NTX5467

There might be some leads in the Buick Performance Group website too, which has a lot of Skylark "following" for those years. Some of their members/associates have done some "runs" of particular restoration parts over the past few years. It might be necessary to be cognizant of the differences in the Skylark, Skylark 350, and Skylark Custom models when you're looking for parts. Might not be many differences other than in grille-related items on the front end, but each variation had some small or not-so-small differences in other parts of the car's trim and ornamentation. For example, the Skylark Custom used a different grille and possibly related "suround" items than the base Skylark or GS. There might be greater availability of the base Skylark grilles (as they were used on the GS too) than for the Custom--by observation. Or you could convert it to the seemingly more plentiful '71-'72 front end and bumper arrangement (which some others have done from time to time). Also, be prepared to have a good line of credit available (or cash reserves) as the prices might be higher (for the grille and headlight bezels) than you might suspect--by observation. A few years ago, I saw an allegedly NOS '70 Skylark Custom grille go for $500.00 or so and then later, a NOS '71 grille (with box) at the Kokomo BCA Nationals for $700.00--neither of which had the surround chrome trim included, just the base grille. You seem to have the normal vendor choices covered, but don't expect them to have what you need for a Buick (unless it might be a GS or "musclecar") as they might for a similar Chevelle. This is where the salvage yard refs above and the BPG might come in handy. BUT, when you're done, it'll be worth it. I suspect you might also need a new a/c condensor. I suspect the aftermarket sources would be good for that, but they might not be "judging perfect" either. While the a/c system is "open", you might adjust the POA valve for R-134a refrigerant (as detailed in several posts in the www.ackits.com website--I believe that's the correct name) by turning the internal adjustment/calibration screw to later achieve a low side pressure of 26psi rather than 29.5 for R-12, which results in the high/low side pressure differentials being comparable to what they were with R-12 and typically identical cooling performance when the evap pressure is adjusted. You'll have to get the old oil out of the system, but it's probably time for a new accum/drier anyway. It's all there in the forums, which are dated about 2004, use "POA Valve" in the search window and it should bring them up. No need to purchase the "POA Eliminator" contraption, which some vendors mistakenly call a "POA Valve". POA valves were listed in service literature as being "non-adjustable", but when you get it removed from the vehicle, there IS a calibration adjustment either on the front or rear of the valve's internal guts. Afterall, if it's built and needs to perform within a specified range of values, there will always have to be some sort of adjustment capabilities for initial caliabrations--especially for a somewhat complicated assembly as a POA valve rather than the later model pressure cycling switches (which are "throw-away" items). Ford used POA valves too, but put in their tech lit about how to build a tester to test and calibrate them for correct functioning. Main thing with R-134a is to get the old oil out of everywhere it might be, with currently approved flushing procedures or outright replacement of components and leaky hoses and adding new "compatible" oil into the system. No special conversion refrigerants, no "replacement" contraptions for the POA valve, just a simple oil change and POA valve adjustment is all that's needed to obtain R-12 style cooling--according the forums, which all makes sense to me. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

Adam, what about the possibility of some regular GS350 Skylarks? Seems like I saw something of that nature somewhere in print? Kind of a "budget" GS of sorts, but overshadowed by the normal GS455s? I would concur that anything with a "Stage One" badge would have to be a 455, though. This might be another situation of owner mis-information. Possibly started out with a 455 that was later replaced with a 350 (salvage yard sourced)? Possibly the owner thinks it might sell better if it was touted as a GS350 Stage One rather than a GS455 Stage One (due to fuel costs??) as they tend to look the same? Lots of different orientations that could only be, respectfully, addressed by checking the VIN and other vehicle stamp/production codes. Key words being "respectfully" and "non-judgmentally", in that process. Sometimes, having a good poker face can help too--just like at a swap meet. Just some thoughts and observations, NTX5467

