I’m well into my forties and I still, occasionally, like to join friends for a night out dancing. No one will ever accuse me of being the best dancer these days, but when I flop around on the dance floor, I have been known to do so with great gusto. I will probably be (if I’m not already) that embarrassing uncle who wants to “hang” with my young nieces and nephews in about ten years from now. I’m an old soul who also has a youthful spirit, if that makes sense at all. In my 20s starting in the mid-’90s, I had listened to a lot of house and electronica, and back then and for a brief, shining moment, I felt like I was one of the better movers on the floor. (In my recollection, anyway.)
How does any of this relate to the reborn, final-generation of Buick Roadmaster, the sedan configuration of which had been reintroduced for model year ’92? I’ll get to that. The downsized B-Bodies from GM seem to be perennial favorites and topics of discussion here at Curbside Classic, and for good reason. The General’s first attempt at downsizing popular and well-liked models was a hands-down success, with those cars being thoroughly modern and achieving most (if not all) of their intended goals to increase efficiency and maneuverability without sacrificing space, utility, quality or class.
In the late ’70s, the “B” platform was, from nearly all accounts I’ve read (I was in diapers at the time), a coup in all positive connotations of that word – the cars that sent Ford and Chrysler scrambling to respond. The new B’s (and C’s) were the new, full-size benchmarks, the new paradigm, the trendsetters, the cool adults in the joint.
Fast-forward about fourteen years, and a new, rounded Roadmaster based on this same platform appeared in Buick showrooms. “‘Roadmaster’…wasn’t that a car from, like, the ’50s?” was what seemed to echo among my teenage peers who cared even a little bit about cars. My friend, Aree’s mom had bought a new one, and Aree was definitely not a fan, referring to it as “that big car” with genuine, disaffected disdain. “Big” it was, exceeding all significant external dimensions of Buick’s concurrent flagship sedan, the Park Avenue Ultra, in every direction.
The B-platform, once the cool, modern “grownup”, now seemed like a total anachronism. Trends and fashions seem to be revisited these days in even shorter cycles than I remember (it no longer seems like a whole twenty years has to pass before things come back into vogue), but for context and in my eyes, the return of the Roadmaster, looking like it did in mid-year ’91, was like your once-fashionable aunt continuing to rock her pocket-stitched Chic jeans and feathered Farrah-hair far into the ’80s like those things were still the epitome of female finery.
The Roadmaster Estate wagon returned first, for ’91, joined midyear by the sedan for model year ’92. I’m unsure about the model year of this example, but it lacks the updated bodyside moldings and revised side view mirrors of the 1995 and ’96 models. In ’92, only about $1,000 separated the starting prices of the base-model Park Avenue and the upmarket Roadmaster Limited ($25,300 versus $24,200). Sales of each, respective model weren’t that far apart: about 57,500 of the former against 43,500 of the latter. I can imagine that many in the older buying demographic of these cars were swayed by the “more car for the money” proposition the Roadmaster offered.
Let’s face it… some cultural icons will never age like the rest of us, but we can’t all be Bono or Madonna. And while I will never deliberately embarrass my nephews and nieces (or myself) by dusting off my old raver-wear navy blue jumpsuit, ball-chain choker and bleached-blond hair (I won’t post a picture, so don’t ask), there’s no guarantee that I won’t attempt, ten years into the future, to try to make as potentially embarrassing a throwback fashion statement as the Roadmaster seemed to when I was on the cusp of young adulthood. I hope that if the spirit moves me and I decide to bust out some baggy, JNCO jeans with the hems cut off and frayed, the younger Dennises will simply smile with acceptance and nostalgia as this Roadmaster caused me to do last fall.
Garfield Park, Chicago, Illinois.
Thursday, November 8, 2018.
Here’s some awesome related reading from Jana Lingo and William Stopford.
Thanks, Joseph! Enjoyable reading as always.
