ZoomZoomFan Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 I drove my aunt's 94 CS 3.4 this weekend. Wow. It runs very nicely, to say the least. I'd look down and be doin close to 70 when I though I was goin like 55! My Beretta is begging for mercy if it gets driven at 70. :oops: Anyway, I really like the way the 3.4 sounds, the way it performs, and I overall really love my aunt's Cutlass. And it looks damn good for a car with 169k miles on it. But the engine's not the original one... Someday I want a 3.4 CS vert. Someday... That's my useless topic! Woot. By the way, what's the highest speed anyone's ever got a 3.4 w-bod up to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chadz34 Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 3.4's are very quick engines. I basically shat when I drove my car for the first time. You gotta love how they sound too. Hopefully you own a Cutty 3.4 someday! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slick Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 You almost shat when you first got on your 3.4??? Wow... I couldn't imagine what you would do behind the wheel of a C6(or for that matter, a C5, or pretty much any V8 F-body, hell, really any RWD muscle car for what it's worth). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chadz34 Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 Well, the Z34 was the first car I ever drove, then I drove the Blazer...wasn't impressed, then I drove dad's 1989 Silverado 350...not impressed. Just this summer I drove my dads Camaro Z28..now that's impressive. But the Z34, as soon as I got my G1 (here in Canada, is the first step of licensing. You are only aloud to drive with an adult with 4 years of experience.) So my dad let me drive the Z34. We went through some windy roads and came up to a highway. My dad said ''Chad, this is a highway you gotta get up to speed quickly theres traffic comming''. So I fuckin' mat the car...and ended up doing 140 km/h and then a truck came out in front (W-BODY BRAKES) but I got it stopped. Then he said ''thats why we don't speed''. SO it was a vicious experience with the Z34. After that I worked 3 years and spent nothing of it to buy the fuckin' thing. Now I can't afford to drive it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonyman87 Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 i know what he is talking about. i went from a 2.5liter chrysler lebaron 1988 to my 3.4dohc 95. and i thought i was king of the hill. from 0-60 in 17seconds to at the time 7seconds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwmin Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 i went from a v8 rwd f-body to a 3.4X and it blew my other car out of the water. 305vinH now its a diff story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastbird232 Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 Thunderbird 3.8L V6 to a 3.4. You wouldn't think losing 25 cubic inches of displacement would add 70 horsepower, but it did. Talk about a night/day difference! 140 horses in a 3600 pound car to 210 horses in a 3300 pound car. YOU do the math. Hell, the V6 in my car is just as powerful as the V8 in that year's Thunderbird, too. The wrong wheels are driving mine, though, but I'm not complaining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 The 3.4L GM's biggest mistake of all time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slick Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 The 3.4L GM's biggest mistake of all time. Then why keep buying 3.4's? And why keep having 3.4's swapped in when your's go? A 3400 will fit almost perfectly and will work with minor modification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 Trust me, I have no incliniation to buy another 3.4 (let anlone another GM)... i did a 3.4 swap becuase it required no modification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White93z34 Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 ross, not to come down on you, but the only thing you see here is the dollar amount, and since you don't do your own work thats all you see. i've gotten 40,000 very trouble free miles out of my 3.4 so far its not your 95's fault that the timing belt went when it did, and its not its fault that the shop that put the new belt on it didn't change what was required, causeing it to break again. and your 92' its not the engines fault that the last owner never checked the belt or got the scheduled matniace performed thusly destroying that engine. it takes 4 8mm bolts and about 5 minutes of your time to check the belt and its so simple anyone can do it. so what i'm trying to say is, IF your 3.4s had at least had the proper matniance performed when it was required, you probably woulden't be here complaining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 See, you've got it all wrong. The 92 3.4 had full dealership maintence its entire life, but everything still went wrong. The 95 3.4 belt broke once. it was changed at 100k, why would it go at 120k? and after it was replaced, it ran like shit after that. I've had nothing but trouble with this engine, not to mention it being incredibly slow. I've been everything but impressed with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Rockstar Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 I am a 3.4 fan.. In fact, I have a 96 LQ1 sittin here for a Turbo project.. And, my friend is going to be buying a 97 Z34, so I am going to buy his 96.. I went from a 2.5L Dukester to the awesome power of the MPFI 3.1.. Then I had to drive around a 3.0 Toreass which was terrible at doin what it was built to do.. I drove my friend's Z34 (THe 96 Ima buy when he gets his 97) and I was definately impressed, and was certain of the swap I wanted for my Lumina.. 8) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnatGoSplat Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 Some of you kids must really abuse the 3.4. I bought mine fully expecting it to be horrible. It did have several problems that needed to be fixed right when I bought it, but I was expecting them. Anyway, after fixing those problems 3yrs ago, my 3.4 has been trouble-free and it's even 99% woman-driven. It has given me less trouble than the 2.8 in her old Cutlass. I don't really think it's very fast though... faster than the 2.8 and 3.1, sure, but it doesn't bury me into my seat like some cars I've been in. Then again, lots of people think the Nissan 3.5 DOHC is fast and I didn't think it was all that fast either. I think low-end torque impresses me a lot more than high revving DOHC's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LumiDriver Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 I actually drove Tim's GTP, and honestly, I was disappointed. I thought this thing was gonna be balls to the wall fast. After I got done driving his 3.4, i was glad to get back in my Lumina. Smoother ride, softer acceleration, and it didn't seem any fast than mine. I didn't like the way it lagged, it fel as if it had turbo lag, and I hate that. The engine shuddered a bit when i got on it. It was rough, slower than anyone has said, and it runs like shit when started from cold. Timmy had to restart it 3 or 4 times sunday morning. ( I think it was sunday), I have the 3100 and it rides and drives better than a 3.4. But thats only one that I have ever driven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnatGoSplat Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 It's not supposed to lag, shudder, or need to be restarted. Mine doesn't do any of that. Sounds like his lower intake gasket is going bad. I had to replace mine when I first got the car, it pretty much did all of that, and worse, it surged really badly when cold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 Cold starts are the worst on the 3.4... they run like complete crap until they are up to temperature, which could take a whhile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastbird232 Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 So did replacing the intake gaskets cure the cold start gremlins? Mine's acting like a bastard and the winters are too long up here to have to deal with that for another year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnatGoSplat Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 Cold starts are the worst on the 3.4... they run like complete crap until they are up to temperature, which could take a whhile. Uh, no, only 3.4's in a state of disrepair do that. So did replacing the intake gaskets cure the cold start gremlins? Yes, my 3.4 now has no problems starting or running at all, not even in subzero temps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 Amazing how hard people come down on an engine as a whole when their's is a piece of shit and they are too lazy to fix it right the first time. My red Z34 just got a brand new GM crate motor, and I have never felt a stock 3.4 so smooth or powerful. At 178whp, it is th emost powerful stock or near stock 3.4 out there, and I still get confused at lights becuz I think it died it runs so smooth. None of those cold start things apply to mine, it is daily driven in CO. Oh, and there is no comparison to my 2.8l. The 3.4 is smoother, quieter, SOOOO much more powerful, much more low end torque, better gas mileage, much more reliable, etc. There is no comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94CutlassSLCoupe Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 The 3.4 in our Vert has run flawless...it does only have 40k though...Runs real nice and is MUCH faster than my 3100, which it should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darksyde Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 what's the highest speed anyone's ever got a 3.4 w-bod up to? I've had my Z pacing a WRX Sti at 137mph......it had no more after that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 I had my white Z34 to about 135-140, I had just gotten into 5th and ridden it out about 500rpm. It was just starting to get into the good rpm, but I had to stop. So it had more in it, i just needed psace to develop the rpm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TGPilot Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 Cold starts are the worst on the 3.4... they run like complete crap until they are up to temperature, which could take a whhile. Right and this is how they were sold at the dealer right...only southern dealerships got cars with the 3.4 because the cold start issues would plague the sales up north in the cooler climates? 8) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chadz34 Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 i was glad to get back in my Lumina. Smoother ride, softer acceleration, and it didn't seem any fast than mine. I didn't like the way it lagged, it fel as if it had turbo lag, and I hate that. The quote] :shock: ......3.4 slower than a 3100...... :? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts