Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





General Motors Fans

1414244464752

Comments

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 45,056
    edited February 16

    I also owned a Bavaria. Not a car GM would have had to worry about in the 1970s in terms of competition, and GM products in the 70s were way more reliable than a Bavaria or an XJ6. It's the 3 series that defined BMW in America and the 5 and 7 series that gave Americans their first real taste of a mid-size and full-size sedan that was fun to drive. Early 7 series BMWs used to be wonderful cars. Now I'd recommend a Cadillac over any 7 series.

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

  • roadburnerroadburner Posts: 6,577

    I wouldn't want either- the exception being an Alpina B7

    2009 328i / 2004 X3 2.5/ 1995 318ti Club Sport/ 1975 2002A/ 2007 Mazdaspeed 3/ 1999 Wrangler/ 1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica

  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,817

    New S-class knocks the socks off the 7er. Silly to pretend to be sporty at that size , so you have to be posh. E23 was definitely sportier than a W126, E38 sportier than a W140 - but the distinction blurred over time.

    It'd be something to see Caddy make something for that segment.

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 45,056

    GM just gave away the luxury market in the 1980s--just handed it over. Too bad. It's always easier to quit than to get back in.

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,189
    edited March 12

    Happy 9th Anniversary to my wife's 2005 Buick LaCrosse purchased new on Saturday, March 12, 2005!

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 18,269

    @lemko said: Happy 9th Anniversary to my wife's 2005 Buick LaCrosse purchased new on Saturday, March 12, 2005!

    Looks good. And that's a good color. The laCrosse is still a nice design.

  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,189

    @imidazol97 said:

    That color is called Deep Sapphire Metallic. She wants her new car to be a similar color.

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 18,269
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,189

    @imidazol97 said: Cadillac cancels rear wheel drive flagship due in a couple of years.

    http://www.worldcarfans.com/113070159552/cadillac-flagship-rear-wheel-drive-sedan-not-happening

    Looks like my 2007 DTS and I will be growing old together!

  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 22,009

    Either Motor Trend, or C&D, did a road test of a 1973 Cutlass Salon, which was supposed to have the improved "Euro" handling, and they pitted it up against a Benz, but I forget which model.

    I forget the details, but they really weren't impressed with either car. Even more interesting, they posted test results from equivalent 1972 models, and the '73 versions scored worse in just about every regard!

    I could see a '73 Cutlass accelerating more slowly than a '72, as they were cutting power and adding emissions controls. But I would think it would handle better? Still, their '72 scored better in slalom testing and such.

    To show how performance was dropping, Consumer Reports tested a full-sized 1972 Impala with a 350-4bbl, 165 hp, and got 0-60 in 12 seconds. But for '73 they tested a Chevelle with a 350, and 0-60 was 13 seconds, even though it was a lighter car. However, I think the test Chevelle used a 2-bbl version, and it was down to around 145 hp or so. They might have also messed around with the axle ratios, too.

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    edited April 1

    I can't remember specifically reading about the '73 Cutlass Salon, but I do remember reading about the Monte Carlo and Grand Am. Mags liked the handling in my memory. First U.S.-use of radials, and up through the '80 model, even the cheapest third-gen Monte Carlo had 205-70's and stabilizer bar in back. In fact, I remember CR saying how their '78 Monte test car rode hard. In '81, the Monte got the same soft suspension of the Malibu, standard.

  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 22,009

    One other detail I remember about GM's '73 intermediates, from CR, is that they mentioned the use of frameless door windows all around, similar to what Ford started doing with the '72 Torino/Montego, but mentioned that Ford's were sealed better.

    They also had one test car, I think it was a '73 Malibu station wagon, where they commented that NONE of the windows rolled all the way down! The back windows were designed like that, stopping with about 4-5 inches of glass still exposed (must have been fun to slam the door extra hard on those) but even in the front doors, I think one stuck up about a half inch and the other a full inch!

    Ah, the 70's. Remind me again why I like those cars so much? B)

  • roadburnerroadburner Posts: 6,577

    The next generation of GM intermediate sedans had rear passenger door windows that didn't roll down at all. That went over big...

    2009 328i / 2004 X3 2.5/ 1995 318ti Club Sport/ 1975 2002A/ 2007 Mazdaspeed 3/ 1999 Wrangler/ 1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 18,269
    edited April 1

    Keeping it all positive for this topic, GM is being proactive in handling the recalls lately. Their latest I just read about is for those who have 1953-1955 Corvettes which didn't get the small block V8 engine.

