My dad bought me a 1986 Buick Century T-Type when I was in high school, and I absolutely loved it. It was a total sleeper car and was powerful for ‘80s standards. I wish I still had it or could find another.
If you did not live through the era of "under powered" cars in the late 70s and the 80s you can't truly understand what these cars like the Buick T Types represented in terms of performance. Even "cool" cars like Camaros and Mustangs were strangled power wise in those days TBH. The advances made in performance in the 90s to today due to the computer controls and fuel injection and the overall design of engines is incredible when you think about it. Four cylinder engines routinely make more horsepower now than many V8s commonly did in the 80s. Thanks for these videos. They really do bring back Old Car Memories, at least for me.
Those cars in the 80's were computer controlled and fuel injected also, the reason today's engine's make so much more power per ci then they did back then is mostly from having much better shaped ports and combustion chambers, trust me I've been building performance engine's for years and you can take some older engine's and have the combustion chambers and ports welded up and reshaped like how today's are and they'll make the kind of power today's engine's do with the same efficiency, I could even get an old engine with a carb and points ignition to pass a modern emissions test by doing that, although it may not pass when you have a major weather change but even then it'd come real close. Computer control and fuel injection gives you consistency over atmospheric changes from changes in altitude and weather but it won't give you the kind of increase in power per ci that modern cars have, that's from the manufacturer's finally listening to outfits like Branch Flowmetrics, they tried telling manufacturer's years ago that their ports were too big and their combustion chambers were poorly shaped, after racing teams that used head's with ports and combustion chambers set up by Branch were kicking the snot out of the factory race prepped machines the manufacturer's started contracting them to do development work for them.
20 years later in 2008 you could buy a factory tuned turbo chevy cobalt that does the 0-60 in 4.9secs which is on par with the mid 80's fastest lamborghinis and the buick gnx, in 2021 they are all considered as fine but not fast for the enthusiasts that does not drive 1000hp+ twin tubo v8 cars as daily drivers... time is changing faster than we can imagine lol
@@dukecraig2402 you forgot prescision, not just consistency, you cant tune a carbureshit and a point distributor on a table of rpms with different timings and fuel ratios, you cant take a look at ur spark plugs when youre at wot if the mixture is too lean lol
@@retrocompaq5212 Yea, I can, only people like you who've never worked with carbs and points think that, I've been working with both carb and points systems and EFI ECU systems since the 80's, I'm from the very first generation of people to work with EFI ECU systems from back when you had to tune in TPS's. With the CV style carbs I work with on bikes and how I know how to modify points I have one bike that after I get done sailing past people like they're sitting still they can't believe it has points in it, then when we stop at the gas station they can't believe their eyes when they watch me putting 87 Octane gas in it, nobody can figure it out because they have all their experience from reading magazines and online articles instead of the 40 years experience I've had doing this since 1981.
@@invisiblekid7374 Dude I'm not forgetting about anything, I've only been doing this since before you were born. Guys like you are all fascinated with dyno's and this and that and you're the polar opposite of everyone who years ago completely dismissed computers when they first come into play with engine management. Both of you put too much faith in one thing and completely dismiss the other as being junk, at the end of the day whoever passes everyone else wins, here's a news flash for you, dyno's and ECU's aren't the final say in matters the way all you guy's thing they are, all of you think an engine run by an ECU that's "dyno tuned" is the ultimate in performance, it isn't, aside from dyno's being able to be manulipated by unethical operators the fact is different dyno's will give you different results, you'll get number's all over the place from different one's, so as much as you dismiss the carb and points systems you give too much credit to ECU's, they're not the magic wand you think they are, they're just something that's programed by a person and if you're not a good tuner then at the end of the day all the downloadable MAP's in the world aren't going to do you any good. And a good rider or driver operating something with points and a carb will fly right past someone who thinks he's Invincible because he's got a dyno tuned ECU running his engine, the difference they make over a well tuned engine with a carb and points is microscopic.
