Opinions on this 82 LeSabre Coupe FS

[Guest BJM]

1982 Buick LeSabre Limited Coupe - Redwood - Auto - 89,000 miles | York | eBay Classifieds (Kijiji) | 6780523

All of my Buicks are under restoration or waiting for garage space. Am looking for a Buick I can drive to club functions that can hold the whole family. This one looks nice. Have requested additional photos and information. Found out son is selling for 88 year old mom. Depends on additional photos but these interiors wear well and that body looks nice. I think I would offer $2000 and we would probably meet somewhere in between. Or, he might sell it locally, who knows. It's in Nebraska so not too far away. I think if I can get it for $2200 or so, it would serve well until other cars are restored. I am also looking at Reattas as a 2nd car but can't take the family in the Reatta. Opinions please.

[Guest pfloro]

Hello Bryan:

IMHO, these GM 'B' bodies are dependable, economical and have a classic look which vanished a few years later. Since they share many mechanical components with other divisions, parts are available & inexpensive. The first generation CCC (Computer Command Control) engine management system is simple & reliable. Even the computer controlled Rochester 4BBL is not a mystery and if set up correctly, meters fuel in both a responsive & economical manner.

The seller indicates that this car has a 6.1L engine. This is incorrect. It either has the Buick 4.1L V6 or the Olds 5.0 V8. Let's hope it has the venerable Olds V8. I believe the Buick V6 is a good engine but it's asked to work hard to haul this big, heavy full frame machine around...!

I believe, 1982 was the first year for the 4 speed OD transmission (200-4R). It's a decent unit & it not abused, will hold up well.

Since I've owned my '84 Toronado since it was new, I've had much experience with the systems that were shared between divisions/models during the early '80s. Some will say that during this era, engineering took a back seat. This may be true for some major equipment, but (IMHO) the early '80s 'B' bodies are still reliable transportation.

Paul

Edited January 1, 2011 by pfloro (see edit history)

[JohnD1956]

Bryan, this car requires some additional research. As Paul says, you should verify which engine it has. I believe it will have the Olds 307 which is not exactly a powerhouse. Further it may be running a 2:48 rear axle which when used on the highway provides higher gas milage at the risk of anemic performance.

Paul, I had a 78 electra with the 4 speed overdrive and that 2:48 rear axle. To be brutally honest, I grew to hate the car. I would never pull out to pass anyone as it just did not want to go. Often I had to pull the shift to drive to get up hills. Meanwhile the 78 wagon I have has a Buick 350 with the turbo 350 trans and a 2:78 rear axle and is a world of difference.

[Guest BJM]

Paul thanks. I will verify engine. I don't want the V6. I thought 'maybe' they still had the 350 around in 82 but when I think about it, that's like 5.7L.

John

I remember your previous discussions about that rear end and motor. I had an 85 Lesabre 4 door once and it had the V8 of the year. (307/305 not sure). It was a good road car. So big I never asked it to move out.

Performance is secondary as long as it's high style, comfortable, a Buick that I can attend shows with.

Edited December 31, 2010 by BJM (see edit history)

[Guest pfloro]

Bryan:

I believe the last year for the gasoline 350 was 1980. The Olds 307 was the replacement gas V8. I agree with John. The 307 is very reliable but a slug as it just doesn't make much power. It develops maximum torque at a fairly low RPM. A 'decent' low speed pass or 'brisk' acceleration from a standstill is possible but acceleration at higher speeds is anemic (read: scary). The 307 runs out of steam pretty early. And yes..., the tall gears are great for quiet & efficient cruising but that's all.

Please keep us posted on your possible purchase of this LeSabre...

A Happy 2011 too...!

Paul

PS: From WikiPedia

...The 1990 5.0 L Olds V8 was the last carbureted passenger car engine on the market in the United States (excluding the 1991 Ford LTD Crown Victoria Police Interceptor 351-cubic-inch (5.8 L) V8, the 1991 Subaru Justy (base model) and the 1993 Isuzu pick up truck, the very last carbureted road vehicle sold in the U.S.).

