I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today! (Archived)

uplanderguy

I still remember a new '73 Monte Carlo that stopped me in my tracks at our local dealer. Deep maroon with full black vinyl top, the five-slot Rally Wheels (only available on Monte Carlo and Corvette that year), black interior with swivel seats, A/C and a bunch of other stuff. I loved to see maroon again, as Chevy last offered anything like maroon in 1970, and same with a reddish interior color of any type. I also remember a lighter maroon that seemed available on Pontiacs but not Chevys that year....the Pontiac dealer had a Grand Prix that color in the showroom and that seemed to be a '73 Grand Prix brochure color. I may not be remembering that correctly, but it seemed lighter on the Pontiacs than the Chevys.

EDIT: I looked at some pics online, and I'm of the belief that the maroons were the same, which only seems logical. I think depending on vinyl roof color, sometimes the mind is fooled that way.

andre1969

I remember sitting in a Cutlass that was for sale at one of the Carlisle swap meets a few years back. Well, probably a few more years than what I'm remembering! I didn't find them to be all that comfortable. I think my main issue with them was that they forced me into a bit of a slouching position, and didn't give much lower back support.

It's something I wouldn't have cared about, in the least, when I was younger. But, alas, one of the pitfalls of getting older, is you start noticing little details like comfort and such. I guess I always had to worry about legroom, to some degree, since I'm fairly tall, but other things like thigh support, lower back support, and so on, eh, I used to think that was just old-people's concerns. But, suddenly time catches up to you...

uplanderguy

Those swivel seats are pretty largely-bolstered. I can't imagine pivoting the seat every single time I'd get in or out, so I could see the seats getting worn on the left side there.

Michaell

Growing up, the dad of a friend of mine worked at the local Chevrolet dealer, in the body department. He bought a new '75 Monte Carlo - orange with a cream interior, and a half vinyl roof. Pretty sharp looking car, for the time.

omarman

Not my choice of colors, but it's great to see a relic of the times when you could have a choice. Bad taste is sometimes better than no taste at all.

kyfdx

uplanderguy said:

Funny to remember the autonomy of the divisions then. Neither Pontiac nor Buick used the swivel seats. Olds used them on the Cutlass S, but not the Supreme. I have no experience with them, but I do remember thinking it was a little odd they were basically a one-piece seat. There was no folding that seat in any way, shape, or form. The big benefit seemed to be rear-seat access.

Or, for ladies that wore skirts.

uplanderguy

Or, for ladies that wore skirts.

I have remembered this '73 Chevelle brochure photo for over 48 years, and your comment reminded me, LOL:

andre1969

That Chevelle interior actually looks kinda nice, in that deep red. But then, in the fine print, I see that's the Laguna interior. And, it's also a painting, or at least a VERY touched-up photo.

I just looked up the specs in the '73 brochure. I know it's definitely a stretch of the imagination to call these cars "small", but I was surprised that the '73 coupe was only 202.9" long, while the sedan was only 206.9". For some reason the numbers 208" and 212" always stuck in my mind for the coupe/sedan, and around 215 for the wagon. But, I believe that's actually for the '76-77 LeMans. Even though the '73 Colonades tended to have bulky rear bumpers, I guess they still had to be altered a bit for '74, which would have added a bit of length. And, GM did have a habit, of making the B-O-P versions a bit longer overall than the Chevy version, something they also did when they downsized for '78.

One little detail I like about the Colonade coupes, is how they put the ashtrays in the trailing edge of the armrests of the doors. IIRC, when they downsized, the ashtray was in back part of the front seat, and right about where your knee would hit. And, as a sign of cost cutting, I think they only put one ashtray back there, rather than having two like the Colonades had.

uplanderguy

The Laguna seats I remember as being pretty thickly padded, in a nicer cloth or perforated all-vinyl, but the seat pattern was plain. Even the Malibu had buttons on the seat backs, although had only cloth or grained-vinyl 'inserts' in a plain vinyl background.

I never cared for the body-colored rear bumper on the '73 Laguna. I wish they'd done a chrome bumper there.

