Looking To Buy 1994 Cutlass 3.4L
Nick, you may be in luck here. Check out E Bay Auction 305764313454. It's a base model with the cloth interior, but you can always have it re-upholstered to graphite. It is in Mullins, SC which is on the other side of the state from where I am, but if this is a car you may want, let me know I can possibly go look at it, and, if you buy it I may even be able to bring it up to you, I have both an open and an enclosed trailer. Granted this car has the 3.1, IMHO I'd almost rather have that motor, it's less of a pain in the A** like the 3.4 is.
Here is a long but has great insight about the engine. Not a 442.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lc3wJMqjH9Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lc3wJMqjH9Y
I guess the Taurus SHO was on the scene, and they were really cool too, but they seemed like unobtanium. Still to this day I haven't seen one going down the road.
Last edited by ourkid2000; Sep 26, 2024 at 08:22 AM.
I thought those cars with that V6 were so cool back then. They seemed to be just about the first domestic 200+ horsepower V6's that came on the scene. If you wanted 200 hp back then, you only had a few options like the V8 5.0 Mustangs, 5.7L Corvettes or Firebirds, or the supercharged V6 Thunderbirds. These were the first, kinda high horsepower, sleeper-family cars that became available in ages. They didn't seem to sell well though and I know mechanics hated working on them.
You are of course forgetting about the turbo buicks of the era. In stock form they are very enjoyable and economical cars to drive.
I do agree with your sentiments. GM finally had a front drive car with a pulse. The 3.4s were a cool exercise/showcase of what GM was capable of. They did suck to work on. The DOHC layout took every square inch under the hood. I vaguely remember changing the rack on a Monte Carlo and hating the job.. too bad GM didn't do more to develop the motor.
You are of course forgetting about the turbo buicks of the era. In stock form they are very enjoyable and economical cars to drive.
I do agree with your sentiments. GM finally had a front drive car with a pulse. The 3.4s were a cool exercise/showcase of what GM was capable of. They did suck to work on. The DOHC layout took every square inch under the hood. I vaguely remember changing the rack on a Monte Carlo and hating the job.. too bad GM didn't do more to develop the motor.
I do agree with your sentiments. GM finally had a front drive car with a pulse. The 3.4s were a cool exercise/showcase of what GM was capable of. They did suck to work on. The DOHC layout took every square inch under the hood. I vaguely remember changing the rack on a Monte Carlo and hating the job.. too bad GM didn't do more to develop the motor.
Last edited by ourkid2000; Sep 26, 2024 at 08:55 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Sicklyscott
General Discussion
0
Jun 10, 2019 07:34 AM
sx455raidercelticfan
General Discussion
0
Dec 11, 2010 09:41 PM



