'75 Caprice Classic convertible production, 8,349, per a few sites I looked at, plus that's a number I remember from the old days. I would expect the Chevy to have been the best-selling model, sold by significantly more outlets at the time.
I don't remember the car, as I didn't know them then, but my wife's grandparents in Rochester, NY had a new '75 Caprice Classic convertible, triple white. My wife says the seats reminded her of a band-aid. I know what she means; the vinyl had a ton of little pinlike perforations in it.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
If it's 7,181, then I see what happened. Consumer Guide's auto encyclopedia mixed the columns up. They have 7,181 for the Royale Town Sedan. 21,038 sounds like a more reasonable number, for that style.
And, it looks like it's not only Consumer Guide that needs to up their eyeglass prescription...the numbers I quoted for the Caprice were '74's. D'oh!
So, here's (hopefully) the correct numbers, and I threw in the MSRPs as well:
Aside from the Grand Ville because of its extra standard equipment, I can't believe how close the other 3 were in price. The Impala interior in the Caprice would have been significantly more plain than the LeSabre Custom or Delta Royale, which were the models offering a convertible. Hard to fathom why anyone would have chosen the Chevy given the price.
I was thinking that, too, about how close the Caprice was to the others, given its more downmarket interior.
Was a center armrest standard on the LeSabre and Delta 88 convertible? I've looked through pics online, and it looks like every one I'm seeing has the center armrest. But the Caprice convertible doesn't. Presuming it's standard, just the armrest on the LeSabre would close that price gap, in my opinion.
I'm surprised the LeSabre and Caprice are so close in price, yet there's a bit more of a gap between it and the Delta 88. I traditionally think of Buick as being a step up from Olds, although by this time it was admittedly a small step. But, by this time I guess they really were more alternatives to each other.
And in some years, it seemed like you had an engine advantage with Olds. For example, by '77 in the Century/Regal, you were limited to a 350 V8, while the Cutlass let you have a 403. And even when they downsized for '78, the Century/Regal started you off with that tiny 3.2/196, while the Cutlass at least gave you the 231.
Then there was the '80 Electra, where they actually made the 252 V6 standard, and a Pontiac 301 optional, with a 350 being top dog. The Ninety-Eight, at least gave you a 307 standard, 350 optional.
Skirts and wide body side moldings with color-keyed vinyl insert standard on the Caprice, although not a fan of either. Caprices always came standard with a clock too but I gotta believe the others did too. EDIT: Per the '75 Buick brochure, the only clock available, and at extra cost, on a LeSabre is a digital clock.
While the above is true, it wouldn't be enough to make me take the Chevy. Not even close.
The Chevy would've been the only one available with a reclining passenger seat, but that was extra-cost.
EDIT: Per the brochure, trunk light was standard in the Chevy, which looks like it was part of a group along with digital clock, for $50 on the Buick. The Chevy came with courtesy lights standard, part of a $22 option coupling with 'door warning lights' per the window sticker of the brown convertible above:
This reminds me that things you might think were standard on the more 'prestige' brand weren't always. More egregious is when I was buying my '81 Monte Carlo I saw that full wheel covers, a clock, and wide rocker and sill moldings were optional on the Grand Prix while standard on the Chevy. Not really the conventional wisdom.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I'd love a '72 Impala convertible, although that's partly nostalgia, as my grandparents had a '72 Impala 4-door hardtop. And it's funny...I don't mind the Impala interior, as long as it's in an Impala! At least it has a level of honesty about it, whereas the Caprice convertible felt like it was trying to pull something over on you. And, the Impala came in at an appropriately lower price point. In '72 it was $3979, while the LeSabre was $4291...and then there was the $4616 Centurion.
The Delta 88 was $4387 in '72...again, a bit higher than a LeSabre. And Pontiac felt the need for two big convertibles, the $4080 Catalina and the $4640 Grand Ville.
A friend has a '72 LeSabre Custom convertible. It's a creamy beige with matching interior, the chrome wheels too. The interior is just fine by my standards. I've ridden in it. Big car yes, but a nice-looking car for sure.
Funny how Pontiac and Buick both offered two big convertibles in '71 and '72.
I like '72 Impalas too. I like the front end styling, and I particularly like the seating styling and upholstery. I can't understand how they could put a small rocker molding on the Biscayne and Bel Air (and Catalina, Delta 88, and LeSabre, for that matter), but leave it off the Impala. You couldn't buy it at any cost that year!
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Just one little problem...you had to go south of the Border (and I don't mean that little tourist trap on I-95 at the North/South Carolina state line) to get them this way! In addition to police cars in 1981, apparently you could still get a 350 Malibu in Mexico.
I do vaguely remember reading that, somewhere. For some reason I remember an asterisk by the 350 and something to the effect of "available in Mexico" in a footnote. Can't remember if it was a sales brochure, or the EPA though.
Already showing as sold. Bill will be beside himself! Shows Texas registration. Looks nice although glovebox door fitment leaves something to be desired.
