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

andre1969

fintail said:

Who does this person think they are, Glickenhaus?

I'll take the 288 GTO.

I'm not all that up-to-date on my Ferraris, so I was just gonna say yeah, gimme the Magnum P.I.

explorerx4

That was about half of them. I didn't want to post any pics with people in them.

fintail

andre1969 said:

fintail said:

Who does this person think they are, Glickenhaus?

I'll take the 288 GTO.

I'm not all that up-to-date on my Ferraris, so I was just gonna say yeah, gimme the Magnum P.I.

There's also a red Miami Vice (but a real one) beside it.

All of these things are worth so much today, they are usually the purview of dynastic inherited wealth, lucky crypto schemers, under-regulated financiers, etc - but when the 1989 bubble popped, there were probably bargains. The exotics market seems to be rhyming with 1989 again, vehicles used as vehicles to store/hide money.

stickguy

Parked in front of a shop a very nice looking 68 or so dart convertible. Maybe a GT because it had a hood scoop.

texases

The '68 Dart GTS had these side hood vents, for looks I bet:

uplanderguy

Anybody watch “Unfrosted” last night? I enjoyed the early ‘60’s nostalgia, and it is awash in that, but overall I thought it was lame. Seinfeld’s character drives a Corvair Lakewood wagon with fender skirts (LOL) and the head of Kellogg’s, named Edsel Kellogg, drives an early ‘60’s Imperial.

I was hoping to see an Avanti, but no luck. Seinfeld drove a ‘64 in “Comedians In Cars Having Coffee”.

stickguy

That body style but a square snout hood scoop. Definitely not original.

stickguy

A hemi style like this. https://www.ebay.com/itm/266380239638?chn=ps&norover=1&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-117182-37290-0&mkcid=2&mkscid=101&itemid=266380239638&targetid=2295557532230&device=m&mktype=pla&googleloc=9004605&poi=&campaignid=20398928557&mkgroupid=166836955371&rlsatarget=pla-2295557532230&abcId=9317287&merchantid=111991004&gad_source=1&gbraid=0AAAAAD_QDh859-gg9rakIRCyLNQPpCtEu&gclid=Cj0KCQjwudexBhDKARIsAI-GWYWiRkmdiBXPEtB6JSHzeHTLq_vg2E2rYCNcqrCW-1Sm0paQOupAqtkaAq9zEALw_wcB

texases

So like this? (Not a Dart, of course)

stickguy

Pretty close but the top went straight across

fintail

People across the street are having a yard sale so there's a constant stream of traffic, unusual spots so far are a very unrestored looking early 70s Lincoln sedan, Bronco II, mid 90s Escort in a very period correct magenta kind of color.

explorerx4

I think he means like this:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/226124569235?itmmeta=01HX2SHTEP711AWP4YK2SDB54W&hash=item34a6131a93:g:JqIAAOSwFjZmM3aL&itmprp=enc:AQAJAAAA4HXNblKUPs05hhnNN3xZkAn/MAXFAklbxdJ+p89nAcs8jLd4NIquvTUJ6Pejb8vyiUv2hdx+vM1XEWXnys0gLXNfouuMHo5xmuqzT9yvkZSxkkTIN3zH37vP9bxUcTmXWcDoGgXkwJ9pXJXlWiajDpxj7mG9s7INsa0xCxZiYsSII+hN8iTY2siIwOQY0T1cqlMI7qtdf0Y5XqwCJCVUZ0J2st3kVHug+uCl7VmNpchNIJ7AAiTuPjLhrrDzztTU22vmnm7D78/d9OMp1y2JZ8ogLpF3k32NGsVFZwyTy+Ev|tkp:Bk9SR7Snx9noYw

texases

Yeah, those pop up a lot on Google.

stickguy

this is the closest I can find. but slightly squarer. not like that other picture where it is elevated and curved.

uplanderguy

Spotted over the weekend in Grove City, OH....probably the prettiest factory-appearing Maverick I've ever seen.