As to the JNCO’s etc – I hear you. I stopped trying to be “cool” at about 15-16 (1995-6ish) since I’m also young at heart but always an old soul. Better Half and I have been talking and planning about kids of late, so even more poignant that I hope to not embarrass them either. But there are photos of me with dyed hair also, so you know … that was before the military and I’m sticking to that story. And yet we were both gassed up dancing to Rhianna videos last night so perhaps it all is just a state of mind. 🤣🤣
Re the subject Roadcrusher – what’s not to love about a big GM barge?? As you noted these are the zenith of the 1977 B/C cars. Wanted when new, still do. These were even nicer as the Oldsmobile Vista Cruiser or Chevy Impala SS IMHO, but you really can’t go wrong. There is one (Buick) that lives in our neighborhood (light blue woodie wagon) and I nearly wreck into it in adoration a couple of times a week. I owe the team here a photo of that one, it’s really nice. 😎
But wait, Chevy, Olds, Buick… Aw, screw it – I’ll take the Cadillac. 😉😆
Thanks, Adam! “Roadcrusher” – I like it.
These cars still raise so many questions to me, chiefly “Why?”.
They just seemed so far behind the times and they were styled to show off the worst of their proportions.
I am with you. These struck me as being so “wrong” in so many ways.
Indeed. It looks like a 70s or 80s car dragged kicking and screaming into the 90s. The barrel-shaped side surfaces were really unflattering, too–something that all of these B-bodies were sadly afflicted with.
This is not one of GM’s better styling efforts. The rear doors and rear side windows are too short horizontally, making the profile awkward and unbalanced. My biggest beef, however, is with the front end with its fish-like wider-at-the-bottom grille. I am mystified why Buick didn’t use the more attractive front clip of the Roadmaster wagon, even if it is Caprice-derived.
I think generally these cars are more attractive in wagon form than the sedans were.
Tonyola, you nailed it – the main issue I had with the front of the Roadmaster sedan. It’s that grille.
I also agree with nlpnt – I think the wagons (both the Roadmaster and Caprice) were genuinely good-looking big cars.
Yep. The sedans were a bit awkward but the wagons killed it. 🙌😎
Funny u paid attention to the front end compared to the Roadie wagon version and its grill… I didnt really like how the front bumper is shaped compared to how the rear is… The front bumper is more wider at the ends amd more squared off than the rear and the rear bumper is way more narrow making the whole rear look far more narrow than it is…
How difficult would it be to argue these were retro before retro became cool again ten years later?
My grandparents (whom I have written about often here) purchased a lightly used 1992 Roadmaster in November 1992. That car with a total pile of fecal material as it required a multitude of torque converters, a few transmissions, and a replacement engine during their ownership.
Despite this they kept that car a very long time and to a higher mileage than any other car they ever owned. Maybe it’s because my grandfather observing “everything on that S.O.B. has been replaced so it’s not as old as you’d think” had something to do with it.
Like Brendan, my first thought in 1992 was “why”. Then I rode in one. The experience was totally different (not bad, just different) than what a Park Avenue offered. There’s something oddly compelling about a car that can cruise at 70 mph and the engine is only turning about 1,100 rpm.
Hagerty (the classic car insurance people) just released their prediction for the Top 10 hottest collector cars for 2019; in addition to the limited edition BMWs and such, a Buick Roadmaster wagon was on the list.
That’s a good line, Jason “not as old as you think…: I’ll use that. Your grandfather had jokes. 🤣🤣
I was not aware they were prone to eat torque converters? But entire transmissions and engines? How do you ruin a Hydramatic 4Lxxx, let alone a 350 Chevy motor? I’m sure your grandfather was no hot rodder either. Sheesh, how disappointing.
BTW- agreed. I think there is a lot to be said about the “feel” of traditional BOF RWD architecture. I know few here would disagree that the contemporary Park Avenue was lovely and desirable, especially with a supercharged 3800, but FWD is just a different animal.
All the torque converters, transmissions, and the second engine were replaced under warranty. So I think it was a combination of it being a very early production model (which is still weird, considering this was GMs sugar stick type of car) combined with a dealer that was throwing parts at it.
A Park Avenue is an apple; the Roadmaster an orange. Both are sweet, enjoyable, and round but the comparison stops about there.
I have heard that a revised transmission was introduced on the B-bodys during the last year of regular 350 V8 production BEFORE the LT1 was introduced. The new trans is supposed to be more durable per the forum reports.
