factory lightweight

[scojack_2001]

I weighed my 86 GN about a year ago. It weighed 3720lbs. with me in it and a full tank of gas. Ive since lost about 30lbs myself, so thats a savings right there.

Its a hardtop GN, manual windows, locks, seats, fixed antenna, no rear defog(although someone added one). It has CS2, posi, tilt and cruise. Also has GTA wheels. Ive added a few things so I digress.

Did all the 86 GNs have the AL bumper supports? First Ive ever heard of that...

 

[UNGN]

Did all the 86 GNs have the AL bumper supports? First Ive ever heard of that...

They should. Mine does. have you checked to see if yours does?

 

[geargrinder427]

Factory Lightweight ???

I'm still old school but the term factory lightweight I thought refers to the manufacturer putting on special parts to make the car lighter for racing purposes, aka Pontiac Superduty's and Z-11 Impalas from the early 60's. These cars had all aluminum front ends and other, not available to the public engines and upgrades. Some manufacturers had holes cut out of the frames in their cars to make them weigh less. I am not aware of Buick specially making light weight turbo cars for race teams in the 80's, correct me if I am wrong here. If they did, I would think they would be more sought after than the GNX's.

 

[turbofish38]

I can't fathom why this would be an argument. If weight was not a factor why do racers lighten up their cars?

I don't know why either. Hey your the dude sponsoring TSA aren't you? So tell me why minimum weight for that class is 3500 pounds? I know you didn't make the rules and I'm sure somebody must have thought that was a nice rounded out number but it seems to me some models are being penalized for the sake of making it a square playing field. I know that with my skinny ass seated and with a full tank of gas I barely make that number. I don't know? Maybe I don't have my shipping weights correct but I do know back in the 80's when these cars were new NHRA used a much lower figure to factor in the classes in Stock Eliminator.

It's been awhile since I put my car on a scale. Anybody else have the same complaint I do? As in your TSA legal car weighs in under 3500? Refer to the tread in another forum for the TSA rules.

Usually when I rant about weight I'm not talking about a pound here or there. I do know what a difference 200 or 300 pounds make. See my signature? While I did reach the point where I couldn't take anymore weight out of the car I was able to use the extra poundage to my benefit by placing it lower and placing it closer to the instant centers of gravity and other BS like that. Damn hard keeping up with those Mustangs and Camaros so the logical solution was to rebuild the GN closer to the specs of those well known handlers.

Sorry for hi-jacking the thread.:redface:

 

[TTA1326]

This is off topic since my car is TTA, but I think you will all appreciate this. I just bought Brembo front rotors for the car. No slots, not cross drilled, just stock 1LE rotors. The UPS box label was marked 57lbs!

 

[Dennis Kirban]

I don't know why either. Hey your the dude sponsoring TSA aren't you? So tell me why minimum weight for that class is 3500 pounds? I know you didn't make the rules and I'm sure somebody must have thought that was a nice rounded out number but it seems to me some models are being penalized for the sake of making it a square playing field. I know that with my skinny ass seated and with a full tank of gas I barely make that number. I don't know? Maybe I don't have my shipping weights correct but I do know back in the 80's when these cars were new NHRA used a much lower figure to factor in the classes in Stock Eliminator.

It's been awhile since I put my car on a scale. Anybody else have the same complaint I do? As in your TSA legal car weighs in under 3500? Refer to the tread in another forum for the TSA rules.

Usually when I rant about weight I'm not talking about a pound here or there. I do know what a difference 200 or 300 pounds make. See my signature? While I did reach the point where I couldn't take anymore weight out of the car I was able to use the extra poundage to my benefit by placing it lower and placing it closer to the instant centers of gravity and other BS like that. Damn hard keeping up with those Mustangs and Camaros so the logical solution was to rebuild the GN closer to the specs of those well known handlers.

Sorry for hi-jacking the thread.:redface:

kirban 2 cents worth

setting the record straight, number one my name is not dude, number two I am not sponsoring the class, zddplus is that is owned by Richard Clark.

He certainily has the right and I would think you would agree that since his company is putting up all the money he can set the rules he wants for that class. I am merely a spectator to help. Our company is the largest seller of the product.

Enough said.

kirbanperformance.com

denniskirban@yahoo.com

Know enough to make it interesting past of many many turbo regals.

