Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
The latter 60's and early 70's definitiely had an airliner thing going on. You could see it in the original Toronado, and if you look at a late 60's/early 70's Intermediate like say Skylark, and then look at the cockpit area of a B707 or 727 (now 737) there is quite a resemblance. I though the 71/72 Plymouth Sebring was a nice looker too (but I'm a sucker for anything aviation like!). That car not only was inspired in the greenhouse, but also the front end. Put them together, and the slightly more uplifted angled rear window reminded me more of a DC8 and the front end also brought to my mind a bit of that aircraft's visible nacelles.
The problem I think with the Ford's of that era was an overall feel of cheapness inside. I did like the 72 Torino fastback roofline though.
But they held up like Japanese imports. Many went well over 200K and you could see them many years after their debut as taxicabs.
I feel the same way. I think the Buick and Olds are both about the most outlandish cars there were for 1958, but the Buick still comes off as flashy and attention-grabbing. Definitely a car with some presence to it. But in contrast, the Olds, despite all that glitter and tackiness, just seems a bit stodgy, and like it's catering to an older, stuffier clientele.
Interestingly, the '58 Olds was actually fairly popular when new, considering there was a serious recession that year, and an over-crowding in the middle-priced field. So, I guess it must have appealed to somebody! I think the problem with Buick though, is that the '55-56 models were wildly popular, so GM rushed them out as quick as they could, and quality suffered. As word got out, it put a damper on '57 sales and an even bigger one on '58 sales. Chrysler also got a bad reputation for quality control in '57, and I think the '57 Mercury also took a hit, compared to the '56 and earlier models. So, maybe Olds was about the only brand left that HADN'T gotten a bad reputation, so that kept buyers loyal?
70's 80's 90's etc........they all kind of lost the boat in my book....
The only thing I could add is all the Pony cars.........up till computers and fuel mileage BS showed up !
They especially hated the clam shell headlights on the '65 Rivieras. They were quite complex and touchy with little micro switches. Just a minor bump to the front bumper would cause them to malfunction.
I may be in the minority, but I think the '65 Riviera looked a lot better than the '63-64. The exposed headlights, which were mounted too far inboard for my tastes and seemed to bug out a bit, were the one detail I didn't like about the first two years of Riviera.
I always thought hidden headlights were kinda cool...gave the car a sleeker, more futuristic look. However, there have been times when I'd turn off the ignition to my '79 New Yorker before turning off the lights, which leaves the covers in the open position. I think they do it that way so that you can get to the bulbs to change them. I've had people remark that it looks cool with the headlights exposed like that. And, I'll admit, it does have a neat look to it. Especially with the wasp nest that's up in there! :P
Now, I think pop-up headlights can look pretty awkward. They look good when they're off, but awkward when up (Corvette, '82-ish Firebird, etc). I always thought the '77-79 T-bird looked awkward with the lights exposed, maybe because it just used large, round single lights. Also, it seemed an often occurence, when those cars were common, to see one with one headlight covered, one exposed, so it looked like it was winking at you!
I didn't mind that look really. Didn't the 67 Chevy kind of do the same thing but on a less pronounced scale?
Yeah, it did, and to a lot of people, 1967 marked a major change, where Chevrolet was starting to eschew sportiness in favor of wanna-be luxury. Which, in the 1970's, would transform into pimpiness.
On the Riviera, which was a much more upscale car, and designed with a bit of neoclassicism in mind, I think it worked fine. But on the Chevy, it just seemed a bit pretentious. Of the '65-70 models, I think the '67 is actually my least favorite Chevy overall, although I do like its dashboard. And, it's not a case of I think the '67 sucks, or anything like that...I just happen to like the other models better.
With the Riviera, I guess the '63-65 is considered the most collectible, but personally, I prefer the '66-69 models.
Curb weight for a 1976 Malibu with a 305 V8? Probably 2 tons.
Curb weight for a 1976 Torino with a 351 V8? Probably 2 tons and an extra 150 pounds!
I grew up in the 70s era which gets re-written and re-made into movies, music and fiction far more often than I would have ever imagined back then. For example, "The Colonades (sic) were...considering the times...a great choice in midsized cars back then. Quality control was pretty good for the era..."
