The 1991-96 Buick Roadmaster Estate has had a lot of airtime on CC. Is there anything left to say about this big old baleen that hasn’t been written in the previous decade of posts and CComments? Probably not. But I for one will never let fear of redundancy, rank incompetance, nor complete cluelessness about a subject matter prevent me from writing close to a thousand words loosely related to it, if only to accompany some (hopefully halfway decent) photos.
But let’s not kid each other here. As far as this CContributor is concerned, the real meat (or if we’re carrying on with the cetacean simile initiated above, the whale carcass) of the matter of this post are the photos. Feast your eyes on this beast!
We’ve had us some Roadmaster Estates from all over the map. North America of course, but CC has sighted at least three in Europe, which is no mean feat. I was living there at the time, and I certainly don’t recall seeing many about. Park Avenues were the only Buicks we regularly saw in the ‘90s. The curvaceous B-bodies were extremely rare and extremely ill-suited to European roads. I did not really expect to encounter one in Japan, were it not for this country’s well-known affinity with whales-related products.
It probably figures that this one is a later model with the 260hp LT1 Corvette V8 – pretty powerful, for a sea mammal of this ilk. If you’re going to go to the trouble of importing one of these the Japan, might as well be the one with the vitamins. GM thought it best to limit the two-ton fuelie Roadie’s V-max to 108mph (174kph), lest the tyres not be up to the challenge. Wise tactical decision, General.
Judging from the comments I’ve read on some of the previous Roadmaster posts, this car seems to be as big on the inside as it does on the outside, but it really isn’t, according to many who have experienced the Buick (or its Chevrolet and Oldsmobile sister cars). Body-on-frame, full-size wagon, RWD and all that, but legroom’s below par? Who’d have thunk it?
The less-than-stellar legroom is much more evident in the rear seat area. Full-size my foot!
Bulging though they may be in the middle and the sides, these suckers are awful long as well. We’re talking 217.5 inches (or 5.53 meters) here – same as a 1978 Oldsmobile Delta 88 sedan. Coincidence? Yes, yes it is. Probably.
According to the numbers I stumbled into on the web, the Buick version of the big GM wagon was just about as popular as the Chevrolet version: both scored just over 50,000 units sold between 1991 and 1996, though the Caprice did edge out the Buick by a 1000 units or so, depending on how you count things such as the Special Service (police cruiser) Chevies. The Oldsmobile version disappeared after about 12,000 were made in 1991-92, so those are the rare ones.
But it was badge-engineering at its finest: all the wagons got the same sheetmetal, based on the Caprice, just as they were in the previous generation. Hence why the Buick Roadmaster sedan looks nothing like the wagon, which I always thought was a bit weird. But not quite as weird as the Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser, which had no sedan equivalent at all. GM logic…
I guess that GM selling 110,000-odd units of their big-boy B-Body wagon in six model years just wasn’t enough to keep the old gal alive. They needed that Arlington, TX factory space to make more SUVs, apparently. The ‘90s were a depressing time.
I guess the fact that this was “the last traditional station wagon” and everything that implies is reason enough for many CC readers to have a thing for this Buick. Fair enough. But as far as I know, this car’s current status as a semi-icon might not take into account the fact that these are pretty cheaply made (especially inside) and an acquired taste, esthetically speaking. I for one would have changed a number of things on this car back when GM were planning it – the rear door is far too small (visually, at least). And the rear end is probably the ugliest of any full-size GM wagon.
But there are a few things they got just right. Everyone who rode in one raves about the comfort. For a Buick, the Roadmaster’s ample amounts of plastiwood, both inside and out, are just right. The super-thick chrome strip that goes right around the whole behemoth is also a visual treat – Chevies and Oldsmobiles (the latter is pictured above for contrast and because I was not able to get anything resembling a rear-end shot of the Buick) don’t have any of that bling and look all the worse for it.
And finally, there’s that rear wheel cut-out. Some folks really hated it, so much so that it disappeared from the sedans after a couple years. But it stayed on the wagons and, to me, it really makes this design work. The shape is Googie revival chic, which matches the name extremely well. There was no Roadmaster for 1959, but it’s like a little of that model year was tacked on to the ‘90s version to remind us of the Eisenhower years. It’s retro before retro became a thing and was just “old-fashioned,” I guess. Very appropriate for this car, especially in its Buick incarnation.
With all its faults, its size and its status as the last-of-the-line, I bet many of these Buick wagons have already disappeared from the road. Seeing one in person so far from its Texan birthplace was a real treat. Master of the road, may you waft over the Japanese network with as much grace as any whale could. And watch your rear, or they’ll harpoon you for “scientific research” purposes.
Related posts:
Curbside Classic: 1996 Buick Roadmaster Collector’s Edition – “B” There ‘Til The End, by Brendan Saur
CC Capsule: 1993 Buick Roadmaster Estate – The Real Ken Kesey-mobile, by PN
CC Capsule: Buick Roadmeister Estate Wagen — In Berlin By Christmas, by Robert Kim
CC Capsule: 1996 Buick Roadmaster Wagon – Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt, by Jim Grey
CC Outtake: 1991 Buick Roadmaster Estate Wagon – Flatland Roller, by Johannes Dutch
Vintage Ad: 1993 Buick Roadmaster Estate LS by CarCraft – The LWB Roadmaster, by PN
My Curbside Classics: 1996 Impala SS, 1996 Buick Roadmaster Woody, 1995 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham – The LT1 Holy Trinity, by Impalafleeta
I never understood why the wagons didn’t share the Roadmaster sedan’s front clip. Was it really because they couldn’t be bothered to create one for the Olds version?
I don’t know, but I do know the sedan’s front clip fits just fine on the wagon, as there are many examples of such online (the Fleetwood front clip fits as well). Note that the wagon debuted a year before the sedan, but that doesn’t explain why they couldn’t update the wagons later.
I think the wagon has the better front end and would like to have seen it on the sedan.
Not sure if this applies to the other versions of this platform, but my 96 Fleetwood has an enormous rear seat – that is, the bottom seat cushion is really long. So the gap between the end of the cushion and front seat looks small, but there’s actually tons of space for your legs. But, I think these B-body wagons have a shorter wheelbase than the D-body Fleetwood, so maybe not…
The Fleetwood did have a longer wheelbase. But the rear leg room in this one looks constrained because the front seat is clearly all the way back, given its relation to the B Pillar. The rear seat leg room in these was quite adequate; essentially the same as all B Bodies since they were downsized in 1977, which was still as much or more than their externally larger predecessors.
I’ve noticed a recurring tendency by this author to judge rear seat leg room by what he sees in his pictures. That’s not really a good way to do that as it’s very subjective. Obviously if the front seat is all the way back and somewhat reclined, that’s going to make a difference. But there’s two other key components of rear seat leg room: the length of the rear seat cushion (which some manufacturers have purposely shortened to make leg room appear longer) and also seat height. The taller the seat, the less the legs have to be extended forward. The 1977-up B-Bodies were several inches taller than their predecessors precisely so that the seats could be mounted higher to create more/equal leg room in a shorter overall car.
It would be better to refer to readily available published stats on things like leg room rather than proclaim judgments on them based on a photograph. This car’s rear leg room is officially 39.5″, which is pretty typical for the class.
Not sure why I run into so many cars where the front seats are always pulled all the way back. Must be all those Japanese basketball players one sees towering about.
Anyway, as regards word choice to describe this particular photo, I wrote “less than stellar”. You find the precise measurements and pronounce it “typical”.
Glass half full, Glass half empty.
I had a Olds Custom Cruiser wagon several years ago… great car, no problems and drove it well over 100 thousand miles…sometimes I miss it… If I were in the market for a vehicle I’d look at a Buick Roadmaster wagon or sedan without any qualms… they are good, comfortable, reliable cars…
I love it. I know it is not rational since I really love driving my Focus and 626 because of handling and expense. However, like a moth towards a flame I am drawn inexorably towards these boats. Now I have to take out my Parklane today to satisfy the itch this story started. I will control myself….maybe….
Besides there is an all new rear suspension in the Parklane as of this weekend so time to test.
What I would really love to see is video, or even photos, of this beast actually on the road interacting with Japanese traffic. I get the cool factor, but I’ve got to imagine that owning such a car in Japan must be a real pain. Finding/maintaining a parking spot alone has got to be a nightmare.
Also, the plastic covering on the seat (looks like dry cleaner’s bags) and the steering wheel are pretty wacky.
My sister worked in London (England) in 1995-’96, and I went visiting her there over Christmas vacation. She lived a short walk from the Bayswater tube stop. The streets were narrow and the corners tight, and one memory that sticks with me is a (brick) Caprice wagon making a multi-point, back-and-forth go at turning one of them. I watched the action from my sister’s flat above, chuckling and being glad I wasn’t the driver and wondering who would drive that there and why.
