(first posted 4/21/2016) I found this Park Avenue in my Chicago neighborhood, Edgewater, several years ago, parked in front of this old, yellow-brick mansion. This area used to be full of residences like this one, mostly up through the 1950’s. The northward expansion of nearby Lake Shore Drive and changing demographics saw many such dwellings subdivided into rental units, as the area slid into a lower-rent district. Many of these houses, which had turned into flophouses by the mid-60’s, were subsequently demolished, displaced by low- and mid-rise apartment buildings.
The area has since experienced a rebirth and renewed popularity as a beachfront, residential community, but let’s look at the sad manse above – doesn’t it appear to have some beautiful bones? Its exquisite masonry and high-ceilinged front porch ooze Prohibition-era class. Similarly, this old, FWD Buick elicits a certain top-drawer swagger, even at a quarter-century off the line. It’s not of a vintage to be considered a true classic, yet not new enough to be considered current.
It has been a fact for some time now that the Buick brand is popular in China. As recently as 2014, over 919,000 Buicks were sold in China that year versus just under 229,000 in the United States, out of an annual figure of about 1,170,000 (also including Buick sales in Canada and Mexico). Granted, the U.S. and China have limited overlap between their respective product lines (no Excelle or GL8 here, with the Envision SUV to arrive this summer), but Buick’s placement in the Chinese marketplace appears to be upscale.
Lately in the U.S., though, it seems like GM is now trying to cast Buick in much the same role as it had tried with Oldsmobile starting in the late-80’s, attempting to jettison Buick’s more traditional, American-luxury image for one that is decidedly more global. The current Regal is, for all intents and purposes, a rebadged Opel Insignia – no bad thing, but not a design of which buyers of traditional, American luxury cars would take “ownership” as a homegrown design.
It remains to be seen if this tactic will be successful for Buick’s survival in the U.S. in the long run. In the meantime, though, please indulge my imagination for a moment. Let’s pretend the beautiful, brick mansion in the title shot got a full-on renovation and was restored to its former glory. As a home insurance underwriter, I have seen it documented that craftsmanship and quality of building materials of houses built around that time were much better than what we’ve seen for at least the past fifty years. I’m also aware some of us prefer newer construction to something this old, which would come with its own share of age-related challenges. All the same, I would prefer something as solid and inherently beautiful as our featured dwelling, once restored, over a newer house with a similar footprint.
As for Buicks (and like buildings), I like them big, expressively-styled, solid, and luxurious – as once was the Grandeur Apartments building in my neighborhood seen behind this second, same-generation Park Avenue. In this age of irony and self-deprecation, it almost seems “uncool” to be aspirational or even just to like nice things. I’ve never been cool, so I don’t care who knows I like old broughams and old buildings. I do hope that Buick succeeds in its new-ish, intended mission, as I’ve already witnessed the death of far too many GM divisions within my lifetime (five).
It would be great, though, to see Buick re-embrace (and really sell to the American people) why their once-trademarked style of American class, combined with obvious benefits of new technology like fuel efficiency and crash protection, could make their classic definition of luxury relevant again in this country, today. Stranger things have happened. The featured yellow-brick mansion and the Grandeur may yet one day be restored. Let’s hope Buick’s place in the automotive upper-echelon will be, as well.
Edgewater, Chicago, Illinois.
December 2012.
Nicely done. Despite my dislike of a certain Buick Lacrosse, I have always wanted one of these. My secretary found a really nice one so I get to see it every day. These Park Avenues really nailed what Buick was all about. Smooth, attractive and luxurious and quite durable.
And I agree with you on the houses too. But I am approaching the age where buying and rehabbing the pre-1920 home is not likely to happen for me. I have enough work to do on my Eisenhower-era ranch house to keep me occupied for quite awhile.
I see your Eisenhower-era ranch and raise you my Nixon-era ranch.
We recently sold our Pre-WWII farmhouse, built by my husband’s father and grandfather, and in the process of selling the 1991 Buick Park Avenue.
So much space for my kids to run around in around the house, and a lot of elbow room in the car!
I have intense nerve pain from a spinal cord injury, (also why the house had to go – too many stairs!) and that Park Avenue has the smoothest ride! We call it our Magic Flying Couch!
To me the Park Avenue is too close to a LeSabre and too front wheel drive.
A (year or two newer) Roadmaster belongs in front of the mansion.
