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

ab348

andre1969 said:

Also, interestingly, the Delta 88 got marked down seriously for build quality/workmanship. They remarked that it was unusual for an Olds, but should still not be happening, as they had been building the car for eight years.

I think that was in part the result of the GM reorg in '84 that created 2 divisions (BOC for Buick, Olds and Cadillac, and CPC for Chev, Pontiac and GM Canada) which caused a lot of problems including in the assembly plants. The B-body Olds was made in the old Olds Main plant in Lansing which was now also asked to make other things alongside it. GM was in a state of turmoil through much of the mid to late '80s.

berri

By 1985 I think Ford was upping its game while GM was cost cutting.

ab348

This is an interesting article from a few years ago about what GM was doing back then. It was a real mess.

http://www.autonews.com/article/20111031/CHEVY100/310319917/why-did-gm-water-down-its-strongest-most-successful-brand?

berri

Interesting article ab. Enjoyed that it really points out that it just isn't bean counters. Marketing and management types are also perfectly capable of screwing things up. Personally, I think one of the things pressuring GM back then was that the competition between divisions ended up with very similar pricing between comparable models. That took away the profitability model and maybe led to the over homogenizing of product. But then Ford/Mercury or Dodge/Chrysler were doing the same thing. Combine that with gov actions like import quotas and tariffs; presto - the doors were opened for Asia to expand their US product segments.

xwesx

berri said:

Interesting article ab. Enjoyed that it really points out that it just isn't bean counters. Marketing and management types are also perfectly capable of screwing things up. Personally, I think one of the things pressuring GM back then was that the competition between divisions ended up with very similar pricing between comparable models. That took away the profitability model and maybe led to the over homogenizing of product. But then Ford/Mercury or Dodge/Chrysler were doing the same thing. Combine that with gov actions like import quotas and tariffs; presto - the doors were opened for Asia to expand their US product segments.

Yes, very true. It was looking for "efficiency" in trial and error. Instead of focusing strengths across the divisions and encouraging image diversification, they just lumped them all together, crossed the boundaries of trim lines, etc., so that the only real difference were the badges. In that, everyone loses because, while you *might* sell the same overall number of cars, you lose the brand identity that creates a loyal customer base. Eventually, when someone wants to go "upscale" or "try something different," they move to a different manufacturer rather than a different division.

explorerx4

Last might taking my wife's MKC to the carwash, a 63 or so Falcon convertible white with a black top.
The reason for going to the carwash was so it would be clean for the paintless dent removal guy.
It got a door ding and she has been miserable about it, so I got it fixed as a mother's day present.
The body shop was about a mile away so I dropped it off and walked back to work.
On the way there I saw a black Alfa convertible for sale, looked nice with a 6k asking price.
It didn't have the added on black ducktail.

fintail

Amusing British take on some 1974 American cars:

https://youtu.be/Rib0jbmeaX0

Mr_Shiftright

They're just jealous. Back then, the British were making their engines out of wood.

ab348

Funny how such luxuries as cruise control and cornering lights were seen as strange foreign affectations back then. Still, '74 was about as bad as domestic cars got, with crude emissions controls and cowcatcher bumpers that made the cars both drive and look about as bad as they ever would.

andre1969

berri said:

Interesting article ab. Enjoyed that it really points out that it just isn't bean counters. Marketing and management types are also perfectly capable of screwing things up. Personally, I think one of the things pressuring GM back then was that the competition between divisions ended up with very similar pricing between comparable models. That took away the profitability model and maybe led to the over homogenizing of product. But then Ford/Mercury or Dodge/Chrysler were doing the same thing. Combine that with gov actions like import quotas and tariffs; presto - the doors were opened for Asia to expand their US product segments.

Oddly enough, GM did comparatively well in the early 80's. There was a couple years in there that Oldsmobile outsold Ford, and one year that even Buick managed to! By 1985, things were starting to get back to "normal", with Chevy being #1, Ford #2, and Olds/Buick/Pontiac being 3/4/5. I think Mercury was #6, but not positive. And also, back then, this was just car production. Trucks (including minivans and utility vehicles...it would still be a few years before the SUV acronym was coined) were always counted separately, and most automotive history books seem to forget about them.

Even in 1985, seven out of top ten selling cars were GM. In no particular order...Cavalier, Celebrity, Caprice/Impala, Cutlass Ciera, Cutlass Supreme, Delta 88, and Century. Ford just had the Escort and Tempo, while the lone import was the Sentra. So, not only did GM have a lot of hot sellers, they were also mostly profitable "bread and butter" cars...mid- and full-sized models, rather than just cheap cars that sold on volume, but brought in little to no profit.

