What was the worst Buick?

[Guest]

Yeah, you probably look fairly typical cruising in your Jap vehicle. I won't say anything about your home, no point in insulting a whole state full of people who have done nothing to me. You probably look real snazzy setting by the road in a broke down Toyota Tundra with your Buick towed behind. Reliablity must be a foreign concept to you. Do your 3 Buicks run, or are they just yard ornaments?

[Dominic_Martinelli]

P, this is not a personal attack forum. Nobody meant any harm to you, your Chrysler, your state, or anyone else for that matter. The intent of my post was to point out that the '58 Buicks were no better and certainly no worse than any of its contemporaries. Let's face it, ALL CARS RUST with a few exceptions (Avanti, Corvette, etc). We really ought to be fighting rust, legislation, and stigmas to preserve our cars be them a Buick, Hudson, Studebaker, Chrysler or FIAT for that matter, instead of slinging mud at each other like politicians. In other words, let's all start behaving like civilized people. <BR> <BR>I kinda have to admit I find it hard to believe that your '58 Chrysler has been driven through West Virginia winters for 40 years without ever having a paint bubble or spec of rust forming on it's body. I'm am quite willing to believe that your Chrysler is a fine example of an automobile and far from resembling a pile of coffee grinds, but not without some hard work going into it to preserve it.

[Guest]

57 and 58 Chryslers ROCK, rust or not.<BR>Same goes for 57 and 58 Buicks and all cars of that era. Who gives a leap what they did or did not do in the past, enjoy them now. If it is rusty, fix it, if not, drive it. I personally know of a 58 New Yorker 4 door that has been on the road in Wichita since new, and has absolutely zero rust, it was just kept clean at all times, underneath as well as on top. Heck, a brand new car or truck will rust as well if not cleaned of the salt and winter crap on the underside all the time.<BR> There are still some of us that drive pre 65 cars all year. I drive them now because they have class and are quite enjoyable. Someday I might grow up and move into the newest family minivan or sedan, but I hope not.

[Guest]

I can not believe how personal you guys have gotten, I have seen every kind of car imaginable rust into oblivion and the same lasting hundreds of thousands of miles. The reasons we like the cars we do are mostly unfounded. We had one bad experiance and that make is junk. We lost aur virginity in another and it's the best. And some of us will act like our mother has been called a whore if a harm word is said about our car. I went back and read my comments and I am no better! Jeez we gotta lighten up! By the way Corvettes rust like a sunken ship, the frame and body struchure are metal remember.

[Guest]

When I said I went back to look at my comments I was refering to "Comment on the Forum" Not this topic, I was a good boy here.

[Guest my3buicks]

P PATTERSON, I can assure you I drive only American vehicles and certainly always will. You might find it interesting my every day vehicle is a Chrysler Mini Van. Unfortunately Buick does not have a wagon or van abvailable. My 3 Buicks I can also assure you are very roadworthy with one being a National Senior Car, one being a national winner, and one being a nice clean original. They all have traveled extensively across the country under there own power, and certainly not trailered behind anything, let alone a Toyota. As for my home, it's really none of your business, although you probably couldn't afford it.<P>------------------<BR>Keith Bleakney BCA# 11475<BR><BR>1967 Technical Advisor<BR><BR>2 - 1967 (3517's) & 1 - 1953 (56R)

[Dave@Moon]

It's only spumoni people! There's a guy down the road from me who loves Yugos, and owns 5 or 6 of them. I might think he's nuts, but I'm not going to burn a cross in his yard. <P>Here's one car I thought would get mentioned here right away, but hasn't, the last Riviera. There appears to be a lot of people who can't stand it's looks. I think it's gorgeous, and would've sold in droves if a real GS option (big dollar, real BMW M5 handling and performance) were offered. Of course that would just be for image, the volume car would've supported itself being tied in to that image. <P>If, such as it was, it was such a good car, why did it fail?

