NTX5467

First, my apologies for getting this discussion a little off topic. Second, you can take an ugly duckling to charm school, teach it the social graces, send it to a personal trainer for a better looking body, then to the Max Factor-type people for a makeover, BUT it's still the same ugly duckling under the skin AND in the bloodline, all things considered. Might be a "new swan" in the end, but we all know where it started from. Third, Eldos were "E" cars, Sevilles were "K" cars all the way to the end of those models of Cadillac. Later fwd Devilles were also "K" cars. Lots of coverage in the "K" Cadillac designation over the decades! Fourth, the early Sevilles were great cars, regardless of their prior GM bloodline. The CA article is really quite in-depth and well researched as it details many of the battles Cadillac fought to get the basic body shell to "Cadillac standards". A body shop customer of ours had a comment . . . "It's good enough for who it's for" and that seems to be something of a guide in designing vehicles. We also know it's less expensive and quicker to adapt from an existing platform than to design a complete new one, especially back then when it took about 5 years to get a new design vehicle to market. Fifth, it's not my desire to demean the '75 era Sevilles in any respect by associating them with the GM X-body. Those early X-cars were some really good designs, just that NVH was not up to what a Cadillac customer would "expect" them to be. Therefore, the reason they (including all involved) went to the lengths they did to distance it from the more mundane X-car platform, lest it get the reputation of being a "fancy Chevrolet" ang nothing more--especially after Chevrolet had such great success with their "budget Cadillac" Caprice. Sixth, I respect your thoughts and orientations, but we have really been incorrect to get so involved in Cadillac issues in a Buick venue. Seventh, the Buick version of the rwd X-body platform, the middle 1970s Buick Apollo was a verrryyyy nice car in so many respects! Plus it could be had with a good running Buick 350 V-8 too! I feel these cars are highly underrated due to their more humble market segment, but with a few parts upgrades they can be really fun cars for daily driving. When's the last time you saw one of those??? I highly suspect many of us have seen an Invicta more times than a rwd X-car Apollo! Again, my apologies for contributing to these Cadillac injections in a Buick venue. Respectfully, NTX5467

There was an article in Collectible Automobile several years ago that detailed the fact that the first year of that particular version of Seville was indeed adapted from the Chevy Nova (X-body) platform and mentioned all of the various things they did to get it up to Cadillac standards of NVH. For example, special body mounts that were totally different from anything Chevy or other divisions used for their X-cars (which had a Cadillac-specific part number and are long discontinued). It mentioned that the second model year went to the larger full size Cadillac's wheel bolt pattern and larger brakes on the rear. Still, it was on the X-car platform (even with the added-on Cadillac parts). These things are easy to track due to the "Cadillac part number" sequence that was used back then--each GM division had their own part numbering sequence so that if you knew what you were looking at, you could determine which division of car it fit. That same article also mentioned that GM sent some production people to Opel to see about adapting one of their larger models instead of using the X-car platform. The decision was made to use the existing X-car platform and upgrade it as necessary. The sales literature talked about their attention to detail and their fasteners for the side moldings having a dab of adhesive in the cap screws to keep them "as assembled" tight. Lots of things that were not done on other Cadillacs, it seems. A really nice car, but from what I've seen, few surviving "pristine" models. The "Percent of Common Content" numbers can be easily manipulated as extra paint, a larger dab of undercoat, an extra hole drilled, an extra bracket attached, or a different rubber bushing will generate a different part number (and production spec) on two parts of the same origin. For example, consider one cylinder head casting that is machined for use on two different spec engines which use different valve sizes (or even different valve stem diameters for the same valve head size!) from each other--same basic part, different labor operations, different part numbers. Sometimes, sales and engineering people can go to particular lengths to shield the real origin of some things from the general public, by observation. In the case of the later '70s Seville, they really did change things from the original basic platform spec to "do it right" (adapting and upgrading to existing Cadillac standards) without having the luxury of time or funding to design their own platform, but the Cimmaron was a little different situation. Body "codes" can be changed as desired. Consider the A-body LeMans that generated the A-spl "G-body" Grand Prix in '69, for example, and other A-body intermediates that were nomenclatured "G-body" by GM over the years. Common architecture, some more special than others, but still basic A-body cars. Or the GM light trucks in 1987. The '86 and prior full size trucks were all C/K nomenclature from way back when. These same vehicles became R/V in '87 until their production end at the end of the '91 model year (Suburban/Tahoe and some cab/chassis models). Same trucks as before, but they could not be "C/K" any more as the new-for-1988 light duty trucks were now "C/K". Then, when the current Silverado came out, a single cab short bed was nomenclatured C15703 and the 1988-style truck was C10703. It can get somewhat confusing sometimes. If you want to compare body structures, you'll most probably end up with GM parts and service books from the dealer body. Even some assembly manuals if those might exist for the Cadillac. As the particular Seville was adapted from an existing body, there should be several common "hard points" in the two structures. Exterior sheet metal might be different, but things like the parts of the structure that would, of necesssity, be common will be significantly the same. I rather doubt you'll find these things online, but I could be wrong. I would recommend you find the article from Collectible Automobile, though. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

Tom, I understand your concern about contact information for the TAs. I also understand that everyone has their own preference of contact method, which as the "giver" they are entitled to determine and specify. From the perspective of someone with a question, I can fully understand how important it is for them to have an answer "NOW" as their whole life might revolve, seemingly, around getting that question answered. Can't wait, gotta call NOW! I've seen that happen--whether in the car hobby or in related businesses. And when the answer could not be obtained from a "willing expert", then THEY got to be the "bad guy" or were perceived to be "unresponsive" or whatever. In earlier times, I've spent upwards of three hours on the phone talking to ONE person about car club things or car issues or answering a bunch of questions just because I was too nice to tell them I had other things I needed to be doing. I didn't mind talking to them, but there has to be a limit. Just as there has to be a limit on how much time I spend in here. And that doesn't include the "I hear you like ________ cars and I have one for sale . . . ." or "How much is a ________ worth?" Initially, it's kind of neat to be asked these questions, but in the end it might have more to do with some people not availing themselves of the resources they might not know they had instead of trying to get out "cheap" with just a phone call. Or the people that just seem to want to talk to somebody. What I have had to do is to advise them of where they can find the printed information they are seeking, instead of taking my time to "eductate" them. I had to learn the same things so I suspect they can too. One of the great things about car clubs is the sharing of information among the members, but everybody has their own tolerance level of what and when and how they desire to do that. Many people, by observation, are not fully aware of many of the informational resources that are readily available, it seems. So, let me list a few tips that might help expedite the whole information gathering function: --Have your vehicle information (not specifically quoting model number, but body style description) ready to relay to the TA when you call or write or email them. Just like going to the parts store, both of you knowing what the vehicle and its related equipment is important. --Make sure the TA you contact is in the specified area of your inquiry, not just the general year and model of vehicle. Be respectful of their contact hours, if listed and ALSO know the time zone might be different than your own. --Realize that the TA's time is just as important as your own. They have to eat, sleep, "pit stop", and work just as you do, so brevity is important. --Understand that information you might be getting is related to one person's knowledge and experience, which might differ from what you'll find in a judging manual or service publication. Many times, you might get information you'll not find anywhere else too. Whether or not you decide to follow their response is up to you. --If you might call, be aware that some people might not answer a phone call where the Caller ID is unknown to them, or "out of area". No way to determine if it's a telemarketer or someone with a TA call. And in the case they might do a "reverse lookup" of the phone number on Caller ID, having YOUR phone number capable of being found can be highly important. --If you might get an answering machine or voice mail, be brief with your question and then offer a phone or email address for the reply. In the case of an email inquiry, be aware that some email providers do not send their emails immediately, but might "batch email" them at later times, so how soon you get a response will relate to when the email arrives and then when the recipient opens their email and responds to the inquiry. --If you choose email inquiries, MAKE SURE your anti-virus protection on the computer you use to send the email with is UP TO DATE. Not relying on the Internet Provider to do it, but YOU doing it--period. I joined a mail list in 2004. About a month later, I started getting virus emails (usually 41-42K in size) from people who were obviously on that mail list, some from Europe and some from the US. Ended up with a mail box full of them--deleted them all! Personally, I like email rather than phone or snail mail. It can allow for better response time and also allows me the flexibility of when the reply is done (i.e., 1:00am) so that I'm not playing phone tag or trying to schedule the rest of my life around getting the reply done at a time convenient for the recipient. Snail mail would be the next preferred medium. And, of course, the OTHER OPTION would be to put a post in one of these BCA Forums about the question or concern. I suspect that many of the people whom you might desire to contact from the TA list monitor these forums regularly, plus others with various expertises that might not desire to be TAs too. All of the people who are listed as TAs in The Bugle have signed on to make an investment in the Buick hobby, to the mutual benefit of all involved. But sometimes there's much more giving of information than thanks or compensation for receiving it. Being a TA can be very rewarding, but it can also be a variable pain too (just depends on the particular situation). Just some thoughts, NTX5467

