Wish I had an extra $2000 I don't need...

[Flybrian]

1992 Skylark

Cowcatcher nose and all, 'tis a good deal.

[04monteintimidator]

no joke... i saw the title and i thought Fly had gone all... BV on us...

Skylarks were nice... when they were coupes... in the late 60s...

[ocnblu]

I always liked the later, GS coupe version of that car, after the nose job.

[Flybrian]

Note my qualifier, "I don't need." I'd still sort of on the look out for an low-mileage E-body ('86-92) Toronado for under $5k. There was one on eBay I linked to months ago that I really could've swung, but...oh well. Granted, there are plenty of -'85 Toros out there for my price, but no thanks.

[Ravenfreak13]

Ugh...my great aunt and uncle hav a 96 skylark...i want to puke everytime i see it...it looks so sad and depressed.

[z28luvr01]

We have a '97 (post nose job) with the 2.4L twin cam that my dad inherited from m greandfather when he passed away. The car is quite a little trooper. The most serious thing that's happened to it has been a burnt valve no more than two months ago. It's had two water pump changes (the second one was a 3rd party POS, so my dad put in a GM one this time). Other than that, the car has over 160K and still runs like new, and doesn't leak or burn anything.

[Guest YellowJacket894]

I had an aunt who owned one. Nice car and real reliable, but the Mr. Plow front bumper can take a hike for all I care. Don't know what GM was thinking with that one.

[XP715]

So do you like any exciting GM cars, or just their bland, front wheel drive mid-90's offerings? I'm gonna go with what 04monteintimidator said and remind you that there hasn't been a really good Skylark made since 1972.

[Flybrian]

So do you like any exciting GM cars, or just their bland, front wheel drive mid-90's offerings? I'm gonna go with what 04monteintimidator said and remind you that there hasn't been a really good Skylark made since 1972.

230608[/snapback]

I'm thinking about what would make a good second...er...third car. Plus, it would be unique. Plus, these cars are realistic. No one likes anything automotive from the 80s and 90s, many are just coming out of the hands of grandpa and are dirt cheap, fairly modern componants (fuel injection, good brakes, etc). Also, I have an affinity for late-80s Toronados for sentimental reasons and the fact that the ones right before aren't as cool.

Lastly, need I remind that many cars from the 70s were just as unexciting.

In any case, at least I'm not gaga over a Millenia.

[Guest YellowJacket894]

Man, I could clear a whole snowbank with that bumper, just take down a few snowmen and make a few kids cry.

[Flybrian]

Man, I could clear a whole snowbank with that bumper, just take down a few snowmen and make a few kids cry.

230613[/snapback]

Little known N-body Skylark facts:

*The car arrives before you do.

*If you run into a wall with a '92, your car becomes a '96.

[Cory Wolfe]

In any case, at least I'm not gaga over a Millenia.

230612[/snapback]

Hey!

As far as that Skylark... Oh my... Atleast the cars I lust after have some sort of style.

[XP715]

Both Fly and BV have good arguments at this point.....

[04monteintimidator]

wait a second... i get it now... you want that so you can push all the toyotas out of the way so you can keep your Aurora safe... makes sense... i say go for it...

Edited December 21, 2006 by 04monteintimidator

[knightfan26917]

Skylarks were nice... when they were coupes... in the late 60s...

*raises eyebrow*

Hmmm....interesting.

Fly ... I took a look at the linked ad ... not bad, actually. Tho, I readily admit when those first came out, I wondered why Buick was trying to be Pontiac, what with the front nose the way it was pointed .

Cort:33swm."Mr MC" / "Mr Road Trip".pig valve.pacemaker

PICS:lego.HO.model.MCinfo.RT.CHD = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort

"Confusing what is real" ... Linkin Park ... 'Crawling'

[04monteintimidator]

*raises eyebrow*

Hmmm....interesting.

