Plush People-Movers: 1996 Buick Roadmaster vs 1995 Chrysler Town & Country

Sbsd 4 2 2024
ADVERTISEMENT

Good morning! We now return you to your regularly scheduled (and reasonably-priced) shitboxes. Today, it’s all about comfort as we check out a wagon and a minivan both stuffed full of nice soft seats and smooth suspensions.

Yesterday’s project cars were obviously not meant to be taken seriously, unless, of course, you are able to play in that league, in which case I want to be your friend. The Aston Martin took the lion’s share of the votes, probably because it was one-quarter the price of the Ferrari. Buncha cheapskates in here, I guess.

But for me, it has to be the Ferrari. I mean, if I were able to do it, I’d want to do it, you know? And nothing does it like a classic Ferrari. Yeah, maybe you’re paying for the name to some degree, but those magical machines from Maranello just have something special about them. They can make almost anyone look cool.

Screenshot From 2024 04 01 18 19 46

All right, moving on: Today we’re looking at both sides of the family-car shift that began in the mid-1980s and was pretty well decided a decade later when these two were built. Wagons went out of fashion, minivans came in, and then they both got trounced by SUVs. Many such vehicles were utilitarian in nature, meant as sturdy family transport, but these two models took the formula a step further and upped the comfort level. Let’s check them out.

1996 Buick Roadmaster Estate – $3,000

00n0n Ht4dddo0mog 0ci0t2 1200x900

Engine/drivetrain: 5.7-liter overhead valve V8, four-speed automatic, RWD

Location: Conway, AR

Odometer reading: 204,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives great

Before there was the minivan, there was the Family Truckster. Full-size station wagons were the kings of the road for many years, though not many made it out of the ’80s. GM’s full-size wagons got a long-overdue redesign in 1991 along with the B-body sedans, losing the classic square styling but keeping the strong body-on-frame architecture and low-stress V8 power.

00m0m B50opmi29zy 0ci0t2 1200x900

In 1994, the V8 in question got quite an upgrade, from what was basically a truck engine to the 260 horsepower LT1, sometimes referred to as the “Corvette engine,” though that isn’t quite accurate. Obviously, only one transmission choice was available in this car, GM’s ubiquitous 4L60-E overdrive automatic. This one also features a 3.23:1 Positraction rear axle. It all runs beautifully, according to the seller, and the car is currently daily driven.

00c0c 2tjqtrnodiq 0ci0t2 1200x900

We don’t get any decent interior photos; the seller says the front bench seat is “dirty,” but refuses to show it. The door panels and the rear seat all look acceptable. The seller says the window regulators are wearing out, and the headliner is starting to droop around the edges. This car does not appear to be equipped with a “way-back” third-row seat, for what it’s worth.

00w0w 6v8ccbapaln 0ci0t2 1200x900

Outside, it’s faded, but the seller says there is no rust. The fake vinyl woodgrain could stand to be redone. Personally, I’m not a fan of it, but I know some people love it, and it is traditional for family wagons, I guess.

1995 Chrysler Town & Country – $2,800

00b0b Jxccq61fwq6 0ci0t2 1200x900

Engine/drivetrain: 3.8 liter overhead valve V6, four-speed automatic, FWD

Location: Converse, TX

Odometer reading: 120,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives great

 

Chrysler’s minivans pretty well took over the country over the course of the late 1980s. Every other automaker followed suit, but Chrysler’s head start and constant improvements on the theme kept them at the top of the sales heap for a long time. Though you could get some awfully nice interior appointments in Dodge and Plymouth vans, in mid-1989 Chrysler upped the ante and applied the famous Town & Country nameplate to their minivan, where it stayed until 2016.

00r0r 82bhog8pimp 0ci0t2 1200x900

Town & Country vans got the full Chrysler treatment, including cushy leather seats, woodgrain trim, power everything, and a flashy digital dash. This one has the larger of two Chrysler overhead-valve V6 engines, displacing 3.8 liters and sending 162 horsepower to the front wheels through an “Ultradrive” four-speed automatic. It runs well and shifts smoothly, according to the seller.

00707 Bbkyjenvl91 0po0jm 1200x900

This van was fitted with a wheelchair ramp at one point, though it has been removed. Unfortunately, that means it is also missing its middle row of seats, leaving only the captain’s chairs in front and the two-seat rearmost bench. At least this way you get plenty of legroom back there. It shouldn’t be too hard to find a middle seat that fits, though finding one that matches could be more difficult.

00n0n 3etp0t1ucoz 0ci0t2 1200x900

Outside, it’s a little faded and banged-up, but presentable. This van was built long before power sliding doors were a thing, but if I’m not mistaken, this one has one added, as part of the wheelchair package. There’s also a switch labeled “kneel” next to the open/close switch, which I assume means that it can lean to the side for easier entry. Not much more than a party trick, without the ramp – one of those things you play with once or twice to show your friends and then never touch again.

If you’re going to drive a cheap car, it had better be something fun, or something comfortable. Either one of these would be a super-comfortable way to get to work on the cheap, and if they’re as good-running as the sellers claim, they could still be family vacation machines as well. Which one is more your style?

(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)

About the Author

View All My Posts

74 thoughts on “Plush People-Movers: 1996 Buick Roadmaster vs 1995 Chrysler Town & Country

  1. Honestly I was all over the roadmaster until I saw the condition of that van. Then I saw the wheelchair lift and removal, and went back to the Wagon for the win.

    1. Nevermind. I answered what I thought you asked but then I looked at the photos and I have no idea what you’re talking about. Nothing to see here.

    2. The seatbelt buckle next to the driver’s side door? Maybe it pivots back and is used to help secure a wheelchair where the middle seats were.

  2. I was ready to pass on the Roadmaster since it didn’t have the jump seats in the back, but missing the whole middle row makes the T&C a no-go for me.

  3. I went into this one ready to vote for the Roadmaster (it’s pretty much the right choice in most showdowns), balked at the mileage, thought about the customized minivan, then went with the Buick. It’s stalwart and generally available to work on.

  4. The van is cool to me, but RMEW all day long please, my best friend had one for 4 years, and I miss it all the time, good memories were made in that rear facing third row seat.

  5. Those wheel-chair modified vans have been compromised to fit a very specific (and necessary) use case.

    For those that need an accessible van, indispensable. For everyone else, avoidable.

    Roadmaster, and not just for car-nerd enthusiasm this time.

  6. After the heady heights of yesterday’s Showdown it’s nice to be back down to earth. That Roadmaster is fantastic. Drive it as is, restore it, or use it as the basis for a restomod (Think Rutledge Wood’s Roadmaster). It’ll always be cool and probably will never be worth less than it is right now. The Chrysler might let you get away with parking in a handicapped spot without getting a ticket, but there is literally no worse reason to buy a car.

    1. My mind immediately went to restomod on the Roadmaster too. If you canceled the fake woodgrain and put a nice paintjob on it the lines would be sublime.

  7. I think I’m getting a little more jaded on these shitbox showdowns. I would drive either one of these cars but for a few pesky details.
    The Buick is tre-cool, but I’m concerned that the interior is so far gone that it would be a horrible place to be. I’ve seen plenty of Roadmasters in way better condition for just a little bit more money.
    The T&C is also very cool, especially with the upgraded leather interior. But the lack of a second row kind of kills this vehicle’s usefulness. And the wheelchair conversion just adds stuff that can break. On the plus side, I suppose the “kneel” feature could be altered to give you a lowrider vibe.
    But again, there are plenty of Chrycovans of this vintage without the aftermarket mods. At this end of the market, something that presents as “normal” is always going to be the best choice.

  8. The only thing I can think of to address on the Roadmaster is to proactively address the inevitable water pump / Optispark failure before it leaves you on the side of the road. Other than that, have fun.

      1. 94-96 had an LT1 with Optispark. Earlier ones had a TBI 305 or 350 truck engine.

        Having owned both versions of Roadmaster, and spent a fair amount of time troubleshooting the LT1, I’m not a fan of the engine. It’s a hodge-podge. Plenty of good parts, but they’re not well integrated. Especially the electronics.

        A 1997 Roadmaster with an LS1 would have been amazing. But GM (being GM) killed the Roadmaster right before that would have been possible.

        1. Yeah this. Had one LT-1 car. Never again. I still like the Roadmaster better than the van because the van was cut up to be an accessible vehicle, then repurposed. That means the suspension is likely raised and it’ll be pretty annoying to drive. I guess I would just drive that LT-1 until it blew up (which would be soon), then replace it with anything.

          Hell, If someone chips in, I’ll drop an Iron Duke in there and daily drive it.

  9. The LT1 was the Corvette engine from…er…some point in the C4 era until the C5 came out with the LS1.

    And that Buick is the clear play here. Even with higher miles, parts (including performance parts) are cheap and plentiful, as are SBC V8s if needed.

    That Chrysler comes from the era of the biodegradable transmissions. Best avoided.

    1. True, but there were several versions of the LT1. The Corvette had aluminum heads and four-bolt mains. The Camaro/Firebird version had aluminum heads and two-bolt mains. The B-body version (the one above) has iron heads and two-bolt mains. So while the Roadmaster did come with an LT1, it wasn’t quite the Corvette version. It did, however, get the newer, vented Optispark distributor before the Vette and F-bodies did, which made the reliability of the Opti go from “bad” to “marginal”.

        1. The “good” fix is switching to a LS1-style coil-on-plug setup to replace the Opti. There are several different ways to do that, with some using the Opti as a cam position sensor while others use a new wheel and pickup to allow for completely ditching the Opti. Sadly, the kits aren’t cheap, and you are still left with an LT1 and all of its unique designs challenges (e.g., reverse-flow cooling system) and limited aftermarket support.

          Source: I’ve owned several LT1-equipped vehicles.

  10. I miss my ’94 Roadmaster. It’s the only vehicle I regret selling. $3000 for one with no rust is a great deal in today’s market for these, especially if “Everything works” actually means the AC works, because some of the AC parts for these are unobtanium, so you really want one with working AC (mine didn’t). Didn’t even read about the minivan, don’t care. Roadmaster all day, every day.

  11. “To the Orgazmobile!”

    “What?”

    “To my Buick Century!”

    (Close enough. Also to the 3 people that get this reference, hello)

  12. ROADMASTER!!! I had the sedan version, and it was a HOOT! And totally reliable!

    Then we gave it to a family member in need, and it was dead within a year…

    1. I swear, sometimes a person just emits a flux of subatomic particles that cause everything around them to break. Just an intermittent random nuclear physics phenomenon.

      1. I have a friend like that. He touched the water from a fountain once. It immediately quit working. I went back by there a year later, and it was STILL not working.

  13. Oh man. My Uncle had one of those Roadmasters. It was hilariously huge. Think Chevy Tahoe in station wagon form. He bought it to haul their 35 foot Airtream. I kick myself over it because he offered to sell it to me for $1500 a few years ago. But I already have a giant boat in my garage in the form of a 4 door 1955 Mercury and my wife asked what we would do with yet another 20 foot long car.

  14. Roadmaster, no contest about it. Yes, this one is rough. But I’d still rather have that beat-up pile than *any* condition of Caravan with that lemon of a transmission.

    The low height does make the Roadmaster annoyingly unhelpful for hauling stuff. Plywood? Yes. Duffle bags? Very yes. Passengers? Sure.

    But the rear hatch height is only about 30 inches. Learned that the hard way when I tried to haul a small generator in mine. It was about 1″ too tall, yet the generator would easily fit into any series of minivan. This also means an adult has to duck his head when climbing into the way-back seat (though it’s reasonably comfortable once you get inside).

  15. I picked the Buick, I just can’t see myself driving a minivan. BUT, On that note, with my internet money, I would chop the top off the minivan by four inches. Remove the sliding door, make it a two-door. Add racing seats, replace the auto tranny with a stick. Replace the engine with a big block. A roll-cage and bitchin flame paint job, and Mickey Thompson racing slicks.

  16. Going Roadmaster here with the proven GM mechanicals. Heard a lot of horror stories about those Chrysler minivan transmissions over the years. The van looks very comfy inside but I’m certain the Buick is too and I prefer cloth to leather anyway. Dad had an ’85 Mercury Colony Park when I was growing up so soft spot for the big wagon. Just don’t haul anything too tall. I’d probably strip off the woodgrain and run clean.

      1. Good question. The previous owner of mine just started installing black paint everywhere the rubber trim was missing. From 20′ away you couldn’t tell the difference. 😛

  17. As someone who worked 6 years at the place that built that van, you don’t want it.

    The vans are lifesavers for those that need them, but the compromises necessary to build them make them pretty bad to drive. It’s honestly impressive this one has survived so long.

    1. Whats funny is that one of the people I worked with at a lumberyard when I was young and dumb and just needed a job had one of those vans that his dad had used for his contracting business. It had over 300,000 miles. He drove it for years. It was burning a little oil by then but still. I was impressed since every other person I knew who owned these had a shit ton of problems.

          1. OK, my comment is intended only to apply to the ones modified for wheelchair use at Braun (like this van) or other places, where the entire floor is cut out and a new one welded in, along with many other modifications/side effects that are necessary for wheelchair users and less cool for anyone else.

            1. I don’t think the floor is cut on this one, though. There aren’t any good photos of the middle, but one photo shows the edge of the sliding door sill, and the factory carpet appears undisturbed all the way up to the rear seat posts. I assumed that’s why it has the kneel function. Unless it’s literally the entire floor that’s cut out?

              1. Unless it’s literally the entire floor that’s cut out?

                Yep, that’s how it works. Here’s a high-level overview of the process. The vans come in different styles and have different floors depending on the type of ramp installed and whether it kneels.

                To be fair, this one is so old I honestly don’t know if the process was exactly the same back then. And the carpeting still being there is abnormal. But anything built in the previous two decades at least will be similar to the video.

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FW_0KmURoEA

    2. I remember reading Tom’s articles about those vans and shopping for them on the old site and it really drove that home. His wife’s Sienna had a surprisingly short life before it was worn out, and that was a Toyota.

Leave a Reply