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

explorerx4

I real like the greenhouse on this 57 Buick.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Zs14qEhC1Q

andre1969

That '57 Century is a really nice car. I've often heard the slur made about that roofline, "Suddenly it's 1949!" because of that three-piece rear window setup. But, I imagine it made for a sturdy roof structure. Oldsmobile did it as well, on their cars that year.

They changed to a 1-piece rear window for 1958, so I wonder if there was enough of a public backlash against that rear window, for them to change it? Or, who knows? The way they liked to change things rapidly in those days, maybe that was already in the works?

explorerx4

I like the 3 piece rear window, so I guess I would have bought a left over '57.

texases

GM was practicing for the split window Vette...

andre1969

Considering what they did to the rest of the car (both Buick and Olds) for '58, I think I would've taken a leftover '57 as well! One feature I really liked about the '57 Buick was that wide open rear wheel cutout. Most cars back then were going for that skirted look, so I think this really made the Buick stand out, and gave it a sporty, almost customized look.

sda

andre1969 said:

Considering what they did to the rest of the car (both Buick and Olds) for '58, I think I would've taken a leftover '57 as well! One feature I really liked about the '57 Buick was that wide open rear wheel cutout. Most cars back then were going for that skirted look, so I think this really made the Buick stand out, and gave it a sporty, almost customized look.

Bill Mitchell probably had a hand in the Buick’s styling.

ab348

Both @uplanderguy and I thought of @andre1969 when we saw this FB post in the All Original Cars group:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/833983836771920/permalink/1626850740818555/

Just a lovely-looking car.

uplanderguy

That '77 is gorgeous. While I like the '79 option of buckets and console, I'd forsake those for this gorgeous, '77-only color combo. And from the pics, I believe the odometer. 350 engine, too.

It's all what you're used to, but with the advent of downsizing in '77, I never looked back and didn't even want a GM intermediate in '77. I was all-in on the downsized big cars.

sda

Pontiac had the best looking dashboard of the GM downsized full size cars. Sharp car.

fintail

Yup, factory built limo, a thing elsewhere going back to fintail days, but never sold in this market. E-class limos are still being made, now all 6-door I think, mostly by aftermarket firm Binz.

Looks like it handles pretty well.

explorerx4 said:

@fintail,
Have you ever seen a Mercedes like this one(W114 /8 LANG)?

andre1969

That Bonneville is pretty sweet. I especially like the fact that it has the Rally wheels, no vinyl roof, and the extra gauges. So while it's still a pretty ritzy looking car, at least it's still trying to hold off on some of the luxury car cliches of the era, and make at least some attempt at holding onto its sporty past. I'd imagine a Bonneville Brougham without a vinyl roof would have been especially rare.

Back in 2007, I saw a '77 Catalina 4-door for sale. It was the same green as the darker color of that two-tone. Pontiac 350 V8. For some reason I'm picturing the interior as a light buckskin color. At the time, they wanted $2900 for it, which seemed high to me at the time. But sometimes I think back and wish I had gotten it. It's not like those cars are all over the place these days, especially in one that's a color I like. And, far too many of them had the Pontiac 301.

andre1969

uplanderguy said:

It's all what you're used to, but with the advent of downsizing in '77, I never looked back and didn't even want a GM intermediate in '77. I was all-in on the downsized big cars.

If I was buying a new car in '77, I think I would have gone into a bit of analysis paralysis when it comes to the Pontiacs. I like the Catalina and Bonneville a lot, and they are a bit more sensible than the LeMans. BUT, I really like the LeMans a lot, as well. And then with the Catalina/Bonneville I'm a bit torn. I prefer the style of the Catalina, but the Bonneville's interior was nicer, and could be made nicer still, if you went for the Brougham.

Now with an Impala/Caprice versus Malibu, that one's a no-brainer for me...the full-size. Same with Buick. But now with Olds, I could see myself on the fence a bit with a Cutlass versus a Delta 88. Especially with the coupes.