Ha-ha! That Taylor-Dunn golf cart brings back some memories. I had the use of one that had a covered cab and an enclosed cargo box while working as an electrician at a large complex a few years back. It was a beast (they even have a narrowed Ford 9″ rear end) that we either jokingly referred to as the tuk-tuk or the Taylor-Dunce, and its abilities are being well demonstrated by Austin Powers here, squealing tires and all.
I had a serious crush on these back in my GM C body phase. There were a number of nice ones rolling around my area for quite awhile – they were favorites of older, well-heeled owners. I knew a guy who was selling one, but he was looking for more money out of it than I thought it was worth, especially since my Olds 98 coupe had about half the number of miles on it.
This one is also possessed of all of the black rubber/vinyl strips on the stainless trim – the adhesive was one of the least durable components on the outside of the car, as those black strips were loose/missing on a lot of these as they aged.
For my money, that 116 inch wheelbase is a great size for a Chevy sedan, but too short for the far-more-expensive-and-prestigious Buick. Chrysler shared its wagon body through the C body lines, but the wheelbase was always closer to a normal Chrysler than to a normal Plymouth. The pre-1977 Estate Wagon/Custom Cruiser was a 127 inch wheelbase, so a full eleven inches longer than these. There are many dimensions where the more efficient newer B bodies were close in size to the older versions, but I suspect that rear seat legroom in the wagons was not one of those dimensions.
There are many dimensions where the more efficient newer B bodies were close in size to the older versions, but I suspect that rear seat legroom in the wagons was not one of those dimensions.
1971 Chevrolet Kingswood rear seat leg room: 38.5″
1995 Buick Roadmaster Estate wagon rear seat leg room: 39.4″
Facts trump suspicions. 🙂
As I pointed out in an earlier comment, the 1977 and up B (and C/D) Bodies are several inches taller than the 1971-1976 versions, for the sole purpose of mounting the seat higher to increase leg room. These downsized B/C Bodies equaled or exceeded every interior dimension of their predecessor except for hip and shoulder room (width), but that’s almost certainly not the case for the significantly wider “whale” version.
“Facts trump suspicions.”
Quite true. I know that the Chevy Kingswood was on a wheelbase a couple of inches shorter than the Buick/Olds (125 instead of 127), but knowing how GM worked, my suspicion (that thing again) is that the extra room was probably not in the back seat area.
As the late 70s turned to the early 90s, what had been considered efficient packaging became much less so, and those old B bodies and Panthers came to possess all of the disadvantages of big cars and few of the advantages where rear seat passengers were concerned.
There’s no doubt in my mind that the 2″ wheelbase difference between the 1971-1976 Chevy wagon and the 127″ wagons (Pontiac, Olds, Buick) was all in the front end. There’s no way they would have created two different highly complex clam shell wagon main bodies. The other GM B Body sedans like the LeSabre had a 2″ longer wheelbase too, so that confirms the longer front clips. The C Bodies did have an actual longer main body.
In digging around on leg room stats for these clam shell wagons, I got some divergent numbers, varying from 39.9′ (automobilecatalog.com) to as little as 37.9″ (GM Heritage official build stats). But these clamshell wagons all had relatively modest rear seat room because the rear (second) seat was mounted a bit on the forward side to maximize room for the forward facing third seat. That was a tradeoff for that configuration. So these wagons are not the best point of comparison.
Surprised there isnt any harpoon damage too it given the Japanese fascination with whale meat, but that wagon is in remarkably good condition, my uncle took his last ride in a Buick wagon last year though it was an earlier model and mint cond most hearses are well kept.
It’s too bad Buick didn’t use the ’77 Electra’s 119″ wheelbase for the Roadmaster (and maybe all the wagons) instead of the B body’s 116″ one. The Fleetwood was 121.5″. The front seat backs were tall and thick, which didn’t help rear seat spaciousness.
I believe the major reason the Whales were whales was because of all the complains about GM’s mid-80’s cars looking dinky. The ’79 rise and mid-80’s collapse of gas prices put them on the wrong foot earlier, so they overreacted.
Little did they know, safety standards would soon make tall side glass undoable. and eventually, strange-looking on non-SUVs. Like the 90’s Deville (which got a wider track and taller nose), the change to a full rear wheel opening certainly helped the Caprice look less bloated.
