Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today! (Archived)
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
At least the Volvo would be good for the officers. Great seats! and a huge trunk. and built like a tank.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
None of my issues were MT though. Just C&D and R&T.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
I have a Mopar police car book that covers the years 1979-present (well, 2002, anyway), and they published some stats of a 1979 Volare and a 1979 Malibu. It wasn't the Michigan State Police, which is considered the gospel of these tests, though. It might have been the CHP, or even a buff rag like Road and Track. I remember the Volare did 0-60 in 8.7 seconds, compared to 8.9 for the Malibu. But in 0-100, the Volare pulled away, hitting it in 22.7 seconds, where the Malibu was more like 28-29 seconds.
Just for comparison, here's an article on the 2010 police cars, and it shows performance stats: http://www.allpar.com/squads/police-cars/MSP-cars-2010.html
The last big block police car, IIRC, was the 1978 Fury/Monaco, which sported a 440 that might have had around 250 hp. My police car book mentions it doing 0-60 in 9.2 seconds, and topping out around 132 mph. That Allpar site above mentions it, and also says that the car would do 0-100 in 24.8 seconds, which was 12 seconds faster than anything else submitted that year! I wonder how accurate that is, though? I remember a 1978 Catalina with a 400 being in that test, and it managed to hit 0-60 in 9.9 seconds. Kinda sad to think that it would then take another 26+ seconds to make it to 100! But then, some cars in the late 1970's and 80's couldn't even make it to 100 at all.
For 1979, the quickest police car the MSP tested was a Dodge St. Regis, with a 195 hp 360-4bbl. 0-60 in 10.1 seconds, although I forget how long it took to get to 100. I think it topped out around 125 mph. It went downhill fast after that though, and it took a long time for police cars to recover. It wasn't until 1989 that performance got back to 1979 standards, when a Caprice with a TBI 350 posted numbers similar to the St. Regis. I don't think it was until the LT-1 came out for 1994 that they were finally able to top the 1978 Monaco and Fury.
In most cases do patrol cars really need to be that fast? Most of the time, people pull over when they realize they have been snagged. You also really can't outrun the radio and if they want to catch you they will.
Today a V6 CamCordIma will outrun most if not all current patrol cars (Vics, V6 Chargers, Impalas, and any SUV they seem to be using).
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic
It might, depending on which Nova. I found a 0-60 time of 10.0 seconds for a 1974 Nova with a 350, but don't know which 350 it had. In 1974 there was a 350-2bbl with 145 hp, a basic 4-bbl with 160 hp, and a hotter 4-bbl with 185. For comparison, the 1973 350 was listed at 9.7, and the 1975 was 10.8. Data is here, and I'm sure as the old saying goes, it tastes better with salt: http://www.albeedigital.com/supercoupe/articles/0-60_Quarter_Mile_Times/C_0-60ti- mes.html
Considering how choked down those engines were, and even though that was net hp by this time, a lot of it still didn't make it to the pavement, I'd imagine that 10.0 second 0-60 time was for the "hot" 185 hp setup.
Those Novas did make good police cars for the time, though. Most police department still preferred full-sized cars, but the Nova was the first smaller package that was successful. Mopar offered a police-spec Dart/Valiant with the 360, but it didn't catch on. For some reason, in civilian cars, a Mopar 360 would usually mop the floor with a Chevy 350, when it came to police cars, the Nova did better all around.
When the Volare/Aspen replaced the Valiant/Dart, the Nova still tended to win out, in police packages. Oddly, the best thing to happen for Mopar was 1979, when Chevy switched its "small" police package from the Nova to the Malibu. You'd think the Malibu would have done better, since it was lighter and more modern, but for some reason, it didn't, and the Volare would blow it away, at least until the torsion bars cracked, the sub-frame started to rust, and the Lean Burn shorted out. :P
Was there a difference in rear end ratio between the two engine variations? That subtle change can affect the times. I recall shopping for 2003 leSabre and figuring out the Touring model had a higher gear ratio, therefore it would feel peppier. Not all 3800s were created equally.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
There might have been, but I don't know for sure. I found those horsepower ratings in this 1974 Nova Brochure at TOCMP.com The brochure does mention that there was still a Nova SS option that year. I wonder if that 185 hp 350 was only offered in it?
And yeah, axle ratios can make a huge difference. In 1976, most of GM's V-8 cars went from a 2.56:1 axle to a 2.41:1, and that's what my '76 LeMans has. It has a 350-4bbl, which according to the Consumer Guide books has 165 hp, but according to the big old blue Motor's Repair Manuals that came from my Granddad's garage, it was 175. I guess they'd tend to be more accurate than Consumer Guide, although Consumer Guide has prettier pictures. :P
Anyway, for 175 hp, it feels like kind of a dog from 0-60, although at higher speeds, it seems to open up. My '67 Catalina has a 2.56:1 axle, and seems to do pretty well with it, but then its 400-4bbl puts out a lot more power than the 350. But even it ain't so hot at higher speeds. It's good from, say, 0-60, but highway passing doesn't seem so hot. But then, above 80 or so, it seems to catch its second wind...but I'm not as willing to take it up to those higher speeds as I was back in my 20's! :surprise:
I think the 350/160 hp for '74 was the california LM1 engine and the 5th digit of the VIN should be an "L." A 5th digit of "K" would be the L-48 advertised at 185 hp. Just for reference they still show up on ebay. Not bad cars for '74 and a lot better for police duty than a Volvo. But stranger things have happened.
