The Buick Roadmaster Estate Wagon was God’s gift to Perry Como fans and the very last of the great all-American trucksters. It was also my gift to the family for last year’s Christmas road trip. I figured I’d nix my penchant for narrow European wagons to forestall the cantankerous habits of our two darling creatures. They needed space. We needed space… and boy, did this car have space!
The plan was to put my kids in the third seat, which was nearly a mile away from the Roadmaster’s front seats. Of course, I’d forgotten one important detail: no child tethers in the way back. So, there was to be no parole for Mom and Dad. On the positive side, by the time we were ready to take the Woody out of port, my wife had taken one look across her endless prow (the car’s) and decided that I would be the sole captain of the good ship Roadmaster.
Back in the day, the Roadmaster was an automotive mastodon. When the big Buick appeared in the late 90’s, large, bulbous, body-on-frame rear, wheel-drive wagons were about as fashionable as plaid pants and pipe tobacco. SUV’s, minivans and four-door pickups were all vying for the title of the all-American family vehicle. The Buick and its sister cars gathered dust in GM showrooms, lonely and unloved. Not even an LT1 small block V8 (transplanted from the Chevy Corvette) could save these siblings from instant obscurity. By 1997, the Roadmaster had gone the way of peckerwood golf clubs. It was, literally, history.
But what a piece of history. If ever a car represented the great American “living room on wheels” style, it was the Roadmaster. The expansive leather seats are thick and comfortable enough to turn the most aggressive pistonhead into a laid back Lay-Z-Boy. It came with electric everything, of course. The interior wood trim is made from a real tree, and the controls make iDrive seem like what it is (a ridiculously complex piece of equipment of dubious utility). You won’t find steering wheel buttons, and the GPS is a Rand-McNally map moldering in the glove box, but didn’t someone say “space is the ultimate luxury?” Or was it something about screaming?
Anyway, the Roadmaster’s a packrat’s dream. Big or small, short or tall, there’s plenty of space for it. The Buick’s rear glass window (close to the size of a solarium) slides up and down and the tailgate swings out or lowers. The fold down second row seats liberates a good hectare of cargo space. In fact, there’s more space in the back of a Roadmaster than entire small cars of its era. If the roof were high enough, a Geo Metro would fit inside.
When it comes to driving dynamics, the Roadmaster was built for drivers who understand both the metaphorical and literal meaning of staying on the straight and narrow. The 350 V8 and four-speed automatic will cruise all day at 85 to 90 mph, and never even see 2500 rpm.
Finally there’s the issue of exterior aesthetics. Contrary to what the modern day sewing circles and soccer contingents say, a woody wagon is indeed a beautiful thing to behold. Forget all those anodyne crossovers, minivans, SUVs and CUVs. The Roadmaster is American. And not just a ‘me-too’ American. A feel good, “I dig all things America!” American.
Maybe that’s why people smile at the Roadmaster, give it a thumbs up, and even mouth out the loving words (with and without irony) “Nice Woody!” A well-kept woody wagon is the equivalent of a well-lighted Christmas display during the holiday season. My kids fell in love with all the attention they got from the passer-by’s, which helped keep things on even keel during our sojourn. While my wife used the words “cold dead hands” when I asked if she would ever be willing to exchange her Volvo for the Buick, it’s not an inconceivable choice.
IF you’re willing to do without an LT1 engine, Buick Roadmaster wagons are reasonably priced. Taxis and police cars from that era were blessed with interchangeable parts; there were literally millions of parts for this powertrain combination, and they were all built to last. A car like the Roadmaster would in fact be the perfect cheap car for the long haul– if only you lived near an oil well.
Most owners of modern day trucks and trucklets won’t be fazed by the Roadmaster’s penchant for petrol. Still, as a daily commuter over long distances, as a vehicle that you have to, at some point park, the big Buick is all kinds of wrong. A Woody Roadmaster wagon is best for road trips, Home Depot runs and weekend rides with the family. It will give you a hankering for old cassette tapes and Norman Rockwell paintings. It’s Americana incarnate.