At the time, Maverick (and Hornet) were slotted in the same market space as Nova and Valiant/Dart, but I always wondered why someone would choose one of them over a Nova or Valiant/Dart as those cars seemed so much more....significant to my eyes. I know back then, more than ever, someone who didn't like GM or Mopar might've chosen those others.

uplanderguy

Speaking of Maverick, I went with my Dad to introduction night of the Maverick. Even as a kid I seemed underwhelmed. I much-prefer this car in that class, the '69 Falcon. In fact, to me, this style Falcon is the best-looking Falcon ever....long-hood, short-deck; notched quarter windows; full-radius rear wheel openings. I gotta say, that huge fuel filler in the trunk is a turnoff. This car is for sale on FB Marketplace in OH for $12K; 58K miles and six, automatic. Probably dreaming but it does look nice.

ab348

Someone locally has one of those late Falcons, a "Sport Coupe" model, red with a black vinyl roof that I see occasionally in the summertime. Always liked those.

We bought a '74 Maverick new in '74, a LDO 4-door, and I cannot tell you why. I think mom just liked how it looked with the fancy LDO trim. I know I tried to talk them into looking at a dolled-up Valiant/Dart but no dice. I don't think we liked any of the '74 GM compacts much so those weren't looked at either. The Maverick proved to be an awful car that drove poorly and rusted out almost instantly, so the 2-door spotted in Ohio must have lived a very sheltered life.

Further to your point, dad replaced his '68 Volvo with a '75 Hornet Sportabout. The wagon body was useful for him and it actually drove really well. The interior trim, though, was really low-rent and quit crude.

andre1969

I'll admit to having a soft spot for those '66-70 Falcons. They're cheap, basic, and no-frills, but I guess there's just a simple sort of honesty about them about them that I like. They're not pretending to be anything more than what they are. I never did like the Maverick, though. They just seemed TOO cheap and small for my tastes. Although, I have a feeling the 4-door models are actually bigger overall than the 4-door Falcons were. But there's just something about the style that makes them look diminutive. And despite attempts to make them sporty, luxurious, etc, they just seemed like a step down from the Falcon to me.

One thing I never noticed before, with the '66-70 Falcon, was how they put the fuel filler on the side. I just presumed it was in back like the earlier models, and the Mustang. None of these cars that had those "drop in" gas tanks were particularly safe in a rear-end collision, but I wonder if relocating it like that did at least make it a bit less prone to rupturing?

I do seem to recall the Maverick actually ranked fairly high in Consumer Reports' reliability ratings, and was usually better than GM's X-bodies, or Mopar's Dart/Valiant. I know the Mopar lovers like to talk about how legendary the Dart/Valiant were, thanks to the durable slant six and 318 V8, but I also recall some auto reviewer joking that they were actually one of the worst cars ever made. Their rationale was that they'd leak, squeak, and rattle, and subject your feet to "water torture", but because the drivetrains were so rugged, their owners would put up with all of that long after most "mortal" cars had been junked!

uplanderguy

Funny, when Dad was looking at a '73 Nova, the salesman showed him a reprint of a car magazine review of a '72 Nova...can't recall which mag. They noted that compared to other compacts, the Nova excelled in good-old workmanship. They ended with, "The Nova comes across as honest as Iowa on Sunday morning".

Ours was definitely the worst-assembled new Chevy we ever had, LOL. It arrived at the dealer with a dent in the roof gutter on the left rear side--nothing could be fixed. It had a big gap where the dash met the A-pillar on the right side. It leaked water in the trunk, and the left rear quarter window (yes, when rolled up tight). It would occasionally grind between (manual) gears, which was found to be a ring of some sort missing.

All that said, it looked nice and was an unbelieable buy at $2,625 at the BOTTOM of the Monroney sticker, including destination. Had AM radio, Rally Wheels, whitewalls, Exterior Decor Group (bright metal around side windows, and body side moldings), floor-mounted 3-speed shifter, and that's it.