Boy, the car is spot-on original/authentic outside. Seems like they moved a good number of Landaus. I like the way they did it, not enough to have spent the extra money on it though, LOL. I'm glad they didn't do a big padded top and shrunk the quarter window.
For whatever reason, I remember looking at Malibu Classics when I bought my '81 Monte Carlo, but I liked the Monte better at the time. I still like the '81 rework of the Monte waaayyy better than the '78-80. I liked how the taillights reminded me of the '74.
The interior of that Mexican '81 has the instrument panel I despise--which was just like my Monte Carlo's. When you didn't get the extra instruments on an '81 Malibu Classic, you got gloss black instead of woodgrain which I like better. Even without instruments, on a Monte Carlo you got that woodgrain-overload instrument panel.
Someone added the '83 Malibu instrument panel nameplate to that little door up at the front end of the console, LOL.
Those seats, and door panel upholstering, are not at all like the domestic car so whether they've been redone or this was some local individuality when built, I don't know. I suspect the former.
But boy, I like those cars in general. Taut, roomy, no-nonsense.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I stumbled upon this video of a '79 Buick Electra Park Avenue that was for sale on BaT and sold last week. It bought $8100, which is just nuts for a car in this condition.
I had one that I bought from the original little-old-man owner in late 2001, having about 40,000 miles on it and near-perfect compared to this one. I paid $2500 IIRC. Mine had similar equipment, same 403 under the hood. When purchased it had just a few flaws: the torque converter needed replacing; one of the plastichrome headlight doors needed replacing (it had been sprayed silver), a plastichrome bezel around one taillight was cracked and needed replacing, and the LR quarter panel had been dented and repaired poorly, so that the resprayed paint, while a good color match, was duller than the original paint on the rest of the car. That's it.
Compared to this one, mine had all of the bumper fillers intact; no splits in any of the interior padding (the BaT car has a cracked dashpad and armrest pads), perfect glass, perfect plastichrome exterior trim (I replaced the two items noted above), chrome Buick road wheels instead of wire covers; an underhood pad that is missing on the BaT car, no interior woodgrain pieces worn away like most on the BaT car, perfect seats, electroluminescent coach lamps all present and working; and everything worked as it should. IMO it was finished in a far better color combo too. It was by far the most comfortable car I had ever driven. Unfortunately it came standard with a very low (numerically) rear end gear with really crippled it off the line. I sold it when my work changed and I needed a more modern car to use in that capacity. Got $3500 for it in 2003. The new owner decided to give it a good-quality respray in the orignal Dark Blue metallic which really made it pop. If the green one was worth $8100 on BaT, my former car (assuming it is still in the condition it was the last time I saw it) is worth twice that.
One of the things I remember about my Park Avenue is that while the instrument cluster bezel had perfect fake woodgrain and plastichrome, the first time I cleaned the interior I noticed the dash chrome was a bit dull. I gave a rag a squirt of Windex and it immediately looked pristine after wiping it down. The car had never been smoked in, but there was some sort of coating over the bright finish, perhaps to protect it during manufacture, that had yellowed a bit. With that gone, the dash looked showroom.
I’d have to think that color combo held that Buick back a bit. I know I couldn’t do it. Those greens, browns and mustard yellows whole period correct are tough to look at.
Look at how much better the pictures of yours look!
Well, in 2001 it was still a relatively common old used car. Even yours was a nice example. Now, it’s aged into the gotta be rare, somewhat of a collectible stage. If you happen to want one (not really sure why) not a ton of options.
Math wise, it’s like looking at Accords. A 2001 vs a 1981. A common still used car that can just be treated like any other car, and an aging rarity that shows up on BaT.
When I had my 82 Skylark, I found the same situation with the instrument surrounds. They were dull looking. Fearing the finish might come off I very carefully cleaned them. Looked great afterwards.
2021 VW Arteon SEL 4-motion, 2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech
One other thing about that BaT Park Avenue I noticed: the interior door panels have a rectangular insert above the armrest that is upholstered in the same velvet fabric used on the seats. Mine had 3 or 4 upholstered buttons acting as sort of a tufting mechanism on those panels. The BaT car does not as far as I can tell, just having a plain upholstered panel. Seems an odd thing to change.
That green was a '79 only color and I didn't like it then, either.
The pale, non-metallic light green that year was bad too, as is that shade of green interior.
The Buick instrument panel is expensive-looking IMHO, particularly with the large round analog clock on the passenger side. I'm reminded of barometric instruments one would see on office walls back then.
Interesting how the FWD Skylark panel was somewhat of a pared-down version of the big Buick panel. Certainly rich-looking among cars of that size and price class.
Greg, your Electra had it all over that green one.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I don't really care for that '79 Park Avenue either, and I'm saying that as someone who's a sucker for the right shade of green. It's just that...that ain't it! GM had some really nice greens earlier on, but in '79 it seemed like a lot of good taste just went out the window.
