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

hpmctorque

sda said:

laurasdada said:

hpmctorque said:

Just ahead of me at a stoplight, a silver Cadillac Catera. From the taillights, this was one frmo the last year or two of production. It appeared to be in good shape cosmetically.

Hadn't seen a Catera in weeks or months, but this was the second one within a week. The first one was an older, dark green example, and its body also appeared to be well maintained.

I wonder whether Cateras have some kind of a minor cult status, similar to, maybe, the Aztec, or whether they're just cheap transportation? I imagine they're cheap to buy but rather high maintenance.

My father bought a Catera, loved driving it. Unfortunately, that was a minority of the time as it was wont to zig to the repair shop. Not in his fleet very long.

Exactly. I bought a used 98 Catera in late 99. It had a list price of nearly $39k, all options including rear sunshade, heated front and rear seats, Bose with cd changer, chrome wheels. A sharp car, solidly built, good driving dynamics, but not particularly quick and weak a/c, most un GM like. I had the car less than a year. It was in the shop over 13 times for various maladies, some which made it questionable to drive. I received Cadillac loaners which was kind of fun and all was covered by warranty but I couldn't keep that pace up. Bought with 24000 miles, sold to Car Max at 41000 miles.

If you don't mind disclosing it, what was the difference between what you paid for your Catera and what you sold it for to Carmax? It would be interesting to know what the depreciation was, even allowing for the fact that you buy at retail and sell to dealers at wholesale.

ab348

Saw what appeared to be a nice early 1970s Mercedes 600 here today, not the stretched Pullman but the regular style pictured below, just down the street. Didn't know there was one of these locally.

sda

hpmctorque said:

sda said:

laurasdada said:

hpmctorque said:

Just ahead of me at a stoplight, a silver Cadillac Catera. From the taillights, this was one frmo the last year or two of production. It appeared to be in good shape cosmetically.

Hadn't seen a Catera in weeks or months, but this was the second one within a week. The first one was an older, dark green example, and its body also appeared to be well maintained.

I wonder whether Cateras have some kind of a minor cult status, similar to, maybe, the Aztec, or whether they're just cheap transportation? I imagine they're cheap to buy but rather high maintenance.

My father bought a Catera, loved driving it. Unfortunately, that was a minority of the time as it was wont to zig to the repair shop. Not in his fleet very long.

Exactly. I bought a used 98 Catera in late 99. It had a list price of nearly $39k, all options including rear sunshade, heated front and rear seats, Bose with cd changer, chrome wheels. A sharp car, solidly built, good driving dynamics, but not particularly quick and weak a/c, most un GM like. I had the car less than a year. It was in the shop over 13 times for various maladies, some which made it questionable to drive. I received Cadillac loaners which was kind of fun and all was covered by warranty but I couldn't keep that pace up. Bought with 24000 miles, sold to Car Max at 41000 miles.

If you don't mind disclosing it, what was the difference between what you paid for your Catera and what you sold it for to Carmax? It would be interesting to know what the depreciation was, even allowing for the fact that you buy at retail and sell to dealers at wholesale.

</Everything considered I came out ok. I drove the car for about a year, put 17000 miles on it, I typically drive around 20000/year. If memory serves me correctly I paid $18k for it and sold it for $14k. I was really floored when I bought it that it had already depreciated by 50% in two years. And I bought it at a Cadillac dealer. It had the remainder of the factory warranty which I think was 4yrs/50k. Too bad it was so problematic. I thought it had a really nice and comfortable interior and the car seemed really solid and well built. It wasn't.

fintail

A 600 is a real sighting.

Today I saw a different chrome bumper MGB, and the same mid 80s GM thing I see now and then, a Skyhawk or Calais, I can't remember.

sda

fintail said:

A 600 is a real sighting.

Today I saw a different chrome bumper MGB, and the same mid 80s GM thing I see now and then, a Skyhawk or Calais, I can't remember.

I can't remember the last time I've seen a Skyhawk. I was always partial to the 'T' Type.

imidazol97

fintail

Ah crap, I meant Somerset...and I think it was a Somerset.

hpmctorque

fintail said:

Ah crap, I meant Somerset...and I think it was a Somerset.

The Somerset was a little more upscale and substantial looking than the Skyhawk. I Iiked the latter better.