A Roadmaster is too Caprice. The Park Ave looks and feels like a real Buick. GM avoided its usual blurry brand distinctions here and it paid off handsomely. This car is different (and leaps and bounds more attractive) than the concurrent Olds 98 or Pontiac Bonneville despite the shared platforms, drivetrains, and hard points. Unlike the Roadmaster, the Park Avenue has Buick-exclusive sheetmetal and interior.
The Park Avenue is a lot like the LeSabre, but a few inches longer. And, that’s not a bad thing- the Jellybean LeSabres were nice cars!
Saw one of these in a handicapped spot yesterday. Fresh paint on it as well.
Joseph: I feel the same about older construction, but I don’t know if that mansion would be so well constructed with a Home Dept rehab by a first time flipper.
Well done comparison.
I am going to cure my ’05 Park Avenue’s oil burning issues very soon. I’ve already had the rear suspension and load leveling rebuilt and the engine mounts replaced. I just can’t give it up. Those who haven’t ridden in one can’t understand.
Oil burning? That is very unusual for a 3800, even with 200K plus miles on it.
The 3800 GM V6 had issues with valve stem seals deteriorating and slipping out of position….I have a 2005 Impala with 165,000 miles on it and it drinks oil around town….but curiously enough, uses less oil on long highway trips…..Sometimes when I start it up, it dumps a bunch of blue smoke….other times upon startup, no smoke.
It seems odd that carmakers have skipped Chicago names. Why not a Buick Edgewater, or a Caddy Oak Park, or a LaSalle …. oops. But that wasn’t named after the Chicago street.
Structurally, the car equivalent of that mansion would be a pre-53 Buick straight eight. Overbuilt and understressed.
A Park Avenue from that era that is clean and well kept is still a really pretty car…give me one in a dark metallic color with alloys and Michelins with the really thin pencil stripe whitewall tires…
I owned a Roadmaster, but I think the Park Avenue has aged better…
IMO, the particular body style was the distillation of all the GM front wheel drive experiments; molded into a most mellow, luxurious, subtle and sweet car. Exactly what a full sized Buick SHOULD be. A classic, modern update of the Big Buicks of the 1960’s and 1970’s.
The full sized Buicks after this one became dull, bland and skewed towards China tastes.
Even the acerbic, often highly critical & blunt Brock Yates had more than a few good comments about this car in it’s “Car & Driver” road test when it was introduced!
A Park Avenue Ultra of this body style would be quite the “Plain Wrapper Sleeper” car to find.
Definitely the best looking of the senior Buick-Olds-Cadillac trio. I really liked these when thy came out, aside from the over-large and fixed “vent” pane. It was one of those details GM just couldn’t seem to sweat back then.
A Park Avenue was featured at the Buick stand at the LA Auto Show when it came out. I thought it was an incredible looking car.
I thought the same about it as Mark Reimer, above, at the time. Full of the essence of Buick on a modern scale.
The last Buick that I quietly lusted after and seriously thought about leveraging myself out on a 6 or 7 year loan to purchase.
I have grown to love Buicks….Fist ‘Classic I restored was a 62 Skylark hardtop with the 215 V8, second was a 1970 Sylark Hardtop. I now have in my fleet a 91 Lesabre 4 dr sedan (Inherited, it was my fathers last car, bought new) and an 87 LeSabre T-type. The long, Low Linear look of thes two ‘H” bodies match well with the smilar lines of my Mid century Modern home. More so than the rounded but still luxuriously appointed PA shown….Lesabre followed the PA in 92 and did quite well. Still A lot of these Buicks plying the roads here in Phoenix. Just my opinion but I still prefer the long , low linear look over the amorphous bar of soap style that followed.
Last Buick I had was Grandpa’s ’70 Lesabre 4dr hardtop. Beautiful and comfortable car but it needed things like a water pump and a replacement for a collapsed double-walled tail pipe (?). Those, and the fact that a fuel crisis was in full swing led to it being replaced with a ’76 Monza 2+2 (equals zero; GM synergy). Nothing in their current lineup interests me.
Had a near-identical house (American Foursquare) in NJ, built 1912, in one of those towns where the taxes are so high, right next to the Congrats HS Grad sign was the For Sale sign. Ran through resources even worse than the Buick, though it polished up well.
Agreed. 100%. I’ve loved the Park Avenue since the very early 90’s when a neighbor had one of the first Ultra’s, in a dark cherry color with light tan leather, supercharged. It had that Jaguar-inspired styling with a sleek and modern, yet somehow very traditional silhouette. His had the color-keyed wheel discs over turbine ribbed alloys. The first time I laid eyes on that car I did the classic double-take. As an early 20-something I had never imagined being so impressed by and enamored of a Buick product. I feel very much the same way about big old houses like the one above. The last house I owned was built in 1889 in a small railroad era hamlet about 90 minutes out of NYC. A relationship change forced its sale after only a few years of ownership and countless hours of loving restoration. To this day I lament that decision (selling the house……NOT the “relationship change”, for sure).