[Guest]

Any car will rot under the right conditions. Any car will remain nice under the right conditions. Its all a matter of how it was cared for. Your Chrysler was probably undercoated and/or oil sprayed, and probably recieved regular wash jobs. Wax helps alot too. <P>I can honestly say that in person, locally I've seen one '58 Chryco. It was a full-tilt resto car. The only other ones I've seen surviving were in the Southern US.<P>There is a really nice '58 Olds around here somewhere. A restorable '59 Buick, and two '58 4-door rustbuckets. I have my eye on a '56 Olds, and a number of years ago (it disappeared) had my eye on a reasonably solid '57 Buick Special.<P>My point is that any car can survive, or rot, depending on how they were treated. Congratulations on owning a solid '58 Mopar. The reason the road salt didn't kill it was BECAUSE it was stored outside. People figure they are doing the car a great favor by parking in the garage in the winter so it will start easier when really they are signing its death warrant. Heat (even minimal) will increase the rot-rate exponentially!<P>I have no experience with Chryslers. All I ever had here was a '62 Windsor, and a '68 Newport. Both were taken off the road due to rotten frames. They were among the worst cars rot-wise we ever owned. The '68 actually buckled into a "V" when the engine was pulled. Then again, so did my '70 Skylark. <P>

[Centurion]

As a follow-up to Dave Moon's question about the latest Riviera, I agree that it was a gorgeous car. In general, however, we have seen the market for larger 2-door models almost disappear. Ford reached a similar conclusion, reflected in the departure of the Thunderbird coupe and the Continental Mark VIII. <P>There is probably more to the decision to drop the Riviera. Was Buick marketing the car correctly, or was the target market for the car so turned-off to American cars that the Riviera would not be considered -- regardless of how wonderful the car actually was? I've also heard the opinion expressed that the car was not selling that poorly, but, as part of the decision to close Buick City and relocate LeSabre production elsewhere, GM opted to use its remaining full-size, front wheel drive passenger car production capacity to make higher-volume car lines.

[Guest]

What is this "ROT" thing your talking about? And the "undercoat" what is that? And "rust"? Can you guys help me out? Thanks, MARTINSR from SUNNY CALIFORNIA

[Guest]

hehehe my point exactly....

[Dave@Moon]

When you bring a cold car into a warm garage, water condenses on it like a cold beer. It will coat all surfaces, interior and exterior, with wet (probably salty) dew. Thus you have rust (iron oxide to you Californians, you'll only find it in the lab or maybe on a pier somewhere). The water is far worse for the metal than the salt.<P>The market for 2-door cars has dropped, but really only for economy models and American luxury coupes. I don't see anyone ashamed to be seen in a Mercedes SLK or Lexus coupe. I believe that the problem is that the U.S. manufacturers never figured out the a 2-door car today HAS TO BE A DRIVER'S CAR. Soft, plush (Buick traditional?) ride won't make it in this market. After years of LTD II rides, its getting hard to get people to swallow that as a sign of quality.<P>And thus my point on the Riv, it wasn't that bad on any point (although I know some people who really hated the body, for reasons they and I can't explain). Why didn't it sell? <P>And if GM can kill off one of their best image brands for the sake of making a plant closing more convienent, how long do you think it'll be before there aren't any seperate GM brands? Their market share is now lower than it has been in almost 75 years!

[Centurion]

With respect to the latest Riviera, it would be interesting to see how U.S. sales figures for the car stacked up against the Lexus and Mercedes 2-door models. I suspect that the Riviera sales would not appear to be a complete disaster relative to the sales of these other models, but it is a sure bet that the Buick nameplate does not have the appeal for many buyers that the Mercedes and Lexus labels do.<P>Perhaps a more important question is how the car's sales compared with the Olds Aurora. If car sales in the Pacific Northwest are any indication (and they probably aren't!), seems like the Riviera may very well have outsold the Aurora. But GM may feel that the Aurora is a more important model from an image standpoint. If one of the cars had to be eliminated, it is not surprising that it is the Riviera that got the ax.<P>As to the car's styling, I believe that the stylists wanted a design with a little controversy. Part of the car's appeal to me is that it's not something everyone instantly likes. I think it's a memorable design that may well become collectible during the years ahead. Wish I owned one!

[Guest]

I have to agree on the latest Riviera being a beautiful car (my mother and father have a 96 supercharged version). Why didn't it sell? Quite frankly a large, powerfull coupe such as this is not going to appeal to a large market. It never has and never will, especially in this age of utilitarian vehicles. This type of car is really impractical (although that has never stopped the American buyer, look at the Suburban, Excursion, etc). Much like the original first and second generation Riviera's and 66/67 Toronadoes they are fantastic cars that not everyone needs or wants, but to me that is part of their appeal.

