PontiacBonnevilleClub.com

This thread for the most part is confirming all along what I thought of the 00+ versus the 92-99.

Mentioned before the last time that this was discussed a few years ago how much I missed my '95 after buying the '04. At the time, I think some folks thought I was nuts!

In my '04, there was no room in the front... or the back. Never could figure out how such a big sedan could feel so small.

Trunk leaked, gauge cluster failed prematurely. Otherwise, it was a solid car.

Saw the '04 two days ago... hate to say it, but I can't say that I really have been missing it!

The only 00+ I would ever get is either a GXP, and you might think I'm crazy, but moreso than that, an 05 SLE....at that it would only be a second car to my 95.

viper8907 wrote:

2000Silverbullet wrote: The 94 handles a little better than the 00.

How does the suspension on a 99 SSEi compare to a 94? Cause I think my 99 handles way worse than my 00.

Thats a hard comparison.. I did the F41 swap on my 95 Bonneville and I feel it handle better than the my 03 and rides better and thats even with extremely tired shocks...

Its really hard to compare the 92-99 suspensions as some were mild to wild in the handling department.. Sandrock at one point had a 94 SSE that had FE2, but it looked like it was lowered and sat low.. The suspension was all factory.. It rode and handled like it was on rails...

The 97 SSE he has rides and drives good but can't be compared with the 94 he had.. There were as many as 3-4 spring rates you could have had in the F41-FE2 group.. It was just nuts how GM did the suspensions on the 91-96 C bodies and 91-99 H Bodies.. The cars could be had from wild to mild..

Its possible that your 99 SSEi may have the softest FE2 spring rate and may be comparable to the stiffest FE1 spring rate.. So yes the 00 may seem like a better handling car..

Jrs3800 wrote:

viper8907 wrote:

2000Silverbullet wrote: The 94 handles a little better than the 00.

How does the suspension on a 99 SSEi compare to a 94? Cause I think my 99 handles way worse than my 00.

Thats a hard comparison.. I did the F41 swap on my 95 Bonneville and I feel it handle better than the my 03 and rides better and thats even with extremely tired shocks...

Its really hard to compare the 92-99 suspensions as some were mild to wild in the handling department.. Sandrock at one point had a 94 SSE that had FE2, but it looked like it was lowered and sat low.. The suspension was all factory.. It rode and handled like it was on rails...

The 97 SSE he has rides and drives good but can't be compared with the 94 he had.. There were as many as 3-4 spring rates you could have had in the F41-FE2 group.. It was just nuts how GM did the suspensions on the 91-96 C bodies and 91-99 H Bodies.. The cars could be had from wild to mild..

Its possible that your 99 SSEi may have the softest FE2 spring rate and may be comparable to the stiffest FE1 spring rate.. So yes the 00 may seem like a better handling car..

Thats probably what the deal is, because there is way more body roll on my 99, although it could maybe use some new struts, so that would make a difference too.

I agree that the older cars were alot more comfortable and seemed to be of Higher quality. I cant understand why automakers are trying to make every car as sporty as possible if people want a cockpit like interior they can buy a sports car. My olds 98 is a hell of alot more comfortable and rides alot smoother than my lucerne which I just sold. The controls in the new cars look so cheap being all cheap plastic, the older cars looked alot more classy with the chrome switches, door handles and shifter handle.

If you have the budget for a newer car, but prefer the 96-99 (and i'll definitely agree with you there)... then you could probably find a very nice 96-99 SSEi, and use the leftover money to fix it up really nice. that's what I would do, I don't trust those newer ones!

I've looked at a few older SSEis and am still searching. I've now expanded my search to include LeSabres.

The 00+s Bonnies just don't cut it for me. But, to the contrary, I don't like the 99 and older LeSabres. lol

Have you considered a Honda?

I have...but they're too pricey for my current budget.

Unless you luck into a "used" Honda with 300 miles on the odo and full factory warranty like my fiancee did, Honda today is a ripoff for what you get. The dealers are arrogant and don't like to move on price. Used Hondas are sold for way too much, and will invariably have a zillion miles on them.

Look into a late-model Hyundai Sonata. Quick cars with the V6, and pretty reliable. If you want fuel economy, and get-up similar to an L27, look at a 4-cylinder version.

Although recommending a Hyundai is probably sacrilege to the ears of many here.