One thing Ford did was to "listen" to the Mustang enthusiasts in the prior upgrade of the car (not to the current model, but from the 3rd model back), which resulted in the Return of the Pony Corral to the grille, plus the signature body side contours. At that time, Mustang sales had flattened and they (from what I read in a local Mustang club newsletter, which was also "connected" to the Ford Dallas Zone office at the time) did solicit input. Recall, too, the Ford Probe was supposed to be a Mustang until the Mustang loyalists made their feelings known to Ford--definitely enough to get their attention and rebadge the car as "Probe" (a name used on some Ford experimental vehicles) and start a yearly continual upgrade of the existing Mustang platform/powertrain of that time (which included the "famous" 5.0L Mustang following. Then, when you put a designer in place whose teenage years (car-wise) were focused on the first generations of Mustang, great designs can happen. As with other aspects of life, you can "direct" and "demand" certain styling orientations to happen, but when the lead designer has a passion for what he/she is doing, great synergies can happen. Just going out to look at cars in a warehouse or on the show field can be a great help, but if you didn't basically "grow up" during the time those particular vehicles were built OR were deeply tapped into a knowledge base on the particular vehicles, there are some things that might be missed in trying to decipher the "chemistry" that made them great. Although WE might be a great core group to be "mined" for desires, orientations, ideas on/for newer Buick vehicles, people that have a desire to see the Great Marque of Buick grow and prosper into the future, [[New advertising tag line . . . "BUICK . . . a Great Marque of General Motors" . . . or "BUICK, One of General Motors' 'Great Marques'"]] some might perceive we might be the wrong group of people to be talking to. Problem is that people who are not Buick enthusiasts might have a highly skewed orientation toward the brand--which can be used in shaping the advertising, but not particularly the sheet metal. On the other hand, we might be a little "too traditional" in our tastes and orientations for many existing non-Buick owners or people we might desire to make Buick an aspirational brand for. Getting Buick BACK to "the styling division" of General Motors orientation seems to have already started somewhat, but not quite to the boldness of former times just yet. I believe that INVICTA would be a great name for a flashy-styled new Buick sedan! Hopefully RWD too!! Adding some trim to the side of the car that would allude to the "sweepspear" of particular generations (55-56, possibly) of Buicks (maybe even with two-tone paint!) and standard whitewall tires would be neat! Of course, with VentiPorts (functional even??). "Invicta" and "Electra" have theatrical sounds to them, even when talking about them in normal tones of voice. You just don't get that "quality" when talking about "cold alphanumeric" model designations! "Excitement" in the name, followed by "excitement" in the sheet metal and engineering, can lead to "excitement" in the current and potential customer ranks, which can ultimately lead to greater sales and market segment impact. "Excitement" about the brand that can continue to be passed from generation to generation. If "they" do it right, Buick (as the first car-building business entity of what later became "General Motors") can help expand the rennaissance of General Motors as it's already started. GM has some great models on the ground now, but there need (and probably will be) more to come out of the pipeline in the future. Using BCA members to comprise a "core" focus group would be great, but there will have to be an orientation of also adapting Buick to future generations of new customers. As always, I'm willing as many others in here are. Sometimes, the best information sources are right under your nose, but operatives would rather spend great amounts of money to bring in "experts" from outside to offer advise and guidance in particular areas. Perhaps that is one thing that's wrong with "modern" business models????!!!! There was an article in "Business 2.0" magazine that mentioned that of the corporations that had outsourced their customer service call centers, approx 80% had brought them back "in-house". It seems that any cost savings in that outsorcing had been overshadowed by loss of business profits. Having "contractors" do such corporate-sensitive (customer support) work was heralded as "great", until poor scores on the services (as compared to previously) started impacting the bottom line profits of these same companies (some of which had been known for great customer support). It was noted that contractors do not (or might not) have the same "buy-in" in making sure their client's customers were as "satisfied" as they could be OR taking the extra measures (which might not be completely available to them) as a genuine company employee might. If a contractor might happen to make somebody mad, so what, they still had a job. Not to say that all "outsourced contractor" employees are "poor", but when the company you represent is also the company name on the top of your paycheck, it CAN put a little different orientation into how things happen. Internal employees can also have different lines of communication to get a caller where they might need to be rather than saying "Please call back . . . so that we can better address your concern". Now, if corporate email inquiries could be channeled to desired areas for a response rather than getting the "corporate 'Thank you' reply". Typically, when the parent corporation actively controls all "labor operations" in their control, there is a much better handle on quality than when you might hand-off such operations to somebody else. Kind of like a dealership not having a brake lathe machine to machine brake rotors . . . if they are sent out to a local auto supply that does not fully finish the job (non-directional swirl pattern to OEM production specs), or does a poor job, and there are customer complaints about that brake job, you either make sure of the "subcontractor" or you bring the process in-house and can make sure it's done right (to OEM-manufacturer specs) BEFORE customers presume that there are other things the dealership "Can't do right" and take car sales and service business elsewhere. By observation, I have talked to some oursourced contractor customer support people that were greatly interested in addressing my concern, but when you hung up the phone, then called back, there was no way to talk to the same person again (as I inquired about such, so that I would not have to repeat the previous transaction to the next call center operative, which might be in another part of the world)--even if it was on my "dime". Perhaps, if it had been an "in-house" situation, I could have been given an extension number or agent number to request? But THAT's a whole 'nuther business model to be concerned with. Just some thoughts and comments . . . Enjoy! NTX5467

I didn't get too good of a look at the interior last weekend (too many people crowding around up close), but like many other pictures of GM's new cars, does look better in person than in the pictures. It does look good in the displayed color too, as it better defines the "lines" and "shapes" of the body better than a lighter color might. Probably a darker metallic color of some sort would work well, or a "pearl coat" paint in a darker color--something to highlight the body shapes with the existing chrome/satin nickel trim for accents. As they said last week . . . "In your Buick showrooms in 14 months" Enjoy! NTX5467

If you had been using Dexron II, it was replaced with Dexron III a good many years ago. According to GM, Dexron III is fully backward compatible to the first HydraMatic, just as Dexron II was. Dexron II was upgraded to Dexron IIe when the first electronic valve body/computer controlled GM automatics came out. In my Turbo 350, it seemed to shift a little quicker and crisper, for example. Dexron IIe was upgraded to Dexron III a year or so later. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

