Beretta.net

Looks really nice. cleaned up good. i love that colour.. the blue on the new ford trucks is close but i like it even better i think. love to paint my car this colour but also want to keep the 2tone and i think my lower colour is quasar, that front lip throws the whole thing off though i would be afraid of it flying apart at high speeds.

What do you think about the wider tires ? handling wise. yes it sticks to the road better, but do you find it pulls you all over the darn place on rougher roads ? the highways around here are not bad and most have been re-done in the past few years but i still find my car is riding all over the dam place with wider tires.

I had 195/70/15 and drove great, i have 205/60or55/15 now and doesnt like to stay in 1 spot very long on the road. if i let go of the wheel it steers straight but follows the curves of the road more. i had an aliment issue when i started driving and was wearing the old tires a little, i adjusted it before the new tires and put 5000 KM at least on them with no wear so its gotta be pretty darn close. im going to take it into a shop 1 day soon and have them do a full alignment since my wheel is turned a little when im going straight.

when i adjusted it myself i had a hell of a time to line the wheels up straight with the body of the car where they look even with the rear it was toed in 2 1/2 inches at the front of the tire, went like .5 Km up the road and WOW it feels like the front end is floating on water LOL scary. so i tryed the string trick around the rear wheels to the front and seems the rear is slightly wider then the front but got it lined up pretty close with less then 1/4" toe in with it lifted in the air. no wear on the tires so its got to be pretty darn close. but dont like how it steers with the wider tires.

The defiantly grip alot better and i have alot less wheel spin though.

Tiffany had HRi's on her Subaru and they were fine for an all season.

woody90gtz wrote:Tiffany had HRi's on her Subaru and they were fine for an all season.

I had bald Continentals on my subi before I got my new ones and those were fine this winter... So really I don't think the comparison to a Subaru is a fair one due to the drive train differences.

Exactly , thank you Jon.

I am actually running a set of Connie's right now. Continentals. And while they are not as "sporty" as some tires and , I might add , a SHITLOAD lighter than the HRi's or the Assurance's I've already run on this car they are an excellent riding tire with decent handling ability. I'm finally happy with the shoes on the old girl....

MPB: So the Kelly's were a hard riding tire with no real handling abilities in your opinion then or? Please, go into more detail. I need to know as much as I can to make an informed purchase.

Thanks all, again, for the compliments. I'm working on the front end, I promise.

That was long ago and they may have changed. Oh they last a long time to be sure, but I almost crashed twice because they didn't grip and I was young and dumb. Check what the treadwear is. 400 is soft and say 600 or higher is hard.

They would spin way too easy off the line and would only stop do to the junk 2nd gear of the 700r4 and still that took some time. The car only had the 305 cross fire with over 100k on it.

So today was compression test day. I also replaced the serpentine belt. The old one was definitely worn.

Geoff, you were correct, as I thought. Someone slapped an LO pulley on the crank for whatever reason.

Compression numbers for 1-2-3-4 are as follows respectively:

142

135

142

150

Not too bad for a Quad with 150k plus on the motor. Not bad at all.

Cool cool. Mike you still want that front lip support? I sent ya pics but havent heard back from ya about it.

SuzukiGhostRider wrote:Well, I was right all the way around. T-stat (one of them at least, yes one of them, read on) was stuck open. Also, being the WRONG head (or so I had always presumed on this motor) no notch in the cylinder head next to the t-stat. In other words, when I plugged off the TB lines, I plugged off the car's bypass to feed the heater core hose.

I had always assumed this was an HO with the wrong crank pulley and a new 456 "wrong" head. Well, as I dug into the motor today deeper than I ever have, I discovered this motor is a '94 Low Output Quad 4. I am PISSED.

Hints:

1. "Remanufactured in Mexico" sticker on the timing cover.

2. 456 cylinder head.

3. T-stat located in the lower water pipe. (But get this! When I GOT the car and first switched the t-stat it HAD one at the cylinder head water outlet housing! WTF?!? So, it had TWO t-stats one top and one bottom!)

4. Fact that this motor was almost EVENLY matched by a late model STOCK TC 2.4L a week ago.

5. LO crank pulley.

6. LO style lower rad hose water pipe.

I no longer harbor any doubt that this motor is an LO. I have all the necessary components to swap it to an HO and that is beginning today. I have the HO pulley, I have HO cams, I have 086 heads. This fucker will be an HO when I'M done!

See my Member's Rides thread for continuing progress if you're interested in following along.

This thread is solved.

No notch in the head (which I had forgotten I saw when I switched the t-stat last time) = no flow to heater core hose when TB lines are plugged off thereby blocking off the passageway to the heater core inlet line.

Made the certain discovery today that someone has replaced the engine in this GTZ with an LO Quad. Read the above quoted text from my diagnostic thread on no heat for clarification.

Only further and final proof I will need and find upon removal of the cylinder head is the pistons. If they have intake valve reliefs , it's an HO block but I know they won't.

If they're dished, it's an LO block which I'm pretty positive of at this point.


So, I called and parts should only cost me $45 my cost for a head gasket, head bolts and associated hardware. I have everything else.

I will post pics tonight, and as I progress over the next few days.

I'm a tad peeved, but at least I have all the components to make this situation right!

