Digital Dash Good or Bad?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mr. McShake
  • 8 comments
  • 717 views
M

Mr. McShake

Messages
506
I just recently bought a '91 Buick Regal and it has digital dash gauges. It seems like those would be more prone to problems. Is that true or am I just wrong.

The tachometer is broken on it...most of the time. Sometimes it'll just kick in for a few minutes then just stop working again and be stuck at at whatever number it was last at.

What do you guys think of digital gauges? Good or bad?

And what do you guys think of my car in general? Is it any good. I know it has a V-6 and I had to have one of those, but I don't know if it's any good really.
 
Ironic, because I just bought a 1991 Buick Reatta convertible (it was my duty as a car lover to buy it), perhaps with the same engine as your 1991 Buick (a 3.1 was standard on the Regal but a 3.8 was available; my car had the 3.8 standard). Perhaps even more ironic is that "Dream On", by Aerosmith, just started playing on my shuffled Windows Media Player playlist (this is the song in all of Buick's advertisements).

Oh, I have digital dash in my new car too. I actually hate it, but that's the way it goes.

EDIT: You know what? I like digital dash. But no-one else does. And since when have I ever been a lackey to everyone else? Forget it, I'm changing my opinion. It's fun to have digital dash and it beats the hell out of this:

2.jpg


And what do you guys think of my car in general? Is it any good.
Click to expand...

Nice enough, but no better than average. I personally would've gone with a Chrysler LH sedan (93-97) or a same-age Taurus (92-95). They're just more refined, though questions have been raised about the former's reliability.
 
I was looking at a Chrysler LHS sedan I think a '94 for $1925, but it was gone when I called so I saw this '91 Regal for $1800 and 65000miles so I got that, and it has the 3.1 engine in it.
 
Mr. McShake
I was looking at a Chrysler LHS sedan I think a '94 for $1925, but it was gone when I called so I saw this '91 Regal for $1800 and 65000miles so I got that, and it has the 3.1 engine in it.
Click to expand...

Doesn't the 3.1 seem kind of gutless? It's only 140 horsepower! By today's standards, that's average for a four-cylinder! Chrysler at least put out 160 standard with their 3.3, and 215 was available with the 3.5.
 
Yeah. 140 sucks. I was driving a 1995 Intrepid before the transmission died. I wanted to stick with Dodge which is why I wanted the LHS. I wanted a big black car and that's what both the Intrepid and LHS were. The LHS, but the 3.5 too. Just too late.

It sucks when you have to get a four door car for under $2500. Not too many choices.

Oh yeah. I don't like the digital dash gauges.
 
I think it's weird looking down and seeing all the green. I guess it's kinda cool to see exactly what speed you're going, and I don't know about the tachometer it doesn't work, but you don't need them in automatics.

It's funny. When I had my manual Mazda protege it didn't have a tach, but my Dodge and Buick both do and they're automatic.
 
M5Power
Indeed. I might have gone Taurus.
Click to expand...

Yeah. There were a lot of cheap ones of those, but my dad was buying it and he doesn't like Ford even though he can't drive it. So you know.

What you can find a lot of for cheap though is Buick's, Towncars and Oldsmobiles.

Maybe something to do with how people over 55 usually buy those and know nothing about cars or what they're worth?
 

Latest Posts

Back