1-Current daily driver -- 1977 Camaro Type LT 5.7L V-8 (enhanced) Buicks are awaiting attention . . . 2-Daily miles -- approx 50 miles (to work, home, work, home) daily cummulative yearly miles approx 25K 3-Current average mpg is approx 17mpg needs to be better If I need to go on a trip, I'll usually get a new Buick from the National Car Rental Emerald Aisle Executive Selection at DFW Airport. 4-Owned a hybrid? No 5 & 6-Purchase plans for a hybrid? None I understand that Toyota's current available (on sale in the USA) technology has been in the home market since the 1997 model year. No battery replacements under warranty, they claim (8 yr warranty). Hybrids of that nature might make sense for the way some owners might drive--and where they drive--but in the driving pattern I do OR are the vehicles of a size I could use for an everyday car to "do everything" in (which the Camaro does not always fit either). I feel that diesel/electric hybrids might be a better long term investment, personally, rather than gasoline. 7-I would not be against owning a diesel car or truck either. I found a neat 2006 MB E-class diesel that gets 37mpg highway and ran approx 140mph in a durability test at a test track near Laredo, TX. Turbo 3.2L inline six, 201 hp, 369 lbs/ft torque, for what it's worth. Window sticker of approx $54K and guaranteed resale value in the future--about $1K less money than a comparable gas model. I would not mind a VW diesel either, or even a Jeep Liberty diesel. Euro diesel techonolgy has far eclipsed what we had over here in the early 1980s! Even some of the Olds 5.7L diesels were much better than generally suspected--I couldn't blow one up in the company pickups I had back then. Granted, power was not great, but once I learned how to "drive" it, it worked pretty well. (Note: "drive" in this case means how much throttle and when, plus using manual upshifts on the freeway on ramps to upshift just before it bumped the governor in the diesel pump. Once I learned those things, I got good performance from it, even with a 2.76 rear axle ratio). IF I was in a strictly "downtown" environment, I'd probably opt for a Ford Escape hybrid rather than a Honda or Toyota (even if Ford licenses the technology from Toyota). But that's not where I live at the present time, or possibly in the future either. Whatever I do has to be cost effective. There's still a good bit of use left in the internal combustion gasoline engines that we use every day. Also, whatever I buy will have to be something that I can work on, if need be. "Paid for" and "less expensive to insure with full coverages" are considerations also! The trusty Camaro now has 655k miles on it, so loooonnngggg term durability and replacement parts are also important. Short term and immediate future "finances" dictate that I make better use of what I have than to purchase a new vehicle, but I can afford a weekend rental when I need one. I concur that the results you might get here would be different than another particular "population", so you might preface your results with that notation. Enjoy! NTX5467

Paul, thanks for the advisory on the delayed delivery of the April "Bugle". I got my copy of the April "Bugle" today, approx one week behind when it had arrived in earlier times. I noticed the new font on the mailing labels. Condition when received was excellent. Another great issue by Pete! I think we have hit upon an editor that HAS seemed to mobilize the membership into contributing articles, pictures, and information of their own accord! Other than just being a club magazine with some information in it, I now consider it to be a REFERENCE grade publication with quality worthy of being on any Buick enthusiast's coffee table. A fantastic combination that needs to continue . . . and that we can all be proud of! Enjoy! Willis Bell 20811

There was "plain" white, "diamond" white, and what I'll call the "Lucerne Special White". Diamond White looked neat, but didn't really look "waxed" when it was. A little dull as it aged. Disappeared for a few years to return after Lexus started using it, I seem to recall. Ground-up diamond dust, or something that looked that way, was supposed to be in it. An optional color in many years. "Lucerne Special White" (at a MSRP of $995.00) does look better than the Diamond White, but what pearl-like color it'll shift to can vary from green-gold to gold depending upon which viewing angle and lighting source (i.e., outside or inside). Kind of looks neat, but just not too predictable. The blue-green color they had in the later 1990s was more predictable in its color shift, I think. Not sure of how hard it would be to color match in later years, either. In the end, the "plain" white can be a good winner if you can find it. All "whites" are not the same, though. Some are more "blue-white" while others have more cream or gray in them. Yet they are all "white" and can be waxed and polished to a high degree of shine--which is good. I don't know that plain white was offered in all of the years that the Diamond white was offered on the same cars. Not sure if a plain white is available on the Lucerne, either. In those respects, if you want "white" you might have to take what you can find. I think some of the deeper crimson reds on those cars look nice too, but that's just a personal pref. "1" vote for Plain White Just some thougths, NTX5467

There possibly is a "park" switch in the motor itself. The instrument panel switch obviously is commanding (that's a later model terminology) the motor to turn off, just as it can change the speed, but if the park switch has failed, the motor doesn't know when to park the wiper arms and stop. Might need to check a Buick service manual for that year to verify my suspicions and/or find the real culprit. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

