16th Feb 2009, 12:27
It's interesting that people continue to confuse the solid, reliable and well-built Quad 4 with the more trouble-prone 3.4 V-6. The Quad 4 was one of GM's best engines, putting out ample horsepower for a 4 and containing features (such as gear-driven cams) that made it far more maintenance-free than almost all other 4-cylinders. I was grieved to see this great engine replaced by the lower quality Eco-tech 4 in 2002. That was what influenced my decision to opt for a Ford Fusion instead of another GM 4-cylinder car. Our Quad 4 has been the most reliable engine we ever had.
17th May 2009, 05:40
I see no confusion here, both of those engines (Quad 4 and 3.4 V6) were some of GM's worst engines and are junk. The 3.8 and 3800 motor was always king back then. More power and better fuel economy than the smaller V6's.
17th May 2009, 12:27
Please cite reliable sources for this comment. No one I know who owns a Quad 4 has ever had problems with it. Several have over 200,000 miles and are going strong. Just what is supposed to make them "junk". Unfounded comments with no supportive data carry little weight. I'd expect that on an import site, but not on a Mustang site.
31st May 2009, 20:36
Look how many 3.8 and 3800 V6 engines are still on the road compared to the quad 4. The 3800 V6 delivered better fuel economy in full size cars than the Quad 4 could do in compacts. The Quad four was one of GM's first lame attempts to copy the Japanese and make a powerful, compact motor. And it failed miserably.
1st Jun 2009, 13:00
This is hardly "citing evidence". The 3.8 was used in virtually EVERY GM CAR, whereas the Quad 4 was used in only the Grand Am and its counterparts. Naturally there were more 3.8's. Just what was "wrong" with a maintenance-free OHC engine that pumped out 150 horsepower stock and didn't even require a TUNE-UP for 100,000 miles?? And yes, the 3.8 is a great engine and did get good mileage, but that is hardly "proof" that the Quad 4 was a bad engine.
20th Jul 2010, 11:20
What exactly is "maintenance free" about the Quad 4?
I owned a 1996 Achieva with this "maintenance free" motor. I can can vouch for that fact that from the showroom floor to 133,000 miserable miles later there was nothing maintenance free about it. And no car from GM has required a "tune-up" since the mid 1970's when high energy ignition became standard.
20th Jul 2010, 17:19
"What exactly is "maintenance free" about the Quad 4?"
To me, everything. In the 85,000 miles I drove my Quad 4 I had not one single problem of any kind, and did nothing but change oil and clean the million-mile air filter. It ran flawlessly the entire time until I sold it to a very lucky buyer. I have friends who have over 200,000 miles on these engines without a problem. Last year my neighbor was selling their daughter's beautiful Grand Am coupe. It looked like brand new inside and out, and had never had a problem the entire time she had owned it. It had 163,000 miles on it. I'd call that pretty "maintenance free".
19th Jan 2009, 11:00
To comment 22:41: You are correct. People are manipulated to feel as if their car is their image. As a mechanic and car enthusiast, I own several cars at a time. My Mustang is for my "enthusiast" image, my Fusion is for my "consumer" image (and my bad back!!) and my SUV is for my "everybody has to have one" image (well, my WIFE'S actually, I don't even LIKE SUV's!!) My Grand Am was bought for my "something to haul my dog in" image. We are all victims of the automotive media unless we make ourselves savvy about cars.
My family has owned 5-series Beemers and Mercedes C-class cars. Neither has really impressed US all that much, though the neighbors jealousy might have been a plus. A Ford Fusion is a far better, more sensible choice, provides greater reliability, has good a ride, and saves enough to allow for much more discretionary income.
I'm happy to report that 82-year-old mom was so impressed with our Fusion that she is passing up the Mercedes and going with me to look at a fully loaded Fusion SEL tomorrow. It has everything she wanted (heated seats being very important for her) and with her horsepower is a meaningless word, so the V-6 will be plenty adequate.
As for Mustang, I absolutely LOVE mine, and regard it as the very best value available in a sporty vehicle. Performance is more than adequate and the styling blows everything else in its class away. Definitely the world's best value in a sporty coupe. I do, however, wish Ford would offer a softly sprung "old people's edition" with a smoother ride.