Buick confirms plans to add rear drive sedan, drop old names

[BuickCollector]

Unfortunately, the V6, if it has a V6, will be the new 3.6L VVT engine, not the old reliable 3.8 we al love.

[55PackardGuy]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It also kind of fit into the GM midset that it didn't matter how many cylinders an engine had, it was the horsepower that mattered (an orientation that carries on today).</div></div>

Horsepower may matter the most according to GM tradition, but Buick tradition is more about TORQUE. That great off-the-line feeling that an Electra had that made it feel like it was light as a feather. Look under the hood of a nailhead powered Buick and you won't find the HP rating on the air cleaner, you'll see "Wildcat 445" designating the torque!

No arguments with what you said, but I thought this needed to be added for proper perspective. What's the torque rating of that new OHC V6? In today's promotions when they brag about 170 ft/lbs of torque like it's going to make you wet your pants, I just have to laugh.

[BuickCollector]

Keep in minds, this is NOT the turbocharged prototype in the Velite.

In normally-aspirated form...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

The 3.6L V-6 VVT engine

The 2004 3.6L V-6 VVT engine is the first variant of the global V-6 engine family to go into production. Although a design priority was to minimize or even eliminate all sources of undesirable engine noise, the sound that does reach the vehicle occupants has been carefully optimized to be rich and rewarding.

Intense focus on reducing noise, vibration and harshness (NVH) did not compromise the dictates of high specific output. The 3.6L global V-6 develops 255 hp @ 6,200 rpm and 252 lb-ft of torque @ 3,200 rpm.

The adoption of fully variable valve timing for both intake and exhaust valves provides outstanding flexibility, fuel economy and emissions-reduction. The four-cam variable valve timing is a key element in the V-6 VVT control strategy, which imparts the engine with extreme flexibility. For example, 90 percent of the 3.6L V-6's peak torque is available across a remarkably broad operating range, from 1,600 rpm to 5,800 rpm.</div></div>

[86 2dr.ltd]

Well before I procede any further I would like to make a few things clear about myself. I can not spell, I have never been able to. Many of the words I write every night my 14 year old daughter helps me with, she doesnt have what ever the problem I have is. My wife who quit high school can even spell better than me. I also stutter in conversation and forget things I know like the back of my hand and cant come up with the words. Its the way I have always been all 46 years of my life. Anyone looking to degrade me on account of this only cracks me up because like I say its been a frustrating struggle my whole life. Oh well. I get by ALRIGHT !

PackardGuy just mentioned torque, the B U I C K V6 has always been about torque just like its larger V8's as you will see when I post up some spec.s I put together.

I have road test results from 71 Riv GS and I used the 91 Reatta because it also had the best version of the 3.8 and compareable final drive ratio. No the Reatta didnt win but I believe the big Riv was not what everyone wants to remember it as either. Also please remember or know that nearly all Riviera's are my favorite of all time automobiles, so unlike some Im not doing this or saying anything to degrade any BUICK - EVER.

-------------91 Reatta-----------71 Riviera GS-------71 Riv.

engine ------231-----------------455

hp-----------170-----------------330-----------------315

hp per cube-.735----------------.725-----------------.69

torque-------220-----------------455-----------------450

tq per cube-.952-----------------1.0----------------.989

weight-------3655----------------4428----------------???

final ratio--3.33----------------3.42----------------2.94

0-60---------9.21----------------9.10----------------9.90

1/4 mile-----16.9----------------15.9----------------16.9

lateral G----.82-----------------???--no one cared back then

top speed----120-----------------??? you tell me I'll edit it in

brake 60mph--???-----------------160 ft.

well its apples to oranges, small car/big car, small engine/big engine, bad gas milage/good gas milage, poor emissions/better emissions but none the less the Reatta actually holds its own and is/was up to par with typical performance.Please realize the the power ratings were the old gross method still for 71 but doesnt matter because the Reatta's acceleration was up to par anyhow.

What gets me about the Reatta is - while everyone is worried about this supposedly underpowered car I'm trying to figure out why its so darn heavy. Thats very heavy for a 2 seater. I believe it should have been aluminum bodied, they hand built it in low production #'s might as well have gotten more exotic beings how it was that kind of car in the first place. Less weight would have went along ways toward all aspects of performance. It was heavier than the full size 2dr. LeSabre (3300lb.)of that time. A two seater should have weight in at 3000 or less.

