1967 Buick Riviera Base Hardtop 2-door 7.0l on 2040-cars
Mormon Lake, Arizona, United States
Up for sale; my 1967 Buick Riviera, I have owned this car for quite some time and have decided to move it on to someone who will restore it to its original state. all of the mechanicals have been rebuilt replaced or upgraded, the things left to do include; interior reupholster, minor body work and paint. this car is an original survivor and was garaged for many years when I purchased it (still had bias ply tires on it). I have since had the 430 rebuilt professionally, detailed the engine bay, rebuilt the front end components, replaced all four coil springs, shocks are new. I have tried to keep all the replacement parts as original as possible because the car was so well preserved. I would hope whomever wins this auction will appreciate the originality of the car and not "cut it up" or create some kind of low rider/transformer from it. there were only a small number of these cars made in 67" and if you are looking at this I am sure you are aware of what this is. That said, I could go on for hours about what I have done to this car and the condition but the photos represent what I consider an honest depiction of the vehicle... so take a look and contact me with any questions, I will try to answer all of them in a timely manner and will send more photos if requested. mature audiences only please !! note: in trunk photo the "wet" you see is from washing the car and opening the trunk, the seal is fine and the trunk does not leak it is rust free. |
Buick Riviera for Sale
- 1969 buick riviera, fully documented with mileage log and orig. owner's manual!(US $34,900.00)
- Low reserve!!!! original miles!!!
- 1964 buick riviera base hardtop 2-door 7.0l(US $65,000.00)
- 1963 buick riviera base hardtop 2-door 7.0l 425 nailhead v8(US $4,000.00)
- 1968 buick riviera
- Classic 1984 blue riviera with 26,500 miles. original owner(US $5,000.00)
Auto Services in Arizona
Twentyfifth Street Automotive ★★★★★
Tru-Tek ★★★★★
Thomas Bishop Automotive ★★★★★
Sonny`s Upholstery ★★★★★
Samson Body Shop Service Center Auto Glass Towing and RV Service ★★★★★
Ramirez Wheel Fashion ★★★★★
Auto blog
Consumer Reports no longer recommends Honda Civic
Mon, Oct 24 2016Consumer Reports annual Car Reliability Survey is out, and yes, there are some big surprises. First and foremost? The venerable publication no longer recommends the Honda Civic. In fact, aside from the walking-dead CR-Z and limited-release Clarity fuel-cell car, the Civic is the only Honda to miss out on CR's prestigious nod. At the opposite end there's a surprise as well – Toyota and Lexus remain the most reliable brands on the market, but Buick cracked the top three. That's up from seventh last year, and the first time for an American brand to stand on the Consumer Reports podium. Mazda's entire lineup earned Recommended checks as well. Consumer Reports dinged the Civic for its "infuriating" touch-screen radio, lack of driver lumbar adjustability, the limited selection of cars on dealer lots fitted with Honda's popular Sensing system, and the company's decision to offer LaneWatch instead of a full-tilt blind-spot monitoring system. Its score? A lowly 58. The Civic isn't the only surprise drop from CR's Recommended ranks. The Audi A3, Ford F-150, Subaru WRX/STI, and Volkswagen Jetta, GTI, and Passat all lost the Consumer Reports' checkmark. On the flipside, a number of popular vehicles graduated to the Recommended ranks, including the BMW X5, Chevrolet Camaro, Corvette, and Cruze, Hyundai Santa Fe, Porsche Macan, and Tesla Model S. Perhaps the biggest surprise is the hilariously recall-prone Ford Escape getting a Recommended check – considering the popularity of Ford's small crossover, this is likely a coup for the brand, as it puts the Escape on a level playing field with the Recommended Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V, and Nissan Rogue. While Ford is probably happy to see CR promote the Escape, the list wasn't as kind for every brand. For example, of the entire Fiat Chrysler Automobiles catalog, the ancient Chrysler 300 was the only car to score a check – there wasn't a single Dodge, Fiat, Jeep, Maserati, or Ram on the list. That hurts. FCA isn't alone at the low end, either. GMC, Jaguar Land Rover, Mini, and Mitsubishi don't have a vehicle on CR's list between them, while brands like Mercedes-Benz, Volvo, Nissan, Lincoln, Infiniti, and Cadillac only have a few models each. You can check out Consumer Reports entire reliability roundup, even without a subscription, here.
Buick, Lexus top J.D. Power survey, as vehicle service improves overall
Fri, Mar 17 2017Buick and Lexus returned to their customary place atop J.D. Power's scorecard of satisfaction with dealership service departments. In the Customer Service Index Study, out Thursday, Buick scored 860 on a 1,000-point scale for mass-market brands and has topped this ranking in three of the past four years. Lexus topped the list of luxury brands with a score of 874. Fiat and Land Rover were the bottom-dwellers in the two categories. Buick and Lexus also ranked highly in the research company's overall Vehicle Dependability Study rankings out recently. The customer experience at car dealerships has improved steadily, with the overall industry score rising in seven of the past eight years. And one statistic is particularly remarkable: 94 percent of customers say their car was fixed right the first time. The dominant area of difficulty in repairs seems to be infotainment systems. Only 80 percent of respondents said their stereo was fixed right the first time. And in last month's Vehicle Dependability Study, J.D. Power reported that infotainment systems were the most commonly reported vehicle issue, accounting for 22 percent of all problems reported, up 2 percent from the previous year. J.D. Power surveyed 70,000 customers for the Customer Service Index Study. For the Vehicle Dependability Study, it surveyed 35,186 first owners of 2014 model-year vehicles after three years of ownership. Below are charts for both the current study and the complementary overall brand dependability survey. Related video:
NC dealer falsely announces return of Regal Grand National, Regal GNX
Wed, Dec 3 2014Like many new car dealers, Liberty Buick GMC gets so excited about its brands' new wares that it puts out press releases announcing when new models are on the way. That's not typically national news, but the Charlotte, NC store has created a bit of internet hubbub by announcing that it will be "one of the first dealers in the country to offer the Buick Regal GNX," and it's even started to add customers names to a waitlist. Only one problem: Despite seemingly annual rumors and calls for such a model, Buick hasn't announced any Grand National models at all – let alone a GNX – and no such models are actually in the cards. The Liberty Buick press release talks in a nostalgic, venerative tone of the original 1982-1987 GN franchise, and goes on to say: "These returning relics will be based on the highly-acclaimed Alpha vehicle architecture currently used in the Cadillac ATS, 2014 Cadillac CTS, and soon to be in the sixth-generation Chevy Camaro. Alpha is the internal name of a General Motors vehicle architecture engineered to underpin compact and mid-size rear-wheel-drive vehicles." In the release, Liberty Buick claimed the GN/GNX models would arrive in late 2015, citing a coupe bodystyle, including a rather fantastical-looking GNX rendering from Bestride.com. Unsurprisingly, none of this is true. Autoblog reached out to Buick for comment about the release, and brand communications manager Nick Richards confirmed that the company had discussed the matter with Liberty Buick representatives. Richards went on to say that the release was wholly incorrect, proclaiming "an agency [for the dealer] picked up a lot of stuff off the internet" and ran with it, including an old Car and Driver story from 2013. The dealership subsequently issued a retraction, with Scott McCorkle, owner of Liberty Buick GMC saying: "We love the idea of the Buick Regal GNX coming back to our showroom but for now, it's only a concept. Bottom-line, the article was incorrect.