[Guest]

MARTINSR, that was not very nice (haha). Come to KANSAS though, and I can show you what hail and tornado damage look like.

[Guest]

In general, I like the looks of the latest gegeration Riv. I think the looks could have been improved if Buick had done the following: 1) abandoned the "pinched tail" look and given the Riv a full width tail with nice large tail lamps 2) Reworked the rear quarter's as there appears to be too much distance between the rear wheel opening and the top of the fender. That said, I still think it was a nice car. I always though that the interior was retro (which I like)... sort of a takeoff of the dash layout of the original 63/64 (with the two large round instrument clusters and the round a/c outlets). But why doesn't it sell well ??? I recently had another look at this vehicle while I was carshopping with my girlfriend. We both came to the same conclusion on the Riv .. which was .... Either the price needs to be lowered or the content level & quality need to rise. The Riv is targeting a market that is not there !! The Riv that I saw stickered out at something around $36K. Other cars in this segment cost more, (Eldorado, Mark VIII, Lexus Coupe) are V8 powered and seem to have a much higher level of interior craftsmanship .. whereas the Riv was very plasticky & cheap inside. How about that North Star in the Riv, or a new buick V8 based on the venerable 231 (If we kept all the goodies from the 231 & tacked on 2 cylinders we'd get a 308 ci V8 ... perfect). I know the supercharged V6 is a wonderful engine ... but I personally believe that buyers in this segment want a V8 for their money). The moral here is that if Buick wants to play with the big boys .. they need to get serious & produce a truly world class product and charge more. An alternative strategy could be to scale the car's size down a bit ... and produce something to coompete with the likes of the Solara, Acura 3.2cl (the new one) or the Accord coupe. I know that these are not the kind of cars that have many fans in these pages .. but they are all well executed and can be had for around 30K fully optioned ... and all of them exude high quality feel. In reality .. the 30K segment is probably a closer proxy for the original '63 Riv's target market than the 40K segment is, and is arguably where the car should stay. The 30k segment would give Buick the potential to sell many more Riv's .. and that higher sales volume would go a long way to ensure its survival.

[Guest]

That's why I like the latest Riviera, because it's not a cookie-cutter car like the Solara, Acura or Accord (can't tell them apart without a name plate).The type of car that the Riviera is will always regulate it to low production and low sales. Sure it could be changed to produce higher sales but it really wouldn't be the same type of car, so what's the point? If Buick wants to increase sales it needs a SUV as that seems to be the only thing that sells these days, not that I would buy one, mind you, I think that the oversized, leather-interior SUV's are ridiculous (but apparently I'm in the minority). If it ( a suv) would give Buick the financial power to build more low volume vehicles like the Riviera then I for one say build one.

[Guest]

The looks can stay unique!!! We don't all need to march to the same beat. How about the Cougar ... love it or hate it ... you certainly won't mistake it for anyting else on the road !! Or the Sebring & C70 (both of which are flat out gorgeous .. and I won't accept any arguments on that point !!!!!). None of the aforementioned will ever be mistaken for one another (and in all honesty I think the Solara, 3.2CL and Accord Coupe all look very different from one another). The point I was making is that the final Riv seemed too expensive to target the 25-30K coupe buyer while at the same time not even being close in quality, content & appeal to compete with the premium level of coupe (Eldorado, Lexus, Volvo C70 etc.). It was a man without a country !

[vasilow]

My vote is 77-78 Rivera, totally non-decript, not worthy of rivera nameplate. At least 4 or 6 cylinder front wheel cars are easy to park, what can you say good about 78 Riv with an olds motor?

[Dave@Moon]

That the '78 Riviera looks better than the '78 Tornado with the Olds motor!!<P>You're right, though, it was a while after that before the Riviera was considered a truly distinctive car again. As nice as the first FWD versions were, they were no more distinctive as "Buicks" as any of the lower line cars were.

[Guest]

Drop a 350 in a Skyhawk, and it is good. Otherwise, they aren't the best, but they are not the worst either. 80 Skylark, WORST. I get tears just thinking about it. 87 Grand Nationals are in my opinion, the best. Not too big, not too small. Almost perfect power, add two more cylinders and it will be purrrrfect.