Just looking at this reminds me of my first great solo road trip-1966 in a brand new Pontiac Catalina wagon- Menomonee Falls to Spokane, an illegal 14 years old. And they wonder why I still score high in the deviant scale of the MMPI.
Oh, what a car.
Eat your heart out, Honda Element.
Even up here in frozen northern New England you still see plenty of GM ‘B’ bodies. I think the B and D (the stretched B that they used for the last body on frame Cadillacs) were some of the best cars GM ever built. I’ve seriously considered buying one of these too. The Roadmaster generally had the best selection of options, but Chevy and Olds also had their versions of the B-body wagons.
The Buick and its sister cars gathered dust in GM showrooms, lonely and unloved. – Steven Lang
A 1984 Buick LeSabre Limited 2-door coupe was the best car I ever owned. The last of the V8 RWD B-bodies, it was stylish, comfortable, reliable and safe. I put on 300,000-miles with only fluid changes, brake jobs, and tires. No major repairs; nada, zero, zilch, bupkis. Lousy gas mileage in city driving, but anywhere from 28 to 32 mpg (imperial) on the highway.
It stayed in the family way longer than usual because it was such a terrific car, and we couldn’t tolerate successor model’s beached whale look. If GM still made cars this good it would not be in deep doo-doo today.
“If GM still made the “B-bodies” it would not be in deep doo-doo.”
Yeah, it still would. But I agree they were great cars – back in the day.
last of the iconic faux wood ‘Merican station wagons. Procrastinating on the internet, instead of figuring out where the brakes went on my faux wood 88 Grand Wagoneer.
Before gas prices went too far north, B-body cars were among the most common ones you would see in the city of Atlanta. It didn’t surprise me given that they are extremely safe, very comfortable to drive, and parts for them are pretty much as cheap as cheap gets. They also had the most common and bulletproof powertrains of that era. Even today, a B-body vehicle can be a good deal if you don’t do a lot of driving during the year.
As far as 80’s era vehicles, I would even go so far as to say that the B-bodies were among the most durable vehicles of that era. Mercedes and Volvo offered greater longevity on average, and better structural integrity. But they also had far higher costs of repair and require the owner to be either a DIY’er or tolerant of constant niggling issues. Other than replacing window regulators, most everything on a B-body WITH fuel injection is pretty easy to work on. Of course many of them are on their second and third paint jobs, and have numerous parts that come straight from the scrapyard. But that’s just one of the many charms of owning an older beater.
These days I still see plenty of vehicles used as beaters in my neck of the woods… and believe it or not many of them are also used as tow vehicles at the local auctions. I know a fellow who has been using a mid-1980’s Grand Marquis for the last 6 years to tow his vehicles from the auction to his lot. He bought it for $500 and other than regular maintenance it’s been absolutely picture perfect. Roadmasters, Grands, and the classic 80’s era GM/Ford wagons tend to be the favorites of old-timers who more or less piddle in the auction business by buying one to two vehicles a week.
“The wood trim is made from a real tree.” Is there real wood inside this car? Certainly the OUTSIDE stuff didn’t come from any tree.
I recently caught a 48,000 mile ’91 Custom Cruiser (complete with VistaRoof fixed glass window over the second row) for $2,000 on eBay. It was Retirement Home Light Blue over Retirement Home Dark Blue velour, but had all the right options. Neat vehicles.
Buick’s General Manager Ed Mertz fought tooth and nail to save the woody. The final generation was never as well built as it’s predecessor, and stylistically, it was a departure….from reality.
Mertz argued that it was unwise to discontinue a vehicle that captured the highest median household income of any GM vehicle at the time, owners averaging a lofty $110k. Many would leave the GM family forever, others migrating to large SUVs.
GM prematurely dumped the vehicle, because General Managers of divisions lack power and influence to act upon the knowledge and experience they possess.
