wuvvum Posted February 24, 2019 Author Share Posted February 24, 2019 Well my curiosity was piqued, so I just took the Buick and my 0-60 telephone application to my own private test track, and it recorded a time of 9.6 seconds. Which tells me that GM's figures weren't far out, and that the old crate is still in fairly good mechanical fettle. In other news, I found the reversing light wiring and bodged in some reversing lights. They look shite but they are actually bloody bright and make reversing the barge on unlit Norfolk back roads a lot easier. In more other news, I might be selling it. Dan_ZTT, egg, danthecapriman and 5 others 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Jimmy Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 9.5 secs is rapid dude, must have a cold air box fitted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purplebargeken Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 In more other news, I might be selling it. Ears uselesssly pricked up... gadgetgricey and eddyramrod 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddyramrod Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 Mine too, and to about the same effect, sadly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocket88 Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 PM'd you......Mr Wav..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wuvvum Posted February 25, 2019 Author Share Posted February 25, 2019 Only, he says. Only!! In terms of specific output it's really no better than your 60-year-old Super Snipe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gadgetgricey Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 Swap for a Jaag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandeth Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 For a wafty car like that, anything sub 15 second should be just fine. Mate of mine has a Rolls-Royce Silver Spirit, and even with 6.75 litres under the bonnet it does 0.60 in 12 seconds I think by the book...wouldn't matter if it was 32 seconds though, acceleration isn't what it's about. I do enjoy riding the surge of boost to 60 in well under ten seconds in the Activa (I really do need to measure it), but the van rumbles up to 50mph in around 30 seconds, and I rarely find myself wishing for more go there... I really do need a bit of American metal in the driveway at some point... Probably my choice would be a late 90s Chevrolet Astro in normal (i.e. not "day van" spec), with the lazy, lazy 4.6 litre V6. Had the use of one for a couple of weeks a few years ago and really wanted to bring it home! Stupidly comfy, made a gorgeous noise, and the engine seemed to produce torque from roughly 50rpm upwards...only had the opportunity to actually put my foot down once and was startled by the way the thing dropped three gears and stood on its tail and took off. LightBulbFun 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wuvvum Posted February 25, 2019 Author Share Posted February 25, 2019 Probably my choice would be a late 90s Chevrolet Astro in normal (i.e. not "day van" spec), with the lazy, lazy 4.6 litre V6. [pedant] 4.3 [/pedant] Good engine is that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schaefft Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 To be fair, I think barely any luxury sedan made in America after 1990 was gutless enough to stay above 10s. Even the much heavier then-new 5.0l Caprice was at 10.3s 0-60. With this gen Buick 3800 or Ford's 4.6 modular V8, GM's and Fords entire range of large sedans very quickly moved below that threshold and even the 3.0 Mitsubishi V6 Chryslers/Dodges (New Yorker/Dynasty) weren't far from 10 second, and especially not after the 3.5 V6 came out for their LH sedans. Just to give everyone a rough guideline. You'd really need to search hard to find anything that's slower and not a truck/van or a dirt cheap econobox. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandeth Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 [pedant] 4.3 [/pedant] Good engine is that.Fair enough...it was 2016 when I looked the specs up! I honestly didn't believe it could have something that size in initially, given it surely would have been a <2.5 litre TD here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now