Barney, thanks for the kind words. I thought the heated wiper fluid was a regional "situation" and it seems that it was standard on a few models, but optional on the lower model lines. Then I saw the price of that option and I kind of laughed. Rather than a "gimmick", I perceive it had to do with a particular supplier coming up with what they considered was a "competitive edge" and then finding an OEM to bite for it--at a particular installation level of production numbers. Probably will make some supplier some money, might even keep them out of bankruptcy court too. In some respects, I suspect it can lead to more customer complaints for "not working" than it might help. I still like my tried-and-true Prestone spray de-icer, myself. One thing I DID find out about the heated washer fluid is that the temperature of the water output is related to which vehicle it's on. Something like 140 degrees on one car and 160 degrees on another car. We figured out it had something to do with the thickness of the windshield's laminate on particular vehicles as the defroster would not heat the thicker w/shield soon enough, so the water temp was increased to compensate. I don't know that this heated windshield washer fluid option is an indictment of American vehicle manufacturers being "out of touch" per se, just that they were trying to get an exclusive on the option before it was released to other manufacturers a year later--which would mean it would be on higher-end luxury imports too, but it was on a BUICK first. An attempt at market leadership that we're snickering at, it seems. There have been other items (of late) that GM has had first-year exclusive status on, but unless you knew what they were, not many people noticed. It was also pretty neat when many major import manufacturers bought electronic modules for memory seats and automatic a/c controls from ACDelco. I didn't know about that until a friend that worked for a Porsche+Audi dealership mentioned it. That was in the middle 1980s. Mercedes also used a hot water valve from a 1970 Chrysler AutoTemp a/c system in some their cars in that same general time frame too. And, of course, the TurboHydramatic 400 in Rolls Royces and Chrysler's TorqueFlite 727 in Aston Martins. Chrysler 440s and TorqueFlites in Jensen Interceptors, too. The USA automobile manufacturers used to have many premium products and assemblies that were gladly used by the European manufacturers--most possibly as the USA market was about "power this and that" rather than bare-bones performance and utility, so naturally we had the "highest evolved" items of that nature. In many respects, GM has the heritage of being a "bells and whistles" manufacturer. In some cases, these things have somewhat overshadowed the fact that the basic vehicles they were installed in might have been somewhat lacking in content, design, or refinement compared to the competition (especiallly in the 1980s and later) in particular market segments. Some customers are more forgiving in the "refinement" area than others might be, though, if other purchase criteria on the vehicle are met. Now, for the FUTURE . . . I saw the Buick Enclave "utility" concept at the Dallas New Car Show this past Saturday. It is great, especially if it hits the middle $30K price range for the top trim level. Great styling and lines, yep, "lines". Fantastic interior look and luxury appointments. In the showrooms in 14 months (as the presenter noted). The Camaro concept was also there. It looks much better in real life than any picture they have released of it!!!! Great styling and interior configuration. Yep, it has "lines" too! Then there was the Dodge Challenger concept. While it is reasonably true to the look of the 1970 Challenger, it is BIG and (in my thinking) has about 2" too much height between the rocker panel and the body side feature line. The metallic orange color didn't show off the body shapes and curves too well--at least to me. And then there was the Chrysler Imperial concept. 6" taller than a Chrysler 300, longer wheelbase too . . . even has a hint of Bentley in the rear 1/2 of the car . . . and it has a 5.7L Hemi too, with a top speed of something like 140mph+, but it'll take every bit of that speed to outrun the "ugly" award. But once you see the interior, it is a very nice place to be (and you can't see how the outer sheet metal looks, too much, from in there anyway). 4 passengers only in outstanding comfort with a '55 Imperial-style instrument panel. Really nice. The Camaro and Challenger had throngs of people around their turntables--cameras in hand and flashes going off regularly. Lots of interest, to say the least. I understand that Salado was another great meet, Barney. Always a great reason to "get out of town" and be with some great Buick friends and associates! Seems there was even a Corvair in the mix too???? Congrats to all of the show winners, including the "Most Drips" Award! Take care, NTX5467