Upgrades in quality and materials, and a re skin to make the Roadmaster Wagon appear more like a low riding Suburban would likely have produced a hit vehicle, and a different outcome for the Buick brand as a whole.
You may recall that the Impala SS of the same generation was the result of a GM executive following home an average joe who had modified his own vehicle to make it less of a blight on the landscape. (And in post-riot Detroit, that is saying something).
Rebeca Solnit did a superb writeup on present day Detroit in Harpers in July 07, btw.
The most unlikely Roadmaster owner ever: Ken Kesey, counter-culture icon, author and Merry Prankster. The last time I saw him (before he passed away), he was tooling around Eugene in a white woody Roadmaster. Perfection.
1994 to 1996 Buick Roadmaster wagons, Cadillac Fleetwood, Impala SS are totally cool cars.
Roadmaster wagons are a “gentleman’s mini van”.
“… If the roof were high enough, a Geo Metro would fit inside.”
That’s the problem with these classic wagons, the roof just isn’t high enough. That’s why minivans are usually a better option – as far as hauling and general utiltiy.
That said, I’d like to have a B-body car, preferably a Roadmaster (wagon or sedan). I started driving when lots of cars were that size and I like them.
Every time I see one of these I just marvel at the sheer size of it. As a counter-cultural-chic car, it’s tough to beat the Roadmaster. You’d have to restore a Ford Country Squire to do better.
Great editorial – it brought a smile to my face. But please, don’t try to defend those aesthetics.
Back when these were new, and I was but a young tot (5-ish years old), my dad and I coined a term for these behemoths: Yuckmobile.
Still, they’re neat, and better proportioned than the Caprice sedan, which was the initial “yuckmobile.”
A lot of very good points…
I was actually referring to the interior on the Woody which is, indeed, wood. Strangely enough, those exterior panels that are made of simulated wood grain are usually more expensive to replace.
……………
We may find the price of oil going to $110 a barrel by the end of next week thanks to the Gaza situation and Spring Break. Although I love driving these cars, I think I will be using a TDI unless I decide to get a tow dolly within the next couple of weeks.
One of the other contemplations I’ve had is exactly how many forklift batteries could fit into this vehicle. If I find a body cheap enough, I may just have to start frequenting the industrial sales and see if it would work. I’ve got a friend who has been bugging me about doing something like that for months.
Ah, the Roadmaster, one of the most luxurious “modern” cars I have ever been in!!! Yeah, it was huge, but oh what a commanding presence it had!
Oddly enough, I think the current crop of Buicks are rather attractive, but let’s face it, they need to go back to offering the kinds of luxury like they did in these cars. Classic American Luxury…I’d like to think it could work again.
Thank you Steve L for this article. up untill one year ago my good car, every day driver was a 91 olds custom cruiser wagon. 17 years old and it still looks good. It is now my second car. It has the 305 chev engine and gives me an honest 25 mpg at 70 mph interstate driving. My son has a dark blue 96 roadmaster with impala SS wheels and the corvette 350 stroked to 396. These were very good automobiles , not perfect, but G M should have refined them year after year.
American automakers have decided it is cheaper to take overseas platforms and make copies of Japanese cars. I always say why buy a copy when you can get the original – my wife and I own both a Toyota and a Grand Marquis, and I still don’t understand how people like Toyota’s so much. For the same price, there is no contest in choosing a Grand Marquis,
American sedans have been ignored for a decade in the rush to make more SUV’s. Just think how good the Roadmaster or Grand Marquis could be if either automaker had a friggin clue about their customers.
Taxman I totally agree with this sentiment. The big 3 went to SUVs because of the better profit margin. I went to 20 yr old BMWs to get a RWD daily driver. GM gave up a good niche when it dropped the B body. I see this sentiment on a lot of the various car forums (fora?) I hang at. Is this just a bunch of old farts, or did GM and now Ford misjudge the market for these? .
At that time the overall sentiment was counter to those cars. Now they are good value, when they were new they were perceived as over priced barges.
