Cars That Could Have Been Great, But Missed
hpmctorque
Member Posts: 4,600
Gosh, where to begin? Two of countless could've/might've/should've been home runs that, sadly, weren't, are the Chrysler and DeSoto Air Flows of the '30s and Chevy Vega.
Although the Airflow had a significant influence on passenger car designs, and sparked awareness about aerodynamics, it flopped in the market place. As we know, its design was too far ahead of its time for the public. Would things have turned out differently if the Air Flow's advanced design had been introduced over two model generations, instead of all at once? Maybe. I think probably. With the new design language trickling down to Dodge and Plymouth by the second Airflow generation, that might have propelled Chrysler Corp. to overtake Ford Motor Co. in the late '30s and '40s. Actually, didn't Chrysler outsell Ford briefly anyway some time in the '30s or '40s? I seem to recall that it did, but don't remember which year(s).
As for the Vega, what's there to say that hasn't been said millions of time? The only thing that was arguably great about that car was the timing of its introduction. GM's reputation was only beginning to be tarnished, but it was still the world sales leader, by a wide, wide margin. The demand for small cars was growing, and would later explode with the oil embargoes. Detroit desperately needed good small cars to meet market share.
Beetle sales were soon to peak and wane when the '71 Vega was introduced (in Spring of '70?), while the other mass market European brands were a small and receding factor in the marketplace.. Toyota, Nissan and Honda had only recently begun to gain traction, but were no match for GM financially or in productive capacity, dealership count, consumer acceptance, and more. It could have been Detroit's great opportunity to drive the imports back to their shores. But, it wasn't meant to be.
Your turn.
Although the Airflow had a significant influence on passenger car designs, and sparked awareness about aerodynamics, it flopped in the market place. As we know, its design was too far ahead of its time for the public. Would things have turned out differently if the Air Flow's advanced design had been introduced over two model generations, instead of all at once? Maybe. I think probably. With the new design language trickling down to Dodge and Plymouth by the second Airflow generation, that might have propelled Chrysler Corp. to overtake Ford Motor Co. in the late '30s and '40s. Actually, didn't Chrysler outsell Ford briefly anyway some time in the '30s or '40s? I seem to recall that it did, but don't remember which year(s).
As for the Vega, what's there to say that hasn't been said millions of time? The only thing that was arguably great about that car was the timing of its introduction. GM's reputation was only beginning to be tarnished, but it was still the world sales leader, by a wide, wide margin. The demand for small cars was growing, and would later explode with the oil embargoes. Detroit desperately needed good small cars to meet market share.
Beetle sales were soon to peak and wane when the '71 Vega was introduced (in Spring of '70?), while the other mass market European brands were a small and receding factor in the marketplace.. Toyota, Nissan and Honda had only recently begun to gain traction, but were no match for GM financially or in productive capacity, dealership count, consumer acceptance, and more. It could have been Detroit's great opportunity to drive the imports back to their shores. But, it wasn't meant to be.
Your turn.
Tagged:
0
Comments
The Airflow was probably painful too look at in the eyes of the time, but another problem was that it was released as a medium-to-high-priced car at the peak of the Great Depression. I'd imagine that nobody in those price classes was selling very well, and buyers of larger, more expensive cars probably didn't want to buy something that would draw too much attention to themselves during such economic strife. They probably opted for something more conservative. That and, to be fair, the Airflows really aren't very attractive...to me, at least. Very modern, yes...they brought the American Automobile kicking and screaming out of the horse and buggy days, and put the passenger cabin down between the axles, rather than a good portion of it hanging out over the rear axle.
One thing I'll say for the Vega, is that it spawned some pretty nice looking offshoots, like the Monza, Sunbird, Starfire, and Skyhawk. And even the Vega itself wasn't bad looking. That baby Camaro style sure made it look a lot sportier than the Pinto and the bulk of the Japanese competition at the time...but a 240Z it wasn't!
Strangely enough, for all the bad press it got, the Vega always sold pretty well. Even in 1977, its final year, it managed to move about 100,000 units, despite competition from the Chevette and Monza. And by that time, big cars were starting to sell again.
As for the styling of the Vega and its offshoots, I agree with you completely. GM got the styling right.
Interesting how well Vegas continued to sell even after word got out about its problems. I gues it's a testimonial to Chevy's extensive dealer network, and to the Bowtie's brand equity in the '70s. But, just think how many Vegas they would have sold if that gotten repeat sales, at a time when a lot of people traded their cars in every 2-3 years, like clock work. It's hard to imagine anyone trading his '71 or '72 for a later Vega once it was known that the bad ones weren't just lemons. The '71s and '72s were all bad, and the '73s were only marginally better.