230654[/snapback]

was that a... "you drive a FWD Monte Carlo" kind of interesting... or a "you have a strange taste in cars" kind of interesting?

no hard feelings... just curious

[knightfan26917]

was that a... "you drive a FWD Monte Carlo" kind of interesting... or a "you have a strange taste in cars" kind of interesting?

*sighs*

Before anyone blows this way out of wack ... the answer to your query is "a little bit of both, actually". I think I was just shocked that you had written that....

Cort:33swm."Mr MC" / "Mr Road Trip".pig valve.pacemaker

PICS:lego.HO.model.MCinfo.RT.CHD = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort

"Who do you think you’re talkin’ to?" ... Lee Roy Parnell ... 'What Kind Of Fool Do You Think I Am?'

[04monteintimidator]

oh alright... i wasnt trying to start anything... i was simply intrigued

[ocnblu]

It seems like the '92 Skylark was an attempt to return to the old days, when W-shaped front ends were produced regularly by Buick, except the older ones leaned more forward than back. I think the backward lean of the front end is what doomed it.

[Sixty8panther]

XP: Take your own advice: "Don't HATE... appreci-ATE!" :wink:

It's a Buick, and a cool one at that. Tthe N-bodys

were a great attempt to spice up styling on

otherwise bland mainstream cars of the masses.

The Grand Am, Skylark & Achieva all looked

quite different and yet they shared more than

many cars from the 90s that you'd think were

absolute twins in every department.

I think the new Ford tripplets and the last VW

Jetta look like they're the same damn car

from profile and they have no excuse.

I loved these Skylarks... "love it or hate it styling"

always beats "Camry bland" anyday. Too bad they

were FWD, these cars looked sharp IMHO. Plus

Honda copied the rear on theor Accord ten years

later, so they were ahead of the curve.

Edited December 21, 2006 by Sixty8panther

[XP715]

XP: Take your own advice: "Don't HATE... appreci-ATE!" :wink:

It's a Buick, and a cool one at that. Tthe N-bodys

were a great attempt to spice up styling on

otherwise bland mainstream cars of the masses.

The Grand Am, Skylark & Achieva all looked

quite different and yet they shared more than

many cars from the 90s that you'd think were

absolute twins in every department.

I think the new Ford tripplets and the last VW

Jetta look like they're the same damn car

from profile and they have no excuse.

I loved these Skylarks... "love it or hate it styling"

always beats "Camry bland" anyday. Too bad they

were FWD, these cars looked sharp IMHO. Plus

Honda copied the rear on theor Accord ten years

later, so they were ahead of the curve.

230777[/snapback]

I suppose. Maybe part of the reason I don't like it is because I have to look at my turd neighbor's bright red piece of $h! '93 every day that he keeps driving regardless of the fact that the suspension's f@#ked and it's developed like a bearing knock or something; the car sounds AWFUL and he's beating it to death. It's just that nose is so ugly, man. Remember Jahan, the guy I used to work with that moved to North Carolina? He had a '96 and that car didn't bother me at all because it looked normal; the restyle on the nose looked nice and it seemed fairly comfortable when I drove it. I used to get a kick out of seeing him dragging his boat around with it!

I guess another reason it seems like a bad idea too is because look at what we've gotten for around $2000; would you take one of those, or a mid-90's Skylark? Tell me I'm wrong!

[Guest YellowJacket894]

Little known N-body Skylark facts:

*The car arrives before you do.

*If you run into a wall with a '92, your car becomes a '96.

Oh-ho! Interesting.

[Drew Dowdell]

Note my qualifier, "I don't need." I'd still sort of on the look out for an low-mileage E-body ('91-92) Toronado for under $5k. There was one on eBay I linked to months ago that I really could've swung, but...oh well. Granted, there are plenty of -'85 Toros out there for my price, but no thanks.

230550[/snapback]

fixed

[Sixty8panther]

Well as far as the nose, I love that piece of styling.

It always reminded me of 1974 camaro more than

any Buick but I know what they were going for:

I guess another reason it seems like a bad idea too is because look at what we've gotten for around $2000; would you take one of those, or a mid-90's Skylark? Tell me I'm wrong! 