Here is one of the most original and well-optioned '73 Lagunas I've seen in decades. To have those huge rear speakers in such an otherwise original/authentic car, yecch--makes me think it has an aftermarket radio but I didn't look:

https://www.oldride.com/classic_cars/178697/1973_Chevrolet_Laguna.html#16

uplanderguy

In the '78 and later Malibus and Monte Carlos--so I'll assume the others were like this--if you got the optional 55/45 or 50/50 split front seat, you got two ashtrays in the back of the front seats. Another reason I like the split seats.

tjc78

explorerx4 said:

Whomever ordered that Monte Carlo was colorblind.
It's in great shape though.

Took the words out of my mouth. Ugh, horrible.

andre1969

tjc78 said:

explorerx4 said:

Whomever ordered that Monte Carlo was colorblind.
It's in great shape though.

Took the words out of my mouth. Ugh, horrible.

I've been trying to think what colors WOULD work with that greenish-goldish-brownish paint. A black top and black interior would work, I think, but would be hotter than hades. A white top/white interior might work. White usually goes with just about everything, but here, perhaps the contrast would be too jarring?

Or, maybe if it had a light brown/buckskin interior? I think what bugs me the most is how clashy the interior green is with the rest of the car. It's a nice hue on it's own, I think, but just does not go with that exterior color. I think it was designed more with this color in mind...

sda

andre1969 said:

tjc78 said:

explorerx4 said:

Whomever ordered that Monte Carlo was colorblind.
It's in great shape though.

Took the words out of my mouth. Ugh, horrible.

I've been trying to think what colors WOULD work with that greenish-goldish-brownish paint. A black top and black interior would work, I think, but would be hotter than hades. A white top/white interior might work. White usually goes with just about everything, but here, perhaps the contrast would be too jarring?

Or, maybe if it had a light brown/buckskin interior? I think what bugs me the most is how clashy the interior green is with the rest of the car. It's a nice hue on it's own, I think, but just does not go with that exterior color. I think it was designed more with this color in mind...

I remember that color combo being popular yet that color paint tended to fade and become dull rather quickly as it aged. At least that’s what I observed down south.

uplanderguy

Most Green-Gold Chevelles and Monte Carlos I recall from '73 had beige interiors and vinyl tops.

andre1969

uplanderguy said:

Most Green-Gold Chevelles and Monte Carlos I recall from '73 had beige interiors and vinyl tops.

Like this?


Actually, that beige landau roof helps tone down that greenish-gold rather nicely.

uplanderguy

Really unusual to see a '73 Monte Carlo without the body side moldings. I don't mind them on those cars, as it's a small molding. In '75 GM started using wide side moldings as optional on some lines, including Monte Carlo, and I didn't like those at all--too 'J.C. Whitney' looking.

The Turbine wheels look to be missing their trim rings, pretty common on the '73's. This '73 Laguna has them. I don't love the wheels (Rally Wheels were not available on any '73 Chevelle except the SS and even those weren't the Monte's five-slot ones), but I hate the Turbine wheels without trim rings, LOL.



The '74 Malibu Classic had a much-richer interior than any '73 Chevelle, but the exterior styling details are much-more appealing to my eyes on the '73.

Too lazy to check, but it looks like the Turbine wheels aren't the same between Chevelle and Monte Carlo. I have some vague memories of one being called 'Turbine I' and the other being called 'Turbine II'.

