NTX5467

The first year of supercharagers on the 3.8L V-6, there was no provision to change or add oil to the supercharger unit. The next year and ever since then, there's been provisions for this maintenance situation. There is a special GM-supplied Supercharger Oil that is stocked by many dealers too. Seems that I recall that service interval to be 50,000 miles also. Typically, most Buick owners (and service advisors at the dealerships) of these units don't know about this service interval and don't change the oil. I suspect the Pontiac Grand Prix GTP owners might be more aware of this deal and that a Pontiac dealer might be more apt to stock the supercharger oil than a Buick dealer might. Same motor in the Buicks as is in the Pontiac Grand Prix GTP, except for the 2004 models where the Buicks continued on with the existing setup and the Pontiacs got something a little different. The information should be in your service manual, including the GM part number for the supercharger oil. The part number for the Supercharger Oil is in the GM Standard Parts Catalog (in the GM Parts database) in the "Lubricants" area. It comes in the same size bottle as the GM Positaction additive. Hope this helps, NTX5467

There was a banner at the BCA National Meet in Flint for that group. Perhaps someone in the Buicktown Chapter might be able to provide a cross reference or maybe some contact information. I know I've seen their logo for a good while now, but haven't had any contacts with them. Maybe their webpage needs updating? Hope this might help, NTX5467

A Group 1.303 listing should be specifically for the grille. Front end sheet metal emblems would be a 8.000 Group designation. NTX5467

Thanks for the input, Brad. Glad you're still coming around! As for the Mopar Nats group, the "Mopar Powered" orientation mirrors what the Super Chevy group requires of the vehicles that enter those events. You missed the Mercedes 450 roadster that turned up with a 426Hemi in it when the show was at IRP. This was waaayyy before the later "German connection". I have been accused of being a purist in the past. I've seen the street rods and such that all tend to have the requisite small block Chevy in them. I ALSO know that it usually takes some additional restraint and a higher degree of execution to not follow that trend. I like to see Fords with Ford engines, Mopars with Mopar engines, and Buicks with Buick (or appropriate GM for the model and year) engines PLUS similar corporate identity batteries under the hood (i.e., Ford-Motorcraft, Chrysler-Mopar, GM-ACDelco) too. I know it takes more "trouble" to do these things, but the mere fact that someone went to the extra trouble, just as having a "home done" car instead of a "check book" car, usually can end up with a better vehicle in the end. I know that Street Rodding got its start when you went to the wrecking yard and searched for a "big car" motor and related drive train. They had the biggest motors and stronger rear axles (the open driveshaft cars such as Pontiac and Olds and Cadillac) and that was why there were so many Olds, Buick, and Chrysler early Hemi powerplants in those cars back in the '50s and earlier '60s. That's why some of the old dragster or quarter mile racers chased Olds or Pontiac rear axles too. 3-speed OD trans (of various brands) were common as were some of the GM 4-speeds, most of which required the bellhousing adapters to make them work (where the beloved JCWhitney catalog might come in handy). No one really worried about "purity of brand" back then, you just wanted to go fast and show your chrome. That's the heritage of Street Rodding and early hot rodding. The distinction of Street Rod or Street Machine might be vanishing as time progresses. One reason might be the complexity of each group doing their individual shows so they decided to possibly merge in some venues to have bigger shows and such. I wanted to mention that deal in my earlier post just to make sure it would be considered here if it needed to be. I concur that "benchmark" judging, as I term it, can be a much better way to judge something of this nature than using a judging sheet. The only objective would be "which one is totally BEST" and how do the others relate to it. As mentioned, the better cars will stand out. There will always be "check book" cars in any show event, which will usually raise the bar of excellence, but I'd just as well see something that has been very well done and executed by an indivdual (possibly with the help of his car club associates who pool their collective expertise and resources) just like seeing an original, unrestored stock car over a complete restoration (which, depending on the expertise of the restorer, might have many of the historical paint stamps/daubs removed in the process). I know there are lots of non-Buick-powered vehicles modified vehicles out there. Although my orientation would be that the modified class vehicle would need to be as much Buick as possible (or Buick/GM in many cases) and personally consider such a vehicle to be of the "higher degree of execution" I mentioned, I also know that there might need to be some bending of that to accomodate the vehicles built prior to the execution of the modified class. Perhaps these other things could be considered with relationship to the year of the particular vehicle? I know there are reasons why everyone jumped on using the Mustang II front end stuff. I know there are reasons why the Ford 9" rear axle became the "industry standard" for rear axles in race cars and street rod/street machine vehicles (i.e., in production since the late '50s, LOTS of them around, rear disc brakes from the Lincoln Versailles, durability, design architecture, less power consumption) too. These are valid reasons just as using a Buick, Olds, Cadillac, or Chrysler Hemi V-8 in a '32 Ford street rod made sense "back then" or a 350 Chevy might make sense in more modern times. As for street legal, I'd concur with that orientation too, plus give some consideration to race only entries (not street legal OR licensed). In some states, using the small block Chevy engine can and has caused the vehicle owners some problems due to the "newer engine in earlier chassis" criteria for street driven vehicles. Meaning that a TPI350 out of an IROC-Z28 would need to have ALL of the emissions items from that "later vehicle" put onto the "earlier vehicle" to be street legal, not to mention being required to meet the yearly vehicle emissions inspection requirements. Not something that many considered when they bought all of those Tuned Port Injection units back in the '80s. So, using a Buick V-8 can now be a better option. Of course, I also believe that all of our more vintage vehicles need to be as ecologically friendly as we can make them (regular maintenance and "no exhaust smoke" from over-rich mixtures) or as much as they would have been if brand new. Given all of the orientations mentioned, I'm sure we CAN determine which ones might best suit the orientations of the BCA -- and -- also give us a Modified Class at the shows that would include modified Buicks in the annual celebrations of Buick vehicles. Of course, sometimes the best criteria might be the fewest, without sacrificing any "standards" in the process. Unfortunately, it doesn't always work out that way. Enjoy! NTX5467