LeSabre in Buffalo wrote:Unless you luck into a "used" Honda with 300 miles on the odo and full factory warranty like my fiancee did, Honda today is a ripoff for what you get. The dealers are arrogant and don't like to move on price. Used Hondas are sold for way too much, and will invariably have a zillion miles on them.

Look into a late-model Hyundai Sonata. Quick cars with the V6, and pretty reliable. If you want fuel economy, and get-up similar to an L27, look at a 4-cylinder version.

Although recommending a Hyundai is probably sacrilege to the ears of many here.

At this point I'm only considering L67s or L36s. The Honda we had was OUTSTANDING. We got it for a steal. Bought with 20,000 miles for $10,500 and when it was wrecked we got $8,100 for it with 132,000 miles. $2,400 of depreciation isn't bad for 112,000 miles of use. But, like you said, they're just too pricey for what you get unless you can find smoking deals.

i don`t remember if it`s been suggested yet but what about a regal GS?

We had one of those but sold it back in May. It was replaced with the Tahoe in my sig. In retrospect, had we known the Honda would have been in an accident, we would have never sold it.

Well...it's come to this. I've found several cars and am not sure which way to go. All of these cars have a reasonable Carfax report or else I wouldn't even be considering them. However, I haven't seen any of them in person. Just what's been relayed to me over email or the phone. Let me know what you guys think.

GTPs…

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?c ... ha=success

Seems really good except higher miles.

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?c ... dard=false

Has a couple issues, but they could be easily corrected. I'd imagine the ABS light is from a bad hub.

Lumina LTZ…

http://flint.craigslist.org/cto/1352613627.html

I only know what the description says, but this would be great cheap transportation.

Park Avenue…

http://lansing.craigslist.org/cto/1352570259.html

Needs tires and front brake pads. One owner since new. Been in a minor accident. The guy is selling it because his parents passed away. He also said there's a strut leaking. Seems like a really good price! But, it really does look like an old man's car.

98 Bonneville…

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?c ... dard=false

Passenger seat doesn’t work. Antenna is faulty. Been in two very minor accidents. Seller is second owner. Otherwise great condition, per the seller.

I'm not sure what to do....

I'm liking the Park ave and the Bonneville

My vote is for the 98 SSEi.
Low mileage and the defects are easily fixed or lived with as is.

Have you sat in a PAU before?

Having sat in a PAU and driven one as well (ok, it was heavily modded) and sat/driven a 1996 SSEi, I would probably pick the PAU given your long commute.

I'm going to look at the PAU today at 6:45 and will have the cash in hand. The seller claims he has four other buyers who are coming at 7:00, 7:30, 8:00 and 8:30. I tend to believe him because he was confused when I talked to him on the phone...I had to identify myself to him again based on our conversation last night. KBB and NADA are WAY higher than his asking price. If it's as decent as he describes, I'll be snatching it up.

I don’t know necessarily. I think it’s really a double-edged sword when you start nit picking all the issues on each generation of car. When I was in service, the ’92 – ‘99’s came back a plenty with all their nuances. Same thing for the ‘00+’s with all their nuances and me having to live with a ‘04. Neither car is far from perfect!

One thing I liked about the ’92 – ‘99’s full size cars, were the interiors and some of the gizmos (seats namely) that had 600 way adjustments. I also liked some of that styling and interior layout better. But as far as fit/finish, the ‘00+ is much improved.

However, I don’t base my car purchases on what car has nicer feeling switchgear in my fingers or how nice the faux wood trim is on the dash. I buy the car for it’s durability/reliability, and the ‘00’s have a lot better attention to detail in some of the chassis layout, components, and design. One of the things I always take note of when I’m under my ’04 is some of the forward thinking in the chassis components and layout of them vs. previous gens. They just seemed to be a few years ahead of even many cars to date.

Step out of the Full Size cars and back into the Lumina’s (and later, Impala’s)/Monte’s/Grand Prix’s/etc. The aluminum front subframe was an ingenious touch that both reduced weight (you can actually carry one around in one arm, it’s that light), was just as strong, if not stronger than the stamped steel version in previous cars, but made for easy cleanup, especially after oil changes because of the stupid placement of the oil filter.

One of my gripes vs. the previous gen of these cars was the Little Tikes quality of interior components and their fit/finsh. I’ve had a ’95 Lumina LS (“X” motor), ’96 Monte Carlo Z34 (“X” motor), and a ’99 GTP. Seriously. My kids plastic toys are built to a higher standard, so…

I see both sides of it.