Moving Reatta prototype convertible

[Guest tempest6cyl]

and has secured commitments for all of the parts required to bring up the interior up to spec.

Out of curiosity, what is considered to be "spec" for this vehicle, a 1988 coupe that's modified to look like a convertible ?

[Guest Kingsley]

Tempest 6 cyl - thanks and perhaps I did not express myself well. Barney checked the car over closely after its arrival in San Diego and determined that it needed an airbag/horn assembly, a CD Player, and a correct '90 radio . Jim Finn and Ed Farnell have furnished those parts which, together with a very thorough cleaning will put the interior in good shape. The exterior paint has been marred a bit during its 20 plus years in the Ivy Tech Community College in Indiana and is the area getting attention now. The Reatta Division has agreed to furnish the paint and the actual painting will be the responsibility of the Museum. They had a number of restoration jobs ahead of the Reatta but it is working its way up the line. In an earlier post in the last several days, I recall Barney furnished pictures of certain features of the prototype that were not carried forward to the final production car. In the case of this car, you might say that "spec" is leaving in tact the items that did not make it to the marketed '90 convertible and replacing interior items that had some damage plus a new paint job. The prototype built in '88 really had minimal refinement changes from the marketed '90 convertible, setting aside any changes that have been made ultimately to the underside. Barney may have some other thoughts on this and he can use another post to bring them out. Kingsley

[Barney Eaton]

This car looks like a 1990 convertible and few convertible owners would notice any differences.

It started life as a 1988 coupe and was modified by GM (some say Cadillac was in charge, other say Buick) It was used at auto shows as an example of what the convertible would look like when Buick built a Reatta convertible. It had the original '88 dash, including the CRT and non-air bag steering wheel until GM chose to update it to appear to be a NEW 1990 convertible and again was probably used at auto shows until actual production 1990 convertibles were being built.

The underside is a different story. If you go to the link of pictures, it appears some "reinforcement" was done under the center. This was not production pieces. The cars was a early production '88 and was probably driven (where posssible) into the auto shows and into the transport. The bulkhead behind the seats appears very close to production appearance. However there are non-production solenoids to releas the tonneau and they have a manual feature in the event the battery was disconnected at a show (or the battery was dead) Without taking the car apart, the tonneau release switch on the door jam is probably a dummy.

I hope to do an article on the car with pictures in the Bugle. I will talk to Pete next week to get his input on the space he might allowed.

[Guest tempest6cyl]

In the case of this car, you might say that "spec" is leaving in tact the items that did not make it to the marketed '90 convertible and replacing interior items that had some damage plus a new paint job.

Thanks Kingsley. I was hoping to hear that the one of a kind features of this car would stay and not be updated.

The underside is a different story. If you go to the link of pictures, it appears some "reinforcement" was done under the center. This was not production pieces. The cars was a early production '88 and was probably driven (where posssible) into the auto shows and into the transport. The bulkhead behind the seats appears very close to production appearance.

The structure is where my interest really lies with this car in determining it's vintage. Thickening the rocker outer, adding to the underbody rails and joining the front and rear rails together were some of the first structural changes incorporated into any of the engineering cars. We already know from the pictures that it doesn't have the rail reinforcements so in my eyes it's not an engineering use/ride mule vehicle but, it's construction could tell us a little more of it's creation. I recall the convertible rocker outer at 2.0mm thick versus the coupe's at about 1.0mm. This could be measured on the car in the weld flange or one of the rocker drains on the bottom side. A coupe thickness rocker is just one more step away from engineering use. A 2.0mm rocker puddle welded in the flanges says the car was upgraded after assembly. A 2.0mm rocker spotwelded in the flanges says it was put in at the Craft Centre. It was a great triumph the first time we were able to do that. A couple other places I'd like to see is whether this car contains a "#1 bar" which was a below floor cross member between the rails and under the dash area (I doubt that it has one), and the actual structure supporting the rear bulkhead.

[Guest Kingsley]

Tempest6 cyl - it is most interesting to learn more about this Reatta and adds a dimension to our knowledge about the car. I will make sure that the underside is examined and will then fill in the blanks. Kingsley Member AACA BCA Reatta Division