1978 Buick Estate Wagon Limited from North America - Comments

Rebuilt transmission in 1990.

A/C died for the last time in 2000.

Rear main seal began leaking in 2003, I just kept my eye on the oil level and drove it.

2 radiators in the lifetime of the car.

1 heater core somewhere along the line.

Replaced the coil springs all around in 1994.

All in all this was a very reliable car for the time I owned it. It was undeniably a pig on gas, but it did OK on the longer trips if you kept it under 70 MPH, probably 19 MPG on a good day, as low as 11 or 12 MPG in the city. If you ask me, there is still nothing made today that is as versatile, smooth or reliable as a full size Station Wagon.

Back in the day it was actually a very stylish car too, nice metallic baby blue with woodgrain, and comfy light blue cloth interior seats. Power windows/seats/door locks all around. It had most of the luxurious creature comforts of the Electra of the same year, including the same grille. The extra added weight seemed to work pretty good in the snow, traction was never a big issue. In the last 4 years we owned it, it simply didn't get driven much, due to the soaring price of gas and a few maintenance issues.

As for how it saved the life of me and my family, one night we had some band concert to go to at my daughter's school. We normally didn't drive the Buick much, but for some reason that night it ended up getting parked in the way of our other 2 cars. I was driving down a busy 4-lane highway, speed limit 65, with stoplights scattered here and there as we get closer to town. Amid the family conversation and other distractions, I noticed out of the corner of my eye a large tractor/trailer flying toward my intersection on a cross street at a high rate of speed. I slammed on the brakes and tried to swerve to the right (as the truck was traveling to my left), but I hit hard right against his rear trailer wheels and rear trailer bumper. The impact sent my car spinning (doing at least 3 360's according to one witness) toward the far right of the cross street's stopped traffic, where we collided with a stopped car with the drivers side doors, and the car still had enough momentum to turn itself back around and plow hood first into a Jersey Barrier. It happened so fast, all I could see was crumpled hood and steam when I hit the trailer, as the radiator burst instantly.

None of the doors would open on our car, due to the fact that the frame, floorpan, and front fenders had somehow absorbed most of the impact and literally bent underside of the the whole car. The windshield was shattered, but still hanging there. I thought I was dead, I thought we were all dead. We all escaped with only seatbelt burns and minor cuts and bruises. My car was still running with several warning lights blaring at me by the time the paramedics arrived. I was so shaken I didn't even notice. It was even able to straighten itself out and drive onto the back of a flatbed under it's own power. The first responders pried the doors open, and when I was finally able to get out and see, I couldn't believe the carnage. The truck was tipped over, and oranges and crates were laying all over the place. Looking at my car gave me the chills, I felt like the 5 of us cheated death that day.

Two days later I went to the junkyard to clean out the personal belongings. When I asked for the car, the employees were certain that it was involved in a fatality. Seeing the car again with my own eyes in broad daylight was again a shock. It looked like it had gotten punched by a bulldozer at about 100 MPH. It makes me wonder if modern cars, with all the technology, air bags, and crumple zones will fare as well?

Yes a modern car would fare as well, if not better. You'd be amazed.

Well yes, a new car with crumple zones and airbags would do just as well, in fact a lot better, but that doesn't change the fact that your car did an admirable job of protecting your family.

It is overly optimistic to assume that the crumple zones would absorb all of the force of a high-speed collision. In fact, their ability to absorb force is not infinite. In practice the older cars are safer in the extreme cases because their overall strength is far greater than the light, small, unibody cars of today.

"It is overly optimistic to assume that the crumple zones would absorb all of the force of a high-speed collision. In fact, their ability to absorb force is not infinite. In practice the older cars are safer in the extreme cases because their overall strength is far greater than the light, small, unibody cars of today."

Actually, while they were stronger, they weren't quite as safe. They were so rigid that they ended up transferring a lot of the impact into the human body, causing a lot of internal damage. In severe cases, most people hit the metal dashboards so hard the head trauma killed them before paramedics could arrive. If they rear ended a tractor trailer, the "nose-dive" affect of the brakes usually made the vehicle dive under the trailer and would decapitate the passengers! The only reason older vehicle seemed safer was because there was less crash related deaths back then due to less cars being on the road.

I agree with the last comment, the older cars are probably safer in an accident overall (although it really depends on the car itself & the circumstances of the wreck). You can put computers, curtain airbags, crumple zones, I don't care what else and that is still no substitute for being surrounded by a couple tons of solid steel.

I got t-boned in my '79 Ford LTD by a '99 Grand Am doing 40 MPH and while her newer car was towed off with the front end DEMOLISHED, I drove my 'ol Ford home and CONTINUED driving it that way (climbing over thru the passenger-side door to drive it) till I got a new car a year later. It is TRUE what some people say- "they don't make 'em like they used to".

"If they rear ended a tractor trailer, the "nose-dive" affect of the brakes usually made the vehicle dive under the trailer and would decapitate the passengers!"

Not totally true, this was usually due to older trailers not having the low, sturdy ICC bumpers that new trailers and straight trucks are required to have. A nose dive of 3 or 4 inches is pretty negligible. Also many new trailers come with side skirts to prevent the same thing from happening on the side. And don't forget the fact the hoods on all new cars other than pickups or SUVs sit much lower than the hood of this Buick.

It looks like the car in the review sustained a very hard front impact, and at least a moderate side followed by another moderate front impact when it hit the barricade. For being a 29 year old dinosaur land yacht, it did a remarkable job!

I agree that modern cars are usually safer if you sustain a single impact.

But some people assume that anything built in the 1970's is rigid steel that won't crumple, and this isn't true. Most full size cars of this era had huge Chrome bumpers with shocks attached. And this is the era when plastic and fiberglass secondary body panels (front clips, bumper fillers) came into use. Also this Buick doesn't have any thick steel in the dashboard, only foam-filled vinyl, plastic and thin aluminum just like today. So during a hard impact, even if a person does hit the instrument panel, they won't be hitting a steel wall. Safety improved quite a bit in 1970's, compared to say a 1940 Ford Deluxe Or a 1955 Chevy Bel Air that truly does not crumple at high speeds.

So sometimes during a less severe impact, yes only the bumper would bend with very little front end damage. But a severe impact will indeed crumple the metal somewhat safely on 1970's and 1980's cars, especially the late 1970's, just not quite as good as today.

So the bumper would sometimes stay rigid and not bend, but end up being pushed back on the shocks, transferring most of the energy to the frame. If the impact was hard enough it would indeed crumple the front fenders, and hood. Now granted, a 1978 Buick does have thicker steel than a new one, but far less thicker than the cars of the 1940's through the 1960's as some people are inclined to believe.

The car in this review sustained three hard impacts, and it looks like it did pretty darn good. I wonder if anyone today has considered multiple impact crash testing. I always wonder, what if you hit something hard, and your airbags are already deployed, and you hit something again. Your crumple zones are already crumpled. Then what?

Sometimes I think the full-size cars from the 1980's were sort of the best of both worlds, they didn't get obliterated in a 20MPH crash, but had pretty good cushioning to protect people if the crash was more severe.

Correct, and structurally, a 1978 Buick was no different from an eighties full size Buick, or Chevrolet Caprice, or Olds Delta 88, nor even that different from a Mercury Grand Marquis/Lincoln Town Car.

Unless you're talking about the full-sized unibody front drivers, which became common in the late 1980s - definitely far less safe than their full-frame forbears.