NTX5467

Thanks for the updates and information. Willis Bell 20811 NTX5467

The main reason you saw so many overhead camshaft motors after the "turbo days" was due to cold start emissions. The turbo cars' turbocharger acted like a heat sink and resulted in not enough heat getting to the catalytic converter to get it fired off quickly enough. The 4 valve per cylinder motors had similar or higher power without that emisisons test penalty. Add in the fact that most other "high line" makers which competed with Olds had 4 valve/cylinder OHC or DOHC motors and you see why the "Intrigue V-6" (aka, "ShortStar) existed. Reports were that the 3.5L would replace the supercharged 3800 Buick motor, but also with a supercharger for a "double whammy" effect, it seems. That probably was the master plan before it was altered in the later years. If you look at GM Parts price list prices, there's about a $700.00/car additional cost for the 3.5L V-6 over the non-supercharged 3800 V-6 (with about 15 horsepower less power). Doesn't take a rocket scientist accountant to seize on those numbers! Yes, the 3.5L was a more refined motor with greater performance potential and finally let the Intrigue go head to head with Chrysler on the LH cars in equipment specs, but accountants (with all due respect) can't justify spending more money for "the same thing" they can get less expensively. One reason the Intrigue and Grand Prix were paired in the same plant could have been a precursor of the fact that the Grand Prix was supposed to later use the 3.5L supercharged motor in a later Grand Prix GTP. Pontiac would be a better use of that motor anyway than would Buick. If you have followed the evolution of the Intrigue, many of the Intrigue-specific items on the vehicle have been slowly and quietly replaced with items from Grand Prixs. The Intrigue-specific 4-stage-valving front struts gave way to the Grand Prix front struts a few years ago. The electric fuel door lock was deleted. There are some other items, but they elude me right now. Yet the more expensive Intrigue-style fold down rear seat is now used on Regals too. When Zarella mentioned that they were loosing money on every Olds they built, I strongly questioned that statement (used as justification to end Olds production). Later, when I finally got around to looking at main vehicle components on the W-platform, the only significant thing was the 3.5L V-6 engine. Everything else priced out to be the same, at least in the GM Parts Price schedule for replacement parts. I suspect that when a Regal GS and an Intrigue GLS sold for similar sticker prices, the engine obviously made the Olds less profitable. But those days are behind us! It would have been nice to see Lutz mold Olds into a more European oriented car line that could compete head to head with Jaguar and Mercedes--if GM could fund a few extra things here or there to achieve that end, but the plans for the Sigma platform were already in place so Olds again seemed to sacrifice for the good of other GM divisions and their future. Lutz, or any other car-oriented person, could have tweaked Olds and put some new advertising in place to get things moving again--for very little additional costs that were not already budgeted. The problem was an observed "parade" of upper management through the division (of which Ms. Francis was one). It's hard to build morale with the troops when these changes are happening all of the time. Add in the fact that many of the "better people" left after the first rumors of Olds allegedly being cut in '92 (when John Rock supposedly said "Over my dead body!") and you end up with a somewhat compromised situation. But, just because some of the people left didn't necessarily mean the remainder were incapable of doing great things either. It all comes down to "direction" from management. GM has the capabilities to do some neat things with the last Aleros and let things go out on a positive note. With respect to the comment about how many of the earlier Olds models are still running around, I've seen quite a few Achievas lately--many of which still have good paint and appear to be "estate" cars getting back into circulation. They aren't being driven by old people either! Interesting that they finally hit their intended target market in later life. All of the marketing whizes talk about "old" people being the only ones to buy Olds and Buicks, but if you look at who the "second owners" are, they are typically much younger that the first owners of the cars--a fact that has yet to be fully documented, but can be readily observed in the various W-body forums and such on the various GM enthusiast websites. Many of these forum participants are equally as enthusiastic about those makes as the traditional new car customers were in prior times. The challenge is to channel those younger people into newer versions of their existing GM cars--plus the respective national car club organizations such as OCA and BCA. Just some thoughts . . . NTX5467 from the BCA General Forum

Thanks for the information and updates. Sounds quite a bit more complicated than the Chevy kit I had or the Chrysler units. That was back when each GM division pretty much did their own thing, also. One reason the Pontiac service manual might be a little vague on it could be that there was a separate manual specifically for that set-up? Just a thought. Enjoy! NTX5467