It got hit hard in Aug. '74 and we traded it in that way on a new '74 Impala Sport Coupe. Dad wanted nothing to do with unleaded gas and the '75's were already trickling in.

andre1969

I have an old Consumer Guide used car paperback packed away somewhere that covers the 1977-86 model years. However, cars that ended production after 1977 (like GM's Colonades, Maverick/Comet, and the big C-body Gran Fury/Royal Monaco) aren't covered, and neither are cars that started in 1986 (like the FWD LeSabre/Delta 88).

Of the '77-79 Nova, they said something along the lines of "as outdated as they may be, these heavy compacts were among the best of their time." I also seem to recall them liking the Fairmont/Zephyr, which overlapped with the Nova for a few years, although they did mention that earlier models had a lot of recalls. And in most Ford V8s of the late 70s, they talked about problems with the "variable venturi carburetor." With the Aspen/Volare, I believe they said something like "stick to a later year, or look to another car." And with the Granada/Monarch, I think they simply didn't like it because it was so obsolete.

Actually, the Granada/Monarch is another one that I seem to recall scored fairly well in the reliability ratings. It's just that it lagged in just about everything else...handling, fuel economy, acceleration, space efficiency, etc.

I do seem to recall Consumer Reports dinging the Nova of the '70s for reliability, often rating "worse than average." I think some of these cars though, would often rate poorly in their early years, when they have relatively minor things failing prematurely, but then as they age, they actually do better, because the cars that might have been more reliable, initially, finally start to fall apart, and in more major ways. Or, it could simply be that some cars scored better as they aged, because they had all their major repairs taken care of early on, whereas the cars that scored well early on were just now getting to their first repairs.

uplanderguy

In my first post about the Maverick, a few back, I wrote "significant" when I really meant "substantial"--the Novas and Valiant/Darts seemed more substantial to me than Mavericks and Hornets.

My uncle bought a new '72 Hornet sedan probably six months before we bought our new '73 Nova. Both were traded in in late summer '74. At less than three years, the Hornet had signs of rust bubbles on the top of the LF fender, that I remember.

Speaking of CR, I remember they said the '71 Vega was 'better than average' in its first year. I have recently been looking at a Vega FB page, and a woman there recently said she saw a new Vega that still had the window sticker, that had a hole in the front fender. Simply laughable. Similarly, people report that their neighbors, friends, whatever, needed new engines in the first six months. I subscribe to a theory that years have a way of making the bad things worse, and the good things better, than reality, LOL. I'm thinking if every single early Vega was as bad as people say, it's doubtful to me that the best-selling model year would be four model years in, LOL.

texases

My first car was a '65 Mustang rustbucket, my second a '72 Duster, rust-free, both Cincinnati cars. I agree, the Duster was much more substantial than the Mustang (Maverick relative). With only a 198 slant 6 I towed a (small) UHaul from Houston to the Bay area, no problems. Can't imagine doing that with the Mustang.

andre1969

Even in the final year, 1977, Chevy still moved about 78,000 Vegas and 33,000 Astres. So it seems to me that if the car was really as bad as people say, it wouldn't have sold nearly that well, seven years in. Although, I think the engine was improved by then. I seem to recall even in an episode of "The Price is Right", or maybe "Let's Make a Deal," where the prize was a Vega, as the announcer was going over the features of the car, they mentioned something along the lines of "an improved engine".

The Vega also had to compete with the Chevette by 1977, although I don't think the Chevette really took off until 1978, when they introduced the 4-door hatchback model. For comparison, Ford sold around 202,000 Pintos and 31,000 Bobcats in '77. Mopar was still depending on imports for its subcompacts, and my auto encyclopedia, unfortunately, only includes domestic cars in its production figures.

The Pinto is another one that history has not been kind to. To hear people talk, you'd think that back in the 70's, they were bursting into flames on a daily basis. But from what I've been able to find online, a total of 27 deaths have been officially attributed to Ford Pinto fires, and overall death rates for the Pinto were actually among the lowest of similarly-sized cars of the era.

Of course, if you listen to Mother Jones, it was more like 500-900. Mother Jones, whom I believe crash tested Pintos multiple times and couldn't get them to catch on fire, until they finally took a '71 Impala, weighted it down in front, turned on the headlights but busted out the glass, and then ran it into the Pinto at something like 10-15 mph higher than the typical crash test of the era.