The output of the 307-cubic-inch (5.0 L) was not particularly high in terms of horsepower. For example, the stock (non-high-output, VIN "Y") 307-cubic-inch (5.0 L) in the 1983 Oldsmobile 98 was a mere 140 horsepower (100 kW), although in that year a high-output model (VIN "9") was available producing a nominal 180 horsepower (130 kW), at approximately 245 lb·ft (332 N·m) torque. The final 1990 configuration was rated at 140 horsepower (100 kW) at 3200 rpm and 255 lb·ft (346 N·m) of torque at 2000 rpm. The combination of good low-RPM torque, the Quadrajet four-barrel carburetor, and the THM-200-4R three speed plus overdrive automatic transmission having a lockup torque converter allowed for fairly good performance, and fuel economy considered reasonable for the era, even in the larger and heavier model cars.

Edited January 1, 2011 by pfloro (see edit history)

[NTX5467]

I concur strongly with the comments on the "underpowered" Olds 307 V-8. Most would get mid-20s on the highway, just don't get in a hurry going up hills OR get stuck behind a slow driver on a two-lane road. The Chevy 305 had a good bit more power for the same engine size. BUT I suspect that if you"retuned" the Olds 307, it might do better as the Cutlass models had 165 horsepower, which was about right for that size engine AND similar to the Chevy 305 4bbls. In many respects, the best thing to do with that Olds 5.0L would be to replace it with an Olds 5.7L V-8 (and not tell anybody). Or an Olds 403, but that would greatly diminish the fuel economy aspect.

In many respects, those were some incredibly nice cars.

Just some thoughts . . .

NTX5467

[Thriller]

From the Standard Catalog of Buick, the '82 LeSabre came with base 3.8 l V6 (110 hp), optional Olds 307, and optional Olds diesel 350.

[Guest BJM]

From the Standard Catalog of Buick, the '82 LeSabre came with base 3.8 l V6 (110 hp), optional Olds 307, and optional Olds diesel 350.

Owner is very nice and sent a comprehensive photo set and verified this is a 4.1L V6 motor.

Interesting. I have NEVER seen a discussion on this forum about the 4.1L V6. I never even knew Buick made this size of V6! I think Cadillac had a 4.1L V8, but 4.1 L V6 is a strange bird to me.

So, I am even more confused...

Nice car overall though. Mom is 88. Wear includes a missing plastic valance piece (chunk) not entire piece in front of passenger side headlamp typical of plastic filler pieces. He said the headliner was starting to droop over the driver.

Paint is pretty nice. Interior is pretty darn nice. Not a $3100 car. He has receipts for the radiator, tune up, starter, etc totalling $1000.

Getting photos next on a 77 Electra 2 door coupe in Milwaukee w supposedly 50,000 miles.

Talked to a seller also in Omaha area selling a 41,000 mile 76 Riviera for "mom" and he was a real jerk. Like he didn't want to be on the phone with me. I said I am calling about the Riviera for sale and he said nothing, finally saying "yes". I could tell he didn't want to talk about it. $4500

[joe_padavano]

Buick built a 4.1 liter (252 cu in) version of the V6 for a number of years. The 1982 would have a "4" in the eight position of the VIN if the 4.1 was factory installed.

[NTX5467]

The 4.1L Buick V-6 was used in the fwd mid-size Centurys and also in the rwd Cadillac "big" cars . . . with a 4bbl carb and intake. In the same model year, a Cadillac DeVille/Fleetwood could have either the Cadillac 4.1L V-8 OR the Buick 4.1L V-6. Best thing to do with those Cadillac 4.1L aluminum V-8s was to replace them with the later model 4.9L V-8, as the earlier 4.1L V-8s had some longevity issues which the later 4.5L and 4.9L V-8s didn't, as I recall.

Happy New Year!

NTX5467

[Guest sintid58]

I had a 4.1 V6 in a 1982 Regal and it was a very good and reliable motor at the time. Not a huge power house but n ot bad for the Regal which was a smaller car than the Le Sabre.

[Guest Dans 77 Limited]

Getting photos next on a 77 Electra 2 door coupe in Milwaukee w supposedly 50,000 miles.

If the price is right I would recommend this car...... but my opinion may be just a bit biased:D.

Although on the serious side , my car has been a great for lack of a better word ....investment. And I dont know what the one you are looking at is going for but I got mine for a steal. These cars are kind of underrated and even the spotless ones go for a good price. Now of course the down side is if youre looking to drive it for a few years and then flip it , you arent going to get huge money for it.

