Park Avenue VS Roadmaster

I've seen a Buick Roadmaster here and there, but never have talked to anyone about how they like them. What is the major difference between the Roadmaster and the Park Avenue? Which are better cars for doing longer distance travel in.. road trips, vacations and the like?

The Roadmaster has a V8 and was the "top of the line"-model of Buick since the production stopped.

Mike

Having driven both, I can shed a little light on that for you.

The early 90's Roadmaster was a full-size, body-on-frame RWD car. It came with the 5.7l V8, and was based on the same platform as the Chevrolet Caprice of the same vintage. It'll be larger than the Park Avenue, but the Park Avenue feels like it has more interior room.

The early 90's Park Avenue was a full-size unibody-constructed FWD car. It had either the 3800V6, with or without a supercharger. Since the PA was a lighter car, it got better gas mileage as well.

Either one is awesome for road trips, but I like the PA's better. Just my opinion.

Jonathan

The PA's have a much better style and looks than the roadmaster.. The Roadmaster is gaudy but still nice.. THe 350 V8 is nice but the supercharged V6 is also nice as well. Both nice cars. The PA has alot more bells and whistles inside.

So, I guess if I do sell my 1993 PA Ultra (with it's little quirks on cool mornings, etc), then I would probably be happier with say a 1994-1997 PA. I've gotten used to some of them bells and whistles :) Also I REALLY like front wheel drive. For Michigan, better in snow and ice. You can drive out of a driveway with the Park Avenue that most rear wheel drive pickups would have difficulty with.

Well, I love rear wheel drive alot better, but as far as bells and whistles, the PA is better..

I own a 91 park ave and had a chance at a 92 roadmaster. i really dislike my PA, and i would have taken the raodmaster if it wasnt in such bad shape. I prefer a RWD car. Also, as far as RWD in MI, i had a 89 town car for two winters in MI and never had a problem with it, going in or out of driveways or anywhere. I really just wnat to get rid of my PA for a nice V8 RWD.

My wife and I like front wheel drive so much that we wouldn't have a RWD Roadmaster if it had all the bells and whistles, made super gas mileage, and rode like a dream. Simply put, there is no better traction on ice and snow than a FWD vehicle. I owned a Honda Civic years ago when I lived in Seattle, working for Boeing. I put mud and snow tires on it and drove it in the mountains in winter hunting elk. I got around where people with RWD AND chains were sliding off the road or getting stuck. I always thought that the engineers really missed or messed up the 4wd vehicles. They should have had them FWD as a primary and shift some of the power to the Rear when the front tires slipped. Most of the time, engaging the 4WD function of the pickup would have been unnecessary. Speaking from driving around in western Nebraska in the winter. *S*

Its all prefrence, i hate FWD, and liek i said, in two years of winter, winter i never got stuck once in my 89 toncar. no, i didnt have any extra weight in the rear, and it also had mud and snow tires. I had just started driving too, iw as 17 and 18 when it was the only car i drove. I drove it a little bit when I was 16 too (it was my dads car first). I am not disagreeing with you that FWD offers better traction, cause i know ti does. Im just saying that I never got into any trouble with a rather similar car. Also there are other reasons that a truck is primarily RWD when AWD is not engaged, and there are reasons why manufacturers arent making FWD trucks.