Should I buy this 2002 olds intrigue?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
51
Location
Nashville/TN
I am looking at this 2002 intrigue (3.5L shortstar engine) with 79k miles. The owner want $3000 for it.
The car seems well maintained and most service records are available. I am very attempted to get this one to replace our aged W-body, a 2000 buick regal with 150km that serves us fairly well, still pulls strong and get 30 mpg on freeway.
However, intrigue seems to have some reliability issues. In addition to the well known oil consumption, flickering headlight and some other electric glitches, the tranny seems not hold up very well as there are quite a few comlaints that the tranny need overhaul before 100km.GM have several TSBs to address this problem, including replace valve body and clutch solenoid if I understand correctly. So my question is: the premature failure of transmission on 2002 intrigue is fairly common or not? How much I should expect for a tranny rebuilt in such a car?

Thanks and I appreciate any comments.
 
I had and passed off to a B-I-L a 99 with the 3.8. Made it to 215k before the trans started acting up, and even then gave another 10k just not locking up and/or shifting to 4th. Was a pretty sweet and underappreciated car, as you know from your Regal. Only real issues were rear rotors rusted from sitting and never swept clean, a wheel bearing, and a strut.

I can't comment on the price, except since the cars are so unknown they often sell for pretty cheap. Anyway a used car is evaluated by condition, condition, condition.
 
I would be hard pressed to swap a 3800 for the shortstar.
The only real issue with the 3800 was the LIM gaskets and upper manifold EGR stack burn through,both easily corrected on the regal.
Trans rebuilds vary wildly depending local pricing and can run 2k to 3k which seems to be the norm these days for FWD cars the old school type transmissions.

To be honest IMHO the Regal in good shape is probably the better car mechanically with parts that are cheaper and more accessible.
 
Trav said:
I would be hard pressed to swap a 3800 for the shortstar.

-------May I ask why? I don't have much experience with shortstar. It seems to have more high end power and is easy to rev up. In addition to oil consumption, is there any other reliability issue?
 
Originally Posted By: eljefino
I had and passed off to a B-I-L a 99 with the 3.8. Made it to 215k before the trans started acting up, and even then gave another 10k just not locking up and/or shifting to 4th.


Similarly, I had a 99 Grand Prix GT with the same 3800 engine and automatic transmission. Around 175K miles I lost 4th gear due to a sheared clutch shaft. I had the transmission rebuilt for $1300 by a good AAMCO shop that provided a 12-month / 12K-mile warranty.
 
We have an '01 Olds Intrigue, bought new and now has 115K miles, and it's been great. I've heard about the flickering headlight issue but our car never had that. I've all but eliminated oil consumption by careful oil selection: 0W-30 GC and now 5W-30 Edge. Early in it's life I tried M1 5W-30 and it consumed it at a good rate, about 1 qt/2-2.5K miles. I've drained and filled the trans (4T65E) several times over the years, using RL D4, M1 ATF and RP ATF and I've yet to have any issues with it. The only problem we have with the car is one of the power window regulators needs replacement but other than that, the car's been trouble-free.
 
Originally Posted By: vulture
-------May I ask why? I don't have much experience with shortstar. It seems to have more high end power and is eay to rev up. In addition to oil consumption, is there any other reliability issue?


The only real issue its larger cousin, the Northstar, had was ocassional problems with head bolts. I don't know if the "Shortstar" shares that same issue. I owned two Northstar engines and didn't have a lick of trouble out of either one. In fact, they were one of the easiest engines to maintain, counter to what most think. There are no timing belts to replace, the spark plugs are good for at least 100,000 miles (I changed the originals in my '97 at 148k miles), the water pump is located off the rear of the left cylinder head, making replacement super easy, and the starter is underneath the dry intake manifold, making replacement rather clean and simple. It was a very nice engine with a ton of potential in my opinion.

More than state of the art when it was introduced in 1992, GM let it languish through at least two engine generations. Ironically, maybe that decision turns out to be the right one, with their DI 3.6L V-6 essentially filling that void. I see a lot of V-8 engines being replaced with high output V-6 engines in the near future, and I'm sure the Northstar will be no exception. It was a super engine during the first 10 years it was out, but was eventually eclipsed by competitors' designs, as could be expected after a run of so many years. I think they really could have developed that engine into something tenable today.
 
There were some reported issues in 2000 and later of oil usage and some piston carbon issues like the N*(no piston slap issues however).Crank sensors have also been reported to be problematic.Head bolts were still an issue IIRC on this aluminum motor,although i believe it was the 99-2000 models that were prone to this N* family problem.

I wish i still had the bulletins related to this engine but it was orphaned quite a while ago.If i was looking at this engine i would have it checked out carefully.

While not as trouble prone as the N* of that era parts and repairs for the LX5 could get a lot more expensive than the 3800.
 
