Fiero plus Quad 4

Has any one ever swapped a Quad 4 engine into a Fiero? Is this a good idea or not?

http://www.gigaparts.com/users/fiero/

http://www.quad4forums.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?s=4c2c37de647d0ac90e4db1cfb5421ddc&f=15

I remember in I think Car Craft magazine back in the 80s someone put one in a Fiero. I would think it fairly easy to do on a 4 banger. Arent the bellhousing bolt pattens and engine mount locations the same?

A forum member (Tom) did it, and supercharged it for the 03 challenge, but had fueling problems, and blew it up. It looked like a pretty straightforward swap, as long as you have the right subframe.

Edit: Tatoodwelder was his username

GM should have done it. Last car I rented for a race weekend when trying to keep my SCCA Club Racing licence in the 90s was some SS Oldsmobile (Cutlass Calais? can't remember whether it was a B or C car) with that engine. Pulled down the straight at Robeling Road, GA pretty well. Got passed by stock Miatas in the big sweepers down there.

IMO, not putting that engine in the Fiero is what would have happened if GM hadn't put the Chevrolet V8 in the Corvette back in 1956. A big missed opportunity.

GM was planning to do it in the next generation Fiero.

But GM decided to be GM and kill off a sure thing.

Shawn

Trans_Maro wrote: GM was planning to do it in the next generation Fiero. But GM decided to be GM and kill off a sure thing. Shawn

Aw, man..that really stinks. Would that have been with the suspension improvements they'd already made for the V6 cars? The last one of those I drove (an 88 or 89 GT, IIRC) was a much better car than the early "parts bin" 84 I test drove at the dealership when they first hit the market.

yes, the Fiero was killed off just as it got it's bugs worked out and was on it's way to becomming a world class mid-engined sports car.

Yup..

I've got the HP books Fiero book.

It covers a lot of the development of the little car. It's a pretty amazing story for such a hated piece of machinery.

They were working with Porche on some turbocharged 4-bangers.

They had the SD-4 program which was making massive power for the Iron Duke engine.

They had intentionally left room in the engine bay for larger V6 engines (3.4 and eventually 4.2) which, simply by chance also left room for V8 engines.

They were planning on the Quad-4 in the redesign and a whole lot more.

And the rest is history.

Shawn

Wouldn't have been the first time GM shot themselves in the foot. They did that a lot in the late 80s.

I'm getting the impression that this wasn't only the case in the 80s...

I actually like the looks of the Fiero and am still toying with the idea of at least looking at a late GT...

That's the engine the Fiero should have had all along, much better than the boat anchor V6 that it came with in the GT and Formula. I remember some of my GM friends waiting for it to come out, and then nothing, they killed it. A shame really as the Fiero was much improved in the final Formula form.

BoxheadTim wrote: I'm getting the impression that this wasn't only the case in the 80s... I actually like the looks of the Fiero and am still toying with the idea of at least looking at a late GT...

Some people will hate me for this.. but the original Fiero reminds me a LOT of the BMW M1

I would love a 86-87 Fiero GT . . . with a 88 engine cradle

But peeps around here want WAY TOO MUCH $$$$ for them

mad_machine wrote:

BoxheadTim wrote: I'm getting the impression that this wasn't only the case in the 80s... I actually like the looks of the Fiero and am still toying with the idea of at least looking at a late GT...

Some people will hate me for this.. but the original Fiero reminds me a LOT of the BMW M1

If you take out the awesome

Very successful autocrosser George Ryan had a manapart built Q4 in his car with 240HP running AP. Car worked great.

as for the "Much" improved 88's , fastest Fiero autocrossers (in prepared classes) all run 84-87 cars with 88 rear cradle swaps.

I am going to tear into my 86 GT with a blown Northstar soon. Probably going to swap it out for something a little more mechanically friendly.. Not a autoX car, just a crusier.

J

I always like this point of reference: The highest output quad4 came out in 1991 and had a 190hp, and the M3 of the same year had about 192hp. (reference: wiki ) To bad the Olds Calais 442 was rear wheel drive and a tight platform, because that other forum topic might had been about a 57 mile Olds found in a garage...

BoxheadTim wrote: I'm getting the impression that this wasn't only the case in the 80s...

True statement; it continues to this day by consistently cancelling their best products (i.e. G8, Solstice, etc.).

Their best products are not usually their most profitable. I know I would rather sell 100,000 units at $2500 profit than 25,000 units at $1500.

John Brown wrote: Their best products are not usually their most profitable. I know I would rather sell 100,000 units at $2500 profit than 25,000 units at $1500.

QFT. I don't blame GM for cancelling the cars, I blame the American public who keeps buying boring crap.

The only fault I find with GM isn't a GM specific quality, and that's killing the cars that get too close performance-wise to their halo model. If your tweaked econobox can outperform your sportscar, it's not time to drop the econobox, it's time to rethink your sportscar.

If GM did sell the Fiero with the quad 4, we would all be complaining about that cast iron boat anchor, and how much better it would have been with the ecotec.

Can you imagine doing a water pump on a Q4 in a Fiero?

Not as bad as you might think. Imagine changing a supercharger belt on a QUAD4 Fiero.

John Brown wrote: Their best products are not usually their most profitable. I know I would rather sell 100,000 units at $2500 profit than 25,000 units at $1500.

It was outselling the Corvette.

It was cancelled due to "poor sales volume"

I bet a parts-bin car makes them more money than the specialty-part-filled 'vette.

Shawn

Trans_Maro wrote:

John Brown wrote: Their best products are not usually their most profitable. I know I would rather sell 100,000 units at $2500 profit than 25,000 units at $1500.

It was outselling the Corvette. It was cancelled due to "poor sales volume" I bet a parts-bin car makes them more money than the specialty-part-filled 'vette. Shawn

I don't disagree, but how much did they make per unit on the Vette versus the Fiero?

John Brown wrote: Their best products are not usually their most profitable. I know I would rather sell 100,000 units at $2500 profit than 25,000 units at $1500.

Sure, if it's actually a choice of one or the other. Unless the car fills the same niche though, it's a (mostly) false dichotomy.