eBay Find of the Day: 1987 Buick GNX #359 - 9.9 miles on the odo
Click image for 55-pic photo gallery
The Buick GNX is iconic -- one of the great modern GM performance cars. The ultimate Grand National, it was limited to 547 units and received a host of changes at the hands of ASC McLaren over the "regular" car. These included substantial upgrades underhood, most notably to the turbocharger and intercooler, and when it bowed, the GNX was advertised as having 275 horsepower and 360 lb-ft of torque. Another set of numbers, namely the car's sub-5-second 0-60 time, was evidence that the factory power rating was clearly on the low side.
A Texas car dealer has acquired Buick Grand National GNX #359 and has listed it for sale on eBay. #359's significance is that it has under 10 miles on the odometer and has never been titled despite the fact that it's 20 years old. All manner of original documentation is included, as well as the original battery, which was removed and stored. It also looks great in and out -- like something out of a museum -- and frankly, we ache for this most evil of G-Bodies. Apparently, we're not alone, as four bidders have pushed the car up over $85,000 USD. The reserve hasn't been met yet, though, and the seller has a "Buy it Now" on the car, too. If you click on that and agree to part with $109,980 USD, it's yours. Sure, you could get something like a 911Carrera S for the same money, but it wouldn't get half the looks, and we gather that the Buick's just as fun (and about as fast, too).
For more, check out this thread on TurboBuick.com, which focuses specifically on this particular car.
Thanks for the tip, Mike!
[Source: eBay]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
cc 9:53AM (4/29/2007)
According to a web inflation calculator, this car cost the 2006 equivalent of $51913 brand-new. And you know what? Worth every penny.
Reply
Avinash machado 10:23AM (4/29/2007)
I think GM should buy this car and diplay it at their headquarters. This way they can remind themselves that there was a time when they build desirable cars.
Reply
Tim 10:41AM (4/29/2007)
According to a web inflation calculator, this car cost the 2006 equivalent of $51913 brand-new. And you know what? Worth every penny.
Of Course you could get similar performance, comfort, reliability from a 3 series turbo coupe for less but what do I know. I think it might be cheaper to get one more "owned" and refurbish it with parts.
Reply
Jason 10:42AM (4/29/2007)
Does anyone know how I can send in links to Autoblog about something I think they should post? I thought there used to be a contact where you could send them links.
Reply
8189720 10:43AM (4/29/2007)
Or perhaps I'd just rather have this Buick over a 3-series... but then again, what do I know.
Reply
bmw122487 10:59AM (4/29/2007)
i'd rather have that 911 turbo for $59,000 there also selling or even that 07 vette for less than half the cost.
Reply
DanMan 12:09PM (4/29/2007)
Damn back when Buick stood for "Go Fast With Class." I lust after Buicks, Corvette killer. The most exilrating ride of my life was in a 87 T-type Regal that my best friends dad (a used car dealer) brought home in the early 90s. And yes I agree GM ought to buy it and install it in the engineering and design departments.
Reply
Doug 12:31PM (4/29/2007)
I was lucky enough to have 2 friends who owned Grand Nationals. They were very fast in a straight line, less great turning corners. Mainly because of what they started out as, Buick Regals. Nonetheless, a memorable ride.
Reply
Doug Stewart 12:32PM (4/29/2007)
It also seems a shame that no one has ever enjoyed this cars potential.
Reply
ruggels 12:51PM (4/29/2007)
hrm I know that'll get 100x the looks for 109,000, an R8. Sure this car rocks, in a nostalgic way, what it represented (corvette beating Buick), but it also represents at lot of GM's current issues, this desire to focus primarily on nostalgia (sans the Saturn brand which we can just call Opel for all intents and purposes) - I year of the time when GM creates new halo cars like this, or the camaro, that aren't simply iterations of previous halo cars. Every time a special comes up on SPEED about cars like this, and you hear of their genesis and subsequent success, you realize GM has lost a lot of their old magic.
Yup that's about it, great car, i've driven one, but in 2007, i'd much rather have something that's today's equivalent of road going architecture :), is excessively capable for the price tag, and emerges from a somewhat less then typical company.
Reply
Mike G 1:14PM (4/29/2007)
Thank you Autoblog, you made my sunday, with this post. I laughed so hard I spilled coffee all over myself.
Reply
Bob-omb 1:41PM (4/29/2007)
I'm no expert at all on cars, but if someone actually wanted to buy and drive this thing, wouldn't they have to put a crazy amount of money into this? And what components would just die instantly after this many years of non-use?
Reply
Ken 1:42PM (4/29/2007)
This car wasn't about getting the looks, this car was about packing a high-tech punch in what looks like your Grandma's grocery getter. You can look fast and get all the attention or be fast and get none of the wrong kind of attention, both ways have their merits.
Reply
Jaymez 3:20PM (4/29/2007)
Anyone else catch the part where it's implied this car still has the factory warranty?
Lets see, for $110K, this car needs new tires because nobody in their right mind is going to trust 20 year old tires. It'll need new belts and hoses for the same reason. Dry rot anyone? They look good in the pics, but, if this car is truely "all origional", I would not be taking chances.
I like the Grand Nationals, but, even if this was in my budget, no way would I consider buying it. I'd rather rebuild one that I can trust and one that won't make me cry when it gets scratched. I want to drive the damn thing.
Trailer/Garage Queens are never impressive. Show me something that's been driven harder than the prom queen and still looks good in 20 years and then I'll be impressed.
Reply
paul34 3:28PM (4/29/2007)
#3: Maybe that's true, but at the end of the day, you're still driving a 3-series - a pity.
Reply
Paul 11:55PM (4/29/2007)
What a piece of sh*t. And, no, this isn't ignorance speaking. It's sense in the year 2007.
Reply
Ethan 11:59PM (4/29/2007)
May I suggest that whoever buys this probably won't be driving it?
Reply
boulderhorn 10:23AM (4/30/2007)
I owned a 1984 Grand National for a number of years and loved that car. It was fast and ugly (or atleast all my friends thought so) but it was a blast to drive. I wish i had never sold it, but it wasn't in great shape when i bought it (90,000 miles on the od.) and it was only in slightly better shape when i sold it (i installed a new turbo).
This GNX example is rolling (er, sitting) art. I certainly can't afford it, but it will make a nice addition to someone's collections once it sells.
Reply
Phil L. 12:04PM (4/30/2007)
#4: Jason -
In the links to the right under "Resources", you'll find "Send us news tips".
Reply
mikeb 11:52PM (4/30/2007)
If you get a picture of a GSX and compare it to a GNX you get textbook evolution, and they look just awesome. Grandparents drive them because they know what's good, they just don't want to push limits in their old age.
Back to the evolution. GM just needs to make a car that still has all of the points of these cars. RWD, price for performance that exceeds other cars in its class, lights in the same numbers with the same placement. Large c pillars. BUICK needs it's old heritage back, which is hurting it most.
Powerwise, how about a V8 version of the 3800(which is based on the BUICK 401 anyway).
oh, #17, just lie down and pull the trigger.
Reply