I think I know that pale green you're talking about, Uplander. If it's the one I'm thinking of, we used to call that "gonorrhea" green!
They redeemed themselves with those light and dark jadestone colors, but then in '83 I think they went to more drab colors.
I loved my '79 Electra instrument panel. The silver gage faces really looked good (though not as easy to read as normal white on black) and the big clock over the glovebox was a homage to Buick dashes of the '40s or early '50s. It still worked too, over 20 years on at the time. I also liked how it had a wide, low pod on the top center of the dash for the idiot lights.
They redeemed themselves with those light and dark jadestone colors
Boy, no kidding. When I knew I wanted to buy a new '81, I loved those colors...and the matching interior color as well. First turquoises (other than that screaming turquoise in '74) that Chevy had had since '70.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
There was sort of a frosty greenish-blue color they had in '77 that I thought was really nice. It makes me think a bit of that light Jadestone. It might depend on your eyesight, but to me this one leans just a bit more towards green on the color spectrum, whereas the light Jadestone seemed to have just a hint more blue in it.
In '78, they had a green that was also pretty nice. What I'd call a bit "frosty" as well in some lights, and somewhat similar to the '77 color, but with any hint of blue removed. Here's a '78 Bonneville sporting it...
Both of these greens are really soothing to my eye, but that '79 green not so much...
@stickguy said:
I am still amazed that people still think that was some kind of "small" car after being downsized.
I don’t have as much experience with the GMs, but on the Fords I can tell you there is a huge difference between the “full size” and “downsized” cars. I used to have side by side pics of my 79 Continental and 89 Town Car. The 79 felt and looked so much bigger.
It's been ages now, but I've driven a handful of GM's '71-76 big cars. While I wouldn't want to take one autocrossing, they still felt more nimble than you'd expect something that size to be.
The downsized ones were more nimble, still, but I didn't think the bigger ones were all that bad. Now granted, my experience with these cars was limited mostly to Chevies, a '72 Catalina hardtop coupe, and a '76 LeSabre hardtop sedan. The bigger ones, like the Electra, Ninety-Eight, and Cadillacs might have been more floaty, vague, and ponderous, as they tried harder to isolate you with that luxury car ride.
I am still amazed that people still think that was some kind of "small" car after being downsized.
I don’t have as much experience with the GMs, but on the Fords I can tell you there is a huge difference between the “full size” and “downsized” cars. I used to have side by side pics of my 79 Continental and 89 Town Car. The 79 felt and looked so much bigger.
I thought of you on Sunday. Was out running errands and passed an 80s vintage square continental. Silver. I think I have seen this one before. Such a period piece!
We had a new '74 Impala Sport Coupe, and traded on a new '77 Impala Coupe in Nov. '76. I preferred the '77 in every way.
GM had variable-ratio power steering at the time which gave you some road feel, as opposed to the totally dead power steering in other cars. Both the '74 and '77 had that I believe. But besides that, our '74 just seemed so....wide. Long, too, but mostly wide.
I remember that light green that was a '77-only color. I like it. I don't see blue/turquoise in it. I've always thought to myself, "How do we know anybody else sees a color the same as we do?". I also remember that slightly bolder '78 light green, which seemed everywhere but I didn't care for it.
That '77 Impala Sedan pic reminds me that there are a couple things about the Impala I actually prefer to the Caprice Classic. One is the full wheelcovers, and the other is the (simple) grille. I remember my Dad, before he bought his coupe, stopping in front of a new gold Impala wagon and saying "I guess those do look nice in the front". Kinda cool that you could get the 50/50 front seats with individual center armrests even in the Impala, but I've seen exactly one so-equipped....a new '77 light blue one with blue vinyl top, sedan, ordered as a Company car for Greenville Steel Car Co. It had the blue 50/50 cloth front seats and I remember looking at it at my hometown dealer.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
@stickguy said:
I thought of you on Sunday. Was out running errands and passed an 80s vintage square continental. Silver. I think I have seen this one before. Such a period piece!
andre, that '79 green on that Caprice Classic is awful IMHO. I used to call that "celery green".
On '77's at the time, I liked Firethorn, and black. On '78's I kind-of liked that light blue metallic. On '79's there was a very deep burgundy I liked.
Now, I'd like this very car except in a coupe! No side moldings, no vinyl top, no bumper guards just the strips. The '77 had the simplest front end and taillight styling of the three years. Yeah, good luck finding one like that, huh?
The dirty/smudgy LF whitewall in this pic always bugged me....they couldn't have cleaned it for the pic?
I'm surprised I can't see the rear stabilizer bar in the rear pic. I remember them being pretty easy to see.
I always liked those plastic spoked wheelcovers. I like them better than the actual wire covers used starting on the '77 Landaus.
I have seen a couple '77 Malibu Classics and Monte Carlos with the spoked wheelcovers and they look nice on those cars too.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Hard for me to think that the '77's are as old today as a 1932 car would've been in 1977.
