Why was the 3.4 so under-utilized?

[fastbird232]

Today I got to thinking: why on earth would GM sink millions into R&D on the LQ1 (as the poweplant for the FWD F-body platform), then only install it in only one platform for only seven years? Sure, it was a powerful engine for a mid-sized car back in the early '90s, but by '94-'95, it would have been a perfectly acceptable performance engine for a smaller car like the Grand Am GT, or even a Beretta GT (and other cars on those platforms). In fact, I remember reading about that Grand Am GTO concept, how the magazine that reviewed it thought GM would have put the LQ1 in it. I can also think of very few other motors that were so under-used. I mean, how many cars did the 3.1/3100 find its way into? Lots. I know none of us are GM executives, but why do you think they quietly swept this engine under the rug, so to speak?

[Euro]

probably because why most of us hate it to much it was considered the "black dog" of GM engines

[patgizz]

it flat out can't fit easily into smaller than a w-body.

[fastbird232]

Too tall and wide?

[Supreme Cutlass]

Too tall and wide?

 

It barely fits into a W... just look at how much smaller the 3100 was made (height wise) before it was put into smaller cars, etc.

[fastbird232]

...and the LQ1 would be underpowered in any larger car. I gotcha.

[luminal67]

Today I got to thinking: why on earth would GM sink millions into R&D on the LQ1 (as the poweplant for the FWD F-body platform), then only install it in only one platform for only seven years? Sure, it was a powerful engine for a mid-sized car back in the early '90s, but by '94-'95, it would have been a perfectly acceptable performance engine for a smaller car like the Grand Am GT, or even a Beretta GT (and other cars on those platforms). In fact, I remember reading about that Grand Am GTO concept, how the magazine that reviewed it thought GM would have put the LQ1 in it. I can also think of very few other motors that were so under-used. I mean, how many cars did the 3.1/3100 find its way into? Lots. I know none of us are GM executives, but why do you think they quietly swept this engine under the rug, so to speak?

 

 

because it is a 3.4

[fastbird232]

Today I got to thinking: why on earth would GM sink millions into R&D on the LQ1 (as the poweplant for the FWD F-body platform), then only install it in only one platform for only seven years? Sure, it was a powerful engine for a mid-sized car back in the early '90s, but by '94-'95, it would have been a perfectly acceptable performance engine for a smaller car like the Grand Am GT, or even a Beretta GT (and other cars on those platforms). In fact, I remember reading about that Grand Am GTO concept, how the magazine that reviewed it thought GM would have put the LQ1 in it. I can also think of very few other motors that were so under-used. I mean, how many cars did the 3.1/3100 find its way into? Lots. I know none of us are GM executives, but why do you think they quietly swept this engine under the rug, so to speak?

 

 

because it is a 3.4

 

Thank you for your reply. Really.

[THe_DeTAiL3R]

Cause the 3400 is smaller in size, and easier to service. Too bad they forgot to design a good lower intake...

[patgizz]

Today I got to thinking: why on earth would GM sink millions into R&D on the LQ1 (as the poweplant for the FWD F-body platform), then only install it in only one platform for only seven years? Sure, it was a powerful engine for a mid-sized car back in the early '90s, but by '94-'95, it would have been a perfectly acceptable performance engine for a smaller car like the Grand Am GT, or even a Beretta GT (and other cars on those platforms). In fact, I remember reading about that Grand Am GTO concept, how the magazine that reviewed it thought GM would have put the LQ1 in it. I can also think of very few other motors that were so under-used. I mean, how many cars did the 3.1/3100 find its way into? Lots. I know none of us are GM executives, but why do you think they quietly swept this engine under the rug, so to speak?

 

 

because it is a 3.4

 

 

i LOVE this new ignore feature!

[DOHCRagtopguy]

I believe that what happened was the construction costs for the engine were what eventually killed it. It is cheaper to continue making the old overhead valve design.

 

The 3.4 could not have possible been a viable option for Berettas, etc because of it's size. I way wider than the OHV engine group.

 

I think that as time goes on, the cars that got the 3.4 will increase in valuembecause of its uniqueness.