[Guest]

Well I understand that people thought the Apollo was the beginning of the demise of Buick's signature, but at least it was offered with the Buick motor and not the corp Chevy and still had the signature"portholes" or "ventports" common an earlier Buicks. The Skylark and those in the late 60's and 70's were Buick Chevelles with a Buick motor so ya know. Although I'm a bit biased 'cause I'm an Apollo freak (ie. webpage <A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/~buickapollo/" TARGET=_blank>www.geocities.com/~buickapollo/</A> ).<BR>My personal opinion is when they began the downfall is in the same time zone of my beloved Apollo's, but I think federal regulations, oil emargo's, etc. played a huge part. I will say that the GN and GNX brought back alot of respect to the Buick name which it so rightly deserves.

[Dave@Moon]

The Apollo took the badge engineering of GM that critical step forward, where the entire internal and external structure of the car was shared. Chevelles and Skylarks were cousins under the skin, the N.O.V.A. series were identical twins (in some instances excepting the engines) which were given different nametags to wear. <P>All of those cars were fine cars, and GM deserves credit for having a reasonably competative car in the compact range (my boyhood friend's family 1972 Nova which had to be scrapped for structural rust in 1975 aside). Unfortunately, since these were so successful, and since Ford and Chrysler were able to also sell clones in this price bracket, all the U.S. manufacturers began cloning everything instead of developing considered and cohesive marque designs (now called "brand image" ).<P>As a result, when Chevy sneezed, the rest of GM... well, you know the rest.

[Guest]

I had a '59 Electra 225 as my first car, You want to talk about rust, If it wasn't for the stainless it wouldn't have had rockers! and when you put the windows down the glass would follow at the next bump in the road!<BR>Wish I still had her today!!!!<P>I've worked for Buick for over 20 years and have seen alot of changes! We are all car people so we know what Riv's and Reatta's are! But take a Reatta to the mall and just see how many people come up and ask what it is! The last Riv's saw so little market exposure they were bound to fail, as was the case with the Reatta! Let's see how Buick does with their new SUV due out next year! <P>Who can forget the Pontiac GTO in '74, at least Buick knows when to put a nameplate to bed and not disgrace it! Having owned a '81 "X" body I still wouldn't trade it for a "K" car! There was alot of new technology in these cars as well as those "problem Reattas" someone mentioned!<P>All told I dont think there were any bad buicks, Heck, we have to have everyday drivers right?<P>------------------<BR>Denmech@hotmail.com<BR>65 Riv GS<BR>69 Skylark conv.<BR>87 GN

[Guest]

The 1980-1985 X-Body Skylark. Yuck!!!!<P>------------------<BR> <A HREF="http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/poland/356/" TARGET=_blank>www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/poland/356/</A>

[Dave@Moon]

No wonder everyone forgot about this thread, it's 1 1/2 years old.

[Guest Shaffer]

Yeah, and everyone kept COOOOLLLL about it. No tempers flared.

[Guest]

kiss my butt, martinsr <P>actually, i went to socal once. it rained the whole time, and all i saw on the packed freeways and crowded city streets were silly rice burners with big stickers and coffee can sized exhaust pipes, filling up on > $2 gas.<P>i will take the rust belt which is tobacco road anyday. ( though i hear there is an island of dryness in central georgia)<P>oh, and the skyhawk? my brother's first car was an 84 ttype. beautiful car, good handling, pretty nice interior, but still a cavalier. within 3 months, he had managed to bash every exterior panel on the freshly painted car. it was very sad looking. so we swapped its entire front suspension/drivetrain into an 86 regular model, smoke gray. ttype in sheep's clothing <P>still a cavalier though.<P>oh, and the earlier posts on the 50 buick! i agree completely, and that is why i am fixing one up! it has the most god awful cowcatching batteringram i have ever seen on a buick. it just might be uglier than the 58 with all those silly squares! after the styling masterpiece which was the 49 fastback, my 50 fastback seems downright hollywood.<P>i do however, prefer it's body sides (used thru 53 on the bigger models) over the more slab sided 49.<P>all of this is why i am into customs. i can strip off the bad stuff, add on good stuff, and i am not beholding to harley earls failing eyesight.<P>allan<P>p.s. my brother's first skyhawk said 'BU CK' on the back, the new one says ' UI K'<P>allan

[Guest]

Rather than to get into an arguement about Apollo's or new Riv's (or late 50's Chryslers????). I will just ask, how about the rear axles in the 56 Buick when it came out? That car knocked Buick out of third place in sales. I'll bet a few old Buick marketing guys might call it the worst Buick.<p>[ 06-14-2001: Message edited by: wildcat465 ]

[Guest]

Subject," Least desirable car ever sold by Buick".Hands down deserving the title,the Buick-Opel from japan

[Guest Shaffer]

I liked that little car. Especially the early 70s.

