Jump to content

looking for parts for a reatts


Recommended Posts

Thank you i did get a hold of them the price is reasobalbe for the rarity of the car. I might also take my original parts and make templates of them to create custom carbon fiber part. That way if i want to go back to original appearance i can.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I was wonderibg if anyone could point me into the right direction. i am looking for center consol parts for my 1988 reatta. I just purchased the car Febuary 17 for 900 and was complete exept a couple broken parts.

You may also wish to check with Jim Finn in Duiuth, MN. He has been selling these parts for close to 15 years. His parts are good and reasonably priced. Best reached at jfinn@cpinternet.com.

We also have appreciation for the work and contributions that East Coast Reatta Parts is making but always nice to have alternatives available.

Kingsley

www.reattaspecialtyparts.com - the name to know when buying headlight motor repair kits for all model years of the Reatta as well sun visor clips and the EZ On replacement tops for the '90 and '91 convertibles

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok thanks for the information i will keep that in mind. I understand that the reatta was marketed as a luxury sports car. In my opinion i think the inside is all luxury so im looking at making custom carbon fiber parts to bring the sport inside the car so any. Parts that have the mettal cover would become carbon fiber.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok thanks for the information i will keep that in mind. I understand that the reatta was marketed as a luxury sports car. In my opinion i think the inside is all luxury so im looking at making custom carbon fiber parts to bring the sport inside the car so any. Parts that have the mettal cover would become carbon fiber.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok thanks for the information i will keep that in mind. I understand that the reatta was marketed as a luxury sports car. In my opinion i think the inside is all luxury so im looking at making custom carbon fiber parts to bring the sport inside the car so any. Parts that have the mettal cover would become carbon fiber.

I've been slowly plodding away at eliminating some of the chrome in mine and turning it black, I think the addition of CF could look great too. I'm excited to see how yours turns out.

I think the two tone is refreshingly different as well. A less common take on the Reatta. Good luck.

Edited by PontiacDude210 (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest my3buicks

By younger they were aiming at the emoty nesters, folks Whose kids were now out of the house and had some extra income. I think women in the professional world were probably somewhat targeted along with upwardly mobile couples. Let's face it, most of the younger crowd couldn't afford a car of the Reatta price category, $25k base in 1988 and running up to about $37k for a conv in 91. That was huge money then in the car market.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Reatta was never marketed as a "sport car"

Yet I still find them to have more sports appeal than the new "RS" model cruze, the "turbo" sonic which needs boost just to perform like a proper car, and the eco turbo Regal. Regardless of performance, the Reattas looks like a proper sports car to us younger folk. Also I just saw the MI intl auto show and was disappointed by the lack of body styling innovation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Today I got in the mail a book I purchased on EBAY called "Reatta, The Premium American 2-seater. by Buick". This book was a Buick publication.

It states "we set out to create the best elements of a sports car and a luxury car into one." It also mentions in one other place on the opening page that to drive the car is a sports car experience without the limitations of many sports cars, bone jarring ride, no storage, hard to get in and out of and such. Just sayin.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With the big 235/60-16 tires I put on my Reatta I think of it as a muscle car without the muscle. Maybe Buick's version of a 2 seat Camaro? Most people I encounter don't know what a Reatta is. They usually tell me it looks fast but when they ask what engine it has I'm embarrassed to have to tell them it's a front wheel drive V6 with about the same horsepower as my old Chevy S10 pickup. :)

CumberlandFalls20145avatar.JPG

Edited by Ronnie (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Reatta may look "sporty" but let's face it, the bent is far more toward luxury than handling and performance. For its size it handles good but it's far too heavy to be considered a "sports car". It's a matter of perspective. Go out and drive a Lotus, Porsche, Vette, Fiero, etc...then go drive your Reatta. You "ll then know what your Reatta is and isn't.