Is the complete setup you purchased an GM Accessories factory kit or the pieces from the production option? There could be some differences. The Chrysler unit I mentioned was circa '67 and prior. There was a dial on the instsrument panel with some sort of "ON" switch in it. Once engaged, you rolled the dial (with reference numbers on it) to the desired speed (above about 30 mph) and could vary the speed with the dial. On some, there was a small set screw adjustment so you could adjust the numbers to approximate the mph on the speedometer. The control box was mounted on the lh inner fender skirt with linkage to the carb from there. Pretty much self-contained. In the '80s, I orchestrated a deal for a friend to purchase the obsolete parts from an old dealership a work associate had bought. In that "stash" was a factory cruise kit for a '65 or '66 Impala. It was the same type as the one Chrysler used--except it mounted the control box on the core support by the radiator. Naturally, the speedometer cables were very long. It worked the carb with a long rod that approached from the front instead of from the rear. Quite a bizarre setup! I wanted it to possibly adapt to my '66 Chrysler, but when I saw how unusual it was, I halted that idea. I don't know if I would have put it on anything as explaining what it was would have been more hassle than it was worth, even though it was a factory Chevrolet accessory item. On the system on the Buicks back then, I suspect the concept of how they operated compared to the Chrysler unit is similar as the control box "guts" would most probably be the same. The switches and how they operated the control box would vary. Chrysler used one integrated switch where it appears that Buick and other GM lines used a couple of different ones. I suspect troubleshooting would be similar in concept to the Chrysler systems also, but Chrysler never used a speed buzzer or extra needles on their speedometers. In one respect, it can all boil down to having good electrical contacts in the wiring harness, in the switches, and inside the control box (i.e., contact points as in a clock, I suspect). As with a clock, the contact points could be gummed up with age and environmental exposure and grease residue. Cleaning them might be all that is needed as the basic calibration would not have changed over the years, typically. Good luck with your project. NTX5467

What I call "The Thunderbird Syndrome" (remember the T-bird steering columns that move sideways to allow for easier entry and exit, but only in Park, from the early '60s?) is a somewhat common GM tilt steering wheel issue with time and age. Tightening the bolts/screws mentioned is the fix, but you'll need to disassemble the column below the tilt portion of the column, very possibly. This isn't a simple operation and requires some special tools and/or someone that's been there before. In some cases, you might be able to get to the screws/bolts wtih a long extension, but my sources tell me that is somewhat rare and taking the tilt joint apart is usually the quickest way to do it. You will most probably discover, upon disassembly, that the pot metal casting that the screws go through is cracked out on the upper edge--where it's pretty thin. When the tilt lever is activated and the upper column area pops up, it appears that this area of the casting takes that force. Ther is a pretty strong spring on the lower side of the column that pops the column upward when the tilt lever is activated too, which must be removed. Dealing with those deals down there is pretty simple, but does require some particular tools and expertise that requires "knowing what you're looking at" to deal with. Getting the upper lock plate off is pretty easy. Don't forget about the spring wire retainer that seats against the lock plate! If you loose it, you can fabricate another one from a paper clip or buy a new one from GM as they fit pretty much every GM column of that type. There is also a strong spring under the lock plate that requires the special tool to compress and remove or coordinate your feet and hand activities--the tool is much easier and is available at most auto supplies. Most large metro areas have specialized GM steering column repair shops. Of course, you could also take it to the dealer. When you get the column apart, it would also be a good time to put some lube on the bearings in the upper steering column housing where the shaft comes through. Plus inspect the plastic gear that runs the ignition switch "rack" in the column for wear. Everytime you turn the ignition key, those things ignition cylinder related items move quite a bit and might need a new dab of grease. On reassembly, make sure none of the little ball bearings in the upper housing bearings get dislodged or if you replace the bearings that you get all of the old races out of the column. ALSO, when you disassemble the tilt joint make absolutely sure you get the upper shaft in the previous orientation to the bottom shaft (note the location of the "master spline" on the upper shaft!) as of it is put in "out of sync" the turn signals will not cancel when they should. Reassembly of the upper to lower shafts at the tilt joint, with them being 180 degrees out, will result in the steering wheel being installed upside down. The lock plate at the top of the steering wheel also determines the orientatin of the horn contact (which must index with the steering wheel exactly for the horn contact's intermediate parts to line up). On the back tube of the turn signal circular horn contact (under the lock plate) are the tabs that cancel the turn signals at the appropriate time. Therefore, if the upper shaft is not put on as it needs to be, not only will the steering wheel be upside down the turn signals will not cancel automatically as they previously did. Dealing with the upper portion of the column where the turn signal switch is is pretty straight forward and only requires the lock plate tool and other common hand tools, but to me, getting past that point could be best left to those who've done it before. Just some thoughts and reminders of side issues on that deal . . . NTX5467