I have read that GM chairman Robert Stempel, fully committed to front wheel drive, was unhappy that GM updated the B Body in 1991. I love the Roadmaster, especially the wagon and the 1994 and later models with port fuel injection, but question the business purpose for this car as minivans were at their peak around this time, and Ford also just introduced the Explorer.
This one has Europe style side lights but not amber rear turn signals like a European GM import. Were those lights also required in Japan? They seem to have mostly disappeared from new European cars. Did lights on the mirrors replace them, or did the rules just change?
Amber turn signals have been required in Japan since 1973, and throughout Europe since 1967-’68. Side turn signal repeaters are required in Japan and in Europe; the trend has been toward mirror-mounted ones in the last couple decades.
We can’t see the rear lights of this Roadmaster clearly enough to tell, but most likely the factory reversing lamps have amber bulbs in them and a white reversing lamp (or two) added under the bumper.
I didn’t know that Oldsmobile ever made a version. I always like the Olds front end and the whole rest of a non-wagon 98 including the dashboard far better than the Buicks. Sadly, at least as far as I found the Oldses didn’t come with the fake wood.
There’s a green Buick Roadmonster woody like this one that parks on the street near me in Brooklyn. Old cars are of course rare in the Northeast, particularly regularly used street parking ones, and they usually don’t look too good, but that Buick looks perfect.
These wagons are my passion and have owned and driven all 3 models starting with the burgundy Olds Custom Cruiser Wagon delete wood.It was an exec car with 6k miles fully loaded. An absolute dream vehicle in 1992. My friend’s family owned the dealership and I think I got it at close to their cost. With 4 sons ,their friends,relatives, multiple dogs,and even a pot belly pig. These wagons gave us 💯 %. After that it was a white Caprice Wagon.Another 💯 % car. Then many white woody Buick Roadmasters. Never a bad one. Finally my last one sitting in my driveway is a black 95 not worth the repairs for me to drive. But still worth $10k. They’re fabulous vehicles and I spent most of my driving life privileged to live in one or another of them.
I actually preferred the Buick “SidewalkMaster” bc I used to drink and drive a lot! 😛
I never looked into which sold in higher numbers: the Roadmaster or Caprice wagons of this era. So it’s interesting to read here that they sold in about the same quantity (though my favorites here were the slow selling Oldsmobiles).
Back in the 1990s, I think I noticed more Roadmasters, but maybe because they just seemed special, so I noticed them more? Nowadays, I definitely see more Roadmasters… they evidently had a higher survival rate. In fact, just last week I drove up a street that had three of them parked in front of the same house… though I didn’t stop to take pictures since I figured there’s little left to say about these wagons that hasn’t been written in the previous decade of CC posts and comments!
I’m glad you documented this one though… and I like the 217.5″ wagon backed into a 218″ parking space.
I have been driving roadmaster for 30 years. All wagons. Won’t have anything else. Have 120 K miles. Runs perfect.
The best thing I ever saw written about these beasties was by an Australian industrial designer, Paul Cockburn, who sometimes worked as a feature writer for Wheels magazine. He was sent by the Editor, Phil Scott, to test this very car in 1992. The result is dry, droll, and very funny. I do hope this link to the article works, because it’s a classic. (Might also help some readers understand that Australians – and New Zealanders – nearly always use drollery and irony in communicating, though, it must be said, rarely with the elan of a Paul Cockburn).
https://bauer-archive.x-cago.net/vw/edition.do?page&date=19920501&id=WHL-01-076-19920501&pub=WHL&dp=WHL
Cockburn was an absolute genius!
Without peer. That Roadmaster article has long stuck in my head, and having finally found it again, it’s possibly even better than I remember.
I must be clueless. Typical overwrought, overthought writing of the times. We obviously have very different taste, as if we didn’t know that already.
I know it’s not meant to be taken seriously, but why all the references to the dirty air and presuming the Roadmaster is going to contribute an outsized portion towards that? All cars had limits on smog forming emissions, regardless of size. And the ozone layer has nothing to do with automotive emissions. And these weren’t really all that big or thirsty; folks were driving lots of much bigger SUVs and trucks already in 1992.
He finally (sort of) gets it at the very end: these were specifically designed for conservative old farts who don’t give a damn about how the car handles or such. It sure took a while to get there though. What insights on this car did he possibly expect to get from Mercedes’ and Mazdas’ design studios??
God, I’m glad the ’90s are long gone…
I agree strongly that a lot of first-person stuff across the era was execrable, but his stuff was (to me) not only funny, it was just plain good writing. Pacing, economy of words, tightness of grammar, originality, quirky but apt phrases, I think it’s a delight.
