Buick GN barn find

[OVERKILL]

I cannot see a stock GN running a 4-second 0-60, my 400HP M5, which was just a bit heaver, and would run mid 12's in the high teens, was a car that was in the mid to high 4's.

The GNX, at 55HP more than the GN, would have been capable however, despite having an "official" 0-60 of 5.4 seconds.

Road & Track had a good article on the GN and GNX:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/road-tests/features/a25623/first-look-flashback-1987-buick-gnx/

They were very easy to mod and make faster, that was the beauty. But stock they were not as fast as many people "remember" them being.

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
I cannot see a stock GN running a 4-second 0-60, my 400HP M5, which was just a bit heaver, and would run mid 12's in the high teens, was a car that was in the mid to high 4's.

The GNX, at 55HP more than the GN, would have been capable however, despite having an "official" 0-60 of 5.4 seconds.

Road & Track had a good article on the GN and GNX:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/road-tests/features/a25623/first-look-flashback-1987-buick-gnx/

They were very easy to mod and make faster, that was the beauty. But stock they were not as fast as many people "remember" them being.


Back when these cars were still being produced, and shortly thereafter, there were tons of magazines with these cars in them all the time...lots of guys were running the times I posted with stock cars...I don't know why, but the magazine guys never seem to get the kind of performance us regular Joes get...maybe they don't try that hard, or maybe they just aren't that good at driving...all I know is I remember seeing the times these cars were running and being amazed at how quick they were...that's the reason I bought one...

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
I cannot see a stock GN running a 4-second 0-60, my 400HP M5, which was just a bit heaver, and would run mid 12's in the high teens, was a car that was in the mid to high 4's.

The GNX, at 55HP more than the GN, would have been capable however, despite having an "official" 0-60 of 5.4 seconds.

Road & Track had a good article on the GN and GNX:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/road-tests/features/a25623/first-look-flashback-1987-buick-gnx/

They were very easy to mod and make faster, that was the beauty. But stock they were not as fast as many people "remember" them being.


Back when these cars were still being produced, and shortly thereafter, there were tons of magazines with these cars in them all the time...lots of guys were running the times I posted with stock cars...I don't know why, but the magazine guys never seem to get the kind of performance us regular Joes get...maybe they don't try that hard, or maybe they just aren't that good at driving...all I know is I remember seeing the times these cars were running and being amazed at how quick they were...that's the reason I bought one...


The 1/4 mile times sound right, but the 0-60 times sound wrong. You could get a fox body deep 13's with relative ease, mine ran 13.8 with a tire under it, and these were 225HP cars.

Are you thinking 0-60 with a slick maybe?

 

[aquariuscsm]

Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
It seems that if a car doesn't look like a plastic conformist jellybean or a smartphone on wheels everyone hates it,good lord.



Well...your car is twenty years old. I guess we can have our "latest ride" skew our tastes.


I see you've neglected to fill out your sig. I'm very curious as to what you drive.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
I cannot see a stock GN running a 4-second 0-60, my 400HP M5, which was just a bit heaver, and would run mid 12's in the high teens, was a car that was in the mid to high 4's.

The GNX, at 55HP more than the GN, would have been capable however, despite having an "official" 0-60 of 5.4 seconds.

Road & Track had a good article on the GN and GNX:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/road-tests/features/a25623/first-look-flashback-1987-buick-gnx/

They were very easy to mod and make faster, that was the beauty. But stock they were not as fast as many people "remember" them being.


Back when these cars were still being produced, and shortly thereafter, there were tons of magazines with these cars in them all the time...lots of guys were running the times I posted with stock cars...I don't know why, but the magazine guys never seem to get the kind of performance us regular Joes get...maybe they don't try that hard, or maybe they just aren't that good at driving...all I know is I remember seeing the times these cars were running and being amazed at how quick they were...that's the reason I bought one...


I suspect the magazine writers aren't seasoned drag racers.

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
I cannot see a stock GN running a 4-second 0-60, my 400HP M5, which was just a bit heaver, and would run mid 12's in the high teens, was a car that was in the mid to high 4's.

The GNX, at 55HP more than the GN, would have been capable however, despite having an "official" 0-60 of 5.4 seconds.

Road & Track had a good article on the GN and GNX:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/road-tests/features/a25623/first-look-flashback-1987-buick-gnx/

They were very easy to mod and make faster, that was the beauty. But stock they were not as fast as many people "remember" them being.


Back when these cars were still being produced, and shortly thereafter, there were tons of magazines with these cars in them all the time...lots of guys were running the times I posted with stock cars...I don't know why, but the magazine guys never seem to get the kind of performance us regular Joes get...maybe they don't try that hard, or maybe they just aren't that good at driving...all I know is I remember seeing the times these cars were running and being amazed at how quick they were...that's the reason I bought one...


The 1/4 mile times sound right, but the 0-60 times sound wrong. You could get a fox body deep 13's with relative ease, mine ran 13.8 with a tire under it, and these were 225HP cars.

Are you thinking 0-60 with a slick maybe?


It may have been, all I know is they had no mods done that gave them more power...I also had an '88 LX 5.0 fox body with a 5 speed manual and 3:08 rear end that was pretty quick, though I think the T-Type accelerated a bit harder...

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
I cannot see a stock GN running a 4-second 0-60, my 400HP M5, which was just a bit heaver, and would run mid 12's in the high teens, was a car that was in the mid to high 4's.

The GNX, at 55HP more than the GN, would have been capable however, despite having an "official" 0-60 of 5.4 seconds.

Road & Track had a good article on the GN and GNX:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/road-tests/features/a25623/first-look-flashback-1987-buick-gnx/

They were very easy to mod and make faster, that was the beauty. But stock they were not as fast as many people "remember" them being.


Back when these cars were still being produced, and shortly thereafter, there were tons of magazines with these cars in them all the time...lots of guys were running the times I posted with stock cars...I don't know why, but the magazine guys never seem to get the kind of performance us regular Joes get...maybe they don't try that hard, or maybe they just aren't that good at driving...all I know is I remember seeing the times these cars were running and being amazed at how quick they were...that's the reason I bought one...


I suspect the magazine writers aren't seasoned drag racers.


I think you're right...

 

[spasm3]

 

[Linctex]

Originally Posted By: SubieRubyRoo
There was a time I was up at GLD and this guy had a low 8-second GN with probably 35k in it... he was boosting it up so much on the line it lifted one front tire nearly 8 inches while the car was sitting still on the line!


Bull Puckey.

"Body twist" only occurs when the driveshaft is receiving torque..... which can NOT happen when the trans brake is engaged!!! (sitting on the line).. ain't no way the rear brakes are holding it in place.

You and your fairy tales....

 

[spasm3]

How many sub 9 second cars have this smooth of an idle?

 

[spasm3]

 

[aquariuscsm]

Buick Grand National = pure sex on wheels!!

 

[Mr Nice]

GN was very fast back in the day.

Today there are Nissan GTR running 6.90's in the quarter mile.

 

[Jarlaxle]

How many are actual street cars?

 

[GMBoy]

I've still got my 1987 GN purchased new and now has 67,000 miles on it. I'll never sell it.

 

[555]

When "Car and Driver" tested the GN the 0-60 mph was 4.9 seconds. Granted it was a cold day, but I figured in a comparison you may as well use figures from the same magazine for consistency's sake.
The photos of the instrument panel are from a GNX not a regular Grand National.
Still want one. Interiors are long forgotten when looking at someone else's taillights.
I know, turbo lag, [censored]: brakes,steering,build quality. Maybe addressing all of the issues was part of the appeal.

 

[turtlevette]

I used to take mine out on really cold Colorado nights. Just giving it a little throttle caused a bit of turbo runaway, quite exhilarating.

The wide discrepancies in quarter mile times is simply where the wastegate kicks in and how good of gas you're running. The trick was to plumb in a ten turn 5/16" valve from the hardware store to bleed off feedback boost. I had mine running 20 lbs boost. It was completely safe as the computer pulled timing out once knock started.

 

[555]

100 octane plus 10 degrees Fahrenheit makes my passengers stop talking in the Subie.