Incidentally, JD, we work in the same field, although I’m on the agency side since 1994. It’d be interesting to compare notes one day. Well….”interesting” might be an overstatement, considering the overwhelmingly exciting nature of our work…but whatever;)
MTN, that’s awesome – we insurance folks share a certain cynicism. We’ve seen a lot of stuff, and we need to be *sold* on things. I’ve been in this industry for close to 20 years. It’s hardly sexy or exciting, but that’s actually part of what I like about it – it’s about as steady as the mortgage! And I am sorry about your former house.
These Park Avenues are, to me, one of GM’s best efforts of the 80’s/90’s. While not radically different than the LeSabre, the featured PA manages a much more upscale image through subtle details. The longer tail with its Jaguar-esque inward taper makes the biggest difference, at least to me. Give me an Ultra, with the supercharger and color-keyed wheels, and I’d be a very happy driver.
I also wholeheartedly agree with you on the houses. That yellow brick one is just waiting for the right restoration to return it to single-family glory, or depending on the size, perhaps 2 or 3 upscale units within might be the right move (retaining as much of the original detail as possible, of course). When my wife and I decided to buy last year, one of my primary goals was to get an older home, with solid construction and the kind of detail that just isn’t seen anymore. Ended up going a little newer than I had wanted (1946) so I didn’t get high ceilings, huge windows or pocket doors, but it does have a slate roof, glass doorknobs, original detailed moldings and arched doorways, and the rock-solid feel of a prewar house. (The wife was not interested in a renovation, which disqualified a number of the older homes that might have been within the budget). Give me that over new construction any day.
The aura of Yesterday’s Splendor is compelling with both cars and houses, as this scene so well illustrates.
My wife and I also bought a place last year, and bought a 1920s-era house. If our house were a car, it would be an older Buick. Clearly, the place was splendid when new, with conveniences that few houses had 90 years ago. Now, the original grandeur is still there, but instead of being glamorous, it feels like a well-worn pair of good shoes – the years have taken their toll, but it’s still comfortable, practical, and can hold its own among newer houses by providing a charm that new things can’t match.
Same with the Buick. This was a classy car 25 years ago, and is still that way today. It can still hold its own against new cars, just like the house behind it could outclass a putty-colored McMansion any day. I hope both the car and the house here live on for many more years.
Nice write-up. Having dealt with older and new houses over the years, I have mixed feelings about that subject. Yes, the old houses had some very distinct benefits, being constructed out of generally solid materials, like the old-growth wood that is no longer readily available. And a brick exterior is certainly the way to go for weathering the elements.
But a well-designed and well-built new house (often the exception more than the rule) has so many advantages too, like a floor plan designed for modern lifestyles, vastly better energy efficiency, which also results in more comfort and savings.
Out here in the West, many/most older houses (with some exceptions) were not as sturdily built as these brick houses back east. Rafters and joists were undersized, leading to sagging roofs, ceilings and bouncy floors. Frankly, new houses are structurally much stiffer, with the engineered wood-composite I beams and such. The changing building code has made under-built houses mostly a thing of the past.
But some low-end builder still skimp on the details that lead to a long-term house, like using plywood (T1-11) for the only outer wall element, etc.
I’m just finishing up a little house I built from scratch, which is modest in some regards, but over-insulated (triple pane windows, etc.), and its quietness and amazing lack of temperature swings makes it very comfortable.
I’ll do a write-up on it when it’s done, soon.
The 1960s are the sweet spot for houses, for me. Modern enough to usually still be in good shape, built just before builders really started getting skimpy with just-good-enough materials. Sensible overall size, well-thought-out floorplans that still work well today (usually opening the kitchen to the dining/living room(s) is the only floorplan modification I’ll make). And then there’s that lovely mid-century modern architecture which I heart. I’d buy new only if it were bespoke; all of the builders around the mid-Atlantic area only build depressingly similar Colonial-style McMansions now, typically with a brick front wall but vinyl siding elsewhere making it obvious the brick is just a facade and not holding the house up.
The midwest (SE Michigan from personal experience) has a similar problem with hideous, badly built, and generic McMansions. Most look like this.