    " GM has informed the NHTSA it will voluntarily recall all 1953-1954 and some 1955 Chevrolet Corvette's over lacking the vehicles iconic Small Block V8. For unexplained reasons, the 1953-1955 Corvette's were installed with an Inline 6 engine instead of the proper V8. Every 1953-1954 Corvette and some 1955's that rolled off the assembly line managed to get by quality checks and sold to customers with the wrong motor installed. Seeing how this massive slip up has managed to go by undetected for over 50 years has current GM management flabbergasted. GM's new CEO Mary Barra stated, " This is clearly unacceptable. We will make this right for our customers owning those Corvette's affected by this blatant oversight". Current chief engineer for the Corvette Tadge Juechter had this to say over this issue, " I am personally insulted by this. This has been a black eye on the Corvette's illustrious history. Every person who owns a Corvette deserves to experience our legendary Small Block V8 engine"

    "How does GM plan to rectify the problem? GM will be installing free of charge their new fifth generation Small Block V8 that is currently found in the C7 Corvette Stingray producing 460 HP and 465 lb.-ft. of torque. All current 1953-1955 Corvette owners affected by this issue have to do is bring their Corvette's to their Chevrolet dealer where they will be shipped to Detroit to make the swap. When the owners pick their Corvette's up from the dealer, not only will they find a LT1 installed under the hood, the vehicle will also be restored to mint condition.

    "Owners will be notified starting in May. "

    gminsidenews.com/forums/f70/gm-recalls-1953-1955-chevrolet-corvettes-over-lacking-small-block-v8-159409/

  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 22,009

    @roadburner said: The next generation of GM intermediate sedans had rear passenger door windows that didn't roll down at all. That went over big...

    Yep. My grandparents bought a new '82 Malibu Classic Estate wagon in February of '82. It replaced a '72 Impala 4-door hardtop. Nobody even thought about trying out the windows and such. Until one warm Sunday in April of that year, I went to church with them. Grandmom sat in the back seat. Started fumbling around, and then muttered "How the hell do you open the damn windows?!" Or something along those lines. We looked all over and sure enough, no way to open them! They just had the little flip out vent quarter windows.

    I remember Grandmom started referring to that thing at "The most expensive cheap car we ever owned". It was an attractive looking car though; I'll give it that. Midnight blue metallic with fake woodgrain trim on the sides. I went to a private school for a few years where you had to pay extra for the bus. My parents worked, as did Grandmom, so Granddad would help out with a local carpool to get us kids to school. On his days to drive he usually took us in his '76 GMC crew cab. But sometimes, if Grandmom was home, he'd drive the Malibu. The housewives who were also in that carpool all remarked about how sharp looking that Malibu was. So either they liked it, or they were using it as conversation to hit on Granddad!

    As for those flip out vent windows, I read in a CR that GM had done some tests, and found out that air flow was actually better in those cars with the vent windows open, than it would have been if the back windows rolled down, with no vent. But, most people would probably have preferred a roll-down window. I guess not enough complained though, as GM never did modify them. The wagons, along with the Malibu sedan, were built through 1983. The Regal sedan's last year was 1984. 1986 for the Bonneville, and 1987 for the Cutlass Supreme sedan.

    Chrysler tried a similar stunt in 1981, with the K-cars. However, enough people complained that in mid-1982, they started making the back windows in the sedans and wagons roll down. Making the windows stationary, with flip out vents was initially a cost savings move, but it turned out, that over the scale they were producing, it wasn't any cheaper to just make the windows roll down. I wonder though, if part of that decision was because when the LeBaron and Dodge 400 came out for 1982, they had roll-down windows from the start? So it might have been cheaper to make them all roll down, rather than having some roll down and some stationary.

    I think Chrysler even carried over some of that rear window foolishness into later years. IIRC, with the Neon, if you got power windows, only the front windows were power; rears were still crank. I can't remember if they did that with the 2000-2005 model as well, but I remember it in the '95-99.

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494

    Funny, imidazol!

    My sister and brother-in-law actually bought a new '73 Chevelle Deluxe station wagon...six cylinder!

    I was all over it, as I was a weird kid and thought '73 Chevelles were an improvement over '72's! The rear windows (as in Chevelle sedans that year, too), opened maybe 2/3 of the way down, but theirs didn't have CR's front-window problem. I'd have known, too, as that baby didn't have six-cylinder with A/C! (Actually, that wasn't even available I don't think.)