I know that people really liked Smokey and the Bandit, Foreigner, 3.2 beer and GM's 50% market share of the car biz. There will never be another time like that. (Insert sarcastic retort HERE.)
If you weren't there, then you missed some party. And if you were there then we both know that there weren't too many "great choices" taken or even available in the 70s. And no, I'm not picking on GM's fat boy, colonnade lineup as the worst example of that, either. The 70s were, put bluntly, an all-you-can-eat-buffet of bad choices and questionable judgement. And that's the point. Now that the 70s are gone, we should all have a more sober, clearer vision of what can/should be salvaged from that era. I liked a lot of things back then and can't defend any of it!
Please strike GM's Colonnade-style cars from consideration as a "great choice" of anything ever created from raw materials on this planet. Thanks and have a nice day.
In later years, they changed the round taillights for the sake of change. The '75's rear end lights were so sloppily engineered, they looked like a low-rent body shop did the conversion. And I'm a Chevy guy (especially so back then)!
They probably were! The first car I can remember us having was a 1968 Impala 4-door hardtop that Mom drove. My grandparents had bought it new, but in '72 gave it to my Mom in trade for her '66 Catalina convertible, which my Dad had ragged out, and then they used the Catalina as a trade on a new Impala.
I don't remember much about the Impala, but Mom said it was a good car. In '75 she traded it on a new LeMans coupe. The rear-end was starting to go out on it, but that was about it. It wasn't rusting, falling apart, or anything like that. But it was starting to look like an old car, simply because the styles were changing.
In retrospect, I wonder if she would have just been better off getting the rear-end fixed, and keeping the '68 awhile longer? Even though it was a bigger car than the LeMans and had a slightly smaller engine (327 versus a 350), the Impala was probably faster, and I wouldn't be surprised if it got better fuel economy, too!
The LeMans actually wasn't a bad car, although I do remember the distributor failing on it when it was fairly new. Dad wrecked it in 1977, and after it got fixed, it never seemed to run right again.
It's funny, but as much as I love the '76-77 LeMans, I hated that '75 when I was a kid. It's amazing what a difference a facelift can make, although most people, I think, prefer the round-headlight models.
I had both (not at the same time), an '83 (Rabbit)GTI and an'86 Mustang GT 5.0 convertible. Fun cars indeed and certainly among the best of the 80s. :shades:
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
It was a great perk for my mom that the business leased her a new caddy every two years...they just about fit in the old garage but boy were they beautiful pieces of metal!
The Sandman :sick: :shades:
2023 Hyundai Kona Limited AWD (wife) / 2015 Golf TSI (me) / 2019 Chevrolet Cruze Premier RS (daughter #1) / 2020 Hyundai Accent SE (daughter #2) / 2023 Subaru Impreza Base (son)
I've mentioned before how we had a bright red '77 Impala coupe 305 bought new in Nov. '76. We traded in a '74 Impala Sport Coupe and I liked driving the '77 better in every possible way. I was away at college and a hometown buddy told me on the phone, "I saw your Dad driving a new Impala!". I went home for the weekend and shortly after I got home my Dad asked if I could run an errand and take the car. The '77 was in the garage, but I knew about it already!
The '77s still just seemed like typical land barges to me. By 1977, you could easily buy cars with fuel injection, 4 wheel independent suspension, decent gas mileage, etc. So, how exactly was the Impala breaking new ground?
The downsized Caprices became very popular, showing up in neighborhoods formerly frequented by Buicks and Caddys.
I still think the '76s look cooler than the '77s.
...but not really on a large sized car. Space utilization and efficiency were key on it. Also, a 350 actually got pretty good mileage compared to its peers for that period in time.
I'd probably go with the 71 sports coupe personally.
Those would easilly go 100,000 miles and more at a time most cars were needing overhauls long before that.
It just goes to show how tastes vary. I was in my late 20's when the '77s came out, and I thought at the time that the transition from the rounded, bulbous '76s to the crisp, trim '77s was a quantum improvement in looks. But then, I was driving a Volvo, so boxy was familiar to me.