Other than Monte Carlo Landaus, where they were standard, I can only say I specifically ever remember seeing one new Chevelle at my hometown dealer's with Turbine wheels....a light blue '73 Laguna coupe with matching vinyl top and cloth interior.

fintail

Out on the road: heavily customized Datsun 510, 58-60 Ford pickup lowered on wide whites, another Festiva, 2x first gen Geo Metro, 70s F-series, 80s style Fleetwood Brougham, Continental Mark V driven by a little old lady, late 80s Imperial, couple of early Saturns, house with 3 60s Dodge pickups in the driveway, W210 4Matic at a used car lot with "4x4" in the window, which amused me.

stickguy

out driving around on local streets, a neat looking Green Dodge. I think it was a 70ish Coronet. Had that squinty eye grill where the inner edges come to a point. Rumbled nice! Black vinyl roof. Could of course have been a package model like a super bee but it drove the other way and I didn't get a look at any badging or stripes (but none really noticeable).

ab348

I don’t think I have ever seen one of these before:

https://bringatrailer.com/listing/1979-buick-century-wagon/

A very fair selling price IMO.

fintail

That wagon has to be one of the best survivors in existence. If that's someone's thing, seems like a deal. Almost all I recall seeing were Chevys or Pontiacs.

uplanderguy

I've seen that trim on the fastback coupes but never the wagons.

andre1969

I looked in the sales brochure for '79, and it's listed as an option package for the Century Special wagon. The sales brochure also lists a Century Custom wagon. I'd imagine the Sport Wagon option must be really rare. According to my auto encyclopedia, they only built about 10,000 Special wagons, and around 21,000 Custom wagons.

It does look nice, with the blackout trim around the windows and roof pillars.

uplanderguy

Those wheels are nice too. I seem to remember seeing the occasional '78 or '79 Regal with those.

I'd prefer the SportWagon without the bird decal, you know me about stuff like that, LOL.

Those GM mid-size wagons reminded me that on the Malibu you could get the 350 in the wagon, which would've also gotten you the 350 transmission. I never saw a single real one--well, that would've required me to see the window sticker as there was no indication of that engine outside the car. It was available in 49 states, but only with the optional 'High Altitude Emission Equipment'. Weird. Not sure if the 350 was available in the other divisions' wagons. That was a weird time, and into the early '80's, at GM with engines....NA CA, CA only, etc. etc.

andre1969

The sales brochure lists four different V8s for the wagon: a Pontiac 301-2bbl, 301-4bbl, Chevy 305-4bbl, and Chevy 350-4bbl. There's a little cross symbol next to the Pontiac engines with the footnote below "Not available in California".

I'd imagine that, in those days of engine roulette, getting a 305, when they ran out of 301s, might have been somewhat common in non-CA areas. But I'd imagine a 350 in a Century wagon was pretty rare.

Uplander, I know you said that the sales brochure is usually be best source of information, and it definitely is, compared to a lot of those history books (like the Consumer Guide encyclopedia I often quote from). But, how accurate do you think the EPA website would be? In this case, the '79 Buick brochure lists a 350-4bbl being offered, but the EPA does not. I guess it's possible, sometimes, that things change after the sales brochure is printed? Of course, the EPA is the government. And the government isn't always accurate

The only downsized Malibu I can recall ever seeing with a 350 was a beige '78 coupe with dark brown SS-looking stripes. The owner was a substitute teacher at my high school. I asked him if it had been replaced and he said that no, it came that way. Although, I only took his word that it was a 350. I didn't actually look under the hood.

ab348

The Chevy 350 4-bbl was also available at Oldsmobile in the Cutlass Cruiser wagon, but just as with the Malibu, I dunno why anyone would order it. It gave you and extra 15HP and 15 torques over the 2-bbl 305. By 1980 it was gone and replaced with a 4-bbl 305.

uplanderguy

I'd order it to get the THM 350 transmission. Plus, the 350 I don't recall hearing about soft-cam issues as with some 305's. Of course, both of these are hindsight now.

uplanderguy

My opinion, only that, is that the brochure is the best information as it is the point of manufacturer's information to the purchaser. They're the ones trying to sell the product. Sometimes the brochures were revised mid-year, and of course there were sales memos sent to the dealer through the year if/when something changed. The EPA you'd like to think was accurate, but.....who knows.