 

[pacecarta]

i have an 87 hardtop GN with every power and convenience option and concert , but no sentinal or security

my buddy has an 87 hardtop GN "lightweight" no power or convenience options except tilt and rr defog

his car basically stock with 3" thdp and dual 3" atr stainless exhaust , stock radiator on stock GN rims with him in it ( he has about 175 lb on me) 3850


mine with me in it ,1/2 tank ,alky injection , clip elims , aluminum bumper supports behind the steel bumpers , external gate 3" steel dp and hooker mild steel 2 1/2 duals (weighs about even with his atr system) stock radiator dual fans hotwired , translator , 4" steel maf pipe, hr mounts , hr rr sway bar (no frt) , on 20# aluminum rims only tips the scale tonight at 3540

id rather have all the options

 

[scottk]

Never had a thread with more than 5or 6 replies!!!!!!!!!!! wow:smile:

 

[Dennis Kirban]

kirban 2 cents worth

about lite weights versus loaded option cars. Its hard to compare the two mentioned above without knowing exactly what the low option car has versus the high option. Obviousily the high option car has saved a decent amount of weight with VD6 and VD7 aluminum bumper supports. Chances are the low option owner may have steel.

Logic would dictate all things being the same less options translates into less total weight. Based on my selling experience of these cars a good market exists for loaded examples and ones that are not loaded with options. Finding a GN with very few options is rare just like the Corvette I own as most buys loaded those cars up assuming money and spouse was not an issue at the time of purchase.

Everyone has an opinion, but I doubt anyone on this thread has sold more of these cars than I have....

kirbanperformance.com

denniskirban@yahoo.com
Always will be at least two schools of thought on any subject.

 

[turbofish38]

IMO the only options that wouldn't be considered light weight would be the Astroroof and T-Tops. Everything else on the check list doesn't weigh enough to even complain about. Back in the good old days GM used to print the extra weight of options in the spring charts. 8 pounds for windows,12 for buckets seats,23 for AC,etc. Since AC is standard and everything else is more or less downsized, options weigh about half as much as they used to 40 years ago.

Sorry Dennis. No offense intended on the dude. I just thought since you were posting money figures than you were sponsoring the class. Kind of moot point since I doubt there isn't a car that CAN'T meet that weight with a full tank of gas. It's damn expensive to put 18 gallons of C16 just to do it was my big complaint. Hey I didn't tell you thanks for the stuff I got the other day.

 

[novaderrik]

IMO the only options that wouldn't be considered light weight would be the Astroroof and T-Tops. Everything else on the check list doesn't weigh enough to even complain about. Back in the good old days GM used to print the extra weight of options in the spring charts. 8 pounds for windows,12 for buckets seats,23 for AC,etc. Since AC is standard and everything else is more or less downsized, options weigh about half as much as they used to 40 years ago.

Sorry Dennis. No offense intended on the dude. I just thought since you were posting money figures than you were sponsoring the class. Kind of moot point since I doubt there isn't a car that CAN'T meet that weight with a full tank of gas. It's damn expensive to put 18 gallons of C16 just to do it was my big complaint. Hey I didn't tell you thanks for the stuff I got the other day.

individual options might not weight very much any more, but if you load a car up with everything there is going to be a significant difference from a "lightweight" car. it all adds up.
i know a power seat weighs more than the same seat with manual tracks, cruise control adds 10-15 pounds, a tilt column weighs more than non tilt, auto climate control weighs more than regular heater controls, and on and on.

 

[Dennis Kirban]

individual options might not weight very much any more, but if you load a car up with everything there is going to be a significant difference from a "lightweight" car. it all adds up.
i know a power seat weighs more than the same seat with manual tracks, cruise control adds 10-15 pounds, a tilt column weighs more than non tilt, auto climate control weighs more than regular heater controls, and on and on.

kirban 2 cents worth

I agree 100% wth the above even GM looks at things like that. They also do it on dollar amounts...while you and I as private consumers can't fathom why they elminate say an ash tray from one bucket seat to save a few pennies GM looks at it times 50,000 units or so. I know this practice from a source that was pretty high up at the Corvette plant.

One example on that scale the 1996 Gran Sport they considered painting the outside door handles to match the car....not a big expense in time or money but they did not do it.

Power seat is heavy, The Corvette is a prime example as to methods where every effort is to save weight. You don't have to take my word for it get hold of a Corvette books on specs and you can see they have pretty much held the weight down from new model to model. If you doubt what I say look at the new body Mustang and Challenger both heavy cars both need alot of power to equal some of the older cars. The real looser in the weight game was the 1994-1996 Impala SS you had to spend big bucks to push that heavy iron much quicker than factory original.

Even Buick on the release flyer for the WE4 touted the fact this car will enable dealers to merchandise a car that is similar in appearance and yet lighter in weight, than todays Grand National. This reduction in weight theoretically, makes the Turbo-T faster than a Grand National for a lower price.

Remember back then promotion could not promote racing or any association with speed like todays commercials do.

Frankly, I can't fathom how their can be so much disagreement on this issue of weight not affecting performance. Granted certian options elminated drop 25 lbs or better but small stuff ads up to,

Factory lite weight cars in my day, they eliminated noise deadner material carpets on the floor. Again by itself not much weight saved its in the addition of the items left out.

Heck we make glass hoods don't shave a lot of weight but it helps......they sell a hollow front sway bar shaves another few pounds add that saving to the glass hood and numbers ad up.

that is the extent of my knowledge on this topic....

kirbanperformance.com

denniskirban@yahoo.com

I did not mean to put this all under the above quote but figured people will read it.

Don't claim to know it all but enough to make people think.

 

[turbofish38]

individual options might not weight very much any more, but if you load a car up with everything there is going to be a significant difference from a "lightweight" car. it all adds up.
i know a power seat weighs more than the same seat with manual tracks, cruise control adds 10-15 pounds, a tilt column weighs more than non tilt, auto climate control weighs more than regular heater controls, and on and on.

Well I can't dispute the numbers if I don't have some evidence so I took the liberty of throwing some common options on the scale just to see how low those numbers really are.

Cruise control= approx. 3 pounds. Weight of servo,bracket and wire harness 2.27 pounds. Throw in the cable and you have a tick under three pounds.

Power windows AND power door locks=approx. 8 pounds TOTAL! 2 window motors,2 wire harnesses,2 lock actuators and 4 switches.

Power seat=approx. 8 pounds. Seat adjuster and motors, harness and switch add up to 14 pounds. Subtract the weight of the manual adjusters and it's about 8 pounds.

IMO the tilt wheel difference is in ounces. C68 is mostly plastic. Maybe 1 or 2 pounds there at the most. The control defenetely weighs less than the 2 lever job.

Everything but those 2 roof options weigh in the single digits so even if you do add them all up it's about the difference of a good hole shot.

BTW I just recieved a couple of invoices from the GM Heritage Center. My cohorts 52 code(almost beat ya, Dennis!) 87 Turbo Regal shows a shipping weight of 3212 pounds. I'm waiting for the invoice of my missing only 2 option 86 GN to show up. Looks like the real porkers in the Turbo Regal world are the 87 steel bumper reinforced GNs! And I wouldn't even consider any of them to be real slow in the acceleration department.

 

[Dennis Kirban]

kirban 2 cents worth

You obviousily have more time on your hands than I do. Another factor completely overlooked is don't forget some cars performed quicker than others when they were new.

Its all about combinations with a good hole shot being part of the plan.

You have your theories, I have mine. Granted individually options may not add up to much weight and collectively may not amount to much but in the scheme of things every bit helps.

On a side not you can bet every new challenger/camaro owner wishes they were not starting out with a 3,800 lb plus car to start with if in the other lane sat a 3,300lb 23 year old turbo buick.....in excellent tune on a cool nite.

Original lite weight cars like I stated above chopped weight wherever possible I don't think insulation eliminated much weight but appearantly car companies did so on factory light weights they did

On the trunk ID label, you seem to be missing the point. I want a reader of the thread who has a car attached to the label to respond.

kirbanperformance.com

denniskirban@yahoo.com
I must be on to something judging from the number of viewers to what I write.

 

[TRDirks]

If a car wins by .01 he collects the money. Alot of times it is a very close race. 5 or 10 lbs can and has made the difference between going home #1 or #2.

BTW...You for got to factor on the weight of the extra ink on the SPID label:biggrin:

 

[gmpower]

My car only has 65 options. It has a standard column, no cruise, no power windows or locks, manual seats, aluminum drums and bumper supports, and standard HVAC. The only "extra" option I have is a CF5 astroroof. It was sure easy to push out of the pits when I blew the engine. . .

Sounds like my 86 has a twin! I thought my 86 was the only one with no options excpt for a cf5!

 

[salvageV6]

Reading and looking at what was posted above your astroroof GN is probably heavier than the average almost loaded but hardtop GN.

Check out the scale pictures.

 

[blipmode188]

kirban 2 cents worth

Good points brought out in above posts. There is always going to be 2 schools of thought those that prefer a well optioned car and probably a smaller segment like myself that like a low optioned examples.

Corvette did it in 1999 when they introduced the fixed roof coupe did it for 2 years then it became the ZO6 in 2001. In 1999 and 2000 those models 0-60 times was 4.7 the coupe and convert 0-60 times was like 4.9 all 6-speeds from what I have read. I have owned one of each 1999 and 2000. My 2000 has a total of just 3 options very unusual in a Corvette.