The things to look out for buying this car are :

Of course the rear inner bumper support , in fact the whole rear bumper assembly is prone to rust.

If the car has a landau top check for rust repair at the base of the vinyl roof under the rear quarter window.

Check the frame behind the rear axle. They are prone to frame problems.

Also check the heater and A/C controls to make sure they function properly.

A drooping headliner is common but is also an easy fix.

Bad interior door panels are one of the few parts ( along with bumper fillers) that are actually being reproduced

Now the good news ....... The rust under the window if caught early is a minor issue ( mine had a small rust bubble that was easily fixed).

The heater and A/C controls are interchangable with any full sized Buick from 77 to about 1985 and the dash is very easy to disassemble and work on.

I have seen other GM cars with the frame problem that were repaired for a reasonable cost (78 Pontiac Grand Am )

These cars are also a bit tough to find parts for but they are avaiable and some pieces are even starting to come out in the aftermarket .

More good news is that whether the car has the Buick 350 or the Olds 403 it has plenty of power and arent really all that hard on gas.

Good luck with it and hopefully there will be aother 77 2 door in the BCA soon !

Dan

[Guest BJM]

Dan

Thanks for the Electra comments.

Willis got your PM and I am considering those points.

I did go back and double check the Standard Catalog and it does mention the 4.1L V6 so this Lesabre does have a 4.1L V6. Although the hp was something like 110hp the torque (which can be expected from such a big jugged V6) was 205 ft pounds.

205 ft pounds still isn't a lot but should get the beast in motion.

On my list, of which none may be purchased, but hopefully one - is the

1. 82 Lesabre 2 door Limited 4.1L V6 (asking $3100)

2. 77 Electra 2 door coupe 403 (I think) $2500 obo

3. 75 Riviera with 41,000 original miles $4500 obo

4. 91 Reatta 130,000 miles $1500

I started a new job about 3 months ago where I am required for now to be with my area manager for training in Wisconsin twice a month. In December I put 2,000 miles (just on those 2 week long trips alone) on my daily driver a 2004 Pontiac Bonneville and I can't keep that up.

So the Reatta looked appealing as a 2nd vehicle to tag team with but I could also tag team with an older car.

Can't take the 3 person family with luggage or such to most Buick functions though -- with the 2 seater Reatta.

Dan. I bought a one owner 78 Olds Regency 98 four door sedan with 103,000 original miles for $500 a few years back. I love the 403. In fact I am looking to purchase a 79 Trans Am with the 403.

I look daily now for a car to add that can fill all needs. My 3 Buicks are needing restoration and won't be ready for 3-5 years. Would be nice to have something to drive to club events.

[Dave@Moon]

My Uncle bought my (much younger) cousin an almost identical car (1981, black) when he turned 16 specifically because it was so slow. He later regretted it because it was so slow that it was downright dangerous accelerating on urban interstate onramps.

Of course in Nebraska that's probably not much of a consideration.

[Guest my3buicks]

My Aunt had a 81 LeSabre Limited coupe with the v6 that I drove a good bit - we live in Pa where there are lots of hills. The car was adequate in power, certainly not exciting, quick, but power was just adequate as I stated. If you are looking for a good cruiser, that rides well, is quiet, and comfortable and has power that just gets it by, then go for it.

[Guest BJM]

My Aunt had a 81 LeSabre Limited coupe with the v6 that I drove a good bit - we live in Pa where there are lots of hills. The car was adequate in power, certainly not exciting, quick, but power was just adequate as I stated. If you are looking for a good cruiser, that rides well, is quiet, and comfortable and has power that just gets it by, then go for it.

I'm 47 years old and take my foot off the peddle to glide up to a stop light while others buzz on by me to "race" to the stop light. My trip to Wisconsin for business is largely highway, where I can set it at 70mph and loaf. Probably get 21 mpg on the highway.

Would not get that in the 77 Electra with 403, even with a 2.48 rear axle, because of the TH400.

No, I have 2 455 Centurions, a Z car, and a couple of others coming. If I wanted pure speed I would go the muscle car route.

[Thriller]

My bad missing the 4.1. The book for those years isn't written for readability. Of course, in prior years when there were only a couple of engines for the entire line, it also makes it easier.