On April 15, 1987 (tax day) I drove past a brand new ‘87 Century T-Type (yes, it was a 1987 four door T-Type, as it had the 1987-spec super lengthened overhang above the deep-set headlamps, minimalist blacked out cross-hatch grille opening and blacked out headlamp bezels) sitting right in the middle of the showroom window at a long since defunct dealer in Morgantown WV. It was black on black with a burgundy interior and the SFI 3.8 - it was so sinister looking for a Century I couldn’t stop staring at it. So…. I bought it. I’ve never made an impulsive purchase like that before or since. But I’m so glad I did. Loved that car. Well, once we got past the little problem it encountered on that very first day. You see, late that evening I took my brand new baby to the post office (located directly behind the Buick dealer) to file my taxes (yeah I was cutting it close) As I went to turn and climb the one-block long hill alongside the dealer, the car shuddered to a stop. It was running and in drive but it refused to move. It just shuddered. Did I hit a boulder in downtown Morgantown and not notice? I got out and looked at it. First one side. Then the other. Nothing unusual. Then head-on. That’s when I noticed the front wheels were decidedly pigeon-toed. Dealer was closed (it was 11 pm) so I had no choice but to have it towed about 80 feet and plopped onto the sidewalk directly in front of the dealership entrance. … 9 am I got a call from the GM - he didn’t appreciate my stunt. To effin bad. They found the cotter pins were missing from the front suspension assembly and the wheels “toed-in” as a result. They had it fixed and in my driveway by 10 am. That was the only thing that went wrong with that car in the four years I owned it. I miss it.
@@axelalex4980 I didn't go to school at WVU but I'm from just across the state line in Pennsylvania and had a lot of high school friends who went to school down there, I attended my share of couch burnings back in the day.
@@dukecraig2402 You’d think so, wouldn’t you? Nope - no couch rendezvous. I knew I couldn’t have hit a deer - I only lived 2/3 of a mile from the dealer.
My first car was a 1983 Century Custom. It had many of the options as a T-Type. Sunroof, console shifter, power everything, the 14-inch aluminum wheels. Later got an 84 T-Type with all the same options. It had a noticeably stiffer ride. Miss those cars.
I'll be "that guy". I owned the '84 Century "Olympia". Buick loaned the Olympias to participants of the '84 Olympics then sold them to the general public. Nice car. The Bose stereo/CD was the best factory sound system I'd ever heard at the time. Regrets; I've had a few.
I was gonna post the same. How sad is it that performance cars in the late 60’s and early 70’s were reduced to golf cart performance figures by the mid 80’s? On second thought, golf carts probably accelerated faster. I’ve owned a lot of American cars, from the 70s, 90’s, 2000’s, 2010’s, & 2020’s +… but I’ve never owned anything from the 80’s because the “dark days” is an understatement.
🙄 These weren't the "dark days". If you don't remember th 80's, you don't have any perspective on how the 80's were a big improvement over the late 70's.
@@Richaag Actually by the mid 80's things were starting to turn around and come back as far as performance with US cars, it isn't just about HP number's, and even then in the mid 80's that was starting to head upwards. In the mid 80's the US auto manufacturers started incorporating better drive trains, the transmissions and their shifting points were getting better, not only was power starting to go up but equally as important they were sending it to the ground much better than they were just 10 years before, add in the leap forward that tire technology took in 1984 when the Goodyear Gatorback tire debuted on the new 84 Corvette, that was a quantum leap forward in tires that no foreign tire manufacturer had and within a few years all the other US performance tire manufacturers upped their game to stay competitive with Goodyear and things really started changing. I started working as a mechanic in 1981, that was about as dark as days were for the domestic performance world, the early computers that were on cars, which coincidentally started in 1981 to, were horrible, they were real nightmares to deal with, the earliest systems actually had computer controlled carburetors, you wanna talk about a hot mess, they were horrible just to keep running right much less try to modify for performance, but by 86 everything except pickup trucks and vans had computer controlled fuel injection, things were changing. When my thinking on computer controlled engine's started to change was in 1987, the garage I worked at had a customer that owned a business that we did all the fleet work on their vehicles along with their personal one's, the owner of it pulled up out front in a brand new IROC Camaro that had the Corvette engine in it and he'd taken it to a performance shop that put a new chip in the computer (back then there was no remapping, ECU's had a plug in chip inside of them that could be changed out for an aftermarket one depending on what you were doing, ie stock engine, stage 1 etc etc) that unlocked a good bit of the engine's potential for emissions sake, after he came in the garage I ask him how it ran and he threw me the keys and said "Go ahead, take it for a ride", when I pulled back up to the garage 10 minutes later I had renewed faith in American performance, between that Corvette engine with the chip in the ECU and the improved drive train with it's 4 speed automatic transmission and those Gatorback tires that came on it that car MOVED, it was every bit a late 60's small block performance Camaro or Mustang was, not just the acceleration it had but the handling of that car would smoke any late 60's performance car made, any Camaro, Mustang or Challenger from "back in the day" wouldn't have stood a chance against that car on a road track and probably would fall to it at the drag strip. We had a customer that had a 308 Ferrari just like the Magnum PI car, same color and all, and I'll bet you that IROC would have taken it down hard. I knew then that America was getting back into the performance game and then cut to 10 years ago when you could buy cars like the new Dodge Chargers and the new Mustang's they were back on top, and along with them now we have the new mid engine Corvette hitting the road racing tracks and America is definitely back on top, king of the hill again💪💪💪 🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲. And they'll run with the best of them from Europe that cost 1.2 million dollars.