Kit

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as power, while the Reatta is no scorcher, it is no slouch either. In the current environment of 300-400 neo-muscle car era, 165hp seems like a small number. In 1988 however, that was perfectly respectable. Consider that most 1988 Cadillacs had a 4.5l V8 that made 180 hp. And they were larger heavier cars than the Reatta. Heck, my brother has a 1993 Fleetwood RWD fullsize land yacht with the 5.7l (aka 350) and it is still only rated for 180hp.

True, those aren't sports car either, but WRT engine power, the Reatta is more than adequate as a touring car (which is what it is despite appearances) even now, and was quite respectable at the time it was made. Cars in the late 80's were still suffering somewhat the blanket downgrades in vehicle size and power that occurred after the fuel crisis of the 70's which begat countless underpowered econo boxes. In that environment, the Reatta was quite decently equipped.

I'd agree it seems unimpresssive against the current stable of high output powertrains that have become so common. Just remember, gas is down to $2.15 or so a gallon as I write this (in the STL, MO area) but this won't last. At some point it will be back over $4, probably over $5 and then the speed demons with their poor Mpg ratings will lose their luster rather quickly unless you are independently wealthy and aren't concerned with fuel costs.

Everything is a tradeoff. I'll take less power for lower operating cost. The Reatta still has plenty of power to accelerate onto a highway and pass. It'll do double the posted legal speed limit on most non-rural interstates, though it may take time to build that speed should you really want to drive that fast. I never feel like it is coming up short unless I'm trying to so something stupid or unneccessarily aggressive in my driving.

Really, I like luxury over sport. I know some guys crave raw performance, but unless you are going to the track or happen to live in a place with roads that are well suited to an exciting drive and minimal traffic law enforcement (and my hometown doesn't fit that bill on either point) the power and handling of a high end sports car is wasted. It is about little more than appearances to have a 300+ hp high performance car at that point.

Some want it even if they can't use it to it's full potential. That's fine, spend your money how you like. I'll be taking a more practical approach as it suits my needs.

KDirk

Link to post
Share on other sites

At some point one has to simply realize that these are 25+ year old cars with 25+ year old technology. You have to judge them in the context they were made and how that has held up over time. The Reatta still has beautiful styling and still offers reasonable performance.

I face much the same dilemma with my old 944. It truly is a sports car, the styling still holds up, and is still fun to drive after all these years. (Though Kit doesn't approve of how clean my engine compartment is...) But bottom line is that it is a 30+ year old design, and many modern minivans can out drag it. The engine in my wifes little C230 has the same 2.5l displacement as the 944, and offers up a good 50+ more horsepower. And even that car is nearing 10 years old.

So I just try to keep both cars looking nice and running well, and enjoy them for what they are. The Reatta getting a Senior Gold in Portland certainly helped validate that approach. (Though my 944 would not do quite as well under similar scrutiny.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
... the Reatta is more than adequate as a touring car (which is what it is despite appearances) even now, and was quite respectable at the time it was made. Cars in the late 80's were still suffering somewhat the blanket downgrades in vehicle size and power that occurred after the fuel crisis of the 70's which begat countless underpowered econo boxes. In that environment, the Reatta was quite decently equipped.

I'd agree it seems unimpresssive against the current stable of high output powertrains that have become so common. Just remember, gas is down to $2.15 or so a gallon as I write this (in the STL, MO area) but this won't last. At some point it will be back over $4, probably over $5 and then the speed demons with their poor Mpg ratings will lose their luster rather quickly unless you are independently wealthy and aren't concerned with fuel costs.

Everything is a tradeoff. I'll take less power for lower operating cost. The Reatta still has plenty of power to accelerate onto a highway and pass. It'll do double the posted legal speed limit on most non-rural interstates, though it may take time to build that speed should you really want to drive that fast. I never feel like it is coming up short unless I'm trying to so something stupid or unneccessarily aggressive in my driving.

Really, I like luxury over sport. I know some guys crave raw performance, but unless you are going to the track or happen to live in a place with roads that are well suited to an exciting drive and minimal traffic law enforcement (and my hometown doesn't fit that bill on either point) the power and handling of a high end sports car is wasted. It is about little more than appearances to have a 300+ hp high performance car at that point.