I'm also looking at this with a modern mindset, where I'm looking back with a bit of nostalgia. I'm sure that if I was back in late 1976-77, and faced with buying a new car, my mindset could be completely different.

ab348

On the FB page where that Pontiac is being discussed there is a lot of chatter with people saying that in '77 the 350 those Pontiacs received was in fact a Buick 350 V8. I was unaware of that. I only have a short experience driving one of those in a '76 Regal and it was the most gutless 350 ever.

texases

ab348 said:

On the FB page where that Pontiac is being discussed there is a lot of chatter with people saying that in '77 the 350 those Pontiacs received was in fact a Buick 350 V8. I was unaware of that. I only have a short experience driving one of those in a '76 Regal and it was the most gutless 350 ever.

But the one above has the Pontiac 350, right? The Buick 350 has the distributor in front.

andre1969

The 350 in that particular Bonneville is a Pontiac 350. It doesn't have the tall front oil filler tube that would tip off an Olds 350. And it doesn't have the distributor in front that would betray a Buick 350.



And, just to throw it into the mix, with a Chevy V8, isn't the a/c compressor on the driver's side, and the alternator on the passenger? And I think the upper radiator hose is shorter and more direct, and the valve covers are a bit narrower.

Some '77 Pontiacs might have gotten a Buick 350, but most of them were legitimate Pontiac engines. In California/high altitude areas, they used an Olds 350, and I think some of those ended up in 49-state applications as well.

Now for '78, the Pontiac 350 was eliminated, and they used a Buick 350, with the Olds as the substitute. Neither the Pontiac nor the Buick V8s took well to emissions controls, and both were banned from California starting in 1977. For whatever reason though, the Buick 350 seemed to suffer more than the others, when it came to emission controls, so its hp was cut worse than the others.

In '77, my old car book is showing two Buick 350s, one with 140 hp and one with 155. I'm guessing that's 2-bbl versus 4-bbl.

Something just hit me though...weren't the emissions controls less restrictive in Canada? So would a '76 Regal in the US be even more of a dog than one from Canada?

uplanderguy

I couldn't begin to tell a Chevy from a Pontiac from a Buick 350 by looking at it, but I seem to remember seeing at the bottom of the new car window sticker with that Bonneville, that it was identified as a Pontiac engine. ("This car equipped with an engine manufactured in a GM plant operated by Pontiac Motor Division", like the cars had then...or wording very similar).

That Pontiac is probably as pretty a Pontiac of that year as any I've ever seen.

I really like that "All Original Cars" page, but hooboy, some of the BS that owners pass off as original, or fact, yeesh (NOT that Bonneville, BTW).

I think people go to that page not only to appreciate seeing the cars, but for obtaining information.

Yesterday, there was a '67 Impala with a real cheapo reupholstery job. It looked like something you'd see in a Biscayne. I complimented the car but said 'it has been reupholstered'. There was one in our family, plus I've been admiring those cars for over 50 years. The owner, who looked to be about thirty, flatly said "You're wrong". I copied the page out of the brochure showing the Impala interior...as did others, subsequently. Finally, the guy grumpily acquiesced.

Earlier that day I, and others, had to tell a guy that his '77 Nova Concours did not have the 'passenger-side airbag option', as there was no such thing. He too, was adamant until shown otherwise, sigh.

No crime in being wrong, or admitting you're not sure about something. Both of those guys, you could almost see their nostrils flaring on the page.

sda

I have to sigh when someone states the vehicle has leather when it is vinyl and it is obvious it is vinyl.

uplanderguy

I have to sigh when someone states the vehicle has leather when it is vinyl and it is obvious it is vinyl.

Yes! That particular one is probably one of the most repeat-offenders!

I'd mentioned this here a few weeks back, but there seem to be more '76-77 Chevy Colonnade cars now with 350's than there were when new, LOL. I think if somebody looks under the hood and sees a SBC, it automatically becomes that default chestnut, the '350'. I know the underhood label would show the engine, but most people don't include that in their for-sale ad.

andre1969

uplanderguy said:

No crime in being wrong, or admitting you're not sure about something. Both of those guys, you could almost see their nostrils flaring on the page.

Yeah, I always get a kick out of it when people are so blatantly wrong about something, but when you try to correct them on it, they double-down.

Heck, I'll admit I'm wrong on a regular basis. And I know in our discussions on this forum, I've inadvertently posted wrong information, repeated something that I thought was true and it wasn't, or just got some facts mixed up here and there. Hell, my attitude is, if I'm wrong about something, I'd WANT someone to correct me, so that I can learn!