For all the serious issues the Vega had -- rusting, overheating, head gaskets, manual transmissions that locked a gear up so that you had to reach under the car to unstick the linkage, to name some -- my brother managed to nurse his '73 just past 100,000. Of course, he spent some money on it to keep it going, and the body was totally corroded by the time the engine just quit.
GM has a number of cars that "could have been".
But, head gasket problems were common, and I think transmissions were pretty iffy, which is sad because that tranny dated back to the 1978 Horizon, so they only had like seventeen years to get it right! Sad thing is, that 2.0 the Neon used dated back to the old Mopar 2.2/2.5 4-cyl, which debuted in 1981 and was designed by the same guy who did the Slant Six.
They did improve the cars as the years went by, but it wasn't enough, and then when the 2000 came out, it just seemed way behind the competition. 3-speed automatic, the same 132 hp 2.0, which suddenly didn't seem as impressive. No optional engines (although that would come later). No more coupe model. And, while it's a fairly minor thing, who the hell makes a 4-door car with power windows up front and crank windows in the back?!
I think they should have kept the Neon around though, and improved upon it, rather than dump it for the Caliber. That would be kind of like Toyota dumping the Corolla and relying only for the Matrix in this market.
Regarding the Allante, yeah, it never really had a chance. Upon arrival it was already outclassed by a 15 year old MB, and when the new SL came out for 1990, it was flatly destroyed. XLR suffered the same fate about 15 years later.
I think had Ford put appropriate R&D money into keeping the Taurus competitive, it could have been something that didn't wither off and die into fleet-land.
Isn't that sort of a trademark of GM? I even notice it with cars like my Dad's '03 Regal and my '00 Park Ave. While most people wouldn't classify either one as a small car, to me they just drive "bigger" than what they are. My 2000 Intrepid was bigger than Dad's Regal, yet felt nimble in comparison. The Regal at least is easier to park in tight spaces though because you can see better where the car ends.
And the Park Ave feels about how my grandmother's '85 LeSabre, a car a foot longer, would have felt with some low-profile tires on it.
I kind of understand what GM is trying to do with these bigger cars...they're trying to engineer in that "big car" ride that they think people still want. They probably started that in 1985 to get buyers to accept those shrunken Electras and Ninety Eights and DeVilles.
But most people buy a small sporty car because they want something that feels, well, small and sporty! I don't see the point of making something like that feel bulkier and clumsier than it is.
Tweaked 3.8L w/supercharger. Six speed stick. oh, yeah ...
Misses? FWD Cutlass, take your pick of models. That was a major seller for GM, but to spread the name out all over the place was stupid.
Cutlass Classic, RWD
Cutlass Supreme, FWD and RWD
Cutlass Ciera, FWD
Cutlass Calais, FWD and RWD
Cutlass Supreme Brougham, FWD and RWD
Cutlass 'S', FWD and RWD
Cutlass Salon, RWD
But the biggest, dumbest thing a bean counter ever came up with at Oldsmobile ...
FWD, 4cyl, 442. Knew the end was coming when I saw that one.
Even the Calais didn't bother me, even though it was originally a trim level in the RWD Cutlass lineup. At the time it came out, I didn't realize that, I guess because what they had been calling the Calais, I knew it as the Salon. However, once they started calling that little N-body the CUTLASS Calais, I thought they were getting stupid.
Had the forecasts of scarce, $3.00/gal gas come to be a reality, those 1985 N-bodies were going to be the replacement for the Monte Carlo, Grand Prix, Regal, and Cutlass Supreme. But then once bigger cars began selling again, GM decided to keep the RWD G-bodies around, so they had to come up with a different name for the N-bodies. Maybe that's why they picked names like Grand Am, Somerset Regal, and Calais...names that in the past, had been associated with the RWD cars.
Speaking of misses, I think the W-body, or GM10 when it first came out, was a miss. By the late 80's, it was obvious that personal luxury coupes were on the decline. The Taurus was a smash hit, and GM's A-body Celebrity et al was starting to look dated. GM should have focused their efforts on a top-notch Taurus contender, but instead, they chose to focus on a replacement of the RWD coupes. They actually had modest success for a few years, as the Grand Prix, Regal, and Cutlass Supreme were decent sellers initially. They'd never reach the heyday of the 1970's though, and the Regal/Cutlass Supreme never even matched their RWD counterparts' best years of the 1980's. And I'm sure losing the Monte Carlo didn't help out Chevrolet much. Finally, in 1990, the 4-door models debuted, as well as the Lumina. It took them FOUR years to respond to the Taurus, and their response really wasn't so hot.