Hooking a more modern GM transmission to the engine is one part of the "battle". How do you propose to deal with the rear of the transmission and the torque tube drive/coil spring rear suspension without completely fabricating a custom setup? Perhaps a later model DynaFlow would be a better alternative? Maybe one from the earlier '60s that might have had some production/operational improvements in the process? On a '62 chassis Buick LeSabre, it is possible to do that as Phoenix Transmissioin (Greg knew exactly which parts to get from the salvage yard and such) did a swap to a Turbo400 for one of our club members that really unleashed the power of his Buick V-8, but doing the same on the year of Buick you have might be a different issue due to the torque tube/coil spring rear suspension. Just some thoughts . . . NTX5467

My '68 LeSabre with a 350-4bbl also has the heater control "water valve" behind the carburetor. According to my '68 Buick factory Service Manual, the '68 430 and 350 4bbl motors have that valve in the same location behind the carbutetor. BUT the valves are NOT the same valve--the GM parts manual shows two different part numbers for valves that look the same, EXCEPT the 430 valve is a tad taller than the 350 valve for some reason. The 430 valve will work in the 350 with no problems other than you'll need a few extra circular gaskets (common Q-Jet carb to air cleaner gaskets) between the carb and air cleaner to space the air cleaner up slightly, otherwise it will be cocked slightly front to back. On my '68 350, it appears that the part of the intake manifold casting that the valve screws into CAN be very fragile as it's pretty thin between the casting's edge and the hole the water valve screws into. It looks like a litle too much resistance in installing the valve could result in it cracking out. I suspect the 430 manifold might be similar just as the other heater hose hooks to the front of the engine. As it takes two heater hoses to make the heater work, if one of the hoses is attached at the front of the engine, where is your other heater hose attached (other than to the heater core)? Just curious. It could be that installing a more common hose nipple in the intake manifold on those Buick engines might be a better alternative than having the valve directly installed into the manifold. There is an S-10 heater hose with a right angle molded into it, but I'm not sure if the size is correct for those Buicks. This way, an inline water valve from another GM application could be put in and the hole in the intake manifold would be less of an issue to me. It would be easier to change too. Just some thoughts on that issue that might explain why the intake manifold might have been changed--if it indeed has. Enjoy! NTX5467

