Today I said a thing I thought I would never say

[iwashmycar]

If it comes out I hope the real one has no B-pillar...but I doubt that is possible these days

[zeitgeist57]

They made it a 2-door hardtop just for extra "auto-show" glitz...would also love to see no B-pillars but Mercedes/convertibles seem to be the only option.

[Geeto67]

You're dumb

http://www.motivemag.com/Content/uploads/1/gn-2.jpg

 

 

 

how many people have actually driven a grand national? They are not great cars. For the time they were a breath of fresh air and a really solid shot across the bow of the japanese that they were not the only ones that could do turbo small motors and make power, but that was mostly due to the time and place....there are 2016 crossovers that are faster now. Its just a really great engine in a mediocre G-body chassis.

 

The thing about G-bodies is that for a long time they were way cheaper than muscle cars but still had a lot of the old A-body muscle car tech, so they were familiar to drag guys who got priced out of chevelles. The fit and finish on every single one is terrible, the interiors are largely that awful mouse fur GM covered everything with in the 1980's, they handle like small boat in a large storm and they stop like a mile of icy road. But you can put everything from a turbo six to a BBC in one, gut the interior, and throw it down the 1/4 mile like a rocket powered lawn dart.

 

 

This new buick? I like it. I know buick has that rep as the chariot of the geriatric but you know why old people bought buicks long after they stopped being good? because they remember when buick built things like the wildcat 445 with 445ft/lbs of torque - a car that didn't move the road so much as turned the earth around it's stationary position. They really are the sleeper cell of GM that cranks out interesting cars in between the Ihop pancake brown lesabres and FWD centurys.

 

Think about it: The 1970 GS455 Stage 1 is regarded as one of the, if not the, fastest musclecar of the era and anybody who has been to a F.A.S.T class race can attest to them giving the hemi's a run for the money. The 1960-70's riviera were paragons of design for their time and are now considered timeless classics, esp the early 60's cars and the 70's boattail rivs. The supercharged 3800 Riviera of the 1990's carried on that tradition as well with styling stolem from 50's italian sports cars and an interior from the bridge of the starship enterprise. When pontiac was making a fuss with it's GTP, Buick had the regal GS which was every inch as fast, had a shorter wheelbase and handled better, and was 4 times less gaudy. Even now they are one of the few GM brands that still offers a stick shift, 250hp midsize sedan that isn't an overpriced cadillac v-series car (the 2014 Regal GS).

 

If the new Buick concept is finally getting you to notice Buick, congratulations - you are now in on a secret that some of us have known for years, buicks are awesome.

[Gergwheel1647545492]

how many people have actually driven a grand national? They are not great cars. For the time they were a breath of fresh air and a really solid shot across the bow of the japanese that they were not the only ones that could do turbo small motors and make power, but that was mostly due to the time and place....there are 2016 crossovers that are faster now. Its just a really great engine in a mediocre G-body chassis.

 

The thing about G-bodies is that for a long time they were way cheaper than muscle cars but still had a lot of the old A-body muscle car tech, so they were familiar to drag guys who got priced out of chevelles. The fit and finish on every single one is terrible, the interiors are largely that awful mouse fur GM covered everything with in the 1980's, they handle like small boat in a large storm and they stop like a mile of icy road. But you can put everything from a turbo six to a BBC in one, gut the interior, and throw it down the 1/4 mile like a rocket powered lawn dart.

 

 

This new buick? I like it. I know buick has that rep as the chariot of the geriatric but you know why old people bought buicks long after they stopped being good? because they remember when buick built things like the wildcat 445 with 445ft/lbs of torque - a car that didn't move the road so much as turned the earth around it's stationary position. They really are the sleeper cell of GM that cranks out interesting cars in between the Ihop pancake brown lesabres and FWD centurys.

