$ 105,000 for an 87 GNX,and the bid goes on?

[Hog]

The GNX was the quickest North America car. I always wished it was a turbo V8.
If the Buick got the B2K's modified L98 powerplant it would have added so much to that car.

But that 3.8 LC2 went on to inspire some pretty cool GM products, which were built by Production Automotive Services(PAS)
]
The 1989 3.8 litre Turbo Trans Am 1555 copies were built.

The Turbo Buicks and the TTA were all great stoplight performers, in part due to the THM-200R$ automatic transmissions that harnessed tehse torquey beasts. IMO the TH-200R$ had the best gear ratios of any GM automatic ever, including the new 6 and 8 speed autos.
The 200r4 had a 1str gear that was right in between the high 1st gears of the thm-350 1.52 and thm-400/4l80e/85e with its 1.48:1 and the other extreme, the very low 3.06:1 1st gear of the 700r4/4l60/4l60e/65e/70. While the 3.06:1 1st gear made foi great holeshots, it leadt a huge rpm drop when it shifted into 2nd gear, while the 2.50'ish 1st gears of the th-350/400/4l80e made for a very long 1st gear, with a great 1-2 upshift with minimal rpm drop. Well the thm-200r4 was right in the middle of bot extremes, respectable launch along with respectable 1-2 upshift characteristics. This was all coupled with the highest Overdrive ratios of all the GM slushboxes, including the newer 6 speeds which matched its 0.67:1 4th gear. Another benefit for the turboed 6's was that the 2.75:1 loaded the turbo nicely s well.

th-200r4 2.75:1-1st, 1.57:1-2nd, 1:1 3rd and 0.67:1 OD
th-700r4/4l60e/65e/70e 3.06:1 1st, 1.62:1 2nd, 1:1 3rd and 0.70:1 OD

GMC wouldnt use a B-O-P trans in their performance trucks(even though the B-O-P 200R$ was an option in the 1989 Caprice coupled with the Chev TBI 305 and 2.44:1 rear axle ratio made for a super cruiser on the highway), so the Chev 700r4/4l60( with its 3.06:1 1st gear would be used in the AWD Syclone and Typhoon. (The electric shift 4l60e didn't debut in the S-trucks?Camaros and Corvettes until 1994, the fullsize trucks in 93) No matter which trans PAS was forced to work with, both the 3.8 LC2 turbo and the LB4 turbo 4.3 got specific torque converters to help spool the turbos. Install a torque converter designed for a turbo 3.8 into a naturally aspirated 3.8 application and everyday driving is affected.

2,995 1991 GMC Syclones in the 4.3 LB4 V6 280hp @ 4400rpm/360lb/ft torque @ 3600rpm
4697- 1992 (2497)-1993 (2200) GMC Typhoon AWD 4.3 LB4 V6 280hp @ 440rpm/360lb/ft torque @ 3600rpm

PAS closed its doors in 1994. Seems as though the early-mid 90's fun was quickly coming to an end all over GM, no matter what engine was involved.

[KILLSHOTS]

Originally Posted by Hog

If the Buick got the B2K's modified L98 powerplant it would have added so much to that car.

I don't know. Car and Driver got the '87 GNX (with a claimed 276 HP) and the lighter Callaway Corvette (with a claimed 345 HP) both to 60 MPH in 4.7 seconds. Transmission differences notwithstanding, I'm not so sure that the B2K V8 would have benefited the Buick platform, with the exception of more muscular sound.

[rush91]

I drove a 1989 turbo Trans Am a few years ago, and was amazed at the power. Driven both the Gnx and base turbo Buicks, I would go with the Trans Am every time. Higher top end ( 160mph from the factory ) while the GNX was governed. The GNX was more brutal on launch, which is why they added a ladder bar. I think the Trans Am would be more livable, and in my opinion, our ZR-1s and the 1989 turbo Trans Ams are next too take off.......I almost pulled the trigger on a 89 turbo. But couldn't find a nice one in my price range that didn't have those ugly pace car Indy lettering on the door......I love my ZR-1 and could care less about dollar value. To me its priceless.