You have two different functions you are talking about. The extra needle on the speedometer is for the Speed Minder buzzer that alerts you when you exceed the speed you have the needle set at. That's all it does. There is a knob to move the needle to different speeds. Otherwise, GM's cruise controls (as well as Chrysler and Ford systems of that general vintage) have a miminum "set" or "cut-in" speed of about 30mph. Therefore, it is not designed to operate below that speed. Depending on how your particular cruise transducer is calibrated, it could well be 35mph before it will set and hold that speed. When you do set the cruise, it should lock in on the speed that you pushed the "Engage" button and hold it within about 2 mph. Sometimes, they will briefly accelerate for a second or two as the transducer gets its activity sorted out, but if correctly adjusted they should engage smoothly and accurately. In other cases, it might let the vehicle's speed drop a few mph or gain a few mph when it sets. I'd recommend you just adjust your procedures to compensate for that situation. I'm not sure what the glowing light situation might mean, but it probably would be good to check the wiring to the transducer and the related connections in that harness. In those GM systems back then and up until the early '80s, the speedometer cable goes into the cruise transducer mounted on the lh front fender apron. A speedometer cable attaches to the output side of the transducer and then goes to the speedometer. There are some vacuum lines that connect to the transducer from the intake manifold and the other one goes to the cruise servo vacuum diaphragm that mounts near the back of the engine block. The cruise servo runs a linkage of some sort of a ball chain to pull the carb linkage and override the foot throttle during normal operation, but the foot throttle can override the cruise in the case of needed acceleration. With respect to the cruise transducers, there are 2 wire models and 3 wire models. 3 wire models have an extra wire to run the indicator lamp on the instrument panel when the system is engaged. Otherwise, they are the same unit. When GM went to the "memory cruise" version, they added mounting holes for a vacuum chopper solenoid that would mount to the bottom of the transducer. The turn signal levers for these cruises had the slide lever with "OFF", "ON", and "RESUME" in that order. Those transducers can be substituted for the earlier models, as I recall, but without the extra solenoid attached. Under the instrument panel, there should be what looks like a brake light switch, but also has a vacuum line attached to it. It is part of the vacuum line source for the transducer to do its functions. If, by chance you have one of the Dana/Perfect Circle cruise units from the middle '60s as factory equipment, there should be some sort of speed dial that you can engage the unit (again, at about 30-35mph) and then roll the dial to the desired speed setting. Instead of the vacuum actuation of the later models, there should be a stepper motor and a solid linkage to the carb. Any override functions will be internal with the stepper motor unit. This system should be similar to what Chrysler used until '67 and on some Fords also. Good, solid electrical connections are necessary. With this type of system, there is no "RESUME" function. If you're at the speed where it will set, you get it to engage there and then move the setting up to where you want it to be without any action with the accelerator pedal. The cruise setting can be moved downward in a similar fashion. It's also necessary to make sure the speedometer cables into and out of the cruise unit are in good shape and lubricated. On the later versions, if the transducer locks up, things come to a halt real quick with that lower cable and will damage the speedometer gear and the cable end where it indexes with the speedometer driven gear. With the main speed reference signal gone, the cruise should shut down and the speedometer needle go to zero while you're driving. In the case of the speedometer, it's just a meter that registers speed and should have no bearing on what the cruise control does or does not do. The Speed Minder buzzer probably uses a simple contact switch on the back of the speedometer unit, but should not affect how the speedometer operates. I mention both of these types of cruise controls as I'm not sure which system your vehicle has. My '68 Buick Service Manual shows the vacuum system I mentioned first, but with switches on the instrument panel instead of using the turn signal lever as later versions did. It appears the instrument panel switches operate the same as the later turn signal lever switches do, though, with respect to "SET" and "COAST" features--plus having the indicator lamp. I hope this information helps. NTX5467

As I recall, with all due respect, that our BCA Nationals has been in the issue of The Bugle that comes out a few months after the meet--even with the previous vendors. From the signals I saw at the Board meeting in Kokomo, that is still the way it's planned and was executed (as in the past). It can also depend on the mathod of publication they use. Typically, a 90 day delay is the norm. Look at your mainstream car magazines and see how soon they get their coverages of events in print. If they use color separations and other procedures as part of their pre-print preparations, there is a certain amount of time that it takes for those things to happen. In that situation, each print color is separated from the others and a plate is made of that color--which means a multi-pass printing process for each page of the publication that has color on it. Similar in concept to the way an ink jet printer makes more than one pass with each color in the color print cartridge before it moves on to the next line it prints color on. I concur that with a completely digital medias, things might operate quicker with similar time frames as a large newspaper might have. BUT it takes more than a 2 megapixel camera to get the same detail as a similar film camera, for example. My gut suspicion is that if it was put in the next bid specs for the national meet coverage to be in the August issue of The Bugle, appropriate plans could be made in that direction as Baker Press appears to have much better capabilities than the previous vendor had and probably should or could have similar capabilities as the publisher of the OCA magazine. It is not my intention to justify how or what Baker does, but to mention some side issues in getting a color print publication from pre-production into our hands. I do not know if other national car club magazine publishers were approached in the previous bid processes and invited to submit a bid to do The Bugle. I seem to recall that the current bid specs were based on what some other national car clubs had in their respective publications, though. I concur that it would be interesting to see just how the Journey With Olds publisher does things and at what cost, but whether or not they would be interested in submitting a bid is their decision, especially if they don't have the capacity to add our publication to their schedule. This year, I got the pictures I shot at the national developed soon after I got home. Is it preferable to rush the picture coverage of the national event into print or have it happen a few months afterward so that the excitement level is extended into other parts of the year rather than being concentrated in just a month or two time frame? There could be justifications in each scenario. Did you also go to the myriad of Cadillac events in Detroit also, Scott? I understand from some friends (that made both events this year) that it was a fabulous event also. Just some thoughts . . . Enjoy! NTX5467