It's easy to look at the numbers and say "A new (fill-in-the-blank subcompact) will beat that", but again, that'd be like saying, "Gee, my '77 (fill-in-the-blank) beats that '32!".
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
That Caprice is nice. But looking at some of the specs, I'd expect it to be quicker than it is. 350-4bbl, 3.08:1 axle, and a lighter car, it just seems like it should be faster. Consumer Reports tested a '72 Impala with a 350-2bbl, 2.73:1 axle, and got 0-60 in 12.0 seconds. Horsepower was pretty close, though, 165 for the '72 and 170 for the '77.
But, there can also be variations from car to car, plus even things like elevation, air temperature, and humidity can make a difference. I don't think it makes so much of a difference these days, with all the electronics and fuel injection and such, but back in the day it did.
I also seem to recall Consumer Reports testing a 305-2bbl Impala or Caprice in both '77 and 78, and 0-60 was in the 12-13 second range. And that was with a tall axle, like a 2.56:1. In '79 though, when it was choked to 130, they tested a Caprice and 0-60 was around 15.9.
One area that I remember most fondly about the new '77 big GM's was how quiet they were. We had an Impala which was quiet enough, but it lacked the added sound insulation of a Caprice. I remember my friends' parents' '77 Caprice seemed absolutely silent at speed. In fact, one of the ads for a Caprice said "You'll find it hard to believe a moving automobile can be this quiet".
That's an area where cars of mine in the past decade have come up short.
fin and I have commented on this before on the 'Postwar Studebakers' page, but while I wouldn't say it's a dead duplicate, the rear door styling of the '77 GM big cars, and the '76 Seville for that matter, reminds me of the 1963 Studebaker four-door rear-door cutouts. I really can't think of another car more similar in that area.
This Stude is a 37K mile original that recently changed hands in my area.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I also seem to recall Consumer Reports testing a 305-2bbl Impala or Caprice in both '77 and 78, and 0-60 was in the 12-13 second range. And that was with a tall axle, like a 2.56:1. In '79 though, when it was choked to 130, they tested a Caprice and 0-60 was around 15.9.
I have read about the supposed drop in HP with the 305 in '79 but I am skeptical. Part of that is because we had a '79 Impala with a 305 and it did not seem underpowered at all, which a drop to 130hp would make one think would be obvious. But also, I distinctly remember reading an article in one of my usual array of car magazines back then previewing the '79s, that claimed that the 305 picked up an additional 5 or 10hp from previous years.
Funny, I was surprised it was 4,000 lbs. when the saw the specs. For some reason, I'd have expected less.
I have paperwork for my 1963 Studebaker Lark Daytona, now in Australia, that had the non-supercharged Avanti V8, automatic, power steering, power brakes, factory air, radio and heater ("Climatizer"), Twin Traction, and factory sunroof, and it was 3,311 lbs.
Old-tech in comparison of course, but also only 184 inches long.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I remember reading that article when it came out and believe I still have that issue in one of the many boxes of magazines and brochures in our storage area. Sometimes for fun I dig them out and browse thru them. Next hours have passed! I hate to get rid of them yet they are taking up room and my wife just scratches her head why. 0-60 in 10.8 was quick for the era, yet I also would have thought with the 3.08 axle it would have been quicker. One of dad's friends bought a new 77 Caprice 350. He complained he never got close to the EPA figures and was lucky to get 14 mpg yet really liked the size and quietness of the car.
2021 VW Arteon SEL 4-motion, 2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech
The base weight of a '77 Caprice 305 is 3701 lb, according to my auto encyclopedia. So while 4000 lb does seem a bit chunky for a "downsized" car, I guess it's not hard to imagine 299 lb being added with options and such. I once heard that adding a/c to a car was similar to having an "average" adult passenger on board. I took "average" to mean around 175-180 lb, but I don't know if they meant literally. Maybe between the added weight of the a/c components, and the added drag on the engine because of the a/c pulley, those two considerations combined were like having an "average" adult passenger on board?
For A/c, you have the compressor, the condenser, a bit of extra junk under the hood, and maybe a little extra duct work inside, but would all that have added up to 180 lb or so?
The 350 would have also used the beefier THM350 transmission rather than the THM200, but I don't know how much heavier it actually is. The 350 might have used a beefier rear-end though, with a larger differential, thicker axles and housings, etc.
I was also thinking beefier wheels and tires. That spec sheet says 15x6 rims with 15x7 being optional. I'm taking that to mean the test car had the 15x6, but I wonder if the test car actually had the 15x7, and on that spec sheet, they're simply listing what was standard and what was optional?
Another thing I was thinking, was the possibility of beefier brakes, but then I saw the specs. 9.5" drums in back are pretty small. I know it's the front brakes that do most of the work, and perhaps with a disc/drum setup, the rear brakes are even less relevant, but still, 9.5" is what the Corvair used to use!