I owned a '86 Grand Am for many years, which was a clone of the Somerset, as both were on the "N" platform (I believe that was the GM designation). My Pontiac was equipped with the Iron Duke, which was called the "Tech-4", 5-speed manual and the "Handling Suspension" (or whatever that upgrade was called). It was a durable, low maintenance car that handled well, but the engine was very agricultural. It practically ran out of revs like a diesel. Yet, it featured fuel injection at a time when the competing Japanese models still sported problematic carburators.

andre1969

There used to be a Somerset Regal in the area back in the 1990's that I used to see fairly regularly back when I delivered pizzas. However, it was a "real" Somerset...a trim package for the RWD Regal coupe. It was a 2-tone...for some reason I'm thinking blue and beige, but could be wrong. And it had nice rims. IIRC, it was kind of a sporty option package, but without any real performance, sort of what the Calais had been to the RWD Cutlass before it went to the N-body.

I thought those N-body coupes were actually pretty nice looking when they first came out. The Somerset did a good job of trying to emulate a scaled-down Regal, I thought. The Calais and Grand Am were nice looking, as well. I don't think they nailed the scaled-down look of a Cutlass or Grand Prix, but they were still nice looking in their own right.

My Mom wanted to get a Grand Am in 1986, but my Granddad talked her into getting a Monte Carlo instead. He did a lot of work on our cars, and said the Monte would be a lot easier to work on than the Grand Am.

imidazol97

Four door version of GM car of similar size.

hpmctorque

I always thought the 2-doors looked better than the 4-door N bodies.

The old design OHV Tech-4 was to be replaced by the all-new GM Quad-4, if anyone remembers those. It was a modern 2.3, 4-valve/cylinder OHC design that put out excellent power and good fuel economy. The problem is that its durability was similar to that of the Vega engine. The Quad-4's weakest point, but not its sole weakness, I believe, was that it blew head gaskets like crazy. Although I never drove or rode in a car equipped with this engine, I heard that it was noisy and somewhat rough. Both owners and dealers hated them. It's a familiar story about new GM engines of the '70s and 80s, right? Odlly, this is the same company that introduced the very successful short stroke, high compression OHV V8s in its 1949 Oldsmobiles and Cadillacs, and followed up with the trend setting Chevy V8.

I was excited about the Quad-4 because from the press reports it seemed that it was even better than the Honda and Toyota 4s. I was ready to trade my Grand Am for a new N body with that engine, but the negative stories about the engine saved me from a bad experience.

The Quad-4 was reworked and became GM's mainstay 2.4 engine. I believe the 2.4 was unexceptional, but reasonably competitive.

fintail

The one I saw was the style imidazol posted above. A nice enough medium blue, OK condition, I have seen it in the area many times. Something once common is now unusual.

Today saw a 1st gen Bronco that looked like it spent extra time in the 80s, and an older lady in a clean W123, maybe a gasoline model as it was quiet.

ab348

Yes, the 2-door styles looked a lot better than the 4-doors. I don't see any of either around up here any more.

It is like GM forgot how to design engines in the 1970s and 1980s. Maybe that comes from not doing much of it. They lived on their 1950s/60s engine designs for a long, long time. I suspect the engineering capability was not passed along and you saw the results of inexperienced designers. The Quad 4, the HT4100, the Northstar, the Olds Diesel... just a lot of poor engine designs.

imidazol97

fintail said:

The one I saw was the style imidazol posted above. A nice enough medium blue, OK condition, I have seen it in the area many times. Something once common is now unusual.

I see a Somerset in this area occasionally. Often in the area of the post office in the central area of our village type city. It seems to run well and doesn't have a large amount of rust. Paint shows patina of aging.

andre1969

I actually don't mind the 4-door N-bodies. I think they're pretty handsome looking for a small, FWD 4-door. They're also probably what saved the lineup, as well. Initially, the N-body coupes were designed to replace the RWD personal luxury coupes like the Grand Prix, Cutlass Supreme, and Regal. I don't know if there was a Monte Carlo replacement in the works or not. Anyway, they were initially designed in an era where the EPA was breathing down the back of the automakers' necks, and we all thought that gasoline was going to cost $3/gal and be ultra-scarce.

They sort of made sense, as a replacement for those cars, at least in the mindset of the time. After all, GM was in the middle of a second wave of downsizing, which kicked off in 1982 with the Celebrity, Camaro, etc. I guess you could lump the Cavalier in with this wave as well. It was sort of a replacement for the Monza/Sunbird/Starfire/Skyhawk. They weren't much smaller, but were noticeably lighter, and more efficient. And spanned a much wider range, offering sedans, notchback coupes, wagons, hatchback coupes, and eventually, a convertible.

But then, a weird thing happened. Bigger cars continued to sell well despite the recession, high-priced/scarce fuel, etc. GM was selling every Caprice it could build, often at sticker price, while the Celebrity, which was supposed to be sort of a family car of the future (my apologies to the marketing department at Chrysler, who actually used that slogan for the Aspen/Volare), wasn't that popular initially, and was requiring discounts to move them off the lot.