Depending on why you suspect you need the 100A alternator, you might be better served by upgrading the battery capacity instead of doing the alternator deal. There also might be a more local rebuilder that might be able to enhance your current alternator to put out more amps instead of getting involved in someone a good ways from you. The "competition sound" people might give you a good lead of someone local that upgrades alternators for ambulances and their boombox-on-wheels sound systems. Just some thoughts . . . NTX5467

Thanks, Loren. I understand what you mean. What's interesting is that the current fwd Impala in police configuration matched the current Crown Vic in the handling tests run by the Michigan State Police. In fact, with the 200 horse Buick V-6, the Impala didn't give up anything at all to the 4.6L Ford. And neither does the upcoming Dodge Intrepid police package. BUT, if Ford would get more serious with their suspension and engine packages, they would be in front just as Chevy was with their last generation Caprice police packages. The Astro van is a good, solid product and the 4.3L Chevy V-6 is very good also. As for the Rainier, with the 5300 V-8 in the lighter short wheel base version of that platform, some unsuspecting BMW X5 V-8 owners (and especially the people with 6 cylinder X5s!) might be surprised by the Rainier V-8 at the stop lights. Enjoy! NTX5467

3M used to have the Mylar tape in their automotive products catalog in varying widths. It would be good to use to restore the various door and interior trim panels it was used on in the '60s and has since peeled off, I suspect. It goes on like pinstripping tape.<P>Enjoy!<BR>NTX5467

From what I understand from our sales people, turning the "chrome plated plastic" emblems into "gold" is done with a simple brush on solution with everything still attached to the vehicle. In some cases, there were factory option "gold packages" that had the emblems gold from the factory.<P>In the case of earlier Cadillacs and such, the actual emblems and hood ornaments were removed from the vehicle and plated with "light brass" color plating or whatever. The existing chrome items were removed and exchanged for the replated "gold" items.<P>As for the plastic replating, when Chevy first used a grille with chrome trim on the Berlinetta Camaros, they said it was done with a process called "sputtering" instead of spraying. Not sure what that is.<P>There are several vendors that replate plastic. Many of the chrome instrument panel bezels are waaay tooo shiney compared to their original satiny chrome finish. In the case of the exterior pieces, that might not be a real issue. <P>There are now several vendors that offer this service, but ask around before you send your items off to be done! You might end up loosing them. Seems like there might be something in Eastwood to do this at home?<P>Maybe if you sprayed some clear onto the inside of the part before spraying the silver? Basically paint it backwards, it might look better as the bottom of the paint is being seen as the top.<P>Enjoy!<BR>NTX5467

Before condemning the cluster, check the sensors and wiring going to it. The cluster works only on the information it gets just as a computer does--if it doesn't get good data, it can't supply good data.<P>When reinstalling the cluster, make sure you're "grounded" to the vehicle as some of those earlier clusters were very sensitive to static electricity issues. The approved "ground strap" was a conductive wrist band with a coiled lead attached to it to be attached to a good ground on the vehicle. The service literature of the time alluded to the fact that a good static electricity "zap" could "zap" a good cluster and make it a bad cluster. Considering the price of the exchange clusters, it's better to be safe than sorry.<P>NTX5467

One key item you need to address--the transaxle and it's torque capacity.<P>In a short feature in one of the high performance Pontiac magazines about 2 years ago, a guy stuffed a TBI Chevy 350 V-8 pickup truck motor into his Pontiac 6000 (A-body front wheel drive) and used the original transaxle, but with massive fluid flow modifications and custom made front drive axles. It DID fit, but the cost of doing the transaxle modifications alone probably exceeded the price value of the car itself.<P>Don't forget about brake and suspension upgrades too, to better support the increased performance capabilities of the upgraded engine!<P>Instead of looking at the rear wheel drive Regals, you probably need to look closer at the current front wheel drive Regals for modification ideas. Most of the performance items are listed for the similar Pontiac Grand Prix (which has a 110.5" wheelbase instead of the 109" wheelbase of the current Regals). Also, don't forget to get the complete computer and harness if you get a different engine for the vehicle too--most local emissions standards are written with the dialogue that the standards for modified vehicles are "for the newest year model, either the engine or the vehicle"--meaning that a 1987 car with a 2002 engine would need to meet 2002 emissions test standards, for example.<P>Air intake box modifications/replacements plus a cat-back exhaust system would be good starts as would an upgraded computer chip. Those would be the good basic starting points that will support later deals.<P>Enjoy!<BR>NTX5467