 

Hemmings Motor News already has put the 90-95 Cutlass ragtop with the 3.4 as one of the top future collectibles. Ain't no way I'm getting rid of mine, hell I might get buried in it when I go!

 

I love that car.

[Bossman429]

As previously stated, the LQ1 is too wide to fit in an N or L body, the biggest they chose to put in those cars is a 3.3 or 3400. The LQ1 is a WIDE ass motor with those DOHC heads on it, I would bet it's probably as wide as an assembled V8 when all is said and done.

 

Fastbird...I do remember seeing that Grand Am GTO that you mentioned. I think the engine they were planning on putting in was a HO Quad, or a 3.4 (OHC version, not an LQ1). It still would have been a cool car though.

[5speedz34]

Personally, I don't think GM spent much on this motor mostly because look at how cheaply it's made. It's based on the OHC 60* motors already. I think this was mostly just a "test" motor since it lead to many other GM DOHC's (N*'s, Shortstars, 3.5, 3.6 VVT, etc.)

 

Ohh and that article where it says it was for a FWD F-body, I refuse to believe that...

[White93z34]

tony GM was considering changing he F body platform to FWD at one point so i could totally see them having some sorta goofy concept car.

 

as far as OHC GM v6s it was i believe the first one that they produced, and since it was the first they borrowed heavally off the OHV 60* desin they had at the time. some things don't make too much sense today, and i woulden't go as far to call it a cheep design because i'm sure it cost an awful lot of coin back in the early 1990s. i'd say it was over-engineered for its time. but it also paved the way for the northstar and about every OHC V engine gm has today. so for a first atempt i'd say they did prety good.

[patgizz]

As previously stated, the LQ1 is too wide to fit in an N or L body, the biggest they chose to put in those cars is a 3.3 or 3400. The LQ1 is a WIDE ass motor with those DOHC heads on it, I would bet it's probably as wide as an assembled V8 when all is said and done.

 

Fastbird...I do remember seeing that Grand Am GTO that you mentioned. I think the engine they were planning on putting in was a HO Quad, or a 3.4 (OHC version, not an LQ1). It still would have been a cool car though.

 

assembled... its wider from tip of cam carrier to tip of cam carrier than a small block from valve cover to valve cover. i measured once when i was contemplating fitting a small block into the old lumina back in the day.

[fastbird232]

Ohh and that article where it says it was for a FWD F-body, I refuse to believe that...

 

Believe it. Look at the Probe: Ford built that to replace the Mustang. Is it really a stretch to think GM once considered RWD obsolete and outdated back in the late '80s?

[White93z34]

Ohh and that article where it says it was for a FWD F-body, I refuse to believe that...

 

Believe it. Look at the Probe: Ford built that to replace the Mustang. Is it really a stretch to think GM once considered RWD obsolete and outdated back in the late '80s?

 

its true, heres a whole thread talking about it http://www.thirdgen.org/techboard/history-restoration/324431-ff-wheel-drive-camaro.html?highlight=FWD+camaro+concept

[ihateallmustangs]

Because the 3800sc was consider less of a maintence nightmare.

[fastbird232]

Ugh, took me a half hour to find this:

 

06/03/02-Branden Farthing

 

GMInsidenews gets the inside scoop on the proposed 1980's FWD F-body!

 

GMI Would like to thank Guy McCoy and Ted Krygier for their large contributions to this article!

 

 

 

 

Well it is very scary to think that we almost had a FWD Camaro, but the story behind why and how is a very interesting one.. In the mid 1980's with FWD Sports Coupes swaying traditional F-body buyers GM was presented with an interesting dilemma for, whether to remain true to the heritage of RWD F-body or make what they thought the market demanded at the time. It was this situation that led to the billion dollar GM80 program.

 

The GM80 started in a time when F-body development was much more brisk than it is today. The cars were major sellers and considered integral to the brand portfolio, thus GM took great pride in them. The third generation chassis it was decided would have a freshening in 1986, it's 4th year on that platform. It was here that GM chairman Roger Smith decided that he didn't like the direction that F-body was going and decided changes needed to be made in order for the car to be in a viable business situation down the road. It was here that it was decided since most of GM's cars would be FWD by the end of the 1980's and FWD sport coupes were becoming the craze it was time to develop a FWD F-body for debut in 1989.