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
I honestly don't know those cars well enough to distinguish, but I was a young Lt. when I saw that 71 and liked it so that's probably my perspective. I actually liked the Grand Prix and Camaro better then, but was more of a Mopar guy (Challenger, Sebring, etc) in those days - but after actually owning one my attitude soon changed!
You know I would guessed the same thing, but I found a brochure online (at American Car Brochures) that says that the Turbo-Hydramatic was coupled with the six in the Chevelle (the Deluxe was the only Chevelle wagon that came with a six, incidentally).
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
Ultimately, I think the Chevy 350 stayed around the longest because of trucks, so they got a greater volume there. And performance cars like the Corvette.
Starting in 1977, Pontiac V-8's got banned in California because they couldn't pass the stricter emissions standards. Pontiac 350 and 400 engines were replaced with Olds 350 and 403's there. And the 301 was just flat-out banned in the bigger cars, and replaced with a 305 in the smaller cars.
Same thing might have happened to the Buick V-8, which was down to only a 350 size by 1977, but I'm not sure. By 1978, they were definitely substituting Olds engines for Buicks in California and regions that adopted CA's stricter standards.
I think the Pontiac 350 and 400 went away entirely for 1979, there were enough 400's left over to use in some Trans Ams. In the Catalina/Bonneville though, they substituted a Buick 350 (Olds in CA).
By 1980, the cars the even offered a 350 were thinned out immensely. It was dropped from the Caprice/Impala, with the exception of police cars. Pontiac also dropped its use entirely, except for California full-sized cars, which offered an Olds 350. The Buick LeSabre and Electra still offered a Buick 350 but oddly, according to the EPA at least, the Riviera was now using an Olds 350. And, the Olds 350 was still used in the Delta 88, 98, and Toronado. Some California Cadillacs, like the Eldorado and Seville, used it as well.
Then, for 1981, it was all over. Unless you got the Diesel 350, or a Corvette or Camaro, or Impala police car, the 350s were all gone. Biggest V-8 choices were a Chevy 305 or Olds 307.
Overall, I think the Chevy 350 was the cheapest to build. It wasn't as clean-running as the Olds 350, but still met emissions requirements better than the Pontiac or Buick engines. I've also heard that it's actually the least durable, with the Olds being the best. But, still good enough. The Olds engine used a lot of nickle in its block, which made for a block that was stronger, yet lighter.
I guess in a lot of "normal" driving, a car like that might not have been too bad. A lot of those weak engines were often okay in normal driving conditions, but the only problem is that when you really needed to stomp it, you didn't get anything more out of them. So, pulling away from a green light, you might not hold up traffic, but if you really needed to stomp on it to merge onto the highway, or pass a slower car, that's where you'd run into problems.
But now, I still have that same Silverado, and today it seems slow. Part of it could be due to aging, but I've taken a stopwatch to it, and 0-60 comes up in around 12-13 seconds, which probably isn't too far off the mark from when it was new.
But, over the years, I've also gotten used to faster and faster cars, and as you get used to them, suddenly those faster times seem like no big deal. For instance, most times I've seen quoted for my 2000 Park Ave are around 7.6 seconds, which would make it the fastest car I've ever owned. Yet, when I punch it, it doesn't really feel THAT fast. But then when I get behind the wheel of the Silverado, or any of my other cars, I think man, what a dog. Except for the Catalina. It's pretty quick from a standstill, but out on the highway, when you need to accelerate, it seems a bit sluggish. I guess that's where newer cars, with 4+ speed automatics, really start to show their advantage.
Now a V-6 Accord would absolutely eat its lunch in a drag race.
2021 Jeep Wrangler Sahara 4xe Granite Crystal over Saddle
2024 Audi Q5 Premium Plus Daytona Gray over Beige
2017 BMW X1 Jet Black over Mocha
Then in 1981 they produced the one year only 4-6-8's. The engines themselves weren't bad but the primitive cylinder switching systems simply didn't work right. The Cadillac mechanics hated them and the "fix" was to snip a wire that caused them to only run in 8 cylinder mode.
Then in 1982, they REALLY outdid themselves with the 4100 engines. These were terrible engines that didn't get better until 1988.
The damage by this time was done. Loyal Cadillac owners left in droves and Cadillac was no longer the "Standard of the World"