...

KDirk

I agree with you. The Reatta is a fine touring car. That is primarily what I want my weekend car to be. Despite it's lack of wow factor in the horsepower department it always brings a smile to my face when traveling the back roads of East Tennessee. It does well on the interstate too but I avoid interstate driving with my Reatta whenever I can.

Where I live most of the roads are well maintained. Occasionally I encounter bad pavement and potholes. I'm always impressed with the way the Reatta's suspension handles rough roads with ease. For my use I would never trade the ride quality of the Reatta for more power or more nimble handling. I wish the power of the Reatta matched it's sporty looks but I'm quite happy with it's performance.

I hurt the acceleration of my Reatta by installing the taller tires and wheels on it but once I got use to it I don't miss it. I don't regret putting the tall tires on because I got a good deal on the seven spoke chrome wheels I wanted that had nearly new tires already mounted on them. If I were buying new I would have gone with 225/60-16 instead of 235/60-16s.

Sometimes I think about installing a supercharger for looks and bragging rights but the extra horsepower would be wasted for my style of driving. If I ever have to do an engine rebuild I might consider it.

Edited by Ronnie
spelling (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites
The Reatta may look "sporty" but let's face it, the bent is far more toward luxury than handling and performance. For its size it handles good but it's far too heavy to be considered a "sports car". It's a matter of perspective. Go out and drive a Lotus, Porsche, Vette, Fiero, etc...then go drive your Reatta. You "ll then know what your Reatta is and isn't.

Kit

Fiero, really?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, really. :)

I hope your not another one of those Fiero "haters". There is way too many of them. :( Kit (85 & 86 Fiero GT's)

Fiero hater may be too strong a term but not a big fan. I like the looks of the Fiero (Pontiac's in general actually) but had the opportunity to drive my friend Julie's Fiero in the 80's. I have never felt as unsafe in a plane, train or automobile ever. It was like driving a glorified go-kart that a neighborhood kid built himself. Way too low to the ground, no suspension, jarring, and generally gave you the feeling you would be meeting your maker soon. I am surprised insurance companies would even offer to insure such a death trap. I think it was a 1984 model and sometime after I drove it, it caught fire and burn away into oblivion. Julie was sad about losing her car but I thought to myself that perhaps the day that car burn up was the best day of her life and she didn't even know it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i drove, and was ready to purchase a '87 Fiero GT V6 around 7 years ago, but the seller and I couldn't agree to price.:mad:

i really liked it - reminded me of the 2 late '60 Datsun Roadster(s) and 2 early '70 Opel Gt(s) i owned in the 70's. 1984s had some problems. i wouldn't rule out a '88 GT in the future - better suspension and more.

first, if able - i need to find a 90/91 Maui Blue Reatta 'vert.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cargirls response is a typical one I get from people who know little to nothing about Fiero's. Your comments about them being a death trap and unsafe is completely untrue. Your negative comments show only your opinion about them but are not based in actual fact. I have two questions for you.......

Question #1

What two cars only made the 5 star crash rating in 1984-1985?

(Hint: one of them was a Volvo 240DL wagon, a car company renowned for safety)

Question #2

Where is the safest place to put a gas tank on a car?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surprising the number of Reatta Owners who have had Fieros and Corvairs. I bought my first Reatta because I wanted a bigger Fiero. Recently went looking for a Fiero and bought a Crossfire, much newer technology, faster, 6 speed, and about the same price as a not-so-good Fiero GT.

ps I always took at the Torque specs first, they tell me more. That said the 3800 is a fine example of the last century's technology and designed when the 55 mph speed limit was in effect. Modern engines (and direct injection turbos are just appearing) are aluminum, have DOHC, and are reaching 125 hr/liter. That is 475 hp at 6500 rpm from a 3800 with 90% of its torque peak at 1800 rpm on 87 PON. These are the good old days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a Fiero Formula before I bought my Reatta. Mine had the 2.8 V6/automatic.