 

Think about it: The 1970 GS455 Stage 1 is regarded as one of the, if not the, fastest musclecar of the era and anybody who has been to a F.A.S.T class race can attest to them giving the hemi's a run for the money. The 1960-70's riviera were paragons of design for their time and are now considered timeless classics, esp the early 60's cars and the 70's boattail rivs. The supercharged 3800 Riviera of the 1990's carried on that tradition as well with styling stolem from 50's italian sports cars and an interior from the bridge of the starship enterprise. When pontiac was making a fuss with it's GTP, Buick had the regal GS which was every inch as fast, had a shorter wheelbase and handled better, and was 4 times less gaudy. Even now they are one of the few GM brands that still offers a stick shift, 250hp midsize sedan that isn't an overpriced cadillac v-series car (the 2014 Regal GS).

 

If the new Buick concept is finally getting you to notice Buick, congratulations - you are now in on a secret that some of us have known for years, buicks are awesome.

is it a v6? is it a turbo? is it 2 door? is it RWD? is it a Buick? you can leave now.

 

Yes compared to today's standards the GN was a shit car. In 1984 it was amazing. Just like this car, with today's standard's, I hope is amazing

[Geeto67]

is it a v6? is it a turbo? is it 2 door? is it RWD? is it a Buick? you can leave now.

 

Yes compared to today's standards the GN was a shit car. In 1984 it was amazing. Just like this car, with today's standard's, I hope is amazing

 

I don't think we disagree at all.Iin 1984 it was the engine that made it amazing - I don't think anybody was getting into a GN and mistaking it for a jaguar inside by the panel fit and materials. I guess what I was trying to say was that even for ALL of GM's terribleness buick still managed to shine in spite of it.

[Gergwheel1647545492]

I don't think we disagree at all.Iin 1984 it was the engine that made it amazing - I don't think anybody was getting into a GN and mistaking it for a jaguar inside by the panel fit and materials. I guess what I was trying to say was that even for ALL of GM's terribleness buick still managed to shine in spite of it.

 

yes, i agree

[99StockGT]

Oh I'm not new to the secret of Buicks at all, have been a fan of their past cars however for the past several generations they have been rather underwhelming. In the eyes of the American consumer they are far down the list of "desirable" brands. However their success in China as a high end brand has kept them rolling more than anything, so they've got that going for them.

 

And as for the GNs, they were shit even back in the day. They rode like hell, stopped like hell, had the styling of a grandparents car even back then. Aside from the all black and wheels you pretty much had nothing other than a badge that denoted you were driving something different. The motor was nothing exciting and not very dependable, the only thing it truly had going for it was a big turbo.

 

Had they sold in great numbers and been something that would have been a viable vehicle for the future we would have seen more of them or a rebirth. GNs made good drag cars because, well you could do the exact same thing to every other G body.

 

The GNs were a low tech high boost way of showing off a little bit that fizzled. Also, nothing like having to explain why your car isn't a grandma's car to everyone who sees it and isn't a "Car person"

[Gergwheel1647545492]

The motor was nothing exciting and not very dependable, the only thing it truly had going for it was a big turbo.

 

You apparently don't know shit about the motors.

[99StockGT]

What high tech cutting edge stuff did they have in their motors?

 

Edit:

 

Don't take my comments as meaning they aren't interesting cars that served a purpose in the genetics of cars to come. With what was learned and demonstrated on the 3.8v6 GNs it was the dawn of an age that saw the crazy cars of the late 80s through mid 90s.

[Gergwheel1647545492]

What high tech cutting edge stuff did they have in their motors?

 

what does that have to do with being dependable? a stock motor from 1987 that can easily handle 500hp is good in my book.

[JaronsToy]

what does that have to do with being dependable? a stock motor from 1987 that can easily handle 500hp is good in my book.

 

It was great back then for a stock motor Up the boost run meth and drive the crap out of it

[99StockGT]

They made it a 2-door hardtop just for extra "auto-show" glitz...would also love to see no B-pillars but Mercedes/convertibles seem to be the only option.

 

From what I have heard of the car its far more working prototype than "concept car" so there's a chance this might actually get built in something similar to this form. There definitely will be some safety concerns with some of the styling and a few items that would have to come up to US code.. but all in all its tasty!

 

What comes to my mind about it is again their Asian market, as their brand image as a car for the "Arrived" is it something we have to look at across the pond

[Geeto67]

What high tech cutting edge stuff did they have in their motors?