That could be. The brochure was a little vague; the only thing it really specified was that the 350-2bbl was not offered in CA, but it didn't say anything about the others being offered as CA-only engines.
For 1975, the Nova's engine choices were the 250-6 with 105 hp, a new 262-2bbl V-8 with 110 hp, the 145 hp 350-2bbl (again not offered in California), and a 350-4bbl that was choked back a bit to 155 hp. No high-output 350 is mentioned in the brochure, although the 4-bbl gave you a 3.08:1 axle ratio standard. All the others came with a 2.73:1 axle standard, and a 2.56:1 optional.
Here's the 1975 Nova brochure. I always thought the '75 Nova was a really handsome car when it came out, although in later years I wasn't so crazy about the rectangular headlights and fussier grilles.
Nice job matching the fonts.
Back seat leg room was tight in the Novas, compared with Fairmonts and Mopars, and the back seat cushion was short.
the LM1 is denoted in the 1974 brochure as: 350-4 V8* (3) 160 SAE net hp
the footnote legend is: (3) Available only when California Emission equipment is ordered.
RE: LaConner + Le Car + Le Font
Haha! Sounds like my kind of town. And the font matching is a bit suspicious, no? Looks like an art director had his way with that pic. After getting the desired shot...now stick on the big POLICE shield decals!
I don't recall what year this was for certain, but am pretty sure it was a '77 or '78. It was really bare-bones: I remember it had a plain bench seat with what I think was plaid upholstery, and I clearly remember the absence of armrests on the front doors. That, I think, was enough to sour me on the car, as I was driving dad's '79 Impala or my Lemans at the time, and this thing was a penalty box by comparison.
It moved out nicely of course, but I remember being a bit disappointed in the power, it seeming to be less than the magazines promised. It handled nicely and drove decently, but I couldn't give the keys back to my buddy fast enough. It was just too spartan.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Novas and their cousins were a bit tight on legroom up front, too. I've sat in a few, and I don't think I'd be able to drive one comfortably for any length of time. The Dart/Valiant and Aspen/Volare were definitely better in that regard. I really can't remember how the Fairmont felt inside now...I just remember it had a HUGE transmission hump that seemed to cram the footwell area. My grandparents used to own an '85 LTD, which was practically the same thing as a Fairmont, and I drove it a few times, but that was back when I was a teenager. It seemed okay at the time, but definitely felt smaller inside than the 1980 Malibu coupe I ended up getting as my first car.
Even though the Nova was restyled for 1975 and looked thoroughly modern, it still dated to 1968, and as the 1970's wore on and people became more concerned about space efficiency, I think it started to show its age. The Dart and Valiant had always been roomier inside. In fact, I remember one consumer magazine, around 1967-68, saying that the Dart was really a midsized car being advertised as a compact! And when the Volare and Aspen came out, the 4-door and wagon were really roomy for the time...really more of a midsize than a compact. Chrysler probably could have called these things Fury and Monaco, and passed them off as truly downsized midsized cars, and beat GM to the market by two years! The coupes were horribly cramped in the back seat, though. And when the GM cars came out, they were more space-efficient, and the coupes were downright roomy inside. In sedans and wagons, the interior room wasn't all that different...GM cars had more shoulder room, while the Mopars had more headroom, and legroom was close. But, a Malibu sedan came in around 192.7", while a Volare sedan was more like 200-202. I think the Nova was around 198-200", and the Fairmont was around 195-196"
I actually kinda like them. In fact, on the day I bought my Intrepid, I was planning on going to a used car lot that had a black 1995 for something like $9995. But, instead, I took my uncle to his dealer to pick up his truck from servicing, and we happened to look at the new cars, and before I knew it, I was signingon the dotted line for that Intrepid.
My main beef with the Riviera is that it seemed small inside. I mean, it was big enough, but I was just expecting something bigger, I guess. It felt slightly smaller inside than the 1980 Malibu coupe I once owned. I also wasn't that crazy about the dash...just too plain.
Another GM car from that era I love the styling of is the 1995-99, first-gen Aurora. Alas, I hear they're not all that reliable, and that 4.0 northstar is expensive when it breaks.
An older friend who was a salesman at our local Chevy dealer said back then that he hated the '75 Nova brochure...looked like the front cover was ripped off of it! (In other words, the cover page had a lot of written info on it).