Would that 350 have had dual exhaust, or no? What about a bigger radiator than the 305? Would they have had to beef anything else up in the suspension/frame/etc for the 350?
The 350 used in the full-size Chevys then had single exhaust.
I'm sure that test car had F-41 suspension, that everyone at the time in the mags was raving about. That would have required the maximum tire and wheel combination, so I'll assume the car has the seven inch wheels although I don't know that for a fact. The head-on and rear-on pics of the car on that magazine page make the tires/wheels look pretty wide/beefy.
Radiator, no idea.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Yeah, I was noticing that in the pics, those wheels and tires looked beefier than stock. I have 15x7" alloys off of a Dodge Mirada, with 225/70/R15s on my '79 5th Avenue, and they give it a similarly beefy stance.
I'd love a 1977 Caprice coupe with the F41 suspension, and no vinyl top. Too bad bucket seats were neve available. I think the only full-sized GM coupe of that era with buckets was the Oldsmobile Delta 88 Holiday Coupe.
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
Greg, could the difference be Canadian vs. U.S.? I have no idea. I do know that as far as GM goes you guys often got special treatment.
US car magazines never talked about Canada-only models, and there were no Canadian car magazines I recall buying back then. I want to say it was in C&D, but can't recall for sure.
Yeah, the Bonneville bucket seats were offered from '79 to '81 in the coupe. That may well have swayed me into a Bonneville those years....makes me think of the '60's Grand Prixs I liked so much.
That pic I believe is from an '80 or '81. I like the door panels those years.
I'd have gotten one with no vinyl top, no side molding, and no pinstriping, and 'snowflake' wheels. That rocker trim at the bottom is waaayyy big enough to overpower any other optional trim IMHO!
I saw a black '79 for sale some time back with the goldish bucket seats. Very nice, but although I can't recall if it had the vinyl top which shrunk the quarter windows, it had body side moldings and pinstriping not only at the top of the body side but around the front wheel openings. It was really too much trim for me.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Yeah, I think you're right, Uplander, about that being an '80-81. I think in those years they had that chrome strip that ran across the upper part of the door panel, but dropped below the pull strap with those right-angles.
I'm sure there would have been no market for it, but I though a cool car would be something like, let's call it a '77 Catalina 2+2. The coupe body style, the 400 out of the Can Am, and bucket seats and a console shift. The '77 Catalina had sort of a crosshair grille that reminded me a bit of the '64 GTO, so whenever I see one I think that there's a sporty car somewhere in there, just dying to bust out!
I think those Delta 88 and Bonneville coupes used the bucket seats from the downsized midsized cars, and those wouldn't have been available in '77. So I guess to make my little pipe dream, they would've had to use the bucket seats out of a Colonade?
I always hated those thick vinyl roofs with the shrunken quarter windows in these cars. It really mucked up an otherwise beautiful roofline. It seemed more common on the Bonneville, but I've even seen it on the occasional Catalina coupe, where it really looked out of place, on the less upscale car.
I liked the B-body Pontiacs from'77-up but it seems like not many others did since PMD dropped them quite early, I presume due to poor sales. The Pontiac dash was my second favorite to Buick in those years, with Olds a step down and finally Chevy bringing up the rear, and the Pontiac exterior styling was very good too. I suppose using the Pontiac 301 in a lot of them hurt sales though.
I think you could get buckets in a Bonneville as well.
That's an interesting picture on a couple of fronts. First, it shows the same steering wheel that I had in my '77 LeMans, not the greatest but not awful. But for '78 and some years later they went to a different design with a metal bezel of sorts around the spokes surrounding the horn pad as shown in the brochure pic above, where the bezel had a woodgrain decal that both looked pretty cheesy but also wore away far too easily, so you had a tatty-looking steering wheel fairly soon.
The other thing I note from the picture is the narrowness of the bucket seats which barely fill the seat wells in the floorpan, leaving the raised area for the frame rails fully exposed. That's because those were A-body bucket seats not designed for the larger B-body's extra width. Wasted space there.
Comments
I don't remember the car, as I didn't know them then, but my wife's grandparents in Rochester, NY had a new '75 Caprice Classic convertible, triple white. My wife says the seats reminded her of a band-aid. I know what she means; the vinyl had a ton of little pinlike perforations in it.
And, it looks like it's not only Consumer Guide that needs to up their eyeglass prescription...the numbers I quoted for the Caprice were '74's. D'oh!
So, here's (hopefully) the correct numbers, and I threw in the MSRPs as well:
Caprice: 8349, MSRP $5113
LeSabre: 5300, MSRP $5133
Delta 88: 7181, MSRP $5200
Grand Ville: 4519, MSRP $5858
Oh, and yes, "Band Aid" is about the perfect description for those "Caprice"/Impala seats of the time!