GM claims that their current DexronIII automatic transmission fluid is backward compatible back to that time frame. You might still find some Type A transmission fluid if you look around in the "lower brands" of transmission fluid at the auto supply.<P>You might check the service literature for that vehicle regarding the shock oil. Also be advised that similar fluid is still available at the motorcycle shops as "fork oil" (on the cycles, their shock absorbers are inside the forks of their suspension setup, similar in concept to the more modern struts on cars). There are various viscosities of fork oil just as there is motor oil. A technician once used that fork oil, in a lighter grade, to substitute for Pugeot shock oil one time with good results (cheaper and didn't have to wait for it to be ordered from France). Seems like it was not the lightest viscosity, but probably about two notches above that.<P>Enjoy!<BR>NTX5467

A friend mentioned one time that he used to use Pledge on his cars back in the later '60s. He claimed it would decrease the orange peel sometimes too.<P>No doubt, anything that puts some of the depleted oils back into the paint will make it look better, but durability would be an issue for exterior surfaces. Not to say it doesn't work well in those less conspicuous places!<P>To me, the main concern would be durability as the outside environment is different than inside a garage or residence. I have found Meguiars products to work extremely well on all of my cars, plus being easy to use. No doubt, the durability is better than a furniture polish and could be cheaper in the long run too, no offense intended. I also suspect it might have a "harder" shine too.<P>We used to get some spray carnauba wax for our used car reconditioning activities. I put some on some of the die cast cars we had on display in the parts department. We had a display with overhead lights shining down onto a glass display case. I had a Dale Earnhart BassPRO edition car on the top. Between customers one day, I got the spray wax and sprayed some on a piece of paper towel that I rumpled up first to soften it. I them lightly rubbed the spray wax from the towel to the car. It made that gold metallic paint on that die cast race car really pop out under those lights. I did the others we had sitting out on display too, with similar results. I was careful not to rub hard lest some of the miniature race decals and such come off. I tried it on the glass display cases too. It worked great there too. PLUS, it made all of those things easier to keep dusted!<P>Best thing is to experiment to find what works best for what you're doing.<P>Enjoy!<BR>NTX5467

In my 1970 Skylark sales brochure, the only place the 455 is listed is in the GS455 as the regular GS had the 350 4bbl engine as standard equipment. I suspect the '71 and '72 vehicles were the same with respect to engine useage.<P>Common sense would tend to dictate that a 455 in a regular non-GS Skylark would take too much away from the GS455 models. Things were very territorial back then. <P>The only exception might be in some "fleet" orders (as in police cars), but it would take some original sales order guides with fleet options to find that out. Until such documentation is produced, I concur that only the 350 and smaller engines (as in Chevy 250 CID inline 6-cylinder) were available in the non-GS Skylark in '72, '71, and '70.<BR>As powerful as the Buick 350 is compared to the beloved Chevy 350, there really wouldn't be any reason for a Buick police car to have anything more powerful than a Buick 350 4bbl for normal police work anyway.<P>And the stated reason for this inquiry is?????<P>Enjoy!<BR>NTX5467

