Why the extinctions of the Buick Grand National? - Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board
Hotrodders.com -- Hot Rod Forum



Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Unanswered Posts Auto Escrow Insurance Auto Loans Advertise
Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board > General Discussion> Hotrodders' Lounge
User Name
Password
lost password?   |   register now

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 09-03-2019, 11:02 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 14
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Why the extinctions of the Buick Grand National?

For the 1987 model year, Buick finally perfected it, then, they stopped making it.
So the most popular performance Buick perhaps ever made, they decided wasn't worth continuing with. I'm perplexed. Why don't they just bring it back? They wouldn't have to change ANYTHING. Just stick the V6 in there and put twin turbos on it. It would sell like hotcakes!

    Advertisement
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to FlamesOfFire99 For This Useful Post:
MARTINSR (09-04-2019)
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 09-04-2019, 07:46 AM
idrivejunk's Avatar
Grand Prix User
 

Last journal entry: Last look
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: NW AR, USA
Age: 53
Posts: 4,297
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 4,894
Thanked 5,890 Times in 3,424 Posts
Here is what you can do to fix this. Or any of the other problems with US car makers which perplex you. Get yourself hired and put in charge, then everyone who works there will have to mind you. Child's play.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to idrivejunk For This Useful Post:
MARTINSR (09-04-2019)
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 09-04-2019, 09:26 AM
MARTINSR's Avatar
Brian Martin,Freelance adviser
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Boise, Idaho
Age: 61
Posts: 16,168
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 6,439
Thanked 7,027 Times in 4,449 Posts
It is interesting that Dodge brought back the Challenger with GOBS of HP and Ford has Mustangs with GOBS of HP and Chevy has Camaros with GOBS of HP and they are selling TONS of them. Why in the world wouldn't Buick bring back their hot rod?

Brian
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 09-06-2019, 01:10 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,812
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 256
Thanked 1,283 Times in 1,013 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARTINSR View Post
It is interesting that Dodge brought back the Challenger with GOBS of HP and Ford has Mustangs with GOBS of HP and Chevy has Camaros with GOBS of HP and they are selling TONS of them. Why in the world wouldn't Buick bring back their hot rod?

Brian

More likely than not they weren't selling gobs of them. It's a grocery getter with a fast motor, against babe magnets that tell the world you a cool alpha male even if you're really the pack's omega dog. The machine makes the image, if not the man, in the eyes of the beholder.


Bogie
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 09-06-2019, 10:23 AM
Semper Gumby
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 343
Wiki Edits: 2

Thanks: 630
Thanked 582 Times in 430 Posts
Of course there is the other issue as well that GM does not make a platform that would suit it. You need a RWD sedan platform (unless you are planning to build a FWD version? Didn't think so)

Maybe use the same platform as the Camaro? Does Caddy have one that could be used?

The costs of developing such a car - desirable to us but not to the mass market - amortized over the number that could be sold would likely result in it costing as much or more than the Corvette when it hits the showroom. So what's the market? How many would be sold at that price point?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 09-07-2019, 01:28 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 14
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by idrivejunk View Post
Here is what you can do to fix this. Or any of the other problems with US car makers which perplex you. Get yourself hired and put in charge, then everyone who works there will have to mind you. Child's play.
If only it was that easy.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 01-24-2020, 08:26 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 87
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 32
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Perhaps for safety reasons? That chassis had been out since 1978----perhaps they felt they couldn't meet the upcoming safety and or mpg requirements?


Plus, gm and the rest of the manufacturers were wanting to switch everything to FWD (still not clear why?).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 01-24-2020, 11:15 PM
Semper Gumby
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 343
Wiki Edits: 2

Thanks: 630
Thanked 582 Times in 430 Posts
Why all the rush to front wheel drive? Well, fuel efficiency was a strong part of it.

the lighter the car, the easier it is to get good mileage.

It is easy to PULL a rope. Pushing it means it has to be VERY stiff. so if you set up a car to be PULLED, you can make a somewhat flimsier chassis than if you are going to PUSH it.

So you can cut out a lot of reinforcements that you would otherwise need if just make it a FWD car.

Then you blanket the press with all sorts of bumfff about superior front wheel drive traction and the sheeple buy front wheel drive cars.