Everybody is entitled to their own orientation of the merits of any given product . . . including US. Just as with politics, there are "radicals", "centrists", "conservatives", "progressives", "regressives" or any other tag that might be desired. Being able to determine what is what by whom (what my old college communications text book called "filtering" and "determining point of view or perceptual bias") can be just as important in reading media accounts as it determining why somebody's screaming and hollering about something. I do concur that when something . . . anything . . . is read in an allegedly prestigous big city newspaper or comes from a noted wire/news service, the readers take it "as gospel" and being totally correct in all respects, plus possibly quoting it to their friends and associates (which further spreads any inaccuracies in the article or reporting). If a retraction or correction is noted later, the readers usually miss that (I suspect). GM and Buick have been making progress in many areas. Many of the JDPowers surveys highlight many of those things too, but too few people read those things and continue to talk about things as they might have been 10-20 years ago (which might have been flawed information back then too!!!)--including news media operatives. By observation, the imports usually are talked about in glowing terms and domestics are (basically) stomped upon. Only when consumes get out and look around for themselves and look at ALL media accounts/comments might they make a buying decision to purchase a domestic vehicle over an import. For example, that new Camry might be a great car, but for more money than a LaCrosse/Allure or Impala LS? Those two extra EPA highway mpgs can come at a somewhat stiff price (for the 4 cyl Camry and the V-6 Impala, for example). Just depends upon what people are looking for or perceive they need. We've been through that before. Whether or not we might agree or disagree with the LATimes article, this IS America and we can all have the same right to our own orientations and beliefs. I believe that Buicks have been selling well, but in a somewhat depressed market many operatives only know how to report decreased numbers of sales rather than look at how things are going relative to other brands in the same sales classes. Consider how many smaller car companies were selling less than what Oldsmobile was selling when it was discontinued--which might be used as ammunition for GM deleting more car brands by some that fail to understand that for GM (or any other car company) to grow and/or maintain total market share it takes a multitude of vehicles in different market areas to really work. Having all of thsoe market areas to be in can also allow particular GM divisions to get a little brave and do something neat (which might really hurt smaller car companies) every so often without betting the bank account on one trick pony (so to speak). Many people also seem to forget that, by observation, as soon as one American car company or companies back away from a particular market segment, the import brands usually fill that gap pretty soon and profitably. It might be hard to justify the business case for marginal sales vehicles, but keeping those particular vehicles in the product mix AND better promoting them can make them more profitable and increase sales, not to mention keeping loyal customers loyal (as in not giving them a reason to "stray"). It's always harder to get something back than to keep it in the first place. Also, Subaru has been a GM "partner" for a few years now. From what I recall of GM's advertising boycot of the LATimes, they "made up" sooner than later but GM also got some consessions in the negotiations process too? End result, it got the attention of the LATimes but the actual settlement was not that stiffly enforced? How the LaCrosse/Allure (replacing the Regal/Century), Lucerne (replacing LeSabre and Park Avenue, and Enclave (replacing Rendezvous and Rainier) might affect Buick sales remains to be seen. Look at what they had in 1955 (model lines and type of vehicles) and compare it to what they will have in 2007. By the way, I saw the Enclave at the Dallas New Car Show this weekend. It IS a very nice vehicle--period! Looks great, inside and out; has some innovative features and appointments; should sell well too; should further lower the "average Buick owner's" average age too. 14 months and counting. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

Looking back, it's amazing how compact and efficiently designed those old dealerships were. I always loved the ambience that many of them had, which is totally missing from the "boxes with walls" that modern dealerships have become--regardless of brand. There was really something special in the way they looked and felt--at least to me. Newer and bigger is not always "better". Sure, by some "modern" standards, they were allegedly "dumps", poorly lighted and maintained, several elevation changes in some cases, but they were also built out of stronger concrete than has existed for several decades now--typically. Yet the dealership employees were generally more friendly and kinder than in modern times where everything (including when to call the customers, as in "customer relations management") is computerized, where you shared information with the salesperson as you became friends because you wanted to rather than at the salesperson's insistence to fill up his computerized customer files. And don't forget the "high security" given to new vehicles prior to show date! Those were the times! Thanks for the memories! Some great postcards and pictures in this thread and related articles! Enjoy! NTX5467

Sometimes, there is a little flat spring to move which basically locks the wiper arm to the splined shaft when the arm is pushed all of the way onto the splined shaft. In other cases, there can be a little lever to move too. In either situation, you have to know where they are, but once you know where to look, it's pretty easy to find again. Might take some finesse to move the tang on the spring with a small blade screwdriver as you also try to rock the arm on the splined shaft as you also gently pull upward. Generally, the insert in the wiper arm which indexes with the splined shaft is cast from softer metal than the splines are. That's what will "strip" and render the arm useless, usually. In some cases, it's not entirely round (being more of a flattened circle) so that it's kind of designed to strip rather than bend some of the internal (in the cowl) wiper transmission links or tear something else up in the process. Considering that the insert for the wiper blade, along with the blade assembly itself, are both removeable without having to remove the wiper arm, there is usually little need to remove the wiper arm from the car. Wiper blades and related inserts are another situation, though. Does the car still have the original blade on it or has somebody put something "inappropriate" on there? Just curious. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

Some GREAT posters! Looks like that would supplement the GMPhotoStore.com products too! Now, to get enough of those things to wallpaper (display) on one wall in a "car room" of the house???? Maybe more than one room???? Thanks, NTX5467

Twisting all of those plastic wing nuts means that no electric tools are needed. A pretty slick way to do things in the "modular approach" too. Many later model cars are that way, yet there are some tricks to know too (i.e., Reatta). Any you ought to see what they've done to ease headlight bulb replacement too! Pretty slick in some cases! Enjoy! NTX5467