Uplander, I'm curious...could you post the link to that '67 Impala with the reupholstery job? I'm kinda curious to see if it's something I would have noticed.

sda

andre1969 said:

uplanderguy said:

No crime in being wrong, or admitting you're not sure about something. Both of those guys, you could almost see their nostrils flaring on the page.

Yeah, I always get a kick out of it when people are so blatantly wrong about something, but when you try to correct them on it, they double-down.

Heck, I'll admit I'm wrong on a regular basis. And I know in our discussions on this forum, I've inadvertently posted wrong information, repeated something that I thought was true and it wasn't, or just got some facts mixed up here and there. Hell, my attitude is, if I'm wrong about something, I'd WANT someone to correct me, so that I can learn!

Uplander, I'm curious...could you post the link to that '67 Impala with the reupholstery job? I'm kinda curious to see if it's something I would have noticed.

Same here and no offense taken.

andre1969

uplanderguy said:

I'd mentioned this here a few weeks back, but there seem to be more '76-77 Chevy Colonnade cars now with 350's than there were when new, LOL. I think if somebody looks under the hood and sees a SBC, it automatically becomes that default chestnut, the '350'. I know the underhood label would show the engine, but most people don't include that in their for-sale ad.

Didn't those stickers though, sometimes combine engine displacements into one "family"? For instance, the sticker might actually say something like "305/350/400" or "305/350?"

Or was it only Ford that did that? For some reason, I'm getting the mental image of a sticker that said "351M/400"

Another way to really know what engine the car has (or had when new) would be to decode the VIN. I'd imagine most people don't have engine codes memorized so they could look at a VIN on a random car and say "Oh, it should have a " but if you're selling a car, it doesn't seem like it would be too hard to just go online and find some VIN decode information.

The one engine code that always seems at the forefront in my mind is the "Y" code for a Pontiac 301. But I think that only counts for 1977-79. And I think that may have just been the 2-bbl version. The 4-bbl was probably a different code, and I'm sure the turbo was. And for some reason I'm thinking the Olds 307 also used "Y".

With the '76-77 Chevelle, by that time, wasn't the 350 only offered as a 4-bbl? Presuming the cars are still stock, that would be one quick way to tell, as the 305 was only offered as a 2-bbl those two years.

sda

The engine sticker for GMs may have shown multiple engine sizes for some. I do recall our 76 Cutlass showed the 350 and 78 Olds 98 showed the 403 specifically on the engine information sticker.

uplanderguy

I seem to remember seeing stickers that would say "305" or "5.0 Liter", versus ones that would say "350" or "5.7 Liter".

Without checking, I'm nearly certain the 350 in Chevelles and Monte Carlos in '76 and '77 could be had in two barrels. It was some ridiculously inexpensive option over the 305 2-barrel...something like $26 or something.

uplanderguy

Here are the seat pics from that '67 Impala. I had sent them to a friend to whom I also shared the story.

Oh, you'll be able to tell.

sda

Oh no, just too plain.

andre1969

Yeah, when the dark strip down the middle looks higher quality than the outer parts, you KNOW something ain't right!

When I zoom in on it, it looks like that 70's crap that, if it got hot enough during the summer, would burn sort of a waffle-pattern into your skin.

Uplander, I found the facebook post where the guy posted the pics of his '67 Impala, and you showed him the brochure. Normally I'm not a fan of golds, but that car in the brochure is GORGEOUS!! Although part of it might be the way the Sun is hitting it.



GM sure did love their Ford-sounding colors though, didn't they? "Granada Gold?" My '67 Catalina is "Montego Cream." On a Chevy they called it "Capri Cream."

andre1969

Well, color me disappointed. I did a search on "Granada Gold" and to me at least, it's a bit more mundane. That brochure pic above, I'm guessing, has been altered a bit online. Here's the same pic, but the coloring doesn't look as rich to me...