I'm sure I'm missing something on the Bonneville and road trips. My brother had a Bonneville and it did well for him until the incident with the deer. Anyway, I would think that such a car would be more comfortable and economical than some of the ones you are considering. If I were in the same boat, I'd look more for a "disposable" car - i.e. something inexpensive that still worked as a family car - than something that is or could be considered collectible. Of course, there is nothing wrong with driving Buicks...just in my mind Iowa to Wisconsin and collectible cars don't go well together for 4-5 months a year. Anyway, that's just my thoughts.

[Centurion]

Probably get 21 mpg on the highway.

Would not get that in the 77 Electra with 403, even with a 2.48 rear axle, because of the TH400.

Jake, my folks bought a new '77 Electra Limited Landau coupe with the 403, and routinely achieved mileage in the 21-mpg range on highway trips. These cars were much more economical than the cars that preceded them.

[Guest BJM]

My bad missing the 4.1. The book for those years isn't written for readability. Of course, in prior years when there were only a couple of engines for the entire line, it also makes it easier.

I'm sure I'm missing something on the Bonneville and road trips. My brother had a Bonneville and it did well for him until the incident with the deer. Anyway, I would think that such a car would be more comfortable and economical than some of the ones you are considering. If I were in the same boat, I'd look more for a "disposable" car - i.e. something inexpensive that still worked as a family car - than something that is or could be considered collectible. Of course, there is nothing wrong with driving Buicks...just in my mind Iowa to Wisconsin and collectible cars don't go well together for 4-5 months a year. Anyway, that's just my thoughts.

Yes, the Standard Catalog is hard to read in the 1980's. I had to put my reading glasses on.

Derek, I understand the points on the Bonnie. It IS a nice road car but I can put 1,000 miles a week going to Wisky and back and due to training need to do this for the next 3 months.

I am still considering a Reatta.

I am also a former certified master MAZDA mechanic so I was looking for Mazda Proteges, which can I repair in my sleep BUT I think getting an older Buick kills 2 birds with one stone as my Buicks under restoration won't see the light of day for awhile, I want to drive an old car to Buick functions. How boring driving a Protege on the road.

I would check the forecast, and if no snow, then drive the Buick for a week, maybe once a month. The Bonneville is a 2004 with 120,000 miles. I have spent about $2000 this year on maintenance and repairs. (including the gas tank incident)

[Guest Dans 77 Limited]

Jake, my folks bought a new '77 Electra Limited Landau coupe with the 403, and routinely achieved mileage in the 21-mpg range on highway trips. These cars were much more economical than the cars that preceded them.

The fuel gauge on my Electra is on the to do list, but honestly I dont believe my Buick uses a whole lot of gas. I know that when I drive it frequently (4-5 times a week), I gas it up about once week and it uses 3-4 gallons of gas. As opposed to my Grandville which uses a little over a quarter tank to cover the same distances. Plus with the 403 you do have enough power to be comfortable. Hell I drive....... oops I mean I know of one that has been known to do a burnout or two in its time :eek:.

Dan

[NTX5467]

("BURNOUTS"????!!!!! In a dignified Buick??? Now, if it had a Genuine Buick motor in it . . . )

NTX5467

[Guest Dans 77 Limited]

("BURNOUTS"????!!!!! In a dignified Buick??? Now, if it had a Genuine Buick motor in it . . . )

NTX5467

In a way I guess it is a genuine Buick motor ...... I mean it came with the Buick new in 77 so I guess its technically a "Buick" motor.

Burnouts in a "dignified" Buick are lots of fun. All people hear are the tires squealing and they have no idea where its coming from until the smoke starts pouring out the back and then their jaws hit the floor when they realize whos doing it. It really POs the muscle car guys. Almost immediately somebody in a Chevelle has to do a better one LOL

I dont do it very often (maybe 3 to 4 times in the last 10 years ) because I dont like hurting my car like that but every once in a while the gearhead street racer I used to be kicks in and I have to show off a little.

Dan

[Rawja]

I am still considering a Reatta.

Do it, you won't be sorry.

[Guest BJM]

[Guest BJM]

[Guest BJM]

[Guest BJM]

[Guest BJM]

[Guest BJM]

[Guest BJM]

[Guest BJM]

[Guest BJM]