I do alright at the unbias, independent, honest conclusion stuff, I's just be needin to figur out's me speelin'

[NTX5467]

You did well, "86"! I concur, it's not specifically about power but how that power relates to the weight of the vehicle it's pulling/pushing around.

I also concur with the statement about "Buick Torque" and the fact that it happened at useable rpm ranges, even with the 3800 V-6. Obviously, the 3800 has more power in it waiting to get out, as the bolt-on supercharger for the 3800 powered Camaro/Firebirds is supposed to be worth an extra 100 horsepower just by itself and as the Buick Turbo enthusiasts have also proven with their vehciles too.

Just some thoughts,

NTX5467

[86 2dr.ltd]

Well it was mentioned as to the why? the Reatta didnt get the Sc engine but it justr wasnt out at that time. It is a shame Buick didnt do different cam and valve and even compression work to the engine for different applications. They could have varied the output by 20 in both departments which would have made good difference. There was only .40" of valve lift but it got gas milage of an earlier 4 cylinder so it was still a remarkable little engine that could. Anyhow as I showed it performed as good as any preceding powerhouse Buicks. Which means the rest of its family tree did alright as well. In fact the 2 dr LeSabre is a lower 16 1/4 mile car just like the older Rivieras were.

I know for a fact that our B U I C K L67 powered LSS with large trunk, large rear seat and all the creature comforts one could ask for would run any procedding factory BOP stock full size sedan right to shame. Handle better , get around real good in real mountain snow situations with TOURING TIRES NO LESS, look good and get decent gas milage while doing so. I've played with cars from rice rockets to TransAms on the interstate and every one except the embaressed rice boys has givin me a big smile and thumbs up.

Such a shame there is so many closed eyes in the Buick world, but those of us that dont need glasses or have some false ego to promote know how great ownership of these more recent cars has been. We also know about the little glitches they have to.

Just like Im sure the newly named and RWD/FWD Buicks will have. I'm looking forward to this DOHC 3600 and a potential turbo version but I also believe they need to keep the L67(I guess its a L34 or 2 now) up and running. It has a huge after market and can make sales just on account of that. Its also one heck of an iron horse if anyone spent some time pounding one around alittle.

[55PackardGuy]

I just like the older V8 powered Buicks better. Nothing against the V6s, just my prejudice. My comment about torque was to point out how this particular spec seems to often be overlooked today, and the days of 1 ft/lb+ per cu in were excellent days indeed (445 ft/lb in the 401 nailhead, fer instance). These cars, of course, had heavy rwd drivetrains that could take all that torque. When I tool around today, I try to fit the car's performance to the road, thus rwd for fair weather, 4wd for foul. It works for me.

I wouldn't use the 455 for the V8 comparison, as the 430 is higher compression (in base form) and generally a more efficient design. (20 mpg+ in the real world on real highways in a '69 Electra for instance. I know a lot of 455 lovers will scream about this--OK, that's a great engine, too.) One might do a comparison of mpg vs weight some time. These big heavy cars were truly marvels of efficiency. (See the thread on "430 gas mileage" and read all the responses from bb Buick owners about their experiences with Economy.)

I enthusiastically admit that the cars of the last half of the '60s are the most interesting to me. A lot of great engineering and hair-raising performance came in those years. I'm 47, but I guess I'm still living in my tender youth when it comes to cars. They'll never be the same, nor should they be, and trying to imitate the past would be mostly counter-productive, I think. However, I'd still like to go buy a new car that gives a reasonable facsimile of the performance and feel of those cars. Even if it's a hybrid or is hydrogen-fuel-cell powered. Or fwd???!!! (only if it's a longitudinally-mounted engine design).

If I want the "real thing" I'll keep getting cars like my '89 IROC (See? I'm not stuck in the '60s!) to play around with and (I hope) sell them for about what I put into them and get another one. I've got my eye on a '69 Electra convertible.

[BuickCollector]

http://www.babez.de/buick/velite.php

Buick Velite

Restrained extravagance. Two seemingly incompatible words that nonetheless convey the spirit of the Buick Velite ? a four-seat convertible that envelops its passengers in a rich, elegant environment while forging new ground in the exclusive territory of expressive, upscale rear-drive mid-size automobiles.