In 'fan' sites decades after the fact, I've seen so many goofs that I know were goofs from years of seeing literally hundreds of the cars, and being a nerd about studying them when new, that I usually chuckle when someone would tell me I should trust that info over the brochure. To each his own of course. I think it's sort-of like eyewitness testimony tending to be more accurate, the closer to the actual event. It's funny how some people who were witness to JFK's assassination have massaged their stories over the years.

andre1969

I was thinking that the 350 should give you a bigger advantage than that over the 305. But, when you factor in you had to basically get it with the California smog package if you wanted it in a midsized car, whereas a 305-4bbl didn't need it, that closed the gap considerably.

I guess though, if you wanted to tow a trailer, or regularly carried around a full load, the 350 was probably a better choice...especially since it got you the bigger transmission.

andre1969

One other detail I noticed with the EPA website, is that they don't have a listing for the 350 that was used in the 1979 Cutlass W30. I know Olds was able to get away with making that car, by only building 2499 units. At 2500 or more, the car had to be EPA-tested and certified, and apparently that's not cheap.

I wonder, if a similar thing happened with the midsized wagons that got 350's in '79? Maybe it's possible that GM purposely kept their production numbers below 2500 units each, for the Malibu, LeMans, Cutlass, and Century wagons? I know that seems a bit far-fetched, but who knows?

ab348

Only the Chevy and Olds brochures mention the Chevy 350 as an option for the wagons. The Buick brochure does not list it as an option but does list the other engines, so maybe it was N/A in those. The Pontiac brochure doesn't mention much about engines at all.

fintail

TPiR April 1980, the golden age of automotive history. Wire wheel covers seem to have been a big thing:

First, a moderately optioned Concord, MSRP $5743:



Then a final run Sunbird with some options, MSRP $5080:



And in the showcase, a Phoenix:

sda

fintail said:

TPiR April 1980, the golden age of automotive history. Wire wheel covers seem to have been a big thing:

First, a moderately optioned Concord, MSRP $5743:



Then a final run Sunbird with some options, MSRP $5080:



And in the showcase, a Phoenix:

IIRC the Pontiac Phoenix was only slightly larger than the Sunbird but so much more efficient space wise. Too bad the first year X cars had issues which hurt their reputation, they were nice cars.

andre1969

Here's the page where they mention it, for the Century It's a bit blurry, but should still be readable.

Unfortunately, the '79 Pontiac brochures I've found don't have much information on engine availability. The EPA doesn't list a 350 being offered in the '79 LeMans wagon (but it doesn't list it for any of the others, either). And my auto encyclopedia does not list it, but it tends to make a muddled mess out of its engine listing charts for the 70's.

The only place I've seen a 350 in a '79 LeMans wagon listed was at Automobile Catalog But, this is more of a "fan site" for lack of a better word. Lots of good information there, but it could very well have errors here and there.

fintail

An old friend had a Phoenix as his first car, early 90s. He loved to regale me with tales of how slow it was, and that it would slow to under a walking pace on some Seattle hills. Can't recall when I last saw one on the road (or an early Sunbird, for that matter). Concord though, an acquaintance of my mom had a high option coupe in daily service at least into the early 2000s, black on red IIRC, thick top, maybe turbine style wheels, and kept up.

sda said:

IIRC the Pontiac Phoenix was only slightly larger than the Sunbird but so much more efficient space wise. Too bad the first year X cars had issues which hurt their reputation, they were nice cars.

andre1969

I used to see a well-preserved Phoenix 2-door around my old neighborhood, and job, on a fairly consistent basis, but haven't seen it in awhile. Actually, outside of a classic car show, I think the last time I saw an FWD X-body was a few years back, in the parking lot at a diner in Carlisle PA. It was a brownish Omega 4-door. As I recall, it looked like a fairly high trim level ("Brougham" maybe) with a nice interior. It was starting to look a little battle-scarred by this point, but not bad for its age. I saw it there several times, so I think it might have belonged to an employee.

Out of all of the X-car permutations, I think I liked the Skylark the best. I tended to like the notchback versions better than the hatchbacks, so that might be one reason I liked the Skylark, as it was notchback only. The Phoenix coupe was nice though, and I liked the SJ or whatever trim level it was that got you the blacked-out grille. With the Omega, even though it came in the notchback style, I just didn't care for its front end. And the Citations always just seemed cheap, although that's probably because it was usually the cheap ones I saw...in a higher trim level they weren't bad.