I, too, thought the '75 Nova was a huge improvement over the '74 (we had a '73 Nova coupe at the time). The Custom had a very nice interior and the LN's were downright gorgeous--although they were rarely seen when new, yet several years later. The four-door's roofline was very BMW-like IMO. I'm not as fond now, on the coupes, of the big vent between the side door glass and rear quarter glass as I was then, although I like the large quarter windows. I hated the "Cabriolet" package which got you a padded half-vinyl top and smaller quarter windows.
In a high-school speech class, I spoke about how a Nova was such a better buy than a Chevelle...only one inch less wheelbase in the coupe and actually slightly better rear-seat legroom in the Nova coupe (33.4 Nova; 32.9 Chevelle). They were much-less expensive too, but the Nova felt like a big small car while the Chevelle felt like a smaller big car.
That generation of Dart/Valiant dated back to 1967, while the Nova dated to 1968. I'm always a bit confused on how old the Granada really is...I know it's based on the Maverick, which dates to the 1970 model year, but then I've heard that the Maverick is based on the Falcon, although I'm not sure how heavily. From 1966-70, the Falcon was essentially a shortened Fairlane/Comet, a midsize. The Maverick seems too much of a lightweight to have much in common with those.
I think GM did a really good job updating the Nova for 1975. It looked really modern. The Dart/Valiant looked downright ancient in comparison. But personally, I find the Dart/Valiant to be a lot more comfortable and roomy. And I like the fact that the Mopars still offered a true hardtop coupe with roll-down rear windows right up through 1976. The last Nova hardtop was way back in 1967, although the 1968-74 2-door post did have windows that rolled down about 3/4 of the way. For 1975-79, I think they were either stationary, or at best, flipped out.
Yeah, I remember seeing that, that the Nova coupe had a bit more legroom in back than the Chevelle. I think the A-bodies had a bit more legroom up front though, although I find them both to be a bit tight. Years ago, I found a base '76 LeMans coupe for sale near me, and I went to check it out. It definitely had less front seat legroom than my '68 Dart, although the seat was a bit better padded, and the steering wheel was in a better location. I'm thankful the '76 LeMans I ended up getting has a power seat though. It's almost TOO roomy. The seat can adjust back so far that I can barely reach the pedals. I can't say that of too many other cars.
That red car is a fairly rare "transitional" car from around 1970 - older style body but with Superfast wheels.
There was a King Size Cougar and Mercury wagon, but I don't recall a sedan...mind you, these toys were made before I was born, but I've had a thing for old Matchbox for many years.
I also remember buying back then a magazine called something like "economy car" (small car digest maybe, or was that another one?). Anyway, the tests seemed to focus on MPG more than anything else.
I remember they had a test on a Benz Coupe, calling it an economy option for commuting.
I used to read anything in those (HS and middle school) days. including Pick-up, van and 4WD magazine (4WD is what they called trucks before they invented SUVs!) Also where I learned who Dick Cepek was when I was about 12.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
I can remember my kids electric car in my childhood. That was really fantastic. I always would play with it. I wish I could go back to childhood by a time macien.
LOL
Thanks
RE: lack of armrests for the front doors.
That's unusual but maybe there was some sort of delete option checked with the 9C1 package to remove them. Just guessing though. Here's a link to a '77 Nova 9C1 which includes a scan of the window sticker. This one looks loaded with options but there's no armrests for the back seat doors. Ha! It's that rear passenger comfort thing again Shifty. :shades:
Yeah, Barney and Andy worked great together as a team, and the show was just never the same without Don Knotts. Even when I was a little kid, Warren would annoy me. I used to hate when he'd do that repetitive "HUH? yeah! HUH? yeah! HUH? yeah!" thing when he'd try to get an answer out of somebody.
Turns out Warren annoyed everybody, they dumped him after 11 episodes. And Knotts left through a misunderstanding - Griffith originally told him they'd only do 5 seasons, so Knotts signed up with a movie studio, by the time Griffith changed his mind to do more it was too late...
Or, who knows? Maybe it was even Don Knott's personal car? Sometimes the actors will do that. There was an episode of "Mama's Family" where Betty White drove her own personal car, a 1977 Seville that was such a pale green it almost looked white in certain lights.
I seem to remember that that Edsel had a piece of trim missing on the one fender. I remember Barney telling "Ange" it was a '60, but don't remember much more than that.
That was the original concept for the series; that Andy was a hick. Andy Griffith soon realized that it would work much better if he played straight man to Don Knotts' Barney, and the Andy that we saw for the rest of the series was the result.
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
But when they went to the color episodes, he changed again, like he was just getting annoyed with the other cast members, and he seemed more cranky and irritable, sorta like a young Matlock with a bad case of hemorrhoids.
When they went to the Mayberry RFD format, with Ken Berry moving in and Andy Griffith moving out, was the show any good? I know it was popular, and only canceled because CBS decided to do their "rural purge". I vaguely remember seeing it as a kid, but really don't remember it. Other than I think Vinton -er, I mean, Sam, drove a Dodge pickup?