| Triple |
04-08-2015 01:45 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by pauldun170
(Post 534361)
around 2010-ish my step father picked up 3.1 equipped Century. I think it was a 94. That car impressed the hell out of me. Everything worked. AC was awesome. Was expecting a shitbox and the thing was solid as a rock. Made the perfect grandpa car.
|
1982-96 A-bodies are among the best front wheel drive platforms ever built, in my opinion. Certainly one of GM's best. They used a variety of drivetrains, most of which were pretty solid, but the chassis were built like tanks. Small by today's mid-size standards, but tap on a body panel and the things feel like they're carved out of stone.
The 3.1L family was plagued with intake manifold gasket failures from (I think) 94-on, but aside from that the engines were pretty bulletproof. I've owned several, but I prefer the 4-cylinder. So much easier to repair/maintain. Lifting a 3.1L off its mounts just to replace the inboard spark plugs is a bitch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gas Man
(Post 534363)
I love the retro. I have a 90 6000LE that when I traded it in, had 287,000 miles on it with the 3.1L V-6. It still got 27mpg at 80mph and I would have drove it cross country. Never opened the motor or the trans short of filters and oil. Sure it had new other stuff, like water pumps, radiators, brakes, alternator, etc... but otherwise it was an awesome steed. Kinda miss it.
|
As ugly as I find the Century, I think the Pontiac is even uglier. That said, I almost bought a 6000LE wagon in nearly identical condition to this Buick, but I was outbid at the last second on eBay.
A-body 4-cylinders were all paired with non-OD, 3-speed transmissions, while all V6 models of which I am aware received overdrive 4-speeds. Fuel economy between the two is therefore almost identical. |