In the middle '80s, the hoods of Chevy/GMC C/K light trucks went to a two piece hood insulator. For a few years, they serviced both sides as individual pieces, but superceded those part numbers to one part number of "roll goods" hood insulation material. It was the GM color of charcoal that was used on most all of their vehicles back then and possibly in earlier times too. Unlike some, it is solid color all the way through instead of yellow and painted charcoal on the bottom side. I suspect that if the charcoal color is what's needed, most any GM dealer could supply this insulation for you. I also suspect some of the restoration supply vendors might have similar products. I don't recall the dimensions of the GM roll, but I reckon it should be enough to do your car (the GM Parts database might note the dimensions for it). There are some very knowledgeable Tech Advisors for the '58 Buicks listed in the back of The Bugle too. Hope this helps, NTX5467

As much as rejection might be part of the territory in artistic endeavors and activities, there are still some "technical" aspects of the artwork/music or whatever it is that's being considered. I would hope this "technical" aspect of things would be the prevailing method of judging any modified vehicle in a higher level show event. Rejection can also be part of a feedback loop of continuous improvement if it's considered correctly. It might indicate that a different direction might be in order too. In any case, the sense of objectivity, focus, and thicker skin can be necessary to achieve the desired results. Unlike the normal BCA 400 point judging, whatever judging criteria would have to be with respect to the other cars that did show up instead of some arbitrary standard. This judging format would be more in line with other shows where there are awards for 1st, 2nd, or 3rd place. There could still be awards for the best decade (i.e., Best '40s, Best '50s, Best '60s) vehicles too with one grand prize "Best of Show". Sure, these awards will be "what trips peoples' triggers" and determined by a group of judges or participants or whomever, but that doesn't mean these awards would be meaningless or the vehicles would not deserve them either. As for the major trophies, I suspect something similar to what many rod & custom shows have. A Best of Show plus all of the "Outstanding ________" awards might be a good start. It might also be possible that, with a little coaxing and growing of the modified class, some aftermarket vendors might desire to get involved in sponsoring the trophies in the areas their products are used (i.e., Dupont or SherwinWilliams or others might sponsor a paint or color award, Holley or Edlebrock or others might desire to sponsor an engine award). Getting things built up so these vendors would desire to get involved might take some time, but it would help the whole thing grow in a mutually beneficial manner. This aspect could also remove much of any judging duties from the event organizers too, except for possibly some popular vote awards. Buick could even sponsor something if they desired to get involved. Lots of possibilities. If things get off the ground well enough, I suspect the National Street Rod Association might desire to help spread the word of the new venture, but I suspect most of their members will have Chevy powerplants in their Buicks. The fact that a modified class does exist might increase the desire of those who might desire to build a modified Buick vehcile to do so and keep it ALL Buick too. It could also help the Buick Street Rod Association too. Lots of synergistic angles here. I suspect the key thing right now is to just get things off the ground and make it fly for now. I know there are probably many BCA members that do not like modified Buicks as that took an original Buick out of the restoration loop, BUT it also has kept many Buicks from being neglected and destroyed or CRUSHED by putting them in another loop of modified vehicles that allowed them to escape their ultimate untimely fates. Both orientations have merit, just from different angles. "Preservation" has many faces. Enjoy! NTX5467

First thing would be to get the surface finish, thread specs, and bolt head style of the bolts for when you go shopping at the bolt vendors. Also be sure of the location of each different style/spec bolt and which hole it goes into as there might be some differences (which many might overlook!). You might need to get into an old GM parts book for that vehicle to get the bolt spec information. That would also generate a GM part number for the bolt. Then you could see if that particular part number is still listed in the GM Standard Parts Catalog and might still be available from GM Parts. Some would be listed as "one per package" and others might be sold in multiples, so that would be a consideration too. Once you know the bolt specs, you might check some of the restoration vendors that specialize in fasteners. Some can even supply the NOS/repro bolts with the correct bolt vendor markings on the bolt head. Just depends on how "deep" you want to get into the restoration process. Hope this helps, NTX5467

I concur that we should have some sort of recognition for Buicks which have been tastefully and innovatively customized, thereby accenting the basic style the cars had to start with. There are some fantastic customized Buicks out there! One thing might be lumping all of the cars into one Modified class. It might take the same level of execution to put a street rod and a street machine into a show-ready situation, but having them show together in the same class might cause some problems. Especially as those two designations of vehicles never do mix in other events. Street Rod = 1948 and prior; Street Machine = 1949 and newer AND the "twain never meet". I don't suspect many "Import Tuner" type vehicles or vehicle modified in that manner, but I suspect that might be a fringe situation at best. Basic definition would need to be: Buick Body, Buick designed engine (except in those instances where a Buick came with a GM engine from another division of GM), Buick/GM transmission, Buick/GM rear axle, Buick/GM frame, and maybe a spec of having the appropriate GM bolt pattern on the wheels. I might recommend that all vehicles be roadworthy and licensed, but that could be open to discussion. As some of the modified cars would be like WillBilly mentioned, there would be many that were more highly modified. It would be nice if those two variations did not have to show against each other. Hence, depending on what showed up could well determine what class/sub-class trophies would be awarded. Judging could well be done by the participants, who hopefully put in enough "hands-on" work on the vehicle instead of contracting it out. One twist that I ran across in the early Muscle Car Shootout car shows was: Participants with cars showing in a particular class judged only that class, but did not judge their own car. That concept has a certain amount of credibility in it, but might make it a little harder to make sure you had all of the judging sheets in unless you put all of the different vehicles on one sheet/judge. I concur that craftsmanship and workmanship qualities are important, just as well executed innovative designs are. Perhaps some experts from the GoodGuys group could be requested to oversee the judging? Plus some custom car magazine people (who might desire to be at the event to scout out new feature vehicles)? Perhaps the GoodGuys people or the Buick Street Rod group could be enlisted to determine the Best of Show-Modified award? Several possibilities! In the earlier days of the BCA, I suspect the awards presentations were more manageable than they have become with advancing time and the number of cars and classes being judged each year. It might take several "divisions" of awards and presentations to keep the main event more manageable or present them in the afternoon instead of at the main banquet. In one respect, the main event presentations will be for the "traditional" BCA awards, which might be the more important ones to the mainstream BCA members. The awards for the Modified class would be equally as important to that group of people also, but the orientation of that group might be that they'd rather get their trophies in the afternoon on the showfield? There would be some things to get worked out. To me, the key thing for the BCA to work toward is to be totally inclusive of ALL Buicks on the planet and not just the "original" ones. ALL Buicks should have a place in the BCA and if those proud Buick owners desire to show those Buicks in a BCA National Meet, then I'd hope there would be some sort of class structure to allow that, even if they were non-judged display classes. The down side of that would be that the yearly events might grow in proportion of size and complexity. But if the main complexity of the show is the 400 point cars and such, then that aspect might become more daunting to orchestrate. Greater complexity is inevitable as each year brings new cars into show eligibility status and the older vehicles might not drop out of the mix. The up side would be a more "show within a show" concept. The Driver's Class, the Modified Class(es), Archival Class, Display Class, etc. would be additional draws for the public and BCA members alike. If orchestrated correctly, I suspect they could all co-exist at the same meet, hopefully. Not to mention membership growth of the BCA. I know that other national car club organizations might be considering similar classes for non-original configuration vehicles -- and it's good to keep tabs on what they're doing for a general reference -- but I feel that what the BCA does needs to meet the needs of the Buick enthusiasts and not be specifically a copy of what other national clubs might do. Perhaps we can come up with some solutions that they didn't even consider or knew existed--plus look good and show some class and leadership in the process! Just some thoughts . . . NTX5467