 

Sequential Fuel Injection and distibutorless ignition in 1984 for starters. Think about that, a GN with a turbo v6 with port injection FI and a distributorless ignition would be sitting in the same showroom as a carb'ed 305 powered buick electra wagon and possibly (if the dealer was a chevy dealer as well) a "cross fire injection" corvette and a banked fire analog MPFI camaro.

 

The block itself isn't really anything special. It's the same 231cu in block Buck had been using for ages, but with lower compression rotating assembly. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, the buick 225 and dauntless engines from the same v6 family were known as overbuilt unkillable lumps that powered many jeeps to glory in the 70's. The Heads are t-type/ GN specific as well.

 

What made the GN engine great was it combined one of the most stout bottom ends with a turbo, and a system that you could tune via computer rather than mechanical adjustments. It made an honest SAE Net 245hp and 355 ft/lbs of torque in a time when the traditional v8 with emissions equipment struggled to make 200hp and keep running reliably. Plus you could crank the boost up and it wouldn't scatter parts all over the street. And it got about 25mpg.

 

The made roughly 30,000 grand nationals. that's not a small amount by any strech. Keep in mind a new grand national was about $18,000 new in the 1980's. That's not cheap. An Iroc Z with options was about the same price and a fully loaded Monte Carlo SS was $3K cheaper. $18K in 1987 is about $39K in today's money. to put this in perspective, they sold more Grand Nationals from 1984-1987 than Subaru sold WRX Sti cars in america from 2004-2006.

[99StockGT]

Sequential Fuel Injection and distibutorless ignition in 1984 for starters. Think about that, a GN with a turbo v6 with port injection FI and a distributorless ignition would be sitting in the same showroom as a carb'ed 305 powered buick electra wagon and possibly (if the dealer was a chevy dealer as well) a "cross fire injection" corvette and a banked fire analog MPFI camaro.

 

The block itself isn't really anything special. It's the same 231cu in block Buck had been using for ages, but with lower compression rotating assembly. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, the buick 225 and dauntless engines from the same v6 family were known as overbuilt unkillable lumps that powered many jeeps to glory in the 70's. The Heads are t-type/ GN specific as well.

 

What made the GN engine great was it combined one of the most stout bottom ends with a turbo, and a system that you could tune via computer rather than mechanical adjustments. It made an honest SAE Net 245hp and 355 ft/lbs of torque in a time when the traditional v8 with emissions equipment struggled to make 200hp and keep running reliably. Plus you could crank the boost up and it wouldn't scatter parts all over the street. And it got about 25mpg.

 

The made roughly 30,000 grand nationals. that's not a small amount by any strech. Keep in mind a new grand national was about $18,000 new in the 1980's. That's not cheap. An Iroc Z with options was about the same price and a fully loaded Monte Carlo SS was $3K cheaper. $18K in 1987 is about $39K in today's money. to put this in perspective, they sold more Grand Nationals from 1984-1987 than Subaru sold WRX Sti cars in america from 2004-2006.

 

I'll certainly give you the fuel injection and distrib-less ignition as valid points, though I think that was done more as necessity to make the thing run with the turbo setup. Same thing with the low compression internals, it's pretty much a requirement when throwing forced induction into anything. Definitely can't argue with the tuning side of things, that period of time was definitely the first twinklings of what we have today. As to its domestic competitors, there really weren't any because everything else we were making was terrible.

[Forrest Gump 9]

Probably end up with fwd

[Geeto67]

I'll certainly give you the fuel injection and distrib-less ignition as valid points, though I think that was done more as necessity to make the thing run with the turbo setup.

 

Seems logical except that Buick had been powering the Regal and Lesabre with the same 231 6cyl block, a turbo, and a 4bbl carb since 1978. Did it work? yes, those early turbo cars worked well if you didn't touch them and changed the oil frequently (every $3K). but you couldn't tune them or modify them. They made decent power, 160-200hp depending on year as compared with the 105hp the NA 231 made that same year, but the moment you fiddled with anything the engine ran lean at the upper range. They also got crap gas mileage. It didn't need the FI to run, but it needed it to aspire to better than the V8 cars (180hp from a 350 chevy in 1978).