[Dave@Moon]

Yeah, right! Small, well-built cars from Japan. There'll <I> never </I> be a future in those things!

[Guest Shaffer]

My Dad used to own a 1977 Buick Opel 2-door coupe. That was a good little car as best as I can remember. That was over 12 years ago. I think one real good quality was the ride.

[Guest nailswede]

The opels from germany is familiar to me here in sweden *lol*<BR>i had a opel diplomat 5.4s 1973 once..it was my first car! bought it on my 18 birthday..still miss that car <BR>must have been one of the best opels ever!nearly as quiet as a buick inside a lots of US GM parts like engine:chevy 327 270 hp th 400 and a very special rear end ( de dion ) with a corvette housing..but 2:73 ratio for fast autobahn traffic!

[Guest John Chapman]

Anders,<P>The Opel Omega (Diplomat?) (modified) is sold in the US as the Cadillac Catera... affectionately (?) known as the 'Opellac'. There are two in our company garage and the owners are pleased with them.<P>I think the Holden Commodore uses the same platform and also uses Chevrolet engines. There was a road test of one done by a company in Los Angeles and it is quite an impressive car.<P>JMC<p>[ 06-18-2001: Message edited by: John Chapman ]

[Guest nailswede]

JMC <BR>Opel stoped using V8 engines after 1977 i think. that was the last year for DIPLOMAT that had a 6 cylinder engine as standard.after that came SENATOR and MONZA and they had a 3.0 l 6 cylinder engine!<BR>( and opel had a model called COMMODORE just like holden,but only with 6 cylinders)<BR>and after that the OMEGA was born 4 or 6 cylinder engines!there was also a OMEGA that LOTUS had layed there hands on,377 hp if i remember right!<BR>And dont forget the other GM brand in europe-VAUXHALL!!!or maybe do..*lol*..quality was even worse then opel..<P>And yes the opelac can be bought here to.. <P>Anders<p>[ 06-18-2001: Message edited by: Anders Larsson ]

[Guest nailswede]

I never heard of a buick-opel..any pics somewhere on the web?

[Guest John Chapman]

I may have missed a chapter here, but didn't all of the Opels (the Kadett, Manta and GT of GM Germany) imported and sold by Buick come from Germany?<P>Oh, nevermind, I found the chapter... Isuzu I-Mark/Opel Gemini/Buick Opel/Ponitac Sunburst. I've seen plenty of I-Marks... still get to dodge a few of the diesel ones in the fast lane out here... have never seen a Isuzu Buick Opel, though. Were they possibly marketed by Buick in areas that didn't have Isuzu dealer networks?<P> <A HREF="http://www.xs4all.nl/~mjs/storygemini.html" TARGET=_blank>http://www.xs4all.nl/~mjs/storygemini.html</A><p>[ 06-18-2001: Message edited by: John Chapman ]

[Guest John Chapman]

Buick sold the German-built Opel (Kadett, Manta and GT from GM Germany) until about 1975. <P>The Isuzu/Opel was a badge-engineering effort built in Japan after GM purchased a controlling interest in Isuzu. I've never seen one on the West Coast... or if I did, didn't notice it.<P>GM (as did Ford and Chrysler) did a lot of badge engineering and platform cross-breeding to get fuel economy into the fleet in the mid-70's.<P>Isuzu P'up = Chevrolet LUV Pickup<BR>Isuzu Gemini = Opel Isuzu<BR>Mitsubishi Pickup = Dodge 'Something'<BR>Mazda B1600/2000 = Ford Courier Pickup<P>And a host of others.

[Guest Shaffer]

I think the Buick Opel was made in Japan, as the Isuzu I-Mark was similar. Whats odd is that I don't ever remember seeing I-Marks older than the late 70s, but am sure that Buick sold the Opel in the ealry 70's , the most popular style I think was the Opel-Kadet wagon.