Yes, there is something soulless and off-putting about most new houses. The small lots get me too; it just feels wrong to have a window looking into your neighbor’s wall five feet away. I know a big yard might be impractical, but there’s something that feels better about space for a garden, kids to play, that old 911 up on blocks….
In the midwest, 1965-ish starts getting into the aluminum wiring era. I consider my own house (1958) as a sweet spot. New enough that I don’t have BX armored cable electric wire and old enough that I have good old copper wire and pipes and 1×6 roof decking instead of plywood.
In my older suburb, the parallels between houses and cars are quite strong. It is amazing how much bigger the houses from 1958-60 are from those built in 1954-56.
My last home still had lots of knob and tube wiring, despite being built after the war when it had mostly been phased out. I don’t understand why it’s so demonized; having the hot and neutral wires far apart makes sense to me and reduces short circuits. All of the original wiring in my 1950 home is BX armored which I’m fine with (less fear of drilling into it). Not much aluminum cable around here but I hate the stuff. I don’t bother with special switches and outlets; better to install pigtails absolutely everywhere unless you replace the wiring altogether.
Your comment about using plywood for outer walls reminded me of something discovered while doing rot repair on our house: siding was attached directly to the studs with NO sheathing. We were told that was “code” in the 80s. Wow!
In the 80s!? They’re still being built like that today! I regularly drive by a low-end subdivision where they’re doing that all the time: Grooved T1-11 right over the studs, with the windows set in the bare framing first.
There was a $350k custom house built not far from me that did that too. It’s far from the only one.
One feature of an older house in the UK over a new build is larger room sizes, reflecting an increase in land values and an increase in en-suite and second bathrooms, built in garages, downstairs WC and all that sort of thing. Also, for a detached house, increased separation from adjacent houses.
This can be a signiifcant factor in a purchase for many
Any idea why the British usually don’t put closets in their bedrooms? This is ubiquitious in the US.
Possible explanation: They’re more likely to have wardrobes (freestanding furniture) than closets to store clothing?
Here’s another question: why are some British bathrooms carpeted? That’s always been a huge head-scratcher for me.
My grandparents’ house has one bathroom carpeted, but not the other. I think it was because they had leftover carpet during construction (it matches the rest of the upstairs).
Thanks, Paul. When I was writing this, I suppose I had forgotten that home construction and materials are right up your alley! Looking forward to reading about the results of your hard work…
All these discussions about houses and architecture are intriguing! Our family has lived in the same house since 1963, a mid-20s American Foursquare farmhouse. It’s been remodeled, repainted, and even added on to, but it’s still a lot of original wood inside.
I’m fortunate to have done lots of time in one of these, as an ’05 Park Avenue would be my dad’s last new car. I was there during the factory order session and helped spec it. We skipped the by-then-virtually-ubiquituous leather seats for the standard scrumptious velour, two types of it draped over the loose-cushion bench seats, both amongst the softest, silkiest fabrics i’ve had the pleasure to brush my hand against. Ours had the self-adjusting suspension and Electronic Ride Control, still not sure exactly what the latter did. Whatever it did, it rode incredibly smoothly if a bit floatier than I’d like. Sticking with the standard 15″ wheels and not ordering the touring suspension with 16″ wheels likely exacerbated that tendency. No sunroof; my dad needed the extra headroom. I insisted on the new-for-’95 dual heated front seats; my mom (who wasn’t at the dealer that day) never stopped thanking me. Most of the other options were packaged together in the highest level of those option packages.
Also new for ’95 was the terrific Series II 3800 V6 which did an excellent impression of a smooth small-block V8. On paper this engine looked behind the times – still using pushrods, overhead valves, and only two valves per cylinder. In use, it made me wonder why you’d want twin cams and 24 valves if such a seeming relic of a motor could be so powerful, smooth, quiet, efficient (we regularly saw mpg in the high 20s), torquey, and reliable. The supercharged version in the Park Avenue Ultra had to wait until ’96, this generation’s last year, for the Series II treatment. The ’96 also got GM’s Magnasteer in most models and a reshaped rear seat cushion for better under-knee support and more legroom.
The interior was as sweet as the Jaguaresque curves on the outside. Ergonomics were spectacular – better than most new cars I’ve driven. Full set of gauges backed with warning lights. Another strip of warning lights across the top of the dash. Big buttons and knobs for the radio and HVAC up *high* on the dash with easy-to-use duplicate controls on the steering wheel. The door armrests are flat and full length, with power seat controls on them as well as windows, locks, and mirrors. Too many gizmos to mention here. Artful and elegant in a way no American car has been since, including the next-gen Park Avenue.