It might be hard to say, not knowing what the clearance specs are supposed to be. Some wear markings would be normal, I suspect, given the age and miles on the motor. I doubt that part is available separately and even if you could get one, you'd have to clean up the bore it resides in which would further increase the side cleararnces unless the replacement piston was an oversize. End result, if there's any doubt in the pump's ability and integrity, you'd probably be better off to just get a new one and be done with it. Oil pressure, and lack thereof, is not something you need to be constantly worrying about as you drive the car, especially on an older engine where the pressure is near the lower end of the factory spec. The decision of how you spend your money is your own. Just some thoughts . . . NTX5467

You might check with some of the restoration or street rod interior people to see where they get their base stock of that backing board. I've seen some custom interior build-up articles/television segments over the years and know they have to get it somewhere. Also, you might want to consider upgrading the watershield material that goes on the door shell before you install the door trim panel. Some heavy gauge clear plastic put on with some silicone sealer has worked well for me in the past. When and if you need to take it off, it comes right off and a little more sealer puts it back again--works better than "dumdum", which can dry out and get brittle with age. Helps keep things a little "tighter" and dust free in the car instead of the heavy paper that GM sometimes used, which crumbles on contact as it ages. The 1/8" Masonite (that was mentioned) or some similarly thin plywood would also be options instead of the heavy cardboard backing board material used by the factory. The harder materials might be a little tougher to work with in some respects and might also not match the expansion characteristics of the metal they'll be attached to nor the potential moisture issues if they are left unpainted/coated. They would probably be more substantial than the cardboard board in some respect too. Much would depend on if there are any curves in the basic contour of the door panel, I suspect. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

When an engine's oiling system is designed, there are certain priorities as to how much oil goes where, when, and why. In a street oriented engine that seldom sees higher rpms and has hydraulic valve lifters, the lifters and cam area can get oil just before the main bearings do. Therefore, when the oil level gets to the danger level, you'll hear the valve lifters clicking and know to check things. Other engines will feed the crank first or at the same time as the lifters and cam area. These engines typically will have greater performance potential as the crank receives oil with a higher priority than other engine areas. Perhaps a good illustration might be the small block Chevy and the Chrysler 350/361/383/413/426Street Wedge/440 big block engine families. In the Chrysler orientation, the cam area receives the oil first and then down to the crank. The possible orientation MIGHT have been that a typical Chrysler customer might hear the clicking of a valve lifter before they'd notice the THUMP of a main bearing. While these engines proved themselves worthy higher rpm motors in law enforcement duty for many decades, they typically did not see more than about 5500rpm for extended periods of time (that was typically enough to allow for approx 140mph to speeds in the police cars they were installed in with 3.23 gears). For higher performance build-ups of these motors that would have mechanical lifters for upwards of 7000rpm capabilities, there would be a reduced need for oil in the camshaft area due to the solid lifters. Therefore, restrictors could be placed in the oil feeds to the cam area to reappropriate additional oil to the crankshaft area. If it didn't go to the cam/lifter area in quite so large volumes, then it would be forced to go to the crankshaft area. There was also a complimentary machining operation to enlarge the oil feed to the oil pump and install a larger oil screen in the pan. The small block Chevy motor was a natural for higher rpms and had factory versions with solid lifters for the Corvettes, from the factory. Therefore, in the orientation of "no cost" modification to cover all engine choices on the engine assembly line, the Chevy engineers designed an oiling system which would feed the crankshaft area first and still put plenty of oil to the cam/lifters to supply the needs up there. As a result, one block casting would work for a 283 4bbl Power Pack or a solid lifter Fuel Injection Corvette. Plus, if the owner desired, the Corvette's solid lifter valve train could be put in the existing passenger car engine with appropriate changes to the fuel induction system for increased performance without any machining operations. I'm not sure what the oiling priorities are for the Olds engine you have, but I hope my information might help you understand why it might be advised against to put oil restrictors in an engine with hydraulic valve lifters. If oil to the lower end of the engine is a concern, you might consider putting in a high volume oil pump, but with regular pressures, instead of oil restrictors. Why not increase the oil pressure with the high volume pump? The oil pump is an internal power consumption item of the engine. Therefore, what power it doesn't take to run it can get to the flywheel for greater performance--not to mention fuel economy. Similarly, using an oil heavier than 10W40 or regular 30 -- with modern oils being what they are -- probably should not be necessary and will similarly load the oil pump more with a resultant power decrease. It is a known fact that the bottom end of those Olds engines was probably the strongest one in the whole GM engine family line back then. The old 394s were the basis of many blown fuel race engines in the '60s too, so I suspect that what's in those blocks, even the later versions (which spawned some awesome experimental "future production" engines that never saw the light of an assembly line), might be plenty fine for a strong street engine, but I'll defer to the Olds experts and their recommendations on that. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