And yes it sounds like a dealer that throws parts at the problem. Our local GMC/Buick dealer while very good on the sales side has a reputation for throwing parts at problems instead of doing proper troubleshooting.
Jason, a good friend of mine had a 1992 Caprice for many years and miles and his had a torque converter failure too, Mind you that was at high mileage, something like 150K mile when that happened. The rest of his car proved to be relatively trouble free for the time he owned it.
Do you remember what the cause of the engine failure was? When I worked at a GM dealer, we did see SBC failures. No engine is infallible and I saw every type of GM engine have failures. The SBC were generally, pretty good overall though.
As for the transmissions, these cars would use a 4L60, which is just a renamed TH-700R4. By the late 80’s these were pretty well sorted, but they weren’t overly durable transmissions. We still saw lots of failures in the field, especially in trucks. The 4L60-E replaced it in 1993 in trucks and 1994 in the B-bodies. It, like its predecessor had mixed results when it came to durability. Some went to really high mileage, others failed at low mileage. There were definitely far more 4L60 swaps than SBC swaps in our shop.
I am wondering too if the dealership that replaced the transmission correctly adjusted the TV cable after replacement. Failure to do so will result in inadequate line pressures and an early failure.
The reasons for the engine swap are lost to time. When it happened I was away at college and got to hear about it in a telephone call.
Once the car got sorted out at around 45k to 50k, it was flawless. It’s just a shame that it all happened; they bought a Town Car the next time around.
Jason, I love that your grandfather put more chips on the table even after all of those repairs.
I was actually on the Hagerty website today to research the average market value of a car I was looking to insure… that’s fascinating that the Roadmaster Estate is a predicted collector-car pick! Probably because it’s the last of its type.
Or because they are freaking sweet cars! (says the owner of a 96 Roadmaster wagon).
Well written, enjoyable article!
I was the deeply uncool younger brother of a cheerleader type in high school, so I learned to do whatever I wanted and not worry about what my peers thought .
Like driving a road master, why the heck not? 😉
Man , did these things look bloated! With cheap trim pieces to boot. GM was clearly on the downslide
I’ve no experience with the sedan but have owned a ’94 Roadmonster wagon for 15 years. No SUV is more competent or relaxed with a load of three bikes (inside) cruising down the western interstate at 75 mph. Driver’s seat is so comfortable I wish I had one in my den. Parallel parking is not advised.
I had to look up JNCO. As always, CC stretches the boundaries of my worldly knowledge. As for the Roadmaster, I think it’s aged well.
Agreed, this car was an old soul when it was introduced. FoMoCo people had the Panther, and this car was GM’s answer for its die-hard fans. Sometimes throwback is good.
I will confess a certain fondness for the Roadie wagon, and until maybe 10 years ago really nice ones could be found out and about.
Always enjoy your views and photography Joseph. In the lead photo, I have to admit, I am appreciating the beautiful autumn tree in the background as much the Buick.
I was in my very early 20s at the time, and I wasn’t especially enamored by this retro look. To me, they appeared like an old car, they tried to modernize with smoothed edges. Rather than the modern styled car, with some styling cues that may have paid homage to Buick’s tradition, it should have been.
Nostalgia has warmed me some to this design. But at the time, I knew with with its aesthetics, it wasn’t going to woo many people under the age of 50.
Thanks, Daniel. Yes – my first teenage impression of these cars wasn’t so much that they were retro, but rather they just seemed superfluous. There were already two, large(ish) Buick sedans for sale: the LeSabre and Park Avenue. I understood that the Roadmaster was RWD and could be used to tow things, but when I think about it now, I can’t remember the last time I saw a Buick towing anything. And I spent a considerable fraction of my life in Florida.
Back in the early ‘90s, there was a very senior guy in my office who bought one of these after owning a long series of Jaguars, BMWs, Volvos, and Mercedes-Benzes. He gave the appearance of being a very refined New York establishment business type, complete with custom-tailored suits from Paul Stuart. When asked why he “stepped down” to the bulbous and awkwardly styled Roadmaster, he replied that he had tired of the expense and drama of European car ownership. This purchase proved to be a prophetic sign of things to come, and less than a year later, he retired and moved to Florida, where presumably the Roadmaster was a common sight.