You might access the website for the Colorado DMV or possibly a link to their vehicle codes for "antique" vehicles. There might also be some information on the SEMA.org website, which would relate to passed legislation on that issue in Colorado. You might also check on the BCA Chapter list in The Bugle to contact some of the operatives in Colorado for their input and knowledge in what you desire to do. Of course, any YOM plate will have to be from the state of residence rather than where you might have previously used your existing YOM plates. I suspect there will be some vintage license plate vendors at swap meets up there just as there are in TX. Using the TX codes as a guide, you will probably have to get the vehicle inspected and licensed in the state prior to getting it changed over to a YOM or antique plate. If you find one of your liking at a swap meet, then there are guidelines to get it restored and then accepted by the DMV as suitable for use AND then them making the necessary changes to the registration documents. Might take a while, but it can be worth it. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

Other than cosmetic issues, I suspect the "Super" will be an adaptation of chassis hardware first seen on the Grand Prix GXP and then on the Impala SS--with a few exceptions. The GXP, being from Pontiac, had many "go fast/stop fast" items on the chassis. Brembo calipers (although the calipers on the 2004 GP redesign were already stengthened), slotted and drilled rotors, larger front tires/wheels than on the rear, special chassis calibrations. Then came the Impala SS with the same 5.3L V-8 (with Displacement-On-Demand and a instrument panel readout to indicate when that was happening), but with upgraded normal brakes and 4 tires of the same size--aka things that would make the basic Impala V-8 "agreeable" to fleet use AND be more user-friendly by the general public, but with speed rated tires. I suspect the "Super" will be more along the lines of the Impala SS -- chassis equipment wise -- but could also have Magnetic Ride Control (as the Lucerne CXS has) and some other high-tech items. The one question I might pose would be which engine will be in the car (all that's been mentioned is horsepower, not engine size or source? It would be easy to do the 5.3L V-8 (or the larger version from the Corvettes, 5.7 or 6.0), but being that Buick's price point supposedly means "more tech", then what about the possibility of it having a normally-aspirated NorthStar? In the days of the Oldsmobile Speciality Vehicles group, there were NorthStar Intrigues as "development vehicles", by the reports I heard back then, so maybe that stuff will finally surface in a LaCrosse/Allure Super? Thanks for the information, Roberta! Enjoy! NTX5467