The Lutz-touched new Buicks are still a few years off and should put more distinction in Buick style again. I believe they have said the grille in the 2003 Park Avenue is inspired by the Lacrosse, if that helps. <P>There is even talk that many of GM's future larger car platforms will transition back into rear wheel drive too, but that's off in the future too. The Cadillac CTS and other performance-oriented vehicles will probably be rear wheel drive too.<P>Full frame vehicles will typically be genuine truck-based platforms and cars will be unit-body construction as below about 120" wheelbase, the unit-body construction is the strongest way to do it. These same cars are subject to the federal side impact crash standards too. Not that the same could not be done with a full frame car (as in the past, even pre-regulation), but the weight penalty takes its toll and weight is a very critical issue in modern times of emissions and fuel economy issues.<P>But, contrary to popular consensus, some of the more modern pre-regulation full frame cars do not have the same degree of side impact crash resistance as some of the earlier models did. I've seen that myself. At least, the earlier models had "crash space" in them, meaning it took more penetration to get to the passengers location.<P>I guess you've forgotten that Ford still builds V-8, rear wheel drive, full frame cars? Crown Victoria, Grand Marquis, and Lincoln Town Car all share the same platform and many mechanical items. Unfortunately, with that heritage the last Grand Marquis GS I rented three years ago had no real reason to recommend it over a similar LeSabre, other than it's heritage. Same basic interior room, worse fuel economy, and the trunk configuration might have held the same amount of "stuff" as the LeSabre. The 2000 and up LeSabre runs at least as good, gets better fuel economy, and rides/handles better. The LeSabre might be a little tighter inside with 6 full sized people inside, but how often does that happen anymore? Plus, the Ford replacement for their 5.0L V-8 (the high tech OHC 4.6L V-8) would not even spin the rear tires with the traction control turned off! At least, a 3.8L V-6 LeSabre will squall its driving wheels a little!<P>Even as Chrysler transitions back into full sized rear wheel drive vehicles with the next generation of LH car (called LN, I understand), they will still be unit-body construction, but UniBody construction is a Chrysler situation since they first used Torsion Bar front suspension.<P>Just because the realities of a modern world have seemingly conspired to take some things of our past from us in the current generations of products, that doesn't mean the new products are completely "bad". In fact, many of these new products are very good products that accomplish things the earlier ones could not and do it more efficiently.<P>Ford has continually tweaked and upgraded their Crown Victoria-type cars as times have progressed. The new Mercury Marauder is a neat car too! <P>I like vintage cars with full frames, rear wheel drive, real Buick (or appropriate for the car line) V-8s, even the earlier UniBody cars too, but I also understand that if you drive something day in and day out, it needs to be new enough to find parts in the salvage yard if another driver does something stupid or unexpected weather happens (i.e., hail). That means either a higher volume older vehicle for daily transportation or something you can still buy an extended warranty for. <P>If you don't feel comfortable in taking the vintage car out of your immediate area, you can rent a new vehicle from National (typically GM cars) or similar for that weekend (usually about $100.00 + off site parking) for a 3 day weekend rental. Hertz and Budget typically have Ford products (including the Grand Marquis and Town Car) if you have to have a rear wheel drive, full frame, V-8 car.<BR> <BR>Just my thoughts and observations,<BR>NTX5467

Thanks, Ray.<P>NTX5467

The Rainier will take the place of the Bravada in the factory production mix, but as Roberta's mentioned, they don't want it to be considered as an Olds model replacement or that it's an Olds with different sheet metal. From what I understand, it will be a different variation just as the Envoy is different from the Chevy.<P>The Rainier will be the only version of that platform which will have the 5300 V-8 (all aluminum) in the short wheel base version, giving it one of those advertising plugs about being the most powerful short wheel base vehicle in that class. In the Chevy, the V-8 only goes into the long wheel base version of the TrailBlazer (which is a pretty dang nice vehicle in that 3 seat configuration).<P>Each of those vehicles will have their own unique items. The Envoy will have the retractible cargo area roof and it and the Rainier will have rear air suspension for better ride qualities. Chevy will not have those, for example. The top line Bravada is/was a really nice vehicle and I expect the Buick version of that platform to go above that.<P>In the short wheel base version and the 5300 V-8, it could be a great performer. A Buick Performance SUV. Don't snicker until you drive one!<P>Enjoy!<BR>NTX5467

This is a situation where having correct information is important. Even the same size engine could be painted differently with differently colored accessory items (air cleaner, valve covers, etc.) depending on which body of car it was installed in and even what production year, obviously.<P>This is where the sales/service literature will come in extremely handy as will the BCA Judging Manual. There's some great information in that one documnent!<P>Know what you are buying as it was proven several years ago that even established and respected paint vendors can make mistakes on what engine color goes where and when. Sometimes things are more tricky than they might be expected to be. I believe that Norb has the correct information in this case with the BCA Judging Manual also figuring into the deal too.<P>Does anyone still make the red krinkle paint? I know it's still available in black.<P>Enjoy!<BR>NTX5467

