackmerius_Tacktheretrix well to be fair the L body was based on the N body. But yeah they had different GM engineering project codes Love the Key & Peele reference
@@matthewbowen5841 thanks. I loved that skit. We had a snack macbine that had a habit of taking your money, so we had a list of who the machine pwed and how much. We put some of those names on that list 😆.
Bought one Brand New, 5 sets Head Gaskets in 98,000 miles. Compared to most 1980's cars my Cutlass Calais doing 0-60 in 7 seconds felt like one fastest on the road. Though 6yrs earlier I had a Chevette, 0-60 in 18seconds
Yeah mine did 60 mph in 7 sec also. It was absolutely fast. Like a mustang GT. I raced those all the time. They were barely ahead. Like a half a car length. The test driver in the video spun the tires like an idiot. You don't measure acceleration times while spinning the tires.
Terrible engine. Terrible brakes, so so electrical system. I should know, as I certainly worked on enough of them in the late 90s, early 00s. GM couldn't keep cylinder heads in stock back then. This is 1 of the few engines even Jasper wouldn't touch to remann.
youre definitely thinking of the SOHC Quad4. GM had a rash of head gasket problems initially due to giving victor-reinz bad design parameters about the gasket. gm revised the torque and that mostly fixed it. alternatively, using a fel-pro gasket eliminated the issue entirely.
I was still 5 years from driving when this came out and I really wanted one. As far as my friends and I were concerned, a front wheel drive 442 was going to be the closest thing to a "muscle car" that we'd ever see again. I would have laughed at anyone who said that large V8 muscle cars would return in the 2000's. By the way, the top of the line International should should have been the 442 with the lower model being a GT.
The Mustang, Trans Am, and Camaro was still in production. I wouldn't have thought near 800hp was possible. Now the reliable 6-10 speed transmissions and advances in EFI has been what transformed performance figures.
I have had three of the 204 made over the years. 100% my favorite driving Oldsmobile. So sad that hardly anyone can experience how special the W-41's were.
I had the 95 Grand Am GT Quad 4 5 spd. It was actually a pretty decent car for its time and especially when it stickered for $13.1k and I paid $12.k even including taxes etc.. Mine never suffered the well known head gasket issue but I only had it for 4 yrs when I traded it in for the 99 Trans Am.
Leased a 1997 Grand Am GT 3.1 liter, Sticker was $19,700! Dad worked GM, so no down payment, $187 a month for 4yrs. At end of lease they wanted $12K for this 4yr old car with 50K miles on it, NOPE! Before this I had a new 1989 Calais SL Coupe Quad 4, paid $12500 for that one. Both about same pickup and gas mileage but Calais went threw 5 Quad4 head gaskets in 98K miles.With 100K warranty running out I sold it after that last set was replaced
To be fair, it seems like the Quad 4 CAN be reliable but only if you NEVER ring it out and granny it 100% of the time(Which defeats the purpose of having a QUAD4 a little bit). You also need a little luck that GM Quality Control actually did their jobs... These head gaskets just can't handle the revs, it all depends on how you maintain it and drive it. These engines just burn out too quickly.
I had this same exact car, handed do to me from my mother who brought brand new off the lot. Except mine was white. And it went through head gaskets like crazy.
"Not your father's Oldsmobile..." Ain't that the truth. My dad had a 67 Toronado. Between that and this red box, guess which I would rather have had...
Those gm N body cars were nice looking and sold well. If you wanted good low speed acceleration and quiet hwy cruising, you were better off buying the 3.3 ltr V6. The Pontiac Grand Am was not available with a V6 after 1987 though.
Owned a '91. Great car, only problem I had was after 100,000 miles the roller for the drivers side window failed, then after having it fixed it was still wonky. Traded it in at 150,000 miles. It got 32 mpg interstate speed (@70 mph)
Had an '88 for 5 years. Went through 4 head gaskets. Surprisingly quick but loud acceleration. Got 30+ mpg when I had highway miles. Decent ride though. Leaky sunroof always... then at 80k other GM quality started to show: speedometer would stick (flick with finger would fix), windows broke, every part of the car started to rattle like it was possessed, trunk latch broke, etc. Traded in at 110k got hit on trade because (you guessed it) cracked head gasket found at inspection.
Ridiculous that they didn’t farm out a large capacity four cylinder family’s development to Opel. Even more inexcusable that they didn’t use an Opel or Isuzu engine in the Saturns.