Cheaper to make, cheaper to meet fuel economy targets, and makes it appear that they are actually doing something.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Dave57210 For This Useful Post:
d.b. cooper (01-25-2020)
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 01-25-2020, 01:51 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 2,242
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 229
Thanked 479 Times in 388 Posts
Traction and safety.
While many of us are happy with rear wheel drive the fwd 3800 allowed for good traction in a package that can go for 300k.
I have taken fwd 3800 engines down roads with 8" of snow plowing my way through without an ounce over factory weight in the thing.


If you want a GN buy one. That car would run for 60+ if built today. You can buy one for less.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 01-25-2020, 06:06 AM
ProStreetRob's Avatar
RedLine Stage 4 ZL1 650rwhp
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Selden NY
Age: 59
Posts: 534
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 12
Thanked 166 Times in 142 Posts
Thats why I went with the Big Brother when I wanted V6 Turbo

I had the 4.3L 91 GMC Syclone AWD; fully built w/forged internals, Big Garrett Turbo, upgraded gate & downpipe, Pro boost control (in cab adjustable), built 700R4, 3600 rpm convertor, TB / Inj's / Exhaust, Axle / Rear / Ignition & Fuel system upgrades, the whole nine... THING WAS A BEAST...

The most amazing part of the AWD system is you could actually power brake it and build boost from a stop and when you let go it would actually lift the front tires, even on the street. The Motors were ugly as ch!t but man those Turbo V6's had some GET UP AND GO!!!
If I remember correctly the AWD could go 80% rear / 20% front traction, to visa versa when needed. SOB pinned the boost gauge everytime you stomped it, LOL...
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Sy B1a.jpg
Views:	12
Size:	84.7 KB
ID:	451331   Click image for larger version

Name:	Sy Motor.jpg
Views:	12
Size:	74.9 KB
ID:	451333   Click image for larger version

Name:	SY I5.jpg
Views:	9
Size:	42.1 KB
ID:	451335   Click image for larger version

Name:	SY Boost 1.jpg
Views:	9
Size:	37.1 KB
ID:	451337   Click image for larger version

Name:	SY Boost 2.jpg
Views:	9
Size:	34.9 KB
ID:	451339  

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to ProStreetRob For This Useful Post:
64nailhead (01-25-2020)
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 01-25-2020, 06:52 AM
64nailhead's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Binghamton, NY
Posts: 3,928
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1,335
Thanked 990 Times in 818 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesOfFire99 View Post
For the 1987 model year, Buick finally perfected it, then, they stopped making it.
So the most popular performance Buick perhaps ever made, they decided wasn't worth continuing with. I'm perplexed. Why don't they just bring it back? They wouldn't have to change ANYTHING. Just stick the V6 in there and put twin turbos on it. It would sell like hotcakes!
Don't be perplexed and definitely don't think Buick had perfected it in 1987. Buick was at the tip of the iceberg in terms of performance, and for that reason along with the REAL reason (IMO) that it was discontinued. The REAL reason, again IMO, was that mother GM's shiny performance star, Corvette, just got made into a 'slouch' by a grocery getter. Mother GM saw the writing on the wall that Buick was going to hurt the Corvette brand - hence - 'shut it down'. GM did not want Buick leading the way in EFI, boost and performance technology.

Think about it, imagine a base GN in 1988-1990 with 300-350 ci turbo'd, EFI'd that out performed a Corvette even more than it did in 1987 for 1/2 the price of a base 'Vette. What would've happened to 'Vette sales in the early '90's? Then imagine if the idea would slid over to Oldsmobile and Pontiac? Especially Oldsmobile since they already had the equivalent chassis and drivetrain in the 442, minus the engine.

Of course this IMO. I've read as much as I've been able to find about the extinction of the GN, and I'd love to know the actual reasons for the decision other than internet speculation (like mine above lol.)
====

I do offer a thank you to Buick for the GN, it's affected me positively. I have a stock diff (8.5") and stock OD trans (200-4R) that has taken a beating well past the GN numbers and is still rolling. And they were cheaper to build any comparable aftermarket or later stock stuff.

My two cents


EDIT : I forgot to mention your reference to twin turbos. There is a reason that no OEM has made a sustained production run of a twin turbo chassis.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 01-25-2020, 11:43 AM
75gmck25's Avatar
Registered User
 

Last journal entry: Engine replacement
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 2,489
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 4
Thanked 223 Times in 203 Posts
GM may have learned from their lack of success in bringing back the GTO from 2004-2006. If you look at the engine specs of the LS1 and LS2 they used, its a great performing car, but sitting in a parking lot its hard to distinguish it from a Pontiac Grand Am. It was a good performance car, but looked like a grocery getter that Mom and Pop would drive in retirement.

Folks these days want something that screams "performance" when it is sitting in the parking lot, even it does not really perform (e.g., look at all the 6 cylinder pony cars with stripes, spoilers and fancy colored lights). They don't really understand what's under the hood, so as long as it looks good they are happy.

Bruce
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 01-25-2020, 01:41 PM
ericnova72's Avatar
More for Less Racer
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: S.W. Lower Michigan
Age: 53
Posts: 17,981
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 280
Thanked 3,327 Times in 2,786 Posts
Another nail in the coffin was the GM Metric midsize platform was already slated for extinction for 1988, and that planning and design work on the FWD car models that were going to replace them was already started fully 5 years in advance....GM only kept building the metric chassis in 1988 because the replacement models were still not ready for production....the original plan of the switch to FWD models was going to be with the 1988 year, but was pushed back to 1989.

Even if sales had exploded in 1986-1987and the sales numbers tripled or quadrupled it would not have mattered at that point....the decision was already made and plans were to far along in tooling and plant reconfiguration to change course.

When you see a new model car be introduced, it wasn't just designed last year....it was started in the design phase 5 years ahead of introduction. Takes time for the wheels to turn in a big company, they are heavy and slow and once rolling are then equally hard to slow or stop.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2020, 03:14 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 87
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 32
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by 75gmck25 View Post
GM may have learned from their lack of success in bringing back the GTO from 2004-2006. If you look at the engine specs of the LS1 and LS2 they used, its a great performing car, but sitting in a parking lot its hard to distinguish it from a Pontiac Grand Am. It was a good performance car, but looked like a grocery getter that Mom and Pop would drive in retirement.

Folks these days want something that screams "performance" when it is sitting in the parking lot, even it does not really perform (e.g., look at all the 6 cylinder pony cars with stripes, spoilers and fancy colored lights). They don't really understand what's under the hood, so as long as it looks good they are happy.

Bruce

Agree. The chevy SS, to me, looks almost indistinguishable to a Lumina. It isn't until i get real close and see the "SS" badges that i'm sure. To be fair, a GTO back then looked like a LeMans etc. The difference is that the base models looked good back then, unlike now.....





Quote:
Originally Posted by ericnova72 View Post
Another nail in the coffin was the GM Metric midsize platform was already slated for extinction for 1988, and that planning and design work on the FWD car models that were going to replace them was already started fully 5 years in advance....GM only kept building the metric chassis in 1988 because the replacement models were still not ready for production....the original plan of the switch to FWD models was going to be with the 1988 year, but was pushed back to 1989.

Even if sales had exploded in 1986-1987and the sales numbers tripled or quadrupled it would not have mattered at that point....the decision was already made and plans were to far along in tooling and plant reconfiguration to change course.

When you see a new model car be introduced, it wasn't just designed last year....it was started in the design phase 5 years ahead of introduction. Takes time for the wheels to turn in a big company, they are heavy and slow and once rolling are then equally hard to slow or stop.

i heard GM seriously considered making camaro/firebird FWD too around then; To combine J-body (cavalier etc) and F body into one chassis.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2020, 03:29 PM
64nailhead's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Binghamton, NY
Posts: 3,928
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1,335
Thanked 990 Times in 818 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericnova72 View Post
Another nail in the coffin was the GM Metric midsize platform was already slated for extinction for 1988, and that planning and design work on the FWD car models that were going to replace them was already started fully 5 years in advance....GM only kept building the metric chassis in 1988 because the replacement models were still not ready for production....the original plan of the switch to FWD models was going to be with the 1988 year, but was pushed back to 1989.

Even if sales had exploded in 1986-1987and the sales numbers tripled or quadrupled it would not have mattered at that point....the decision was already made and plans were to far along in tooling and plant reconfiguration to change course.

When you see a new model car be introduced, it wasn't just designed last year....it was started in the design phase 5 years ahead of introduction. Takes time for the wheels to turn in a big company, they are heavy and slow and once rolling are then equally hard to slow or stop.
^^this makes a lot more sense than my previous post. Especially considering the make over required to change most models to FWD.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Recent Hotrodders' Lounge posts with photos

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name (usually not your first and last name), your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright Hotrodders.com 1999 - 2012. All Rights Reserved.