post '72 gran sport info

[Guest]

anybody have any links to web sites with info on '73,'75 GS's. seriously! these cars are getting rare and worth saving! there must be someone else interested in the century-based gran sports. everytime i search on line i come up with the same two or three listings [and one of them specializes in mid 70's GTOs]

[BuickNut]

Good luck in finding either parts (NOS or repop...) for the cars. I have a '73 Century G.S. Stage 1 with a 4 speed, and its difficult to find good NOS parts beyond ignition and electrical switches. Luckily, mine is all there, and aside from the interior, IF I can't find the NOS or NORS parts, I can either rechrome, restore, rebuild or likewise just rework the part. The interior is going to be a chore, but definately not impossible.

[rtabish]

thanks for the reply. i suppose the rarity stems from most of these cars having been demo derbyed, trashed out, or just neglected because people thought they were too under-powered, too heavy/big, or just not worth keeping up. most of the wrecking yards have crushed the ones they get long ago. now i think they are the last vestage of real american iron that the average guy can afford and understand. i own a 90 olds cutlass supreme, and find there is very little i can do on a practical level to sport it up other than adding tires and wheels and an expensive chip. got any pictures of your GS you would like to share?

[BuickNut]

I've got some pics before it went into storage, and before it became "psychodellic" when I had to cut the rear section off (from the "C" pillars on back) and replaced with a rust-free section from Arizona. I'll see if I can get them scanned sometime and send them to you.

I agree though, there's a lot of post '72 out there that was still nice and worth keeping. I had a '78 Skyhawk V-6 x 4spd that I wish I would have hung onto. I can't ever find one on "Autotrader" nationwide, let alone locally. I liked the '76 Centurys also with the V-6's (did any have V-8's ? ), but to find them is very tough too. My '73 is indeed "underpowered" by '72 on back HP ratings, but in '73 they first started taking HP readings in a different way, thus the same engine in even the same car would appear "underpowered" if you used the 2 different ways of determining HP. Also, '73 was the year the did start to put MORE HP gobbling smog stuff on as well.

Once they started putting electronic ignition, and more importantly "COMPUTERS" in cars with all the multitude of sensors that could go wrong, cars basically became unworkable to the shade tree machanic. Thus the great influx of "non-car-guys" and "non-gearheads" into the Automotive Engineering fields. No offense to the ladies intended, but todays typical male engineer knows no more about cars than a typical female engineer......definately not the case 20-30 yrs ago. I find so few engineers that actually turn wrenches on either their everyday car (...even to change the oil ! ), or who know what to do to their collector car if they even own one. A sad state of affairs which is only getting worse (....sorry to sound to negative....)

[rtabish]

yeah, we all know the same tricks work on your briggs and stratton or your supercharged 3.8l V-6 "tech" motor. you just have to throw more money at the newer stuff. i used to get parts [ some pretty interesting] from the local scrap yard [pacific iron and steel] for $.10 -thats ten cents- a pound! and the hunt was half the fun. hot rodding tricks work just as good on post-72 "smog" motors as they do on high compression stage one monsters. so shave those heads, beef up that cam, and trim a little fat off the bottom line [ie; get rid of the a/c, cast iron manifolds, steel wheels, and as much dead weight as you can] and you can turn a 3800 lb road pillow into a decent muscle car of around 3500 lbs pretty easy! plus you can get better brakes and handling. i just wish it was that easy to trim me down to racing form. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/icons/crazy.gif" alt="" />

[Guest]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Once they started putting electronic ignition, and more importantly "COMPUTERS" in cars with all the multitude of sensors that could go wrong, cars basically became unworkable to the shade tree machanic. </div></div>

I can't get over how many "old timers" are afraid of "COMPUTERS" aka ECM's. There are really easy. They actually make it easier to diagnosis/tune the car, IMO. Just get a cheap scan tool and suddenly you have a whole set of gauges. Tach, coolant, air/fuel, knock, etc. They even diagnosis themselves via the check engine light.

Unworkable? Only if you aren't willing to try something new.

[rtabish]

hey rich. love your web site! as for being tooo afraid of computers, i scoff at you! one of my other "hobbies"[ie;infatuations] is building computers [ibm and mac]. i am not a software kinda guy but it aint like new tech is over my head. i wouldn't rejumper a motherboard or over-clock a processor out in my front yard and i would be kinda leary of anyone who tries to tune a newer car without a good idea of what they are doing. i guess i don't consider a tach and dwell meter or a timing light "high tech". thanks for the replies though.

[BuickNut]

Ugh....excuse me, but I'm no old timer.....just turned 42, so unless you're 18, maybe I AM an old timer. I ask you a question though - if your car dies on the highway, where do YOU look "Mr Young Pup" <img src="/ubbthreads/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" /> .....how do you easily tell if its getting gas, if the problem is spark, or on the "new" engines, if its the fuel injection, the fuel pump (...or which fuel pump, in tank low pressure, or on frame high pressure fuel pump), the filter (ever try and change a new car's fuel filter on the road, in the rain....takes a while to do now doesn't it ? ), or is it one of the myriad of sensors that might be wrong ? The old cars weren't easy to dianose by a long shot....but MUCH easire than todays monstrosities !

If an older car goes south, despite the parts being more expensive then they were "a-way's back then" if my memory can work that far ( <img src="/ubbthreads/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" /> ), it's still cheaper and easier to shot-gun the problem and replace all that might go wrong, than to try and diagnose the actual problem. Now keep in mind, that approach was for those that weren't all that good at diagnosing the problem, and would be the more expensive route than correctly using the "old time" tools of yesteryear even back then. However, todays diagnostic tools are more expensive, and when was the last time you could drag one those out on the highway if your car died, and find the exact cause out of the 10-20 possible causes that the newer diagnostic tools give you ? And sorry, I still don't buy into one computer diagnosing another computer (ever try to fix your PC using its own "self-diagnostic" programs...they don't work very well. My computer couldn't even "diagnose" that my 5 year old had accidently switched the printer port while he was goofing with the computer....I had to go and dig for it myself using my "ol noggin"...so much for one computer diagnosing another..... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/icons/confused.gif" alt="" /> )

The new technology is good while it's working....but when it goes bad, its VERY expensive to replace, let alone FIND if its wrong. Todays parts are designed as assemblies (that can't be disassembled and fixed) instead of components (ever try to replace a $15 ABS sensor replacement that might go bad....you generally have to get a complete hub and bearing with integral ABS sensor for about $275-$350). I work in the auto industry as an engineer, and I know for a fact that there is miniscule effort into making parts/cars workable by the average Joe - let alone the dealership mechanic ! Most of the "young pup" engineers I work with (and granted, I was one of the VERY few that actually turned wrenches or even changed my own oil, from the class of engineers I graduated with, so I'm not THAT far removed or THAT ancient.... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/icons/cool.gif" alt="" /> )have never turned a wrench on a car "because they are too complicated" (their quote, not mine...). So this is a fact, and not just "misirings from an old man". I go to local cruise-ins, and always hear the same thing from "young-uns" when they look under the hood of the old cars, as to how uncomplicated they are and "probably easy to work on". Its been said too many times and ignored especially by todays auto-industry engineering "experts", KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid).... that simplicity is analagous robustness !

I've kept my "computerized" '88 Dodge Daytona Shelby Z going (yeah, its an "old" car too by some standards...), having to diagnose its electical/computer problems....and given that I have done both old and "new"....I still take the older cars. If you want the handling, milage of the new cars - the slam it, throw an overdrive unit on there and GO !

Just my humble, albiet VERY long-winded opinion...... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />

[BuickNut]

..PLEEEEZ keep in mind my reply was very "tongue in cheek", and wasn't trying to be TOOOOOO sarcastic or offensive to the "young-uns" out there......I'm actually glad you're into cars, and do you're own wrenching......"ya keep the hobby going" ! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />

[BuickNut]

..TO GET BACK TO THE SUBJECT...(guilty as charged here....), its kinda funny as a gent was advertising his '73 Century for what seemed a resonable price, and he got lambasted by someone for asking so much for such a run of the mill, non-rare car <img src="/ubbthreads/images/icons/confused.gif" alt="" /> . Guess I'm a little biased as I own a "73 Stage 1, but they ARE rare - GS, Stage 1, or plain Jane Century. That may not necessarily translate to "desireable" or "collectable", but that's "in the eye of the beholder". I used to love '66 GTO's, until the last 4 Detroit "Dream Cruises", and you can't swing a dead cat without hitting one. From my own perspective, for me at least, I'd much rather drive my '73 Stage 1 though it mightn't be as collectable - but I know that there aren't going to be 10 more in the same color just down the street. I see it as Chevy's....EVERYBODY's got either a Chevelle, Camero, or Impala....the only difference between them is if the big block has a 9-1 compression, 12-1 compression, etc. I don't think ill of them if that's what they like.....but guess I'd rather just be different <img src="/ubbthreads/images/icons/tongue.gif" alt="" /> !

[rtabish]

[ahemm] alrighty then. thank you for that interesting saga-er-reply. by the way, anyone see a convertable mustang around here? i think it is red, an there weren't very many of them!

[BuickNut]

.....guilty as charged..........my bad