Born in 80', my grandparents had an 84' Century I got to ride in. THese Century T-Types were so rare to see on the street in a sea of other Cenutries on the road that I forgot they existed. A best friend in high school had 2 different 80's Century sedans starting in 96' that his dad had bought from the power company where they were business cars. The late 90's were full of old Buick's hauling teens, pounding bass and gangsta rap.
This was an unexpected video. I must say it was interesting and informative about the Century. You know Oldsmobile had a Cutlass Ciera ES 1984-1986, Ciera GT that had the 3.8 liter V6 1985-1987? Then it became Cutlass Ciera International Series in 1988. Pontiac had the 6000 STE as we all know. It was a good video.
Yup same body. just different front and rear ends. Some would claim it was badge engineering at it's worst, but I guess they didn't see cars like the Chevy uplander or Neon. Litterally same car, faults and all.
This is the first I've heard of the Buick T-Type. I didn't even know there was ever a Century 2 door coupe variant. It's so interesting to learn about cars like this that I didn't know ever existed. Another reason why this is such an awesome youtube channel.
Thanks for the trip down memory lane... my folks had an '83 Century T-type 3.0L sedan in the same silver/gray as most of the advertising photos. It was the family car from before I can remember, till just late enough that it was used for most of my learner's permit supervised-driving hours. It almost would've been my first car, but the 2nd engine was going out like the first engine had (wiped cam lobes, etc.) and my dad decided that it wasn't worth fixing again. I can't help but think the early T-types would have been better if Buick had swallowed their pride and used the Chevy 2.8 in 6000STE spec. I knew these were somewhat rare since most of the other Centuries I've seen were the more typical Buick look, but didn't realize they were quite as rare as they are.
I remember that the T Type Buicks existed (not just the Century T Type) but they were so rare even when they were brand new. The 3.8L V6 with SFI was VERY advanced for 1984, since most cars still had carburetors. The 3.8 V6 with a carburetor was still used on the rear wheel drive Regal at the time, and it was popular. Having an engine of this size with SFI in a car that was this small and light made these cars VERY fast. They did not keep producing T type Buicks because that was not the market segment Buick was intended to fill. Pontiac was supposed to be the sporty division of GM. GM had to go back to sorting out which division represented what market segment. Oldsmobile for example offered a sporty Cutlass Ciera GT for a while, then discontinued it by 1987 or so. I don't remember many of those being around either. By the late 80s/early 90s, the sporty cars went back to being offered only by Pontiac.
Back in the day, I was blessed with company cars to drive for business (and personal use at just pennies per mile). For 1985 I was given a new Century, Custom. It was a driving dream, even at the bass model level, as in previous years the company cars were Chevy Vega, Chevy II Nova, Oldsmobile Omega, Buick Skylark, which were small with 4 cylinder engines. The Century was very roomy inside and drove like a full size car with the very smooth V6 engine. Good memories. The T type Century was very rare, in my area of the country, as most Centuries were sold as company cars and to older folks wanting comfort at an affordable price and good gas mileage.