    Theirs was a pretty (IMHO) very dark brown metallic, with cheapo saddle-colored interior.

  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 22,009

    I've heard that the '73 intermediates were built better than the '72's in some ways, but then they cheaped out in others. For instance, I think the bodies were a bit stiffer, and less rust-prone. But then they'd cheap out in other areas, such as trim pieces, interior stuff, glues, plastics, vinyls, etc.

    I think the '73's, when they came out, seemed a lot more attractive, and modern, than equivalent Fords and Mopars. The 4-doors and wagons, especially, seemed open and airy, with large windows, thin pillars, and the quarter windows in the C-pillar. The Fords and Mopars had a beltline that kicked up toward the rear, making the rear windows seem smaller, and the interiors a bit claustrophobic, in general.

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    edited April 1

    We had a '67 Chevelle and Dad had been talking about a new car for six months or so (as usual). He liked the looks of the '71 and '72 Chevelle coupes. When the '73's came out, he didn't like them at all and he bought a Nova coupe instead. I, for one, liked the Chevelles (I actually preferred the Malibu to the Laguna, because I didn't like the Laguna's body-colored rear bumper), but I was glad that mid-way through the year, the filler between the grille and the front bumper was changed from silver on all cars, to body color--made that front bumper look a teeny bit less like a railroad tie! I did like the simple grille.

    You're right--the interiors (Malibu comes to mind, especially) did not hold up as well as '72 and earlier.

    Personally--other than liking the interior of the new Malibu Classic--I didn't like what they did to Chevelle for '74. They had a luxury line, pushed the Malibu down to 'Deluxe' territory, and had no model in the middle.

  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 22,009

    I think one thing that made the cars start looking a bit cheap was when they went to those two-piece door panels, where the upper part was vinyl, fabric, etc, and the lower part was hard plastic, with an integrated armrest, and glued on carpeting for the nicer models. It didn't look bad when the cars were new, but as the interiors aged, the vinyls, fabrics, plastics, rubbers, and carpeting seemed to all fade at different rates. And often, that carpet would start to come loose.

    I thought GM made a really good move for 1977 in the big cars, moving away from that two-piece door panel, even though the midsized cars still used them in the '78 downsizing.

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    edited April 2

    True. I did like the one-piece, soft door panel of our '77 Impala compared to our '74.

    I remember this quote in a CR review of a Chevelle (I want to say a low-line six-cylinder) of the '73-77 era: "The Chevelle inspires driver confidence". I seem to remember hearing even owners of base GM intermediates saying they 'drove' so nicely.

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    edited April 2

    One thing I definitely remember about the '73-77 4-door GM intermediates--from my sister's wagon and my best friend's parents' '76 Malibu Classic--those doors had the stiffest detents I can remember...they were actually hard to close even though they were short. They also closed with a very distinctive sound--not tinny, not particularly solid, but I could probably identify one by sound if I heard it even today.

    If you were checking out B-O-P's more than Chevys then, you may or may not have noticed how on the cheapest Chevelles, you didn't get a roof gutter molding. I detested that, as the car looked unfinished there. Even my sister's Deluxe wagon had the optional "Exterior Decor Group" which got you wheel opening moldings and roof gutter moldings...an absolute must.

  • eliaselias Posts: 1,929

    iirc the 1970s rear-windows that wouldn't roll down more than halfway were due to federal requirement in order to stop little kids from somersaulting out the rear windows.
    and the late 1960s the rear-windows and lack of rear-seatbelts did apparently result in kids egressing the vehicle while in motion.
    ps - thanks for the frightening memories of the 1971 metallic-green plymouth satellite wagon. my dad's best friend had the Olds VISTA CRUISER with the roof windows. I remember my vehicular preferences switching to GM from MOPAR in the mid-1970s...

  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 22,009

    @elias said: iirc the 1970s rear-windows that wouldn't roll down more than halfway were due to federal requirement in order to stop little kids from somersaulting out the rear windows.

    I don't know if there ever was a federal regulation on that...if there was, wouldn't all cars have had windows that only went down about half way? On the 1976 Aspen/Volare, and the 1977 Diplomat/LeBaron, the back windows went down just about all the way, only leaving about an inch or two of glass exposed. On my '79 New Yorker, the windows go down all the way in back. However, it's a fairly small window, as the quarter window is extra-bulky, built to simulate an opera window. On lesser models, like the Newport and St. Regis, the window went down about 3/4 of the way. Maybe still enough to keep a kid from being ejected, but not enough that they couldn't climb through if they had a notion.

