Car Craft Cover

[ck80]

They were rare because they were super expensive for 1982 and Buicks were a "fringe" car bought only by "Buick guys".

Guess by that reasoning it's the same reason there were 547 GnXs....

The reason why it is in Car Craft is its very well done.

Missed the headline where it said "very well done ls swap!!!"... I could've for the life of me sworn it said "Rare 1982 Buick GN"...

Oh well. Guess the words looked like something they werent.

You know, many guys dont know the difference between rebuild, restore, and resto-mod.

That car at best is a resto mod. But in no way "restored."

 

[Wraith]

Click bait title get the clicks, magazine purchases, and a thread here.

 

[fleming442]

Click bait title get the clicks, magazine purchases, and a thread here.

You're welcome.
Honestly, I thought it was a factual error not knowing that there actually were 215 Grand Nationals built before 86. I thought they were all T-types. The magazine is still sitting on the kitchen table, and I haven't opened the pack of new reading glasses yet. Gawd, I feel old!

 

[Csilvy2000]

Fake News has infiltrated every aspect of life. Even the car hobby.

 

[olds307 and 403]

Big bold print says 1982 Buick Grand National restored.

That's not a restore to me.

Just another lame Chevy engine swap.

Why not do a clone instead? No real special parts like the 8.5" on that 82.

The reason why it is in Car Craft is its very well done. It has A/C, It isn't "hacked" and he even fitted it with 4 wheel disc brakes in the tiny factory 14" wheels.

I think LS1 swaps are overdone and a stock '86/'87 Turbo motor would be 1.5 seconds faster in the 1/4 than the owners claimed "mid 13's on slicks", but this car is very nicely done and won't reinforce the widespread thought that all non '86/87 GN's are "pathetic" and get a "neat" with an eyeroll at a car show like other "sticker package" 70-80's cars get.

As Good Guys and NSRA members start buying G-bodies in force, this type of thing is going to get a lot more prevalent, because driving a G-body beats driving pretty much any 72-earlier car hands down.

In what way? Value, nope. Handling, my 70 out handles my 88. G bodies will never really have value outside the rare limited edition performance models, unfortunately. G bodies were the end of a dark time for the auto history.

 

[UNGN]

I want to find a 1969 Z28. Gotta have a home for my LQ4 and 4l80e.

'69 Z28's have a relatively high value in stock form. A non Turbo 82 GN does not and NEVER will.

Guess by that reasoning it's the same reason there were 547 GnXs....

If they made 1,500 GNX's they would still be less than $35,000 today. They only made 1,500 Turbo Trans ams and they are faster and will run circles around a GNX, yet apparently, even today, you can buy all original ones all day for $16K (and not $50K). Buick didn't make money on the GNX. It was a marketing ploy.

A "Buick Guy" post 1986 isn't a "1982 Buick guy". A post 1986 Buick guy has owned a 5.0 Mustang and/or a '70's Mopar. A 1982 Buick guy owned Buicks...Because that is what his father and his grandfather owned. In 1982 ONLY "Buick guys" bought Buicks. My family owned Mopars, Fords, AMC's, Chevys and Pontiacs and I can't think of one Buick purchase pre 1986. A 1982 Buick guy was a business major who golfed and couldn't fix anything to save his life.

 

[UNGN]

In what way? Value, nope. Handling, my 70 out handles my 88.

If your '70 Cutlass out handles your '88, you are doing it wrong. I'm not talking stock (but even stock a performance G-body would easily out handle even a "performance" '70 Cutlass). With simple, cheap mods on G-body, no '70 cutlass would be able to touch it (unless the cutlass had Cubic money in suspension mods) I'm trying to remember the last time I saw somebody trying to drive a near stock suspension A-body at a driving event and I can't think of one. Sure my memory is great, but I'm drawing a blank.

I did a full suspension on my '72 Chevelle with heavy duty springs and 1.6" and 1.4" sway bars and it rode and drove nice, but it couldn't out handle my T-type. The A-bodies are the nicest riding/driving of the "classic" muscle cars, but if I was building a pre-1988 car to autocross, it would be way down on the list of choices, even below "mustang II".

Malibu's and El Caminos are not "rare performance models" and the prices are already climbing for nice ones. This is the first year for G-bodies at GG's and NSRA. People soon will be ditching their pre '72 rust bucket projects in favor of something more modern, with factory air, power disc brakes, etc that requires less work to finish.

 

[Turbo Zach]

I don't get the magazine any more so I don't know much about the article. In my mind it would have been neater if they kept the 4.1 and added the turbo and top end from a 87 Grand National. In all reality I am doing that to my engine and often think I should have went with a LS. It is the more sensible opinion now a days.

 

[fleming442]

Malibu's and El Caminos are not "rare performance models" and the prices are already climbing for nice ones. This is the first year for G-bodies at GG's and NSRA. People soon will be ditching their pre '72 rust bucket projects in favor of something more modern, with factory air, power disc brakes, etc that requires less work to finish.

Yeah, 80s rust buckets!

 

[UNGN]

Yeah, 80s rust buckets!

At least 80's rust buckets are cheaper and more plentiful.