Mr. Flint started reporting on the auto industry in 1958, so he's seen lots of things happen in that time. He ALSO has not minced any words in the past about what has been "wrong" with GM--something that some of the former (and probably current) management did not like to be "told" or have to sit through. Still, his assessments have credibility. Many of the "problems" at GM began in the middle '80s and were NOT fixed with the "palace coup" in the early '90s, nor with "brand management" by people more used to hawking sun glasses or detergent. Lutz has really changed the whole GM product organization in many positive ways, but perhaps we had some "greater expectations" on the product side of things? Perhaps new product is still more a function of "disposable" corporate profits ("disposable" meaning after paying shareholder dividends) than some would like to admit? Perhaps there was too much to change with "breakthrough" products in one feld swoop? Perhaps Lutz forgot how they did things at Chrysler, recognizing that they did neat things with the same product investment that could have easily done more "bland" vehicles? Many side issues that can only be speculated on! To me, the LaCrosse looks more like a sedan version of the last gen Riviera, from the front, but that rear deck lid screams "Nissan Altima" to me. I saw the spy shots of the next Impala and Monte Carlo--can you say "Recycled Lumina" styling? Not to mention the "evolutionary" styling in the LeSabre replacement "Lucerne"? None of these vehicles are the "gotta have"-styled vehicles we were led to believe they would be, it appears, but just "mid-cycle refreshes" as we wait for the GM model cycles to turn again to "new" platforms that really ARE new. These vehicles might have "much improved" interiors, but if the exterior styling is still unremarkable, who's going to want to look inside? GM likes to ballyhoo about how much money they are pouring into "new product", but it appears they are not getting their "bang for the buck" that they might have--by observation of what other companies are doing. AND they have to cycle the investment from carline to carline in some sort of priority system--just like they seemed to take Olds profits in the late '80s to rebuild Cadillac -- back then -- as Olds had profits back then, yet was later starved for new product in the early '90s, which ultimately led to the demise of that noble brand. Perhaps I'm a little frustrated by that whole situation, but I recall the "glory days" when new GM models were cycled by body series in ALL divisions instead of how they are now. When ALL of the intermediate line was new, for example, or all of the full size cars were new in the same year. Now, Grand Prix gets the upgraded platform first, then Buick, then Chevy, it seems. Might keep customers coming into the newer combined dealerships over the years of new introductions, but it also can dilute the "ALL NEW" orientation too, when this year's ALL NEW GRAND PRIX is next years ALL NEW BUICK LaCROSSE and the next year's ALL NEW IMPALA. Is something wrong with that scenario? Depends on what your orientation is--toward "financial" or "neat, new product" to generate sales and publicity in the press, I suspect. Maybe Lutz has been spending too much time "rebuilding" the European operations? Forgive me if I seem to be losing my patience, but there just seems to be -- and have been in the "mid-century 1900s" -- a better way to do things. Modern styling just seems too "common" for some reason. Or is this styling driven by certain vehicular design architectures of components that's driven by lower assembly cost AND higher assembly quality? For all of the talent that GM has at its disposal in MI and CA, I just shake my head and wonder where it's all going with respect to the mainstream car product. Ford and Chrysler seem to have the "market cornered" on being able to use "retro" names on new vehicles and also design and style vehicles with many "retro/heritage? styling cues that loudly resonate with existing and NEW owners (the current "Charger" situation excepted). Or is GM choosing sub-optimal vehicles to "retro"? Lots of discussion points, I suspect. Perhaps the Regal/Century car needed to be renamed anyway, but making a warmed over LeSabre into "Lucerne" as if that's going to really get -- and keep -- people coming to see that car, I have my doubts. It ought to be "LeSabre" as that's what it really is, a new version thereof. Perhaps if the "GM Style" is already locked in for several more years, then what about figuring out how to add some COLOR to the production vehicles? As blah as the current DeVille looks, I've seen some with darker lower body color and then some chrome wheels that really did dress the car up--one even had a conservative rear spoiler too. Just like the dark argent lower body paint on the prior Regals gave them a very high class look, why is not something like that standard equipment on Buicks anyway? There just seems to be quite a bit of untapped potential in current GM styling that it's unreal, especially in the color and wheel area. Just because Hondas and Acuras and such have monochromataic exterior color orientations is NO reason for GM to follow suit! Even some body side moldings with mylar chrome accents would be better than what they have now! Maybe some creative two-tones or classy pin stipes (if the bodies had enough congruent feature lines to make those things work!)? Maybe it's a "generational" thing? Enjoy! NTX5467