Later in the 80's, when GM tried to make Buick/Olds/Pontiac more distinctive, that seems like it was when the problems really started, sales-wise, and it seemed like a downward spiral that could never be escaped. To be fair, Pontiac started to stumble in the 70's, when it became harder to sell cars based on performance, and by the early 80's, GM actually considered dropping the brand. In 1983, I think Pontiac only sold around 300K units, and was #6, behind Mercury. Just a few years before, they were good for a consistent 700-900K units. But in 1984 when they were reborn as the "performance" division again, sales took off, to something like 700K I believe.

But, by the late 80's, Ford and Mopar were stronger presences. And the imports were constantly improving, and branching into markets they'd never been in before, such as the midsized car market. In 1980, for example, nobody looking for a midsized car would have considered a Japanese import. No matter how good they might have been, quality-wise, a Japanese midsize just didn't exist...at least in the US market. But, by 1990, cars like the Toyota Camry and Honda Accord were pretty much in range of something like a Taurus/Sable, Spirit/Acclaim, or Lumina. And, there's only been more overlap since those days.

Olds was the first to fall, probably because it tried harder to go against the imports, and also tried to shake off its old image with that "Not your Father's Oldsmobile". But, all it served to do was alienate a lot of its faithful buyers, who probably defected to Buick or Mercury, and a good deal of the demographic they were trying to win over either didn't fall for it, or tried it, was disappointed, and moved on.

Pontiac was a victim of the "Great Recession" re-org that also took out Saturn and Hummer, and I guess that's when they sold off SAAB as well, but at the rate they were going, it was only a matter of time before Pontiac folded. They were mostly down to rental car fodder by that time, and all the interesting stuff was low volume.

I have a feeling Buick would be gone as well by now, if it wasn't for their strong presence in the Chinese market.

berri

I think some of the damage from the 80's GM cars was that more than a few owners had too many issues and ended up buying something else down the road. I agree with you on the China influence on Buick, but I also think that GM makes a better profit margin on GMC trucks than Chevy (despite the similarities) and Buick makes a good pairing for GMC dealers since GMC is produced in lower volumes. Dealers matter because many have somewhat long term contracts with GM and also because it gives the GM (or any other manufacturer) more locations to park newly built vehicles.

Mr_Shiftright

Soon To Be Obscure

andre1969

Mr_Shiftright said:

Soon To Be Obscure

It's destined to happen, eventually. However, who was it who once said "the rumors of my demise have been greatly exaggerated"? Panther copcars are still all over the place here in Prince George's County, Maryland. Heck, they even have a few Impalas, still. Even the older, 2000-2005 style. I'd imagine the Crown Vic is mostly gone from highway patrols and state police, but it'll take awhile for them to completely be retired from duty. I'd say give it, maybe the start of the 2021, maybe 2022 model year, and then they'll really become a rarity.

I can remember it took around 11-12 years before the '82-83 Malibu became a rare sight around here. And the Mopar M-body was similar. The '94-96 Caprice also had a good run...in that case some police forces preferred to simply refurbish the old ones, rather than go with a Panther.

I think these days, with the proliferation of Charger Hemis and V-8 Caprices, and even the high-powered V-6 Taurus/Explorer, departments don't really miss the Crown Vic, like they did the Caprice.

uplanderguy

I had good luck with my new early'80's Chevys, but I do think Ford was improving quality and offering better engines in that period, while GM was putting out lackluster engines and quality control seemed to slip. Those were the Roger Smith years, by the way.

I always thought GM had it all over Ford in that period, in the 'first impression' kind of things. But even a friend of mine, whose Dad was all about Cadillac (and Pontiac as a second car), talked his Dad into buying a new '85 LTD (Fox-based) wagon instead of a GM. They had traded in a well-worn '78 Pontiac Grand LeMans Safari. Despite the other stuff, I just could never stand that era of "LTD"--just screamed "Fairmont" to me.

I do think GM's paint quality got worse in the early eighties. I remember 'spider-webbing' on dark colors on the hood in that period.