I have never, in my life, seen a Pinto fire, other than online, or on tv. I remember in the late 70's, it seemed like every day the news would run the same video of a Pinto getting crash tested and bursting into flames, so they were drilling it into our minds until it became the gospel. And yet, they still managed to sell about 184,000 Pintos in the final 1980 model year. Despite the fact that it only came in 2-door configurations, in a market where it was obvious buyers were preferring the versatility of 4-door variants.

imidazol97

I saw this beauty at my morning coffee. I thought it was a Cadillac by the front fenders, then the rear compartment caught my eye. Beautiful condition.

kyfdx

Is that a New Yorker?

stickguy

Might be a 5th avenue!

explorerx4

Saw another 55 Shoebox Chevy not far from me.
Couldn't get a good picture.

ab348

I was reading an article about the Vega that had some interesting nuggets in it I never knew before. There was actually no traditional business case for the Vega, since GM concluded they would always lose money on every one they made regardless of how it was designed. It was done more for customer loyalty and brand image, given the surge in small car sales that were mostly imports at the time. The article said that being smaller only saved GM somewhere around $100 in costs compared to a bigger car.

They took some extreme measures with it though. The article said it used thinner sheetmetal in the body to save both weight and cost. Early prototypes suffered from buckling after trying them on the Belgian block track at the proving grounds, and Fisher Body had to design reinforcing members to cure that. Then there was the little 12”x12” radiator, the sealed air cleaner, the lack of a coolant recovery system, the new rustproofing system that didn’t reach parts of the front fenders, and the deletion of inner fenders. None of those things added to customer satisfaction over time but all saved cost. The engine, being technology new to GM, suffered some unexpected problems, like piston rings that had a sharp 90 degree profile where they met the bore that caused scuffing of the aluminum block, which once discovered was changed by Perfect Circle. The valve oil seals tended to self-destruct quickly and again once changed were cured. It had an oil pressure switch that cut power to the fuel pump if it thought there was no oil pressure, so a failed sensor would cause a no-start. And the cooling system was inadequate, unfortunate for an engine that could self-destruct easily if it overheated.

Corporate issues led to other problems. The car was the baby of GM boss Ed Cole, father of the Corvair and was largely developed by GM staff, not Chevrolet, so the division really didn’t want it and didn’t feel ownership of it, including the new Nicasil aluminum block. That led to Chevy staff being somewhat lax during final development. It was decided to build it at Lordstown, which was a new GM plant with a young workforce, not UAW lifers. GM wisely placed 700 or so QC employees there and early production seemed to work reasonably well. Then the UAW went on strike and after it was finally settled GM corporate decided to cut costs, so the QC people were let go and responsibility was transferred away from Chevy to GM Assembly Division, which the workers did not like. The workforce reportedly didn’t have the same commitment to their jobs that the long-term UAW workers had and quality went downhill. Combined with the design problems, the cars were just not good and became doomed

andre1969

That one Imidazol97 posted is a 5th Avenue. The wheelbase was a 5" stretch of the regular New Yorker, something like 109.3" vs 104.3", I think. The revived Imperial was also on that longer wheelbase, but had a more sloped-off front end. I think the entire 5" went into legroom for the back seat, so they were almost limousine-like back there!

explorerx4

@ab348,
I've always felt the 3 Domestic manufacturers were not good at designing small cars and wanted them to fail.
On the other side of the coin, other manufactrers are not good at designing big vehicles and they don't do well, i.e. Ridgeline, Titan, Tundra.

imidazol97

andre1969 said:

That one Imidazol97 posted is a 5th Avenue. The wheelbase was a 5" stretch of the regular New Yorker, something like 109.3" vs 104.3", I think. The revived Imperial was also on that longer wheelbase, but had a more sloped-off front end. I think the entire 5" went into legroom for the back seat, so they were almost limousine-like back there!

I noticed the extensions on the end of the rear fenders. Was that where the 5 inches was added? Take that off and the shape of the body and cabin could be from a smaller Chrysler car. I'd like to see a breakdown of
just where the extra length was added because the rear seat looks really spacious.