A great site that obviously includes some great advertising pictures from the GM Photographic archives. When I checked it last week, it seems there's more pictures there now than previously and includes some later models now. For another great site, check out www.fitz-art.com. Enjoy! NTX5467

(Wonder if everyone that has bought a front wheel drive car for the past decades cares about how hard it is to remove the transaxle for repairs/rebuild, AND takes special tooks to do, when compared to a modern rear wheel drive car? Or if someone DIDN'T buy a torque tube configured Buick because it took much more work to R&R the transmission in those cars?) With just a little effort, there are many vehicles (USA designed and otherwise!) that have labor operations for particular repairs that look like nightmares to the uninformed. On the other hand, you might not believe how some make a major situation out of a simple repair. On the earlier Rolls Royces, you HAD to have intimate knowledge of where all of the hidden fasteners were just to do minor body work on the car as the ones you could see were only about 1/2 of what was there. Then there were the '40s (?) Chevys where it was easier to remove the front sheet metal of the car if you needed to do a valve job rather than "fight it" by not taking it off? Or the old "bore only 5" rebuilds on the 6 cylinders because the cowl got in the way of mounting the boring bar to the block? Did anyone NOT buy those cars or trucks because of those things? Sure, GM has had their share of vehicles "designed to assmeble" (and not quite as easy to work on in the field as other brands), but that didn't stop people from buying them. The people who worked on them knew the flaky things and adjusted their work operations and/or bought new tools to compensate for it. I've experienced the "50,000 mile spark plug" on the mid-60s Pontiac 389s. I know about the Chevy Monza V-8 spark plugs too, plus the "behind the fender" blower motor location on my '77 Camaro and alternator replacements on the cammer 3.4L Chevy Luminas. These are things the normal owner doesn't know or apparently care about--that's why they pay mechanics to do their work for them OR buy the extended warranty OR just figure that all vehicles are the same. Another reason they make ratchet extensions and u-joints, plus air ratchets to speed things up. I hope everyone has a safe and enjoyable holiday weekend! NTX5467

I agree with Old Guy, you don't just buy bearings and put them in. As part of any re-bearing situation, you need to check the journal sizes or get the crank polished/turned dowm to the next closest size and THEN put new bearings of the correct size with it. Chevy would use cranks with .008" undersize journals and put appropriate bearings with them on the assembly line. As my machine shop guy says, when the engine needs rebuilding, then you put .010" under bearings with it and everything is fine. We even found one in a new replacement box too, from GM. This way, they could "save" a crank that was originally cut just a hair off by cutting it to the .008" undersize size. Even some of the reman crank kits can have the wrong bearings with them from the engine shop. Always check everything that has to be a particular size to make sure it's what it needs to be. Plastigage works great! Just some thoughts . . NTX5467

Thanks for that great picture of the car and trailer! I saw it on the grounds with the trailer still hooked up and the towing mirrors attached. It looked fantastic! Unfortunately, I didn't have my camera at the time. Thanks, NTX5467

During that time frame, the 3.0L and the 3.3L were used somewhat interchangeably in those cars, so I suspect that would be pretty much a bolt in situation AND your transaxle could be upgraded internally (if there were any differences in the clutch packs at all) with not too much trouble. These engines were in the same family as the 3.8Ls, but I'm not sure if they would share the same mounts. Of course, the 3.8L will have more torque. From the ratings, the 3.3L was pretty powerful for its size--especially for horsepower. Of course, there would need to be some changes in the computer chip due to the different engines, but that's a easy thing to do, usually--even if you get an aftermarket calibration that is emissions friendly. As you're concerned with going fast, don't neglect to upgrade the brakes, shocks, sway bars, and tires. The aftermarket can help here as there typically weren't any performance versions of those cars from GM back then. Not to mention a clean cat-back exhaust system. Might even be some headers for that engine too. Hope this helps, NTX5467

As good as the Haynes Emissions Manual you have might be, if you have some concerns about checking codes, you really need two things--a GM service manual for that year of vehicle and model of vehicle and a QUALITY code scanner. Pulling the codes can be the easy part, but when two codes are set because of a third malfunction (temporary or constant), that's when those who are trained in such things come into play. I know that in earlier years of GM computers, you could short the two terminals together and it would flash the Check Engine Light in sequence for each stored code, after it got past it's original dummy code (which preceeded the real codes). By the time that OBDI came around, there's a bunch more data in the data stream now than in the earlier times. This is where a quality code scanner comes in--not an inexpensive one from the auto supplies. Plus, in some cases, it can be somewhat time consuming to let all of the codes flash if there are many if you try to check them without the scanner. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

The Harley Earl commercials seem a little unusual at first glance, but have special meaning for those of us who know who he was and what he did for Buick and the rest of the automotive industry. The future one we were shown at the Saturday night presentations was neat and might have been one of the earlier ones so others might know what was going on. Using the print advertising to kind of tie things together is good too. Enjoy! NTX5467

In the later '80s, I found some dealership advertising items for Buicks that year. It listed the various target markets and demographics for each Buick model. Not ALL Buick owners then were the same age. This information somewhat mirrored the great multimedia presentation that we were given at the Flint BCAeet by Ed Mertz. The Park Avenue owner was basically in their 60s and was comfortably living on their generous retirement income (or getting ready to). The LeSabre customer was younger and more family oriented and "mainstream" America (my term). The Skylark customer was the younger family in their later 30s that wanted the prestige of a Buick but was typically too tied down with mortgages, a young family, and a yet-to-grow income. So, the age demographics went from later 30s to the '60s and beyond. If you go into www.RegalGS.org, I suspect you'll find many later 20-somethings that are Buick owners with similar situations as the earlier Skylark customer (i.e., family, house in the suburbs, decent jobs--or getting ready to be) and like their Regals for what they say about them--plus all of the performance stuff that makes their Regal GS much faster (ala Grand Prix) without looking like a racer-type. Doesn't that sound familiar? "Fast with Class!" Yet, with all of the hoopla, the "typical Buick Owner" is allegedly "retirement age". It's a really neat site. Lots of tips and interactions regarding the intermediate size front wheel drive Buicks that many others tend to shun for whatever reasons. That also doesn't consider the many home pages that even younger Buick owners have put up with their '80s front wheel drive Buicks (typically their first car!) and all of the things they've done to make it neater (i.e., stereo, "chip", K&N) and better. Many of the things that work and fit the Pontiac Grand Prix (which has a performance image) will also fit the Regals/Centurys, with a few exceptions. This is one way that using the same motor in several different vehicles is good, especially when one of the vehicles has a performance image. If all of those young rock star and television star gazillionaires start buying Rainers to go with their Escalades, it should drop the age demographics of ALL Buick buyers a bit, I suspect, and make Buick more socially acceptable as a brand. Imagine the paparazzi's reaction when they're looking for so and so in their Escalade and they escape them because there weren't expected to be in a Rainier? Possibilities there! Enjoy! NTX5467

