Do Grand Nationals get too much credit for the greatness of the G-Body?
- Thread starter oldmansmonte
- Start date
- Status
You said "annals"....
Speaking of, I am rather curious about this Grant Nationals they are speaking of
Not to nitpick but the '89 Turbo Trans Am was the "fastest car of the 1980's"... and I just happen to have one for sale.
I remember back around 1990 in Kennedale, TX, a Turbo Trans am and GNX showed up for a "grudge race". The TTA had a hole cut in the fender for a fender well dump, so we figured at least one of these guys has more money than sense. The GNX was not stock, either. I just remember being one car back behind the burnout box in my '86 Mustang and at least 100 people crowded around the starting line, watching and betting on the winner. Both the TTA and GNX did multiple "top fuel" rolling burnouts past the tree to heat up their slicks. so I got out and joined the crowd.
The TTA won the race with like an 8.22 to an 8.35 for the GNX. I just remember thinking "Man, that was fast" - I was still an impressionable 20 something. A few years later I was running 7.7's without a fenderwell dump and other stupid mods those two "supercars" had and all I could think was "man I was naïve".
Everything's relative. There were other production supercars of the 80s that had a higher top speed or better acceleration than, either the TTA or GnX.
What made the turbo buicks special in their day was they were a passenger coupe... not a sports car.
You could put a family of 6 in them with the a/c on, and at the same time, out run the best American car of any kind in its day - passenger car, sports car, didn't matter.
Had the gbody not been killed off, imagine how much better it would have been in 2 more years... When you look at what happened between 1982 and 1984, and 1984 and 1986... if that r&d continued who knows.
Not taking anything away from a tta, but a 4 seat firebird (4 being generous considering what the back "seats" were) is a little different what a 6 passenger car (if ordered full bench) was. In fact, considering what strides buick was making every 2 years on that powertrain, I'm disappointed the tta wasn't more potent than it was...
What made the turbo buicks special in their day was they were a passenger coupe... not a sports car.
You could put a family of 6 in them with the a/c on, and at the same time, out run the best American car of any kind in its day - passenger car, sports car, didn't matter.
Had the gbody not been killed off, imagine how much better it would have been in 2 more years... When you look at what happened between 1982 and 1984, and 1984 and 1986... if that r&d continued who knows.
Not taking anything away from a tta, but a 4 seat firebird (4 being generous considering what the back "seats" were) is a little different what a 6 passenger car (if ordered full bench) was. In fact, considering what strides buick was making every 2 years on that powertrain, I'm disappointed the tta wasn't more potent than it was...
Factory option code B2k callaway twin turbo corvette... ordered through a chevy dealer, sent by gm for conversion, then delivered at the gm dealer...
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/callaway-twin-turbo-chevrolet-corvette-archived-road-test
382hp...562 lb ft torque. In 1989 it was faster than any TTA off the showroom floor.
Sorry to revoke your TTAs title.
Now, we were discussing gbodies, which neither the 1989 c4 callaway nor the much much slower 1989 tta were not...
Last edited:
I don't know what all the hype is all about but there were nothing special about them other than the engine thats it. I worked on these cars at the dealer back then and I can tell you they had problems when new. Yes it was faster than other G body's but not the most attractive one and especially the granny speedometer and the small led tach and boost gauge that you can barely see when it was sunny out thats just my opinion. Driven the GNX when new it was faster than the GN and i liked the way it launched from a dig but going over bumps it felt like you were in a dump truck because of its rear suspension but its more of a quarter mile car and deserves respect . My son asked my one day how come i didnt buy a 1987 GN, my answer i was happy with my 85 442 and they way it looked but if i needed more power for the street i took out my 71 super bee 440 six pack and had fun. GNX will always be top dog since it was a limited edition. CK80 is correct there were other cars that are faster, you could walk into a chevy dealer and order a 1987 callaway corvette RPO B2K
The 80"s Callaways were complete crap. Car and Driver went thru three trying to get a complete road test out of one. If the internet existed in 1989, Callaway would not have.
Are you going to say the "Vector" was faster, too?
For anyone who believes the 1987 Callaway Corvette was the "fastest car of the 1980's" you need do download and watch this raw video from a 1987 Popular Mechanics photo shoot with a GNX and a Callaway Twin Turbo Corvette:
- GNX embarrasses Callaway Twin Turbo Corvette at Photo Shoot
Maybe it was "the fastest" if it didn't break, but no way was it the quickest. It doesn't even look like it could run a 13 second 1/4 stock.
- GNX embarrasses Callaway Twin Turbo Corvette at Photo Shoot
Maybe it was "the fastest" if it didn't break, but no way was it the quickest. It doesn't even look like it could run a 13 second 1/4 stock.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