As a result, GM started holding back on discontinuing some of their popular, larger models, and then scurrying to re-brand the replacements as something else. For instance, I'm convinced that for 1982, GM was ready to dump the B-body LeSabre, Delta 88, and Caprice/Impala, and try to rebadge the Century, Cutlass sedan, and Malibu as their replacements...just as Pontiac ended up doing with the the Bonneville G for 1982. But, at the last minute, they held off, as those cars maintained their popularity.

By the time the N-body was launched, GM tried to position them as sporty import fighters, going after the likes of the BMW 3-series. I don't think too many people fell for that, but they were reasonably popular at first. However, when the 4-door versions came out for 1986, their popularity really took off. In fact, for 1986, the Grand Am version became one of the top 10 selling car nameplates in the US. I'm not sure when it ultimately dropped off. When GM redesigned the N-body for 1992, the Buick and Olds versions dropped off fast, but the Grand Am remained a hot seller, right up until towards the end. I'd guess that by 2005 it had lost its luster, but that '99-05 style in general was pretty popular for awhile.

sda

andre1969 said:

I actually don't mind the 4-door N-bodies. I think they're pretty handsome looking for a small, FWD 4-door. They're also probably what saved the lineup, as well. Initially, the N-body coupes were designed to replace the RWD personal luxury coupes like the Grand Prix, Cutlass Supreme, and Regal. I don't know if there was a Monte Carlo replacement in the works or not. Anyway, they were initially designed in an era where the EPA was breathing down the back of the automakers' necks, and we all thought that gasoline was going to cost $3/gal and be ultra-scarce.

They sort of made sense, as a replacement for those cars, at least in the mindset of the time. After all, GM was in the middle of a second wave of downsizing, which kicked off in 1982 with the Celebrity, Camaro, etc. I guess you could lump the Cavalier in with this wave as well. It was sort of a replacement for the Monza/Sunbird/Starfire/Skyhawk. They weren't much smaller, but were noticeably lighter, and more efficient. And spanned a much wider range, offering sedans, notchback coupes, wagons, hatchback coupes, and eventually, a convertible.

But then, a weird thing happened. Bigger cars continued to sell well despite the recession, high-priced/scarce fuel, etc. GM was selling every Caprice it could build, often at sticker price, while the Celebrity, which was supposed to be sort of a family car of the future (my apologies to the marketing department at Chrysler, who actually used that slogan for the Aspen/Volare), wasn't that popular initially, and was requiring discounts to move them off the lot.

As a result, GM started holding back on discontinuing some of their popular, larger models, and then scurrying to re-brand the replacements as something else. For instance, I'm convinced that for 1982, GM was ready to dump the B-body LeSabre, Delta 88, and Caprice/Impala, and try to rebadge the Century, Cutlass sedan, and Malibu as their replacements...just as Pontiac ended up doing with the the Bonneville G for 1982. But, at the last minute, they held off, as those cars maintained their popularity.

By the time the N-body was launched, GM tried to position them as sporty import fighters, going after the likes of the BMW 3-series. I don't think too many people fell for that, but they were reasonably popular at first. However, when the 4-door versions came out for 1986, their popularity really took off. In fact, for 1986, the Grand Am version became one of the top 10 selling car nameplates in the US. I'm not sure when it ultimately dropped off. When GM redesigned the N-body for 1992, the Buick and Olds versions dropped off fast, but the Grand Am remained a hot seller, right up until towards the end. I'd guess that by 2005 it had lost its luster, but that '99-05 style in general was pretty popular for awhile.

Didn't the Somerset become the Skylark and the Calais the Acheiva in 92? I thought the styling on the Grand Am was heavy handed but the Skylark and Acheiva not attractive at all. The Acheiva did have a nice dash board and the GS Skylark was interesting with its two tone exterior. I think that took the focus off the over styled front and back end. Chevy has the Corsica, was it on the N platform too? It was clean looking in comparison and the LTZ version pretty sharp.

andre1969

Yeah, Calais became Achieva for 1992 until it was dropped, and then it was replaced by the Alero. The Somerset Regal name got phased out more quickly, though. IIRC, it was called Somerset Regal only for 1985, and then simply Somerset for 1986-87. The 4-door, which was added for 1986, was called Skylark right from the start, and then the coupe was called Skylark starting in 1988.

I thought the Achieva coupe was a nice looking car, but didn't care for the sedan, with the rear wheel arches that were leveled off, giving it a bit of a skirted look. But in general, I think the Grand Am was handled better than the other two. For 1999 though, I prefer the Alero. I had one as a rental once, in California, a green one with the DOHC 4-cyl. It was a nice car, I thought.

