A couple Buicks parked in a shed with less than 1500 miles combined.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4398562/Twin-1987-Buick-Grand-Nationals-neglected-garage.html

or http://alturl.com/jwi2i

I really can't think of these as classic cars. 1950s, 60s, and
maybe early 70s, These are just too new. I'd probably like
to have a Tucker if I was into collecting cars. Its weird factor is
pretty high. The car had a third headlight that would turn with
the front wheels.

On 4/10/2017 7:59 PM, Dean Hoffman wrote:
A couple Buicks parked in a shed with less than 1500 miles combined.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4398562/Twin-1987-Buick-Grand-Nationals-neglected-garage.html


or http://alturl.com/jwi2i

I really can't think of these as classic cars. 1950s, 60s, and
maybe early 70s, These are just too new. I'd probably like
to have a Tucker if I was into collecting cars. Its weird factor is
pretty high. The car had a third headlight that would turn with
the front wheels.

Still 47 Tuckers around if you have about $3million you can get one.

The Grand Nationals will be worth quite a bit and gain in value,
especially if kept together. Not often you find twins. But I agree, not
classics yet.

On 2017-04-11, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Still 47 Tuckers around if you have about $3million you can get one.

I remember meeting a Tucker owner --with his car-- at a car festival
at Half Moon Bay, CA. He had personally driven it down from Oregon
jes to be at this particular festival. The car was fully functional.


The Grand Nationals will be worth quite a bit and gain in value,
especially if kept together. Not often you find twins. But I agree, not
classics yet.

Although I never drove one, I recall them being the terror of the
tarmac. They ruled the drag strip .....and with a turbocharged V6, no
less. I'd say they were considered "classics" in their own day.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars...987-buick-gnx/

****OR****

http://tinyurl.com/n2g36ry

nb