Ofcourse, each to their own and all that.
As an aside, the maniacally-laughing-father-of-the-MX5 Bob Hall mentioned in the article must’ve taken quite a shine to the magazine – I’d imagine Cockburn to be pretty good company – because he soon after moved to Oz and was an excellent columnist and tester for Wheels for years.
The problem is that it reads like dozens of other features from Car and Driver and others going back to the late 60s. Which were of course all riffs on Hunter Thompson’s “gonzo journalism”. It was a massive influence on magazine writing, and it lasted way too long. By this time, it was long past its expiration date.
The problem for me is two-fold: It got old and affected and predictable. And it inevitably mangles the truth in the process. Falsehoods are tossed around like empty beer cans or drug ampules for the sake of style infuriates me.
An overarching theme in this one is that this Roadbelcher is destroying the air quality in LA because of its size. Not so; it’s orders of magnitudes cleaner than all the older little Datsuns, Toyotas and VWs on the road then. Size does not equal dirty, in smog forming emissions. And of course it’s vastly cleaner than his beloved Holdens back home, which I assume didn’t have nearly as up to date emission equipment, FWIW.
Now if he had been a wee bit more enlightened, he might have brought up greenhouse emissions. AGW was of course already old science in 1992 and a serious concern to some of us. But no such thing, because auto journos invariably loved their hydrocarbons and inevitably hung out the specter of being forced to ride in slow, dull and emasculating EVs. Bringing up EVs in that way in a feature or editorial back then is the automotive journalism’s Godwin’s Law. Which is why they mostly all drifted from being mostly liberals in the 60s to being libertarians (or worse) in the 70s and later. Government regulations were going to be the death of gonzo living! The huge political shift and endless anti-regulation editorializing was the what finally woke me up about the truth of automotive magazines. They were of course in the pockets of the manufacturers, as well as convinced that the regulations were going to destroy the capability of cars being fun to drive. How wrong they were! And if only they could have had a glimmer of a vision of what EVs could actually be, like the Tesla Model S.
But genuine vision as well responsibility for what cars had done to the cities and the planet was not in their oeuvre. “If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem” and automotive journalists were clearly the latter.
FWIW, his writing style is better than others of the genre, but I OD’d on that long before 1992. Give me truth (along with a bit of vision), not shit wrapped in fancy paper.
I’m obviously in a different camp than you and many others who put style over substance. This explains why I do not read much fiction. There’s so much truth still to learn about that I just don’t have much time for fiction. Not that I don’t get the value of plumbing the mind’s ability to synthesize. It’s just a matter of priorities.
One last thought: I give the writer a bit of grace, because he sounds very deeply jet-lagged in this piece. And alternative drug, in essence.
Yes! I was going to say Hunter s Thompson has an awful lot to answer for.
Otherwise, no.
This quite ridiculous vehicle was never going to be sold in Australia: this is not journalism nor an attempt at it. The writer was an industrial designer (and a good one at that). He had a flair for spinning an entertaining yarn, and nothing could be more ripe with possibilities for that than this dead-end machine.
As for emissions, a two tonne V8 barge compliant with 1992 standards puts out more emissions than a one tonne similarly compliant four in nearly all circumstances. Size does matter when pushing weight around, and a large half-forested Bulgemobile is a legitimate target to pick on for that. As for Holdens, a 92′ Commode had to meet nearly the same levels as a ’92 US-something – it had the 3.8 V6 from Buick, after all! And he wasn’t one to love Holdens much: he drove an E-type jag modified for fun and to annoy purists. And he made fun of his ownership of it, btw.
I don’t go for the in-manufacturers-pockets trope, not here anyway. Sure, they could be sucked in and make silly nationalistic decisions at times about not-very-good cars, probably after duchessing from the makers. But I’ve mentioned on this site before that Oz motor journalism went on to have a significant impact in England, and elsewhere, and for the longest time it was rigorous in demanding better handling and drivability and efficiency in cars. Wheels itself, for an example, began to demand ABS to be COTY eligible from approx 2000, and later three-point middle rear seat belts ditto. They often enough called a spade a spade to make manufacturers change. The anti-regulation (at least, again, here) was directed at the poor-quality of local compliance with pollution requirements, and otherwise at speed limits (they totally lost that one, as they mostly should have).
Yes, there’s a petrol-head mentality, ofcourse there is. Their readers, me included, liked to read about higher and faster and sideways-ier. Environment considerations were not high on the priority list, but they WERE there. Anyone living in a big city knew things had to change, but this wasn’t Environment Weekly, for gawd’s sake. EV’s were so under-developed for so long they were always going to attract a bit of derision. I suspect few people foresaw the fact that Li battery tech would so profoundly move the apparently-stubborn battery issue into near-irrelevance, which is what has made modern EVs work so well. (And for the record, I love them, especially for their potential to help the great climate battle: they simply are the future).
It’s OTT to say I value style over substance. I value style when it enhances pleasure, or even just a moment of wellbeing, especially with the written word. But I’d never splash big money on a posh car for the sake of the image, for example. That sort of empty valuing of style all-but offends me.
As for fiction, well, after a long day, humankind can only bear so much reality. I agree entirely that the endeavour to learn is lifelong – the alternative is living death to me – but the endeavour lies in many places, so it’s a bit much to reduce, I dunno, TS Eliot, to a synthesizer!
Otherwise, I agree with everything you said….
As for emissions, a two tonne V8 barge compliant with 1992 standards puts out more emissions than a one tonne similarly compliant four in nearly all circumstances. Size does matter when pushing weight around, and a large half-forested Bulgemobile is a legitimate target to pick on for that.
No, that’s simply not true, and never was. Smog-forming emissions (CO, HC, NoX) standards /limits were always measured in grams per mile, regardless of whether it was a Mini or Bulgemobile.
I realize that may be counter intuitive, but that’s the reality.
And your saying so otherwise suggests you’ve been under the influence of writers like this one, who mangled most of his facts, way too long. 🙂
Of course that’s not the case with greenhouse emissions (CO2), but then that was never raised, as I mentioned earlier.
I enjoy entertainment too, but it has to be really good (in my standards). For instance I dislike 99% of comedy (Andy Kaufman being the notable exception). And 97% of tv show. 98% of movies. And when it comes to car based entertainment, it’s extremely hard to find something I like. I absolutely loathe Top Gear/Jeremy Clarkson, and his ilk. It’s all staged and not remotely funny or entertaining. Pure garbage. The part I most dislike is the creation and dissemination of blatant falsehoods, by rigging/staging what is passed of as genuine. Like the Tesla Roadster running out of range prematurely, and the Reliant Robin three-wheeler tipping over in every corner they took. I don’t find deception amusing.
But that’s just me.
What do I like in car based entertainment? Daniel Stern’s COAL. One of the best things like that ever written. Incredible detail of facts, no BS, and brutal honesty of his relationship to the cars and the other facets of his life. It makes Clarkson (and so many other automotive writers) look like a pathetic minstrel show buffoon.
Oh, great. I didn’t see this till just now.
I knew and know about the grams-per-mile emissions metric, remembered in fact for the fact of its metric-and-imperial combination oddity.
Ofcourse I meant CO2 emissions with the the ’92-complianced cars I mentioned: maybe the author meant such emissions too. Or not, probably, given his ozone-on-a-stick and so on – but it matters nothing, as he was an industrial designer proffessing no car expertise who was sent there only to write a funny story about a silly car, and did, because it was. The result is something you don’t get, or more kindly, don’t like, and I do – so each to their own, which is just where we were several exchanges ago, and that’s just as the civilized world should be.
I’m not clear how it is that making plainly rude comments about me being influenced by “writers like this” for “far too long” – and no, a smiley doesn’t make it not rude – helps anything, let alone making the really offensive comment accusing me of fancying style over substance, but it’s your site.
My sincere apologies. I failed to heed my commitment to not respond to your comments, since doing so seems to inevitably lead to hurt feelings.
We all love many of your witty and pithy comments, so I will recommit myself to social distancing. It’s obviously safer that way.
Oh no no, please, comment – my feelings are double-vaccinated.
But do wear a mask.
That’s a hoot!
1995 Buick Roadmaster
a far cry from the real wagons of 50s-70s shoddy, cramped interior. id trade the detuned corvett engine for the earlier wagons.
Nice “Bumper Car”!
Mine is a 1995. I switched out the LT1 to a Covette 1996 LT4 (330 hp). I can get (if I drive it slow) in town 20mpg, and about 29 on freeway. Planning on switching the nose to the sedan. Great car, and fun to drive! I had the pcm reprogrammed so the speed limiter is off. Instead of 108 mph, it goes 40mph more.