The Velite is the first American demonstration of GM's all-new Zeta global vehicle architecture, featuring a premium rear-wheel-drive chassis. Buick will unveil the Velite concept at the New York Auto Show.

Named for an elite class of quick-moving soldiers in Napoleon's army, the Velite was designed at GM's Advanced Studio in Warren, Mich. and assembled at renowned coachbuilder Stile Bertone's studio in Italy. Its sister car, the Opel Insignia, debuted the Zeta architecture at the Frankfurt International Auto Show last year.

?Velite is a new expression of Buick's longstanding heritage in understated yet sophisticated design,? said Anne Asensio, executive director ? GM Advanced Design. ?While certainly an expression of premium American style, the Velite's impressive stance and overall presence emphasize a sumptuous driving experience that further pushes Buick on to the center of the world stage of luxurious touring cars.?

Indeed, Buick's global presence is widening, particularly in Asia. Recently introduced products in China, for example, have been warmly received with demand exceeding supply. The upscale aura of these vehicles is enhanced with the rear-drive Velite ? its athletic proportions and aggressive stance emphasizing a bold, contemporary design, while readily identifiable heritage cues are worn with an international flair and understated elegance.

Designers pored over Buick's extremely rich design history while also studying trends in global cultures and contemporary design. Modern furniture and even the atmosphere of trend-setting lounges influenced the color, mood and shape of the Velite's exterior and interior. Heritage cues can be found in the Velite's long dash-to-axle proportions, which convey power and a sporting elegance ? a theme reinforced by 20-inch front wheels, 21-inch rear wheels and short overhangs. Its long, sculpted clamshell hood introduces a bold new look for Buick's signature waterfall grille design. It is finished in a jewel-like luster and creates a three-dimension visual effect that blends seamlessly with the body when viewed from different angles.

The hood integrates portholes ? three per side ? in a romantic, yet contemporary nod to Buick's heritage. The hood tilts forward when opened, creating a dramatic look that evokes a bygone era of touring cars. A complementing clamshell deck lid opens in the opposite direction to swallow the Velite's folding soft top. When retracted, the top is completely covered by the rear deck for an integrated, contoured look reminiscent of Buick's dramatic boattail designs of the 1930s.

Decidedly upscale yet subtle appointments underscore the Velite's aura of refined sophistication, including its Dark Tarnished Bronze Metallic exterior color. The rich-looking hue complements the vehicle's relaxed, sophisticated mood, and is a reflection of the color's emergence in modern design around the globe.

The color contrasts with crystalline headlamp lenses, which combine with X-Beam technology to create a distinct, superior lighting system. Using the same halogen light source, X-Beam enables the use of a smaller lens while creating 44 percent greater luminous intensity than traditional reflector headlamps. Cooling vents for the lights are slotted next to the lenses, creating a unique and purposeful styling element. X-beam technology also is used in the taillamps, which blend into rearward sheetmetal designed with a nod to the 1938 Y-Job ? Buick's first concept vehicle and first convertible.

?The Velite has a presence that conveys confident power,? said Sang Yup Lee, exterior designer. ?It's a fresh, contemporary design that not only hints at Buick's design direction, but speaks the language of modern design trends around the globe ? a statement of strength through elegance, not extravagance.?

Romantic environment

Contemporary design also is reflected in the Velite's passenger compartment, which uses sumptuous materials and the warm glow of indirect lighting to harmonize with the vehicle's exterior design voice. It's a tangible expression of a jazz lounge atmosphere, including an inviting rear seat that wraps around the interior like a comfortable lounge loveseat. Rear HVAC controls allow rear-seat passengers to adjust the climate to suit their moods.

Subdued lighting radiates a warm glow throughout the cabin, and is complemented by leather of three shades: Bronze Pearl, Iceberg Blue, and Woven Tan. The look of Gold Leaf Lacquer, in place of wood, is a statement of richness in many Asian cultures; it accents the interior, including the door handles and shift knob. All seating is leather-covered and the materials used throughout the interior were selected for their reassuring tactile feel.

?Everything from the colors to the shape and feel of the upholstery was designed to provide a rich, relaxing and romantic environment,? said Bryan Priebe, interior designer. ?The Velite is a respite from the outside world and invites human interaction.?

