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

ab348

The reason that the Canadian ‘77 LeMans wagon got the 301 was that GM Canada did not build any wagons (for any of the 4 A-body brands, as I understand it). So wagons sold in Canada came out of US plants with US engines. I think all other body styles were built in Canada and got whatever engines the divisions and GM Canada agreed they could have.

uplanderguy

Original paint and interior, from the 'All Original Cars' FB page.

I hate the 'comb' on the side, but I like the unusual color ("Cay Coral") and that skirts, fake exhaust ports, and a Continental kit haven't been added, LOL.

Correct whitewall width, too.

Seems like so many now are bright turquoise, red, or black, nice IMHO to see a subdued color.

Hard to believe that was a one-year design.

I think GM was sweating Mopar's design prowess at the time and was actually influenced by Mopar to come out with the '59 GM designs. MHO only.

I also like a nice '58 Ford Fairlane 500 Victoria, not all hillbillied-up with accessories.

ab348

There are a lot of accounts of how GM's '59 designs came to be, leading to the premature demise of the '58 bodies. I think this is one of the best versions, and it dates from a time when many of those involved were still living and able to discuss what happened. Even at that there is some variation in terms of who did what, but I like the general theme of the story.

https://www.hemmings.com/stories/2012/07/15/sia-flashback-gms-far-out-59s-when-imagination-ran-rampant-part-i#&gid=1&pid=2

uplanderguy

Yeesh, some of those are horrible.

Of the '59-60 models, I like the '60 Oldsmobile best.

andre1969

I always thought it was a shame that the '58 Chevy and Pontiac were 1-year only designs, as I much prefer them to the '59 models. But, realistically, I think that they could have only gotten one more year out of the design. The styles changed fast in those days, and by 1960, these would have looked pretty outdated.

Sometimes I wonder how automotive history would have played out if, say, Mopar waited until 1958 to spring their '57 models, and gotten most of the quality control problems worked out? Or if GM had held onto that '57-58 (58-only for Chevy/Pontiac) a year or two longer.

uplanderguy

For years I detested the '59 Chevy, and the '60 I hated less, but it was a total 'meh' to me.

Now, if someone said I had to buy one, I'd choose a '59 I guess because it is so ridiculous, and it's the original.

I did like how Chevy did the two-tones that year, with the decklid the color of the roof.

Never cared for the flattop four-door hardtop rooflines those years, although my friend said his under-five-foot mother appreciated that roofline on their '60 Cadillac while driving and backing up.

andre1969

The '59 Chevy is a bit too much for my senses, but I don't hate it. It's cool in its own flamboyant way. But I prefer the toned-down '60. I REALLY like the '61.

uplanderguy

I really like the '61 also.

andre1969

I always thought '61 was an interesting year in that it seemed like Chevy had the market cornered, if you wanted a big car that was somewhat youthful and sporty, while the Fords that year did well for a more conservative type of buyer...and both looked great, in their own way.

1961 must have been a horrible year to be a Plymouth dealer. Which is kind of a shame, because the cars did have good handling, good engines and performance, and by that time the quality had improved. But they were just so weird looking!

ab348

All of the GM big cars were their best in terms of body design in '61 and '62.

texases

I think of the '62 Chevy as a 'modern' design, for some reason, with all '50s elements gone.

andre1969

One thing I notice is that 1962 seems like the year that pretty much everyone jettisoned the wide whitewall tires, and went to the narrower stripe. There might have been a few exceptions here and there, but that seems like sort of a milestone that brought the American car kicking and screaming into the 60's.

Michaell

When did American manufacturers get away from the annual restyling trend?

Trying to think about the costs involved to restyle every model, then update the plants to accommodate the new tooling, etc.

Makes my head spin.

uplanderguy

The annual model changes may have been expensive, but they sure made things interesting to me.

Now, meh.

At GM, the Chevy II hung on from '62-65 without a reskin, and Corvair from '60-64. The mid-size and big cars were on the two-year cycle most of the time. First time I can recall that GM got off the bandwagon on a bread-and-butter series of cars, like the full-size Chevy, was when they kept building basically the '71 model--and you could see that--into '76. I was so excited to see the new big cars for '77. It had been too long. The Colonnade mid-sizes hung on from '73 to '77.

Ford did similar with their '73-78 full-size cars.

uplanderguy

GM's '61 cars remind me of "The Jetsons" cars, although I like the bubbletop.

The '62's were nice too, although as discussed here before, the long-hood/short-deck look hadn't hit yet.

Other than its cheaper interior and only two taillights per side, I could like owning a '62 Bel Air Sport Coupe--the '62 body with the '61 bubbletop. I swear, I believe every single one has been converted to a 409 by now.

Make mine a 327 with Powerglide.

The '63 and the '64 to my eyes didn't look as good as the '62's did, and the '64's I just downright didn't like with the U-shaped horizontal side trim and blunt front end. What do I know though; lots of people seem to love them.

ab348

The '64 was the worst-looking big Chevy of the 1960s IMO. A big step back from the '63.

Imagine if you bought a new '64 Chevy in the summer of '64 and then a couple of months later the '65 appears. While it may not have been as good a car as the '64 over the long term, at that moment the '64 suddenly looked very old.

uplanderguy

I agree totally. I can't imagine a '65 Impala Sport Coupe on a dealer's lot next to a leftover '64.

That said, I remember that there were always people who wanted the last of 'the old one' as well as people who always wanted the first of 'the new one'. I remember that in '76/77, and '90/91 specifically, when I'd chat with salesmen.

You know, I'd have to agree--to my eyes, the '64 is the worst-looking full-size Chevy of the sixties as well! Next might be the '68 with formal top. I really didn't start to prefer the formal top over the sport coupe until the '71's. For some reason, I didn't mind that sport coupe roofline on the B, O, P cars in '71 and later, just the Chevys. The Chevy had slab sides and square wheel openings. The sport coupe roof always looked small on the Chevy body to me.

Only very minor-related, one one-year-only thing I liked about the '71 big Chevys is that they came with silver wheels, whether you got full wheelcovers or dog-dish caps. With the dog-dish caps, I think the silver wheels looked dressier than the usual body-colored wheels.

ab348

uplanderguy said:

That said, I remember that there were always people who wanted the last of 'the old one' as well as people who always wanted the first of 'the new one'. I remember that in '76/77, and '90/91 specifically, when I'd chat with salesmen.

I think our '78 Grand LeMans Safari was certainly the first of the new ones. I'm not convinced it wasn't a pilot line car in fact. Dad bought it sight unseen based on a brochure picture and the assurances of the salesman that they had a pair of them in the exact same colors arriving for introduction day. I have no idea how they agreed on a price. When we took delivery a lot of stuff just didn't fit. It had crank windows up front and the regulator shafts were about 1/2" to 3/4" too long, so the handles stood proud of the doors by that amount. The plastic C-pillar trim inside didn't fit right at all. It had the wrong model nameplate on the dash. It didn't have A/C but the fresh air vents in the dash weren't connected to anything (later fixed under warranty). It was pretty much a mess and very poorly built even for the times.

andre1969

One thing that impressed me with the big Chevies, of the '65-70 generation at least, is that while they made the more major revisions for '67 and '69, the even-year revisions were somewhat substantial, as well.

For instance, just eyeballing the '65 versus the '66, it looks like the whole front clip is different. Not just the grille/bumper, but the fenders and hood as well. The doors look the same, and most of the rear quarter looks the same, although it was altered at the rear. The trunk lid, rear bumper, and taillights are also different.

But then the '67 was so different that they even changed the roof structure! And, they did so again for '69. I used to think the convertible roof structure stayed the same from '65-70, but not long ago I saw an advertisement for a convertible top, and it was advertised as "1965-68 General Motors B-body" so they might have done some changes for '69. At a quick glance it looks like the same shape to me, but it might have been subtle. I know they got rid of the vent windows for '69, but I wouldn't think that would affect the top structure.

For '71-76, while they did change them every year, it was much more subtle. You could tell a '76 Caprice was the same car as a '71, just facelifted. When I was younger, I used to think the '67, and '69 Chevies were all-new, because to my eye, they looked radically different from the '66 and '68 versions.

Then where GM REAAALLY stretched it out was the downsized cars. As far as I know, the B-body used the same frame from 1977-96. If you really wanted to, you could pull the body off a '96 Caprice and drop it on the frame of a '77. For '77-79, they at least did annual styling changes with easy-change stuff like the grilles and taillights. And Chevy had to keep track of both the Impala and Caprice. The '80 re-skin was probably more substantial than a lot of people realize. It was still unmistakably Chevy, and a logical evolution of the Caprice and Impala, but just about all of the sheetmetal, and even a good part of the roof structure, was new. It was most noticeable on the coupes, which unfortunately lost their individuality, but even on the sedans, the C-pillar was a bit more slim, and upright, with a more upright rear window. They also did something to the back door, enough so that I've noticed when I've seen these with the windows rolled down, it went down just a bit further on the '77-79. I don't know if that's because the roof of the '80 was more squared off, which would make a larger door opening and larger rear window glass, or what. The rear deck was a bit higher and more level, giving a bit more cargo space. I've also heard that the front was lowered a bit as well, giving it a slightly more wedge-shape, so I guess that means they might have had to change some of the underlying structure? Although with a B-O-F car, maybe all that means is that, in addition to lowering the fenders, you simply lower the radiator support bulkhead up front...maybe that's less of an accomplishment than I'm giving them credit for?

They did a slight update for '81, which was most likely just changing the grille inserts. For '86, they finally dropped the Impala, and replaced that trim level with a base Caprice. It got a new header panel, and grille...maybe a new front bumper as well, but I'm not sure. They also changed the taillights. That probably saved them a few bucks, not having to differentiate the Impala and Caprice anymore. I thought it was kind of a shame though...I actually preferred the style of the Impala in most years!

They gave it composite headlights for '87, but after that I think it went unchanged through 1990. Then the whale/bathtub style came out, and carried them from 1991-96. Although in a move somewhat reminiscent of the '65-70, they changed it slightly every two years.

ab348

I remember reading at the time of the 1980 model introductions that the changes to the B/C-body cars were intended to make them more aerodynamic (hence the lower nose and higher rear roof/trunk lid) and lightweighting of the bodies. I don't know if that was done with reduced structure, thinner glass and sheet metal or how exactly, nor do I know if the ownership experience was compromised other than by the loss of the large-displacement engines.

uplanderguy

I always remember a magazine review of an '80 Caprice Classic coupe. They said, and I wholeheartedly agreed, then and now, that "the car has lost the chiseled good looks it was born with".

andre1969

On the subject of Ford's 73-78 cars, I've heard that basic design was actually the same from 1969-78! If that's the case, I'd say Ford did a damn fine job of updating them for '73, because I'd swear it's a totally different car. For the '73-78 style, I'd say the most noticeable update was for '75. That was when they came out with that style for the coupe where they had the little slit window in the B-pillar, and the somewhat triangular window behind it, doing away with the hardtop style, which had a small roll-down rear window in '73-74, and a wide C-pillar.

The Mercury Marquis coupe kept the same roofline for the duration, '73-78, but starting in '75 they just made those back windows stationary. I never really did like the Fords of that generation, but do find myself drawn to the Mercury. It's like the Ford tried too hard to be pretentious, whereas the Mercury just came about it naturally, if that makes sense! I know my tastes are kind of funny, where I could love one particular car, but then another that only has slight variations, leaves me cold.

andre1969

uplanderguy said:

I always remember a magazine review of an '80 Caprice Classic coupe. They said, and I wholeheartedly agreed, then and now, that "the car has lost the chiseled good looks it was born with".

I guess depending on how you define "chiseled", to me it seems even more "chiseled" with the '80 restyle. But I agree, it wasn't as good looking. Although, I'll say, I could be happy with this '81 Impala...
With the 305, at least...please no 229 or 267!

sda

Dad had a 77 Grand Marquis with the 460 that I liked. It had an upscale look and nice interior. I did find it curious that for 77 the backseat lost the center armrest. The 76 and earlier models had the armrest. Perhaps that was one way to encourage a potential buyer to upgrade to the Lincoln Town Car to get the rear center armrest? I've shared this pic several times before, sorry it is the only one I have of this car. The fit and finish and overall workmanship was significantly better than his 78 DeVille.

andre1969

That is a handsome looking beast!

uplanderguy

andre, I always considered the '67 and '69 Chevys, and '67 and '69 and '71 and '73 Fords, to be new designs too.

Usually, in my mind at the time, if the wheel opening shapes changed, it was a new car. Secondly, side window styling changes meant that to me too.

Although I guess by the standard of 'wheel opening shapes', then the '76 Cutlass and Century/Regal coupes would be all-new cars, and that wasn't the case of course.

RE.: that '81 Impala coupe--that is a nice-looking example and color. I actually don't think I remember those as '81 colors but they must be. The grille isn't a 'wow!', but rather, 'that looks pleasant'. 'Simple' usually wins with me and that is a nice-looking front end.

The '81 Impala interior was bland though IMHO...real bland. The two buttons per seatback were gone in '80, and the hard plastic around about the top 1/3 of the instrument panel went from color-keyed to black. No more 50/50 front seat with dual center armrests offered on the Impala anymore.

I have to look at the brochure but I was thinking 305's weren't available in states outside of CA then. But then, I was only interested in the mid-sizes when I went to buy that year.

RE.: The Mercs and Lincolns of that era pictured--it's only personal taste of course, and what you're used to, but I could never like that era of huge, slab-sided, blunt-front, hideaway-headlights cars. I think I've read that HFII liked those styling features and he'd drop by the styling studios to remind them of that. I'm sure I've mentioned too that my first real boss drove a Marquis like that and he was largely a contemptible human being--big drinker, chain smoker, and hit on girls at the office half his age, LOL. I'm sure for a guy like him, a big car was a phallic symbol!

UPDATE: Looked at the '81 full-size Chevy brochure. The 305 was available outside of CA and is the only way I'd have bought one of those cars! The colors in the pic andre posted don't seem to be listed in the brochure, hmmm. Of course I know that sometimes colors don't reproduce in photographs real well.

uplanderguy

Greg, did your Dad know about the fixed rear side windows in his '78 Grand LeMans wagon before the car came in? I think that had to be a hard pill for salesmen to swallow. I know my Dad moaned about that and the mini-spares in the '78 mid-sizes (we didn't buy one).

andre1969

I wonder if that '81 Impala coupe I posted is actually this car...

...and it just looks different because of the lighting and background.

The picture out by the ocean looks more green to me, where here it looks like champagne over brown.

Re: mini spares. What year did GM start putting them in the big cars?

uplanderguy

I bet you're right.

Adding the bumper strips, and guards sometimes, helped the looks of GM cars I always thought. I hated seeing bumper bolts.

The rear styling is pleasant and traditional. I haven't seen one in a long time. Got the ol' Impala three lights on a side with backup light in the center. Kind of a comforting styling touch if you had Impalas for twenty years before that, LOL!

andre1969

I just looked up the stats, and wow, no wonder they pulled the plug on the Chevy B-body coupes after '81. That year, they sold 6067 Impala coupes, 9741 Caprice Classics, and 6615 Caprice Classic Landaus.

When the coupe came back for '84, only as the Caprice, it sold 19,541 units, despite the market for full-sized cars in general being better by then. I'm surprised they actually kept the tooling around for it. While the Delta 88 and LeSabre kept their coupes through the end of the RWD style in '85, the roofline was a bit different around the rear quarter window/C-pillar area, although they might have used the same rear window.

Sales tapered off year after year and in the final year, 1987, it was down to around 3,000 units. One thing that's kind of curious is that my old car encyclopedia only lists the coupe in "Caprice Classic" trim level, whereas the sedan was offered as Caprice, Caprice Classic, Caprice Classic Brougham, and Caprice Classic Brougham LS.

So I wonder, if you could get a more luxurious interior (like leather perhaps?) as an option in an '87 Caprice Classic coupe, or if you were just stuck with its standard interior?

ab348

uplanderguy said:

Greg, did your Dad know about the fixed rear side windows in his '78 Grand LeMans wagon before the car came in? I think that had to be a hard pill for salesmen to swallow. I know my Dad moaned about that and the mini-spares in the '78 mid-sizes (we didn't buy one).

I suspect he didn't, although I probably read about that in the car magazines but I don't recall if the stories appears much in advance of him making the purchase. Of course I was the only one who traveled back there so maybe in his mind it didn't matter.

I cannot recall now why he was so hot and bothered in what must have been late August or early September of '77 to get a new car. He was driving his '75 AMC Sportabout at the time and while it wasn't the most luxurious car for sure, I don't recall it having any grievous problems that would make him want to dump it. But he was determined to do that. I remember us shopping for and test-driving 3 cars. We drove a blue '77 Dodge Aspen SE wagon, which seemed nice enough but Mom did not like it for some reason. Then we went to the Ford dealer hoping to see a new Fairmont wagon, but they had none. They did offer us a dark red '77 LTD II Squire wagon, which was certainly very nice when we drove it, but they felt it was a big boat. We didn't encounter any leftover '77 GM A-body wagons but the salesman at the Pontiac dealer did a sell job on the new downsized '78s, and Dad had been a longtime GM man in the past, so he bit on it.

uplanderguy

I'm about 94% certain on this (hey, I started my real job in '80, LOL), but only the Impala coupe was discontinued after '81. There was still a Caprice Classic coupe in '82. That was then discontinued, and reintroduced for '84. My Dad looked at one before he bought his Monte Carlo in Dec. '83. The Caprice had the bench front seat with fold-down armrest, in the pattern and material that previous to '84, was the 'CL' interior but became standard in '84. Similarly equipped, it was about a grand more than his Monte Carlo.

I was happy in '83 that the Monte Carlo instrument panel was toned down, and that the 305 4-barrel was available. In '84 buckets and console became available in Monte Carlos again, on top of a Caprice Classic coupe, and Citation Club Coupe, being reintroduced. '84 was a good year in my mind for Chevys, other than the Camaro Berlinetta--loved the gold trim but detested the video-game instrument panel.

I'm about 78% certain (LOL) that the compact spare was first put into 1980 big Chevys. I'm thinking that was part of the further weight reduction. My '93 had a full-size spare as an option, and I liked that. I didn't search for that but the car I wanted for the colors in and out, and the F-41, just happened to have it.

Here's the only interior pattern and material available on an '87 Caprice Classic coupe. I remember gently trying to sway my Dad in that direction--he didn't bite. But I always liked this pattern and material. I'll even say I like it better than the pillow seats in the Brougham. Incidentally, I'd wager a C-spot that the first Brougham ('86?) had the seats used in the previous year's Delta 88 Royale Brougham. They sure looked the same to me. BTW, I think the woodgrain used on the door panels and instrument panel of the Caprice by this time was pretty passable as almost-real.

uplanderguy

Have you ever seen an '80 or '81 big Chevy with the Custom Wheel Covers (geometric design)? See RR wheel in this brochure photo. I can't say I loved them--I still prefer the Sport Wheel Cover as in the photo above this post--but I find them intriguing. I don't know if I ever saw a single car in person with them.

sda

I don't know if you'd consider it full-size, dad's 79 Eldorado had a space saver spare. Mom's 78 Olds 98 and dad's 78 DeVille that he traded for the Eldo both had full-size spares.

uplanderguy

Here's a page from the '80 big Chevy brochure mentioning "new compact spare tire".

https://www.lov2xlr8.no/brochures/chevy/80_7.html

uplanderguy

'86 Caprice Classic Brougham seating, and '85 Delta 88 Royale Brougham seating.

andre1969

Oops...yep it was just the Impala. I double-checked, and it looks like there were 11,999 Caprice coupes sold in 1982. Incidentally, in Canada, you could still get a Parisienne coupe for '82 as well.

And I was thinking that yeah, 1980 sounds like a good guess for when the space savers came out in the bigger cars, since that's when they went on a mild diet.

Take it with a grain of salt, but my old car book lists the base weight of a '79 Impala coupe with the 250-inline at 3495 lb, and the '80 coupe, which had the 229, at 3344. With the V8, it dropped from 3606 lb to 3452 lb. So about 150 lb in each case. At first I was thinking the reduction should have been greater for the 6-cyl model, but it turns out the 229 V6 wasn't much lighter than the old 250 inline. According to one of those engine weight charts online (again, take it with a grain of salt!) the inline was 440 lb, versus 425 for the V6.

andre1969

From what I've heard, the Fairmont was really popular when it first came out, so they were selling them just as quickly as they got them in the showroom. I remember awhile back, one of the members here (hpmctorque, I want to say?) had told me he wanted to get a '78 Fairmont when they were new, but they kept having shortages. I think he was trying to special order one too, so that might have made a difference. And then they had a lot of recalls, which I think messed with production.

Anyway, he ended up with a '78 LeMans. I don't remember much of the details, but I think it was a 4-door sedan, 305 V8, and he did have to have the THM200 transmission rebuilt at some point, but it was close to 100,000 miles.

Oh, as for the stationary rear windows, just to show how observant my family is NOT, my grandparents bought their '82 Malibu Classic wagon in February of 1982, when it was cold. I remember they bought it at night, too. Nobody ever bothered to notice that the back windows were stationary, until one hot Sunday in April, when I went to church with them. Grandmom sat in the back seat, started fumbling around, and finally asked "How the hell do you open the window?!" And that was when we figured it out!

I always thought of those stationary back windows as a good example of just how much GM could get away with back then. Think about it...they started that in 1978. I'm sure people complained, but they still bought these cars. And GM kept building them that way for ten years. While the Malibu, as well as all the wagons, were dropped after '83, the Regal sedan made it through '84, the Bonneville G through '86, and the Cutlass Supreme sedan made it through '87! If there was enough of a backlash against these windows, I'm sure GM would have changed it.

But, unless you carpool to work or have a large family, I'm guessing the back seat in most cars really doesn't get used that often. And when it does, it's usually the parents up front, kids in the back, and if they got too hot, well, tough love!

uplanderguy

Any time I've ever ridden in the back seat of one of those GM midsize four-doors with fixed rear windows, the armrest seemed awkward to use--quite a bit forward of where my arm would normally rest.

I will say that in my experience over the years, in the back seat, most wind you get is from when the front windows are down. And, coupes had had fixed rear quarter windows for a few years. Still, it was a shock to most people (me included) when the four-doors had the fixed rear-door glass in '78.

tjc78

@uplanderguy said:
Have you ever seen an '80 or '81 big Chevy with the Custom Wheel Covers (geometric design)? See RR wheel in this brochure photo. I can't say I loved them--I still prefer the Sport Wheel Cover as in the photo above this post--but I find them intriguing. I don't know if I ever saw a single car in person with them.

I may just not remember, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen one with a moonroof like in the brochure.

uplanderguy

I may just not remember, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen one with a moonroof like in the brochure.

Me neither.

sda

I know I've referenced a lot of cars recently that we had in the late 70s early 80s. I thought you might be interested to see what my parents owned since they married.
Cars my parents owned. Only three bought new. * In the late 70’s early 80’s more frequent activity of trades but generally buy and hold long term. Bought the 78 98 LS sedan and sold within 3 months and realized a $2k profit.
Cars they owned when they married, St Petersburg, FL
• 55 Chevy 150 2dr sedan, 6cyl, manual (mom)
• 59 Pontiac Catalina 2dr hardtop, auto (dad)
Later: St Pete
• 63 Olds Dynamic 88 Holiday Coupe a/c, replaced Catalina, for mom
• 65 Ford Custom 500, a/c, dad’s first company car, sold 55 Chevy for $75
Move to New Orleans, LA 2/68
• 66 Ford Galaxie 500, no a/c, dad’s company car at new firm
• 69 Olds 98 LS replaces 63 88
• 70 Ford Custom 302 a/c replacement company car
• 71 Pontiac Catalina coupe company car
• 72 Olds Cutlass Supreme, replaces 98
• 73 Pontiac Catalina company car
Move to London, England 6/74
• 72 Ford Cortina GXL 4sp dad’s new company car, was his boss’s
• 74 Ford Cortina E automatic, also was his boss’s, Boss got new Granada
• Mom did without a car
Move to Paris, France 2/75
• 75 Renault 16 TL automatic
• 71 Audi 100 LS automatic for mom, bought from a Canadian couple returning home
• 76 Renault 30 V6
Return to US/Farmville, VA 8/76
• 76 GMC Sierra 15 4wd*
• 76 Olds Cutlass Supreme wagon*
• 71 Datsun 510 wagon, 4sp bought to keep miles off Olds
Move to Knoxville, TN 8/78
• 72 Toyota Corona Mk II
• 73 Pontiac Grand Am sedan (above 2 for sisters to drive)
• 78 Olds 98 LS 403 replaces Cutlass wagon
• 78 Olds 98 Regency coupe with Astro-roof, 403, replaces 78 98 LS sold for profit
• 77 Mercury Grand Marquis 460 (for dad)
• 78 Cadillac DeVille d’Elegance replaces Marquis
• 79 Cadillac Eldorado Diesel replaces DeVille
Move to Charlotte, NC 5/85
• 85 Mercury Grand Marquis LS replaces Eldo
• 87 Ford Taurus LX sunroof, replaces 78 98
• 95 Olds Cutlass Cierra SL II* replaces Grand Marquis
• 98 Olds Aurora 2/2000 w/autobahn, sunroof, replaces Taurus
• 2010 Honda CR-V EX 7/2012 replaces Aurora

xwesx

Impressive gap between the Aurora and the CR-V; they must have really dropped off on the usage around that point.

sda

xwesx said:

Impressive gap between the Aurora and the CR-V; they must have really dropped off on the usage around that point.

Yes, that's true. Even then mom was sad to shed the Aurora but at 103k it reared the ugly Northstar issue of stretched head bolts leading to overheating and a blown head gasket. She gave the car to my sister who had a used engine installed. Her boys drove it another 5 years. Mom just stays close to home, shopping, dr's appts, etc. for her and dad. I don't think she drives 3k a year at this point. She is 80, dad 86.

uplanderguy

I'm drawing a blank here. Would that Aurora have been the first style, or second style?

sda

uplanderguy said:

I'm drawing a blank here. Would that Aurora have been the first style, or second style?

It was the first generation Aurora. I had a 2001 Aurora 4.0 which was the second gen.

1998 Like this, similar color,

My 2001 was similar to this:

ab348

uplanderguy said:

I'm drawing a blank here. Would that Aurora have been the first style, or second style?

A 1998 would have been first-gen.

I'm impressed that they kept a '79 Eldo Diesel running for 6 years!

I remember way back when ('70s I think) seeing a magazine ad with testimonials for Merit cigarettes where one of the ladies saying how much she liked them was from Farmville, VA. I figured it was just a made-up place name because it just sounded like such an unlikely name. Is it very big? I would presume it is mostly farms?

sda

Farmville is in central VA. Charlottesville, Lynchburg, Richmond are all around an hour or so away. It is largely rural with a lot of farming, logging, etc. Dad bought a 450 acre farm there which was sold a few years later. I have the utmost respect for farmers.

stickguy

I only know what my parents had from around when I was born, from stories. And it wasn’t many.

A metro and FS Chevy wagon in early 60s. Then just the wagon (maybe not same one!) until 1969. Then a new Volvo 144, kept until ‘79. Then a pair of Omnis until maybe 88ish (first one engine died early). Then a civic, followed by a Saturn SL, olds achieva, a Corolla for my mother, and a pair of Sentras for my dad.

Not a lot of cars in 50 years!

Though until about 1995 my dad always had a company truck and for a while a fire chiefs car (volunteer) so until after I was married they only ever owned 1 car at a time.

Michaell

Hmm, let's see if I can recreate my folks' history with cars.

'57 Chevy
Early 60's Beetle
Late 50's Ford Truck
'67 VW Squareback
'70 Chevy C-10
'73 Toyota Corolla
'72 MB 220D
'83 Toyota Celica
'91 Toyota Camry
'03 Hyundai Sonata

My dad drove a city vehicle (Dodge Diplomat or the Plymouth equivalent, IIRC) when he was doing fire cause investigation for the FD. I still remember the sound of that starter motor.