I'd go 3800 over Shortstar. That Regal likely just needs a freshening to be good for another 100k miles. Struts, suspension bushings, tuneup, other little things that make a lower-mileage car feel better.

For the transmission, that's a 4T65 thing. Some will give 200k miles, others like the one in my 99 LeSabre act up with 80k on the clock. Get it checked out by a reputable transmission shop, and drive the car to see how it's acting. Floor it from a dead stop a few times, see if it jerks/shudders or doesn't engage right away. The 4T65's with low miles for the age seem to act up more than more-mileage 4T65's.
 
Originally Posted By: Trav
I would be hard pressed to swap a 3800 for the shortstar.
The only real issue with the 3800 was the LIM gaskets and upper manifold EGR stack burn through,both easily corrected on the regal.
Trans rebuilds vary wildly depending local pricing and can run 2k to 3k which seems to be the norm these days for FWD cars the old school type transmissions.

To be honest IMHO the Regal in good shape is probably the better car mechanically with parts that are cheaper and more accessible.


==============================================

Originally Posted By: vulture
Trav said:
I would be hard pressed to swap a 3800 for the shortstar.

-------May I ask why? I don't have much experience with shortstar. It seems to have more high end power and is easy to rev up. In addition to oil consumption, is there any other reliability issue?


IMO, especially compared to the ancient 231/3.8L V-6, which is an ultra-superb engine, the "shortstar" is an under-developed newcomer. Sure, with everything operating correctly (and that's the big, problem assumption) the shortstar is happier and happier-sounding when revving into the upper rpm range, but is that really a prime mission for your car? I owned a 98 Regal GS (with the SC version of the 231), and absolutely loved the drive-train. I had issues with the body hardware, but since these cars are platform-twins, those issues should be similar/parallel.

If it were me, I'd keep the Regal, unless I suspected an impending, fatal, mechanical issue. the 231 V-6 originally debuted (as a 198 cid engine) in 1961!!!, coincidentally, the same year I debuted... It's an engine with a rock solid, iron block and head design, that has had every trivial glitch excised long ago. You can NOT say anything like that for the somewhat-infamous shortstar engine (or the long-star Northstar either, for that matter...).

Again, keep the 231 Regal unless you think it's about to blow up for whatever reason.
cheers3.gif
 
Thanks for all the inputs.
I have been convinced that I should keep my regal as it still runs beautifully. However, I am concerned about the longevity of the autobox which is the same 4t65E used in intrigue. Surprisingly, I did not found much complaint about transmission from regal owner. Anyway, I just wish the auto in my regal can hold up.
 
GM slushboxes are very reliable. Assuming yours has not been abused, and that you've taken care of it, I would not be terribly concerned. Keep the fluid fresh, and don't do anything stupid to it, and you should be fine for a very long time.
 
I think GM's Hydramatic transmissions are about the best auto boxes on the planet. The one in my former '97 Cadillac still has the original fluid at about 180k miles, and clicks off perfect WOT upshifts still (my brother owns the car now). Actually, I couldn't swear that the fluid is original, but my mother bought the car in 2000 with 38k miles on it, and the fluid hasn't been changed since, so it's at least that old.

Granted, that 4T80-E is a little more stout than the 4T65-E in the W-body cars, but still...GM makes a fine transmission overall.
 
But the 4t65E in intrigue seems to have a fairly high rate of premature failure, at least for 98-2000.

What confuse me it that, although the same tranny used in regal, there is little complaint about tranny failure from regal owners.
 
It maybe the same box but there can be other differences that could effect longevity i.e. different stall speeds on the converter,gear ratios or shift points to take advantage of the other engines torque and RPM characteristics.

In general the GM units in the Regal,Lesabre,Grand Prix etc are a very durable unit requiring only periodic fluid changes to last a long long time,they have few if any known issues in these cars.The Regal has a rock solid drive train that is worth keeping.
 
Avoid at all cost.


I know a few people who HAD them (*both 02s). Complete trash.


I wouldn't put much stock in any of the last Olds that rolled out there....and the Alero as well....


Let's just say that the "workers" weren't happy about Olds going either....



This week I've been passing an final 500 Auroua that is having all kind of issues.....
 
Keep the Regal.

Barring that, I'd look for a 97+ Regal before I'd get an Intrigue. They just seem buggy to me. The ones I see for sale are either dead and cheap, or fairly cheap and not promising. Regals on the other hand are great as long as you get one that hasn't been abused by a teenager or twentysomething.

Ah, forget it. Keep the Regal. Or get an older one. I'm not kidding...the 95-96 Regal sedans are from the height of GM's good days in the 90s. They really are exceptional when not abused. You could go back to a '93-'94 with the 3800. Those are nice, too, but have the older dashboard, less plastic outside and more chrome trim. Sharp cars. I'm a Century fan myself and I'd take a 4-cylinder '86-'96 Century over any Regal but I'm biased because of the ones I've owned previously.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top