Why no Grand National?

[cvette98pacecar]

Originally Posted by VetteMed

Robert, I love the Hurst Olds too! Please feel free to post more pics if you have 'em.

Unfortunately, with the exception of the GN, the G-body cars didn't have the HP to back up their looks. That can be corrected, of course, with a few grand in mod money

I had a 403 in mine. My ex blew the 307 HO, and there was no way I was getting spanked by an escort GT ever again.

[Funracer]

Originally Posted by Bob Eyres

The GN was the only "muscle car" the wife ever encouraged me to buy. Back in 94' I bought the ZR-1 instead. No regrets.
So, would you have been ahead now, money wise, if you'd bought the GN instead? You must have dropped $35-40K for the Z, back in the day.

Good point. Surprisingly the Z has turned out to be almost the worst
car I could have chosen from an investment only standpoint. To this day
I still don't understand why a Grand Sport vette is worth more than my
91 Z.

I saw a 1974 MGB (restored) go for $18K at an auction recently.
Does that make any sense? There were something like 150,000 MGB's
imported into the USA from 1963 to 1980 (I owned a '69 for many years).
When I paid $31K for the Z in 1993, nice MGB's could be had for 1/10th of that. There were only about 7000 ZR1's made. When I go to local car
shows I almost never see another Z, even if it is a local Corvettes only show.

So we own an iconic American brand (Corvette) with spectacular
performance (until then unmatched in Vette history, generally
speaking) that are rare to very rare (less than 500/year from 1992-1995
if I remember right). And yet we get no respect in the resale market.

I believe the GN's back in '93 were going for around $7-8K. I could have
bought several for what I paid for the Z and been ahead that way
I guess. Or 10 MGB's. Ferrari Dino's were the same price as a Z back then and now are over $250K. Oh well. We may have our day yet

[Bob Eyres]

Still, you're in great shape if you paid $31K for a 91' Z in 93' (killer deal for a decent car).
19 years of fun for maybe $10K in depreciation, not bad.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by Funracer1

Good point. Surprisingly the Z has turned out to be almost the worst
car I could have chosen from an investment only standpoint. To this day
I still don't understand why a Grand Sport vette is worth more than my
91 Z.

I saw a 1974 MGB (restored) go for $18K at an auction recently.
Does that make any sense? There were something like 150,000 MGB's
imported into the USA from 1963 to 1980 (I owned a '69 for many years).
When I paid $31K for the Z in 1993, nice MGB's could be had for 1/10th of that. There were only about 7000 ZR1's made. When I go to local car
shows I almost never see another Z, even if it is a local Corvettes only show.

So we own an iconic American brand (Corvette) with spectacular
performance (until then unmatched in Vette history, generally
speaking) that are rare to very rare (less than 500/year from 1992-1995
if I remember right). And yet we get no respect in the resale market.

I believe the GN's back in '93 were going for around $7-8K. I could have
bought several for what I paid for the Z and been ahead that way
I guess. Or 10 MGB's. Ferrari Dino's were the same price as a Z back then and now are over $250K. Oh well. We may have our day yet

In another forty years maybe; your ZR-1 should increase in value!
Right now they are still to new to be very collectable.

[Funracer]

I thought about selling the Z a few years back. But I have owned
it for so long now its part of the family. My kids have all grown up
riding in it. I think it will be my "Retired Guys Car Show Car" in a few
more years.

In another forty years maybe; your ZR-1 should increase in value!

Hope it does not take that long! I have watched the value of these cars
decrease for so long now I would be surprised (pleasantly) if it were ever worth what I paid for it. Anyone buying today would be far ahead in terms of depreciation/insurance/maintenance/storage/oportunity costs born by original or long time owners. At the end of the day it is a cool car no matter what its worth on paper.=D>

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by Funracer1

I thought about selling the Z a few years back. But I have owned
it for so long now its part of the family. My kids have all grown up
riding in it. I think it will be my "Retired Guys Car Show Car" in a few
more years.



Hope it does not take that long! I have watched the value of these cars
decrease for so long now I would be surprised (pleasantly) if it were ever worth what I paid for it. Anyone buying today would be far ahead in terms of depreciation/insurance/maintenance/storage/oportunity costs born by original or long time owners. At the end of the day it is a cool car no matter what its worth on paper.=D>

I hope it doesn't take that long too!
But your example of a 1974 MGB; is thirty eight years old.
It takes time, some times alot of time!
I have $30,000.00 in my 1938 Chevy Master Coupe and it's value is about $20,000.00! (It is seventy four years old!)

[White Bullet]

In my younger days I was into Firebirds. I like the looks however the power plants at the time were disappointing. When the Grand Nationals came out I really liked the power and looks of the car. But given my youth and my earnings it was not to be. Then in 1989 Pontiac placed the Grand National motor in an anniversary Trans Am. Well there you go a Firebird with power to spare. But since it was a limited run car the prices were well beyond my means. Either way I think the power plant made both cars special.

[Funracer]

Either way I think the power plant made both cars special

I agree. But what could be more special than a Lotus designed
Mercruiser cast aluminum block 16 fuel injector DOHC LT5? The GN
has an awesome look to it. But what engine looks better than an LT5? Like something out of Alien (movie).

There were over 30,000 GN's produced from 1984-87 (I Googled it).
Compare that to approx 7000 ZR1's from '90-'95. GN's values are
up 100% over the last 20 yrs ($7K to $15K roughly) and Z's are flat
to down.

Wishful thinking, but I think we go up from here.

[cvette98pacecar]

Originally Posted by White Bullet

In my younger days I was into Firebirds. I like the looks however the power plants at the time were disappointing. When the Grand Nationals came out I really liked the power and looks of the car. But given my youth and my earnings it was not to be. Then in 1989 Pontiac placed the Grand National motor in an anniversary Trans Am. Well there you go a Firebird with power to spare. But since it was a limited run car the prices were well beyond my means. Either way I think the power plant made both cars special.

The 89 Turbo Trans Am was an entirely different monster, 4.3L not 3.8 that the GN had, GN heads were too wide to fit in the F-body Chassis so GM out of their infinite wisdom installed 3.8L FWD heads. Four head bolts, once you tried to do anything to raise the boost say goodbye to the head gasket. Did anyone ever get that resolved?
Dont get me wrong I liked them very much back in the day.

[VetteMed]

Originally Posted by cvette98pacecar

The 89 Turbo Trans Am was an entirely different monster, 4.3L not 3.8 that the GN had, GN heads were too wide to fit in the F-body Chassis so GM out of their infinite wisdom installed 3.8L FWD heads. Four head bolts, once you tried to do anything to raise the boost say goodbye to the head gasket. Did anyone ever get that resolved?
Dont get me wrong I liked them very much back in the day.

Wrong.

The 4.3 was a supercharged motor in the Syclone and Typhoon.

The TTA was still a 3.8 even with the different heads.