My experience, is our Buicks really are affected by weight. If you doubt this pick three of your heaviest friends and take them for a ride. Your car will feel like you lost 25-30 hp....kinda like turning the AC on.

T-Types and Turbo-Ts have a great advantage right off the bat....they don't have 28lb wheels turning on each corner of the car. As any racer will tell you the quickest way to make instant power is shed weight. They got a formula for this.

Be surprised just how heavy that astroroof set up is out of the car. Plus less options less things can go wrong. Power windows will never break any speed records. A power antenna has a very high failure rate and translates into at least 1 our or more to replace.

Less options are termed factory light weights I assume. Years ago even a heater was an option......

kirbanperformance.com

denniskirban@yahoo.com

Could say I have owned a few of each......

I have to defend ole Kirban on this one.

From what I have seen and read (by no means an expert) the term factory lightweight to these turbo cars does not even apply.

Sounds to me like some people trying to distinguish their particular car from the rest by being something special by really they are a low optioned car.
Factory light weights do exist. but it is a dramatic difference and not just a few options missing here and there.
Check out some of the factory sponsored lightweights.
Take for instance the 1969 dodge Dart Hemi factory lightweight !
The car was built strictly for racing period and was sold as such.
Fiberglass hoods, doors, windows that were plexiglass, virtually no interior to speak of.

Nothing wrong with a low option TURBO car at all.
Sometimes I wish mine didnt have all the gizmos that simply go bad a need replaced.

Im not trying to make anyone mad, but I am guessing BUICK was playing more of an inventory game with parts to produce whatever they could while depleting the inventory they had or didnt have.

As far as the weight issue goes, ALL THINGS being equal, and I mean two cars EXACTLY EQUAL (nearly impossible to do) but for now say we have two exact equal cars,
Im puttin my money on the skinny guy with an 1/8th tank of fuel and a loaded turbo GN against the so called LIGHWEIGHT car with the fat guy driving with a full tank of gas !
For what its worth, and I agree not much
Steve

 

[blipmode188]

I have to defend ole Kirban on this one.

From what I have seen and read (by no means an expert) the term factory lightweight to these turbo cars does not even apply.

Sounds to me like some people trying to distinguish their particular car from the rest by being something special by really they are a low optioned car.
Factory light weights do exist. but it is a dramatic difference and not just a few options missing here and there.
Check out some of the factory sponsored lightweights.
Take for instance the 1969 dodge Dart Hemi factory lightweight !
The car was built strictly for racing period and was sold as such.
Fiberglass hoods, doors, windows that were plexiglass, virtually no interior to speak of.

Nothing wrong with a low option TURBO car at all.
Sometimes I wish mine didnt have all the gizmos that simply go bad a need replaced.

Im not trying to make anyone mad, but I am guessing BUICK was playing more of an inventory game with parts to produce whatever they could while depleting the inventory they had or didnt have.

As far as the weight issue goes, ALL THINGS being equal, and I mean two cars EXACTLY EQUAL (nearly impossible to do) but for now say we have two exact equal cars,
Im puttin my money on the skinny guy with an 1/8th tank of fuel and a loaded turbo GN against the so called LIGHWEIGHT car with the fat guy driving with a full tank of gas !
For what its worth, and I agree not much
Steve

I knew when I was typing it, I would mess it up
See link for a factory light weight.

Sorry for the lack correctness

YouTube - 1968 Dodge Dart Hemi-an original LO 23 factory lightweight

 

[turbofish38]

Sorry for bringing this thread back to life but I'd thought I would share this little bit of information with you guys just to prove my point, which would be every Turbo Regal is a factory lightweight in some way.....or who ever said a GN couldn't be considered a lightweight didn't have a clue of what they were talking about. Okay here are 2 invoices for 2 totally different Turbo Regals. The first one is my almost fully loaded,just missing a couple of options 1986 Grand National. The second invoice is from Brians 87 Turbo Regal, 52 codes on the SPID label straight bench column shift car. Notice the Shipping Weights printed on the invoices. Two cars from each end of the spectrum.Fully loaded to fully stripped. Almost loaded to almost stripped. Well I wish my GN had an Astroroof so I could say it was all the way as far as a heavy in options and heavy in weight Turbo Regal goes. WOW! A whole 73 pound difference. Chrome steel wheels,rear spoiler,power seat,windows,etc. That's all? Just 73 pounds! Some might argue that's the difference between two classes in NHRA Stock Eliminator or my skinny 160 pound azz against your 230 pound beer belly but the point I'm making here is that even with almost every option in the book these are still light cars.