I’m glad I still have loads of pics of it which I used to sell it on craigslist about 8 years ago. For some reason the only ones on the computer I’m using are small and fuzzy – probably sized for those CL adverts – so that’s what I’ll post for now.
Love that house too.
To me, Buick’s relationship to Cadillac was the same that Bentley had to Rolls-Royce for decades — a less ostentatious vehicle that told the world that the owner had the means to drive something flashier, but not the need. It was the perfect choice for professionals wishing to project substance and taste.
I think these Buicks have some European flair — but then, I think recent Mase’ rati Quattroportes look like Italianate Buick — with Ventiports,no less.
I learned only after my family sold their Park Avenue that these were actually sold in Europe, where they were gifted amber rear turn signals and the much larger side rearview mirrors they so badly needed. I would have never guessed this most American of cars would be sold overseas; I’m always looking for Euro-market OEM mods for my VW Golf but didn’t imagine such a thing existed for a 90s Buick.
Count me in as a fan of the First Gen Park Avenue. These were the last cars that Buick built that I like, they where the cars that put the brand on the map for a reason. These are one of those Buicks I wouldn’t mind being seen in, they still manage to look reasonable nice without fully permeating of Goldbond and Cough drops. I think the backdrop of the old house just compliments the car well, they’re both old and outdated, but they still manage to stand out in the crowd.
I like Buicks and broughams just as much as the next person on this site – actually had a Park Avenue for a while, a nice one that I bought on my own and didn’t “inherit” from a great aunt – but I don’t think the wire-wheel formula is their way towards the future. Who, exactly, buys “traditional American luxury” when signing a 60-month new car loan in 2016? The handful of people that still do probably already own an Escalade. “Luxury” itself is a relative term that is very much a product of its period in history.
The similarities you observed between Buick’s current situation and the nadir of Oldsmobile is almost creepily on point – especially now with the “That’s a Buick?” ad campaign. The difference is that, unlike Olds which kind of naturally slipped into irrelevancy, GM actively dug that hole themselves this time. Building Centuries and Lesabres with large-print radios, marshmallow shocks, and bench seats long past the point when any other brand did that… what was their long term strategy there? They blatantly and exclusively designed their cars for the WWII generation for 20+ years, and now GM is not-very-subtly exclaiming “JK, they’re all dead now! We’re hip! Buy this chrome-grilled Opel you trendy millennials!” only to hear crickets chirping in response.
I’m not actually sure what the right solution is, and they can’t really axe the brand completely with a million sales in China each year, but it’s a sad sight for a once desirable nameplate. I want the brand to succeed in some way, but history has a bad habit of repeating itself.
Yeah, “That’s a Buick?” = “This is not your father’s Oldsmobile”. Even my teenage niece who is not a car buff commented on these ads and mentioned that people must think it’s embarrassing to be seen driving a Buick or something. It’s an admission that their image is un-hip. Think of the cars they’re trying to compete with. Can you imagine “That’s a Lexus”? “That’s an Acura”? People who are too young to remember what Buick ever was are being turned away.
Completely agree with you and Max P. Those ads are such a sad throwaway-use of a brand name that used to carry such equity and cachet.
When I read a post like this one, I wish once again for Buick to build the Avenir concept that made the rounds of the 2015 auto show circuit. Big, bold and glamorous, it was everything a proper Buick should be.
I love seeing old homes pictured with the old cars here, especially the unaltered homes Paul posts from Eugene.
It’s funny to see this Foursquare repeatedly referred to as a mansion (since I live in one). They were very practical and didn’t have vast areas of wasted space that “today’s” homes have. But you are right–they are classy–that’s why I live in one AND drive a Buick (that will change when models are brought in from China).
These Foursquares can be seen more commonly in rural Illinois, a very popular area for Sears’ kit homes (amazing quality). The old-growth wood doesn’t split like the junk today…just take a look at the grains sometime if you get a chance!
I’m waiting for Paul’s house write-up…. 🙂
David (and Fahrvergnugen, above in the comments) – thanks for pointing that out about this being an American Foursquare. I never knew that terminology before, and now I learned something. Compared to the houses I’ve lived in, though, this would be considered a “mansion” (in quotation marks) for sure, based on its sheer size. I hope it’s safe from the wrecking ball, but it’s got a parking lot on its north, so unless renovated, and in another ten years or so… I really hope it gets some love. It appears to be occupied.
I was going to send an addendum to my initial post…”funny, as in our perspectives of a city (apartment?) dweller vs. rural resident” but you must have understood my sentiment.
