Mr 74

I am posting this thread on the C3 Forum because I own a C3, but maybe it should be posted on the C4 Forum.

I met a guy this weekend that is a local distributor for the ZDDP product. He is in to Buick Grand Nationals big time and owns several of them. What I learned from him about Grand Nationals is very interesting.

Buick produced them in the mid eighties(84 or 85-87). They were 6 cyl turbos. GNX model was built in the last year of production. Supposedly they were faster than the Vette and beat them regularly in the quarter mile. GM had to tell Buick that the Corvette was Americas' sportscar and Buick could no longer make the Grand National. That is why they had such a short production run.

I have not checked this story myself. I am only presenting what I was told. Please speak up if you have any info or knowledge on the subject.

My87

Yeap, the grand nationals were faster than the stock c4. I don't know about the part of GM telling Buick to stop but back in the days a lot of them made by 87 look like crap.

Ganey

NO!
GM stopped building the RWD 78- mid size cars in 87 (despite these being some of the best cars ever built- relatively light weight, handling very good in some like Monte Carlo SS, even quiet, etc.) & went to FWD in 88. Monte Carlo SS continued in 88.

The GM mid size were Malibu, Monte Carlo, Cutlass, Regal, Grand Prix, Bonneville.

PS Chevy performance enthusiasts do not run sto*k- that's just a baseline!

VettePower

I had a grand National back then, and from a standing start, it would beat any Vette. But from a 60 mph punch, the Vettes would always get me. The turbo would be used up by then!!

tfi racing

Short production run?Buick built turbo V6's from 1978 to 1988 if you call ten years short!It wasn't until 85 or so till they made decent power with the addition of EFI and an intercooler.The GNX was a low volume beast of its own,with a different engine spec(advertised at 300 horse but probably closer to 350!), and a unique 3 link rear suspension set up and is one of the rarest and likely most desirable GM products of the last thirty years.The turbo V6 was considered for the Corvette and did find its way into a few Trans Ams,its demise was the end of the A and G body RWD platform,possibly one of GM's greatest blunders as it slipped almost all of its product line into FWD mediocrity.

7T1vette

Too much expense on 'special' components for too few units sold. GM's interest in the mid-80's was to make as much profit as possible with as little investment as possible. They really didn't care about performance automobiles between 1975 and 1988. GM lost its way [as a company focused on developing the future in automotive transportation] in the 1970's. And [obviously] they still haven't returned to that "vision". How can a company that is run/managed by MBA's and financial bozos generate a vision based on the manufacture of a [mechanical] automobile? They know nothing about manufacturing/assembly; and they know nothing about the product!

sabre1981

Funny, I heard the same story only involving the Fiero.

70Donnybrooke

I remember reading some where that is was the fastest production in 1987. I would assume they meant fastest US made production car.

HamadUP

In that clip you'll see one of the Car and Driver mag. editors mentioning how GM had a fear that the '87 GNX may affect the reputation of a Corvette as the #1 US sports car :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1G6wtnmdZhE

The13Bats

Mr 74

I have always heard the same things as you, where there's smoke there's fire,

I believe it was a very real fear to chevy, but then again the G'nat
in stock forum isn't gonna spank a ZR-1,

But no one much ran them stock, I knew a group of fellows with G'nat's and to be in their clique you had to run 11's or better in street trim, and this isn't hard,

I always wondered what would a person have if they dropped a G'nat engine into a vette....

Attfay Elleybay

The 20th anv. Firebird (1989) had the same turboed v6 and was faster than the v8 Firebird thru the 1/4 mile. It was rated 250hp and 340 lb torque. I was a Firebird guy when I was younger and needed a car with a back seat.

81pilot

Yea Yea, they were not a world burner, my 79 400 4speed TA would take one without too much effort, the engine in the TA was slightly massaged. They (GNX) spun up too slow (it seemed), a torquie car could get far enough ahead to take em, not a world beater as none were in that era. Vette's included. I saw a few with alittle work and a lot of money run well, high 11's. but to get much more they needed a LOT of money and work.

Attfay Elleybay

Lets not forget the GMC Syclone. 280hp turboed 4.3 v6. 0-60 mph in 4.6 seconds and could do a quarter-mile run in 13.4 seconds at 98 mph. That will outrun my vette.

81pilot

I have a hard time when folks start talking early to mid eighties speed. I had a fairly quick TA, but my "Hobby" was racing drag bikes, ran 2 trailered worked and very fast J model KZ 1000's that were both street legal mid to high 8 second bikes, so my idea of fast from that era is a little skewed.