1987 Black/Chrome Grand National

[GNANIMO]

I did post this in DieCast as well but figured everyone should take a peek at this...

I just got my 1987 GMP Black/Chrome Grand National in the mail today! Looks VERY nice. The picture doesn't do it justice at all!

Now my only problem with it.. When you open the box there is a writup on the Grand National. And they go on to say "The Buick Grand National will always be #1 in our book, because it started our Muscle Car success." Ok very nice, and you figure that they would know the car fairly well right? Now, check out the first paragraph:

"In the 1980's there was one muscle car that stood out above the rest. With its jet black appearance and sleek styling, not to mention the SUPERCHARGED V-6, the Buick Buick Grand National was definitly a winner both on and off the strip."

That is typed in EXACTLY as it reads in the box.

Does anyone not proof read this? I mean punctuation errors and double words are a huge mistake and should not have slipped by anyone if they did some editing but to say the engine is Supercharged instead of Turbocharged is a HUGE mistake in my books... What gives??

Does anyone's have these errors corrected?? Just wondering but I highly doubt it.

 

[BlackBuick84]

The topic of super/turbo charger was brought up in a gnx thread. Coz there was another writeup that said supercharger instead of turbocharger. But i think it was b4black who mentioned that a turbo is a type of supercharger, so the literature is technically "right"

 

[b4black]

Yep, just like Coke is a cola, a turbocharger is a type of supercharger. Turbocharger would be more specific and appropriate however.

I don't think this is as bad as leaving the spoiler off the '85 GN (at least that's what I heard, I don't have one myself). And don't get me started on that whole RED GN stuff.

How important are details anyway?

 

[Intercooler]

Originally posted by b4black
Yep, just like Coke is a cola, a turbocharger is a type of supercharger. Turbocharger would be more specific and appropriate however.

I don't think this is as bad as leaving the spoiler off the '85 GN (at least that's what I heard, I don't have one myself). And don't get me started on that whole RED GN stuff.

How important are details anyway?

Yes, someone dropped the ball on the 85 GN. I remember when I got mine I was like WTF! Until it was explained here.

 

[strikeeagle]

Ever hear of the upside down airplane on the 24 cent US stamp many years ago? And the double die obverse 1955 pennies?

Consider these as proof that we are, after all, human. Be amused. And know that these apparent screw-ups are now considered curious rarities that have great value to collectors.

If you had a few of those stamps you could surely trade them for a GNX or two...