This car has an almost flat rear tire...
I apologize for the garbage truck in the picture.

fintail

Speaking of 55 Chevies, this is one I have mentioned before in my neighborhood, image taken from a nearly 11 year old Streetview pic. I think it's kind of a 70s hot rod style - owner seems to take it out in the spring to use as a driveway ornament, and it just sits there, but might go into storage in the winter. It may be moved now and then but always seems to be in the same place when I drive by:

andre1969

imidazol97 said:

andre1969 said:

That one Imidazol97 posted is a 5th Avenue. The wheelbase was a 5" stretch of the regular New Yorker, something like 109.3" vs 104.3", I think. The revived Imperial was also on that longer wheelbase, but had a more sloped-off front end. I think the entire 5" went into legroom for the back seat, so they were almost limousine-like back there!

I noticed the extensions on the end of the rear fenders. Was that where the 5 inches was added? Take that off and the shape of the body and cabin could be from a smaller Chrysler car. I'd like to see a breakdown of
just where the extra length was added because the rear seat looks really spacious.

This car has an almost flat rear tire...
I apologize for the garbage truck in the picture.

No, the metal part of the fender just ended that short, and they used a plastic endcap to extend it all the way out. Here's a New Yorker for comparison...
They might have cut the metal part short like that, to make it easier to differentiate the Dodge Dynasty, since all the changes could be made in the plastic endcap, and not the sheetmetal. Here's a Dynasty, for comparison...
As for the extra length, it was all in the wheelbase, and all in the back seat. I looked up some specs on Edmund's, and they show a 1993 5th Avenue as having 42.9" of rear legroom. For the New Yorker, they goofed up and showing the specs for the longer car. But for the Dodge Dynasty, they showed 38.0" of legroom in back.

Looks like the wheelbases were tweaked slightly during the production run, as well. Initially the Dynasty/New Yorker were on a 104.3" wb and the 5th Ave/Imperial on 109.3, but for 1991 they moved to 104.5" and 109.5", respectively. And for 1993, my old car book shows 109.6." So I guess they did some minor suspension tweaks along the way? And maybe that 109.5" was actually 109.55" and they rounded down one year, and up the next?

uplanderguy

RE.: Vega--I remember that when Lordstown was retooled for the Vega, it was touted as the most automated auto-assembly plant in the world. The workforce was fairly militant, and combining that with 100 cars an hour at one point, things didn't go well.

The auto press generally loved the Vega; it was the most-awarded small car from more than just Motor Trend. They liked the styling, many options, four body styles at introduction time, and nearly-totally-flat cornering. I remember the '72 brochure was full of gushing fan mail from owners of '71's, including names and pics.

I could like a '76 GT Kammback in red with the white side striping, roof rack, and white-lettered tires.

A good bit of the '76 brochure is about how the engine and rust problems were gone and how the engine was by-far the longest-warrantied engine in the industry.

I can remember looking at a new '74 Vega at the hometown dealer somewhere mid-way through the model year, at which point GM was replacing fenders on early models. For some reason I reached up inside the one front fender and felt a plastic inner fender. That was done mid-model-year.

I'd also like a Cosworth, which never had the early-Vega woes. Even R&T reviewed it quite positively against European iron, which is certainly not the conventional wisdom.

Although I hate the '76's taillights on the hatchback, I could very, very much like owning this, although don't care for the aftermarket radio :


The small dealer where I bought my Corvette, upon my asking, told me they did not sell Cosworths as the current owner's Dad felt they wouldn't recoup the cost of the tools and training required. My hometown dealer in PA sold exactly one. Price was a huge thing to counter on those cars and most were well-discounted at sale time.

uplanderguy

The Dynasty in the pic that andre showed reminded me of the company I worked for at the time, giving auditors those as Company cars. This was largely after I was out of doing store auditing, so I never got a Company car. The younger guys called them "Die-Nasties", of course because they weren't young-looking. A few had trans issues. At the time, my best-man was a zone service rep for Chrysler in WV and, as a fan of V8 Packards, commented that the Chrysler trans, I think now, was called "Ultradrive", not unlike Packard's troublesome "Ultramatic", which he jokingly referred to as the "Problematic" trans.