You know that story about how GM brass stepped in when the 1959 redesign was going over budget and issued a decree that all five divisions would have to share the Buick’s front door? I wonder which division got their styling wish with this one, which also featured interchangeable front doors. Not Oldsmobile surely, which only fielded a wagon. And based on the Roadmaster’s looks, not Buick either this time. I’m guessing Chevrolet got first dibs since they had the volume model and also because it looked most like it belonged there. The Cadillac Fleetwood and especially the Buick Roadmaster just didn’t look the way they would have had their respective divisions been able to design the whole car.
This was most apparent at Buick, where you could compare the Roadmaster to their other big car, the (’91-’96) Park Avenue which very much did look like a Buick was supposed to, inside and out. No surprise, since unlike the Roadmaster, the Park Ave was gifted unique sheetmetal throughout, as well as a unique interior with a dash, door panels, and seats that looked nothing whatsover like those used by Olds or Pontiac. And to my eyes at least, much more attractive than the Roadmaster (and for that matter, the other GM divisions’ big front-drivers) both aesthetically and ergonomically.
Aging raver, meet an aging metalhead. What does that make me, a tail-end Fox Mustang?
\m/
Rock on.
It’s funny you should mention a latter-day Fox Mustang. There’s one that “lives” not far from me that I’ve been considering writing up. Maybe that should happen.
I actually thought the styling on these was fine. I still really want a last of the line Custom Cruiser with 350 and towing package. Blue velour interior please.
I used to hate never fitting in. Now I love the comment that I once heard said about me;
He marches to the beat of a different drummer. It’s not his fault they’re playing in a band in another Town!!
Maybe why I still would like to own a Roadmaster to this day.
My parent’s last car. It sits in my garage, hibernating.
We were a Buick family since the fifties and Mom and Pop insisted on a 1994 model year. (LT1) I wasn’t impressed with it at first. My Park Avenue Ultra was much better.
Once I inherited the car I took it to the local garage and had the guys put the police package suspension,steering, and brakes from the Impala on it. World of difference!
Not the most graceful styling job but I love my Roadmaster.
Great write up as always Joseph. You have a way with words when it comes to comparing a vehicles attributes to a person’s. While I liked the 91-96 Caprices (mostly the 93-96s), I never really cared for the styling on these Buicks. I agree with other commenters that the wagons were nicer looking.
If you would have gone back to the early 1980’s no one would have believed that a car like this would be introduced for 1992. But as we know, the automotive marketplace quickly changed in the 1980s and all of a sudden “big was back”. I remember reading comments in magazines from the 1980’s saying that there was a push inside GM to modernize the RWD cars once the 1985 C-bodies and 1986 H-bodies weren’t the roaring or profitable success that GM hoped. That’s the reason the D-body Cadillac also stuck around past 1985. My guess is that this was when the idea for the new B-body came into fruition. I also recall seeing spy photos on the new RWD cars in the late 1980s.
While it may be hard for some of us to comprehend now, there was a still a substantial amount of people in the market at this time that wanted a traditional American car. To them, that meant soft rides, large size and a V8 with RWD. That’s who these cars were marketed to. However, under Chuck Jordan, these cars took the aero trend too far for the conservative tastes of this market. While Ford had just the right amount of aero with the traditional attributes. My guess is that GM approved these new cars, but the budget was pretty limited, hence the limited chassis improvements. Had they performed a more concerted effort and had more conservative but modern styling, perhaps they would have been around a little longer.
Lincoln-Mercury nailed it, but Ford Division overshot the market with the aero look on the ’92 Crown Vic, despite it aping the already 6-year-old (but aimed at a more progressive buyer pool) Taurus rather than moving things forward. The ’93 gained a hastily shoehorned-in traditional chrome grille.
Thanks, Vince, and you make some great points.
It wasn’t so much the “aero” styling theme of the Roadmaster that didn’t appeal to me. I think that the concurrent Caprice’s styling was fairly well executed (minus the skirt-look rear-wheel cutouts on the early models), but it was the Roadmaster’s combination of “aero” with a bunch of straight lines. The rear door / window area still looks odd to me, combined with the curved sides and rounded tail.