One of our chapter members has a LeSabre Limo that is an '88, I believe. Just a normal LeSabre that's lengthened for an additional front seat behind the original front seat. His limo is white with blue cloth interior. It was purchased from a Dallas used limo company that deals in used funeral home vehicles, for example. We started referring to it as the "corporate limo". It has been on some of our chapter's out of town trips and has carried some of our chapter members' wives on shopping trips on these out of town trips too. Quite nice for that! I suspect that as LeSabre T-types were black, someone got innovative or there was a shortage of sedans when they needed the cars to build the Limos from. Might have had something to do with the longer doors on the coupes too? There is a Professional Car Society national car club that I believe has a website. "Professional cars" would typically be limos, hearses, flower cars, and maybe even police cars (although there are separate clubs for them). Hope this helps, NTX5467

I'll concur with the comments about the Motor Trend awards. In the '60s, for example, it was given to the whole vehicle line instead of just one model. I would give those earlier awards more credibility than the more current onces. At least in the earlier times, everything was compared to everything and it was a more level playing field. Innovations were rewarded and lauded as real advances too. CAR AND DRIVER's 10 Best deal is somewhat interesting, but probably more realistic than the current MT deal. I've seen situations where they'd hammer on a particular vehicle for some detail and then it'd turn up in the 10 Best list that same year and it would be a really good vehicle. It seems that those automotive journalists sometimes seem too jaded in some respects that they have trouble perceiving the realities of multi year ownership. Some of the long term test vehicle articles are pretty decent, though. Some of the C&D writers seem to be of the orientation that if it isn't new, it's not worth having. I do like some of their editorial writers' monthly comments, though. In one of their family comparison tests, they checked the interior space for passenger accomodations, but didn't evaluate the cargo area for the week long family vacation, much less a small child (and all that adds to the mix). I liked the old CAR LIFE magazine for their attention to technical/mechanical details. When they awarded their 1966 Car of the Year Award to the full size Mercury, they had lots of technical information in the article. Things that didn't relate to styling or hype, but solid engineering data of how much better the new car was than the old one in almost every measure. They probably could have also given it to the similar Ford that year, but obviously Mercury went just a little farther in some respects as it was a higher level car line than Ford. Anyway, they looked at things differently than Motor Trend back then. Pity that Motor Trend bought them in the late '60s. As for the "car" versus "other" versus "truck" nomenclature. If the SRX (in either 2 wheel drive or all wheel drive) is termed "car-based" SUV, would an Audi sedan with Quattro all wheel drive (and a fold down back seat for added utility) be similarly termed "car-based" SUV? Both are built on car platforms whereas the "real" SUVs are on truck platforms. The whole "crossover" nomenclature is really new-speak for the dreaded "station wagon" nomenclature. It's been mentioned in many magazines (by noted writers) that "station wagon" is a bad word and "SUV" is "in". In the earlier times, station wagons were some really classy vehicles! It is suspected that as the minivan generation doesn't need a minivan anymore, the crossover SUV will be what they might well move up to for their new vehicle--provided they don't go all the way to the Suburban/Tahoe or Explorer/Expedition vehicles (which also have been somewhat stigmatized by various groups). End result, "crossover" is good (with respect to vehicle designations). "Car-based" means better fuel economy, typically, than the larger truck chassis SUVs too. A duck is still a duck, but a crossover SUV is not a station wagon. Enjoy! NTX5467

I have no doubt as to the reputation or credibility of those involved in the situation with the Bravada. I just know what GM warranty labor time is for that operation AND that our technician did not have to remove the body from the few Trailblazers that we had to remove the engine from for warranty repair (early in their production run). No more, no less. As to the main bearing support plate which holds the crankshaft main bearings, this is nothing new. The NorthStar V-8 is that way and has been since it first appeared. Prior to that, many high end drag racing engines used similar things, called "main girdles" to reinforce the lower end of the block. Similar in concept to cross-bolting the main caps to the side of the block, as was done in the '60s and still is done today, on certain higher performance engines AND (if I recall correctly) the current LS1 family of GM V-8 engines. I read a news release where Flint South complete their 1 millionth 4200 I-6 engine last week. That's a bunch! Enjoy! NTX5467