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Was a center armrest standard on the LeSabre and Delta 88 convertible? I've looked through pics online, and it looks like every one I'm seeing has the center armrest. But the Caprice convertible doesn't. Presuming it's standard, just the armrest on the LeSabre would close that price gap, in my opinion.
I'm surprised the LeSabre and Caprice are so close in price, yet there's a bit more of a gap between it and the Delta 88. I traditionally think of Buick as being a step up from Olds, although by this time it was admittedly a small step. But, by this time I guess they really were more alternatives to each other.
And in some years, it seemed like you had an engine advantage with Olds. For example, by '77 in the Century/Regal, you were limited to a 350 V8, while the Cutlass let you have a 403. And even when they downsized for '78, the Century/Regal started you off with that tiny 3.2/196, while the Cutlass at least gave you the 231.
Then there was the '80 Electra, where they actually made the 252 V6 standard, and a Pontiac 301 optional, with a 350 being top dog. The Ninety-Eight, at least gave you a 307 standard, 350 optional.
While the above is true, it wouldn't be enough to make me take the Chevy. Not even close.
The Chevy would've been the only one available with a reclining passenger seat, but that was extra-cost.
EDIT: Per the brochure, trunk light was standard in the Chevy, which looks like it was part of a group along with digital clock, for $50 on the Buick. The Chevy came with courtesy lights standard, part of a $22 option coupling with 'door warning lights' per the window sticker of the brown convertible above:
https://bringatrailer.com/listing/1975-buick-lesabre-10/
This reminds me that things you might think were standard on the more 'prestige' brand weren't always. More egregious is when I was buying my '81 Monte Carlo I saw that full wheel covers, a clock, and wide rocker and sill moldings were optional on the Grand Prix while standard on the Chevy. Not really the conventional wisdom.
When I look back with all these years’ hindsight, I’m amazed at what $5,100 got you then.
The Delta 88 was $4387 in '72...again, a bit higher than a LeSabre. And Pontiac felt the need for two big convertibles, the $4080 Catalina and the $4640 Grand Ville.
Funny how Pontiac and Buick both offered two big convertibles in '71 and '72.
I like '72 Impalas too. I like the front end styling, and I particularly like the seating styling and upholstery. I can't understand how they could put a small rocker molding on the Biscayne and Bel Air (and Catalina, Delta 88, and LeSabre, for that matter), but leave it off the Impala. You couldn't buy it at any cost that year!
https://classiccars.com/listings/view/1005342/1981-chevrolet-malibu-for-sale-in-houston-texas-77006
Just one little problem...you had to go south of the Border (and I don't mean that little tourist trap on I-95 at the North/South Carolina state line) to get them this way! In addition to police cars in 1981, apparently you could still get a 350 Malibu in Mexico.
I do vaguely remember reading that, somewhere. For some reason I remember an asterisk by the 350 and something to the effect of "available in Mexico" in a footnote. Can't remember if it was a sales brochure, or the EPA though.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
For whatever reason, I remember looking at Malibu Classics when I bought my '81 Monte Carlo, but I liked the Monte better at the time. I still like the '81 rework of the Monte waaayyy better than the '78-80. I liked how the taillights reminded me of the '74.
The interior of that Mexican '81 has the instrument panel I despise--which was just like my Monte Carlo's. When you didn't get the extra instruments on an '81 Malibu Classic, you got gloss black instead of woodgrain which I like better. Even without instruments, on a Monte Carlo you got that woodgrain-overload instrument panel.
Someone added the '83 Malibu instrument panel nameplate to that little door up at the front end of the console, LOL.
Those seats, and door panel upholstering, are not at all like the domestic car so whether they've been redone or this was some local individuality when built, I don't know. I suspect the former.
But boy, I like those cars in general. Taut, roomy, no-nonsense.
I had one that I bought from the original little-old-man owner in late 2001, having about 40,000 miles on it and near-perfect compared to this one. I paid $2500 IIRC. Mine had similar equipment, same 403 under the hood. When purchased it had just a few flaws: the torque converter needed replacing; one of the plastichrome headlight doors needed replacing (it had been sprayed silver), a plastichrome bezel around one taillight was cracked and needed replacing, and the LR quarter panel had been dented and repaired poorly, so that the resprayed paint, while a good color match, was duller than the original paint on the rest of the car. That's it.
Compared to this one, mine had all of the bumper fillers intact; no splits in any of the interior padding (the BaT car has a cracked dashpad and armrest pads), perfect glass, perfect plastichrome exterior trim (I replaced the two items noted above), chrome Buick road wheels instead of wire covers; an underhood pad that is missing on the BaT car, no interior woodgrain pieces worn away like most on the BaT car, perfect seats, electroluminescent coach lamps all present and working; and everything worked as it should. IMO it was finished in a far better color combo too. It was by far the most comfortable car I had ever driven. Unfortunately it came standard with a very low (numerically) rear end gear with really crippled it off the line. I sold it when my work changed and I needed a more modern car to use in that capacity. Got $3500 for it in 2003. The new owner decided to give it a good-quality respray in the orignal Dark Blue metallic which really made it pop. If the green one was worth $8100 on BaT, my former car (assuming it is still in the condition it was the last time I saw it) is worth twice that.
