2.0L LNF Performance Tech 260hp and 260 lb-ft of torque Turbocharged tuner version.

Buick Regal GS 2011 LNF

Old Feb 20, 2010 | 11:57 PM
  #26  
cakeeater's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-17-07
Posts: 9,378
Likes: 0
From: right behind you.
for reference....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMWHsKxzdHc
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 09:33 AM
  #27  
80vetteL82's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-13-08
Posts: 1,884
Likes: 0
From: Waltham MA
And these:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wc5z0ycGJE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ja4Ffcr8n0

The second video is great.
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 09:43 AM
  #28  
steddy2112's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: 05-08-06
Posts: 25,520
Likes: 3
From: Newark DE
Originally Posted by EcoTecDriver
I understand BUT I would take a grand national over a cobalt/any lnf any day...Grand nationals make serious numbers modded and atleast they have respect on the track and are rwd....(not intended to start a fight)


and the last GN the 1988 was 276hp...I know i had one
And about 5 or 6 years ago SAE standards got more strict, and I forget when manufacturers stopped using gross numbers and went to SAE
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 10:03 AM
  #29  
stevessvt's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: 11-25-09
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
From: FL
Originally Posted by EcoTecDriver
I understand BUT I would take a grand national over a cobalt/any lnf any day...Grand nationals make serious numbers modded and atleast they have respect on the track and are rwd....(not intended to start a fight)


and the last GN the 1988 was 276hp...I know i had one
The only Grand National to have 276hp was the 87 GNX. There was no 88 GNX.

http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...national.shtml
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 10:03 AM
  #30  
80vetteL82's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-13-08
Posts: 1,884
Likes: 0
From: Waltham MA
Originally Posted by steddy2112
And about 5 or 6 years ago SAE standards got more strict, and I forget when manufacturers stopped using gross numbers and went to SAE
They went from Gross to Net somewhere around 71-73....

Either way, the GN is still a legend and as much as I like my SSTC the GN holds a much higher place in the automotive world.
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 10:06 AM
  #31  
HHRSSouth's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 09-04-09
Posts: 2,218
Likes: 0
From: Alabama
GN's were only made from 84-87. The early GN's 84-85 were 200 hp (and slow in the 1/4 mile 15's), roughly 2,000 made of each year and hot air cars (originally were suppose to have injection on them,gm scrapped the idea at the last minute, theres even a injection light on the dash) , while the 86-87 were intercooled, the 86 was 235 hp with 5,500 made, the 87 was 245 hp with 20,000 made , the GNX was 275 hp (only 547 made).

Now turbo regals were made as early as 1978

My 85 GN (and my 90 talon TSI AWD you can see in the background), notice no center caps on the wheels, took them off the 85 caps are EXTREMELY rare and cost a lot when you find them, found that out after losing 1 the 2nd week I owned it.


Same GN with 100 spoke true knock offs


I don't own it any more sold it to my father about 3 years ago and my brother has recently bought it off him this last fall, the GN now resides in PA (in a garage).

Last edited by HHRSSouth; Feb 21, 2010 at 10:22 AM.
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 10:11 AM
  #32  
stevessvt's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: 11-25-09
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
From: FL
Originally Posted by HHRSSouth
GN's were only made from 84-87. The early GN's 84-85 were 200 hp (and slow in the 1/4 mile 15's), roughly 2,000 made of each year and hot air cars (originally were suppose to have injection on them,gm scrapped the idea at the last minute, theres even a injection light on the dash) , while the 86-87 were intercooled, the 86 was 235 hp with 5,500 made, the 87 was 245 hp with 20,000 made , the GNX was 275 hp (only 547 made).

Now turbo regals were made as early as 1978
^^ this.
If anyone had an 88 standard GN with 276hp that would be worth an enormous amount of $$ if was in good condition today. Since it would be the only one made.
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 10:31 AM
  #33  
buellfooll's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 08-28-08
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 1
From: Sunshine State
I'd rather have a Syclone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUWLG...eature=related
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 11:36 AM
  #34  
redninja6r's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 10-09-08
Posts: 569
Likes: 0
From: Conneautville. Pa
The funny thing is, when the GNX first came out we all thought, "ewwww it's a 6 cyl it can't be fast, it's stupid." Little did we know then how things were changing.
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 11:41 AM
  #35  
09CobaltSS1's Avatar
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
 
Joined: 04-12-09
Posts: 4,869
Likes: 16
From: Connecticut
Originally Posted by redninja6r
The funny thing is, when the GNX first came out we all thought, "ewwww it's a 6 cyl it can't be fast, it's stupid." Little did we know then how things were changing.
lol.. and who would have thought that some V8 purests would ever socumb to the darkside.. the dreaded 4 cylinder.. bum bum bum..

you will still never truely outperform a V8, but a 4 banger sure is a fun little econobox
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 11:55 AM
  #36  
importkiller's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: 10-14-05
Posts: 2,291
Likes: 0
From: Colorado
The Grand National is a cool car, I want one for sure...but, take a GNX and a Cobalt SS/TC on a road course and see who wins, I did not buy the cobalt for the strip i bought it for the twisties.
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 12:07 PM
  #37  
09CobaltSS1's Avatar
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
 