Just a few short thoughts . . . 1 -- Dave, the SRX is built on the Sigma platform, NOT a truck platform. In using some allegedly politically incorrect terminology, it is a CTS "wagon". It is classed as (in politically correct terminology) as a "crossover SUV" that is "car-based". The Lexus RX300/330 is similarly car based as is the Volvo in that market segment too. The BMW X5 is similarly a car-based vehicle. It is predicted that all growth in the "SUV" market segment will be with car-based SUVs and not light truck chassis versions. 2 -- As for the surveys, J. D. Powers has been doing surveys for many years. They seem to have the most credibility in what they do, whether we agree with how they do it or not, or the results. There have been other groups/magazines that have done customer surveys and those awards have been mentioned in Buick and other vehicles' advertising when those results or awards are released. Motor Trend's Car of the Year award only considers NEW vehicles of that model year and not existing vehicles which might have been much improved over prior year's versions. 3 -- From what I suspect, the customer base of Consumer Reports might not be a representative sample to deal with, when compared to the greater population that J. D. Powers samples. I also suspect it's smaller than the customer population that GM regularly samples after warranty work has been performed or their new car has been delivered (the Customer Satisfaction Index ratings for every franchised GM dealership and vehicle line thereof). CR also has a word that they throw around a lot -- "defect". To me, a defect is something that is broken due to poor design or just doesn't stand up to the use of the intended customer. CR classes headlights out of adjustment as a "defect", or at least used to. CR, in the past, has had management that had "agendas" which later came out in court in sworn testimony. The Suzuki Samari "situation" was one. Or they perform seemingly "defective" stunts with their test vehicles, like doing a sudden lane change and then the test driver takes his hands off of the steering wheel. How realistic is that? To their credit, they do test any and everything. I feel they do very well with applicances and other electrical items, but sometimes it seems their automotive tests have been a little flat. But, in recent times, they are getting better. In any event, when I look at their tests, I look at the numbers and not so much as their dialogue about the vehicle. 4 -- I will concur that "feel" and "character" are very good things to have in a vehicle. That's ONE reason I like older vehicles. The sound of the door latches closing. The sound of the starter. The sound of the engine as it moves the car down the road. The way the transmission shifts and how it reacts to driver input. The way the chassis reacts to steering input. The perceived solidity of the body structure. The "feel" of torsion bar front ends instead of coil springs. It ALL plays to the senses. Unfortunately, not everyone can key on those neat things (or understand those of us that do). When GM was great and each division had their own chief engineers, each brand of vehicle had their own unique sounds and character. This is one reason that '77 Olds customers probably were very disappointed to NOT hear an Olds engine under the hood of their new '77 Delta 88. These are things that marketing people can't really quantify and transmit in their print advertising, but it matters to us. Now, you can still tell a Chevy V-6 from a Buick 3800 just from the sounds they make. Not loud sounds, but sounds nonetheless (notice I didn't say "noise"?) When we were waiting our turn on the handling course the other day, I listened to the sounds of the quickly accelerating vehicles. The Lexus just whoooshed away quietly and smoothly. The BMW roared off and sounded nice too. The SRX made those lovely V-8 performance sounds. The others were quieter and somewhere in between. Even as quiet as modern vehicles are, there are still some key sounds they make which excite the senses. One thing that doesn't excite me is a 4 cylinder of V-6 with a loud exhaust--YUK!--but those who have them consider them "kewl". Many orientations and perceptions of "neat" depending on who it is. Unfortunately, from the Lexus perspective, the only good sound is NO sound. Yuk! No sound can also be dangerous if you aren't aware of your surroundings. But too much sound can be annoying too, even if it's a nice sounding exhaust or the tires letting you know you're not on smooth concrete pavement anymore. With Lexus being a "benchmark", that's where everyone usually feels they need to be. A quiet and smooth running vehicle is usually associated with "luxury", but sometimes it can be taken too far. I like vehicles that communicate their likes and dislikes back to the driver. Feedback, if you will. It's great to know that your vehicle enjoys cruising in the 75-90mph range (in appropriate areas and conditions) as the engine sounds nice and has tight throttle response and the chassis likes it too. When the "harmonics" are right, it just feels "right". Unfortunately, even some of the older vehicles are not quite as expressive in this aspect as some feel the same at 40 mph as they to at 80 mph. And we haven't even mentioned how the suspension reacts to turns and dips yet either. But when everyone started going to front wheel drive and shorter wheelbases, it seemed that some of those character traits were dulled somewhat. Everyone was chasing the Japanese and what I call their "appliance" cars. Yes, they do everything they are supposed to quietly and reliably and efficiently, but they are just lacking in character, at least to me. Some of the main "offenders" in this area are usually most Toyota and Honda cars. Granted, the current Camry has some great chassis dynamics in it, but you have to drive it "not like a Camry" to discover them. Hondas have lots of performance potential--for a price--but are still reliable servants in their more mass market vehicles. Some of your experiences might be different than mine--which I totally respesct--but these have been my observations over the years. Character in a vehicle is good, but much of it has been diminished in recent history in so many vehicles that try to follow the Japanese vehicles in an effort to gain sales. Yet, it seems that whenever the Chrysler guys in the '90s (pre-DB) broke out and did something different and unique, they sold more cars and trucks. There's a message there. 