Buick Invicta Convertible Ground Up Retoration! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Junkyard Gem: 1984 Buick Skyhawk Custom Sedan

Many laughed in 1982 when GM's Cadillac Division began selling the Cimarron, essentially a luxed-up Chevy Cavalier, at about twice the Cavalier's price. One rung below Cadillac on GM's Ladder of Success, the Buick Division got its own version of the Cavalier at the same time: the Skyhawk. Nobody laughed at the 1982-1989 Skyhawk's respectable sales figures. We saw an '85 Skyhawk coupe in a California boneyard last winter, and now here's an example of the sedan version in Colorado. This was the second generation of the Buick Skyhawk name, the first being applied to a Buick-ized version of the Chevrolet Monza during the 1975-1980 model years. That Skyhawk was available solely as a sleek two-door hatchback. This generation of Skyhawk could be purchased in coupe, sedan, hatchback (1986-1987 only) and wagon (1983-1989 only) form, with the coupe proving to be the most popular. For the 1984 model year, the base Skyhawk engine was the 2.0-liter pushrod four-cylinder from the Cavalier, rated at 86 horsepower and 110 pound-feet. If you opted for a five-speed manual or three-speed automatic transmission instead of the base four-on-the-floor manual, you could spend an extra 50 bucks (about 149 bucks in 2023 money) to get this higher-revving, Opel-designed/Brazilian-made 1.8-liter SOHC four-banger with 84 horsepower and 102 pound-feet. A turbocharged version of this engine with 150 horses was available on the Skyhawk T-Type. Buick was proud of both the overhead cam and the electronic fuel injection in this car, applying these badges to brag a bit. You'd have thought that a buyer sacrificing torque for a better-breathing engine would have selected a manual transmission, but such was not the case with this car. The three-speed TH125 slushbox cost $395, or about $1,179 after inflation. The cheapest '84 Skyhawk trim level was the Custom. The MSRP on this car was $7,345 ($21,922 now) before options. Its Chevy Cavalier sibling started at $6,214 ($18,546 today), while its Pontiac 2000 Sunbird and Olds Firenza counterparts were $6,791 and $7,293, respectively ($20,268 and $21,766 in 2023 dollars). Meanwhile, the King of J-Bodies, the Cadillac Cimarron, listed at $12,605 ($37,620 today) in 1984. That $7,345 sticker price didn't include plenty of features we now take for granted in new cars. If you wanted air conditioning in your new Skyhawk, as nearly every Buick buyer in 1984 did, the cost was $630 ($1,880 after inflation).

GM claims it's first to sell million 30+ mpg vehicles

As we continue to put together all the data for the year-end edition of By The Numbers, General Motors has announced that it sold more than a million vehicles in the US last year that achieved at least 30 miles per gallon on the highway. More impressively, GM managed this feat using multiple strategies including small vehicle size, turbocharged engines and hybrid or plug-in technologies across four brands (Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet and GMC) accounting for 13 separate models. This number will grow even more in 2013 thanks to cars like the all-electric Spark, the diesel Cruze, the range-extended Cadillac ELR and the Buick Encore compact CUV.
GM's small car sales were up 39 percent last year helping to attain this million-sales mark for 30-mpg models, and almost 40 percent of all GM sales consisted of cars with fuel-efficient I4 engines. In regards to more advanced means of improving fuel economy, GM says that it plans on having 500,000 vehicles with "some form of electrification" on the road by 2017.
Scroll down for the full list of GM's million 30+ mpg cars as well as an informative press release.

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.