N2 Buick Skylark Project ideas

"AMC/Renauledge" (n2skylark) 11/26/2013 at 14:37 • Filed to: Project Car Hell

3

14

It's no secret that I am an avid fan of that dubious POS we all know as the 1992-98 Buick Skylark. I've never been able to articulate exactly why I like it so much, but I have since my 8 year-old eyes first saw them on the road and in commercials in late 1991. It's weird, I know. Bear with me.

So I've decided that I'm going to buy one soon and turn it into a project car. I want to use off-the-shelf GM parts from other cars to turn whatever example I end up buying into a fun-to-drive performance sleeper for as little money as possible. Here's what I'm thinking:

1. Buy any year Skylark, 1992-98, but preferably a coupe with a floor shift console, leather, and a tach.

2. Replace engine and transmission with a working W41 Achieva SCX 2.3L Quad 4 and its accompanying 5-speed manual transmission, ECU, and pedal box. Throw it all into the Skylark.

4. Stiffen springs, lower ride height, and use Grand Am GT steering gear - all to improve ride, handling, and feel.

5. Put fog lights on the front, GS two-tone trim and wheels all around, and GSX badges on the grille and decklid. Maybe smoke the headlight lenses in a pattern similar to the facelifted FY33 Infiniti Q45. Paint the grille bars in body color. Tint the windows. And definitely put a sequential turn signal system into those characteristic wide, saggy taillights.

Of course, this whole plan could be modified, too. The W41 engine, because it's so rare, could be substituted for the Grand Am's HO Quad 4 and 5-speed manual.

Or, since the 1992-93 cars used the Buick 3300 V6, maybe a later 3800 Series II or III would fit. Maybe even a supercharged version, if it wouldn't wrench the wheel out of my hands every time I thought about hitting the accelerator. Then again, I don't think any car with the transverse version of that engine came with a manual transmission. And if I'm going to do a project car and build it my way, a manual trans is a must.

I am pretty sure that the W-body Pontiac Grand Prix came with optional 3.1 Turbo and DOHC 3.4L V6s that offered manual transmission options. Since the 1994-98 Skylarks used the 3.1L 60-degree V6, and the 3.4 DOHC was the same engine family, I'd imagine either would fit, as well.

In fact, now I wonder if a later "high value" VVT 3.5L V6 from that family would mesh with one of those earlier manual transaxles used with the 3.1 or 3.4. Because that might be a good option, too.

And then I go on to wonder, since the N-body and FWD A-body cars were closely related under the skin, if the Pontiac 6000 STE's AWD system would fit under the later Skylark.

The possibilities seem endless.

What do you fellow Opponauts think? Other than that I must be criminally insane and am not worth taking seriously on any topic?

Nibbles > AMC/Renauledge 11/26/2013 at 14:40

2

The Getrag 5 speed should be able to handle an L67...

Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney > AMC/Renauledge 11/26/2013 at 14:52

2

Love it. Do it. Report back.

Ghost Dog - For the kittens > AMC/Renauledge 11/26/2013 at 15:03

1

Kind of off topic, but what are your thoughts on the post-facelift version?

Deal Killer - Powered by Focus > AMC/Renauledge 11/26/2013 at 15:06

1

I think I'd stick with a 4-cylinder DOHC engine from an Olds or Pontiac, as the ease of installation would be a bonus. The V6 would have the benefit of being a smoother engine, but I don't think that's what you're aiming for, am I right? I'd rather have a higher revving engine than a low RPM V6 if I were going for a manual transmission project car. That, and the 4-banger would be lighter and affect the handling of the car less than a V6.

The DOHC GM engines would be a very tight fit, IMHO, as they would be very wide in order to accommodate the OH cams and valve train, where as the other V6 engines are all push-rod motors.

If you want to get really weird, I'd put the dash from the Olds Achieva in the Buick, as it was much more driver oriented, but that's just me.

AMC/Renauledge > Ghost Dog - For the kittens 11/26/2013 at 15:07

0

I like it, too. It's not as wacky as the pointy-nosed '92-95. It's got the more conventional Olds Achieva interior, too.

So, while it was toned down to turn fewer people off, I'd still have one.

Ghost Dog - For the kittens > AMC/Renauledge 11/26/2013 at 15:09

1

Didn't know the interiors were different. Learn somethin' new everyday...

