When it was first launched, the Chevrolet Beretta was a sharp-looking coupe. Its powertrain line-up, however, was nothing exceptional. It used the same four-cylinder and V6 engines that powered tens of thousands of Cavaliers, Celebrities and Corsicas. Even the racy-looking GTU, despite its firmer suspension, used the same corporate 2.8 V6 as countless GM products. What the Beretta needed was a performance engine, and that’s just what Chevrolet gave it for 1990.
Enter the GTZ. Available only with a five-speed manual transmission, the GTZ used the high-output LG0 version of the Oldsmobile-developed, double overhead cam, 16-valve Quad 4. Displacing 2.3 liters, the LG0 produced 180 hp at 6200 rpm and 160 ft-lbs at 5200 rpm. Though it was down 20 ft-lbs on the ’90 Beretta’s flagship 3.1 V6, it produced 45 more horsepower and had a better 0-60 time – Motor Trend was able to hit 60mph in 7.6 seconds, compared to 9.3 seconds in a V6 Beretta. Say what you will about the Quad 4 – it had reliability issues, it was unrefined – but it gave the Beretta a kick in the pants.
As Oldsmobile had developed it, the Quad 4 first appeared in the Cutlass Calais. It soon proliferated throughout the Buick, Chevrolet and Pontiac line-ups in regular LD2 and high-output LG0 variants. Buick only got the less-powerful LD2 (and only in the Skylark), while Chevrolet only got the high-output LG0 and only in the Beretta.
1990 interior
Costing $1250 more than a Beretta GT 3.1, the GTZ added a firmer FE7 suspension tune and a fresh look of its own. The grille was blocked off and there was a unique front air dam and rear spoiler, body-colored 16-inch wheels, and a complete absence of brightwork. The GTZ also added standard air-conditioning, fog lights and a leather-wrapped steering wheel. Alas, the interior was almost identical to regular Berettas with its drab plastics and slabby, shelf-like dashboard. Fortunately, all Berettas received a redesigned and more attractive dashboard and driver’s airbag for 1991.
Critics found the L-Body Beretta GTZ to be a more cohesive package than the related N-Body cars. The Quad 4 was said to be less prone to noise and vibration, while the Beretta had superior roll stiffness to sporty Calais and Grand Am variants. There were still complaints about the GTZ’s peaky and noisy nature, however, and Consumer Guide also dinged the Beretta for its “uncoordinated suspension” even though they found it overall to be fun to drive.
In their 1990 Bang For Your Buck special, Motor Trend found the Beretta GTZ to be “more neutral, and thus, more fun to drive than the Calais and Grand Am”. Motor Trend did, however, criticize the Beretta’s “mushy brake feel” and “notchy shift action”. Despite a slalom time slower only than the Nissan 300ZX Turbo – not bad for a fleet of 20 test cars – the Beretta GTZ scored only 15th in fun factor. Still, its 0-60 time was just 0.3 seconds off a more expensive Ford Thunderbird Super Coupe and its list price of $13,750 was around a grand below rivals like the Eagle Talon TSi and Ford Probe GT.
Given Chevrolet’s higher sales volumes and the fresher look of the Beretta vis-à-vis the N-Body cars, it wasn’t surprising to see the Beretta GTZ to storm past its cousins in sales. Oldsmobile shifted just 818 Cutlass Calais Internationals with the LG0 in 1990 while Pontiac managed a more impressive 4921 LG0-equipped Grand Ams. As for Chevy, they shifted 13,239 Beretta GTZs, accounting for around 7.5% of all Beretta sales.
The four-banger GTZ’s glory was short-lived. The regular Beretta’s 3.1 V6 became a $119 credit option for 1991 and, despite only being available with a three-speed automatic, it appears to have been more popular than the mandatory-manual Quad 4. Just 3010 GTZs were produced for 1991 with the Quad 4 and this number continued to shrink during the GTZ’s run. In 1993, just 1.5% of Berettas used the engine.
For 1994, the GT and GTZ were replaced with the new Z26. Much as the Cavalier Z24 had used a V6, the Beretta Z26 was available with the Quad 4, the last number in the trim name merely indicating the Beretta’s position in Chevrolet’s sporty car line-up. The Quad 4 lost 10 horses for its final year but increased its sales slightly, 896 Z26s rolling off the factory line with the Quad 4. Pontiac, conversely, shifted three times as many LG0-equipped Grand Ams.
By this point, Beretta sales were in terminal decline. The Quad 4 Beretta was gone after ’94 and the entire line discontinued in 1996, the same year a new LD9 variant of the Quad 4 arrived, finally featuring balance shafts but down 20 horses from the last of the LG0s. Crucially, the addition of balance shafts improved refinement considerably and the LD9 engine lasted into the 21st century.
It’s likely the Beretta GTZ’s lack of an automatic transmission did it in more so than its rev-hungry four. The Beretta’s ageing body probably didn’t help, either, especially in such a fashion-conscious segment. Then there were the cheaper Cavalier Z24 and Beretta GT models, available with automatic transmissions and featuring V6 engines, relatively rare for the segment.