Ironically in this conversation, that guy now owns the one Cosworth Vega sold new at our hometown dealer.

ab348

The article I read on the Vega said that Cosworth designed the head for the Cosworth Vega for $250K which GM considered a bargain. The first prototype versions built put out 180HP but a lot of it was very high in the rev range. By the time it was tamed for emissions it was down to less than 120.

It also noted that Bill Mitchell and GM Design based the original concepts for the Vega hatch on the Fiat 124 coupe, which he thought was a good-looking car.

ab348

I had a Dynasty for a week in Florida as a rental back in '91 or so. It was not a fun drive. Soft, floaty, didn't handle, just not good. The styling didn't help. Fit right in at the retirees place Dad and his GF were living in though.

kyfdx

That reminds me.. waiting to turn out onto our local thoroughfare, and a car comes over the rise. Massive supercharger sticking out of the hood (as tall as the roof), and giant drag slicks on the back. VEGA!!

No idea where he was coming from, but about a 1/2 mile later, he turns into the Advance Auto Parts. No way that thing was street legal. Didn't notice if it had plates.

kyfdx

ab348 said:

I had a Dynasty for a week in Florida as a rental back in '91 or so. It was not a fun drive. Soft, floaty, didn't handle, just not good. The styling didn't help. Fit right in at the retirees place Dad and his GF were living in though.

Funny... I had a Dynasty rental in Ft Lauderdale in 1988. I thought it was decent, at that time. Of course, I didn't even own a car with A/C, so I was easily impressed.

andre1969

Back in the early 90's, I test drove three used cars in a fairly close timeframe. One was an '87 Cutlass Supreme sedan with a 307, one was a Dodge Dynasty V6 (can't remember now if it was the 3.0 or 3.3) and the third was a Dodge Monaco (Eagle Premiere clone).

I remember liking the way the Monaco handled, but there was just, for lack of a better word, a "foreign sort of weirdness" about it that I didn't really care for. The Dynasty seemed like a modern car trying to be a more traditional car, but it didn't really do that great of a job at either. Overall I liked the Cutlass Supreme the best. It just had a comfortable sort of GM familiarity about it. So probably the very attributes that would turn off a lot of buyers, to me made it feel like an old family friend. So, I'll confess, it was hardly an unbiased comparison!

I do kind of like those Eagle Premiere/Dodge Monaco models. I've heard they were pretty troublesome though, and would probably be a pain to deal with now, 30+ years later. IIRC, they sort of laid the groundwork for Mopar's LH cars, as they were FWD but had longitudinal engines.

One of my friends, right out of college, bought a brand new Dodge Dynasty. I forget the year now, but it had the 3.3, and that Ultradrive A604 transmission or whatever it was called. He was only in his 20s when he bought it, so I'm sure being that far out of the target demographic threw the salesperson for a loop!

It went through two transmissions. I think the first was around 30-35,000 miles, and replaced under warranty. It failed again, around 86,000 miles, and that time, Chrysler covered half of the cost. After that, he traded on a Nissan Maxima with a stick. I'm thinking it was a 1995, but I'm fuzzy on the details now. That one was a good car, but got rear-ended and totaled, and he replaced it with a "2001.5" Passat.

Michaell

When I was travelling a lot for business between 1989 and 2003, I had a parade of rental cars, most of them utterly forgettable.

However, I do remember getting a Dynasty on one of my trips to Ontario, Canada. As noted above, it was quite floaty.

stickguy

IIRC the Monaco/premier was a Renault underneath? Making the foreignness logical!

Michaell

Yeah, the Renault 25.

The Medallion was based off the 21

uplanderguy

andre, I know what you mean about familiarity in a car. I think ab348 and I discussed this here at some point.

It's easy to get used to things like the appearance of instrument numbering, position of door locks, appearance of interior door panels and armrests, controls, etc. If you're used to a certain manufacturer, anything else seems odd. I felt this way back when I was renting cars almost constantly in the '80's and '90's (rented less after that). Back then, I couldn't wait to get out of low-priced Japanese cars for those reasons and others. I didn't like to be seen in them, or be in them.