    I think a more logical explanation is a combination of downsizing, the trend towards larger window area, more widespread use of air conditioning, and cost cutting. When GM kicked off their first wave of downsizing, the cars were smaller, yet the glass area was larger and taller. There was a taller window, but less area in the door for it to go down into. As air conditioning became more and more common, I think buyers tended to care less about the windows rolling down. As for cost cutting, well, some of those older windows had to go through a couple of different maneuvers to get all the way down. They didn't just drop straight down. Sometimes, they'd roll backwards a bit, and then pivot down. I remember with GM's '71-76 full-sized 4-door hardtops, they would leave just a slight corner sticking up once fully down. I'd imagine that it's easier to make a window do one maneuver as it rolls down, rather than several.

    Apparently, there was talk about federal regulations on the horizon regarding better rollover protection for cars, that existing hardtops and convertibles would not have been able to pass. Supposedly, that's why GM eliminated those body styles for the '73 midsized cars, in anticipation of it. But, in reality, who knows? Convertible sales had been declining for a few years. I'd imagine that 4-door hardtops, in the midsized ranks at least, were dropping as well. Ford only offered them in '70-71 on the Torino/Montego, and Mopar never even bothered to offer them, unless you count the '62-64 models. The hardtop coupe was still a mainstay, but the trends were heading toward a more formal roofline, with thicker C-pillars and a smaller rear window. So GM might have figured, let's just take a chance and get rid of the hardtops altogether.

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494

    I can plainly remember our salesman telling us when we picked up our new '67 Chevelle, that the reason the rears didn't roll down the whole way was so kids couldn't fall out. They rolled down most but not all of the way. I guess our Fairlane before it had windows that rolled the whole way down.

  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 40,861
    edited April 2

    Honestly, it sounds more like some reasoning made up by the salespeople to explain the issue instead of it being a federal reg. But trying to search the regs is about impossible so who knows. I think it's just an issue with the wheel wells being in the way.

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    edited April 2

    andre, talking about things CR noticed on cars in the '70's--I plainly remember their test of a '73 Buick Electra 225. It had 46 defects (back when they'd count them), and there was a pic of how opening the right front door actually dented the upper fender sheetmetal where the fake 'portholes' were! A kid I knew in school was obnoxious about how much-better Buicks were built than Chevys. I made sure to show him that article. LOL

  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,817

    I don't know about that supposed regulation about windows rolling down - never had or seen an MB where the windows didn't go down normally. MBs tend to have a "soft" pillar in the rear door, which helps.

  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 22,009

    @fintail said: I don't know about that supposed regulation about windows rolling down - never had or seen an MB where the windows didn't go down normally. MBs tend to have a "soft" pillar in the rear door, which helps.

    I think often that "soft" pillar, with the little quarter/spacer window, makes it much easier for a window to roll down all the way. With midsized cars, Mopar and Ford usually had those quarter windows in the back doors, to allow a window to roll all the way down, whereas the GM midsized cars didn't. Chrysler did away with those quarter windows on the midsized cars for 1971, and IIRC, the windows stuck up a few inches. Ford did away with them for 1972 in the Torino/Montego, but the windows were fairly small, and the kick-up in the beltline helped hide them as well, so I think they did still go all the way down.

    Now that I think about it, I don't think the back windows went down all the way in GM's big '71-76 pillared sedans. I believe they stuck up about 3-4 inches, but as they rolled down, they created a gap at the back because of the slant, so you could still put your arm out the window. Even once they put a spacer window in the sedans for '75-76, I think they still stuck up a few inches.

    I think the pillared version of the '74-78 big Mopars also stuck up a few inches, but it's been ages since I've seen one of those, I can't remember. Usually, with those, the survivors I see are hardtop sedan versions of the Newport and New Yorker. I think the '73-78 big Fords and Mercurys rolled down all the way, but they were fairly small.

  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 40,861

    Rear windows that don't roll all the way down are a real pain. We should start a campaign to ban them - for safety reasons naturally. Just imagine some poor car-sick kid cutting his throat on that glass edge from a halfway rolled down window. :'( :p

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 45,056

    I always thought the windows didn't roll down because of design problems in fitting the glass into the door's limited space.

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

Sign In or Register to comment.