5 -- Rebates, cheap of no interest rates on loans, or whatever, it's about moving product into the consumer's driveway. Back in the '80s, when the first GM rebates and cheaper interest rates started, I commented "Why don't they just drop the price of the vehicles to where they'd be with the rebates?" Then I realized that not all vehicles would qualify for the rebate and not all customers could qualify for the cheap interest (just as now). Hence, just like a mail-in rebate on an appliance battery, those things don't cost anything unless someone uses them. Hence, more profits than if they just dropped the prices in a normal manner. Lots of debates can happen on this subject and most will have valid points. GM's on a mission to gain market share and is using the financial things to make it happen. How we judge their vehicles compared to others is not necessarily the issue, as each of us have differing orientations in that area. GM has the resources to keep this activity up until the newer and more desireable vehicles come to market (that hopefully will not need rebates to sell in large quantities). When I was at the Grand Prix dealer training event, we were told to take every prospect on a test drive. To use the throttle. To use the brakes. To create desire in the customer by the way the vehicle drove and reacted. To show off the neat things the vehicle would or could do FOR the customer. After hearing that orientation, I'm thinking I need to go back and figure out where we can build a demonstration track! The key message was to build enough value of the vehicle with the customer that they wanted to buy the vehicle because of what it would do and what it was. The way it felt compared to the other vehicles. Pontiac, being the "performance" division of GM, desired that every prospective customer know the performance attributes of their vehicles and that they were desireable vehicles for many reasons--other than just purchase price. In this case, the purchase incentives were icing on the cake. At this time, the incentives have lasted far longer than anyone might have suspected and still hasn't eroded the financial stores of the corporation. Now, it's more of a power play against the competition who doesn't have quite the financial situation that GM does. Questionable tactics? Possibly, at this time. Effective? Enough for them to continue. Remember too, that it was GM that stepped up with these great purchase incentives after the 9/11 attacks. It is widely accepted that if GM had not done something to jump start things, the recession we were in at the time of the attacks would have become much more severe. Sure, it was a marketing ploy of sorts, but it also got people's minds off of the tragedy enough that they would at least get out of the house and go shopping for things they needed--like cars. We ALL know how much it can lift the mood to have a new car in the driveway. Whether we like all of the price incentive/rebate games, you have to give GM credit for taking that bold action back then. And, possibly somewhat reluctantly, many others followed and also saw the benefits back then. Just as in the '80s, if one manufacturer does those things, the others typically will follow. It's been something that has been widely debated in the economics circles then as in more recent times, yet at some time in the future, it will be necessary to scale them back. Just as in the '80s too, I suspect that when they are, sales will drop, so then here comes more incentives (this has already happened a few times when GM tried to back away, but had to put a new program in to keep things moving). Also, notice that most of the incentives are on vehicles that have high inventory levels for one reason or another. The participation of Cadillacs and Corvettes will vary from program to program too. This is now the "buildout" period for the existing year's models and has always been a traditional time for such buying incentives too. It is recognized that neat vehicles will move themselves from the dealerships into the new owners' driveway with no incentives. Everyone knows that and has been working toward that. Unfortunately, only a few of them have hit ground now, but there's more in the pipeline--from GM and others. The next couple of years should see some really neat vehicles be introduced. We all know that things can't stand still with respect to the competition, too, but there are some observed cycles in the mix. One company introduces a new model that sells great. A few years later, the competition's new models will "answer" them and so it goes. It's a moving target that you can either react to or show some quality leadership as you do react to it AND anticipate what the next big things will be. This is where Lutz comes in. 6 -- Rental cars have been much maligned as a tool the manufacturers use to increase their sales. In the past, Ford DID own most of Hertz, Chrysler had controlling interest in Dollar and Thrifty. Each manufacturer also has their own in-house leasing entities too. Before the Daimler & Chrysler "thing", Chrysler spun off Dollar and Thrifty in what became a combined Dollar/Thrifty business entity (DTAG?). Ford got out of Hertz back then too, as I recall. National had partnered with Pontiac and Buick for promotional deals, historically. Dollar and Thrifty are still deep into Chrysler products, but will use others to fill gaps in their rental vehicle inventories as necessary. National is still mostly GM oriented, but has Mitsubishis and Toyotas too. Hertz is still Ford-friendly too. Alamo has a little bit of everything, it seems, even as it has merged with National. Key thing about the much lamented rental cars--they HAVE to be reliable and in service to make money. They might not see the easiest of treatment, but from my experiences with them over the past 7 years or so, there have been no glaring deficiencies in the vehicles. So, the fact that a particular model is in a national brand rental car fleet could be a good recommendation for it. Having those cars in rental service also provides people who might not otherwise be exposed to them to broaden their automotive horizons too. In fact, moving the electric trunk release from the glove box to the left of the steering wheel is one thing that changed as the result of the rental fleet business. One reason I first became a National Car Rental Emerald Isle member was because they were featuring Buick Regal LS cars with leather interior, CD player radios, AND Gran Touring Suspension. The first one of those cars I drove was impressive with NO float. I was amazed! This was back when the Century had their smoooth ride suspension calibration, the regular Regal had a more firm calibration, and the GT suspension was superbly firm and smooth at the same time. In short, three different struts. Now, everything's in the "firm" calibration using tires and sway bars to make up the differences. Still, a good compromise. 7 -- GM has made some notable gains in quality of assembly and design in the past 10 years. In some cases, it's now acknowleged that they were a little timid in some respects of design and marketing, when compared to what everyone else ended up doing. There were some bright spots, anyway, just not universally so. The J. D. Powers reports are one area where there has been continued improvement and noted higher rankings that many of the more prestigious marques, even in earlier times. The other great strides have been in plant productivity, as evidenced by the Harbour Report. GM also has more North American plants that rate high or at the top of the list than anyone else does, which is great. It's one thing to have great quality vehicles, but if you can't efficiently produce them, that's another thing to work on. All of these gains have been through steady improvement. These improvements come from vehicle designs, assembly improvements, and a motivate work force. They also don't happen overnight either. Sometimes, it's a slow process, but a beneficial process and necessary to build into the future with. 8 -- Dang! I was going to keep this whole deal reasonably short, but looks like I erred in that desire. My apologies! NTX5467