Who would spend 40 large for a new Fleetwood in 1996 when the automotive media of the time portrayed the car as being rather incompetent.
In the mid 90’s the cool factor was gone from station wagons, today a Roadmaster wagon is cool for its price, size, and what you get. Different perspective when they were new.
My pappy loved his 1972 Pontiac Catalina Wagon — Metallic Blue, and the faux wood siding somehow seemed to like the blue.
A 400 CID V8, strangled by a skinny Rochester 2-jet meant no dragstrip fun, but smooth, tourqey power, and reasonable gas mileage for the time (low 20’s HWY), meant effortless cruising (especially at 55 mph).
I find it hard to get sentimental about these things. When I look it, I see another nail in the coffin of the US auto industry.
These things are built on the same formula that has putting Detroit into a grave. A bulbous, crude beast with blah packaging and poor handling, whose only virtue is decent straight-line acceleration.
I could see buying one if I needed cheap wheels that could haul a lot of stuff, but I doubt that I would particularly love the car for its own sake. And it sure wouldn’t move me to pay real money to buy a new one.
I wonder how many people who wax poetic about these cars now were, when they were new, saying, “I wish Detroit would build more relevant cars, like a (affordable sports sedan, fun-to-drive subcompact, euro-inspired luxury sedan – take you pick) instead of these outdated and somewhat embarrassing beasts.”
If there had been a market for them, Detroit would have continued to build them. Most people I know who have one bought it used, because they tend to be tight with a dollar, which certainly isn’t bad, but GM and Ford would rather sell you a new car. They aren’t in the used-car business.
I had a ’94 (LT-1) Roadsmasher Estate from 2002 to 2005 as my “utility” vehicle. It had 160K when I bought it and 190K when I sold it (to a neighbor.)
That engine was amazing, it ran perfectly, never burning (or leaking, amazing for an old ‘Murrikan motor) a drop of oil. MPG ranged from 22 on trips to 14 around town. Yes it was a large car, but like all Detroit full-sizers of yore, a vast footprint did not a roomy car guarantee. The back seat, in particular, was too low and not very accomodating. The Vista window always did elicit kudos from second row passengers, though. I never found any tree-wood inside my ’94 so I am not sure what year might have had the real stuff.
And the interior in general underscored the major problem with GM cars right to this very day: cheap, hard plastics everywhere that eventually warp, buzz/rattle/squeak, or just fall off. The door weatherstripping was similarly poor; wind noise was the dominant noise at speed. There was no craftsmanship apparent in any part of this car’s assembly.
She did break down on a road trip also. A hard plastic “T” connector that linked the water pump hose, expansion tank hose and a heater hose split along its pressure-molded seam. Couldn’t find one in the Amarillo, Texas area so I called a local plumber and he made a new one from copper for $45. Crap like this is why former owners WILL NOT BUY American cars anymore.
And the interior in general underscored the major problem with GM cars right to this very day: cheap, hard plastics everywhere that eventually warp, buzz/rattle/squeak, or just fall off. The door weatherstripping was similarly poor; wind noise was the dominant noise at speed. There was no craftsmanship apparent in any part of this car’s assembly.
From that description it makes the Panther cars of similar vintage sound downright superior. The interior in my 92 CV is eminently livable. By comparison at speed the car is silent as a tomb, the only noise penetrating is the cheapo tires that the former owner put on it.
I know that in subsequent years (95-) they beancounted the hell out of those interiors.
“If GM still made cars this good it would not be in deep doo-doo today.”
well the late model olds cars were right up there in anyones quality standings, nevertheless they are gone also. they are big time bargins now, i am looking at 4 yr old arouras in perfect condition for around 10 000.
My brothers and I grew up in a pair of the B-body wagons that were the predecessor to this Roadmaster. Bad memories as a teenager of my father telling me to sit in the nominally 8 passenger Buick Electra’s middle front split bench that kept your butt cheeks on different planes, amongst others, put us into the minivans that we drive now that we have our own families.