I can't remember the last time I saw one of those Monza-based Sunbirds. Once upon a time though, it seemed like they were everywhere!

andre1969

The other day, stuck in traffic, I spotted this, up on a trailer...


Unfortunately traffic was pretty bad, so a mirror shot was the best I could do. For a Mopar guy, you'd think I'd know my Barracudas, but I'm not 100% sure. I think this one is a '70? All I know, is the '71 was the only year they had quad headlights. And I think '72-74 were all the same, and had a thicker grille center portion.

There's a drag strip not far from where I took this pic, so I'd imagine it was on its way there.

kyfdx

Hyundai Equus. I think that is my first one, this decade

ab348

There's an Equus that must live nearby as I see it fairly often. It is now in livery service.

ab348

Over at Hemmings today they have this wonderful 1980 photo of the old Dodge Main plant in Hamtramck, MI. Even with Chrysler on the brink at that time, the workers seemed pretty loyal to the cars they made. This blows up to a huge size:

stickguy

Looks like a fairmont front left pointing toward camera, with a very shiny grill.

texases

And a Mercury on the far right.

ab348

I never knew Stick and Tex were Ford shills...

Shiny grill car on the left side is too narrow to be a Fairmont, looks like an Omni to me. No Merc anywhere in sight on the right. If viewing on a PC most browsers will offer a "View image" or similar with a right-click on the pic, which lets it blow up to full size. Alternatively you can go to the Hemmings link and click on the pic there which does something similar. This is a very large image.

explorerx4

I see a big Buick 3rd from the right in the nearest row. A Cadillac to the right of the van in between the Mirada and the hatchback next to it. A Barracuda white top convertible all the way in the back.

texases

Well, now I'm stumped. What is the car on the right end of the first row?

andre1969

Yeah, I think the shiny grille car, that you can't quite see all of, is a Horizon or Omni. If y'all mean the one that's in between a station wagon and a New Yorker. Now the one that's all the way to the left, facing the camera, is a Dodge Diplomat. The one all the way to the right is an R-body New Yorker. Now, one that threw me off at first, was the 4th from the right. The way the light is hitting it and making a reflection, it almost looks Cadillac-ish. But then when I zoomed in, it's either a Cordoba or Mirada, with either a carriage roof, or a very thickly padded regular vinyl roof.

At a quick glance, some of those fastbacks towards the right, made me think of Fox-bodied Mustangs or Capri's, but zoomed in I'm pretty sure they're Omni 0-24's or Horizon TC3's (later renamed "Charger" (don't laugh) or "Turismo").

Mis-identifying some of these cars as Ford products, though, is an honest mistake. A lot of Ford stylists jumped ship to Chrysler before Iacocca. They had already laid their mark on most of the upcoming Ford products of the late 70's, and when they went to Chrysler, started influencing them almost immediately.

andre1969

explorerx4 said:

I see a big Buick 3rd from the right in the nearest row. A Cadillac to the right of the van in between the Mirada and the hatchback next to it. A Barracuda white top convertible all the way in the back.

That's a Newport, I think a '77 or '78. They are kind of Buicky looking, though...


Here's the closest LeSabre I can think of. This one's a '76 but a '75 would look almost the same from the back...


Actually, the rump of the Marquis from around that era has similar theming, with the thin, wide taillights.

andre1969

texases said:

Well, now I'm stumped. What is the car on the right end of the first row?

All the way to the right? That's a '79-81 New Yorker.


Those wide taillights do look similar to what Mercury, or Buick, was doing around the same time, though.

explorerx4

I guess I'll have to cry Uncle and defer to your Mopar knowledge.

ab348

explorerx4 said:

I guess I'll have to cry Uncle and defer to your Mopar knowledge.

As a Ford guy, it's like you brought a knife to a gunfight...

explorerx4

A knife with a rubber blade.