One of the things I remember about my Park Avenue is that while the instrument cluster bezel had perfect fake woodgrain and plastichrome, the first time I cleaned the interior I noticed the dash chrome was a bit dull. I gave a rag a squirt of Windex and it immediately looked pristine after wiping it down. The car had never been smoked in, but there was some sort of coating over the bright finish, perhaps to protect it during manufacture, that had yellowed a bit. With that gone, the dash looked showroom.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
I’d have to think that color combo held that Buick back a bit. I know I couldn’t do it. Those greens, browns and mustard yellows whole period correct are tough to look at.
Look at how much better the pictures of yours look!
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
2021 VW Arteon SEL 4-motion, 2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
The pale, non-metallic light green that year was bad too, as is that shade of green interior.
The Buick instrument panel is expensive-looking IMHO, particularly with the large round analog clock on the passenger side. I'm reminded of barometric instruments one would see on office walls back then.
Interesting how the FWD Skylark panel was somewhat of a pared-down version of the big Buick panel. Certainly rich-looking among cars of that size and price class.
Greg, your Electra had it all over that green one.
I think I know that pale green you're talking about, Uplander. If it's the one I'm thinking of, we used to call that "gonorrhea" green!
They redeemed themselves with those light and dark jadestone colors, but then in '83 I think they went to more drab colors.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
They redeemed themselves with those light and dark jadestone colors
Boy, no kidding. When I knew I wanted to buy a new '81, I loved those colors...and the matching interior color as well. First turquoises (other than that screaming turquoise in '74) that Chevy had had since '70.
It might depend on your eyesight, but to me this one leans just a bit more towards green on the color spectrum, whereas the light Jadestone seemed to have just a hint more blue in it.
In '78, they had a green that was also pretty nice. What I'd call a bit "frosty" as well in some lights, and somewhat similar to the '77 color, but with any hint of blue removed. Here's a '78 Bonneville sporting it...
Both of these greens are really soothing to my eye, but that '79 green not so much...
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
I don’t have as much experience with the GMs, but on the Fords I can tell you there is a huge difference between the “full size” and “downsized” cars. I used to have side by side pics of my 79 Continental and 89 Town Car. The 79 felt and looked so much bigger.
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic
The downsized ones were more nimble, still, but I didn't think the bigger ones were all that bad. Now granted, my experience with these cars was limited mostly to Chevies, a '72 Catalina hardtop coupe, and a '76 LeSabre hardtop sedan. The bigger ones, like the Electra, Ninety-Eight, and Cadillacs might have been more floaty, vague, and ponderous, as they tried harder to isolate you with that luxury car ride.
I don’t have as much experience with the GMs, but on the Fords I can tell you there is a huge difference between the “full size” and “downsized” cars. I used to have side by side pics of my 79 Continental and 89 Town Car. The 79 felt and looked so much bigger.
I thought of you on Sunday. Was out running errands and passed an 80s vintage square continental. Silver. I think I have seen this one before. Such a period piece!
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
GM had variable-ratio power steering at the time which gave you some road feel, as opposed to the totally dead power steering in other cars. Both the '74 and '77 had that I believe. But besides that, our '74 just seemed so....wide. Long, too, but mostly wide.
I remember that light green that was a '77-only color. I like it. I don't see blue/turquoise in it. I've always thought to myself, "How do we know anybody else sees a color the same as we do?". I also remember that slightly bolder '78 light green, which seemed everywhere but I didn't care for it.
That '77 Impala Sedan pic reminds me that there are a couple things about the Impala I actually prefer to the Caprice Classic. One is the full wheelcovers, and the other is the (simple) grille. I remember my Dad, before he bought his coupe, stopping in front of a new gold Impala wagon and saying "I guess those do look nice in the front". Kinda cool that you could get the 50/50 front seats with individual center armrests even in the Impala, but I've seen exactly one so-equipped....a new '77 light blue one with blue vinyl top, sedan, ordered as a Company car for Greenville Steel Car Co. It had the blue 50/50 cloth front seats and I remember looking at it at my hometown dealer.
I am still amazed that people still think that was some kind of "small" car after being downsized.
I don't think I knew anybody who called it 'small', but....it did lose its, ahem, "road hugging weight".
I haven’t seen one of those in forever.
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic
On '77's at the time, I liked Firethorn, and black. On '78's I kind-of liked that light blue metallic. On '79's there was a very deep burgundy I liked.
Now, I'd like this very car except in a coupe! No side moldings, no vinyl top, no bumper guards just the strips. The '77 had the simplest front end and taillight styling of the three years. Yeah, good luck finding one like that, huh?
The dirty/smudgy LF whitewall in this pic always bugged me....they couldn't have cleaned it for the pic?
I'm surprised I can't see the rear stabilizer bar in the rear pic. I remember them being pretty easy to see.
I always liked those plastic spoked wheelcovers. I like them better than the actual wire covers used starting on the '77 Landaus.
I have seen a couple '77 Malibu Classics and Monte Carlos with the spoked wheelcovers and they look nice on those cars too.
It's easy to look at the numbers and say "A new (fill-in-the-blank subcompact) will beat that", but again, that'd be like saying, "Gee, my '77 (fill-in-the-blank) beats that '32!".
But, there can also be variations from car to car, plus even things like elevation, air temperature, and humidity can make a difference. I don't think it makes so much of a difference these days, with all the electronics and fuel injection and such, but back in the day it did.
I also seem to recall Consumer Reports testing a 305-2bbl Impala or Caprice in both '77 and 78, and 0-60 was in the 12-13 second range. And that was with a tall axle, like a 2.56:1. In '79 though, when it was choked to 130, they tested a Caprice and 0-60 was around 15.9.
That's an area where cars of mine in the past decade have come up short.
fin and I have commented on this before on the 'Postwar Studebakers' page, but while I wouldn't say it's a dead duplicate, the rear door styling of the '77 GM big cars, and the '76 Seville for that matter, reminds me of the 1963 Studebaker four-door rear-door cutouts. I really can't think of another car more similar in that area.
This Stude is a 37K mile original that recently changed hands in my area.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
I have paperwork for my 1963 Studebaker Lark Daytona, now in Australia, that had the non-supercharged Avanti V8, automatic, power steering, power brakes, factory air, radio and heater ("Climatizer"), Twin Traction, and factory sunroof, and it was 3,311 lbs.
Old-tech in comparison of course, but also only 184 inches long.
2021 VW Arteon SEL 4-motion, 2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech
For A/c, you have the compressor, the condenser, a bit of extra junk under the hood, and maybe a little extra duct work inside, but would all that have added up to 180 lb or so?
The 350 would have also used the beefier THM350 transmission rather than the THM200, but I don't know how much heavier it actually is. The 350 might have used a beefier rear-end though, with a larger differential, thicker axles and housings, etc.
I was also thinking beefier wheels and tires. That spec sheet says 15x6 rims with 15x7 being optional. I'm taking that to mean the test car had the 15x6, but I wonder if the test car actually had the 15x7, and on that spec sheet, they're simply listing what was standard and what was optional?
Another thing I was thinking, was the possibility of beefier brakes, but then I saw the specs. 9.5" drums in back are pretty small. I know it's the front brakes that do most of the work, and perhaps with a disc/drum setup, the rear brakes are even less relevant, but still, 9.5" is what the Corvair used to use!
Would that 350 have had dual exhaust, or no? What about a bigger radiator than the 305? Would they have had to beef anything else up in the suspension/frame/etc for the 350?
I'm sure that test car had F-41 suspension, that everyone at the time in the mags was raving about. That would have required the maximum tire and wheel combination, so I'll assume the car has the seven inch wheels although I don't know that for a fact. The head-on and rear-on pics of the car on that magazine page make the tires/wheels look pretty wide/beefy.
Radiator, no idea.
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
2021 VW Arteon SEL 4-motion, 2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
That pic I believe is from an '80 or '81. I like the door panels those years.
I'd have gotten one with no vinyl top, no side molding, and no pinstriping, and 'snowflake' wheels. That rocker trim at the bottom is waaayyy big enough to overpower any other optional trim IMHO!
I saw a black '79 for sale some time back with the goldish bucket seats. Very nice, but although I can't recall if it had the vinyl top which shrunk the quarter windows, it had body side moldings and pinstriping not only at the top of the body side but around the front wheel openings. It was really too much trim for me.
2021 VW Arteon SEL 4-motion, 2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech
I'm sure there would have been no market for it, but I though a cool car would be something like, let's call it a '77 Catalina 2+2. The coupe body style, the 400 out of the Can Am, and bucket seats and a console shift. The '77 Catalina had sort of a crosshair grille that reminded me a bit of the '64 GTO, so whenever I see one I think that there's a sporty car somewhere in there, just dying to bust out!
I think those Delta 88 and Bonneville coupes used the bucket seats from the downsized midsized cars, and those wouldn't have been available in '77. So I guess to make my little pipe dream, they would've had to use the bucket seats out of a Colonade?
I always hated those thick vinyl roofs with the shrunken quarter windows in these cars. It really mucked up an otherwise beautiful roofline. It seemed more common on the Bonneville, but I've even seen it on the occasional Catalina coupe, where it really looked out of place, on the less upscale car.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
The other thing I note from the picture is the narrowness of the bucket seats which barely fill the seat wells in the floorpan, leaving the raised area for the frame rails fully exposed. That's because those were A-body bucket seats not designed for the larger B-body's extra width. Wasted space there.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6