Willbodine, I spent a lot of beautiful summers in upstate New York where the horse population was larger than the human one. We had a centuries old saying when it came to training horses, “It’s not the horse, it’s the rider.
When it comes to cars, “It’s not the car, it’s the driver.” My particular Roadmaster was conservatively driven and well maintained. As an overall demographic, I can tell you from the trade-in’s and personal experience that the prior owners usually rival Volvo owners for their caretaking of these vehicles.
The particular example I had was 16 years old and had 180k+ on the odometer. Other than some chipping on the faux-wood frame exterior doors and some minor peel, I really didn’t see much wear. In fact the vehicle, condition wise, was closer to a 2000 model than a 1992.
The interior parts are very durable. In fact the panels remind me a lot of the ones on the Suburbans which are very durable as well. However, if you don’t take care of the interior wood grain (which is real), or the vinyl on the door panel, it will do what any other vehicle of that era will do. It will show wear and the vinyl will curl up… as it does with any Volvo, Toyota, Honda, Lexus, or Acura model from that time period.
For a car that can tow a 5000+ lb. trailer, store and haul large amounts of tools or whatnot, it’s hard to beat the Roamaster. SUV’s of the 1990’s usually offered worse mileage, inferior durability and have cheaper interiors. Minivans fromt hat era can’t haul nearly what a B-Series wagon can (unless it’s truck based), and have terrible transmission problems that would make towing a no-no nadir.
As a daily people hauler I would choose a minivan, most likely a 1996-2000 Chrysler minivan.. But if you really need a jack of all trades for your weekend work I would choose a RWD body-on-frame V8 wagon from the U.S. of A.
Imagine in 10 years owning and trying to deal with a 15 year old finely crafted import car bristling with technology and computers. Franchised dealers in many instances are not interested in dealing with a 10 year old twin turbo, active suspension, finely crafted leather interior version of their flagship model.
The popularity of these American cars when they are used is the price and the simple layout of the cars, basic maintenance is easy and cost effective. Proper reconditioning is not so cost effective although still simple.
As an aside the downsizing in 1977 of the full size GM wagons usually with a 455 that were used like today’s full size SUV’s is when Suburbans started crossing over from a strictly utilitarian vehicle to a replacement for the full size wagon.
The Sierra Classic 2 wheel drive Suburban with a 454 and a 33 gallon gas tank in the late 70’s was the full size station wagon of the time.
The mother-in-law of my good friend’s co-worker (what a connection, right?) just died and left behind one of these behemoths. My friend had the opportunity to pick it up for $500.00. I tried to make her promise on her death bed that she’d buy it herself or introduce me to these people, but she wouldn’t (probably because she knew that I would buy it, and she’d be stuck going places with me in it. Anyway, I’ll never forgive her for passing on the opportunity. The next time one comes my way, I’ll definitely snatch it up. What better insurance policy than having a car that you can live in if all else fails?
It is, aesthetically, a lovely car, and a true American. It has a real face, unlike all these pokemon-inspired appliances. And despite its size, it has a certain grace and elegance. You can thank the SUV loopholes for the fact that these things disappeared.
Thanks, Steven, for a wonderfully evocative editorial.
When I was 10, our family bought a new 1976 Olds Vista Cruiser from Royal Oldsmobile in Decatur, GA (this dealership was shown in the film Driving Miss Daisy). The Vista Cruiser was essentially a Cutlass station wagon. We had it for 10 years before my mother finally traded it in the summer of ’86 for a Dodge Omni (and that’s another story).
Although our Vista Cruiser, light blue with fake wood contact paper on the flanks, was the ultimate in embarrassement for a highschool kid in the early 80s, it’s amazing that today we grow nostalgic over it’s type. I got both my learners permit at 15 and my first drivers license at 16 in that car.