230787[/snapback]

YES!

Anything over $1500 and it better be a RWD, hardtop, V8, BOF landyacht...

Anyrthing above $4000 & it better be a 1959 Buick/Pontiac/Dodge/Plymouth something-or-other or a 1931 Pontiac [ex-Argentenian taxi cab].

Ahh-Ruuugggga~!!!

Edited December 21, 2006 by Sixty8panther

[Petra]

Whenever I see this car, I think of that Jiffy Lube commerical with the guy inside the glovebox.

"Have you checked your Owner's Manual lately?"

[Cory Wolfe]

I suppose. Maybe part of the reason I don't like it is because I have to look at my turd neighbor's bright red piece of $h! '93 every day that he keeps driving regardless of the fact that the suspension's f@#ked and it's developed like a bearing knock or something; the car sounds AWFUL and he's beating it to death.

230787[/snapback]

Let me guess... Quad4?

[Flybrian]

fixed

230807[/snapback]

Those don't have throttle shifters. :AH-HA_wink:

[Drew Dowdell]

Those don't have throttle shifters.  :AH-HA_wink:

230839[/snapback]

they also don't have docked tails.

[knightfan26917]

oh alright... i wasnt trying to start anything... i was simply intrigued

*nods*

OK ... I believe you.

As I wrote, I guess I was just shocked you had written that about the Skylark here when you pipe up whenever someone talks about the new mcs vs. the old MCs.....

Cort:33swm."Mr MC" / "Mr Road Trip".pig valve.pacemaker

PICS:lego.HO.model.MCinfo.RT.CHD = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort

"It almost seems like yesterday" ... Kenny Rogers ... '20 Years Ago'

[mjdecker]

92-98 N-bodies:

Grand Am > Achieva > Skylark

Coupes > Sedans (the grand am one was alright but I despised the other two as sedans)

[Cory Wolfe]

2. Black Viper: because he still has those model cars he was supposed to sell me months ago.    :AH-HA_wink:

You can have them... you just have to drive up here and get them.

92-98 N-bodies:

Grand Am > Achieva > Skylark

Coupes > Sedans (the grand am one was alright but I despised the other two as sedans)

231008[/snapback]

[Intrepidation]

Gah, sorry fly but that is an ugly mofo. I'd take almost any other car over that. Hell, I'd take a Neon over it...if only cuz it's easier on my eyes...at least you can call it "cute"...then it blows a head gasket

[XP715]

Let me guess... Quad4?

230838[/snapback]

Gee, how'd you ever manage to guess that one?!

And speaking of ugly cars, what's the latest on your buddy's LTD; that still for sale?

[FAPTurbo]

Oh, my God... that's an ugly mofo...

It redeems itself by being ugly in a kinda funny way though

[Cory Wolfe]

And speaking of ugly cars, what's the latest on your buddy's LTD; that still for sale?

231046[/snapback]

I have no idea... He still has it, he's just retarded. Doesnt know whether he wants to sell it or not.

www.usps.com

www.fedex.com

www.ups.com

www.dhl.com

231222[/snapback]

Well, refresh my memory of what one's you wanted and I'll look into it. :wink:

[GMTruckGuy74]

Fly, I too have liked the '92 Skylarks for a long time. I got my driver's license in December of '91, so these were the newest GM cars out then and I would have taken a 1992 Grand Am GT coupe, Olds Achieva SC coupe or Skylark GS coupe if I had the chance (on a promotion, I got to test-drive the Achieva SC in bright red and fell in love with it!).

A neighbor of mine has a '92 Skylark GS in the color combo I wanted back in '91/'92 (and no, I wasn't on drugs back then!):

This car was actually for sale last spring, until the car got hit while parked on the street. The fender was replaced recently (a day or two ago) and needs paint. So I'll be keeping an eye out for the "For Sale" sign to return (not that I'd buy it, unless they want like $500 for it!).