Joined: 04-12-09
Posts: 4,869
Likes: 16
From: Connecticut
I love my TC, but if anyone ever wanted to do a straight up trade with me for a GNX I wouldn't even blink an eye at that deal... that's just me personally.. **** I might even consider a doing it for a T-Type... well... alright maybe not so much a T-Type
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 12:38 PM
  #38  
EcoTecDriver's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: 01-16-10
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 0
From: Houston
Originally Posted by stevessvt
The only Grand National to have 276hp was the 87 GNX. There was no 88 GNX.

http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...national.shtml
yes that was my mistake, 87 is the last year.
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 01:11 PM
  #39  
ebristol's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: 04-15-07
Posts: 5,457
Likes: 3
From: WI
GM should have stuck with the Turbo Technology. The would be light years ahead of the competition.
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 02:42 PM
  #40  
RBC's Avatar
RBC
Senior Member
 
Joined: 10-25-05
Posts: 4,359
Likes: 3
From: Saginaw/Fort Worth, Texas
The bad thing is if I am not mistaken the gn's only came in auto's and that's why I have never owned one. Nice car but its dead now, why don't people just stay on topic.
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 02:44 PM
  #41  
EcoTecDriver's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: 01-16-10
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 0
From: Houston
Originally Posted by RBC
The bad thing is if I am not mistaken the gn's only came in auto's and that's why I have never owned one.
these comments are soooooo ignorant and repetitive , it only shows how little a person knows.....
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 02:46 PM
  #42  
RBC's Avatar
RBC
Senior Member
 
Joined: 10-25-05
Posts: 4,359
Likes: 3
From: Saginaw/Fort Worth, Texas
Hows that god of the automotive world?
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 02:48 PM
  #43  
EcoTecDriver's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: 01-16-10
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 0
From: Houston
Originally Posted by RBC
Hows that god of the automotive world?
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 02:51 PM
  #44  
09CobaltSS1's Avatar
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
 
Joined: 04-12-09
Posts: 4,869
Likes: 16
From: Connecticut
EcoTecDriver has a very valid point.. Auto's are, and always will be faster and more effective down a drag strip.. The only place a manual is faster is in some sort of autocross where you need more control over your shift points
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 02:55 PM
  #45  
RBC's Avatar
RBC
Senior Member
 
Joined: 10-25-05
Posts: 4,359
Likes: 3
From: Saginaw/Fort Worth, Texas
Originally Posted by EcoTecDriver
Don't make a dumb ass statement and not explain

Originally Posted by 09CobaltSS1
EcoTecDriver has a very valid point.. Auto's are, and always will be faster and more effective down a drag strip.. The only place a manual is faster is in some sort of autocross where you need more control over your shift points
How does my preference of owning a manual trans car make my comments idiotic? I never said that manual cars are faster.

Last edited by RBC; Feb 21, 2010 at 02:55 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 02:56 PM
  #46  
EcoTecDriver's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: 01-16-10
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 0
From: Houston
Originally Posted by RBC
Don't make a dumb ass statement and not explain
lol considering you started with a *******/rude statement, i dont feel inclined to explain anything to you.....
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 03:00 PM
  #47  
RBC's Avatar
RBC
Senior Member
 
Joined: 10-25-05
Posts: 4,359
Likes: 3
From: Saginaw/Fort Worth, Texas
How was my statement dumb in anyway? Don't try and be a bad ass just because you are behind a computer. Opinions are opinions and that doesn't make a person dumb. What I stated was FACT so you can do what ever you want with that.
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 03:00 PM
  #48  
09CobaltSS1's Avatar
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
 
Joined: 04-12-09
Posts: 4,869
Likes: 16
From: Connecticut
Originally Posted by RBC
Don't make a dumb ass statement and not explain



How does my preference of owning a manual trans car make my comments idiotic? I never said that manual cars are faster.
please point out in my comment where I ever refered to you as being an idiot or that your statement was idiotic....

reading is a fantastic skill my friend
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 03:04 PM
  #49  
EcoTecDriver's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: 01-16-10
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 0
From: Houston
Originally Posted by RBC
How was my statement dumb in anyway? Don't try and be a bad ass just because you are behind a computer. Opinions are opinions and that doesn't make a person dumb. What I stated was FACT so you can do what ever you want with that.
what im trying to say is, i see already what type of responses you give (very defensive/attacking/cruising) so im not going to waste my time getting into a discussion with you....so have a great day and sorry if i raised your blood pressure...

Sincerely,

Mr."bad ass"
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2010 | 03:05 PM
  #50  
cakeeater's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-17-07
Posts: 9,378
Likes: 0
From: right behind you.
Originally Posted by 09CobaltSS1
EcoTecDriver has a very valid point.. Auto's are, and always will be faster and more effective down a drag strip.. The only place a manual is faster is in some sort of autocross where you need more control over your shift points
This is one of those "facts" that people have exaggerated. A built/stalled auto is faster than a manual yes, but we are just getting to the point now where stock auto tranny's are faster than manuals. The 4 speed (and less) autos used in the 60's-90's are nowhere near as quick shifting or efficient in transferring power as a manual transmission. A good paddle shift will always be the best of both worlds.
Reply

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:09 PM.