And while the 4 bbl 350 actual Olds engine (before GM started homogenizing their brands’ engines) was choked down with mid 70s smog equipment and was gutless, I could still do power braked burnouts on our church parking lot after it rained. Seems that the sealant used on the asphalt was a slick as ice when wet. I’m sure the minister loved me.
Given the current standards of vehicle longevity and quality control, that 76 Vista Cruiser would’ve been considered a piece of crap today. But based on the 1970s frame of reference, it was about average for repairs and breakdowns.
Just thought I’d mention that I did, indeed, see one of these very vehi-mouths THIS MORNING on the way to work. To have survived here in Vermont is a real testament. I”d never have one here, though. But just before leaving CA I was in ownership of an 84 Mercury GM wagon. I love these cars.
Great editorial, Steven. I drove both an LT-1 Roadmaster wagon and a Caprice, finding the Caprice to be downright fun in an Impala SS kinda way…I wonder if it had a handling package the ‘master did not.
Real wood…really? The LT-1 models had a newer dash and that stuff looked and felt pretty plasticky to me. Not to mention that GM interior is absolutely dreadful, especially when the nicest, most decadent land yacht of them all (95-97 Town Car) is the same price these days.
That LT-1 and wagon configuration made the last gen B-body work for me. Otherwise those upside down bathtubs had nothing on the Panther. And yet M/T made the Caprice its car of the year in 1991.
Sajeev,
I wonder if Stephen’s wagon was a pre 1994. As you mentioned, the LT1 came out that year, but the older throttle body injected cars did have slightly better interiors.
But the only real wood I ever saw in a 90s GM vehicle was in a Fleetwood. Too bad the clips holding it in place were typical GM crap, and liberal use of that torquey 4.9L V8 off the line would result in the real wood radio bezel in your lap.
Thanks for the great memories, Stephen. I’m gonna surf over to ebay now to see if I can find a properly preserved example on the cheap.
I own a ’94 WB4 (wood delete) Roadmaster Wagon, with the LT1 and some minor bolt ons. It runs low 15s in the 1/4, gets 25 mpg highway, hauls my racecar, and carries 8 people in comfort. It’ll be in the 14s this year. Basically, it’s a truck with more room for people, better gas mileage, better handling and better performance. A small number of chassis upgrades can help improve the braking and handling BIG time on these cars.
We have a small but dedicated enthusiast’s following, thanks to the Wagon section at http://www.impalassforum.com , as well as the American Station Wagon Owners site. A guy named Fred runs Northstar Motors in Waterloo, NY, a dealership dedicated PURELY to GM fullsize wagons. (http://www.bigstationwagons.com).
Outstanding!!
As the owner of a 1994 Roadmaster, I applaud your appreciation for this hallowed vehicle.
Dont know too much about the Roadmaster but I spent considerable time with a Chevy Caprise version of the same POS and I can’t for the life of me understand any sort of waxing nastalgia over that vehicle.
The gasoline engine had all the characteristics of a diesel; nice jump off the line and than NOTHING!
The chassis was the poster child of the “land yuaht syndrome”, nevermind steering, this thing felt like it a rudder that was too small.
The interior space sucked considering the football field sized hood!
The interior felt and was as cheap as any taxi or police car version.
On top of all the bad attributes the caprise/roadmaster looked like a beached whale on a roller skate.
IF you guys think GM should have continued to produce half-ass cars like this……. nevermind!
I have owned several of these big wagons. My first in fact, looked exactly like the picture at the top of this article. Sitting in the parking lot right now is my ’96 Roadmaster Limited (wood delete).
While there are certainly a few issues with these cars, they are reasonably easy and cheap to fix.
Seats 8 (7 realistically), can tow up to 5,000lbs and can fit a 4X8 sheet of plywood in the back. Really all the best things about a large SUV without the poor gas mileage drawback (relatively speaking of course).
And yes, I drive either my Roadmaster or 95 Fleetwood daily. Even with gas prices just north of $3/gallon (US) it’s still cheaper than a new car payment and insurance!