Pretty decent looking car for the brand. Akin to the Buick Regal GS (Opel Insignia GSi) before they killed it off in North America. Very sporty, great looking cars incongruent with their brand.
Most GM N, L and J bodies turned to dust decades ago. The quad 4 was impressive for the time, but GM engine technology wasn't up to the task of a performance N/A 4 banger. They ate head gaskets for breakfast, coil towers failed constantly, water pumps were trash and a royal pain to replace, they leaked oil from everywhere and the timing components were sketchy at best. All of the H.O. quads had 11:1 compression and very aggressive cam profiles. This meant lots of heat on an engine with no oil cooler. Plus, no American in this time period was putting in the required 91 octane fuel.
This is one of my favorite cars of all time. Simple, practical, easy to work on, fast, fun, and cheap. Most modern cars cant even touch this thing, or its faster Quad 442 counterpart. This was made when cars were meant to be admired and enjoyed.
Those were very good specs for a 1990 s car! Your grandfather's Oldsmobile it isn't. Dang! I still drive a 2002 GM product with a 2.2l 135 HP 4 banger car because I'm a cheap bastard and rather invest $$$. I admit, his one looked more fun to drive. Even though it was 12 years older than my 2002 GM conveyance.
Funny to watch oldsmobile, building cars their base didn't want. The achieva was one of their best-looking cars, for someone the age of 28. Aunts etc. wanted an 88 or 98.
Lots of comments about "gm junk" the reality is that the Quad 4 was the bain of the N bodies and the reason alot of these cars rarely made it to 100k. I had a Grand Am that went almost 200k before I sold it (in great running condition) with the Buick 3.0 and my mom had a Grand Am that went to 270k with the Iron Duke before the transmission started slipping. Again in running condition when sold.The reason these cars are all long gone is because WE DROVE THEM and got every pennys worth out of them
@@jkeelsnc they made the same or more power than the rivals and got the same or better mpg. real car guys generally dont give a rats ass about ReFinEmEnT as thats just ignorant salesman speak to lure in morons.
Who remembers those old GM RPM gauges that wouldn't drop to 0 once you turn the car off? Remember it used to happen in early Cavaliers/Sunbirds as well lol
I disagree, heavily. This was, and still is, without a doubt, one of the single most aggressive sounding and performing 4 cylinders to ever exist. And its the only one ive ever driven that makes my heart race
Oldsmobile should've fired their advertising and marketing division at this time. They were blatantly insulting their core consumers while trying to do the job Pontiac had covered. Insulting your key demographic is the best way to put yourself out of business, which is what Oldsmobile eventually did. Also, this cheaply made cardboard box of a car looks almost identical to the overpriced Cadillac Seville and Oldsmobile Toronado of the day.
All that noise for a near 9 second time. My favorite part was when you couldn't even hear John over the noise that POS makes. And before you say something, my parents were unfortunate enough to own an early Quad 4 in a Calais. You should have heard the thing on morning start ups. I remember because it used to wake me up in the mornings for school. Thing went back multiple times for quiet recalls to get it right. Never was.
@@moejr1974 Yeah the HO Quad4's were definitely much quicker than 8.8 0-60. They had little refinement, but the damn things were borderline fast when they ran right.
@@jkeelsncCadillac northstar came out around the same time promising 100,000 mile lifespan...is it wrong think to expect another gm product will last longer than 3yr or 36,000?
Had a '92 Regal years ago, had no idea they were an early "auto" seatbelt design. I just thought it was GM making use of space having it attached to the front doors. Always unlatched them when getting out.
@@buickboy92 They didn't even improve safety - in fact, they were more dangerous in a crash, because if the impact busted the door open, then there went the only thing keeping you from being ejected.
I had one of these in the early 2000s in my early 20s . Was a cool car or at least I thought it was . Fun to drive and ripped off the motor mounts a couple times lol . At the time spare parts where virtually obsolete and had to let her go.
Cara esse carro tá um arraso sensacional que tempo desse automotivo retrô na década de 90 🎤🎤 imagina se anos 90 2000 fazer carro como esse sensacional 👍😁🦈🦈
replaced a lot of head gaskets on these. Never saw a turbo quad. i never understood why it wasnt offered as a engine option on/in the camaro. sure wooda ben easier to set the timing in a camaro. those calais engine areas were tight on the right side. i still wanna put one in my bmw