 

Also remember this, in 1978 the only other turbo car on the market in the US was the Mercedes Turbo Diesel, and the Saab 99 turbo.

 

Same thing with the low compression internals, it's pretty much a requirement when throwing forced induction into anything. Definitely can't argue with the tuning side of things, that period of time was definitely the first twinklings of what we have today. As to its domestic competitors, there really weren't any because everything else we were making was terrible.

 

yes the low compression was needed to run the turbo, but just by building the car GM tried new things. the GN was one of the first GM cars to use ceramic coatings. It was one of the first turbo cars to use an intercooler. When you think about turbo predecessors there are really only 3 that stand out: the 1962 olds turbo, the corvair 180 turbos, the 1980 turbo trans am. All were horrible flops for one reason or another. This worked.

 

Here is what the Buick GN did: it proved GM could build a "modern" technologically advanced car in-spite of itself. the problem is that after the GN, GM went back to being old GM for the rest of the 1980's and most of the 1990s and didn't really figure out why the GN was a legend in its own time or how it could apply it to their whole product line. That doesn't mean they didn't do interesting things, the LT5 comes to mind, but how much more fun could the 1990's have been with LT5 powered caprices or Turbo 4 cylinder z24 cavaliers. Seriously the cobalt SS is a car that could have easily been built by GM a decade earlier if they had gotten their heads out of their ass.

 

you know who did get it? Mopar. If it weren't for the chassis being just absolute crap, the daytona turbo and dodge Omni GHL were tremendously forward thinking cars. Ford kind of got it too turning their Thunderbird turbo coupe into the "super coupe" with a supercharger but that car was always in the mustang's shadow.

[99StockGT]

As a firm believer of turbo things I completely agree with you, there were some steps that had they been recognized and followed up on could have lead GM into making some truly fantastic fun rides. Instead of all the stuff we saw through the late 80s and 90s that were definitely terrible.

 

Turbos on carb'd cars were around, they just weren't something that worked very well and needed constant supervision. Once we realized we could monitor and modify things through electronic brains it opened up a lot of options.

 

On the non-GM side we also saw the birth of the SVO mustang in the states which was a turbo 4 that could out run damn near any domestic V8 with a little bit of massaging. Intercooled low compression forged internals fuel injected all but together in a tried and true ford 2.3 that had been around powering all sorts of things just like the 3.8 from GM.

 

However unlike GM, the Oval boys spun that power into several different cars over a number of years to some very sizable success. Following on those heels were things like the turbo probes which though largely mazda applied a lot of the same lessons.

 

Now we've come into the modern world where turbos are becoming more and more popular for the same power out of smaller more efficient motors. Ford with all their various EcoBoosts and GM with all sorts of various cars across their lines, even the new Camaro with a turbo option. Unfortunately the lessons of the old 3.8 V6 didnt' really come forward into the future... I promise you if you take a look under the hood of a modern mustang with the 2.3 turbo, it's unmistakable where the genes come from.

[99StockGT]

DAMN YOU GM!! That thing was even sexier in person than in photos online...and now!

 

http://jalopnik.com/buick-wont-make-the-avenir-concept-because-its-busy-doi-1754877693

[Geeto67]

DAMN YOU GM!! That thing was even sexier in person than in photos online...and now!

 

http://jalopnik.com/buick-wont-make-the-avenir-concept-because-its-busy-doi-1754877693

 

to translate: GM can't build cool stuff because it is too busy being old GM trying to convince you it is not old GM.

[Miller]

A gaggle of cucks at a meat strudel buffet in here.

[ShowHBK]

A gaggle of cucks at a meat strudel buffet in here.

 

I fucking lawled :funny:

[99StockGT]

They can't build it because they don't want to take the thunder from a re-emerging Cadillac and don't want to build a car that's in competition with the CT6? Are you kidding me?

 

You won't build this!

http://i1045.photobucket.com/albums/b452/LucoreRacing/2016-buick-concept-avista-landing-page-image-05-938x528-022_zpsqis4aocy.jpg

 

Because you are worried it will steal thunder/customers from

 

THIS!?

 

http://i1045.photobucket.com/albums/b452/LucoreRacing/635892915989128751-ct6_zpsl4kkb2ea.jpg