I should also mention that I had a ’94 Fleetwood Brougham (also LT-1) version of this platform. And the comments about the crapo interior plastics/assembly stand for my Caddy also. (It was built on a Chevrolet, not Cadillac, assembly line.) BTW both were bought from the original elderly owners and had been well taken care of and maintained for that matter.
Thanks for all the kind comments folks… and even a few of the not so complementary ones.
A lot of the satisfaction of owning a particular vehicle has to do with how you use it. The Roadmaster in question is actually a very good fit for my particular work. When I’m not auctioning off vehicles, I transport drivers to pick up the few that I get on the side. A car that has plenty of space and a nice smooth ride helps the commute go quicker and keeps those folks in better spirits. Doing it this way saves me about $50 per vehicle.
I also can store a lot of things that I inevitably need. That can range anywhere from fluids, battery chargers and basic tools, to 180+ boxes of girl scout cookies. I especially like the fact that the solarium rear top simply pops out. I can literally get what I need and close it up in short order.
The one thing I actually haven’t done is towing. The Roadmaster didn’t have a tow hitch and I never did get around to putting one on. That could have also saved about $60 per vehicle but I usually don’t do a lot of high volume car purchases. Usually I do no more than three. But this past Thursday I picked up seven.
Wasn’t the 1991 Caprise’s styling based on that of the 6000sux from the Robocop movies.
Thanks for the childish insults, whatdoiknow1. And it’s spelled “Caprice.” And while the 91-92 Caprice styling was a bit mundane, you can’t argue with its purest version, the Impala SS. Gorgeous and timeless, understated perfectly.
You’re entitled to your opinion–but compared to a lot of the cars in 1994, the Buick version at least was pretty darn refined. Mine has 112,000 on it, most by old man but some driven hard by me–not a single rattle, squeek, or poor fit in the interior, and every single feature still works. The car, now riding on 17″ Impala SS wheels with 255/50/17s, handles “well,” and far better than any truck or SUV… And it doesn’t take much more than good springs and shocks, and beefier swaybars, to improve it even further.
And I dunno how you can think the interior space sucks–91 cubic feet of cargo room is more than most 1/2 ton pickups.
And as far as the engine, I can only assume you were driving a whipped old 305, because my LT1 has 330 ft-lbs of torque and around 300 hp, and pulls strongly and smoothly from idle all the way to 5500 rpm. Passing on the highway is the very definition of effortless. It also sounds fantastic, with the Dynomax cat-back. You should sample a stronger offering.
Here it is, if you’re interested.
http://rides.carcraft.com/ride/1001520/tigeraid1994/1994/buick/roadmaster/index.html
A 1984 Buick LeSabre Limited 2-door coupe was the best car I ever owned. The last of the V8 RWD B-bodies, it was stylish, comfortable, reliable and safe. I put on 300,000-miles with only fluid changes, brake jobs, and tires. No major repairs
My how things change…my wife’s 99 LeSabre was total POS…made it 99,000 miles before engine went.
John
tigeraid :
OK, you have me on the Impala SS, Chevy did do a pretty good job on that one. Now if only they had had the good sense to gone a little bit further and made a coupe and convertible, now those would have really been the sh*t!
Funny how a simple change to the c-pillar, the removal of the rear wheel-well covers, and the addition of a new grill can do wonders for a relatively ugly car (I do stand by that opinion).
The irony is that if done right the big 2.8 would have been able to continue making their BOF, Axle equiped, RWD cars and selling at a profit.
Oh the many ways GM screwed itself!
Yeah that caprice wagon was an ole 305 POS! But outside of the crappy engine there was nothing else to find favorable with that car UNLESS you purchased it with the intention of using it a workhorse. The problem with these things as workhorses is that a Tahoe makes for a much superior hauler/worker, easier to load and considerable more ground clearance when said vehicle is loaded.
The beauty of these cars is that most folks “don’t get it” that’s what makes the cars cool.
The average import buyer thinks that these huge American rear drive cars with a V8 are “rolling obsceneties”.