That was a multitude of factors to contend with before you even got to the engine, which was known to suffer from cracked heads and blown head gaskets. Nevertheless, the Quad 4 had outputs that were very impressive for a naturally-aspirated four in the early 1990s and remain impressive today. The Beretta GTZ was also an attractive coupe with a very different vibe from a cheaper V6-powered Cavalier Z24 or a similarly-priced, V8-powered Camaro RS, plus some meaningful suspension improvements over lesser Berettas. Alas, both because of and in spite of its engine, it probably wasn’t the best buy in the sport coupe segment or even within the Beretta line-up.
1990 GTZ photographed in Crescent City, CA in June 2019.
Note: a rerun of an older post.
Related Reading:
Curbside Classic: 1988-96 Chevrolet Beretta – Latchkey Kid
COAL: 1995 Chevrolet Beretta Z26 – A Boy And His Car
Curbside Classic: 1990 Chevrolet Cavalier Z-24- Camaro Z-28 Minus Four?
When these cars came out, I test drove one. I loved the styling, which was by far the best of the N bodies. That’s where my love ended. The Baretta drove like a big J car, because that’s what it was. The handling was mediocre and the interior materials awful. The only good part of the car was the venerable 3.1 V-6. Although not that powerful, it was smooth and torquey.
How GM kept it so long is beyond me
I have always liked the Beretta; it has a smooth, modern look. As typical of GM, the last model years were much improved: a funky looking but better dash, and finally a 4 speed auto. By the time they got it right, it was too long in the tooth and terminated
Yeah the GTZ was my car for 6 years. I wrote about it in a COAL post a while back (and borrowed your photo – thanks)
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/cars-of-a-lifetime/coal-1990-chevrolet-beretta-gtz-trying-hard-to-be-a-genuine-sports-coupe/
Sure it was flawed but I loved it driving it nonetheless. It was a fun, flashy, sporty car for a kid fresh out of college, with a good enough job where I could afford the car payments on it. I haven’t owned anything since with as much of a love-hate relationship as that GTZ. You can say a lot about the GTZ but it certainly was not boring, unlike most GM products of that era.
Outward visibility, in both the Corsica/Beretta and the Lumina class, must have been terrific:
https://i0.wp.com/www.curbsideclassic.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/chevrolet-beretta-gtz.jpg?quality=75
with side beltlines going in the right direction as opposed to today.
Always loved the GTZ, but never rode in one. Always loved the Beretta in general, especially the earlier ones with the quad parking lights. It’s also interesting how people have swapped the Euro sealed beams in, which makes the aggressive nose look even more so.
My first Beretta experience was 1989 when my uncle drove a 1988 GT 2.8 5 speed here from Colorado. His wife would only let him go like 2 mph on our dirt road. Well he took me for a ride, we got to the main road and he laid me back in the seat. The V6 may not have been a speedster but it was quick in the torque department where it counts for driving legal speeds. The 3.1 MPFI is even better. And the exhaust note of both is my favorite still. And they run forever. I’ve had many with 200 or 300k and the car would fall apart before the engine did.
One of my neighbors for the longest time had a pair of Beretta GTZs at the back of his property. There’s a new pole barn now blocking the view. I’d like to ask him about them, but I want to be prepared to actually buy them if he’s willing. Which won’t be until next summer. I’d get at least one going and drop in a 3.1 if it doesn’t have it already. If not then no big deal.
My understanding was that so many long running models were dropped after 1996, because of a government mandate for side door beams and maybe more. Which thickened up everything and was basically the end of the airy greenhouse with super visibility. A lot of cars switched to the required OBD2 for 1996, then had to go. So they must have been profitable enough for that.
It may partly be my anti-GM bias (burn me once, shame on me, burn me twice…), but I can’t imagine choosing this over an Accord coupe, Ford Probe, Mazda MX-6 or any other of available options.
Just the usual GM marketing shell game. For any so-called ‘brand-new’ model, they’d assign an MSRP comparable to the superior competition, but then quickly slather on the rebates and incentives to bring the street-price down to something more realistic, thereby having gullible buyers thinking they were getting a relative bargain (which they really weren’t).
Friend of mine really wanted one of these. His father (freshly divorced) had just bought a “standard issue” Beretta. He thought they were so cool. To me they just looked like typical GM plasticky cheap cars of the times. I had a “cool” 78 Firebird at the time, and another friend had a 70 Camaro. THESE were cars that I liked. Not some new Cheap looking 90 “GM-Mobile”.
Also:
“There were still complaints about the GTZ’s peaky and noisy nature..”
I get “Noisy”, but what is a “Peaky” engine? (I assume it was regarding the engine, don’t know how a car itself can be “peaky”).
I wonder what this car would have been like with the 4.3 liter and a 5 speed?