And yeah, the Corsica/Beretta were on the same platform as well. I thought they looked good on the outside, but didn't like the interiors.

I wonder if some of this delayed timing might have been one of the things that ultimately made GM stumble? Once upon a time, if they redesigned a model, then all the divisions that had that model would get the new one, at once. But then here we had GM trickling in the N-body...B-O-P coupes for 1985, sedans for 1986, and then the Chevy version for 1987. Then, the B-O-P versions were redone for 1992, but not the Chevy. Finally, Chevy gets the Malibu for 1997, but then the Olds and Pontiac versions aren't redone until 1999. I can understand the Buick decision to not replace the Skylark, as it did help them to move upscale a bit, and leave the smaller cars to the less prestigious divisions.

GM did that with midsized cars as well, with the GM10/W-body Grand Prix/Cutlass Supreme/Regal coupes debuting for 1999, but then not getting a sedan until 1990, which was when GM finally got around trying to fight the Taurus, with the Lumina. Then, they started trickling in the restyles here as well. New Lumina, with the coupe being called Monte Carlo, for 1995. New Grand Prix and Regal, with the Century joining in, for 1997. And then the Intrigue being late to the party, as a 1998. I think it might have even come in a bit late for a '98 model.

And even lately, GM has still been out of phase with these redesigns. For instance, the Buick LaCrosse first debuted as a 2010 model, but we didn't get the XTS until 2013 and the Impala didn't move to this platform until 2014.

fintail

Funny, I never realized the Corsica/Beretta were on the same platform as the smaller looking cars.

The replacement Skylark had a weird front end and was kind of odd all over, and the Achieva sedan had a weird area between the C-pillar and rear fender, I think. They seemed popular at introduction, but vanished fast, they are pretty rare sightings today.

andre1969

The Achieva sedan's roof makes me think a bit of the 1991-96 Olds Ninety-Eight...almost as if it's a bit too small and tucked-in for the body. Kind of, for lack of a better word, a "turret-top". I think this pic shows it off pretty well...


Most cars had moved the C-pillar out to be more flush with the side of the quarter panel back in the late 1960's, so this move makes the Achieva look a bit old-fashioned to me...sort of like trying to peddle a Valiant/Dart in 1976.

uplanderguy

I liked the Achieva coupe, with that big backlight. I hated the skirted wheel openings of the Ninety-Eight and Achieva sedan. Just cut straight off across the top.

I had a new Corsica and a new Beretta GT, and my parents had a V6 Corsica. The GT was an '89 and all the others were '90's. They were all good cars. My parents' had a column-shift automatic! LOL

Truth be told, I thought the original Corsica looked nicer than the Beretta. I never liked in '91 when they put those cantilevered taillight lenses in.

My Beretta had big tires and nice wheels, and was red (yawn) but was the light beige cloth interior instead of the typical grey. Seats were like corduroy and I liked that. The driver's seat adjusted a bunch more ways than any car I'd had up to that time. I put 75K miles on it and traded it on our new '93 Caprice Classic. At 35 and 28, we were probably the youngest Caprice owners in the area.

I liked the rear of the Beretta, before they started putting small spoilers on them. Even without a spoiler, they had a tiny 'kamm' effect in the back which I liked.

ab348

The Achieva (or as some GM-hating auto journos called it, the "Under-Achieva") was a clean design but that skirted rear wheel-opening look, which GM also tried as an Olds signature of the 98, just didn't work. The Achieva had a fat-hipped look which was improved a lot when they went to the full-radius rear wheel opening. I remember reviewers always criticized the Quad 4 engine it had for it raucous nature. I never had firsthand experience with it so I don't know if the reputation is fair.

The early-'90s Skylark was bizarre, with the beak-nose and a very odd dashboard. A refresh a few years in moderated some of those things. I don't know what GM was thinking. Those were dark years for GM Design.

sda

I agree the skirted look of the rear quarters of the Acheiva made it look portly. I thought the front end with the hood that had the piece that reached down to the bumper and gave that divided grille look gave a retro 69-72 look, and very Oldsmobile. The interior was the nicest of the group. I seem to remember them being more expensive than the should have been.

fintail

Yep, that's the look I was thinking. It kind of has "hips" to me, and not in a good way. Strangely enough, IIRC, the 87-91 Camry suffers from the same odd detail. When I was in school, I knew a girl who had a coupe...I called it the "Underacheiva" too. It was only about a 5 year old car then, and I don't recall her being fond of it. Not the golden age for GM design, indeed. My brother had a 93 Lumina Euro years ago, and even on that relatively normal thing, some things were offbeat.

andre1969 said:

The Achieva sedan's roof makes me think a bit of the 1991-96 Olds Ninety-Eight...almost as if it's a bit too small and tucked-in for the body. Kind of, for lack of a better word, a "turret-top". I think this pic shows it off pretty well...