The Velite's warm interior lighting glows from the backs of instrument panel controls and gauges. The subdued look includes a panel over the XM Satellite Radio and OnStar controls, allowing a smooth, uninterrupted appearance of the dashboard and center console.

An ?E-lock? security system allows the Velite's driver to unlock or lock the vehicle without fumbling for a key fob. The system, which uses a proximity signal for vehicle function commands, allows starting and driving without the need for a traditional ignition key.

Power to move the Velite comes from Buick's experimental twin-turbocharged, intercooled global V-6 engine. Four hundred horsepower and 400 lb.-ft. of torque are derived from its DOHC design and 3.6-liter displacement. The engine features fuel-saving variable valve timing technology, which is available on some of GM's four-, five-, six- and eight-cylinder engines. Through the use of variable engine valve timing, valve lift and duration is continuously varied to improve fuel economy, horsepower and torque, while reducing emissions.

The V-6 is backed by a Hydra-Matic 6L80-E six-speed, rear-wheel-drive automatic transmission equipped with manual tap-shift gear selection. A pair of large, oval exhaust outlets provides an aural reminder that performance is very much a part of the vehicle's character.

?The strength of the powertrain is the necessary complement to the Velite's powerful design statement,? said Tom Peters, Buick Velite's chief designer. ?It's premium performance to go with a contemporary, muscular presence.?

Although a concept, the Velite affirms GM's vision for Buick as a global manufacturer of premium, elegant vehicles. It shows the exciting possibilities of the all-new Zeta vehicle architecture and an expressive new direction for Buick.

?There's an edge to the vehicle, more than is reflected in its sculpted bodywork,? said Peters. ?It's a forward-looking vehicle that not only stands for Buick in America, but how American style, performance and prestige resonates in a contemporary, global form.?

Text and photos courtesy of General Motors

[86 2dr.ltd]

The 60's and early 70's are my favotite cars for styling too. I also love RWD cars. I just am not one to sit back and let someone go off on some tall tail. Such as the FWD in snow issue. Or "FWD's handle badly, I drive a old Buick," trust me you cant run the back roads and hang with my Regal. No my Regal wont hang with a RWD of its equivelent day and age but it will out handle an old landyaht. No it does not ride as nice but pretty darn good. I also really cant tolerate insults such as not "real" Buicks, dont perform like real Buicks. I just blew the truth to that right out of the water. If you wanted to use the high compression 70-455 or 430's I could pull the L67 specs out and blow that out the water as well. I think its 270ftlb out of a 231 its also 240 hp out of a 231. I just cant see where these insults are good for anything. Theres always a drifter or two that passes through here. Some proud owner of their first car or first Buick and theres little help here because frankly the "unreal" Buick people hang elsewhere, is this what is wanted ?

As far as torque I agree 100% and just made a statement about it on another forum. GM with its race winning engines need to drive those torque figures home into the heads of all Americans. We all hear the advertising about the HP of these different import cars and it would be embaressing for GM to give theirs because it takes nearly one extra litre of an American engine to match HP with an Import. However if GM advertised its torque it would have some pretty astounding #'s to imbed in the minds of shoppers. Thats what you feel under normal driveing the torque. These high torque engines also getting great milage that I would have argued impossible 10 years ago.

** BTW I'll never believe the 20mpg out of a 430 landyaht until I get it myself. sorry. I know my 350 Olds got 15-17 and I also got that 15-17 out of "Grandpas" 318 NewYorker but from an older big block I would have to see it to believe it. If seen some tall MPG stories in my life time. In fact I never heard anyone in conversation not give a figure that I felt was tweeked. Back in the 70's Dad and I got consistent 12-14 out of both the 283 powerglide 58 Brookwood and 304 74 Matador**

Anyhow its one thing to have a preference, its another thing to insult what you know nothing about. That has been my whole point in this topic.

Now lets just hope they build that darn Velite and dont go bluffing into the future.

The info Buickcollector gave is a great write up. Here again is the link to it and the best photos I've seen of the car as well as some engine specs, not that "concept" specs mean much. I think is darn interesting styling and it ABOUT TIME for an exciting Buick !

http://www.fast-autos.net/buick/buickvelite.html

[NTX5467]

With all due respect, I'm not going to doubt the 430 fuel economy as I was not around any of them on the road. I do know that my uncle's '68 LeSabre 350-2bbl did right at 20mpg on a trip on I-20 in West Texas with 4 people aboard and the a/c keeping everyone comfortable one summer day (it also had the 2-speed automatic). I also was around several '72 era Olds 350-4bbl Cutlasses that, when "desmogged" per a popular manual back then, they'd suddenly and consistently do 20+mpg on the road (back when they were new cars).

