1941 Buick Special Totally Unrestored Survivor 36,886 Original Miles! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Junkyard Gem: 1997 Oldsmobile Eighty-Eight LSS Supercharged

Oldsmobile got terminated by The General in 2005, in part because the marketing suits decided that the first three letters of the marque's name made the cars undesirable to the under-75 set (never mind that 21st-century rappers continue to venerate Oldsmobiles). Not long before the demise of Olds, though, you could buy an Eighty-Eight with the supercharged L67 V6, known as the Luxury Sports Sedan or LSS. These cars are very rare today, but I spotted this '97 in a Denver self-service wrecking yard. These Eaton blowers are now so easy to find in wrecking yards that most of them go unpicked by customers. The going rate for this supercharger is about 50 bucks, because everyone who wants one already has a big hoard of the things. If you have ever wanted to drop a supercharger onto your crapcan race car's engine, now is the time. Performance was respectable for the era, with output of 240 hp and 280 lb-ft. The 3800 was the descendant of the ancient Buick V6, which debuted way back in 1962, so GM had had many decades in which to make it a dependable (though not very smooth-running) powerplant. Yes, you could still buy big ol' sedans with rear drums at the dawn of the 21st century. Did the LSS steal any sales from potential BMW or Mercedes-Benz buyers? Probably not many, though its $27,695 price tag must have looked pretty tempting when compared to that of the much slower $32,960 Lexus ES 300 in 1997. Right now is the best time to make a resolution you'll enjoy sticking with. The reviewers at Popular Mechanics were unable to break the first-year LSS. Related Video: Featured Gallery Junked 1997 Oldsmobile Eighty-Eight LSS View 12 Photos Auto News Buick Economy Cars Classics Sedan supercharger

The 10 car brands cheapest to maintain over 10 years

Buying a car can be fun and bring a lot of freedom, but things can go sideways when it comes time for repairs. Some car brands are better than others, however, and Consumer Reports recently ranked the least- and most-expensive brands for owners to repair. There are few surprises on this list, but the cheapest new car and the runner-up might come as a shock. Tesla and Buick were the cheapest new car brands to maintain and repair over 10 years, followed by Toyota, Lincoln, and Ford. 10 car brands cheapest to maintain over the next 10 years: Tesla: $4,035 Buick: $4,900 Toyota: $4,900 Lincoln: $5,040 Ford: $5,400 Chevrolet: $5,550 Hyundai: $5,640 Nissan: $5,700 Mazda: $5,800 Honda: $5,850 Consumer Reports noted that maintenance costs for some brands can look deceiving, as many offer free maintenance for a period after the purchase. New-car warranties also play a role, with the powertrain coverage spanning four or five years and 50,000 or 60,000 miles, depending on the company. It's also worth noting that Tesla only sells EVs, which don't require engine air filters, oil changes, and some other routine maintenance, lowering their average costs. Related: Cheapest electric cars Cheapest SUVs The most expensive brands to maintain might not come as a surprise, but the costs associated with owning them might. Land Rover was the worst, at $19,250 over 10 years, while Porsche came in second at $14,090. Mercedes-Benz’s average costs were $10,525 and AudiÂ’s $9,890. While this suggests that these brands need more frequent repairs over the 10-year period, it also points to higher labor and parts costs for the European automakers. If you own one of the more expensive brands to maintain and youÂ’re worrying as you read this, there are a few things you can do to prolong your vehicleÂ’s life and minimize unnecessary maintenance costs. The first is to follow the automakerÂ’s suggested maintenance periods, changing your oil, rotating tires, and doing all the “boring” stuff before it becomes a problem. ItÂ’s also a good idea to take care with the way you drive, avoiding potholes, accelerating gently, and trying not to abuse your brakes. Finally, donÂ’t modify your vehicle. Car companies spend billions on research and development, and most know better about how a vehicle is meant to operate than you do in your garage with third-party parts. Buick Tesla Auto Repair Driving Maintenance Ownership Consumer Reports

GM won't really kill off the Chevy Volt and Cadillac CT6, will it?

General Motors is apparently considering killing off six slow-selling models by 2020, according to Reuters. But is that really likely? The news is mentioned in a story where UAW president Dennis Williams notes that slumping US car sales could threaten jobs at low-volume factories. Still, we're skeptical that GM is really serious about killing those cars. Reuters specifically calls out the Buick LaCrosse, Cadillac CT6, Cadillac XTS, Chevrolet Impala, Chevrolet Sonic, and the Chevrolet Volt. Most of these have been redesigned or refreshed within the past few model years. Four - the LaCrosse, Impala, CT6, and Volt - are built in the Hamtramck factory in Detroit. That plant has made only 35,000 cars this year - down 32 percent from 2016. A typical GM plant builds 200,000-300,000 vehicles a year. Of all the cars Williams listed, killing the XTS, Impala, and Sonic make the most sense. They're older and don't sell particularly well. On the other hand, axing the other three seems like an odd move. It would leave Buick and Cadillac without flagship sedans, at least until the rumored Cadillac CT8 arrives. The CT6 was a big investment for GM and backing out after just a few years would be a huge loss. It also uses GM's latest and best materials and technology, making us even more skeptical. The Volt is a hugely important car for Chevrolet, and supplementing it with a crossover makes more sense than replacing it with one. Offering one model with a range of powertrain variants like the Hyundai Ioniq and Toyota Prius might be another route GM could take. All six of these vehicles are sedans, Yes, crossover sales are booming, but there's still a huge market for cars. Backing away from these would be essentially giving up sales to competitors from around the globe. The UAW might simply be publicly pushing GM to move crossover production to Hamtramck to avoid closing the plant and laying off workers. Sales of passenger cars are down across both GM and the industry. Consolidating production in other plants and closing Hamtramck rather than having a single facility focus on sedans might make more sense from a business perspective. GM is also trying to reduce its unsold inventory, meaning current production may be slowed or halted while current cars move into customer hands. There's a lot of politics that goes into building a car. GM wants to do what makes the most sense from a business perspective, while the UAW doesn't workers to lose their jobs when a factory closes.