I'll try to get us back on topic - VW Rabbit, especially the GTI. The Rabbit was good and the GTI was incredible...if you could keep them running. If they only had decent reliability, perhaps they could have held off Japanese from taking over the small car market.
I'd say the Pinto damaged Ford's brand equity more than the first generation Rabbit damaged VW's. That's because, as far as I know, virtually all Pintos (and Mercury Bobcats) were sold in North America. So, Pinto became synonymous with bad small car. Maybe not the worst, but bad, nevertheless. By contrast, I think the Golf (Rabbit for non-North American markets) was generally perceived in a positive way. That's probably due to some combination of Americans' less diligent maintenance habits, and driving style. Also, the Rabbits produced in VW's Pennsylvania plant probably had more quality problems than the Rabbits made in Germany. I have no data to support this last point, but I'd bet on it.
The Rabbit and the Pinto are trumped by the Vega, though, both in terms of lost opportunity and damage to the brand.
Furthermore, it soon became apparent that despite all the jollies offered by the GTi, the Rabbit was, sadly, about as reliable as a Trabant (on a good day).
In hindsight, the GTi could have been the BMW Mini, 20 years earlier, but it couldn't shake the reputation of the Rabbit, despite upgrades. The Mini wasn't an "upscale" anything, it was a brand new car.
The Rabbit was in the driver's seat when it first came out in the USA, and could have easily dominated the small car market up to the present day--but VW seems to have lost interest in the car for America and pumped the Jetta and New Beetle instead.
I could have seen the Rabbit evolve into today's MINI and Scion line.
I remember though, when they took us kids to the Kings Dominion amusement park, we went in their brown Ford Torino Elite. I'm sure it's because, even though that Elite was anything but space efficient, you could still pile more people into it than the Rabbit. But, maybe there was something else at play...like the Rabbit might not have made it that far without breaking down! :P
With its early use of fuel injection the Rabbit should have led VW to great things. Still waiting for that, but the newest GTI still has me interested, and I fit in it!
The last time I looked at a new Rabbit in a VW showroom was in 1978 and the price had jumped to $5k. And still, the Japanese were selling base models about a grand cheaper.
Westmoreland never found "the answer." Who has? What country has effectively countered Asian import cars? By "counter" I mean effectively "compete with."
Without tariffs or other import trickery, what country has beat the Asian imports with open borders, toe to toe on the currency and quality which adds up to the best value for the consumer?
I'm honestly not trying to be a smart [non-permissible content removed] here, but if there really is a non-Asian champion why isn't it gobbling up market share in the U.S. right now and for the last 30 years? Be it Detroit or import from Europe?
PS-Not making any excuses for Detroit. Nada. Chickens do come home to roost. But more car makers than the Big Used-To-Be have lost ground. And lots of it.
When I was in high school, we used to pick up vegas for $50, yank the 4 cylinder aluminum block that was always warped and dropped in a V-8.
Loads of fun, power of a muscle car on a beer budget.
The only thing you had to be careful of is that you didn't get on it too much, as the subframe didn't hold up too well.
My favorite was a 72 vega wagon. You could fit a bunch of people and supplies for a good weekend.................uh........picnic. Yeah, that sounds good.
A guy in one of my Mopar clubs had a Vega, once. And he said he didn't have too much trouble with it. I forget what year he said it was, but I think he had it for about 90,000 miles, and the only major thing was getting a cylinder sleeved.
He also said he had a Pinto that was fairly reliable. In fact, both cars were more reliable than the 1994 Chrysler Concorde 3.5 he had, which had problems with the water pump, timing belt, and air conditioning all before it was 3 years old.
Y'know, that's another one that could have really been great, if the quality had been there...the 1993 Mopar LH cars. They had a lot of promise when they first came out, And some of their components were actualy pretty good. The standard 3.3 V-6, for example. It was just a pushrod, but pretty good as pushrods go, and put out good power. I think it had 161 hp in those days. In contrast, Ford was only getting 140 out of the Taurus's 3.8, and I and I think GM was only getting about that out of their 3.1, although I think the Buick 3.8 was up to around 165-170 by that time.