Thanks

AMC/Renauledge > Deal Killer - Powered by Focus 11/26/2013 at 15:19

0

I'd imagine the 60-degree DOHC 3.4 would fit fine width-wise, since the Skylark came with the 90-degree 3300 for its first two years. Height might be a problem, though, since it's a narrower V6 with OHC apparatus, while the 3300 was a short-deck version of the 3800. I've heard the DOHC 3.4 is a terrible engine, too.

As for the 4 vs 6 question, I'm totally with you there. A V6 would be cool for added Buick smoothness and power. But it'd be more nose-heavy and hurt the handling, which I'd be trying to improve already.

I also wonder if a 2.0 S/C LSJ engine out of an ION Red Line or Cobalt SS S/C might not be a suitable alternative. Smoother, more power and torque, and certainly more reliable.

As for the interior, I'd keep it as-is, mostly. As long as it had a floor shift and console. The '92-95 cars had the weird, melting Salvador Dali look, while the '96-98s had the Achieva interior. I like both.

Deal Killer - Powered by Focus > AMC/Renauledge 11/26/2013 at 15:26

1

Good points. I'm no expert on GM engines by any means, so I'll take what you say as gospel. I'd think that any modern engine would be a nightmare insofar as getting the computers to mesh with an older car. I remember when Car & Drive built their Mazda-5speed, with the turbo engine out of a Mazda3speed. You'd think it would be a fairly straight forward swap, but it was not. I think they had to install the 3's whole engine control assembly or some such, in addition to the 5's in order to get the engine to work correctly. Just some food for thought. I'm always a fan of the KISS method.

AMC/Renauledge > Deal Killer - Powered by Focus 11/26/2013 at 15:57

0

I'm no expert, either. But your point about modern engines is a good one.

It's probably best to stick with something older, that was designed to fit in the first place. And 170-190 revvy hp with 3 pedals would be plenty for the 2,900lb car.

KISS is definitely the preferred method for me, too.

Dunnik > AMC/Renauledge 11/26/2013 at 16:41

1

I think this car is unworthy of the love and attention you want to lavish on it.

I like most Buicks, but this one of the most disproportionate cars ever made. It just looks wrong, likely because what Buick seems to have done is take the design cues from their larger cars (Park Avenue, LeSabre) and slapped them on a compact frame. Kinda like a boy wearing his father's suit.

For the kind of money and work you're willing to throw at this, you could probably get a GNX. Or built yourself a fake one from a Regal.

But hey, it's your dream and your money. Who am I to tell a fellow Opponaut not to follow his car dream?

AMC/Renauledge > Dunnik 11/26/2013 at 16:55

0

Actually, the Skylark didn't have many cues from the other members of the Buick line. They had cues from the Lucerne and Bolero concept cars of 1988-90. I know they tried imitating the effect of the '39 Buick grille at the front, but it didn't quite translate.

And I don't think it'd cost GNX money to mod. I can get a decent one for $1k in my area. Finding a working Quad 4 HO with an MT might take awhile, but I can't imagine it'd be too expensive. All the parts can be found in a lot of dead cars lining Pick-A-Part places.

Even with a full-body respray, I can't imagine the project costing more than $7,500 all-in. Is the ultimate generation Skylark worth that much? Certainly not. But it's not anywhere near GNX money.

Then again, maybe I've been watching too much Velocity to have a realistic idea.

Rock Bottom > AMC/Renauledge 11/26/2013 at 18:22

2

You are a sick sick man... but I shall be the last to cast stones. I have a secret love for this body style Grand Am:

AMC/Renauledge > Rock Bottom 11/26/2013 at 18:55

2

I know. There's something strangely compelling about these things.

evilfacelessturtle (Hooning a Ford is Domestic Abuse) > AMC/Renauledge 11/28/2013 at 23:38

0

You're not the only one who likes N-bodies! I got a hand me down '96 Grand Am and I slowly came to appreciate it's light weight, clean styling, reliability with the 3.1 V6 and surprisingly good handling. With the right mods, it can be a pretty cool car:

Good luck finding a turbo 3.1 though, those were only offered in the ASC/McLaren Turbo Grand Prix, of which around 2k were made.