Many of the later Olds 307 4bbls in the midsize Bonnevilles and full size LeSabres in those middle '80s time frames typically would hit middle 20mpg numbers on highway runs. My '77 Camaro with the original 305-2bbl and 2.56 rear axle ratio would only do 22mpg on the road w/o the a/c running (cruising in the 60mph range) with my daily use averaging 17.66mpg.

From what I remember of that '60s era, most all of the "standard V-8" cars with 2bbl carbs would normally do 16-19mpg on a freeway run with daily averages dropping a little, depending on use and driving routine. In that realm, it included the small block Fords, Chevies, Mopar engines plus the big block 2bbls in the larger cars too. Some were a little more and some were a little less, but that was generally where I remember things being.

The only Chrysler New Yorkers with a 318 were the last generation of rear wheel drive New Yorkers and Fifth Avenues (based on the Aspen-Volare platform) and the '79-'81 New Yorkers (based on the original '75 Cordoba/mid-size platform). Big Block Chrysler engines started out at 350 cid in '58 and grew to 361, 383, 400, 413, 426 Wedge, 426 HEMI, and 440 through the years. There was an earlier 318, the original Chrysler A-block from the 1955+ time frame that was called "Wide Block 318", but that engine family ended with the '65 cars.

Fuel economy is a highly variable situation, but some general trends can exist. It's also possible for some engine/carb/axle ratio/body combinations to be better than others too, even when they really shouldn't be--but we do know they do happen that way.

When all of the 455 GM engines were done, many were basically stroked versions of their earlier engine sizes. In many cases, the stroke length got real close to the diameter of the cylinder bore and, in the process, might have degraded some of the relationships of the earlier engines, not to mention the loss of efficiency of going to lower compression ratios. As each of those engines were designed by different groups and used some differing design orientations, some seemed to work better than others (like the 454 Chevy and it's somewhat unusual appetite for fuel and oil, compared to similar sized Buicks or Oldsmobiles). Emission controls also conspired to possibly keep the 455s from being all they might have been if they'd been produced 10 years earlier too.

Main thing that we, as hobbiests, need to do is make sure that all of our vehicles are running as efficiently as possible, putting out as few pollutants as possible, and keep the maintanance done so that all of the dialogue that's been put out about our older cars being driven less, being better maintained, and such is really true. "Driven less" means in relationship a daily driver car that might usually be a newer model vehicle and see something like 10,000 miles or more per year.

By the way, the '60s+ vehicles are many of my favorites. Getting out of high school in '70 put me right in the middle of some of the neatest vehicles ever to put rubber on the road. Lots of neat stuff built from the middle '50s on up to the late '70s years, just that you had to look a little harder for them as the years progressed into the later '70s and early '80s.

Just some thoughts,

NTX5467

[86 2dr.ltd]

Maybe its too hilly around here and even though its country there is still some stop and go. Those are really unbelievable numbers for anything I've ever driven. I didnt mean any disrespect, Im a sceptic by nature.

Grandpa always had Newports, in 70 or so he brought home one of those biggest ever NewYorkers with the 440. you know the car, 1st year was 70, it had the trunk like a pickup truck like the Electras and 98's had. He only kept it for one week and took it back and got a smaller engined Newport. He just said it used too much gas. The 82 I have is his last car and first NewYorker he kept that is. It became the Fifth Avenue in 83. His son my Uncle always had Imperials. I think this is why Im drawn to these big cars and Im sold on Buick/Oldsmobile styling. I had another uncle that always had Buicks and I remember a fully decked Sportwagon. It had the glass in the roof and electric rear window, seats in the back, roof rack that got used (four kids),speed alarm, thats about all I can remember. It was white and I think it had woodgrain. Did sportwagons have wood grain?

[55PackardGuy]

86 2-door,

MAN you seem to have an edge, and I can't really tell if you're mad at me or some mythical "drifter" that you've decided hates you and everything you stand for. As for "insulting what you know nothing about," in addition to NTX's comments, see the "430 gas mileage" thread I told you about. Then, send a note to each of the "grandpas" that posted their personal experiences with 20+ mpg with their bb Buick "land yachts" and call THEM liars, too.