Coming from Flint, Michigan, where Buick was HQ’d back when these cars were new, I still rooted for the success of this car. It’s nice to see one out and about.
These look good out of context, but I see how they might have come out as old fashioned back in the day. Come to think about it, Buick also did a new Riviera around that time, right? Although only the name was kind of retro on that one.
Here in Chile, you only used to see Roadmaster and Caprice as hearses.
The final-generation Buick Riviera came about in 1994, as a 1995 model. For the first year only, the Riviera used the 3800 Series I normally aspirated and supercharged engines. I suspect the 1995 cars also had the bridge-gap OBD 1.5 interface that was present in some 1994 and 1995 GM cars, rather than the OBD 2 standard that became a federal requirement in 1996.
The 1996-1997 cars got the 3800 Series II N/A and supercharged engines, which included a power bump. They also received a revised dashboard with wood inserts, a new radio, a new keyless entry system, and a couple of other upgrades.
In 1998, GM killed off the N/A engine and made the supercharged unit standard. Also, at some point, the Riviera’s engineers made a one-off concept featuring a rather ostentatious blue color, special wheels, and a Northstar V8 (like the Riviera’s platform mate, the Oldsmobile Aurora). This concept has been seen on the auction block a few times. I suspect they weren’t able to make the case to executives to green-light a Northstar Riviera or to keep the Riviera in production at all, because…
In 1999, GM concluded Riviera production with a special run of 200 “Silver Arrow” units. These got Silver Arrow badging and seat embroidery, a unique silver exterior color, and a numbered plaque.
The Riviera did get a final gasp of publicity when its interior was borrowed for Buick’s 2001 Blackhawk concept, albeit wrapped in better materials. The eighth-generation Riviera was Buick’s last-ever coupe until the introduction of the recent Cascada, which is of course a rebadged Opel.
Yes. There was a fantastic “new” Riviera. Had one, a 1994 model, supercharged 3800. That car was big, strong, luxurious, well built and did extralegal (triple digit) speeds every day. Woof, that was a Buick worth its name. 👍👍
But yes, that OBD 1.5 BS was infuriating albeit the new G Platform was awesome. Aurora Gen1 with a new engine, please… Or just another Rivi… The 3800 is more durable than the 4.0 “Shortstar” anyway 😎😎
Dad had a ’95. Great smooth ride and lots of power from the V8 but I thought the interior was cheap….something creaked on about every bump. Overall I liked the car as it was big and comfortable as a Buick should be.
Glad I left Chicago in the early ‘90’s – although there was a hip hop/rave scene in Seattle,the grunge look was at it’s apex, which was more my aesthetic since my high school days in the late ‘70’s early ‘80’s.
While I love the 1977-1979 GM B & C bodies, and am a big fan of the 1980 to 1990 Buick Estate Wagon, I never cared for the Roadmaster – it looked so very wrong to me.
I remember my younger Gen X brother and a Car Collector friend both liked the BIG Buick & it’s Wagon, I always thought they looked way too huge and backward, especially next to Ford’s restyled ‘92 Crown Vic / Grand Marquis and the Chrysler’s ‘92 FWD Cab Forwards.
Looks like this Roadmaster is wearing early-1980s Park Avenue wire wheel covers. It’s like trying to dance wearing your father’s shoes — if you’re uncool to begin with, that can’t possibly help.
Maybe the problem with the Roadmaster was that it was more restrained in styling than it could have been. Think about it, compared to the Park Avenue, it was really anachronistic when new. Bigger, bulbous, just dying to have 4 Ventiports on the fender like a good 1948 version or a snarling toothy grin as it wore in the 1950s. Had they gone all baroque and broughamed it up X10, the old folks would have still bought it, and loved it even more. Old people do not buy retro, they buy what they have bought previously and liked. They may change the size, maybe the color, but the basic entity stays the same.
The biggest problem with the Roadmaster was that, despite all efforts to make it look like a Buick, it was a whale Caprice. It sucked as a Chevy. It was worse as a Buick. I’ll be polite and not offer comment on the Cadillac version.
