[IlikebigbuicksIcannotlie]

Took a few pics today, while doing some repairs/detailing with one of my buddies, (he's agreat help and I keep some at his house because of space concerns and also because he's a top mechanic,, so I let him use a few in return for help.)
pictured are my 93 sedan my 92 Estate Wagon,, a 98 Park Avenue,, and a 1977 Chevy K10 full-time 4x4 old school squarebody I use to tow cars home on a trailer. I drove the Chevy over just for fun today. My wife says I need to stop buying cars. I'm stocked up on 5 Park Avenues,, but those were just the gateway drug. The Roadmasters are the hard stuff. Looking for a LT-1 next.

 

[96 Black]

Quite the collection! And they appear all in v. well attended condition. If never having been involved with a second LT- they're quite enjoyable to toy with. The reverse cooling works and you have to be trying hard to blow a head gasket. You'd learn all about the opti-spark, whether you want to or not.
Oh, and round up all new Gr.8 bolts for the exhaust manifolds and immediately change them out. No questions, just do it.

 

[IlikebigbuicksIcannotlie]

Quite the collection! And they appear all in v. well attended condition. If never having been involved with a second LT- they're quite enjoyable to toy with. The reverse cooling works and you have to be trying hard to blow a head gasket. You'd learn all about the opti-spark, whether you want to or not.
Oh, and round up all new Gr.8 bolts for the exhaust manifolds and immediately change them out. No questions, just do it.

Thank you. Yes, I've heard about the optispark and other issues. Including the electronically operated vs hydraulically operated transmissions. I decided to dip my toe in the L05's first. They seem incredibly reliable. That wagon has 198,000 miles and EVERYTHING works. Small patches of rust on the rear quarters that I can fix myself,, andthe famous Buick bumper fade/mirror fade are about the only serious cosmetic issues, but runsas great as the sedan which was always garaged and has 99k mies. I just wish they got the same mileage the ParkAvenues do. Although I recently got 25.54 mpg on a 500 mile round trip in the sedan. I use 93 octane in all of them.

 

[Fred Kiehl]

You are wasting your money on the 93 octane fuel. You will get better mileage, and a fuller pocket if you use 87/89 octane. The engine was designed to use 87/89 octane. Even the LT1 is designed to use regular gas. With regular gas you get more gas and less antiknock compounds. Finnegan did a program on this, for Engine Masters (on Motortrend cable TV), and as long as the octane rating is what the engine requires, you can save a lot of money by using the lower octane. You should not need 93 octane until you get over 10:1 compression ratio with iron heads. The LO5 has a 9:1 compression ratio, and a wimpy cam.

 

[IlikebigbuicksIcannotlie]

You are wasting your money on the 93 octane fuel. You will get better mileage, and a lfuller pocket if you use 87/89 octane. The engine was designed to use 87/89 octane. Even the LT1 is designed to use regular gas. With regular gas you get more gas and leemss antiknock compounds. Finnegan did a program on this, for Engine Masters (on Motortrend cable TV), and as lonseg as the octane rating is what the engine requires, you can save a lot of money by using the lower octane. You should d not need 93 octane until you get over 10:1 compression ratio with iron heads. The LO5 has a 9:1 compressiations anon ratio, and a wimpy cam.

l
I've been told this before and even the manual agrees. But I have done mileage calculations and I tend to get 25 mpg+ on 93, and about 23.5 on 87. This would be interstate miles at 75 mph average. I know that does not make up for the extra cost, but I like that the 93 I use has extra detergents, etc. Interestingly, I get the same shitty mileage on either driving in town. Maybe I shoud use 87 for loca trips...thanks for the info

 

[96 Black]

I've recounted the funny story before, but discovered running 80 for 5 hours through the night weekly either to the project site or home always ran me bone-dry and required a fillup early in the morning about 30-40 miles from destination. Driving in to the site just once at 70 the whole trip let me pass the station, which put me at the trailer to start at exactly the same time as before. I consistently got 22-24mpg with that car, so right at 10% better mileage and no time lost.
But not as much fun not having to rely as much on the 2 radar detectors and portable cb.

 

[IlikebigbuicksIcannotlie]

I've recounted the funny story before, but discovered running 80 for 5 hours through the night weekly either to the project site or home always ran me bone-dry and required a fillup early in the morning about 30-40 miles from destination. Driving in to the site just once at 70 the whole trip let me pass the station, which put me at the trailer to start at exactly the same time as before. I consistently got 22-24mpg with that car, so right at 10% better mileage and no time lost.
But not as much fun not having to rely as much on the 2 radar detectors and portable cb.

I love checkingb my mileage. I usuallly use cruise control and set it at 74-75. Not worth a cop's time to pull you over. And a stock looking old Buick is pretty much invisible to them unless it going 80. One thing I will say. These cars love cruising on the highway. If I don't use cruise, I willl find myself going 80-85. The pichup in speed is effortless and the lack of road/wind noise does not help to alert you to speed. Truly a great road trip cruiser.