Lexusfreak, thanks for the reply and comments. RE: NorthStar issues -- The oil leaks, which usually get everybody's "attention" are due to the design of the block (having a main bearing "saddle" instead of individual main caps) and how also the design of the vehicle "around" it. In order to fix the "leak" (or accumulated seep), the main saddle must be removed from the block and new seals installed. That, in itself, does not sound too bad, until you consider that to get the motor out, you have to drop the front subframe ("cradle"), as there is no way to get the engine, or even a cylinder head on the motor "out" without removing the whole front subrame sub-assembly from the vehicle, from the bottom. To replace just those $30.00s worth of seals, you end up with a $2500.00+ repair bill. I think I'd try some brake clean and externally applied (finessed and in the correct color, of course) silicone sealer, if that was possible--not to mention finding out why the oil was leaking from an area that is above the oil level in the crankcase (PCV system issues?). That type of construction was basically reserved for top fuel drag race motors in earlier times, which used a "stud girdle" for added lower end rigidity and strength. Other motors also use it now, it seems, as it might also decrease assembly hours on the engine assembly line. Might also be related to the brand of oil too. The other common "complaint" is the placement of the starter in the valley between the cylinder heads. This was first done, from what I recall, on the ZR-1 Corvette motors. When it came out on the NorthStar, it was mentioned that starters are so reliable in more modern times that they were not "common" replacement items, so packaging them in that location was more acceptable. From what I've seen, that's pretty much true. Sure, you have to remove the intake manifold to change it out and it does look pretty involved, but it is obviously within the capabilities of many shadetree mechanics too--if they take their time. In reality, the packaging of the starter on the NorthStar V-8s is much better and easier to do than the DOHC 3.4L Monte Carlo (and other similar W-body cars that used that motor) is. And it's in the "traditional" location. The other situation is when you pull the heads off (for whatever reason) the motor, which has been well past 150,000 miles (by observation), the threads in the aluminum block for the head bolts usually have "issues". I'm not sure what sort of coating they might have had when assembled at the factory, but it might not totally prevent the threads from coming out with the bolts. Conventional wisdom suggested HeliCoiling each one of the bolt holes, but a replacement "TimeSert" insert for just this service issue is less expensive and easier to do. Most of the Cadillac dealers either have them or know where to get them. But still, this is not something that happens until well past 100,000 miles. And then the question might be posed of whether these issues with NorthStar V-8s are worse or anymore expensive to fix than the factory air bag suspension on Lincolns? The NorthStar engine has turned out to be a very durable engine, especially considering its assembly complexity. Many of the electronics issues on it are pretty easy and simple to fix too. The reason the engine/subframe must be removed from the bottom for any engine work of any significance (other than starter, alt, and similar things) is how the body on the fwd cars is contoured around the engine. A packaging situation which makes the LS series "Chevy" V-8s of similar horsepower look pretty inviting, even if they do not have the "requisite" OHC configuration for that price class vehicle. Not to mention the earlier 4.9L Cadillac-only engine in the earlier cars. VW and Audi have been "married" for many decades, yet each has been treated as a completely separate operating unit of the same parent organization. And don't for get Porsche in the same group too. VW dealers typically were separate from the Porsche+Audi dealerships too. I know that Lexus vehicles are not just rebadged Toyotas, yet the smaller Lexus models typically have more in common with the Camrys, by observation, with the larger series Lexus being their own unique entity. I usually don't rely specifically on the "% of common content" figures as I know that the same part, with an additional gussett or hole or other "labor operation" on it generates a new part number for the part per se. So what I look at is just how much is similar when you put them both on a lift side by side, or look under the hood at body stamping and such. Parts sharing with Toyota vehicles would not be a good thing for the "image" of Lexus. When the Cadillac Sevilles came out in about '76, those cars were on the same platform as the Chevy Nova and other GM X-body cars. As it was a market test for a smaller Cadillac, they also used many Nova replacement parts (i.e., brakes, wheel bolt pattern). So they got the reputation of being a "Fancy Nova", yet in the second and later model years, after the market niche was determined to be a good one, those Chevy parts were replaced with parts common to Cadillacs. Yet those cars had many unique and Seville-specific parts (i.e., body mounts) too. So, this might help explain why small Lexus brake pads are different than similar Camry pads (shape, configuration, friction materials?). I will concur that Lexus typically had a better balance luxury car package than Infinity did in the earlier years. The Lexus had a nicely conservative look with good mechanicals and the Infinitys went more for an "Oriental Jag X-type sedan" look, yet the Infinitys had much more interesting mechanicals with an optional active suspension option and other similar things that Lexus did not have. Lexus did "change things" and capture the imagination of many buyers, as the similar Infinitys had grass growing under them. Where Nissan got into trouble was in giving very generous (i.e., inexpensive leases underwritten by the parent corporation) lease rates on the cars to get them on the street (and keep their dealers in business). Then they didn't stagger the lease expiration rates sufficiently to keep all of the cars from coming back in at the same time. All things which conspired to further drive down resale value--yet make them exceptional values on the used car market for their level of sophistication (according to DFW area auto historian Ed Wallace). One of the things that makes Lexus leases typically less expensive is the higher residual value. This is an estimate of what the vehicle will be worth at the end of the lease period. Higher resale results in higher residual values and decreased monthly lease rates. But that does not mean they are "great" cars, just that lots of people desire them as used vehicles--for whatever reason. I used to watch the cable infomercials on late night television of the "Certified Pre-Owned Lexus Vehicles". Quite interesting! Somewhat groundbreaking too, all things considered--but nothing that a US manufacturer might have done too, and did later. I'm not sure where all of those estatic CPO Lexus buyers might have been, but they all marvelled at how good the cars were at 50,000 miles and that they were financed at "new car rates" and had a 100,000 total mile warranty on them. Looking at these things from the business side of things, you lease a desireable automobile, service and maintenance it in your shop (putting more money into the dealership profits in the process), then get it back off-lease and "certify" it, then put it on the dealership used car lot and hit the "second owner" customer base and things start all over again. Not a bad business model that some US brand dealerships might have already been doing. Clothe the whole situation in a "high class" dealership for high class vehicles with a high quality of ownership experience and you can make more money on the whole situation. Then you take the profits and add to the amenities of the ownership experience and things build from there. As I noted, a good business model, but one "not typical" for other brands of vehicles. In my personal vehicular value system, "awards" are not a critical item as I deem the "feel" of the vehicle as much more important. Reliability is necessary, of course, but then all vehicles have a high degree of reliability in modern times (with a few exceptions). The smoothness of the controls, the sensory inputs from the chassis and engine (but not objectionally so), the "real" durability and demonstrated body structure strength, plus how it feels like it is "ready for anything"--including crisply responsive evasive maneuvers (i.e., active safety), good fuel economy, good looks, and it needs to have some character about it (i.e., "non-applicance" feel). Oh, and it needs to be easy to change oil and filter on too! It needs to be a "nice" car in all respects, but I care more about the "chemistry" between myself and the vehicle rather than whether it's "trendy" or has a high lease residual on it or has a wall full of "achievement awards" to its credit (if I like it and it gets awards, that's great too, but not necessary to validate my purchase decision). Even with all of the awards and recognition that Lexus might have justly accumulated, I'd still prefer a Nissan or Infinity over a Lexus for the performance orientations with some really nice luxury "trappings" too (have you seen the "4-place" option on the new Maxima?!). Yet my purchase would most likely be an American Brand Vehicle instead of something else. Yep, they might have a few more "repairs" or other things, but ease and cost of maintenance is usually better than many import brands--by observation (but a 4-cyl Camry, the current body, is one really easy underhood to work on!). I know that Lexus has some really impressive upper level cars out. But I also know that, considering I don't "trade" every couple of years, cost of things like a/c controls and other high-tech luxury car items would necessitate an extended warranty of some sort--just in case. And what about the potential after warranty repair cost of the "turning headlights" on the RX? Over the years, I've seen used Lexus vehicles at non-Lexus dealerships as trade-ins (before they were cleaned up and detailed). They fit the mold of somebody buying a Lexus and treating it like a mere Toyota Corolla. I've seen Porches treated like VWs and Corvettes treated like Chevrolets. Obviously, owned by people that were more concerned about the image the vehicle added to their personna than treating the vehicles with respect and normal care. In those situations, the Lexus vehicle would show at least as much "wear and tear" as a comparable US brand vehicle (plus cost more to fully fix back to the potential new owner's "expected" condition). Any vehicle can be "killed" by abusive owners, just that some vehicles take more abuse than others and some are more expensive to fix and clean up that others too. So, I'm glad you are enjoying your Lexus and I'll keep enjoying my non-Lexus vehicles. We all have our various preferences, for many reasons, which I fully understand and respect. Respectfully, NTX5467

Seems like the corrosion issues are from "moisture attraction". Other issues might be rubber fuel line items (and accelerator pump cups) swelling or otherwise deteriorating quicker? I think the current max amount of ethanol in the fuel is about 15%, as most owner's manuals state their vehicles will tolerate. Didn't we used to call that "gasohol" in prior times? Just some thoughts, NTX5467