When I rented a Malibu a couple weeks back for my 2,000 mile trip instead of the brand-new Highlander they wanted to give me--because it was not set up for satellite radio from the factory (huh?), the Malibu was very easy for me to get used to, so far as light, climate control, and radio controls. Even my wife thinks that the C8 is easy due to switch labelling being typical 'Chevy'.

I'd have picked the Cutlass Supreme 307 out of that group by a landslide, LOL.

A coworker of mine had a Maxima, I'm losing track of the year, but it was the same style as the Infiniti model. He picked me up at my house to drive to our remote location in Harrisburg, PA, about six hours away. Before we left my town, the check engine light started flashing. He had no idea that you don't drive it that way. I told him to leave it at my house and I'd drive. His car did have either 84K or 88K miles so it wasn't new or low-mileage. We took my fairly-recent but low-rent (crank windows) Cobalt out there.

uplanderguy

That pic of the New Yorker andre showed, reminds me that Chrysler did the multi-button, loose-cushion look I think before anyone else did. I know, Cadillac copied that look for it's 'd'Elegance' models. I'm thinking even the Volare-based Fifth Avenues did something like that, although my memory is rusty on that.

uplanderguy

I'm thinking now that my interest in the Cosworth Vega parallels my interest in a '65-66 Corvair Corsa coupe with turbo. Definitely would be outrun by a typical-layout big V8 domestic of the time, but I have to admit to liking the sophistication, for lack of a better word.

I'd have wanted a late Corvair after the Studebakers I owned (low-tech but appealing to me in a rarity way and that I could remember them), but my gut told me they'd have been harder to find a mechanic to work on them than a Stude. I'd been told there was a Corvair guy's shop about 25 miles south of me, but that was twenty years ago and I could see him either being retired, not taking new customers on, or worse.

I had read someplace that most Chevy dealers had only one Corvair guy, as nothing on a Corvair was used on any other model of Chevy.

andre1969

Yeah, the M-body (Volare-based) 5th Avenue had those thick pillow, button-tufted seats, too. The front seat was actually lifted right out of the 1979-81 R-body, although I imagine the back seat was a different shape.

One odd little detail: the back seat of the M-body 5th Avenue did not have a center armrest. However, if you sprung for the optional interior on a Diplomat, which got you nice, but not button-tufted seats, you did get an armrest! I think that trim level was called Diplomat Medallion through 1984, but then for 1985 they called it Special Edition, and gave it a different front-end. It used that same "upside down" front end that the 5th Ave did, with the turn signals above the headlights, but had a crosshair grille instead of the vertical Chrysler grille.

I think you could get that Medallion/Special Edition interior as an option on the Gran Fury, as well, but I can't remember what Plymouth called it. There was a Gran Fury Salon, but at some point I think they called them all "Salon." At least, the '89 Gran Fury ex police car I had said "Salon" on the door panels. It was trimmed a bit nicer than your typical police car, with cloth seats, armrest up front, carpeting on the door panels, and such. But it was hardly what you'd call upscale.

Michaell

When my dad switched over to fire cause investigation from working on the line at the FD, he was issued a Diplomat. He went through two of them over the years - one was a baby blue, and I don’t remember the color of the other one. Vinyl seats, cop-spec. The trunk was full of supplies and such.

fintail

ab348 said:

I had a Dynasty for a week in Florida as a rental back in '91 or so. It was not a fun drive. Soft, floaty, didn't handle, just not good. The styling didn't help. Fit right in at the retirees place Dad and his GF were living in though.

I still remember my first issue of CAR Magazine (UK) was in 1989, and it had a blurb on the Dynasty. The reviewer was not a fan. Not sure if surprisingly, he liked the then-new Lumina, that review sticks in my head 35 years later.

uplanderguy

I wasn't a fan of the Lumina sedan, but I did like that they offered a coupe, something most of the other makers weren't making in a FWD that size.