From the picture, it appears to be in fine condition…but yes, hard to believe it wasn’t removed for the monstrosity/parking next door!
In the south, many four square homes in rural areas were made more grand by traveling column salesman that would add front porches with Greek columns to existing homes to give a little of the older plantation style.
Perhaps those homes were more along the lines of Colonial style? Foursquares had large front porches with columns when built (and are more common to the Midwest [MN IL WI IA] like its “Prairie” style kin). Some Colonials in the South did often later have large two-story porches with ornate columns to give it the Greek Revival look. I didn’t know traveling salesmen were part of the renovation though!
I too learned a lot from owning the old barn. Including a lot of skills the lead picture could use, garnered in keeping the resident ghost happy (I kid you not). All original woodwork, oak floors, and , as I just learned on Zillow, sold at the absolute trough of the market!!
Awesome house. Definitely my style
The attic must be quite a space with all those windows. That enclosed porch surely isn’t original..?
“Barn”? Foursquares are my addiction–not sure I approve of that terminology 🙂
Would love an interior shot.
I’ve seen an increase in price in these homes, yours not so?
The “attic” was two bedrooms, a full bath and two storage rooms, plus access to the crawlspace above! The enclosed porch was from a makeover in the late ’50’s over an earlier makeover from a sunroom in the late ’30’s. Even the original windows from the sunroom were layered inside the walls, and the original 7′ chestnut french doors from two openings from the living room were up in the ‘attic’.
“BOB the Big Old Barn was a barn in the sense that something always needed fixing. But it was a great place to raise a family.
We had to downsize and sold at an instance of poor timing. The value since has gone up nicely, for the new owners at least…
Our American Foursquare farmhouse was practically a mansion when it was built with upstairs and downstairs plumbing in the early ’20s.
I typically associate Buick with senior drivers (now me?), vinyl roofs, and crappy rental LeSabres. My eyes were opened by a last-century Park Avenue interior, which was clearly a place I would like to be. Moreover, the Oldsmobile Rocket has been launched and Cadillac seems to be in another dimension. I have also noted Buick’s tradition (Y job, straight 8, Roadmaster, waterfall grille, nailhead engines, and even Dynaflow). It’s an unexpected appreciation, and I just hope Buick is able to find path between mediocrity and bling.
Good Buick:
Bad Buick:
I have to agree. Really wanted to like this one, but the high beltline and low roof just turned me off. I know the roof’s supposed to be down, but riding in a tub isn’t my preference.
Mom and Dad bought a ’92 LeSabre brand new, so I’ve got a sweet spot for these H/C body Buicks. What they didn’t care for was the Dynamush(tm) insta-blown struts these came with brand new. Dad and I put new aftermarket struts on it about a year into its 12 years with us, which tamed the puke inducing ride substantially, and lent a lot more stability on wavy roads. It was not hard to get the OE suspension to leave the ground on a bad road, or to get it to leave the ground with it sitting still by jumping on the bumpers.
It was a magnet for getting rear ended though, it got bumped about a half dozen times, each time with no damage done. It was also very unreliable for the duration of its 3/36 warranty going in the shop at least once a month. Once it got past its 3 year mark, it was solid as a rock! oil changes and spark plugs and that 3800 was a honey of an engine. Not a great handler, but could scoot pretty good. More than once when I was driving it on family road trips, I’d bounce it off the 108mph speed limiter without realizing I was going that fast, with its soft accellerator spring, it was easy to rest your foot and gain speed without much effort.
At some point I’d like to find a later PA Ultra, to get that much more space.
I had completely forgotten “DynaRide”. It’s like they were trying to evoke the ’50s.
The main thing I can say about that generation of the Park Avenue is that the Le Sabre was the nicer-looking and better-proportioned of the two.
One other thing: I never could understand why they designed the car with that divided glass in the front doors. It sure made for a relatively small opening for the driver and front passenger.
Finally, these cars still suffered from GM’s “halfway-down” rear door glass mentality.
or the Not Down at all problem. Mom’s LeSabre the rear windows got stuck fully up about year 5, and stayed that way till we sold it. never had an issue with the A/C not working.
the funky ‘vent’ windows were odd, and the only thing I can think of was to clear the front speakers, or to make it a bit more aerodynamic and less wind noise.
One advantage those fake vent windows had was allowing the main window to roll down completely without resorting to those little triangular inserts you usually see in the front corner of the front window which is also where the rearview mirror is normally hung. The combination of the rearview mirror, triangle insert, and A-pillar blocked a wide swath of outward visibility. In GM’s arrangement on this Park Avenue and related cars, the mirror is moved back to the “vent”/main window cutline which separates the rearview mirror from the A-pillar and there’s no triangular insert at the front, leaving an open, unresricted view outward between them. Great front, side, and rear visibility in this gen Park Ave and LeSabre.