” Sales of each, respective model weren’t that far apart: about 57,500 of the former against 43,500 of the latter. I can imagine that many in the older buying demographic of these cars were swayed by the “more car for the money” proposition the Roadmaster offered.”
I imagine that sales of the LeSarbre ate into the sales of the Roadmaster and the PA.
The 1992 LeSabre was a lot of car for the money.
I like the Roadmaster wagon. The sedans seemed odd looking with the rear window
Thanks, everyone, for taking the time to read this on a Monday and for all the great comments and weigh-ins.
I had a little time over the December holidays to draft some pieces (with actual ink on paper) while slumming it with family, so it was fun to finally get this one scheduled. 🙂
That don’t look like Chicago. That looks suspiciously like a very warm place.
Correct. 🙂
For what it is worth, as it is a little beyond me, but Hagerty calls the 94-96 Roadmaster Estate Wagon one of the top ten collectibles for 2019.
The guys at Hagerty’s are smoking some really good shit!
Though not my cup of tea, I have to admit this car has presence in a way the Park Avenue never did. The biggest, baddest sedan in the U.S., with no apologies. Sort of like the Ford Excursion of sedans. Sure the styling is weird and it was hopelessly out of step with the times, but once it got the LT1 it was the ultimate boulevard cruiser. As much a Roadmaster as the four portholers from the fifties.
Drove a turtle cop version for years. Great power, but was like sitting in a bunker. Never broke down on me, but was well maintained by the county.
Great article, good human metaphor. This is a pretty unglamorous example with some of its side bump strips fallen off (common malady), front trim sagging, various dents, scratches and rust and the wrong hubcaps. Nothing says past-its-prime on a car to me like the wrong hubcaps! But it keeps on rolling, a true CC. BTW, I put this as a 92 or 93 model, based on the dashboard.
I never questioned “why” on these cars. I spent much-loved time with my grandparents and their retirement community friends back in the 80’s and can tell you first hand that there were men (don’t recall women ever talking about it) who were untrusting and unenthusiastic about the new breed of front wheel drive cars and disappointed when Buick dropped their RWD sedans after 1985. My great uncle was one. He kept his 83 Park Avenue much longer than he had been in the habit of doing, before finally giving in and buying a 91 LeSabre. When the 92 Roadmaster came out, my thought was that this is the very man they built that car for. I tried to sell him on buying one, but he didn’t want to replace his new LeSabre which he actually ended up liking. Sadly, he died in 94 so the LeSabre was his last car. My great Aunt kept the car for another 10 years, and I think it only ever had about 10k miles on it.
I don’t understand the hatred on this car, I have owned 1 wagon and now 5 sedans, all high mileage all strong runners. 350 V8 w/ the 700r4 trans is one of the strongest drivetrains around. The powerful LT1 version with 4L60E was a bit finiky-er but still as reliable and strong, more so than other V8 contemporaries available…
True, towing is usually reserved for the wagons (allthough I tow with mine – even with the smaller 2.56 gears – higher gearing is how you could tow up to 5000lbs) and I understand the styling isn’t everyones cup of tea. I personally like the ‘bulldog’ front end grill on the sedan, and yes while a restyled Buick, the styling was in line with all other Buicks, good looking throw back while being modern and “Buick”
I have never gotten anything but compliments driving my roadies and while its not cute
(my wife says “well, it’s very comfortable” when I ask how she likes it) its a good looking car with good lines, for me exactly what I need it to be
I have the ultra rare Canyon Yellow, yes a throwback color in itself, that was only available in 1992
I prefer the LT1 Roadmaster sedans. I drive a ’96 black limited with no fake top and the aluminum wheels with whitewalls. The car gets attention everywhere. I also keep it looking as new as possible. The mistake people make with many is not keeping them up. If the rubber trim starts to sag, they pull it off and it looks nasty.
There’s more beat up versions driving around than clean examples. As for the interior, the only real weak spot is the fake wood strips on the door panels. These cars are amazing on the road and the LT1 gives it power on regular gas. I also have what I consider the holy grail, another black ’96 sedan with the Grand Touring suspension.
I’ll drive these before I drive anything modern. Great under appreciated cars.