Why the Grand National?

SC UL8R1990

Registered User
My dad asked me a really really good question. We were talking about "cult cars" and whatver. and my dad asked about why the grand national is so much more popular than the Super Coupe. I couldnt come up with a good answer. First We both agreed that buick cars are pieces of junk. Next , the grand national couldnt handle its way out of a paper bag. Finally, the GN only came with an auto transmission. My dad is a GM guy and said he would take a Super Coupe over a GN anyday regardless of 1/4 time.

So why is the Grand National so much more popular than our birds? :confused:
 
because they were the 1st true corvette KILLERS!.....

:confused:

no because they cant handle, a vette would make them look like an SUV on a road course.

not only that but in 1990....the Corvette ZR1 was introduced. One of the fastest production vettes ever. But if you mean the regular late 1980s vettes....i guess the GN would spank them in the 1/4 but definitley not the road course.
 
Last edited:
the GN and GNX were produced i believe from 84-87? hp was 245 in 87 and 355ftlbstrq 1/4 was 14.23 @ 98, for a mid 80 to late 80's hotrod it was untouchable quiet and fast, not sure wut the ZR-1 hp #'s are i think somewhere around 450 a rare car indeed stock for stock the ZR will win in a straight line and obliterate on an auto X, but the 80's vettes were gutless pigs.
 
87 GNX was the last turbo regal, it was handed over to ASC/Mclaren to give the regal a grand finale finish, they upped the turbo, intercooler, chip, trans/trq converter and misc interior details as well as the famed GNX badge after the makeover the GNX bosted 276hp and 360ftlbs, 0-60 was 4.7, 0-100 was 12.9 and the 1/4 was 13.4 at 104.....however the top speed was only around 125.....wut are some specs on the 90 ZR-1?
 
grand national

I think a lot of the popularity had to do with the body style. The Monte Carlo SS, the Hurst Olds shared the same basic body style, but had no where near the performance the GN did. And as for problems with the car, I've never heard of any majors ones, like the HGs with ours. I liked them when they first came out, but being a Ford guy, I'll take my SC over it even if it's not as fast.


David
 
Its all about the 1/4 mile..Thats why..They were faster and responded to modifications better..Im sure they were cheaper then the SC as well...Kinda like why are Stangs so much more popular then Tbirds in that same era...Same answer
 
i did some digging and found the 90 ZR-1 sprinted to 60 in 4.9 and the 1/4 in 13.4 so the GNX has the upper hand in the 0-60 and is dead even in the 1/4 and IMO better bang for your buck car.
 
Buick only built 547 GNX's in 1987 and i seen one at Toth Buick in akron ohio. it was the owners car and was'nt really for sale but he said he would let it go but it would be well over $100k.
 
Yes it was about the 1/4 mile and that it. That's what made it a muscle car which is what people wanted in the early/mid 80's. I was 17 in 1984 and the benchmark for what was or wasn't a real car were the 60's muscle cars. Very few people, at least that I knew, cared about handling. Nothing was cooler than seeing a GN with an "I eat Corvettes for breakfast" bumper stickers.

GN's have a problem with the roof cracking near the top rear corner of the side windows, due to twisting. I'm not sure if that's impressive because that shows how much power they had or if it's very unimpressive structure/design.

Kurt
 
i love seeing those things build boost u look over and the front of the car starts to raise then the light turns green and POOF he disappears then reappears a mile down the road.......i still like my sc better
 
Back
Top