[Hog]

Originally Posted by KILLSHOTS

I don't know. Car and Driver got the '87 GNX (with a claimed 276 HP) and the lighter Callaway Corvette (with a claimed 345 HP) both to 60 MPH in 4.7 seconds. Transmission differences notwithstanding, I'm not so sure that the B2K V8 would have benefited the Buick platform, with the exception of more muscular sound.

The exception you mention is IMO the missing piece of these Turbo Buicks. I would never own any Turbo Buick, simply because it has a 6 cylinder in it.

I never thought about a B2K Vette running a Turbo Buick, it would take a B2K Vette to come close to running a Turbo Buick.
It was well known back then that the L98 Y-bodies didn't fare well in drag trials, but if the encounter lasted any significant amount of time, the Vettes would top them out speed wise.

[t5irocz]

Just my opinion... At 547 copies, they are unusual, but not what i'd consider rare. It only takes a few minutes of searching on the web to find one for sale at any given time. I think they are overpriced and have been for some time and will drop or level out.

91/92 Firehawks (25 made), various callaway cars, 1LE f-bodies, 93 Cobra R mustangs (just over 100 made), 89 TTA Hardtops (39 made) should command more $$ than they do currently and I think they will in the coming few years.

[gen2rt]

The June 1989 issue of Car and Driver has tests of the ZR-1 and turbo Trans Am. They were close 0-60 4.6 for the TA, 4.5 for the zr-1. It opens up a bit 0-100, 13.0 for the TA, 10.4 for the ZR-1, by the time they hit 130 it's all over, 30.2 for the TA, 18.4 for the ZR-1.
The turbo Buicks and TAs were pretty cool for the time - high performance was just beginning to re-emerge.
But - most here would probably agree the LT5 is a far superior motor (technically, visually, and from a material quality standpoint) to the turbo V6 in the Buick and TA.
Then came the Viper and ZR-1. And the car buying public responded favorably.
From all that - we have Hellcats and Shelby GT350s today.

[SAB]

Originally Posted by gen2rt

The June 1989 issue of Car and Driver has tests of the ZR-1 and turbo Trans Am. They were close 0-60 4.6 for the TA, 4.5 for the zr-1. It opens up a bit 0-100, 13.0 for the TA, 10.4 for the ZR-1, by the time they hit 130 it's all over, 30.2 for the TA, 18.4 for the ZR-1.
The turbo Buicks and TAs were pretty cool for the time - high performance was just beginning to re-emerge.
But - most here would probably agree the LT5 is a far superior motor (technically, visually, and from a material quality standpoint) to the turbo V6 in the Buick and TA.
Then came the Viper and ZR-1. And the car buying public responded favorably.
From all that - we have Hellcats and Shelby GT350s today.

Agree, the turbo V6 was great from a standing start but ran out of breath once they got past 100mph in stock form. That said, they responded very favorably to mods.

[Hog]

Originally Posted by SAB

Agree, the turbo V6 was great from a standing start but ran out of breath once they got past 100mph in stock form. That said, they responded very favorably to mods.

If comparing modability(the ability to modify from stock)/bang for buck the turbo V6 is orders of magnitude better than the LT5. Simply "adjusting" the wastegate on the turbo V6. This is true of most OEM turboed vehicles. A perfect example is the Duramax diesel world, and even the turbo I-4 GM engines with their Chev Performance Packages which up boost along with PCM recalibration direct from GM.

That LT5 on its own is a wonder of 80's technology. The 16 injectors and its instant switching from 8 to 16 squirters depending on inputs was amazing. You can decide whether you want to cruise down the highway using all 16 injectors, or using just 8 injectors. Simply in the manner in which you get to your cruise speed. Best to cruise with all 16 keeping the intake runner clean.

[Hog]

A 1500 mile GNX just hammered at Barret Jackson for $107,000.

[Vette73]

Originally Posted by Hog

A 1500 mile GNX just hammered at Barret Jackson for $107,000.

Wow.....107K? I would say strong money for that car...I was 24 back in 87 and I remember the Grand National and the GNX....Didn't see any GNX on the road back than...Saw a decent amount of grand nationals ....I liked the look of the Grand National and there sound...Never got a chance to drive one..