The last GM cars I liked a lot were the intermediate RWD cars. I always thought the Fairmont and its ilk seemed like big small cars, while GM's seemed like small big cars.

ab348

I recently re-read a book by Maryann Keller that came out in the early '90s called Rude Awakening that looked at GM during the Smith era. It did a good job of outlining a lot of their problems but one of the most telling yardsticks of the result of those problems was their market share. After they introduced the FWD X-cars in '79 their U.S. share was well over 50% and getting a 60% share seemed not out of the realm of possibility. Then the problems with those cars came to light and it started going the other way. Not much else they introduced seemed to appeal to the public and many of those products also had quality issues or seemed out of step with the market. By the end of the decade they were somewhere in the low 30s in terms of percent share as the Japanese really started to assert themselves. The main takeaway I got from her book was that the culture there at the time really kept the huge bureaucracy they had from changing very much and even if someone had a great idea, the committee structure and bureaucracy it had to go through meant nothing good came out the other end and they were always slow to respond. Add to that the internal dysfunction caused by the reorg Smith pushed through and everybody forgot why they were there.

omarman

However, who was it who once said "the rumors of my demise have been greatly exaggerated"?

Mark Twain also said, "Those who don't use the internet are uninformed. Those who do use the internet are misinformed."

He may have been talking about newspapers but I got that quote off the internet.

andre1969

berri said:

I think some of the damage from the 80's GM cars was that more than a few owners had too many issues and ended up buying something else down the road. I agree with you on the China influence on Buick, but I also think that GM makes a better profit margin on GMC trucks than Chevy (despite the similarities) and Buick makes a good pairing for GMC dealers since GMC is produced in lower volumes. Dealers matter because many have somewhat long term contracts with GM and also because it gives the GM (or any other manufacturer) more locations to park newly built vehicles.

Yeah, the quality issues were definitely a thing. I can remember one story, that was published in a car enthusiast magazine (possibly "Pontiac Muscle" or something like that) where they said one of their colleagues had bought three Pontiacs in a row that turned out to be turds. One was an '84 Fiero, and the final one was an '87 Grand Prix, but I can't remember what the other one was. Might have been an N-body Grand Am, or a Firebird. Anyway, the Grand Prix, despite being the oldest design, supposedly tried and true, turned out to be the most troublesome of them all. Her next car, after the Grand Prix, was a Honda Prelude.

So, it's not like she abandoned GM at the first sign of trouble. Heck, she gave them THREE chances in a row, and got burned! She didn't turn them away, they practically gave her no other choice!

As for dealership setups, around here I think they tend to combine Buick, Cadillac, and GMC. So, I guess that works for them. The dealer I bought my used Park Ave from, at the time, sold Buick, Pontiac, GMC, Hummer, SAAB, Saturn, and Cadillac! That must have been a mess, back in the day.

uplanderguy

For me, Chevy's success in the sixties was that they seemed to put their money where you could see and feel it. Interiors that often equalled or even bettered similar lines in the B-O-P lines IMHO. They got away with Powerglides and 283's, because, well....those weren't quite as obvious, LOL.

Obviously, I'm old-skool, but a young fashion-plate guy I used to work with bought a new '82 Prelude. I had never seen a car where the front seat actually touched the back seat, LOL. Plus, the antenna reminded me of a '48 Hudson, and not in a good way, LOL.

Mr_Shiftright

omarman said:

However, who was it who once said "the rumors of my demise have been greatly exaggerated"?

Mark Twain also said, "Those who don't use the internet are uninformed. Those who do use the internet are misinformed."

He may have been talking about newspapers but I got that quote off the internet.

He also said: "Never own anything you have to paint or feed".

explorerx4

So now we know where Jeremy Clarkson got his inspiration.

andre1969

uplanderguy said:

I had good luck with my new early'80's Chevys, but I do think Ford was improving quality and offering better engines in that period, while GM was putting out lackluster engines and quality control seemed to slip. Those were the Roger Smith years, by the way.

I always thought GM had it all over Ford in that period, in the 'first impression' kind of things. But even a friend of mine, whose Dad was all about Cadillac (and Pontiac as a second car), talked his Dad into buying a new '85 LTD (Fox-based) wagon instead of a GM. They had traded in a well-worn '78 Pontiac Grand LeMans Safari. Despite the other stuff, I just could never stand that era of "LTD"--just screamed "Fairmont" to me.

I do think GM's paint quality got worse in the early eighties. I remember 'spider-webbing' on dark colors on the hood in that period.

The last GM cars I liked a lot were the intermediate RWD cars. I always thought the Fairmont and its ilk seemed like big small cars, while GM's seemed like small big cars.

By 1985, that might not have been a bad idea, going with a small LTD wagon, as GM's equivalent wagons by that time were the Celebrity and its siblings. Depending on how long he was going to keep it, that is. That was the era where GM cars were often troublesome in their early years, but would get better with age, like a fine wine. Might be where that old line "GM cars run bad longer than most cars run at all!" comes from Now, if the choice was between say, an '83 Malibu and an '83 LTD, it would be the Malibu, hands down, stationary rear windows and all. The LTD would've been pretty cool if they offered the 302 in it, but other than the limited-production 1984-85 LX Sedan, and police models, they were all either the 2.3 that originally came from the Pinto, or the 3.8 "Essex" that often blew head gaskets around the 90K mark.