Most cars had moved the C-pillar out to be more flush with the side of the quarter panel back in the late 1960's, so this move makes the Achieva look a bit old-fashioned to me...sort of like trying to peddle a Valiant/Dart in 1976.

berri

The early-'90s Skylark was bizarre

IIRC that was one of the cars George Castanza drove on Seinfeld. If so, it about says it all don't you think

uplanderguy

I think they went to great effort on the early '90's Skylarks, to make them look like a bird! Same thing Ford did, IMHO, on '61-63 Thunderbirds.

Re.: George on 'Seinfeld'--I remember him saying in one episode that he drove a LeCar in high school, and the kids taunted him with 'Le George'!

His parents had a Granada IIRC in an early episode, but a Seville in a later episode. George's Dad also referred to a "Coupe d'Elegance"! LOL

Jerry always had the Saab convert, and Kramer, the '73 Impala with an airbag dash, which I'd never seen before in real life.

Oh, and of course George also had "John" Voight's LeBaron convert.

hpmctorque

uplanderguy said:

I liked the Achieva coupe, with that big backlight. I hated the skirted wheel openings of the Ninety-Eight and Achieva sedan. Just cut straight off across the top.

I had a new Corsica and a new Beretta GT, and my parents had a V6 Corsica. The GT was an '89 and all the others were '90's. They were all good cars. My parents' had a column-shift automatic! LOL

Truth be told, I thought the original Corsica looked nicer than the Beretta. I never liked in '91 when they put those cantilevered taillight lenses in.

My Beretta had big tires and nice wheels, and was red (yawn) but was the light beige cloth interior instead of the typical grey. Seats were like corduroy and I liked that. The driver's seat adjusted a bunch more ways than any car I'd had up to that time. I put 75K miles on it and traded it on our new '93 Caprice Classic. At 35 and 28, we were probably the youngest Caprice owners in the area.

I liked the rear of the Beretta, before they started putting small spoilers on them. Even without a spoiler, they had a tiny 'kamm' effect in the back which I liked.

I also likes the styling of the Achieva coupe. To me it was kind of a sleeper, on a positive way. I rented the sedans a couple of times for work, and drove them a total of several hundred miles. They were probably the 4-cylinders, but I can't remember. I do recall that the noise, vibration and harshness problems of the Quad-4 had been corrected. Overall they drove, rode and performed well, in my opinion.

I also rented a Corsica V6 with the 4-speed automatic (I think the earlier Corsica and Berettas used 3-speed units), and it performed well too, although I preferred the Achieva. Maybe it was because the Acheiva felt a little more substantial than the Corsica.

I thought the Beretta was nicely styled, but, like you, I preferred the rear deck without the spoiler.

andre1969

There's a local car show in Rockville Maryland that I used to go to. One year a '73 Impala showed up there with an airbag dash. Not the best picture quality, but here it is...

Here's an exterior shot...normally I like green, but not too crazy about this particular hue...



I never watched Seinfeld much, but I do remember the "John Voight" LeBaron! I think we probably perpetuate it too because whenever we see one at a car show, someone will usually say "Look, it's John Voight's LeBaron!" And, believe it or not, they pop up more often at car shows and swap meets than you might think...

Didn't one of the characters drive an M-body Diplomat/Gran Fury? For some reason I remember a big guy driving one...Neuman or something like that?

stickguy

George also had a Contour at one point (it featured prominantly in an episode when he worked for the Yankees).

Funny on that Chevy. My friend had a similar vintage Caprice back when we were in HS. One day, on the triboro bridge, some fool in a Monte Carlo (later 70s "downsized"version) was weaving in and out, and lost control and spun in front of us. T boned him just behind the door. Monte looked like a crab after that when he took off. Caprice, we barely felt the bump, and the damage consisted of a cracked grill spoke. What a tank. Probably not the car of the era that needed an airbag the most.

ab348

Re. that airbag '73 Chevy - that's an Oldsmobile dash, isn't it?

ab348

uplanderguy said:

Truth be told, I thought the original Corsica looked nicer than the Beretta. I never liked in '91 when they put those cantilevered taillight lenses in.

I'm having a difficult time recalling this and Google doesn't seem to be much help. Can you enlighten?

andre1969

I've always wondered if Chrysler designed their big '74-78 C-bodies with airbags in mind? They had moved the glovebox to the center of the dash, and on the passenger side the dash was pretty upright and prominent.


I think GM actually put some effort into those big '71-76 cars, with regards to safety. They were big and sturdy, but at the same time, they were starting to design crumple zones into them. Not as advanced as today's cars, but you have to start somewhere.

explorerx4

Nice descriptive plate on that green Chevy.

uplanderguy

That looks like a Delta 88 dash to me too in that Chevy, for the most part. I think I remember Kramer's car having more of the '75-76 big Olds dash look, but it might have been a mongrel.

Here's an early Corsica taillight, in the not-often-seen hatch (neither Dad nor I had the hatch):

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/89/Corsica_Liftback.jpg

Here's a later Corsica with those taillights I don't like like I do the smooth ones:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2f/Corsica_1994-96.jpg

BTW, I always liked that era Dodge instrument panel, andre. I remember them advertising that a lot of customer research went into the design of those cars, and I always thought the center glovebox might have been one result. But with the sweeping windshield with A pillars completely 'chromed', the peaked front fenders, and the shape of the four-door rear doors and windows, they cribbed the '71 and later big Chevy look. That padded part of the instrument panel does look like it could hold an airbag.

andre1969

Yeah, those big Mopar C-bodies definitely have a GM-derived look about them. I think the Chrysler Newport/New Yorker stand well on their own as a fairly unique looking car, but the Monaco/Fury have a strong GM resemblance. The Monaco especially, as it has a Buick-like swoopy crease on the side, and the front-end of the '74-75 models, at least, looks like a '71-72 LeSabre to me. I think the later hidden-headlight models carry their own identity pretty well, though. I think the 4-doors, especially the hardtop sedans, have a GM B-body look to them, while the hardtop coupes have sort of a GM C-body roofline.

They're handsome cars, IMO, but they were released at just the wrong time...right as the economy was going into a recession and the fuel was getting scarce. The Mopars had a heavy, hulking look about them, whereas the GM cars had a comparatively lightweight look to them...if you could ever think of something that size as "lightweight!" Another problem, I think, is that the Dodge and Plymouth just looked too much alike. Nobody back then was going to confuse a Catalina with an Impala, for example, but the Fury/Monaco just seemed too similar. Again, putting hidden headlights on the Royal Monaco models did help distinguish them, but I wasn't so crazy about what the Gran Fury did, with a somewhat tall grille, and single headlights with vertical turn signals.

fintail

Yep, Newman had a Diplomat I think.

Jerry had at a couple of BMW E34 5ers along with Saabs. George had what I think was actually a Mercury Mystique (probably kind of obscure now) along with a couple Buicks - the Skylark and a 91-96 style Regal sedan, I think, along with the LeBaron (he was shopping for a Volvo when he bought it). Kramer also had a Fox body LTD along with the airbag Impala. I don't recall Elaine having a car. The Costanzas had the Monarch or Granada that got destroyed, and I remember a Cadillac reference too, but not sure what model. I only remember Jerry's parents with the big Fleetwood that he gave his dad.

andre1969 said:

I never watched Seinfeld much, but I do remember the "John Voight" LeBaron! I think we probably perpetuate it too because whenever we see one at a car show, someone will usually say "Look, it's John Voight's LeBaron!" And, believe it or not, they pop up more often at car shows and swap meets than you might think...

Didn't one of the characters drive an M-body Diplomat/Gran Fury? For some reason I remember a big guy driving one...Neuman or something like that?

berri

I'm thinking that in the early 90's Olds had those Cutlass 4 doors with some styling cues from the old 59/60 flat top roofline?

sda

ab348 said:

Re. that airbag '73 Chevy - that's an Oldsmobile dash, isn't it?

My thought as well, looks like the 88-98 dash from 71-73. I suspect they had to do some modification, reinforcement to incorporate the air bag and didn't want to go to the expense of doing the same with the Chevy dash.

andre1969

I just found this website, which seems pretty comprehensive on info about the GM airbag cars. http://automotivemileposts.com/cadillac/cadi1974acrs.html

Looks like for 1973, it was only offered in experimental fleet models of the Caprice/Impala. Then for 1974-76 it was offered in Cadillacs, the Olds Delta/98/Toronado, and the Buick Electra/Riviera. But oddly, not the LeSabre. It also seems that Pontiac never got a version.

According to the website, they actually sold about 10,000 units. Much less than they hoped for, but still a lot more than I would have anticipated.

fintail

One of these?



Kind of an unusual style, like the coupe, which seemed really modern to my young eyes when it was introduced.

More odd early 90s GM styling:

berri said:

I'm thinking that in the early 90's Olds had those Cutlass 4 doors with some styling cues from the old 59/60 flat top roofline?

ab348

When that Cutlass style appeared, I thought it looked like a Saturn, at least in the roof/greenhouse.

That Olds 98 looked odd but I gather they were nice cars. I remember a story about them when introduced that said the GM people were comparing it to the Audi 5000. Uh, no.

sda

andre1969 said:

Yeah, those big Mopar C-bodies definitely have a GM-derived look about them. I think the Chrysler Newport/New Yorker stand well on their own as a fairly unique looking car, but the Monaco/Fury have a strong GM resemblance. The Monaco especially, as it has a Buick-like swoopy crease on the side, and the front-end of the '74-75 models, at least, looks like a '71-72 LeSabre to me. I think the later hidden-headlight models carry their own identity pretty well, though. I think the 4-doors, especially the hardtop sedans, have a GM B-body look to them, while the hardtop coupes have sort of a GM C-body roofline.

They're handsome cars, IMO, but they were released at just the wrong time...right as the economy was going into a recession and the fuel was getting scarce. The Mopars had a heavy, hulking look about them, whereas the GM cars had a comparatively lightweight look to them...if you could ever think of something that size as "lightweight!" Another problem, I think, is that the Dodge and Plymouth just looked too much alike. Nobody back then was going to confuse a Catalina with an Impala, for example, but the Fury/Monaco just seemed too similar. Again, putting hidden headlights on the Royal Monaco models did help distinguish them, but I wasn't so crazy about what the Gran Fury did, with a somewhat tall grille, and single headlights with vertical turn signals.

I've always was partial to hidden headlights and enjoyed watching the headlight doors open and close. Some made quite a racket when doing so. I remember when the 67 Grand Prix came out. It had GTO slat like tail lights that were practically hidden, hidden head lamps and hidden wipers. As a boy of 8 I thought the future had arrived. I like sequential turn signals, speedometers that change color (59-62 Olds) and cornering lamps!

hpmctorque

That generation of Olds 98 ('91-??) did indeed look somewhat odd, but they were good solid cars; incomparably better in terms of reliability, duarbility and cost of ownership than the Audi 5000.

berri

One of these?

Yep, that's it. Had kids at the time and thought about buying one, but then the horrors of my previous Ciera held me back and I bought a big old V8 Mercury wagon instead. I actually liked that land yacht and had pretty good luck with it. I called it my "Stretch 8" as in the old, long and narrow stretched versions of the DC8.

jpp75

berri said:

One of these?

Yep, that's it. Had kids at the time and thought about buying one, but then the horrors of my previous Ciera held me back and I bought a big old V8 Mercury wagon instead. I actually liked that land yacht and had pretty good luck with it. I called it my "Stretch 8" as in the old, long and narrow stretched versions of the DC8.

What year was your wagon? We had a 1985 Colony Park when I was growing up, it was a troublesome thing but nowhere near the nightmare that was the 1988 Lincoln Continental that replaced it.

andre1969

ab348 said:

When that Cutlass style appeared, I thought it looked like a Saturn, at least in the roof/greenhouse.

That Olds 98 looked odd but I gather they were nice cars. I remember a story about them when introduced that said the GM people were comparing it to the Audi 5000. Uh, no.

I dunno about the Olds comparisons, but the 1991 Park Avenue was getting compared to Jaguar! I even remember an issue of C&D or MT that had the Park Ave on the front and the headline was "America Fights Back! With a Buick?!"

By the time 1990 rolled around, sales of the C-body Buick and Oldsmobiles had cooled off. Buick sold about 48,000 Electras, with the vast majority of them being the Park Avenue trim level. The Ninety-Eight was a bit more popular, with about 62,000 sold. When they were redesigned for 1991, Buick renamed the whole lineup Park Ave, and sales jumped to around 109,000. The Ninety-Eight actually regressed though, with only around 54,000 being sold.

By 1996, the last year for this style, the Park Ave was down to about 46,000 units, but the Ninety-Eight was down to around 15,000! The Park Ave was treated to a redesign for 1997 and made it through 2005, but the Ninety-Eight was dropped. It was tokenly replaced by a Regency trim level, which was an Olds 88 with a Ninety-Eight grille.

I think the '91-96 Ninety-Eight looks nice from some angles, but odd from others. And from some shots, it looks a bit diminutive, which may have hurt sales a bit. In contrast, the Park Ave looked like a bigger, more prestigious car to me, even though they were both about the same size. I think it looks fairly nice in the shot above. From that angle, it looks like it has a nice, long rear deck.

I thought the '92-99 Olds 88 was a nice car, too. It seemed a bit less stuffy than the LeSabre, but more tasteful than the Bonneville.

kyfdx

It's not hard to see why Oldsmobile got the ax, after looking at those pictures from the '90s..

ab348

andre1969 said:

By the time 1990 rolled around, sales of the C-body Buick and Oldsmobiles had cooled off. Buick sold about 48,000 Electras, with the vast majority of them being the Park Avenue trim level. The Ninety-Eight was a bit more popular, with about 62,000 sold.

Those original FWD C-bodies were nice cars, but their reputation took a big hit with all the transmission problems the first few model years had to endure. I don't think they ever recovered from that.

andre1969 said:

When they were redesigned for 1991, Buick renamed the whole lineup Park Ave, and sales jumped to around 109,000. The Ninety-Eight actually regressed though, with only around 54,000 being sold.

By 1996, the last year for this style, the Park Ave was down to about 46,000 units, but the Ninety-Eight was down to around 15,000! The Park Ave was treated to a redesign for 1997 and made it through 2005, but the Ninety-Eight was dropped. It was tokenly replaced by a Regency trim level, which was an Olds 88 with a Ninety-Eight grille.

The Olds styling really hurt sales. Plus, Olds was trying to reposition itself as an alternative to the premium imports, which in retrospect was foolish. Longtime Olds buyers probably would have been happy if they just kept the RWD platform around with a re-skin, while import buyers didn't take Olds to be a legitimate competitor. No wonder sales fell through the floor.

andre1969 said:

I thought the '92-99 Olds 88 was a nice car, too. It seemed a bit less stuffy than the LeSabre, but more tasteful than the Bonneville.

Those were very nice cars. I remember at the Olds Centennial in Lansing in 1997 sitting in each of their then-current models and thinking that the 88 was by far the nicest inside, both in terms of materials but especially in design. A friend later bought one and it was an excellent car.

uplanderguy

I haven't thought about that era Eighty-Eight in a long time. I think (seriously) they were shaped 'sportier' than the LeSabre.

My friend the Studebaker dealer in my hometown bought a relatively low-mileage (although I can't remember what) used '86 Ninety-Eight Regency in a champagne color with matching cloth interior. I thought it was a very, very nice car...one of the few times I preferred the Olds version of something to the Buick. But alas maybe eight or nine years ago, it needed major trans work and he ended up selling it to the trans shop, unrepaired.

Remember, I think Olds positioned the Aurora where the Ninety-Eight had been in the lineup. I still like the styling of the first Auroras, much-better than the second-gen.

berri

jpp - sounds like we had the same car. Ours was a blue 85 Colony Park LS with the fake wood, chrome and coach lights It was a pretty good car for us other than a muffler until around the 80K mark, which I think wasn't unusual in those days. In those days domestic quality was spotty, as shown by our entirely different experiences with the same vehicle and cars still weren't really geared to 100K lifespans. We got a great deal because those big wagons had gone out of favor for minivans. That Merc had a great highway ride to it.

Regarding Olds - I hated to see it deteriorate from the great and innovative model it used to be. John Rock gave it a valiant try, but Roger Smith's approach to his car lines had pretty much ruined it. Then the imports were growing based on the two line up approach; basic and upscale brand, like Toyota and Lexus. All of this was probably the kiss od death for D3 mid level vehicles. I think Buick only survived because it was important to GM's China entry and growth.

hpmctorque

uplanderguy said:

I haven't thought about that era Eighty-Eight in a long time. I think (seriously) they were shaped 'sportier' than the LeSabre.

My friend the Studebaker dealer in my hometown bought a relatively low-mileage (although I can't remember what) used '86 Ninety-Eight Regency in a champagne color with matching cloth interior. I thought it was a very, very nice car...one of the few times I preferred the Olds version of something to the Buick. But alas maybe eight or nine years ago, it needed major trans work and he ended up selling it to the trans shop, unrepaired.

Remember, I think Olds positioned the Aurora where the Ninety-Eight had been in the lineup. I still like the styling of the first Auroras, much-better than the second-gen.

I bought a well maintained '85 Ninety-Eight Regency with 32,000 miles on it in 1988, with exactly the same color and interior as you described. It was a good, comfortable, competent car for its day, but the then-new 4-speed automatic was the major weak spot. I thought I was home free because the original one was replaced under warranty at ~26,000 miles by the first owner. Also, I'm easy on transmissions and I follow the recommended fluid change schedule. The second tranny went out at 87,000 miles, and the third at 156,000. By that time the car also had other needs, so I managed to nurse it to the junk yard under its own power.