1993 Oldsmobile Cutlass Reviews - Page 2 of 7

1993 Oldsmobile Cutlass from North America

Model year1993
Year of manufacture1992
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission Automatic
Performance marks 2 / 10
Reliability marks 0 / 10
Comfort marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 1 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
2.0 / 10
Distance when acquired270000 kilometres
Most recent distance300000 kilometres
Previous carNone None

Summary:

Not worth it, unless you got it brand new

Faults:

Let's see, I have had to have the brakes, muffler, transmission, and the fuel pump fixed. The motor head cracked on me; (which made me have to get another car). So in the long run I had the car for about 7 months and I probably put about 3,000 dollars worth of work into it for nothing.

General Comments:

It was running well, for a while, and it was pretty comfortable, but with so many problems with the car it just was one big head ache.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 8th December, 2005

1993 Oldsmobile Cutlass SL 3.1L from North America

Model year1993
Year of manufacture1993
First year of ownership2000
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 3.1L Automatic
Performance marks 6 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.0 / 10
Distance when acquired130000 miles
Most recent distance300510 miles
Previous carPontiac Grand Am

Summary:

Best car I have ever owned!

Faults:

Replaced starter.

Replaced rear brake calipers.

Replaced gas tank.

Carbon builds up in intake manifold.

Parasitic draw, kills battery in 3 days.

General Comments:

This is the most reliable car I have ever owned.

Change the oil every 5000 miles, only burns 1/4 quart every change.

I use it for towing 2 jet skis without a problem.

Handling with Potenza tires is great.

Radio is hard to reach from drivers seat.

Decent gas mileage for a 6 cylinder, 30 mpg freeway.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 13th August, 2005

30th Oct 2006, 19:47

That 3.1L V6 just won't die those engine last for ever. That is if you take care of them.

1993 Oldsmobile Cutlass Convertible 3.4 DOHC from North America

Model year1993
Year of manufacture1993
First year of ownership2005
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 3.4 DOHC Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.7 / 10
Distance when acquired100000 kilometres
Most recent distance105000 kilometres
Previous carOldsmobile Cutlass

Summary:

Can't wait for sunny days, even in winter

Faults:

Difficult to close the convertible top latch.

Replaced rear speakers for improved sound.

Dome light switches do not work - probably worn out.

General Comments:

A nice, luxury and sporty convertible for any age or gender (except those who want outrageous speed and drifting)

Leather bucket seats in front AND rear treats all passengers with comfort and respect.

3.4 GM engine is very smooth and adequately powerful.

Steering wheel controls are great.

Dash lights could be brighter.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 24th February, 2005

1993 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme Convertible 3.4L 24-valve V6 from North America

Model year1993
Year of manufacture1993
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 3.4L 24-valve V6 Automatic
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Dealer Service marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.8 / 10
Distance when acquired123000 miles
Most recent distance126000 miles
Previous carBuick Park Avenue

Summary:

This convertible is the best deal ever!

Faults:

This car has not had many things wrong with it. I have had to replace the battery, sway bar's, CV ball joints, and the windshield washer fluid pump. This all cost around $800.

General Comments:

The 3.4l V-6 with 210 horsepower comes with adequate power, and really moves. I would seriously not recommend getting the 3.1l, because it doesn't have enough power. I love this car, and have wanted it since it came out in 1993. When I turned 16 my dream came true, and the car is better than I thought. The interior is wonderful, and has supple leather, and everything is electronic. The electric top is great, and it is fun to have it down. This car is great! I bought it for $2500, and it is all black. It is at 125k miles, and drives like it has 30k miles on it. The keyless entry comes in handy too! I've never used the key to get into it! This car is wonderful!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 12th February, 2005

19th Sep 2009, 03:25

I have a red 1993 Olds Cutlass Convertible that I bought with 24K on it in 1999. I'm never getting rid of it. I now have 267K on it! I bought the Helm manuals for it right after the purchase (Olds dealers use these for repair specific to the model) to eliminate any guess work for repairs. I am glad I have the 3.1. The power is not that bad and you better have some "powerful" money to fix the 3.4. Even the manuals say the twin cam timing set up was a nightmare, and three times as costly to fix as the 3.1.

1993 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme SL 3.1L from North America

Year of manufacture1993
First year of ownership1998
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 3.1L Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.8 / 10
Distance when acquired75000 miles
Most recent distance101000 miles

Summary:

One of GM's best cars of the 90's

Faults:

Rear struts had to be replaced.

Front and rear rotors and pads.

Rear Calipers.

Alternator.

Stock fog-lights which were terrible looking anyways.

Driver side power window motor went out.

General Comments:

This car has very good overall.

The repairs I've had to make (brakes, struts) came at about 90,000 miles and more stress was on the suspension since I lowered it 3.5", so I expected to have to replace and upgrade the struts and brakes.

It has decent pick-up, the 3.4 liter would be favorable, but the 3.1 is much better mechanically.

The interior is very comfortable. My black cloth seats are great.

The only thing that is lousy is the flat dashboard. The 95 model Cutlass got the new modern style dash, which I would pay to get on my cutlass.

The stock radio and tape player is rather far away from the driver, it's uncomfortable to reach up to.

The dual exhaust is cool-I replaced it with an aftermarket dual Tanabe exhaust, which sounds great with the 3.1L engine.

Not a ton of aftermarket support for the w-body cars, but you can find things if you know where to look. On the other side, at least not everybody modifies one of these like a Civic or an Eclipse.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 2nd August, 2004

Average review marks: 6.9 / 10, based on 30 reviews