The big deal though, was the 3.5 OHC engine, which put out something like 214 hp...pretty impressive for a fairly mainstream 1993 car. And even more surprising, the 3.5 was one of those pushrod-to-OHC conversions that was actually reliable! It was basically the 3.3/3.8 block converted to an OHC setup and sporting a 3.5 CID displacement. GM tried a similar route with their 3.4 DOHC, which was based on the 2.8/3.1 pushrod block. It was pretty strong, but proved to be troublesome.
Unfortunately, those early LH cars had transmission problems galore, plastic fenders that warped, paint that peeled, sensors that would go bad, water pump issues with the 3.5, a/c issues, and so on. My understanding is that by 1996-97, they improved them considerably, and the redesigned 1998 models were better still. But, alas, the damage had been done.
GM, to its credit, did improve this generation somewhat, giving the Eldo and Seville improved looks and an improved V-8 by the end of the run. The damage was done, however, and sales never improved to their pre-1985 levels.
I had a 1980 Rabbit. Nowhere near that kind of luck. Was a fun little car when it ran but that wasn't very often. To this day I'm skittish about VWs. Thirty years down the road I've yet to buy another VW.
If that timeline had played out, I'm sure those cars would have been a hit. But as it was, the fuel started flowing again, and prices dropped, and big cars came into favor. And oddly, even in some of the darkest days of that 1980-83 economic cesspool, GM's big cars continued to sell well. I have an old MT or C&D from early 1982 that tested a Caprice with the 305. They mentioned that these cars were going out the door for well over MSRP, while cars like the Celebrity, which was supposed to point the way to the future of the family car, only sold with deep discounts. However, part of that could have just been that the competition was drying up. Pontiac and Mopar left the big car market after 1981. And GM might have purposely cut back on production of the Impala and Caprice, figuring they wouldn't sell, and that might have inflated demand.
Back to those shrunken Eldos and such...once word got out that they were going to be downsized, people flocked out to buy the big ones while they could. As a result, 1985 was a very good year for not only the Eldo/Seville, but also the Toronado and Riviera. The LeSabre and Delta 88 also had a very good year in 1985. That would be the last time the Delta 88 was in the top ten selling cars. And the LeSabre was popular enough to hit #18. Although for some reason, the LeSabre did take to downsizing better than the Delta 88 did, and managed to maintain its popularity.
Looking back to that time, I remember my grandparents wanting to get a new car to replace their crappy '82 Malibu wagon. A guy in our church had an early 80's Electra coupe that my Granddad really liked, and he wanted to get one of them. But they had just downsized them, so Grandmom and Granddad made sure to run out and get a LeSabre before that one got shrunken, too!
Moving beyond that dumb comparison, the new for '76 Mopars were in a market with great promise, the upscale intermediates. With memories of gas lines and high gas prices still fresh, the idea of an upscale compact (I think that's how they were categorized in those days) was very appealing to a lot of folks. These cars combined relatively good fuel economy for those days, or, at least, the perception of it, while being a step up from the previous generation of compacts. How could brand spanking new models with that positioning fail? Well, we all know the answer.
What's interesting about the Aspen/Volare is that they really had no direct import competition. Volvos and Audis were more expensive, and the Japanese brands had nothing as large in North America. Of course, the same could be said of the upscale trim level '73 Maverick(LDO?)/Comet, Granada/Monarch, and '75 GM compacts.
Oh, I've got to comment on the Granada/Monarch. I think Ford had a brilliant marketing idea; Combine the faux styling of a brand that enjoyed universal respect and "wanna have" appeal -- Mercedes -- and sell it for half the price. So what if it used a Maverick suspension and running gear? Heck, those dumb Americans won't know the difference. And you know, sorry to say, most Americans didn't, or it didn't matter much.
Those early Granadas actually drove and rode worse than Mavericks, but they sold like hot cakes. The ads were also spot on. Never mind that those cars were a poseur's delight. They looked good in the driveway. In the lower income neighborhoods they looked important. In the middle class neighborhoods they flashed the message, "smart buy/smart owner." In the upscale neighborhoods they were understated, yet elegant. To some neighbors, at least, they whispered, "he can afford a Mercedes, but he doesn't want to be showy." The upshot was that Granada/Monarch made owners feel good, whether it meant feeling successful, having good taste, being a smart shopper or frugal, or whatever. And hey, isn't buying a car largely an emotional experience. Well, those Ford twins sure pushed the right buttons.