With all due respect, Lexusfreak, IF Lexus had not been in the marketplace, what might your purchase decision have been? Would it have been a Toyota Avalon? Possibly an Infinity? Or a Mercedes? Just curious . . . From what a friend that has worked at Lexus dealerships has told me, the "ownership experience" is weighted toward the dealership experience as much (or more than) the focus on the vehicle itself--kind of like Saturn started out, but at a much higher price point. There is no doubt the Lexus vehicle is a quality automobile, but the lesser models still have the same Toyota trait of the low-hanging exhaust pipes as "normal" Toyota Camrys and such. Yet the way Lexus has been positioned, it's usually perceived to be a totally different entity from its parent Toyota (despite the Toyota nomenclatured tags under the hood). We all have different perceptions of "quality" and "refinement", which usually ties into "quietness" issues, which all tend to relate to "luxury". Somewhere in that complicated mix are "value" and "desireability". Yet all of these traits are not mutually exclusive nor related to a particular price point or type of vehicle. In some cases, "perception" is NOT reality, by observation. Nor is an OHC style engine a "better" powerplant than a pushrod engine in similar applications (other than when higher rpm power characteristics are needed or other application-specific traits are desired). In other cases, the little added cost involved in added perceived refinement has a very high price premium for the customer--whether in initial vehicle purchase price or the non-warranty repair price for the 2nd or 3rd owner. There's usually a reason why the higher end luxury brands many times do not command the same premium prices as used cars that they did as new vehicles (whether they are the apparent "bargain" can relate to where they are in their replacement parts cycle of their lives). In some instances, perceived refinement has more to do with additional sound deadening and other vibration isolation materials than any real differences in the mechanicals. And what about the cost of lost keys in a Lexus? Lexus, no doubt, has been a "benchmark" brand for many reasons. Yet when Infinity had it's own benchmarks in machinery in the earlier years, these things tended to fall on empty showrooms. In the earlier years, Infinity was the more technically interesting vehicle, but didn't have the same "luxury" perception as Lexus tended to have. Maybe it was more of a styling issue than performance? Or a dealership experience issue too? Being more performance oriented than "cush" oriented, I would probably have chosen an Infinity over a Lexus and would certainly do that in more modern times too. I enjoy having some sensory input from what the vehicle is doing rather that total isolation--but that's just my orientation, just as I like vehicles with "character" rather than "appliances". But still, what might your purchase decision have been IF Lexus had not been in the marketplace? I'm curious. Respectfully, NTX5467

I'm not sure when the particular locations might "turn" their fleets and I did notice a 2004 Grand Prix at DFW recently, but the Century I got recently (at DFW) was a 2005 and low mileage. One thought on the rear sear leg room, the Buick Century/Regal and the Intrigue are on a 109" wheelbase. The similar Impala, Monte Carlo, and Grand Prix are on 110.5" wheelbases. I suspect the fact that the MC and GP were in NASCAR when the cars were designed would have dictated the 110.5" wheelbase as the NASCAR min spec was 110". That extra wheelbase seems to be basically in the rear seat floor area of the Impala and Grand Prix, for example. Enjoy! NTX5467

I will concur with Matt's orientation on many of these concerns. One key point regarding K&N air filters--in order to achieve the advertised "gain" in performance, the existing air filter has to be overly restrictive to start with. In the days of circular air filters, the K&Ns were said to better "straighten" the air flow through the filter and help smooth the air flow into the carburetor. Plus they had the least flow restriction of any filter in the '70s (as tested by David Vizard back then). Other than that, the cleanability is probably the best selling point rather than just increased air flow (which the engine probably does not need or can use in stock form). I can also understand Matt's comments about their oil possibly causing fuel curve issues with the MAF sensor Compared the other GM cars, the ACDelco filter elements for those cars are very inexpensive. Oil filters? No need to stray to a K&N or Mobil1 oil filter from the factory ACDelco Duraguard filter. Many of the "premium" oil filters sold by some aftermarket brands are not really so "premium" in the filtering media, but have a much higher price (which can also be related to the "better" rubber seal gasket). The thing with Fram filters had been noted to be their greater used of paper-type items where other brands use metal to cap the filter media's ends. Not to mention less sophisticated pressure valving too. You can usually find the ACDelco filters on sale too, at certain times and at different places. Many of the oil companies also have their own brands of filters, basically so they can sell oil and filters to quick lube chains. I suspect they are all good quality items, but I have always used OEM manufacturer filters on my cars as I felt they were better than some of the aftermarket brands. It was noted in an oil filter evaluation by Auto-X magazine in the '80s that Wix bested many of the OEM brand filters in design and construction, but filtering media issues were not part of the comparison (which used the Motorcraft FL-1A filter for comparison). Also be aware that while a private brand or house brand of filter might be made by a "big name" filter company, they will be made to the specs set forth by the company whose name is on them, not just merely relabeled from the "big name" company's name at a lesser price. There might only be a few oil filter manufacturers left in the world, but there is a whole multitude of specs that they can be built to in order to hit the production price point of the customer. Synthetic oil usually has better wear and cold flow characteristics than regular or blended synthetic oils, by design and configuration. BUT if you research the latest oil spec ratings (ILSAC, etc.), the latest specs for the oils now on the shelves, current 5W-30 and 10W-30 oils (tagged "Energy Conserving") are also better at wear protection than the prior level specs. When synthetic oils were first promoted to the automotive marketplace in the '70s, (other than Amsoil, which already had their grassroots distribution networks of racers and such, or Mobil1 in its original 20W configuration), the anti-wear, cold weather, and hot weather attributes were usually mentioned in the sales literature. Plus that they'd been used for years in the Artic areas of the world for vehicle lubrication. In the end, it's your judgment call as what you do, but it is possible that a normal oil in a particular weight might work just as well as the synthetics would. I think I've seen the 0W-30 oil in non-synthetic configurations too. Might even consider a blended synthetic at the modest increase in cost over regular oil too. A quality oil with quality filters that are changed regularly should work fine in any modern vehicle. The base oil of modern times is greatly improved over what it was even 10 years ago--better in all respects as the performance specs have been elevated many times from the old MS/DG days. Many of these elevated specs have been driven by the more complex OHC engines of more modern times and tighter emissions/fuel economy standards, I suspect. If I was going to build a race engine, it would most probably have some brand of full synthetic oil in it, due to the operational situations of that use. But for a lower rpm, lower stress level, normal performance engine with somewhat generous bearing sizes on the crank and rod bearings, a current spec petroleum oil should work fine--even in "premium" OHC engines and "stop and go" driving in the heat of summer in Arizona. Where the extra protection from "thermal breakdown" would take place would be when a water pump or fan clutch might fail (or a sudden coolant leak) that would suddenly put extraordinary demands on the motor oil to lubricate, protect, and help cool the internal engine parts. Should be no issues with changing to synthetic oil from what had been in there before. One thing to make sure does not happen is that the oil drain plug is "overtightened" by the oil changer people, who ever they might be. Usually, the threads will start pulling off of the plug, as it should be softer than the nut it screws into inside the pan. A "new" wear area it seems! It's y'alls money, but you could do a whole lot worse than just use OEM ACDelco oil and air filters with normal 5W-30 motor oil. If your geographical location might lean toward some sort of synthetic, that's your judgment call. As for the spark plugs, many GM vehicles have been coming with Iridium spark plugs from the factory. Research on the NGK and Denso websites indicate the Iridium plugs to be an upgrade from platinum, in all respects (i.e., durability, lower voltage requirements). Pretty much the same price too! One thing, DO NOT regap them from the "as delivered" gap--even GM has that note in their parts database. The center electrodes are the "fine wire" size and obviously can be damaged from traditional gap checking, it appears. Unless there is some operational problem that results in fouled spark plugs (highly rare in modern times, if everything's working correctly), then don't worry about them unless there is a diag code relating to them or the maintance schedule mileage is approached. I need to mention that there are several different "styles" of platinum plugs. Many of the less expensive platinum plugs usually have a "pad" (of platinum material) on the ground electrode that's laser welded onto the normal ground electrode to lessen electrode erosion with use. Others will have a center electrode of platinum also, at a higher price. The more premium brands will not have the pads, but full platinum material in the electrodes, just as the Iridium plugs use Iridium in those areas. Again, using ACDelco plugs is probably the best way out (plus they are usually NGK or Denso plugs anyway). Enjoy! NTX5467

I did check the GM Parts database today and the number cluster you mentioned for the LeSabre will fit the Electra/Park Avenue of that same year, but the '88s have different part numbers for similar application clusters. As you noted, the computer systems did change yearly with upgrades and enhancements with each later year model. Take care, NTX5467

My late uncle and his wife bought a new '56 Special (white over black with red interior) 2-dr sedan when they returned to the States from his tour or duty in New Foundland. Bought the car in Trenton, NJ on the way back to Texas. Exception was that it was a base model instead of the better equiped model you have. V-8, 3-speed, white walls, wheel covers, and heater. BUT it was still a BUICK! I always like the dash and that flashy steering wheel! Stayed in the family until the '80s. One of our chapter members had recently put a '55 Roadmaster Riviera through an name brand annual auction. A very nice car with rear deck dealer-installed "factory a/c", correct and documented for the car. Also black and white. It just cleared $20K in the bids and was a "no sale" at that time. And that was a Roadmaster and not a Special, for whatever that's worth. Some venues seem to be better than others for selling some great, but possibly less "popular", vehicles. Value is highly relative and sales only take place when the buyer and seller's amounts "match", regardless of what any of the price guides might claim the value to be. Sometimes, it's more about "Who" buys the car than for how much. From what I saw of some of the No Reserve cars at Barrett-Jackson on Speed Channel on Saturday, some bargains were definitely "had" in that lot of vehicles, considering what they were and what it took to "get them there". As always, make sure "the check clears" before handing over titles or vehicles! Sounds like really nice car! It deserves a "good home" when it is sold! Enjoy! NTX5467

Hadn't thought of the "40th Anniversary" situation! If you mention "Flint" to some people, they'll probably think you're talking about Indian arrowheads or rocks that when struck, produce sparks. Just like if you mention "Dearborn" to the same people, they might think of a premium brand of gas room heater. But WE know what those "codes" are! Were there any significant vehicles or engines that hit ground in the same year you did? Enjoy! NTX5467

It was really easy to tell what car was what by the styling in the '60s, but with the advent of "soft" front bumpers and such in the '80s, "grilles" tended to disappear in their prior context. Loss of identity? Yes. Lighter weight and more safety conscious? Yes, too. Be that as it may . . . These changes in construction architecture tended to get various makes to carve out new "identities" in the process too. In some cases, if you didn't see the "emblem" on the grille (if it was still there!), identification could be hard to do. Tail lights and such were identifiers too, in earlier times. I suspect that as many oriental brands have somewhat "anonymous" styling identities and styling, with that being "the standard" it seems that that is where much of GM's styling has been in more recent times. For example, the current DeVille might be styled in the "mold" of an earlier Lexus, but if you put that same new DeVille up beside of a middle '80s Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham, the differences are startling. In more modern times, it seems that whatever grille is in the vehicle defines the brand more than any other exterior styling cues. GM has finally seemed to have achieved full integration of their engine programs now that they are all under the umbrella of GMPowertrain. Highly similar to what Ford and Chrysler have had for ages, but due to the culture at GM in earlier times, was not done as each engine played into the total design character of the respective car line it was used in. The engine/trans/chassis combination was highly important to the brand image of each GM division. In the time prior to the middle to late '60s, Fords and Mercurys could have different engine sizes in the same engine family, just as each Chrysler division had a specific size Hemi V-8 in the '50s. Same engine family and machining, just different bore/stroke combinations. Now, power differences between the brands (and some emissions standards) is done electronically depending on the recommended fuel octane rating (the difference in the Intrepid R/T and Chrysler 300M horsepower ratings of the same mechanical spec 2nd gen 3.5L V-6, the Intrepid tuned for 87 posted pump octane and the Chrysler tuned for 89 posted pump octane). And then there were some years in the early '70s when Ford LTDS and Mercurys were on the same wheelbase with the same total length, but unless you looked at the specs, you didn't notice it (or at least I didn't) as Mercurys were "better" than Fords and typically "bigger". Now, the Crown Vic, Grand Marquis, and Town Car all share the same Panther platform, but with different equipment content(some not quite as "hidden" as they probably could be, by observation). The rental car companies have seemed to settle on "full size" nomenclature for what used to be "intermediate" size in the '60s. Has nothing to do with comfort of the rated capacity, just the number of seating locations than anything else. But then I think the size designations are a little "different" than in prior times (seems like the Feds use interior volume now instead of real interior leg room or shoulder room dimensions), or at least the times we grew up with when a Chevy Impala was on a 119" wheelbase and was "full size". Next step up in their fleet would have been a Bonneville or LeSabre, which would have had the extra rear seat leg room (and would have probably gotten better fuel economy in the process too, by observation). Not sure about the issues with the hvac system, though. To their credit, the new Grand Prixs do have MORE a/c vents than other similar GM cars and do seem to cool down better than the others (by observation). And I suspect those round a/c vents (that harken back to the '60s GM a/c vents) probably give less trouble than the vaned versions other carlines use). I also suspect that if you rented it recently, it was a 2005 model (as the one I rented at DFW a while back). Production has ended on the Century, but I doubt it was a 2004. What I did notice about the 2005 was the rear disc brakes and fold-down rear seat back, which were not standard on earlier Century models of some years. High Quality and High Pizzazzz and High Reliability and High Value CAN exist in the same vehicle--just as the last three (at least) did in the '50s and '60s--but some of the people in charge don't seem to have figured that out. Or perhaps production costs/architecture/production processes/commonality issues have overridden design too much? Yet improvement in the design and manufacturing processes over the years have resulted in the much better (in many respects) that we currently have. BUT that does NOT mean that we like to choose between "Neutral" or "Graphite" for interior color choices! The real answer, at least to me, is to look at what Harley Earl did with Style and Colour in the prior decades. By that "standard", modern cars are just "dull" in so many respects. We went through a phase in the early '80s when there were no really bright or distinctive exterior colors available from any of the car companies. Now we have some color, but mundane sheet metal and other materials they are applied to. And what about those beautiful cloth interiors of the '60s? Great fabrics that sparkled in the bright sun, which led to the velours of the '70s and such. Maybe the brocades of the '60s might not "fit" now, but certainly something along the lines of what Buick did in the later '80s Park Avenues (and the similar Olds 98 Regencys) would work now--in either a quality non-patterned velour-type cloth or leather. Recent case in point -- the Olds Intrigue. A car that was a great car, mechanically, but had no distinctive styling as such. Only place it said "Oldsmobile" on it was (for the first couple of years) in the right hand backup light lens (molded in) and nobody recognized the "new" Rocket/Olds emblem on the front end. The upscale leather interior was just blah, even if it was leather. The same year Grand Prix and Monte Carlo had much more fitting leather interior seats in them! Nice shapes on the instrument panel, but using color to define style instead of bright trim and appropriate woodgrain seemed minimalist to me. Mazda yes, Oldsmobile NO. Even if the basic platform and wheelbase are the same, the "flavor" of the vehicle is more related to the exterior styling and the interior styling, plus equipment content levels. Add in chassis tuning orientations and there's lots that can be changed for different markets. Just not quite in the same way as in the '60s. There will be some engine differences in the future, usually "market driven" for the vehicle's market point than brand as such. Some of these issues are "bragging points" than anything else as a responsive engine can be made regardless of where the camshaft(s) reside. Funny thing is that Corvettes and Vipers have not come under fire for their pushrod engines, but the Buick V-6 and its OHV pushrod configuration seems to be a good target for those "shooters". Just some thoughts and observations, NTX5467

As I understand it, Keisler sells a "kit" instead of just a bare transmission. I also suspect that unless you find a GM production trans, it will have the higher horsepower capacity you mentioned. Key thing to consider would be the rear axle you now have or desire to put in the car. With a (suspected) 3.42 rear axle ratio, the effective ratio with a 5-speed OD unit would be about 2.4. That might sound like a lot of fuel savings, but if it drops the cruising rpm levels too low, it could be just the opposite as it would be lugging the engine too much (unlike in an automatic which would kick out of OD and unlock the torque converter clutch when needed). So, a rear axle ratio change might need to be figured into the mix too (i.e., 3.73). Many later model transmissions also use a hydraulic clutch setup, which would need to be adapted to your vehicle if that was the case. Otherwise, there could well be added expense in the hookup pieces. Not to mention driveshaft length/yoke issues. None of these things are not impossible to do, but they do cost money and time to engineer. Key thing would be to figure out if a real world 10% or so gain in fuel economy would be worth the effort and expense to achieve in this manner. If you desire to add some sort of fuel injection, it would probably work better with the lower number effective ratios instead of a carburetor. But that's even more expense and engineering. Why? As soon as the throttle pedal moves, the fuel injection system is immediately adding fuel to generate acceleration (of whatever degree) wereas a carburetor needs added air flow to pull the extra fuel into the engine--one reason that fuel injection systems are more responsive in those situations. Plus, if the manifold vacuum levels drop too far with a carburetor, then the power circuit is activated and that means less fuel economy whereas the injection system will most probably have a feedback loop for optimum mixture control. There have been some articles on GM's 5-speeds and their dimensions in magazines over the years. Finding one with useable mounting/case dimensions AND fitting a Buick bolt pattern (I suspect that the multi-pattern GM bell housings from the few '80s cars that could have manual transmissions would also come with definitely "low power" transmissions behind them) might be a trick without some sort of adapter kit. Might make a nice driving and performing car with the extra (and typically deeper low gear) gears, but I highly doubt it would be cost effective from a fuel economy standpoint. Maybe you could change the suspected 3.42 to 3.08 and then rebuild your existing trans with a different gear set (with a little bit lower 1st gear ratio combination to compensate for the new rear axle ratio being a little bit higher)? But much of this could also relate to the engine combination in the vehicle now. As simple as this swap might seem on the surface, it can get involved really quickly (and more expensive in the process). Your money . . . Your vehicle . . . . Enjoy! NTX5467

Howdy! If the engine is quiet now, I highly suspect it will continue to be. Make sure the DEXCOOL coolant level is maintained with a good radiator cap, but that goes for all vehicles that use DEXCOOL. Seems that many of the V-6 engines can develope intake manifold coolant leaks. There are appropriate GM Service Bulletins on that issue. In order to find out about the vehicle's prior warranty repairs, you can go to your local GM dealer's service department and ask them to pull up a VIS report from the GM computer database. Takes only a few seconds, with the full VIN of the vehicle. This report will also indicate what service recalls/campaigns might also be outstanding and need to be done, plus other things. This information will not cover any "customer pay" work, just GM warranty repairs. If the instrument cluster display starts "going crazy" or other electrical controls become suddenly unresponsive, it could indicate a battery and/or alternator problem getting ready to happen. By observation, the GM computers will allow the car to operate down to about 5 volts, but not without the warning signals I mentioned above. One time, we were load checking a Malibu's charging system. We'd put an a/c control in the same car earlier that day, for operation issues. The no-load output was "normal", but when load was added via the charging system checker, when the voltage approached 5 volts, the warning lights in the instrument cluster flashed in pairs until the added load killed the engine. A new alternator took care of that situation. 5 Volts is basically a "dead battery". Most of the later model GM cars just take normal maintenance to provide reliable and dependable transportation, plus some gas every now and then. To me, the Century is a solid product that many tend to overlook for the Regals. Might not have the allegedly more desired 16" wheels and tires, but the 15" wheels/tires work just fine for many people (plus being less expensive to replace). I like the chrome trim accents the Century has rather than the "none" approach of the Regals. The Chevy V-6 is also a well-sorted out engine, just less power than the Buick 3800. Not a bad car for general running around or day-to-day activities for many people. This is a great board for Buick items. For a more "model specific" board, you might check out www.RegalGS.org. There are many Regal owners in there, but also a good number of Century owners too. Lots of good information too! Enjoy! NTX5467

My "gut" suspicion would indicate they are not compatible, as things of this nature usually did not transfer from year to year, much less from LeSabres to Park Avenues of different years. I might be wrong in this case though, so I'll mention that up front. Even having the number from the cluster would not tell of compatibility per se. I don't recall if those cluster part numbers would be listed in the GM parts database either, as many were "exchange only" with no user serviceable parts in them and listed "NS" (not serviced from GM Parts). The OTHER situation is that without some GM Part Numbers to deal with, getting a repair vendor to determine if one cluster "goes" or "will work" in an application it was not "listed" for could well be pretty much impossible. They do have listings of what cluster numbers fit what vehicles, but if they made just a cosmetic change from one year to another, that generates a new part number for the assembly. In other words, you'd have to get deeper inside the vendor's repair facility to the techs with the part numbers for the circuit boards and such to see what might work or would not cross over between different clusters, which might indicate the "crossover" to a "non-specified application" you desire. GM's orientation (from my own experiences) is that if their database does not indicate the part is also used in another vehicle, it does not go there--period. No matter if everything looks similar, there could be different circuits that work off of different connector pins and all of that. The only way to deal with that issue would be to have the factory wiring diagrams for both vehicles to determine what wires were located where in the harness plug on the respective clusters. In the case of Escalades and their Chevy/GMC light truck relatives, it can be possible to put the Cadillac cluster in the same year Silverado/Sierra as a "plug and play" situation. But that is the same platform, same year, same "vehicle" situation, just different trim levels. By the time you purchase the cluster from the salvage yard, then possibly have to send it off to be repaired, it could be an expensive situation, all things considered. If you're looking for a "spare part", it might be possible that one of the repair vendors might have some old exchange stock they might desire to liquidate. Only thing is that these vendors are set up to deal with dealerships and not individuals per se. Some might have local repair facilities, though, so there would be some provision for contact with non-dealership customers. Check with your local GM dealer to see who they send their clusters to for warranty of "customer pay" exchanges. Just some thouhts, NTX5467