It’s unbelievable where has the time gone that was another world I vividly recall those cars and those days a long time ago yes and no I was more into Pontiac & Oldsmobile Then Buick but I like your tutorials Buick was riding high in those days so was Chrysler Plymouth & Ford I was just starting out still in high school just got my freedom pass a.k.a. Drivers license entering the work force going to save up for a car but what I did not know at the time I wound up with a used 79 olds cutlass with a V 6 it served me well until I got my first new 1990 GMC Sierra pickup
I had a 1988 chocolate brown Buick Century from around 2003 to 2007, I paid $500 for the car and other than an ignition coil going out on the 2.8 liter V6, I had no other problems with it in over 100,000 miles of driving it. It was uglier than sin though and I sold it for $800.
Excellent video...you never see any t types on the road anymore except for Regals. The Skyhawk T type was a little screamer with the 1.8 turbo and even had 1.8 turbo emblems on the hood scoop like a regal GN or T
What always killed me about GM in the 1980's was the staggering amount of overlap in their car lines. First you had the god awful small X-cars in 1980(citation, etc), then the slightly smaller sized but cheaper and better built J-body(cavalier) in 1982. Along with the slightly larger new FWD A-body(Century, Celiberity, Olds Ciera) which competed on price with the well equipped X-car. Yet you still had the old RWD 4 door A/G-body sedans which were similar in price to the FWD A-body. Then in 1985 they introduced the N-body(Grand Am, Cutlass Calais, Skylark) which also competed in the same price class as the FWD A-body, just so many cars that all looked the same, similar price, but were on different chassis. 1987 saw the introduction of the w-body, which was supposed to replace the A body entirely then GM kept the A-body(Century and Olds Calais) in production until 1995 or so.
Some of the overlap was due to sales. The G-body 2 doors were supposed to go away with the introduction of the N-bodies (hence the fact that they are styled similarly), but they sold so well GM kept them in production a few years longer until the W-bodies in '88. The FWD A body sedans were strong sellers for GM, so they kept them even though the newer sedan W-body was sold alongside them. Chevy was first to drop their version of the A after '89, then Pontiac in '91. But as you said, Olds and Buick kept theirs for several years later.
The Century Grand Sport really needed the 3800 Supercharged V6 that would later go into the Buick Regal GS. Then, it would have been a great seller for Buick I think.
You do an excellent job compiling info and editing. This is the type of superb video that should be on MotorTrend TV, instead of the monotonous content of that channel. Thank you!
I wish you would have made a video on the 80's Skylark T-Type. That was a cool car. Much quicker than the Century because it was lighter and only came in a coupe. A friend of mine bought an 85 with a manual and we drove to Chicago in it and it was a blast.
I had a white w/blue interior 1988 Buick Century with sport options that incl bucket seats, 60 series tires, lower stance, and the 3.8L V6. It took us from CA to FL & back, but after the engine died on me twice on mountain curves, I stupidly traded it in on a leased 89 Cougar.
In 1909 General Motors founder William Durant hired Louis Chevrolet to drive a Buick in the Vanderbilt Motor Cup race on the motor parkway on Long Island. He wanted to promote Buick as a sports car for GM. The Chevrolet and Pontiac divisions had not yet existed. During the race the car broke a fastest lap record but did not finish due to a mechanical breakdown.
Buick Regal Turbo and GNX still the baddest Buicks ever made. Nice pic of Monte Carlo SS I had an 87, white with red stripes and lettering still wish I had it.
My parents had an '87 Century with the 2.5 liter four. Very comfortable car, but slow and underpowered. Our '76 305 powered Nova left it in the absolute dust, like the rest of the 80's 4 cylinders out there.
The Buick Century T-Type and Gran Sport seem like pretty decent looking and performing cars. I remember occasionally seeing a few T-Types, and didn't really appreciate what they were. And it seems so did the general public, as these didn't seem to catch on like the Taurus SHO did. For a while, I had a 1986 Buick Century Custom 4 door, which is what I thought was the typical Buick. Wish I could have had a T-Type or Gran Sport.
I couldn't help but think of my 1987 Chevrolet celebrity Eurosport named Penelope while watching this. I would like a video on that car anyone else agree?
Had a 1983 Century, free due to family member's death. The body panels were at incorrectly attached at off angles, 0-60 in 17 seconds, the engine block cracked open at 47,000 miles and then sold the car for parts. Last GM car I ever owned.