Matt, I must say that I've never seen a door panel laying on the ground--ever--unless it was taken off for some inner door repair. I would certainly hope your father's Century is not the norm. Usually, the only times we have to order a door panel for any GM vehicle, it's due to a scratch during transportation or similar. If it is so bad, it might have been a good idea to request a buy-back for another GM vehicle. Not to doubt your experiences with it, just to say that I've not seen one that bad from GM. Usually, when we see "laundry list" warranty repair orders, you can tell from what is listed that something of "buyer's remorse" has kicked in after the sale. Especially when everything that's complained about is not a normal complaint on the vehicle. Be that as it may. Back in the '70s, when the Japanese were allegedly making their inroads, down here under the Texas sun, the paint on those Datsuns and Toyotas was pretty much baking off of the metal. The interiors (even on the non-Mercedes German vehicles) didn't fare that well either. End result after about three years, the cars looked much worse than any American vehicle. The reason? The paint was about three notches down from the acrylic enamel or acrylic lacquer that we used over here--and had been using since the earlier '60s. The interior vinyls were thinner and just weren't "tested" for our environment and heat. Yet, those Datsun and Toyota and VW 4 cylinders just kept on going with normal oil changes and maintenance. You'd see these cars every day on the way to work and back. They were basic transportation if you didn't care what they looked like. When the clear coat paints of the '70s came online, there were lots of gold VW Super Beetles with crazing clear coat inside of two years. The saving grace was that there was a very strong aftermarket supplier network for those cars that had the repro interior parts, engine parts, etc. to keep these vehicles running much less expensively than items from the dealers. So, the mechanicals might have been great, but the cosmetics on the imports just took a beating in our warmer climate. During that same time, the US makes always looked good for many years with little more than a yearly wax or polish. One thing that can be critical in any longevity/reliability discussion, is that most American car buyers got into the trade every three year orientation so they seldom knew that their vehicles would run well past 100,000 miles with just basic maintenance. It was the people in the used car markets that found these things out. In the later '60s, Chevy led Ford in the used car market values, but when those resale values were extended out to 5+ years, it was Plymouth that was in the lead. Interesting . . . There is no magic bullet about who has the best car or whatever, what it all depends on is if it's the right car for you and how you use it. Each make has their own "things" that make them good or not so good. It can be the way it rides, how the controls feel, the way it just keeps on running and running and running with little more than fuel and normal maintenance, or the way it looks to you and others. From what I've seen, when people venture from what they're used to, it can cause problems--especially when they perceive that all vehicles should act and feel the same. "Things just aren't right", it seems. All cars are not built with the same orientations and, as a result, will not be as acceptable to some when others consider them to be totally great. Just as with the Mazda ashtray versus the Century ashtray, it goes back to what I said earlier about it depends on where you want to spend the money om the vehicle. Not everyone is "meant" to love Buicks, Fords, Audis, or whatever. Finding what's right for you is important and can take a while to happen. There are still many loyal Buick owners just as there are loyal Mercury owners. As long as they're there, they need to be taken care of regardless of what their age demographics are. They don't need to be chunked out into the woods, so to speak, like the Delta 88 owners were. Lincoln likes their Town Car customers, but they also know that's not their only market to be into. The profits from those Town Cars goes toward new models that will similarly bring younger buyers into their showrooms. Just as Buick profits can do if GM management doesn't divert them elsewhere. Just because current or near future Buick products might not have bunches of overhead camshafts or other "things" that other allegedly more desireable vehicles might have, that doesn't mean that our current Buicks are not very credible vehicles with good power, fuel economy, and longevity. As for engine choices, what Roberta mentioned about the Rendezvous is accurate. They will use a local engine (for the assembly plant) before they'll spend money shipping them in. BUT, there are situations where GM ships engines across continents and oceans already. The real reason could well be that the original vehicle proposal just didn't suspect the need for more power in a fuel economy aware world. When the new family of V-6s gets up to speed, the Rendezvous will have it and the power issues should go away. Remember too, each engine must be certified with the EPA for emissions, fuel economy, and such. Certification is not cheap. Remember, too, that when GM standardized their full size cars with the updated/redesigned 3.8L Buick V-6 with a particular automatic transaxle in the middle '80s, their approval ratings with customers suddenly went up by leaps and bounds. Building them all the same way does have it's merits, provided the original design is adequate or can be updated as time goes on. Powertrain choices can be good, but with modern realities, a few choices make more sense than a whole bunch like we had in the '60s--at least to those who pay the bills for EPA certification of EACH engine/trans combination. At one point in the '90s, when Ford was having some issues getting their Crown Victorias to pass emissions/fuel economy regulations, it was discovered that with just a few different vendors, it's USA content would drop so low it could be considered an "import". Interesting. This was before NAFTA was approved, too. They got past those issues and it's content still allowed it to be a "domestic" vehicle. From a dealership parts sales orientation (being paid on departmental gross profits), I can truthfully say that GM vehicles are getting better. We aren't seeing the same problems we did years ago or even last year. Much fewer repair orders come in that look like books too. Now, they are the rare exceptions, if at all. Sure, there are still some areas to improve on, but the "low hanging fruit" has been gone for a very long time. Competition does improve the whole marketplace. Those who don't improve will not survive in the long term. Cost effective improvement will not come nearly as soon as some might like, but it happens. On the issue of no import cars in Flint, we noticed that too! Had to get down to Detroit proper before we saw significant numbers of imports. When we went on the engine plant tour at the prior Flint BCA meet, one of the tour patrons asked a union employee about how many of the workers drove Hondas. He laughed and said that when an import vehicle was parked at a union hall for a meeting, there were some "messages" sent to that vehicle's owner. Those people know it's correct to support the company that pays your bills. Sure, factory and dealership employees have had some great vehicle purchase opportunities over the past five years. That's one of the perks of being employed by a car company or its dealers. Many took advantage of it while others were not able to, but they were still there. GM has their reasons for the incentives and such and has the financial power to keep them going with the end result being great corporate profits in the end. If it takes rebates and such to get people to notice the fine products that GM currently has, then that's what they are going to do--it's not about foisting poor vehicles on an unsuspecting populace at all. Most people are so "into" other vehicles that they just don't look around at what's aveilable. I'll take a new Impala at low $20s anyday over a mid-$20s Camry any day of the week. I rented an Impala last week for one day. With mostly easy freeway driving, mpg was nearly 34mpg. Not bad for the "antique" Chevy 3.4L V-6! One orientation is that many don't care what's under the hood so long as it moves the vehicle and gets good fuel economy regardless of the brand of vehicle. I've rented a couple of Camry 4 cylinders that didn't come close to that type of performance or mpg. As for modern technology, there's more at GM than GM readily admits to. More coming too. Not even including their European or Japanese partners, just GM-USA. There's lots of information on their www.GM.com website. Even if it is their website, it makes you realize that they aren't still in the '70s technologically, as some might suspect. This has been a great discussion! Happy Buick Motoring! NTX5467

If you get close to a Super Chevy show (or similar), you might check out the manufacturer's midway for the Legendary Interiors tent. They are one of the higher level reproduction interior parts vendors today. For carpets, it's Auto Custom Carpets, although Legendary also has carpets and later '60s style GM floor mats. Both companies have been around about 20 years or so and are established entities in the reproduction/restoration field. There might be some others with some other information too. Year One! is a good source too, but if you can get to the manufacturer of the part, it might be possible to work a better deal than with a brokering vendor. This is where research can pay off--knowing who gets what from where. Year One! (and maybe Legendary too) has a purchase program with a sliding discount rate depending on how much you buy, so it can be beneficial to get with some friends that are also fixing up their cars too and pool the order for a greater discount. One of the other car clubs I'm in did this and it resulted in a bunch of people getting excited about getting their cars fixed up, which was great. Enjoy! NTX5467