Ok, so basically made it to where I need to be to finish tear down tomorrow. Got a late start when I decided to rip the head off the car. Was only gonna do t-stat, water pump and heater core.

So, the only things I've got left for tomorrow are:

Motor mount removal. Outer timing cover removal. Crank pulley removal. Remove chain, tensioner, guides and chain. Unbolt cam gears. Remove head and cam towers. Pretty straight forward. I'm pretty well "there" at this point.

Gonna remove that nasty looking alternator and clean it as well as the intake while I have it out. I intend to replace the timing chain PVC hose that caused the mess in the first place too. So what started out a simple cooling system update turned into putting in an 086 head, HO cams, new Felpro headgasket, new Felpro head bolts,new timing cover gasket set, HO pulley, new water pump, new t-stat, and a heater core.

LOL!

Kinda reminds me of going to Walmart "just for milk" and coming two hours later with hundreds in groceries........ Sigh.....

Pics:

Ok, so day two.

Today was a good day! Great day! Got the outer timing cover off to discover what is basically a BRAND NEW set of cam gears, crank gear, 3 guides, and tensioner! Very pleased! I also got the cams and towers out, head off and was ECSTATIC when I looked into the block!!

HO pistons and crosshatching!! WOOT!

Note the two valve reliefs in the pistons on the intake side in the pics below. Also pictured , the timing set.

I also got the cam housings apart and measured the cams. They ARE HO cams. Thank god for that. I have a few sets here , but still.....twas more good news. In fact they look to be VERY low mileage. Maybe 30k-50k. They look as nice as the 30k set I have for sale.

Lifters also look VERY low mileage. Pics below.

So.... while ALL signs pointed to an LO motor it is indeed and HO motor. Was being strangled by two things.

1. Shittiest head , maybe EVER , to be put on a Quad motor.

2. Poor torquing made for an apparent poor seal on the head/block. Looks like I know why I had hell bleeding this thing now and why the compression tests DEFINITELY came in lower than they should have. I BET when I get my 086 head on and torqued down, we see alot different compression numbers with ME torquing the headgasket. And with the MUCH better flowing head, power will be nicer!

Pics below of all, including cams from the engine,lifters, timing, cylinders , block and my girl tucked in and bedded down for the night.

And check out the cross hatching in cylinders 2 and 3. WOW! I about crap.

I'd say the head went, he bought the cheapest head he could find, that being the LO 456 head that has NO business on an otherwise HO engine. That is being rectified now obviously.

I would say this motor has no MORE than 50k judging by the shape of all seals, the condition of the head, cams and timing. Shame they fucked up the end game with a VERY poor flowing head and a bad job torquing the head gasket.

I'm TRULY looking forward to driving this again when completed!

Enjoy, and feel free to comment.

456 cylinder head that was on then engine until today. Cams and lifters that were on the car and indeed HO. Also , last pic, all tucked in for the night.

So, I know I've been kicking back and forth on this, but the more I think about things, the more convinced I am this was a reman motor install with "slapped together parts.

I haven't actually eyeballed the crank casting number, but since ALL Quads (sohc, dohc LO , and dohc HO) all shared the same crank from '90-'94, I'm quite sure it's a 690 crank.

The block is a 661 casting number which was '92-'94 so it is technically the "correct" block. 927 blocks were also used '92-'94 for LO and HO. Both block numbers were "shared" by the LO and HO motors.

Head was WRONG. 456 heads do NOT go on HO motors. They used them on '94 LO motors ONLY.

HO Pistons (as witnessed by the intake valve reliefs).

HO cams , as micrometered out. So they are correct.

LO pulley. INCORRECT.

Cross hatching in the cylinders, indicating a fairly recent hone or bore.

Pistons look newish minus the carbon burn up top.

Head definitely looks "new" all around. Burning very clean, no buildup whatsoever as seen in pics.

To me, this all spells typical reman company cutting corners to save money by going with the more easily obtainable head and pulley. So, my logic and guessing, leads me to conclude this was a reman motor sometime in the last 50k or less.

I'm putting the correct 086 head and HO pulley back on the car, so in effect when I'm done this week, the car will be a full on HO as intended , meeting ALL '92 HO specs. Including the t-stat (only ONE this time,lol) in the correct HEAD location.

Car is also getting the brand new water pump.

Anyhow, bored and droning. Chomping at the bit to get her buttoned up, but I have some work to take care of tomorrow first. Gotta make a living to pay the bills and support my money pit and all that jazz....

In your other post you made it sound like it might have had LO cams... But here you said they were HO cams... So essentially your going to change the head only? as far as performance parts go? And then just all the other corresponding HO attachments to the motor including pulley and such.

Reman companies never use the intended part for the motor either... they just slap whatever they have together to make it work. I don't see that as a way to cut corners, I see that as typical operation.

What is the difference in the LO head and the HO head???

And you had mentioned also in the other thread that the LO pistons were dished...but with no valve reliefs. Is the only difference in the HO pistons valve reliefs???

(Not criticizing... <<< quad handicapped!!!)

I think the major difference between the heads, is how they flow. The HO's breathe better, if I recall correctly. lol

Not to mention all the small details that can cause performance differences. At least you will have it right when you are done.