Ethanol, like most alcohol-based compounds, absorbs water when exposed to air. In pipelines, they used to use a "divider" of water (of some kind) to allow different batches of fuel from different sources to travel in the same pipeline. Can't do that with ethanol, obviously. Possibly one reason that different fuels had different colors in prior times? Since about the middle 1980s, all replacement rubber items that relate to an automotive fuel system have been rated and compounded for "alcohol fuel blend" contact. Therefore, NOS items are not good in these places, unless they were produced post-1985 (or thereabouts). Seems like South America has been using "high aromatic" alcohol-based fuels since the 1980s, which also prompted GM to issue a particular part number for Quadrajet carburetors' accel pump cup (export market, "high aromatic fuel" listing in the parts list of particular carb numbers). If you read your owner's manual, it could well state that up to 15% ethanol is acceptable to operate in your (newer) vehicle--but only the "bi-fuel" vehicles of late (usually with some little emblem to signify such, or a particular engine option code on the build sheet/Service Parts ID label) can tolerate the E85 fuels. Again, read your late model vehicle's owner's manual for information. As mentioned, some of the early fuel tank sealers were not compatible with alcohol-based fuels. Many CURRENT fuel blends have had a small amount of ethanol in them for several years--depending upon and varying by brand and region. MTBE was a known carcinogen when it was approved. After it was discovered in the water supply of a California city, then they got excited and that started the ball rolling on getting it outlawed. In TX, it'll be gone by May of this year, for example. MTBE was also linked to many respiratory issues with "at risk" individuals, yet this issue was not widely mentioned as it was promoted as "a better" situation. Some of these health issues were (seemingly) close enough to those of ozone issues to be considered "the same", but reporting of such things was (by observation) highly crude in those earlier times, so the information from the medical field could be flawed. For more information on the ongoing MTBE situation, since its inception, there could well be some archived information on Ed Wallace's website www.insideautomotive.com. Even before the alcohol content in our fuels was a real issue, there were transition periods between winter and summer fuels where many vehicles, including newer ones, had issues in the warmer weather of spring that might have happened sooner than anticipated. Stalling, poor fuel economy, poor driveability--all of which went away as the blends got stabilized a month later. If there are concerns about "hot fuel handling" or vapor locks due to evaporating fuel from the fuel bowl, there can be a few things to consider. ONE will be engine operating temperature and radiator condition--if in doubt, get it cleaned out or replaced and use the recommended temperature thermostat of good quality. If the engine temp starts hotter, then it'll get hotter in the "hot soak" mode after turning off the engine. If possible, always aim the car into the wind when you park it. That should get things cooled down sooner with less evaporative loss from the float bowl. Keeping the outside of the carb clean can help things cool down sooner too. Similarly, making sure the clutch fan (if equipped) is working as designed is a related issue. Many replacement fan clutches are no longer of the thermostatic variety (preferred, with the thermostatic coil on the front), but rather of the earlier design that decoupled based on engine speed rather than cooling demands (no thermostatic spring on the front). I always liked the dedicated bolt pattern flange rather than the universal slotted design (using the centering hole specifically to center the clutch on the water pump hub), but many older part numbers are now of the universal flange design. I'm not sure why a turbo might "love" alcohol-based fuels, other than the possibility that it might serve to cool the charge a little more, might be marginal at best. Another "something" that might be needed is to increase the size of the carb main jets to compensate for these newer fuels. Back when octane boosters were "everywhere", some recommended increasing the main jet sizes up to 4 sizes larger, which was later determined to be due to the high alcohol content of the particular quart of booster, lest it lean things out too much--don't know how this might play into the situation with a vintage street car, though, so an air/fuel ratio check on a road load chassis dyno might be advised before going this direction. It could be that higher compression engines might make the transition to alcohol-based fuels better than lower compression engines might. And, last but not least . . . many of the oil company websites might contain some really good information on (what might be called "Reformulated Fuels with Ethanol") gasoline now blended with Ethanol, plus the "greater" Ethanol fuel E85. MTBE was considered a "fuel extender" or "oxygenate" additive, with Ethanol now taking it's place in that respect. I kind of suspect there have been some SAE Transations/papers on this subject, but have not investigated that possibility. Remember that this change of additive packagaes is generated by governmental entities and not the oil companies themselves. In the DFW area, fuel prices have spiked to $2.75+/gallon for regular unleaded in the past weeks--which curiously seemed to follow predictions from industry "experts" that such would happen. DFW and Houston have to be changed to the new additives by sometime in May. Refineries have to be changed over too, it seems. Spot shortages of fuel due to lack of fuel inventories are also happening, but these shortages have been spotty and temporary (as reported in the local newspapers). In some cases, the name brand fuels have been slower to increase prices than the private brand fuels, but they'll all stabilize at the same levels before it's all over. People seem to be more price conscious, especially on the fringes of the area where they have to drive an hour to work each day (one way), but speeds on the highways have not noticeably become slower. As much as we might complain about the fuel prices now, many of our reference points can hinge upon what they were when we were growing up. If you remember 25 cent/gallon regular leaded gas, then things are really more expensive now than in the 1960s (or prior), but if you're younger and your reference point if more in the $1.50/gallon range, it's not quite as big of an increase. Fuel costs have not really been influenced by inflation as other consumer good have, though--not that THAT's justification for some of the (perceived) pricing tactics of late, though. How a vintage vehicle "takes" to the ethanol-blend fuels can be highly variable. Maintenance and operating condition can be factors just as basic design and engineering of vehicle systems can affect the tolerance to ethanol blend fuels. A good start would be to make sure that everything's working "to spec" before automatically blaming the fuel for any new problems. Although the water absorption issue was noted to be an issue with alcohol-based fuels, it does not really seem to be as much of an issue as some might expect. This is one time that keeping the fuel tank pretty much full during storage could be beneficial (less air in the tank which can be moisture-laden with changing ambient temperatures over time). A lower fuel level, latent condensation from ambient temperature swings, plus latent corrosion in the tank itself might all contribute to an accelerated "crud in the tank" issue--not than any would be broken loose (unless possibly the earlier sealers had been used), but that it would multiply faster than normal with the fuel now absorbing more of the latent condensation. Perhaps an incognitio clear inline fuel filter could be an asset in these situations (or the glass fuel filter bowl on earlier vehicles)? We might be trading one environmental issue for another one in the change from MTBE to Ethanol-blend fuels, but it's something we can work together to help each other with in making that transition (where applicable). Just some thoughts, NTX5467

More and more functions that used to be "hard wired" are now run via the Body Control Module--even the starter (which is why there might seem to be a slight delay between when you turn the key and the starter engages on many modern vehicles, automatically disengaging the starter when the engine speed signals "Started" to the BCM--plus not letting the starter re-engage while the engine is running). Lots of interfaces between many more vehicle "body" functions as time progresses into the future. NTX5467

In those model years, the Hurst Hatch Roof was not done at the factory, but by an authorized Hurst Hatch Installation Center near the location (hopefully close by) of the dealership the vehicle was invoiced to. If the price is on the window sticker, it was all handled outside of the dealer's normal activities, but if it was a "dealer add-on" situation, it would not be on the manufacturer's window sticker or build sheet. To do that installation, the interior was removed and a holding tool placed into the sun visor mounting holes and also inserted into a rear roof inner structure area (especially on unit body vehicles!!). Then the template was installed, along with plenty of masking tape around the areas to be cut, and the installation began. In some cases, an extra front-back brace was installed down the middle of the inner roof structure. Other than the disassembly and reassembly, the installation was pretty straight forward to do. Back then, the Hurst Hatch Roof option was a really big deal. On some GM cars, the width of the glass in the roof panels was narrower than with some of the later brands, especially on the F-body Firebirds. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

There will need to be a switch in the door frame (somewhere, possibly on the front side) to interrupt the ground path of the dome light circuit. As mentioned, the headlight switch can override what happens at the door. The switch is a simple "ground interrupt" switch to break the circuit and keep the lamp from being on. If the switch has failed, it can keep the light on. The failure would be for the contacts inside of the switch to be touching regardless of what the plunger of the switch does. There should be a timer in the Body Control Module that will turn off the dome lamp after about 30 minutes of the vehicle not being in use. "Battery Rundown Protection", I think they called that. A different function than the "Theatre Lighting" which gradually dims the interior lamps after the last car door closes. Regarding the door locks "not setting", is that via the door switch or the keyless entry remote or possibly an automatic locking orientation when the vehicle reaches a particular speed? That's a different circuit from the dome lamp, though. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

If the window goes down fine, but has trouble being rolled back up, it could be a window regulator issue. It sounds like the regulator is binding somewhere and causing the thermal cutout on the motor to do its job. Probably need to remove the door panel to inspect the regulator asm as it goes up and down. I'm not sure how the door panel comes off, but sometimes it's better to let somebody else do those things. Probably need to check the voltage at the release solenoid of the deck lid release. Might be that it's working fine, but the housing that holds it (which would react to the "release" torque of the solenoid) could have fractured with time and use. Again, it just needs to be observed during operation to see where the problem might be. Enjoy! NTX5467

The "key" might be if they are "NOS" or "NORS" hoses OR if they are new hoses with the correct numbers and codes and configuration for the original hoses they will replace. To me, a 50 year old rubber hose might be great for a 110% correct restoration, but I don't think I'd trust it for a road trip of any length. In any event, I would consider it very fragile. It could serve a reproduction company well (to build a new repro part off of). Depending upon how it was stored could also determine how valuable it would be in actual use too (as in how much the rubber might have deteriorated/aged over the years). In many cases, the major brands of "production-style" hoses were usually pretty close to the originals (some were even better as they might have fixed the OEM "problem areas"), but there were also some universal-fit hoses that would look cobbled-up by even standards back then. Ultimately, it will depend upon what the purchaser's expectations are for the NOS rubber part (while being cognizant of all of the side issues). By observation, the "value" of some parts/items offered for online auction can be more in the mind of the seller than in the minds of the potential purchasers. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

It could be that the "normal" lash adjustment (on the top of the box, with the jam nut) might need to be revisited. When I got my '68 LeSabre, the steering felt funny and made some "worn out" noises until I got it tightened up some. The box still has some wear in it, but it feels better now. The "connector" in the line you indicate might have more to do with getting resonances out of the system than fluid restriction per se. Chrysler has used "stepped" hoses, but in greater size differences than on yours, for years (at least with the '70s and prior). Only reason can be to get harmonics out of the fluid flow, I suspect. The only restriction in the power steering system is in the back of the power steering pump. There's a drilled orifice (which is replaceable) where the pressure line attaches, that governs "boost". A little difference in the hole size can make a BIG difference in steering actions--as in from highly overboosted to normal to less than normal--which is independent from the "feel" imparted by the stiffness (or lack of) of the internal torsion bar in the gearbox. Basically, there have been no more than three different orifice sizes over the years. Too large of an orifice dimension can make the steering have a mind of its own, highly overboosted at the same time, by observation. This is a reason that a replacement reman power steering pump might feel different than the original one you took off. Once you get the gearbox adjustments taken care of, then you might also get a hand vacuum pump and figure out a way to pull a vacuum on the power steering reservoir. Might be some trapped air in the mix too. I suppose you are using GM-spec power steering fluid? Enjoy! NTX5467

Skyking, I concur that "INVICTA" would have been a worthy nameplate to put up against the Chrysler 300. Only problem is that the "metal" does not seem very willing (the Lucerne) or worthy of such a flashy name as "Invicta", with all due respect. Now, after I sat at work and pondered how to spiff up the Lucerne . . . (don't gasp too loud!) . . . there are some body lines that with some of the chrome (probably it would need to be "satin nickle" now) trim of yestercentury, there are a couple of possibilities for two-toning ala 1961 Invictas. Unfortunately, it would take more to get rid of the side mouldings and make a SweepSpear side motif ala Boat Tail Rivs or something akin to a 1956 Buick. Seems strange that the Lucerne has body side mouldings in the way and the Cadillac STS has none to start with! Even a simple single pinstripe on the Lucerne makes it look better! One of my work associates also believes that the Lucerne needs a chrome strip down the middle of the hood, with a stand-up hood ornament so the "typical Buick owners" can tell where the front end of the car is. Might give it a more upscale touch of class too! I've been looking at tape stripes for the LaCrosse too. Have it almost figured out. A modified SweepSpear of sorts to follow the existing body lines. I'm not sure about "Super" and "LaCrosse" together. But it amounts to "smaller and lighter car" and "big engine". Now, while the horsepower figure has been mentioned, considering that OHV motors are allegely "pa-saaaayyyyy" in that price class, might the V-8 in the LaCrosse Super be the NorthStar rather than the LS1 as is in the 2006 Impala SS and Pontiac Grand Prix GXP? Be glad that platinum-tip spark plugs are now standard!!! I'll check some of the newspapers in the morning for possibly pictures of all three. Just some thoughts . . . NTX5467