Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Classic Cars Project Cars--You Get to Vote on "Hold 'em or Fold 'em"
19249 messages, Last post on Nov 10, 2009 at 3:21 PM
You are in the Classic Cars Forum. Your Host is mr_shiftright
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: explorerx4 (Jul 02, 2009 4:25 pm) I here this is a common method for older Honda's around here.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ghulet (Jul 02, 2009 10:21 am) |
|
I have noticed recent articles in different car magazines talking about the 94-96 Buick Roadmaster Estate wagon and its possible rise to collectible status.What got my attention was the claim that it could get 21 to 26 mpg on the hiway. I am looking at replacing the wife's 1994 Mercury Grand Marquis (27 mpg on the highway) and this looked like an attractive alternative. Does anyone on this board have any experience with these cars or their corporate siblings. Any comparison to the Grand Marquis/Crown Vic would also be welcome.
|
|
|
Replying to: fortee9er (Jul 05, 2009 8:08 pm) I've driven a few of those '94-96 GM B-bodies, and a friend of mine had a '95 Grand Marquis, and now has an '04 Crown Vic LX. I prefer the GM cars to the Ford cars, but they're both good cars IMO. The LT-1 V-8 from 1994-96 fame will blow the doors off the 4.6 that Ford was using in the 1994 Grand Marquis...although in later years Ford did up the hp of the 4.6, and nowadays, I imagine with the optional axle ratio, a Crown Vic or Grand Marquis might be close in performance to an LT-1 GM B-body. Those LT-1 cars also had beefed up suspensions, whether sedan or wagon, so they were excellent handlers for something that big. They'd probably handle a lot better than a similar-vintage Crown Vic or Grand Marquis. On the downside though, the curvy body makes it harder to see the edges of the car, and they just FEEL like a bigger, bulkier car, even though they're within inches of a Grand Marquis in most respects. The GM cars feel like they're bigger inside, as well. Less dashboard intrusion, smaller transmission/driveshaft hump, bigger doors, less intrusion of the rear wheel wells, etc. They're also a couple inches wider inside. However, I do remember that in the 1991-96 Caprice sedan, my head brushes the ceiling in the back seat. And I'd have faith in one getting 26 mpg on the highway, as long as you're not heavy-footed, and it's in a good state of tune. They used a somewhat old-fashioned formula of a big, powerful engine, coupled with a tall axle ratio, so the engine's loafing along pretty lazily at highway speeds. I'm sure in spirited driving it'll get pretty thirsty, but then most cars guzzle a bit more when you have fun with them! One downside I can see though, is that if you have a preference for Ford, then you might not like the way GM does things, and vice versa. I guess I'm fairly unbiased though, since I have a preference for Mopar! But Mopar hasn't built a car in this class since 1981, so it's not like I have a dog in this fight!
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: jlflemmons (Jul 04, 2009 2:23 pm) i will see if i can find some. usually i just burn up the old gas, put in some fresh stuff, then just before the test, put some good heat in the engine. so far, it has always passed, despite never having had a tune up. |
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Jul 06, 2009 12:44 pm) Thanks for the thoughtful comparison. I always preferred GM over Ford that is until I my father gave me his 94 Grand Maquis with 35k miles a few years ago and my oldest daughter gave me the 94 Ford Ranger (4cyl 5 spd) Supercab mini truck that we bought for her when she was starting college back in '98. All of the sudden we had Ford daily drivers. In the time that we've had these vehicles I've come to appreciate Fords. The GM gets tested every couple of weeks when we make a 400+ mile round trip in one day. It never fails to get 27+ miles to the gallon and it is very comfortable. The 16 gallon gas tank is an incovenience. The one downside has been the GM's 4.6 engine, it is starting to burn a little oil. my mechanic thinks it may be the rings. This car has no more than 80k miles. Other than that I think it has been a great car and the price was right. The idea to get the Buick wagon came up after I realized the possible ring problem with the GM and that I may need to replace it soon before it gets worse and unsalable. |
|
|
Are these really 'must sell today' prices? Needs TLC BMW Weird that there is no mention at all of the engine Paint doesn't look that good If you have $850 and can take it away before I change my mind, it is yours I better race over there What is the story with these? |
|
|
Replying to: gsemike (Jul 07, 2009 10:34 am) Cobra replicars - from what I hear scary fast, scary handling, brutal ride. |
|
|
Replying to: gsemike (Jul 07, 2009 10:34 am) I smell a rusty shark in that 633. |
|
|
Replying to: gsemike (Jul 07, 2009 10:34 am) Gotta wonder why the seller didn't call the good folks who left all those notes instead of putting it up on craigs.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Classic Cars Project Cars--You Get to Vote on "Hold 'em or Fold 'em"
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