Still not a bad color, but it just doesn't grab me like it did in the previous pic. In that pic it just had sort of a glow about it, that I liked. It's also kind of odd that they the lower picture in the brochure is cropped differently in the two. In the more vibrant picture, at a quick glance I thought they were at the beach. But in the lower pic, it looks to me like they're in Death Valley, or maybe the Great Sand Dunes in Colorado.

fintail

Welcome to 90% of non S-class MB ads claiming leather.

sda said:

I have to sigh when someone states the vehicle has leather when it is
vinyl and it is obvious it is vinyl.

uplanderguy

That first pic is surely more vivid in color. I can't say I remember '67 Impalas in a gold color, although I know it was offered of course and I do remember seeing Chevelles and Caprices that color.

My grandparents had a new '67 Impala Sport Coupe, and I always liked the cars. I realize they are 'hip-py'.

Theirs was Madeira Maroon with a totally matching-color brocade cloth interior like the interior in that brochure pic. Compared to our '67 Chevelle 300 Deluxe, it seemed so plush to me....thick seats, the chromed radio speaker in the middle of the back seat. And, the '67 instrument panel to me is the best Chevy panel of the sixties.

uplanderguy

Interesting (IMHO) article on Edsel and their dealers today in 'Curbside Classics'.

The Studebaker dealer in Kent in the '60's, where i live now, was formerly an Edsel dealer.

Newman and Altman, who were South Bend's smaller of the two downtown Studebaker dealers in the '60's, had been Edsel dealers previously.

Amazingly, considering they were the smaller of the two, they were the ones who bought the rights to build trucks and Avantis after the South Bend shutdown, but while Studebaker was still building cars in Canada for the U.S. market. Also, they were the ones who sold leftover NOS parts for decades after Studebaker was gone. They were great; their multi-story parts building in South Bend was a 19th century Studebaker building with "STUDEBAKER" and "CARRIAGES" in faded paint still visible from the street. I bought many parts from them, very reasonably priced, up through the '90's, including sheetmetal and trim pieces and upholstery.

https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/curbside-classic-automotive-history-1959-edsel-corsair-and-a-history-of-edsel-dealers-a-different-perspective/#more-419064

uplanderguy

RE.: Andre's question about 350 4-barrels in '76 Chevy Colonnades, the brochure shows that in 49 states, only a two-barrel 350 was available. The four-barrel was available in CA only.

I saw a few, very few, 350's in '76 Malibus and Monte Carlos when I was about living at our hometown dealership. The brochure shows a 400 4-barrel available in 49 states. I don't recall ever seeing one of those in person.

http://www.oldcarbrochures.com/static/NA/Chevrolet/1976_Chevrolet/1976 Chevrolet Chevelle Brochure-2/image10.html

andre1969

uplanderguy said:

I saw a few, very few, 350's in '76 Malibus and Monte Carlos when I was about living at our hometown dealership. The brochure shows a 400 4-barrel available in 49 states. I don't recall ever seeing one of those in person.

If you jumped ship to Pontiac that year, in the LeMans the Pontiac 350 seemed like it was very common. However, the LeMans didn't offer an engine in the ~5 liter range that year; if they did I'm sure it would have accounted for most of the bulk. In '77 the 301 was offered, and I'd imagine most of them had that.

The LeMans engine range was actually pretty broad for '76, starting with a Chevy 250-6, and working up through the Olds 260, Pontiac 350 (2 or 4-bbl), Pontiac 400 (2 or 4-bbl), and Pontiac 455. The 350-2 and 400-2 were banned in CA, while the 350-4bb was CA-only. Somehow, the '76 LeMans I ended up with, has the 350-4bbl. And I've checked the VIN...it's the correct motor.

I don't exactly see a ton of '76 LeManses out and about, but I used to look for them on eBay and such. The vast majority were showing up with the 350-2bbl. Years ago, I saw one with a 400 at one of the Carlisle swap meets. It was a dark blue coupe, and I think they wanted $6800 for it. Also years ago, there was one for sale locally at a park-and-sell lot, a brown one with a Chevy 250-6. I also recall seeing one in a junkyard that had the Olds 260. I don't think I've ever seen one with a 455. I have a feeling that while it might have been offered across the board, it mostly went into station wagons. And police cars.