The individual that wants one of these cars used (and the good ones are increasingly challenging to find) thinks they are cool. Especially with 17 or 18 inch wheels, cross drilled brake discs, Flowmasters, inexpensive to tune the ECU on the motor, and so on.
Tigeraid: Saw you call your wagon “The Roadmattress.”
Great nickname! Buick, which sells to an older demographic, is thinking “Doh! Why didn’t we think of that?”
A ’91-’96 B body wagon (preferably an Olds or Buick) is very high on my list of Cars I Must Own Before I Die.
my first car was grandpa’s Ford LTD Country Squire wagon. sat 10 with seatbelts. 10. wood trim. awesome car. wagons are the coolest cars for those who know. live the dream, steven.
Oh yeah, that brings back some memories. In the late seventies, I spent a week with my best friend’s family at the Jersey shore. My best friend’s dad had a piss yellow Ford LTD wagon with the fake wood and the rear facing jump seats, 390 engine with a four barrel. It was July, and 110 degrees in the shade, but that LTD’s AC unit made the inside of that car feel like a meat locker.
Ummm… let’s see… 2 feet longer than my minivan, half a foot wider, similar power-to-weight ratio, probably slightly worse fuel economy overall, 30 to 40% less cargo capacity… The minivan has individually reclining seats for 6, holds 7 at need, could have been purchased for 8, nearly walk-around room inside… I’m 6’4″ and the minivan has more headroom and legroom than I need…
It might be state-of-the-art for a wagon in 1990-something and, yes, it’s attractive and the right end smokes if you punch the gas but I am not going back.
I love a B body, but I’m under no illusion that they’re something they aren’t.
I owned a 1996 Impala SS until 2003 (I sold it with 40K miles – carpet still under plastic). I drove a LOT of B bodies as a police officer. I have a love/hate relationship with the cars.
I loved the LT-1, and the fact that the aftermarket was filled with thousands and thousands of parts for it. I hated the sloppy engineering and spotty build quality of the platform. Anyone who’s very familiar with the 9C1 platform can tell you about things like missing front body mounts, and panel gaps that small children could fall in.
The car had a lot of character, it was a cool car to cruise in, but the fact is, the Honda was my daily driver most of the time. I didn’t spend countless hours reshimming/realigning any body panels on it, the interior bits were all nicely aligned, all the weather stripping was properly attached, I didn’t have to constantly fiddle with the front suspension so it would maintain a decent alignment, etc., etc….
That being said, once I sold the Impala (damn that divorce!), I ended up trying to resurrect the process all over again. And I have to do almost all the same crap with Chevy’s spiritual successor, a Trailblazer SS (missing parts from the factory, fixing panel alignment, paint job from hell, unused wiring harness fasteners in the doors, etc.). Oh, why do I have this sickness? Where’s my Honda?
KixStart:
But…. you’re driving a minivan.
The minivan’s seats aren’t nearly as decadent, has typical high center of gravity ride/handling, no access space under the hood and –most importantly–no Vista Roof for the 2nd row.
Wagons aren’t for everyone. But wagons rule.
Wow, great article. The LT1 door panels and dash pads are pretty horrible but the seats are fantastic versus ANY of today’s offerings short of a new Town Car. Not much more I can say after all the great comments as well….I only wish folks would have thought the same of these cars ten years ago. Instead back then I remember cries about the B-bodies alegedly horrid MPG (25+ MPG HWY BTW) at $1.25 a gallon gas and how the B-bodies were “too big” while they shoved themselves into massive 12 MPG Suburbans. The cancellation of the B-bodies epitomizes what’s been wrong with GM’s car lineup over the last ten years, and why I’ll be making the inevitable switch from my last two B-bodies, #8 and #9 BTW for me respectively, will be to Ford’s Panthers which owe alot of their sales success over the last decade to GM’s incompetence and greed (SUVs).
Although I would like to try a B-body wagon before I’m though….B-body #10 perhaps?