It was always baffling to me that Buick never did a front drive turbo V6. We know it can be made to fit as others have added them after the fact. It would have been a challenger to the SHO for sure!
I don't clearly remember now but I think that the Century Grand Sport had a 5 speed manual transmission as standard with a 4 speed automatic as an option. The manual was a much better choice not only for performance but also for reliability and durability. Those early GM front drive automatics weren't all that good and a person had to be fanatical about fluid changes if they wanted it to last to 100,000 miles.
I don't believe any 90 deg Buick V6 has ever been available with a manual in any FWD platform. If it was in 1986 it would have still been the 4 speed since the 5 speed HD Muncie wasn't introduced until the next year for the 2nd gen Chevy 60deg V6 and the Quad 4
I can NEVER wait for new content ... I absolutely LOVE this channel! With that said is this a "Bot reader" we're listening to, or is this actually a person narrating? Ive always wondered and it seems to be more and more "non human" as time goes on. Anyway I respect the channel and its one of the few that I have notifications turned on for. Keep em coming✌🏾
I think the reason why they didn’t evolve these into turbos is the transmissions. The FWD transaxles likely couldn’t handle that kind of power back then.
I received a 7 year old, hand me down '86 Century 4 door, carburated, automatic with the crushed velour green bench seat. A true GM, Rodger Smith wonder machine. Enough to make a whole generation run away from American cars!
Excellent video, I wonder how many grand sports are around? I live in Michigan, somewhat near Buick city, I have only ever seen one. I know what they are, and had a few turbo Buicks back in the day. Now I drive a Denali, how I have fallen...LOL
My 86 Century almost killed me. The car would stall after shifting from a higher gear to a lower. Imagine cruising at 55 mph and exiting the highway, then stalling out on a ramp doing 30mph.
I always thought Oldsmobile and Buick were about equal in the GM heirarchy - above Chevy, but below Cadillac. Their cars were pretty similar. My family had a Cutlass Ciera, that was basically the same car as the Century.
a performence oriented car only offered with an automatic was kind of doomed to fail if it have has the choice between a auto and a manual at least in the Coupe (and meaby t-top too - it was called the T-Type after all) the Regal T-Type was as far as I know alongside the GN/GNX (which was a Le Sabre) offered with optional T-tops
The 1986 version of this car was well sorted. The 3.8 made it an excellent car. My family owned the 1983 version with the 3.0 liter. It was awful. Lots of oil pressure problems and core engine issues. And a 2 barrel carb and torque converter failure for additional punishment. This was my mothers car but dad paid the bills and dealt with all the warranty issues and I remember he was NOT happy. As a new driver I would come to a traffic light and stop. The oil pressure light would come on - Dad said put it in "N" and keep the R's up. We LOL about it today. I drive a Toyota.
So here’s some incredible trivia about the Century model line, well really ALL the “A” body vehicles. Here it is….of any and all of the available options or standard items made available on this line of vehicles, they came STANDARD with power front seat recliners. Anything and everything else power operated were options. You couldn’t even get power reclining seat on a Cadillac without buying an options, and today, they are really rare. You couldn’t even get MANUAL reclining seats on most GM cars. But there it is on the “A” body GM cars, standard for both front passenger and driver, no matter the entry level or higher level trim models. Isn’t that strange?
80’s “performance” is somewhat an oxymoron. The abundant torque steer in these front drivers made the driving experience unenjoyable for most. Having the wheel yanked to the right under even moderate acceleration and the distinct sensation of being pulled rather than pushed and propelled by the engine had many of us buying G bodies.
Idea for you if you’ve not already done it….Dodge Lancer/a Chrysler LeBaron GTS. You’ve got limited models (Lancer Pacifica), performance (Shelby Lancer), and a very short production run.
I wish I could buy a brand new basic car these days. A tool for me to get from A to B. No power seats, windows, or locks. No infotainment screens. A 5 speed too maybe. Not sure why no one will make this car, but it would sell like hot cakes. Something along the lines of a 2005 cobalt base car.
Those days are mostly gone. Possibly the closest you will get is a Nissan Versa at 15K for a manual trans. Nissan has verifiably 100% garbage automatic transmissions. But their manual transmissions? There's never an issue. And their engines are very solid. There's very little chance that there's an issue with them either.