For '77, the lineup was something like Buick 231, Pontiac 301, Pontiac 350 (Olds in CA), Pontiac 400 (403 in CA). I think the 301 was only a 2-bbl, while the others were 4-bbls. In Canada, I'd imagine they were using Chevy engines, as AB348's '77 had the 305, IIRC. Oddly, for '77, the majority of the ones I come across have the 400...but that's because they're usually Can Ams!

As for a 400 in a '76 Malibu, I wonder if it would have been somewhat common in a station wagon?

uplanderguy

As for a 400 in a '76 Malibu, I wonder if it would have been somewhat common in a station wagon?

Funny you say that. A good friend of mine has a '74 Avanti II with 400 4-barrel. He's been told that that engine had been mostly used in Chevelle wagons.

I know that through '74, a 400 was standard in a Caprice Classic, although I'm pretty sure a two-barrel. Too tired to verify.

andre1969

Just going by the horsepower ratings in my old car book, I'm guessing the Chevy 400 was only a 2-bbl from 1971-73. In '74 there were two versions, a 150 and 180 hp version, which I'm presuming is 2 vs 4bbl. Then for '75-76, there was just one version rated at 175 hp, which again I'm presuming is the 4-bbl.

Now I pulled that info out of my old car book, so I could get it quickly, but don't take it as the the gospel

uplanderguy

RE.: Colonnade wagons--as much as I was and am a fan of the fastback roof models with the big, triangular quarter windows on coupes--I could never stand the styling, in the rear at least, of the wagons. All seemed to be done on-the-cheap to move to a one-piece liftgate, like a Vega or Pinto wagon, and the lights down in the bumpers, yuck.

I could be interested in the one-year Chevelle SS wagon, '73. In all these years I only have ever seen one in the flesh, and it was a beat-up one in a mall parking lot, mid-to-late '80's.

uplanderguy

RE.: Edsel dealers article in today's "Curbside Classics"--that may be the most-interesting reading on Edsel I've ever done, focusing on three dealers and what happened to them.

The article states that people who bought a new '60 Edsel were given a $300 coupon to use on their next new Ford product--with no expiration date. Per CC, according to an Edsel fan site, the last one was used on a new 1995 Crown Victoria!

ab348

Quite by chance, over in the Mystery Car Pix board today I posted a pic that has a gold '67 Chevy 2-door HT in it.

stickguy

Good thing about the SS. there are likely more clones than real ones, so find a 73 wagon and make your own SS!

sda

uplanderguy said:

That first pic is surely more vivid in color. I can't say I remember '67 Impalas in a gold color, although I know it was offered of course and I do remember seeing Chevelles and Caprices that color.

My grandparents had a new '67 Impala Sport Coupe, and I always liked the cars. I realize they are 'hip-py'.

Theirs was Madeira Maroon with a totally matching-color brocade cloth interior like the interior in that brochure pic. Compared to our '67 Chevelle 300 Deluxe, it seemed so plush to me....thick seats, the chromed radio speaker in the middle of the back seat. And, the '67 instrument panel to me is the best Chevy panel of the sixties.

I do find it odd Chevy only used the 67 instrument panel for only one year and reverted back to the traditional horizonal cluster in 68. I do like the 67 display much better. It added a bit of sportiness and the gage package was neatly incorporated.

uplanderguy

Quite by chance, over in the Mystery Car Pix board today I posted a pic that has a gold '67 Chevy 2-door HT in it.

Took me awhile, but I did find it.

uplanderguy

Not "obscure classic", but the other day we pulled up behind a new Kia of some model. I mentioned to my wife that with their latest nameplate, I could barely decipher that it's "Kia". She said "Looks like 'Nine Inch Nails' logo".

Just today I Googled that and apparently other people think the same thing.

I did vaguely remember the Nine Inch Nails logo, but my wife is 7 years 3 months younger than me so closer to that whole thing than me, LOL.

Trent Reznor grew up in the little town of Mercer, PA, 15 miles south of where I grew up, incidentally.

stickguy

Also not a classic, but on my lap around the block walk today, 2 different Mazda 6 hatchbacks. Pretty uncommon I think.

uplanderguy

Spotted in downtown Kent. '81 to '87 model Chevy pickup, in rusty, crusty NE OH. '

xwesx

uplanderguy said:

Spotted in downtown Kent. '81 to '87 model Chevy pickup, in rusty, crusty NE OH.