This just needed to be said. Your tone is not appreciated.

I would much sooner continue with a civil discussion that honors differences of opinion, and acknowledges our (many) similar opinions. I feel like you're "laying for me" every time I post. Is that your intention?

[86 2dr.ltd]

Geeze Guy, not at all. Maybe you have to struggle back through and reread my long posts. I know its painful to read, I try hard anyhow. I dont feel I was in bad tone at all. Just to the point and apparently misunderstood. Oh well. Guess I should let FWD be terrible in snow and unreal Buicks be slow and big mistakes as well. Sorry I drownded out some other tones

I thought I explained my agreement about the engine torque issue. I also thought I explained my gas milage experience and logistics of the area I live. As well as my sceptic nature. I hope the 430 does get 20 as someday I hope to have a 430 Riv. still I wont believe the milage till I see it. I did follow the 430 gas milage post when it was current and never said anything because I didnt know or have a reason to get in that conversation. It was brought up here so I stated my V8 gas milage experience and scepticism, nothing more. I thought landyaht was an accepted term for the big old cars, not an insult. My "Grandpa" moms dad was my #1 big guy my whole life until 8 years ago when he was 94 and moved on. I have highest respect for old guys and gals, I was raised that way and close with my mothers parents, relatives and friends.

Yes I have an edge and a scattered way of getting to the end of what Im saying. Oh yea and I cant spell.

Seriously I think you misinterpreted maybe the last few posts I made here on this topic. The other one on the FWD in snow issue I was harsh and to the point. Had to be, my experiance in that department is a life long struggle at least 4 months of the year. Sorry if all that information was too much but I needed to back up my proof and honest experiance in snow/mountain driving.

I endured the insults, bucking like a mule, put up the info to prove the insults unjust, forget the unecessary part and Im the one out of tone ? Figures

[55PackardGuy]

Never meant to be insulting myself on the FWD issue, just opinionated. I thought your reply there was unnecessarily harsh, so I just blew it off as you may recall. It didn't seem to make much sense to start a war over what, in the end, is pretty much a "religious" issue. Topography and weather definitely alter the cars we use and love. After all, sometimes it becomes a true life-or-death matter, and FWD has freed many people in the North, particularly in hilly areas, to live and prosper. I think the hill-climbing aspect is particularly noteable (do you remember my reference to the original Toronado ad campaigns that were all about Pike's Peak Hill Climb results?) Nothing, but NOTHING can beat FWD to pull you up hills, especially on snow or ice. I don't care if you've got limited slip, chains, and whatever, if you're only driving the back wheels slippery hills will be harder to negotiate.

As for my last post, I did not see your reply to NTX, because I either did not notice the new page 2 or because we posted at the same time. When I went back to the thread, I read your reply to NTX and I let my post stand, because it really was in reply to your previous post, which, unless I'm really paranoid, took some pointed shots at yours truly. The fact that you replied to NTX with apologies did not seem to me to rectify this.

I just come to these message boards to share some good ideas, information, and anecdotes about the cars we enjoy. It's relaxing and fun. When it stops being fun, it's usually because the discussions are getting heated and turning into arguments about "who's right" and "mine's better." I'm all for having clear facts and data, yet when it comes down to it, even with these, you usually make your choices based on opinion because there are a lot of ways to interpet the "facts." And I'm ready to "discuss" all day as long as the tone stays respectful, if sometimes a little pithy.

I'll try to watch myself when it comes to stating opinion as fact. That's a habit that I don't enjoy in myself.

Best wishes to you... and thanks for replying.

[96roadmaster]

Bring back the ROADMASTER!! It was a cool name and believe it or not, the younger people love it too. They think it's kinda cool having a car called the Roadmaster. If Buick is targeting the younger generation, shouldn't they at least be listening to us?!?

[decembro]

My vote goes out to :

Wildcat

Electra 225

Invicta

GSX or Gran Sport (not as some BS option on a Regal)

Banshee?

Roadmaster was a great name that's been ruined by the monsters of the 90's

How about a Sedanette model to go with a convertible and a two-seater? Or is that too much like a PT Cruiser? How about a station wagon with a partial glass roof?