The Granada was a marketing success, but IMO, there's no escaping the fact that it's a tarted-up Maverick. It's narrow inside, has a huge driveshaft/transmission hump, and just isn't roomy in general. And, what they tried to pass off as "luxury" in the interior, for the most part was just tacky.
In contrast, IMO, even though the Volare was marketed as a compact and a replacement for the Dart/Valiant, I'd really consider them midsized cars. Truth be told though, an argument could be made that the Dart was really a midsized car, too. Heck, my '68 Dart had more useable room than my '76 LeMans. And the '68 Dart sedan had more front and rear legroom than a '68 Impala...a fact Consumer Reports was all to quick to point out.
Now the Volare coupe, which was on a shorter wheelbase, was cramped in the back seat, but the sedans had legroom, both front and rear, that rivaled most midsized and even some full-sized cars! They also had large windows, which helped make the interiors seem more open and airy, and the sides didn't curve in too much,which also helped with making the interior feel roomier.
The Volare also wasn't a bad copcar. In 1979, Chevy switched their "small" police package from the Nova to the Malibu, and the Volare pretty much whipped its butt. With a 360-4bbl, the Volare police car would do 0-100 in 22.7 seconds, a time that's actually competitive among police cars today. The 3.9 Impala, 3.5 Charger, and 4.6 Crown Vic with the 3.27:1 axle tested around 22.5-23.5, according to the Michigan State Police. The Crown Vic with the 3.55:1 axle was around 22-22.5 seconds, and the Charger Hemi blew them all away, with 0-100 of around 14-14.5 seconds.
Oddly though, the 1978 Nova was considered a great police package. So you'd think the newer Malibu would have been even better, but somehow it came off worse.
The last offshoots of the Aspen/Volare played out their last act in 1989, as the Gran Fury, Diplomat, and 5th Ave. And considering how little the cars had changed in later years, they were still pretty good, although a bit of a throwback. Chrysler let them languish by not adapting them with fuel injection or 4-speed transmissions. But, they did have air bags! My '89 Gran Fury was the first car I ever owned with an airbag.
1983 Ford Thunderbird Turbo -- could it have been America's Supra?
AMC Eagle 4X4 -- crude and a gas guzzler at birth, could it have evolved into America's Subaru or Audi Allroad?
Not with that Pinto-4 with the turbocharger slapped on, it couldn't! :P Overall though, I think the 1983 T-bird turned out to be a success. It revitalized the T-bird (and Cougar) namplate, and helped pave the way for American acceptance of rounded, aerodynamic-styled cars.
Now it never sold in anywhere near record numbers...the T-bird sales champ is actually the 1977-79, but I think the '83-88 T-birds are remembered much more fondly. And the fact that they sold well as the personal luxury coupe market was drying up is proof of their acceptance with the public.
As for the turbo model, I looked at that as sort of a competitor to the likes of the Buick Regal T-type, Monte SS, and Olds 442. More of Ford's attempt at a revitalized musclecar...albeit with a 4-cyl of all things. I know they had a 5-speed, and 140 hp, but would something like that have been fun to drive in a ~198" long car that probably weighed 3200 lb or more?
Kind of a shame that Ford never put the engine from the Mark VII LSC in these cars, or, better yet, the 302 from the Mustang.
One car that I thought was really plush for its class was the first offshoot of the Aspen/Volare...the 1977.5 Diplomat and LeBaron. In base form they just had vinyl interiors, but option them up and you could get some nice velour interiors that would rival the likes of a New Yorker, Park Ave, Ninety-Eight, Etc. And leather was even optional! That was probably a rarity for cars in this price point at the time. I don't recall too many compacts or intermediates of that era offering leather seats. Some personal luxury coupes, like the T-bird/Cougar and Cordoba/Magnum/Charger SE did. I don't think the Grand Prix/Monte Carlo/Regal/Cutlass of the time did, though, although by the '80's it started creeping in. With the Regal/Cutlass, at least.
I also recall hearing from some mechanic friends that the XR4Ti had some teething and quality issues at the time. It's been years since I've seen a running example - have most of them gone to that big scrap heap in the sky already?
IMHO the rust issue was worse. My friend with a brand spanking new '74GT had holes around his front and rear windows after only 2 years (in California). At least the engine usually lasted 50K or so, so that would have been about 3-4 years of average driving.
He used to say that he was going to drive his car until it was a convertible! But then his engine finally went around 55K.
I kept tooling around in my rust-free 66 Bug that I bought used for $670. :shades: