I have a chance to pick up for next to nothing except labor an Olds Quad 4 engine with only 31,000 miles on it.. (Honestly driven by a little old lady who serviced it per the book) This is the 180 HP model not the 150 hp. She got tail-ended and her insurance company is giving her scrap value for the car..
My thoughts are to put it in an old Chevy S10 pickup with a bum motor and A T5 transmission. I suppose I'll be forced to fabricate an adaptor plate and find a flywheel but I can't seem to find anybody with experience with the Olds Quad 4
Anybody owned one of these?
I read the head flows better than the Cosworth but don't know anything about reliability
frenchyd wrote:
...but don't know anything about reliability
Quad 4....reliability... Funny! You'd probably be better off reliability wise with your "bum" motor.
In reply to underpowered: The motor or other stuff with Oldsmoble? What parts fail? While I'm not a fan of Oldsmoble it seems like a light, powerful, fuel efficient motor. Going on carparts.com I saw a lot of really high mile cars they were selling the motors.
I know nothing about this site except it exists, might be helpful.
http://www.quad4rods.com/
In reply to frenchyd:
I've seen multiple ignition system issues, timing chain issues, head gasket issues, and most of them are noisier than a 24valve Cummins diesel.
jstand
HalfDork
10/31/15 3:40 p.m.
I did a head gasket on one that was overheated, and it wasn't too bad. There are bosses on the head that allow you to put pins in to align the cam while installing the timing chain.
The spark plug towers (under the dress up cover between the cams) were known to go bad and cause poor running.
Can't say much about long term reliability, but short term it seemed nice once I fixed the plug towers and head gasket.
Of course that was probably 15 years ago, so my memory of how it ran may be softened by the years.
sergio
Reader
10/31/15 4:38 p.m.
There are enough TSB's on these motors to make me runaway.
I just ran across this and found it interesting.
From: Will Remaklus (remaklus@vnet.IBM.COM)
There has been a lot of recent interest in the QUAD 4. Let me share my facts and impressions:
The rate of head gasket failure from 1987 to 1993 was 11%.
Anything about 4% is considered excessive.
The rate of coil pack failure, for the same time period, is approximately 40%.
Oil pressure sender failure: 15%
Check valve failure: 7%
I like to think of it as a loose Offenhauser clone that was crudely streetified. Many NVH issues, not known for a long life. Seems most people who put them in things are mainly after the look. I believe these guys are the ones to talk too about swapping them into things http://quad4rods.com/ .
There are a lot of engines I'd pick for a hot rod S10 before a Quad 4.
I remember all the talk about this engine as it was being introduced. It was supposed to be the best thing since sliced bread. Funny how sliced bread is still around. Not so much the Quad 4.
the only "neat" swap idea for a H.O. quad4 is into a Fiero. imo anyway.
In reply to Nick (Not-Stig) Comstock: Thank you I love that sort of information.. Unfortunately My experience has been with British cars.. The list of failure areas only stimulates my desire to own one.. Somehow repairing issues to make things reliable activates the ownership Portion of my Brain..
Just like a mother, defending a misbehaving child only makes you love the S.O.B. more.. Am I allowed to use such language here?
(Actually I now have one in the shop)
There was a Quad Four powered Achieva in my family that was sold with nearly 200,000 miles on the clock in good working order (except for a lot of broken interior trim). There are reliable ones out there.
Personally, I'd say stuff it in a Fiero. An Open GT might also make an interesting swap. An S10 seems a bit heavy.
The neatest thing to stuff one into would be a track nosed 27 T. The quasi-Offenhauser look seals the deal.
The Quad 4 I had was quite reliable, never gave me any issues. Maybe I was just lucky. It wasn't cause I was easy on it. It was daily driven, autoxed, and even had a couple driving experiences as well. Being that it was a 92 Achieva SCX W41, it was too much fun to not drive it like you stole it. I have thought about getting an H.O. and put it into the MGB. 
Way back when, my sister's friend got a brand new Beretta GTZ. Neat car. He never had motor problems that I know of, but the rest of the car didn't last long enough to give it a real longevity test...
The head gasketing issue was because the bolts were so short. When the head would move around with heating/cooling cycles, the bolts couldn't wander with the head, so the head gasket would fret and fail. When GM turned the Quad 4 into the Twin Cam, one of the main upgrades they did was head bolts over twice as long, threading deep down in the block instead of right up at the deck.
Timing chains seemed to be if people believed in oil changes or not. They were always noisy because GM made no effort to damp out timing chain noise.
1988RedT2 wrote: Funny how sliced bread is still around. Not so much the Quad 4.
GM makes a bazillion Ecotecs. That evolved from the original Quad 4.
the S-10 is way to heavy for the Quad 4. Try a Chevette or Vega instead.
I have a weird thing for Quad 4-powered cars. I would totally rock an Achieva SCX as a daily driver. I wouldn't put one in an S10.
In reply to Appleseed:
I'm not normally for the show crowd, but all the effort that guy spent really paid off. That timing chain cover alone is breathtaking. The cam towers look awesome uncovered in a Prewar Industrial kind of way, like a melding of Miller and aircraft engine.
That exhaust has got to sound horrible though 
Knurled, it is pretty much a guarantee that the exhaust sounds horrible. That is one bad side to a Quad 4, uncork them and you end up being lumped in with the F500 guys for horrible exhaust noises. Although I bet it does an awesome flame show.
Hater's gonna hate, just like the Ecotec thread. LOL at anybody who mentions NVH in a thread where somebody wants to do an engine swap into an old S10, or any other hot rod type application