In several newer cars with their ever more rakish windshields, a small triangular window *ahead* of the A-pillar accomplishes the same thing, though not as well (as those tiny forward-of-the-A-pillar windows are often partially blocked or just too small to see through easily).
That’s what I think too–or rather, the LeSabre and Park Avenue looked too similar. Contrast the 88 and 98, two very distinct cars from each other.
Great write-up and nice juxtaposition of house and car.
These Park Avenues were probably the last “real” Buicks to my eyes–done just right: solid, stylish, low key but confident. It was cars like these that made Buick’s reputation for decades, and I still mourn the loss of the brand’s core essence (pun intended).
I’m partial to old houses (mine was built in 1923) so I see lots to love in this one. Hopefully it gets the care and upgrades it deserves. If my house is any indication, the bones are great, even if it has its quirks. The charm and solidity should outweigh any negatives. Plus, bonus points for standing strong though decades of Chicago winters!
A car like this would totally be on my list were I looking for a good used sedan.
But when they were new — no thanks. Not my style. What I’m willing to accept in a very used car is way different than when I’m shopping for new or newly used.
The new Opel-based Regal really speaks to me.
The Insignia is a pretty decent car, with an attractive style and nice interior. It may drive as well as a Mondeo but it is a very valid choice inthe sector, especialy as a low mileage, nearly new purchase.
Didn’t Buick only survive the 2008-9 Cull of Brands because of the Chinese sales?
A very good and valid point, Roger. Buick’s sales in China probably spared it getting the axe versus, say, Pontiac.
And I do, actually, like the Regal / Insignia on its own merits, even if its Buick-ness is somewhat diluted. I had a chance to rent one about a year back on a trip back to Michigan, and I was convinced I would buy one if I was making that kind of money…until I looked at the rear seat room. Still, it was such a responsive, fun, and well-put-together car. That Regal sold me on some modern, GM goodness.
I just miss the homegrown Buick designs. Perhaps I’m partial, being from Flint – home of former Buick World Headquarters.
Great write-up. There’s an interesting backstory to Buick’s success in China. Back in the early 90s, Chrysler and GM were competing for a joint venture with Shanghai Automotive Works. Over at Chrysler, Francois Castaing came up with the CCV, a plastic 2CV-ish “people’s car”. But the Chinese officials didn’t want people’s cars, they wanted cars to be chauffeured around in.
GM, got it, and one the contract. When it came to deciding on the brand, the Chinese mentioned that Jhou En Lai, Mao’s right hand man, had a Buick he liked when he was based in Shanghai, so they started making Centurys.
These were the mid 90s US model, and still in production when I moved to Beijing in 2001. But I believe they’ve followed VW’s lead and extended the rear compartment of their current offerings – because the “owner” is usually sitting in the back.
That’s one of the reasons the current Passat we get has a generous rear seat area – both it and the Jetta are China designs also made here – China and the US are the only markets where the Jetta historically outsold the Golf, due to a combined aversion to hatchbacks.
These are attractive cars, although I must say I prefer the contemporary 98 even if it less classically handsome. But after this, the rot kind of set in at Buick… Still relatively handsome designs and cushy interiors, but no advancement in design or quality. The brand was stagnant and it needed to be shaken up.
Buick has really hit its stride now. The LaCrosse is a solid Lexus ES competitor, the ageing Enclave is still handsome and upscale, the Regal is desirable… Now there’s also the Cascada which will further help Buick’s newfound premium image. Buick meandered downmarket in the 1970s and 1980s, I feel, and didn’t shore up its more upscale lines to the detriment of its image.
The most important car for Buick now though is the Encore and it seems to have hit a sweet-spot in the market. I know somebody who has leased one and is very happy. Is it a big, handsome boat? No. But it’s one of a lineup of cars that is helping re-establish Buick as a premium brand of high-quality cars with luxurious interiors. Not a brand of ageing, low-tech cars like the misbegotten Century which, although reliable and comfortable, was doing nothing good for Buick’s image.