Send me an email with the codes (which should match those on the label in the luggage compartment if there's one there) and I'll decode them for you at work. I don't anticipate any real surprises in that deal unless there might be some special emissions package or something. As I recall, most of those vehicles were spec'd out the same mechanically (other than V-6 or V-8 or suspension upgrades) or were all pretty close, leaving the basic differences to be in color and trim, sound system, and wheels.<P>NTX5467

The word "car" is being grossly misused by the general public these days. I've heard people refer to Suburbans and Tahoes as a "car" when they are built on a truck platform. Same with minivans too. Seems no one really cares as long as it performs the same functions as their older sedan or station wagon.<P>Personally, I don't care for "SUV" either. That original nomenclature was put on Jeep Cherokees and such as they had the hauling space for active lifestyle people who went road biking or bike racing or camping or such and needed to haul their gear (that would not fit in a downsized sedan and a car chassis station wagon did not have enough ground clearance). Now, it's become a generic name that carries a certain amount of scorn with it in some respects. Then there's the BMW X5 that is called a "sports activity vehicle" although it has basically no load area, yet it handles sporty driving verrrry well.<P>Remember the Subaru Brat? It was able to be imported at that time purely because it had four seats and could be called a "passenger vehicle" instead of an import truck. Sometimes, creativity has its limits.<P>Just some thoughts . . .<BR>NTX5467

I suspect there are some realities here that are being missed. Buick or any other GM/Ford/Chrysler division can't just design ONE NEW vehicle just to commemorate their 100th Anniversary--especially when GM's looking at decreasing their number of models. It would be nice if the Blackhawk would have a limited production run for the 100th, but I don't see that happening.<P>In other GM divisions (as in Chevrolet), everytime there's a special edition Corvette, the people start getting a little weird. For example, when the Silver Anniversary '78 model was announced, the whole production run was sold out -- sight unseen. They all had marginal paint from the old St. Louis plant, but that didn't stop those Corvette enthusiasts in the least (the dealers usually ended up repainting some anyway). Then, in early '78, the Pace Car Edition was announced for later in the '78 production run and then Silver Anniversary Editions were "cold" and the Pace Cars were "hot". Even after the Pace Car Editions were out, there were people still trying to sell the Silver Anniversary Editions for $30-50,000 dollars in the Dallas News.<P>In those earlier pre-Internet days, some people were calling dealers in small towns trying to buy the Corvette they had coming in and then flying to go get it. It was definitely a feeding frenzy!<P>Then came the famous SS454 pickups. By observation, when you combine "SS" and "454" in the same designation, the Chevy guys start salivating. Prices went high real quick, even though they produced those vehicles for 3 yrs (with the last two years being the best with the overdrive automatic). Still, there was a feeding frenzy.<P>Now, the Corvette is 50 years old in 2003. Just as the 40th Anniversary Edition, it has special paint, a particular interior color, and other ornamentation. An instant collectible it would seem.<P>Now, here come's Olds doing a special edition "Final 500" Intrigue. One particular paint color, one equipment package, etc. #499 went to a long time Olds customer in CA and #500 goes to the Olds Museum in Lansing.<P>So, considering how easily Chevy gets away with their special editions being hot commodities with just a particular paint and trim combination, plus appropriate ornamentation, plus the Olds commemorative editions, what would make anyone consider that Buick might do anything different?<P>The platforms the LeSabre and Park Avenue are built on will not be replaced for a couple more years so that negates any new body change or alterations. That leaves the things that can be changed reasonably easy and inexpensively--paint, equipment, interior, ornamentation.<P>It seems that all I've seen in here is comments about being "disappointed" with the Buick 2003 Commemorative Editions. Point is, you should be glad it even happened considering the fact that these things were probably planned out under the Zarella mentallity that preceeded the coming of Mr. Lutz. From what I can tell, the Final 500 Intrigues probably came real close to not happening themselves. <P>If there were still real separate operating divisions in General Motors as there were in the '60s, where each division protected its own territory and heritage and tried to out do the others, things might be different. Unfortunately, those things seemed to vanish with the various combination strategies of GM management (i.e., accountants) of more recent times.<P>I'm sorry if some might be offended by my comments, but that's the reality as I see it.<P>NTX5467