Who stole my horsepower? (and others)
December 28th, 2010, 12:45 PM
#1
Got wood? I do! (an '89)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Southeast Michigan
Posts: 310
Who stole my horsepower? (and others)
I'm always working with spec sheets of the vehicles I review, so I figured I do some digging and create one on my '89 Custom Cruiser. Little did I know that when it was done I'd have more questions than answers.
For instance:
In 1989, the "family" of RWD wagons from Buick, Chevy, Olds and Pontiac are all listed as having 5.0-liter/307 cu. in. OHV V8s with a 4BBL carb. They all share horsepower ratings of 140 hp and EPA ratings of 17 city/24 hwy. So why do the first two have 255 lb.-ft. of torque and the others only 225 lb.-ft.?
And why does the Buick have a 115.9" wheelbase while the rest have 116"? And why, when the Pontiac is smaller in every regard, does it share the Olds' 4,221 lb. curb weight (the highest of all, including the larger Buick, which is 4,209 lbs.)?
But most perplexing of all is: Why, with Buick being sold as the "premium" pick of all four, did they price the Buick LeSabre Estate wagon ($16,770) $25 BELOW the sticker price of the Olds? Buick's ELECTRA Estate is WAY up there at $19,680, and the Pontiac and Chevy are pretty far down at $15,659 and $15,025, respectively.
So you get 25 more lb.-ft. of torque for $1,770 less with the Chevy vs. the Olds. And while you can load that Caprice wagon with (probably) all of the Olds' additional equipment, you can't upgrade the Olds' motor. And...
You get the idea.
Was this just GM planning for Olds' future demise, or could the product planners really not notice that they were trying to hit the same nail with five different hammers?
Drew
For instance:
In 1989, the "family" of RWD wagons from Buick, Chevy, Olds and Pontiac are all listed as having 5.0-liter/307 cu. in. OHV V8s with a 4BBL carb. They all share horsepower ratings of 140 hp and EPA ratings of 17 city/24 hwy. So why do the first two have 255 lb.-ft. of torque and the others only 225 lb.-ft.?
And why does the Buick have a 115.9" wheelbase while the rest have 116"? And why, when the Pontiac is smaller in every regard, does it share the Olds' 4,221 lb. curb weight (the highest of all, including the larger Buick, which is 4,209 lbs.)?
But most perplexing of all is: Why, with Buick being sold as the "premium" pick of all four, did they price the Buick LeSabre Estate wagon ($16,770) $25 BELOW the sticker price of the Olds? Buick's ELECTRA Estate is WAY up there at $19,680, and the Pontiac and Chevy are pretty far down at $15,659 and $15,025, respectively.
So you get 25 more lb.-ft. of torque for $1,770 less with the Chevy vs. the Olds. And while you can load that Caprice wagon with (probably) all of the Olds' additional equipment, you can't upgrade the Olds' motor. And...
You get the idea.
Was this just GM planning for Olds' future demise, or could the product planners really not notice that they were trying to hit the same nail with five different hammers?
Drew
December 29th, 2010, 06:34 AM
#2
Old(s) Fart
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 47,446
Torque was 255 ft-lbs on all the VIN Y 307s. Don't be mislead by typos. I know it may be hard for you to believe, but journalists sometimes make mistakes. 
0.1" difference in wheelbase is roundoff error. The differences in base price are related to standard equipment levels. You can't compare the prices unless you know they are equipped exactly the same. My 84 Custom Cruiser has a manual, one-piece cloth bench seat, crank-up windows, and manual door locks for example. It also has A/C, cruise, and posi. Go figure. Also, do all your prices reflect three-seat wagons? The third seat was an option on some.
0.1" difference in wheelbase is roundoff error. The differences in base price are related to standard equipment levels. You can't compare the prices unless you know they are equipped exactly the same. My 84 Custom Cruiser has a manual, one-piece cloth bench seat, crank-up windows, and manual door locks for example. It also has A/C, cruise, and posi. Go figure. Also, do all your prices reflect three-seat wagons? The third seat was an option on some.
December 29th, 2010, 12:05 PM
#4
Got wood? I do! (an '89)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Southeast Michigan
Posts: 310
Walked into that one. In my defense, however, I got all of those numbers from a Consumer Guide "Autos 89" book which--even though I got it when I was a sophomore in high school I still had because I never can throw stuff like that away--seemed like a reputable source.
They just stopped publishing those last year, so they did something right along the line somewhere. I called over there, though, to "complain". Turns out that during that pre-internet era they just published the numbers the car companies sent over.
Not my fault. Live and learn. Have a little cry...
They just stopped publishing those last year, so they did something right along the line somewhere. I called over there, though, to "complain". Turns out that during that pre-internet era they just published the numbers the car companies sent over.
Not my fault. Live and learn. Have a little cry...
December 30th, 2010, 03:45 PM
#6
Got wood? I do! (an '89)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Southeast Michigan
Posts: 310
Ask and you shall receive. I have posted the scans in my personal photo album (I think) and created a new thread, "Sharing the wealth".
No take-backs. You asked for it, so you'll just have to deal with the fact that 21 years ago all these shitty brands were sold on our shores by salespeople with STRAIGHT FACES!
[Yup, even Yugo...]
No take-backs. You asked for it, so you'll just have to deal with the fact that 21 years ago all these shitty brands were sold on our shores by salespeople with STRAIGHT FACES!
[Yup, even Yugo...]
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
RetroRanger
Parts For Sale
11
February 25th, 2014 05:04 PM
