silverbullet

At least respect the old Buick for it's simplicity and good engine design. The friggin turbo is right at the top of the motor, you could probably swap turbos between runs! Compare that to digging way into/under the engine for a day to find it.

jebdog

FBIII , friend in high school had a 64 409 convert , another a 442, friend had 55 chev convert hopped up 301 4 speed ,one guy had a 57 ford with a nascar 427 4 spd it was pretty nasty, one drove an XKE but the killer car was a kids real 289 A/C cobra.Buddies Buick Wildcat 401 4 door was fast and a great double date car. I drove many things but had some fun with a Carmen Ghia and an Opel Cadet ,girls loved the Opel big hit at Big Boy. I probably would choose the 356 because I never ever thought much of Corvettes. I have driven (not owned)several Muscle cars in the last couple years including big block Vettes SS 396 Z-28 440 Cuda and once you get past the Nostalgia they are not very good cars.But that is why they make so many different cars something for everyone so if you want a car which will not turn or stop well they made them, for those still stuck in their adolescence.

FBIII

But that's the point they were made to accellerate. No one buying or designing gave a hoot about turning. People would buy a magazine to check 0 -60 and qtr mile times not 80 - 0 or skidpad numbers. They were designed and evaluated for how well they did in a straight line. Don't forget that a lot of cars that were considered
"handlers" back then really weren't that much better. BMW's and Porsche, till 1966ish, still had swingaxles and a lot of the expensive Italian cars were still on solid rear axles. I had a 1974 3.0CS BMW, beautiful car but still had a swing axle rear suspension that could create a really bizarre oversteer. I think the Maserati Ghibli, a design masterpiece, sits on a live axle. My point is to be fair to cars of different eras and different designs they should be evaluated within their parameters and competition rather than saying that a such and such from 20 years later is better.
Case in point. Lets say you think a 928GT is a "better" car than a real 427SC Cobra from the mid sixties because the 928 has a much more sophistocated suspension, handles better and certainly is less of a handful to drive fast. With big reds it probably even stops better. We'll give the nod on accelleration to the Cobra. Now how do you reconcile your position when the Cobra has such a star studded past in competition and the 928 has no history? The same arguement would prevail with a lot of the old muscle cars. Some of them had successful straight line histories and others road racing successes. I just cringe a bit when people make blanket statements about how good the 928 is when comparing it to a vehicle that has historical racing significance when we have none.

Ketchmi

But then again the original big block Cobra's were not the best cornering machines. It did not matter since they were so damn fast between the corners.

I grew up with some cool toys, the most memorable was my 70' SCJ Mach 1. It ran honest mid 12's on street tires with closed exhaust. It did not take much to get it there either, torque monster. It had disc brakes and a handling package, cornered very well and stopped OK in comparison to other vehicles at the time.

Comparing an AC Cobra to a 928 is like matching a supermodel to a high priced hooker. Sure, they are both women but whereas one is beautiful and can do probably everything pretty well, the other is pretty also and just plain NASTY! Can you tell I want an AC Cobra?

John Struthers

Having stirred the pot Mark bails...
Bottom line on the original stuff a buick turbo 6 cyl into a sHARk reference.
1. It would be cheaper to do it.
2. The early models would see a significant gain in HP, torque, and probably fuel economy as well.
3. I don't think, initially, any of us would like the torque/hp curve.
Same applies to the engine sound.
4. The poor thing would undoubtably be snickered at even more than the Renegade 350ci chev mods by most sHARk owners no matter how well it performed. Puick, Buorsche...
5. The sad truth is that a 4cyl, 4wd swap out of a Subie, or a 3 year old Japanese 6 cyl vario-cam adapted to a sHARk would easily flog all except the Euro's thru at least 1982.
There are plenty of engine swaps 4 -8 cyl that could do the same.
So yes, the Buick engine would work and someone might do it.
Maybe you or I would classify it as the work of heretics and crazy people but It isn't your or my shark.
Ownership gives us autonomy over what happens to our cars not theirs.
As far as Porsche vs Muscle cars of the past, Apples and Oranges. Different purposes, engineered accordingly. I like em'all.

FBIII

Dave, Had a friend that had a late 275 GTB 4 cam, one of my all time lusted after cars. The guy had a drinking problem and stuffed the front end up to the firewall. He had no desire to fix it but was able to trade it even up for a real 427SC Cobra. This was about 15 years ago. I know the example I made of comparing the 928 to the Cobra was extreme but I was trying to exagerate the case of comparing a vehicle with significant historical significance to one that really doesn't have any. I love 928's but I try to keep a realistic perspective.
Fred

vanwyk4257

I have had numerous muscle cars over the last 15 years, 3 '70 chevelles, 1 '69 chevelle, and a '71 convertible with a very healthy 454. My dad has a pretty nice collection of '68-'72 Chevelle SS and ElCamino SS cars. They are heavy and crude, but there is nothing like the feeling that a 502HO motor like the one in my dad's recently restored 70SS gives you when you put the pedal to the floor. The acceleration pins you back in the seat. One of my neighbors has a '70 Chevelle that he's putting a 572 cu big block in for drag racing. I had a '70 chevelle that I did a bunch of suspension mods to and it probably handled as well as many of the cars on the road today, I could four wheel drift that car at will around corners!
All of that being said, they lack the handling and pedigree of a Porsche, whether that be a 911 or 928. I am a Porschephile through and through, but I still appreciate a Big Block with a high-lift cam and racing gas!
As for the turbo Buicks, I've seen some here that were faster than some of the hotter big block cars I've driven.
To each their own I say.

FBIII

Mike, EXACTLY!!!!!
What's the story on your 911T?
Fred

Fogey1

FBIII wrote
"Will, I guess you forgot that A production at that time was a battle between the Corvettes and the Cobras or that one of the all time great battles in production racing was B production the battle of the Lotus Elans and the small block Corvettes. Or possibly that a L88 Corvette won the GT class at the 1968 Lemans and finished 6th overall."

Nope, I didn't forget. But, again, when you're talking 'Vettes or Cobras you're way past the truck-like devices that passed for automobiles back then, even if they did have lots of muscle.

I know there were and are people who care about nothing but 1/4 mile times, but I was never one of them. In fact I didn't care much about about them at all. Even as an adolescent I cared more about the total over the road package, so bad brakes and handling were more than important enough to overcome an advantage in pure acceleration. Look at what you wrote about B production, 'Vettes vs Elans. Which of those two cars braked and handled better, do you suppose? I'm betting the Elan, which had to overcome a huge horsepower deficit with other qualities.

And since that over the road package also includes a degree of comfort on a 12 hour drive, I'd have ended up back in the 356SC. I'd have loved to have a Vette or a Cobra but it would have been a toy car and I've never been able to afford one of those.

vanwyk4257

The 911 is a nice rolling chassis with very little rust. The rust that is there is mostly cosmetic, structurally all the important areas on the car are very solid. I've had it for 5 years and bought it as a roller with intentions of making a "period-correct" track/street car in that order out of it. I was going to do a full monoball/polybronze suspension setup and a 2.5L short stroke motor with Weber carbs. I added up what I was going to spend to do the car the way I wanted, divided by my budget, and realized that I couldn't wait that long to have fun!
One of my neighbors when I was a kid had a brand new 1985 928S and I've always liked the 928's so when I finally came to the hard decision to part with the 911 I decided to buy a 928. If you're interested or know anyone who is I can email a bunch of pictures of the car. Thanks!

FBIII

Will I agree, its a matter of preference. Not that one is better than another. When I was in high school a family around the corner were all motor heads. Studebakers with Cadillac engines, a go cart with a twin cylinder engine that was faster than a 421 Pontiac tripower, and then a turn torwards sports cars, G production sprites, Mini Cooper S's and the old man took us to little league practice in his Porsche Speedster. The youngest son as a 17 year old bought a 67 Lotus Elan SE with the Cosworth twincam Ford. It was the most incredible little car I had ever been in. It was fast, it handled, it stopped and it broke. Up to 70 miles an hour it was as fast as a friends big block camaro.
He would goad seemingly faster cars to race, thinking they were up against a Fiat and clean their clocks. Most egos were so shattered that one looser even wanted to fight!

Nasty 928

before id put any american gm made motor in my shark, i would put my 1994 saab aero's engine in there. It has a 2.3l turbocharged intercooled 245hp and 310lbs of torque(slight mods). I have done very little to get those numbers(stock is 225hp/270lbs) and it is my daily driver. I can dump some more $$ into it and have it over 400hp and 450-500lbs of torque, and still cost less then those American MADE 3.8 gnx/1989 gta indy motors and last WAY longer. Come on guys were talking about a pushrod(POS) motor in our porsches. Yea you might be able to make your shark faster but for about the same cost you could find an old jet/helicopter turbine and make ur shark the fastest around.(but it still wouldnt handle)

vanwyk4257

Nasty 928, not all of GM's motors are pigs. The LS1 motors in the newer F-body and C5 Corvettes is a very strong motor. My brother drives a '99 T/A that's been dynoed at 385 (flywheel) based on a chassis dyno and it only has a flowmaster muffler, K&N filter, and reprogrammed engine mgmt computer. Throw one of those in the shark, ad a turbo and you could have a VERY easy 600-700 HP. I'm certainly not condoning the practice, if I wanted an LS1 motor I would have bought a car with one, but GM makes some pretty good stuff for the money.

m21sniper

The Turbo buick 3.8SFI motor is about 100lbs lighter than even an LS-1, and they came stock with 4 bolt mains, forged crank, hyperuetectic pistons, and HD rods.
And as i've said many times, they're ridiculously easy to make huge power with....while still maintaining streetability. They also have massive aftermarket support, which is always an important consideration when choosing a swap.

JimBob951

I saw a 944 with a the Buick 3.8 Turbo in it... But hell I'd rather have a 951 motor in a 928 than a Saab 2.3!