Finally GM managed to Americanize Opels, not necessarily a bad thing…
Good catch on both the house and the car. My neighborhood in Toronto has a lot of older homes, and they have more charachter than anything built today. If I was in the market for a house (and had the money) I’d snap one up in a heartbeat. At present we live in a 1920’s apartment building that also has plenty of charachter, more so than the generic and ugly ’60’s and ’70’s buildings you see all over town. As for the Buick, nice find. They were the last Buicks I really liked, and they’re still a common sight. A friend of mine had a LeSabre of that vintage he inherited from his dad, and it was always a nice car to ride in. It was close to 10 years old when he got it in 2005, and he managed several more years of good service until the engine suddenly gave up the ghost. I’ve had a few Buicks as rentals (an Allure and a Lacrosse) and liked the power and good fuel economy from the 3800 engines, though otherwise they didn’t excite me much. I have yet to drive any of the latest models, but I hope they can take Buick in a new direction while maintaining the traits that made Buick stand out for all those years.
This strikes close to home. We live in a California Craftsman house that was built in 1927 and love it. Luckily our climate is warm enough that we don’t suffer the marginal energy inefficiencies that some do in the snow belt or in the super sunny areas. We have actual real working shades on the windows that allow airflow but keep the sun off and our utilities are not that bad.
Anyways, we have loved most of our Buicks. My first car was a Riviera and we have had a succession of LeSabres and Park Avenues over the years culminating in a supercharged Regal GSX. A supercharged Park Avenue from the mid 1990s is about the best combination you can get, strong powerful engine but smooth and comfortable and the pre 2000 versions were built in Flint MI at the old Buick Main and quality control was outstanding. Currently we are driving a Cadillac DTS and a Silverado truck so cannot comment on the late model Buicks but have heard good things about the new Regal and a close friend has a Lucerne CXL that he loves.
The Chinese love their Buicks – they are supposed to be bringing a small SUV over here that is built in China not sure that I care for that but the economies of scale probably dictated.
Nice looking cars to be sure. I have a Roadmaster but these Park Aves have definitely aged well.
That ice blue doesn’t hurt.
I would probably own one if I didn’t have an allergy to front-wheel-drive and unibody (and anything with less than a V8).
I think this generation Park Avenue is one of the best looking GM cars of the 90’s. I’ve seen a few around Europe; they look particularly dignified with amber turn signals.
Japanese parliament bought two ’92 Park Avenues for official use. Part of a plan to reduce the $38 billion trade imbalance with the U.S. Very well-styled car, especially the interior. Got my father to equip his ’92 with black walls/alloy wheels.
I just discovered this article about the Park Avenue and feel the urge to contribute my ten cents.
My personal car is a ’95 Park Avenue, which has been my daily driver for 21 years and counting. When I got it back in 2001 it had a mere 73,000 kilometers (45,370 miles) on the odometer; now, it’s close to 287,000 kilometers (178,375 miles).
I use metric measurements because I live in Germany, by the way.
This is the best car I’ve ever owned, period. It’s dependable, roomy, more than adequately powered, lavishly equipped, and extremely good-looking. As if all that wasn’t enough, it’s even quite economical for a car this size and weight. I routinely get 25 mpg with my Buick in a typical city/country/highway mix. This is more important than ever today with local fuel prices at approx. 7.5 dollars per gallon. Thanks for nothing, Putin.
Speaking of highways, I drove my car flat out just once on the vaunted German autobahn and it hit a solid, GPS-verified 205 kilometers per hour (127 mph), more than enough for my taste. I usually cruise at a relaxed 75 mph on the highway.
My other car, by means of comparison, a 1964 Chevy Bel Air four-door with a similarly-sized 230 CID Six, barely touches 150 kph (93 mph), but then it’s only got 140 gross/120 net horsepower and is considerably bigger and heavier. With the Bel Air, I cruise at 60-65 mph.
GM did indeed sell the Park Avenue over here in the 1990s for a few years, but in typical GM fashion, they asked an eye-watering price of 80,000 deutschmarks, which was approximately 40,000 dollars at the time. In the US, the base price was 26,360 bucks.
At 80,000 deutschmarks, the Buick competed with the likes of BMW and Mercedes, which jaded German upper-class car buyers would NEVER EVER give up for an American car. Therefore, the Park Avenue languished in the marketplace for a few years with a resounding – and perfectly predictable – lack of success and was quietly withdrawn after 1996.
GM probably never sold more than a couple hundred per year over here, but quite a few of them are still around at very reasonable prices. I bought mine in ’01 for 25,000 deutschmarks, a whopping 70 percent depreciation after a mere six years. Today, good examples sell for around 2,000 euros (2,200 dollars).
Anyway, I love my Buick Park Avenue and I intend to drive it for as long as I possibly can. Let’s see who quits first, me (I’m 61) or the Buick.