Quick question about the 2.3L Quad4

[kirrer]

-disclaimer- my first post, i tried searching and skimming topics to no avail

My mom needs to get a new car for herself, and someone local has a 1995 Grand Am with the 2.3L quad4. I know the later 2.4L engines are generally crap (unless taken good care of), are these engines the same way, or do they have a better build quality? I noticed they switch to the 2.4L engine in 1996 making this the last year they used it in GAs. I just dont want to buy her junk.

Oh, the car is a 1995 GA SE, 2.3 (obviously), 125K miles, heat and A/C, CD, power windows, power locks with remote, asking price is $1600 obo. Seems like a good price to me, the edmunds value is $2300-$2700. What do you guys think?

[urweak]

The 2.4 is a good motor. Dont let people tell you its crap, they dont know what their talking about. The 2.3 is probably less reliable then the 2.4 (but this is just b/c its an updated version) Anyways, the car might has problems with it having 125k on it but youll have to find that out for yourself. I would say go for it and see if the car is in good shape. But i guess to answer your question the 2.3 is a great motor, it got a bad rap when it first came out in the late 80s early 90s and then the SOHC motors didnt help that image. But anyways go for it.

[RomeoGAOC]

If you do end up buying it, here are a few things ALL quads will have to have done to them.
1) Something with the ignition. Either coils or coilpack;the coilpack is generally the problem.
2) Timing chain
3) Water Pump
4) Head gasket. Theres a decent chance that this will never occur, but the quad is notorious for having this problem.

Other than that, its a pretty sweet engine.

[urweak]

If you do end up buying it, here are a few things ALL quads will have to have done to them.
1) Something with the ignition. Either coils or coilpack;the coilpack is generally the problem.
True ive replaced two so far

2) Timing chain
maybe

3) Water Pump
maybe, the only big problem with the WP is getting to it if it goes.

4) Head gasket. Theres a decent chance that this will never occur, but the quad is notorious for having this problem.
This is a problem that plaged the SOHC motors and the earlier motors, a 95 shouldnt have this problem.

Other than that, its a pretty sweet engine.

[Brad97GS]

In 4.5 years of ownership (the old '89 GA), I never had a problem with the coils or coil housing. Also never had a problem with the timing chain (sold the car with 136k miles). I did replace the water pump, but that was because we were trying to determine if that was bad or if the head gasket was blown. It was the head gasket...

But that was early on in my ownership of the car. The next 4 years went by with no head gasket problems (then I sold the car). I think Quads are perfectly fine engines as long as they are taken care of. So the best thing to do is to see how well it was maintained. :)

[Matt95GT]

The 95 Quad 4 is a transition year... it has similarities to both 2.4 (96+) and 2.3 Quad 4 (94-down)

IMO the 95 was a pretty mature Quad 4 design... and although it's performance numbers are weaker than other years I believe it is a very reliable year.

I've owned a 95 2.3 for nearly 5 years... from 43K miles and just hit 138K. Runs as good as day 1. I tore down a 95 2.3 in a junkyard with 160K+ miles... all parts showed minimal or no wear.

Going on my own personal experiences, I would place more faith in the longevity of a 95 Quad 4 than other years of 2.3 and 2.4