Okay, help me out.... What is unique about the 81-87 that distinguishes them from the '73-'80?

uplanderguy

In '81 there was a slight refresh or whatever, where the hood sloped ever-so-slightly down from back-to-front, and the nameplates moved down lower on the front fenders. Also, the front ends had small square headlights, IIRC.

xwesx

uplanderguy said:

In '81 there was a slight refresh or whatever, where the hood sloped ever-so-slightly down from back-to-front, and the nameplates moved down lower on the front fenders. Also, the front ends had small square headlights, IIRC.

Okay, thanks. I never noticed that change. Funny, honestly, considering that the primary change from 68 to 69 was a change in the sloping of the hood line from soft to hard (for lack of better terminology), and that is the primary thing I look for when I spy a 67-72 era GM pickup.

andre1969

I can narrow that '81-87 down a bit further, by saying that it's not an '85. At least, with the '85 I had, the two-toning was different. On mine the body was red, roof was white, and only the lower contrast, below the side trim, was white. Unless they offered several different two-tone options?

texases

There were 4 different two-tones for '85:
http://www.oldcarbrochures.com/static/NA/GM Trucks and Vans/1985_Trucks_and_Vans/1985 Chevrolet Full Size Pickups Brochure/image7.html

Looks like there were 3 in '82:
http://www.oldcarbrochures.com/static/NA/GM Trucks and Vans/1982_Trucks_and_Vans/1982_Chevrolet_Pickups_Brochure/1982 Chevy Pickups-22.html

fintail

IIRC the Studebaker dealer (who also handled Packard) in the small town where my mom lives also had Edsel.

re: Colonnade wagons, the bumper lights have always bugged me, same for the later G body wagons and at least one 2010-ish Kia CUV.

For squarebody trucks (always found the name funny, as the rounded window corners seem anything but square), grille is always the giveaway, 1981+ has a flat front end. Still tons of those on the road around here (and even more Fords of similar vintage).

uplanderguy said:

Interesting (IMHO) article on Edsel and their dealers today in 'Curbside Classics'.

The Studebaker dealer in Kent in the '60's, where i live now, was formerly an Edsel dealer.

Newman and Altman, who were South Bend's smaller of the two downtown Studebaker dealers in the '60's, had been Edsel dealers previously.

Amazingly, considering they were the smaller of the two, they were the ones who bought the rights to build trucks and Avantis after the South Bend shutdown, but while Studebaker was still building cars in Canada for the U.S. market. Also, they were the ones who sold leftover NOS parts for decades after Studebaker was gone. They were great; their multi-story parts building in South Bend was a 19th century Studebaker building with "STUDEBAKER" and "CARRIAGES" in faded paint still visible from the street. I bought many parts from them, very reasonably priced, up through the '90's, including sheetmetal and trim pieces and upholstery.

https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/curbside-classic-automotive-history-1959-edsel-corsair-and-a-history-of-edsel-dealers-a-different-perspective/#more-419064

andre1969

I think that term "Squarebody" is a relatively recent occurrence, coined by a generation that wants to put a label on everything. I'd never heard it, until the past few years, and these trucks were a part of my life going back as far as I can remember, to when I sold Granddad's '85 Silverado in 2017. Now we started referring to them as "Saddle-tank trucks" at some point, but you can probably thank Dateline for that

I guess it's not that much different from throwing around labels like "Colonade cars" or "Forward Look cars" although those are at least using wording that the original manufacturers came up with, rather than some made-up label decades after the fact.

Oh, and yeah, I never was a fan of the taillights down in the bumper, either. In theory, it seems like doing that would allow for a wider rear opening. And looking at the rear of a Colonade wagon, the rear hatch extends all the way to the edge of the car, sort of like a clamshell. But I'm sure there's a lot of overlap, of the tailgate versus the actual opening.

I'm too lazy to look up the specs, but I'm thinking the actual load floor of the Colonade was around 45" between the wheel openings, whereas the competing Ford and Mopar models were about 48". I seem to recall the '71-78 Mopar intermediate wagons even passed the "4x8 test", although I wonder how far forward you had to move the front seat!