Most of the "radiator" shops that also do fuel tanks usually don't recoat them, if they were coated or painted anything other than "natural galvanize". At one time, there were internal coatings and such, but not specifically for the outside (that I'm aware of). Seems like Eastwood has some "cold galvanize" coating . . . Unless there is some sort of natural coating on the metal, or it's "pickled" correctly before use, the tank will rust internally. I suspect this "coating" is what many of the hobby people had to do with their earlier vintage tanks, which also raised the concerns about the "new fangled" fuels attacking those coatings. Remember that most fuel tanks will not have any external coatings, unless they were not galvanized from the factory. Fuel tanks most probably were attached to the undercarriage (or body) after all of the paintwork on the bodies was completed. Only "extra" thing might be some overspray from the possible undercoating activities on the assembly line. Saving $25 cents of paint on each fuel tank used results in a huge savings in the end, especially if galvanized metal is the "spec" material for the tank anyway. It was pointed out several years ago, that "silver" fuel tanks were appropriate as they would reflect any reflected heat from the roadway, there lessening heat-related fuel expansion in the earlier tanks (which did not have expansion chambers internally, as may "evaporative emissions" control tanks might) and the related "overflow" from the vent tube in hotter weather. It might be a "lost cause" but researching "unmolested" or "unrestored" similar vehicles might be the best "indicator", but you could do a lot worse ( judging wise ) than to leave it "natural galvanize" or a freshened version thereof. Under-vehicle tanks would be different, exterior finish wise, than a tank that was a prominent body topside -- and exposed from the top side -- fuel tank. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

Value judgment . . . what's worse? . . . "Slash and burn" or "Rust and CRUSH"? NEITHER one might be "the best", but which one keeps the vehicle on the road the longest AND around for others to see? Might not be "production stock", but still "serviceable" and "reliable" and "fixable" as later model parts are most probably used. Just like in the "old days" when "hot rodders" relied on what was available in the salvage yards to upgrade their vehicles' powertrains. Hopefully, any "new" parts would be from the same manufacturer's family (i.e., Buick parts for Buicks, or GM parts for Buicks) lest the demon "tissue rejection" ever raise it's ugly head. Picture that Pennzoil oil commercial where the engine jumps out of the vehicle to go to the Pennzoil oil change place, except it would be Chevy engines jumping out of Fords, for example, and just high tailing it over the hill as the cars remained by the side of the road--dead. I highly respect those that keep their vintage vehicles "whole" and "production original", but I also understand parts availability and related issues too--especially on a trip "away from home" and mechanics that "know what they are looking at". Strict originality stops at the first oil change, anyway. Or the first tune-up. I also understand that you can spend money to put it back "original" or spend the same money to upgrade things in ways that will not readily affect outward cosmetics adversely. Just depends on how the owner wants to spend HIS money. We might not like it, but unless the particular vehicle is residing in OUR garage with OUR name on the title, then it's HIS judgment call of what and how to do it--period. Screaming, hollering, gripeing, and knashing of teeth is counterproductive so why even get involved in those activties? All WE can do is hope that it is done in a first class manner and comes out as great as it can be. To me, THAT's the reality of the situation--period. I'll agree, sometimes some purchase decisions are more related to available funds (like buying the "base" Holley 4-bbl and spending lots of time tuning it rather than the OEM production version of the same carburetor, which usuallly costs more and bolts right on), but many owners are usually more concerned about enjoying their vehicles rather than working on them, so they take the "easy" road out. Sometimes not the best road, but still viable alternatives. And, as always, it's THEIR judgement call, although if they ask OUR opinion, it can be respectfully given (along with consideration of all alternatives!) in a non-negative manner. Respectfully, NTX5467

A few thoughts that may or may not apply . . . A solid vacuum source is still required on these systems for the vents to change, just as on the manual a/c systems. Default mode is air through the defroster and floor vents at the same time and not changing from that situation. On the '80s cars, the vacuum source was a check valve in the cruise control system, with a tee on the vac source side. Very bad about cracking and making the a/c vac go away. Sometimes, over near the power brake booster. On the '90s automatic a/c systems, there was a circuit board that was located under the hood, in the a/c case. Had a pretty good size electrical connector, and when you pulled it out of the case, an aluminum heat sink with some transistors on it. If the blower motor per se had any problems (other than failure), it was most likely this "blower motor control module" having "problems". I suspect there would still be some sort of "blower motor resistor" in the a/c case under the hood on the earlier systems, so that could be an issue with the blower motor issue. Although there would be "no user-serviceable parts" in the programmer assembly, it might be that it could still be openned up and cleaned appropriately by somebody that had some time and appropriate tools to use, plus being aware of how fragile some of the parts in that assembly might be at this point in time (LOTS of plastic!). IF you heard a humming noise, it could also be one of the vacuum switches/modulators in a particular "resonance" mode at particular vacuum levels. On one of my cars, I replaced the factory water valve with an aftermarket one, with a smaller vac "can" on it. At certain vacuum levels, the switch in the dash would loudly vibrate, but a factory valve with the larger vac can never had that problem. There were some Buick water valves that were run by a flat stepper motor that bolted onto the water valve--pretty trick stuff! Many times, when some electrical switch fails, it might be due to the component it controls having problems and drawing too much "juice" through that circuit. When that happens, things upstream in the circuit from the failing component "cook" at the location of least resistance. And do this without blowing any fuses. So . . . one thing could well lead to another. It's been a while since I looked at those earlier systems in the parts database, but I suspect they were an evolution of the earlier Comfotron systems of the '60s and '70s. Could be some common parts with similar Cadillacs and Oldsmobiles, but the programmer might look different from the other carlines. I suspect there will be a basic potentiometer/rheostat to control the temperature functions, which in concert with other sensors/aspirators will determine what vents open when/where/blend and how much. Not to mention appropriate fan speeds too, depending on the actual and desired temperatures. Might take several hours, some jumper leads, some vacuum source (hand-held pump, for example), the factory manual, and patience. One of those jobs that should be scheduled without any outside interruptions. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

Unless the trunk mat is molded rubber, you probably can get some roll goods material with the correct "spatter" or other color pattern and then cut it to match what it needs to be. You might be able to find ones "new" or repro for Pontiac Catalinas and Bonnevilles, which might be close in size, but the finish color pattern could be different, even if it's the same type of thin rubberized material. Might check around the salvage yards to see what other similar Buicks have in them too. There should be a large car upholstery wholesaler in your part of the world that might have some of that material. There were one or two spatter paint "color" patterns that GM vehicles used back then, so it's possible that the mat would need to match the paint color pattern on the wheel wells and other luggage compartment areas. Hose clamps of the "tower" or "wire" configuration can be found from other non-Buick-spefic vendors of repro/restoratioin parts. National Parts Depot is one source for those things, as are other places that have GM repro/restoration parts--even some of the Corvette vendors as most of those things were pretty much generic among other GM vehicles too. Seems like a "fleet option" was for stainless steel screw-type hose clamps too? Key thing in the cleaning is NOT to remove any of the assembly markings and such in the quest for "making it nice". Just clean gently. Might need to add a soft bristle paint brush in the mix too, as some toothbrushes are a little too stiff. An oil-based cleaner (non abrasive) can help emulsify oil deposits and such. Low pressure water can work, but high pressure water streams have been known to remove paint that might not have been stuck too well. Engine paints were just sprayed over bare metal and were not designed to have the same general durabilty as "body" paint, so some extra care would be needed in those areas. For general hand cleanup, I've found that Panama Jack sun tan oil works well to remove engine oil from my hands. Other brands of oil might work just as well. It will wash off with normal hand soap too, but I've never tried it "under the hood". About 20 years ago, I ran across a paperback book about "Secrets of the Show Cars" that related to polishing and cleaning/detailing and such. Pretty informative. There might be some more recent versions of it around. Enjoy! NTX5467

Some of the GS people might know who's doing them for GM vehicles. Maybe even some of the Camaro or Pontiac people too. I don't know who does them for GM vehicles, but know that somebody has been doing them for a good while for the Chevy and Pontiac people. Same people could do them for Buicks too. Might check with Year One also. Just make sure they understand you're talking about a BUICK 350, for good measure. Enjoy! NTX5467

1979??????? On most rear disc brake systems, the "stopping" function is hydraulic and the parking brake is mechanical. Two DIFFERENT systems with different control mechanisms. NO fluid going to the back brakes in one thing, most probably related to something between the master cylinder and the rear brake units. There probably is some adjustment on the mechanical parking brake mechanism, somewhere. When you replaced the rear calipers, did you "reseat" the pads by stepping on the brakes hard a couple of times before the final cable adjustment check was done? Just some thoughts . . . NTX5467

Thanks for the reply and kind comments. Also, NEAT thumbnail slideshow! Right now, there is the orientation that "retro" does not sell, but it sure was good enough for the first couple of years to pad dealers' pockets with availability charges for PT Cruisers, Thunderbirds, and such. I highly suspect that the GTO is not selling well as it's not retro enough--some of the first things the enthusiasts screamed about were the lack of several key styling cues associated with '60s GTOs (not the later Ventura GTO X-body version!). Somewhere in that continuum, there should be a "happy mix" (probably called "2005 Mustang") that will work. I suspect that many of us who have been around Buicks by choice (and other brands of vehicles too, for good measure) probably know more about the "essence" of Buick than a contractor person, with all due respect, "doing a job" or is too young to understand why and how Buick got to be the great sales success it was in the middle '50s. They can see styling, but might not understand the mechanicals and how they were different/better than other GM lines at that time--and other vehicles too--nor how it all interacted to make BUICKS what they were. I seem to recall hearing about a "play book" that noted that all Buicks would have "wall-to-wall" taillights, a particular grille design, and a few other things as their distinguishing attributes (with other GM brands having similar listings) as part of probably became "brand management" orientations. A book that any newcomer could read and "know" what made a Buick a Buick, in theory. Unfortunately, in our digitally-driven (not meaning "fingers") world, many desire to put things into a binary perspective when there are some things that just don't translate that way (i.e., "chemistry" and "feel"). In that perspective, if you put a Buick grille and wall-to-wall taillights on a Toyota Avalon, would it be a Buick? Toyota builds a nicely done vehicle, but I consider it highly "dull"--and that "Toyota" steeering wheel position makes me think it's a "forward control truck". Quality assembly is necessary, but it takes more than that to make a great, or even nice, vehicle. Just for grins, check the pricing on a new Avalon and compare it to a new Park Avenue--yikes! Less is more . . . and "better"?????? I know that what Lutz did to delay the Regal and Park Avenue replacements as he did was probably necessary, but so far the results are a little "underwhelming" to me. Or perhaps my expectations were too high? Or is it related to corporate profits or letting Cadillac "go first" with the redesigns? Maybe everything's going according to plan? Maybe I'm a little impatient? Whatever . . . A few weeks ago, there were two Cadillacs on the shop at the same time, a new 2005 and a few stalls over a '86 Fleetwood Brougham rwd car. The differences were startling, to say the least! One looked stately and the other one, well, looked "underdone", although it had the Cadillac grille in it. And y'all probably know which one was which without me mentioning it. Sometimes, I wonder if the real driving force in modern automotive design is really COST. If "Invicta" can inject some of the middle '50s styling magic into the mix--inside AND outside--while still being totally modern in everything else, THEN we might have a winner. A "winner" that will deliver high luxury at affordable prices just as Buicks did in, say circa 1955, when bankers and other "monied" people drove Roadmasters instead of DeVilles, but had cars just as nice as the Cadillacs . . . and GMAC financing (the 36 month car loan) put Buicks in the budget (and driveways!) of those that could buy a Buick Special (and ALL that that meant to own a Buick back then!) for the same price as a car from the "Low Price Three". And do ALL of that for the price of the emerging #1 contender in that market, the Chrysler 300C Hemi or the 300 Touring--or less. To me, that formula can work today as it did back then. Is that "old school"? Using what worked in prior times that was somehow "forgotten" as things progressed into the future? I know, many are probably thinking that there's no way a fwd Buick could compete with a rwd Chrysler in sales or desireability. Acknowledged, but I suspsect that there are existing Chrysler owners out there that might not like the new 300 for many reasons, who would love to get a Buick that was still fwd instead of the new 300. Yep, GM's late to the game again, but that does not mean the game's already won--several ways to look at that too. Yet we can only dream of a 400+ horsepower rear wheel drive Buick to counter the upcoming Chrysler 300 SRT-8! A slick Invicta 4-door, formal, elegant, with some CHROME on the SIDES, with PIZZAZZZZZZZ, a more cost efficient MagnaRide system, a LSIII displacement that might coincide with "401 cubic inches" and rated at 400 horsepower (not Northstar, for reasons I will not mention here), 6 spd automatic (which is supposed to be easier to do than a 5-speed), Displacement on Demand, room for 6 (with room under the front seats for the rear seat passengers' feet!) using a 50-50 split bench front seat OR optional buckets and console in a "Wildcat Package", and a snazzy wheel/tire package (with a tire size that doesn't cost mega bucks to replace! NO runflats allowed!). A snazzy regular Invicta for the more conservative Buick owners and the Wildcat version (with StabiliTrak Sport III) for the SRT-8 type people. Max price -- $39K. And then when and if the Cadillac Sixteen hits production, the Buick version could be Limited! (((DOHC V-8s might be fine for some people, but using the more conventional OHV LSIII would allow for a sleeker hood line than the tall and wide Northstar (i.e., more efficient packaging), not to mention more power for less cost. Size it and tune it for a Buick-specific application and it would be fine for little additional cost. I'm not sure what the life expectancy of the MagnaRide shocks are, but even the older "Northstar System" electronic shocks for the DeVilles are high enough to send their elderly owners into sticker shock, plus the younger owners too. So, "3rd owner" time frame affordability on chassis parts is key to higher resale value and desireability on the used car market. Priced Town Car rear air bags lately? Not to mention that Cadillac Allante electronic shock absorber "support" was withdrawn several years ago, with s service bulletin being issued as to how to put normal shocks on those cars and how to wire around the computer sensors for the shocks. Maybe Delphi could come up with a "two tier" situation for different suspension packages and cost levels? So, trick stuff might be neat, but 10 years later it's either expensive to replace, to fix, or not available (without modifications).))) "DREAM UP" NTX5467

The battery tray is configured for the particular size of the OEM production battery, so there will probably not be any "inexpensive" replacements as that size battery is pretty much only for those cars. Be sure to look for cable issues when you replace the battery too! With all of the computerization and longer cable runs, make sure the CCA rating of what you get is at least what the OEM production battery is. The ACDelco website has a lookup function, but it takes a little while to work your way through it. The vehicle's owner's manual should have the size listed in the back of it too. You might be able to find a ACDelco "6YR" (or 72 month warranty) battery if the one from the factory is a "7YR" battery (or 84 month warranty period), though. ALSO, make sure the battery is pretty much fully charged before you hook it up! If the battery is not charged sufficiently, the initial start-up can cause the alternator output to spike to "MAX" and can cook the regulator mechanism in the alternator. Not like the old days with the earlier design alternators. I guess you are aware of the location of the battery too? Enjoy! NTX5467

Great picture! Hadn't seen anything like that in a long time. Lots of stage band memories too! What sort of material did y'all play? Thanks, NTX5467