http://www.autoexpert.ca/en-ca/2351 829_1987-buick-grand-nat

>$60,000 on a 30 year old gm
Nothing special enough about it to justify that price

>>16711893
Yeah this.
You can have a faster, better handling, better looking car for half that money. It won't be a GNX, but I honestly don't think the extreme hype around that car is entirely justified. It's still a fucking Buick clunker with 300hp that can't actually turn. Get something equally nice looking with a big ol V8 and turbo it for kicks for a third of that money. It's not like the GNX has a particularly unique look. Most malaise era cars will look like that murdered out.

>>16711729
Nope. Crap.

>buy old g body
>250 dollars and an afternoon
>Cxracing eBay special twin turbo kit
>???
>Profit!

>>16711729
You gotta be kidding. Just buy a 3k crown vic interceptor.

I bought an 81 Olds Cutlass Supreme in running condition for $300 anon.

You're going to engine swap it anyways so why the boner for this gbody?

$300 gbody, $5k in materials, labour w/e you think you're worth, L9H swap out of a wrecked silverado...

>60k for an old Buick with a V6

lol fuck no

>>16711729

I live in Canada and see clean drivers posted for around 10k and nicely restored cars from 15-20k. 60k is absolutely ridiculous for an 87 Grand National.

>>16713455
It's a GNX tho. With turbo-chargers

>>16713467
thats not a GNX just a GN

if it was it would be six digit price

you can get GNs for 15-20k all day

File: IMG_4168.jpg (86KB, 833x458px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 833x458px

>>16711729
I admit that the Buick Grand National is a tempting combo, but that's a little high on the price. Bang for buck, you could enjoy the same GM body with a swapped 350, 327, or even a small block 400...