NOT MINE, but this looks very interesting.

https://bringatrailer.com/listing/19...ile-achieva-3/

Found this via C&D. Auction ends in 2 days.

 

Believe it's an "N" body, sharing many components with the Buick Skylark and Pontiac Grand Am. Had a '93 Skylark, It had a decent IRON 90 degree V-6 but was optioned oddly. Mainly in it having power locks but manual windows. Frankly would prefer neither, but one would think having power windows would be far more appealing to the "masses" than power locks. No this is NOT that car, but one in the yard that had very similar options.

 

I drove a '92 Skylark in college for a semester. It was a two door and dumpster green. Arguably the ugliest car made in 92, but it ran good with the 3.3. It was a nice car but it needed a rack which i couldn't afford so I drove it without power steering for the last few months.

 

This car for sale is a thoroughbred. One commenter on the sale raced them when new under factory assistance, offers some interesting perspective. They won their share, amazing to see one like this still in mostly original good condition. I never knew about the larger fuel tank, but it makes sense for showroom stock homologation.

Quad 4 w/Getrag 282 5-speed. One of 1146. Price is going up, will end later today.

 

Yes sir.


Very cool find Johnny. Thank you for posting. (A fun rabbit hole to delve into.)

For those unfamiliar. This was essentially a modern 442. Quicker than any Oldsmobile from 1992 and going back 20 years from there. If you want an interesting nice performing attractive compact Olds that gets good mileage. This is it.

1973 V Code 442 4 speed m 270 HP 0-60 in 6.8 and 1/4 mile 15.4 @ 93 mph
1992 Achieva SCX 5 speed m 190 hp 0-60 in 6.7 and 1/4 mile 15.2 @ 93 mph

442 weighed 4200 lbs and averaged 10 mpg (gear 3.23) top speed 114 mph
SCX weighed 2900 lbs and averaged 20 mpg (gear 3.94) top speed 140 mph

Automobile Catalog simulation test specs.

 

Bid to $4800 w/ a little over 5 hrs to go, no reserve. Watched a U-Tube video this morning on it showing it being driven.

 

And an original actual road test thanks to John Davis, Motorweek, and the uploader of course.

 

We never knew about these when they were new. Might have bought one instead of the few years older Beretta GT which was still fun but had problems, especially the digital dash display. I called my wife over this morning and her eyes became round. WHERE IS IT? HOW MUCH? IS THAT ALL? LET'S GO LOOK. I explained it is a auction format and will go certainly higher. She's a trooper, I'm lucky to have her. 32 years.

 

That's probably not much slower than a '92 L98 Camaro/TA. I seem to remember those to be 14.90 cars. I'm sure it would keep up with a 305 car easy.

 

I've always had a soft spot for the Quad 4. My BFF had an '89 Calais w/ one (I think the 170HP) and AT. We raced (my Cutlass stock except for dual exh) multiple times up to ~80-90 MPH and we were evenly matched Whoever got the jump kept it but could not pull away from the other. A co-worker also had a '89 Calais Quad w/ 5-spd and it was pretty impressive from the passenger seat. My xMIL had a '92 Grand-Am Quad which I spent the day in driving to Cedar Point and back. Never had a lack of power under 99% of traffic conditions, whether on the freeway or on a 2-lane hwy. with multiple needs to pass. NVH?? WTF is that? Never bothered me.

 

Snag. It. For. Her.

 

Thanks and your heart is in the right place, but including organ donors and drivers this car would make 27, plus a motorcycle. I have no inside room for a great car like this car.

Was chatting with a buddy who used to race similar cars and was reminded how hard to find (at least at one time) that w41 cam cover is/was. One of these W41's locally got 'circle tracked' ugh

 

That was typical of GM in those years. They had these neat, well engineered performance cars but didn't advertise or promote them. Nothing but Corvettes and Camaros got any press or promotion.

GM management had its head so far up its own *** back then that it knew what the next day's breakfast was going to be. Competition from Asian and European products wasn't what the Corporation needed to worry about. It was their own incompetent top management.

Let's hope this little street terror finds a home with someone who knows what it is and appreciates it.

 

$6941 + 5% BaT fee.

 

yep that's what happened with the Pontiac Fiero as well. They got a V-6 and five speed into it - and then killed it a year or two later. Probably didn't advertise it very well, either.

 

Didn't the final year ('88) finally get rid of the Chevette front suspension too? If ever there was a car begging for a Quad-4 it was the Fiero. I don't think that 2.8L V6 was more than 160HP. I had 1st dibs on a co-worker's '88 GT V6/5-sp if he wanted to sell it, but when the opportunity presented itself, I had more cars than room to add another and had to pass. Another co-worker swapped in a SBC in his 2M4 and made it pretty wild. There was another around town that had a Northstar swap (it's wheelbase had to be stretched a tad). Going from U-tube vids it seems a S/C 3800 swap is also pretty popular.

 

True... too little too late. Oldsmobiles ship had sailed as far as performance relevance. Most of us stopped paying attention by then. (I have this in a write-up I've been meaning to post to my average horsepower thread).

Love it ! Lucky man.

 

Yes. Impressive isn't it. Then you realize what could have been. And it ends up being sad. John Davis mentions the importance of a performance vehicle in a lineup, to help secure the future... in that SCX test. He was well aware that Olds was dying. 0:30 to 0:45 of video I posted in post 7.

Here is another video that backs up your beliefs. Very short under 2 minutes and straight to the point. Real "stock" cars from back then. Not the double the factory horsepower that they refer to as stock nowadays.


Here is a recap, for those with little patience.
Camaros, number 2) is stick, 3) is auto.
1)170hp L03 TBI 5.0= 17.43 @ 77.03 mph
2)230hp LB9 5.0 TPI= 14.74 @ 95.09 mph
3)245hp L98 5.7 TPI= 14.58 @ 92.39 mph

The SCX obviously made good use of it horsepower. It's performance is right where it should be vs performance cars.

P.S. the LB9 was a wicked small block.

 

I'm surprised the 305 is only two tenths slower than the 350.

A good buddy had a grand am with the quad four back in the day. I drove a Beretta with a 3.1. We were both in our early 20s so naturally we raced everywhere we went. Those cars would run side by side unless one spun badly.

At the time I also worked part time at a machine shop while in college. The shop catered to the dealers and garages. This was back when all the makes were struggling with aluminum heads, so business was really good and we saw heads from everything. Nearly every quad four head that came in was cracked or warped so badly it wasn't useable. We joked that every four seconds somewhere a quad four just blew a head gasket or munched all the valves..