 

This was all that radical an idea as it is today since Ford had seriously toying with the idea of replacing the Mustang with the car that eventually became the Probe. Also in another lesser known project Ford even considered moving their big coupes, the Thunderbird and Mercury Cougar, to the new in 1986 Taurus platform. That changed once they decided to sink $1 billion into making a world class RWD chassis to replace the Fox platform, which became the MN-12. The MN-12 was envisioned to not only include the T-bird and Cougar, but also various Lincolns, the Mustang, and was even engineered to Australian standards for possible export! It was this over engineering that destroyed the program, making it too heavy to replace the Mustang and too costly to export overseas. The MN-12 platform thus never achieved it's multi-carline intentions and was largely a financial mistake for Ford..

 

By 1986 work was going full tilt on the GM80 program which the FWD F-body came to designated. The car would have been the best performing FWD car in it's price class and would bring a level of engineering to the F-body never before seen. Lighter than the current car everything about the car would have been high tech from plastic body panels to high-tech powertrain choices. The base engine was set to be a 180-200 HP 16 valve Quad 4 which at the time was still in development. The top of the line engine was set to be the 24 valve 3.4L DOHC V6 that GM had developed from the 2.8L engine block. At the time it was making 285HP+ in development and if a transmission could be made to handle it GM fully intended to go into production around that figure. What is interesting is how similar those figures are to the initial 4th generation offering in 1993. One can't help but wonder if the FWD F-body might have been faster than the RWD one we craved. The 3.4L also is significant because though it was the basis for the Cadillac Northstar and 3.5L "Shortstar", development costs were staggering making it GM's most expensive V6 ever. All these advances cost money but the projected $22,000 dollar cost for the time of introduction in 1989 isn't so bad when compared to the $24,000+ that the 1989 20th Anniversary Trans Am sold for.

 

 

 

As the program neared completion costs started to mount, making it a $1 billion plus program, a very large sum for the day. What finally killed the program was GM buying Hughes Aircraft and Roger Smith's obsession with starting the Saturn brand. The Saturn project which was particularly expensive, cost GM over $5 billion in development costs. Thankfully GM couldn't support all these projects and the GM80 program was cancelled in 1987 leaving the F-body to die. That was until some enthusiasts in GM decided that the car needed to go on pushed the idea of evolving the third generation chassis into the forth generation making the car we have today. It is scary to think that GM almost butchered the heritage of the F-body by going to FWD, but it is just a reminded that cars are business and GM is there to make money selling what the market wants.

 

However, most of everything this guy says about the MN-12 platform is total bullshit, so I can't vouch for the Camaro stuff. This came from GMInsideNews.com or something.

[White93z34]

thats really intresting, i'd love to have a GM80 car with a 285hp 3.4 DOHC, however just don't call it a camaro.

 

what i'd give to have seen some of the concept drawings and possable cars they had at that time.

[fastbird232]

Call me weird, but I think those weird GM concepts of the late '80s are cool as shit.

[fastbird232]

Well... yeah, I'd just ignore that shit I quoted. "The 3.4 was the basis for the Northstar"? Whatever... But I'm sure there really WAS a planned FWD Camaro!

[White93z34]

the 3.4 was. it was the foundation of most the GMs OHC v engines that we have today.

[5speedz34]

I'm just suprised GM would spend all that money planning a FWD F-body just to get rid of it....

 

And the site I'm thinking of is the one with all the info on the 3.4. I don't know if it is still around, but I know it's not very accurate.

 

I've just never seen any hard evidence.

 

Has anyone ever seen the pics of the prototype second-gen Fiero? The intake manifold looks awfully alot like the 3.4's. It was actually a 3.2 litre. I've always thought they where going to put that or a derivitive of it, if they ever made a second-gen...

[THe_DeTAiL3R]

It's cool how Cadillac now has a 2.8L DOHC that puts out 200hp (in the base model CTS). Too bad this engine wasn't around back then for the F-bodies...