PROS:

Good looks. -I love the front end of the car and the big spoiler on the rear.

Lots of aftermarket parts. -You can put almost any engine in the Fiero by buying engine swap kits that are available.

Easy to find parts.

Nice steering wheel.

Nice dual exhaust in the rear.

Composite body panels are easy to change.

Body kits to make it look like other sports cars.

CONS:

This car was built to be an economy car. Plastic parts, fit and finish reflects that.

NO POWER STEERING - Hard to maneuver getting in and out of parking spaces.

Hard to work on the engine/transmission. Everything has to come out through the bottom.

Low on horsepower

Lack of room - Room for feet around the brake pedal is a joke. - Low ceiling height.

Slides the front tires in a curve before the rear. - This is scarey and dangerous.

Not enough storage inside or under the hood.

Cheap uncomfortable seats.

Geared too low for comfortable interstate driving. Too many RPM makes it feel buzzy.

Bottom line for me is the Reatta is a better car. Fiero is not in the same class as the other sports cars mentioned in an earlier post.

post-52331-143142989493_thumb.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, almost all your cons are completely incorrect.

1) The Fiero did start with parts bin technology but the designers had hot sports car in their minds. It was pushed to the corporation as a sports commuter but the designers had grand plans for this little car. Come on, do you think it's a coincidence that the engine bay is unusually big for such a small car? You can put a Northstar in the thing for crying out loud!

And headroom poor? Are you kidding? Go out to your Reatta, get inside your Reatta with a tape measure and measure the distance between your head and the ceiling. There ain't no way the headroom is better in the a Reatta. I have both cars and my head is telling me the headroom is much less in the Reatta.

Cheap uncomfortable seats? That's your biased opinion. I have had many cars and the Fiero seat is the most comfortable, supportive, hugging seat I have ever sat in! My Reatta seat is comfortable as well but not supportive and hugging like a Fiero seat.

Low on horsepower? Wrong again! Dude, were talking 1985-1986 here. 140HP was plenty acceptable and "current" for its time and its size.

Not enough storage space? So, what about the MR2? As that much better?

It's amazing to me the crap people bring up about this car. Its like I said I said in the beginning, there is a lot of Fiero haters.

You can go ahead and bring on your opinions (your entitled to them) but it doesn't mean it's true.

Oh and since nobody answered my question above....

1) The Fiero is the only car in 1985 (besides the Volvo 240DL wagon) that made a 5 star crash rating. Not bad for a car that is a death trap according to Cargirl.

2) The safest place for a gas tank is directly in the center of the car. Where is it in your Reatta? Where is the gas tank in a Fiero?

Kit

Link to post
Share on other sites
... These are the good old days.

Sadly true. Larger NA engines are getting to be an endangered species. The future is smaller engines with forced induction. Or a combination of Atkinson cycle gas and electric (e.g., the Prius and the Gen 2 Volt.) Or pure electric. (At least Tesla has amply shown that electric cars can perform quite well.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Unfortunately, almost all your cons are completely incorrect.

Kit

I'm not a Fiero hater. I'm an ex-Fiero owner. I'm not completely wrong about the Fiero either. I lived with one for about 5 years so I know them well. I wrote a big long rebuttal to the rest of your post and then I deleted it. It would have served no useful purpose.

The bottom line is if you love your Fiero great. I liked looking at mine. I just didn't like driving it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I had a Fiero Formula before I bought my Reatta. Mine had the 2.8 V6/automatic.

Low on horsepower

.

Geared too low for comfortable interstate driving. Too many RPM makes it feel buzzy.

Bottom line for me is the Reatta is a better car. Fiero is not in the same class as the other sports cars mentioned in an earlier post.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]296951[/ATTACH]

sounds like a reatta engine and trans would make a great swap.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I had my Fiero the 3800 engine and 4 speed automatic transmission was the #1 swap that people were doing. You can get a kit to put almost any engine in the Fiero if you have the money to spend. V8 Archie use to be the goto guy for Fiero swaps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...