I used to joke that those '78-88 GM A/G bodies were so good that it took GM THREE different platforms to replace it! They started with the A-body (Celebrity et al) for 1982. The N-body (Grand Am/Somerset Regal/Calais) were originally supposed to be a second downsizing of the Grand Prix/Regal/Cutlass Supreme coupe, but once the fuel started flowing cheap and plentiful again, and these cars tended to sell well, GM held onto the RWD models, and repositioned the N-body as an import fighter. It wasn't until the GM10/W-body of 1988, that the old RWD intermediates were replaced for good. And even then, Chevy and Olds held onto their Monte Carlo and Cutlass Supreme for about 3 months of the 1988 model year.

uplanderguy

British film: "The Mar-kwiss", LOL.

Yeah, no one in the 'States could find anything to goof on British cars of that period, LOL.

I'll admit to generally not being a fan of enormous cars though.

texases

That's a favorite thing to do - pick the biggest boats and show how big they are. Jeremy's done it, another Spanish auto writer did it a few years ago. Obvious conclusions, of course.

berri

I think taxi's can give you an idea on robust cars. Detroit has always done well with rwd, while Toyota is maybe best at fwd durability wise. For example, I remember at airports like Washington National (Reagan) you'd see a lot of Camry wagons and rwd Caprice and Buick Roadmaster taxi's. At O'Hare it was very Crown Vic taxi's and Lincoln Town cars liveries. Many of these had well over 200K on the odometer. Today I seem to see lots of Camry's and Prius, as well as a few Malibu's and Fusions being driven as taxicabs, while liveries are often things like Tahoe or Expeditions.

stickguy

some of the local PDs near me are still running Crown Vics. I think my daughters BF (local cop) drives a crapped out one. That he hates.

stickguy

a 1977 Beetle. Fuelie. Last year of the standard beetle. sedan. With fewer than 350 miles on it.

On the floor of the VW dealer. Big sign, "not for sale". Might be the last brand new one in existence.

fintail

To be fair, the main complaint is size - I dare say mainstream British cars of that year were of sketchier build quality and reliability than American cars. Something like the Camaro or Markwiss Browhim or Continental was probably reliable enough, and not too slipshod. BL cars on the other hand could be eastern bloc in comparison.

Speaking of Crown Vics, my local PD has some too.

uplanderguy said:

British film: "The Mar-kwiss", LOL.

Yeah, no one in the 'States could find anything to goof on British cars of that period, LOL.

I'll admit to generally not being a fan of enormous cars though.

uplanderguy

I remember the old joke about B-L vehicles was "You ---- on the hubcap and they won't start", LOL.

fintail

BL cars seem to be as divisive for Brits as malaise era GM stuff is for Americans.

Here's another glimpse into that age in Blighty:

https://youtu.be/eAAD4Vp9lZE

One highlight, the car at 8:50, a landmark and always interesting to see reaction to it when it was a new design.

andre1969

Gotta love some of the hypocrisy...re the Rolls at around 2:25 "longer, lower, wider". Wonderful, but when GM does it, it's a mortal sin. As for that other video where they were ragging on the '74 cars, actually it was more level-headed than I thought it would be. And for some reason, it gave me a new appreciation for the '73-78 Markwiss. One thing that was pretty cool, about that model, is that it was the elusive true hardtop, which was only offered in '73-74. For the longest time I didn't even realize they offered a true hardtop, as the much more common sedan had frameless windows and a B-pillar that seemed a bit thin, and recessed, so at a quick glance they almost looked like a hardtop.

ab348

Interesting comments from Sir Michael Edwardes regarding the Mini Metro and how all it could do regardless of how many were sold was to reduce the losses at Longbridge. Also how they were waiting for a decision from govt before the end of the year re their next model. No wonder BL was such a disaster. Then you have TVR, "one of the most successful companies, building about 6 cars a week".

The Honda Quintet is something I never heard of or saw previously. Nor was an onboard computer built by Smiths! OTOH a British anti-theft device designed to cut off the electrical circuits seems a natural - must have been a Lucas subsidiary! I felt bad for poor Jan, one of the hostesses, who was the subject of far too much groping from the male entertainers interviewed. Charming lady though who out up with it with grace, glad that sort of thing is no longer acceptable.

Mr_Shiftright

Oh you mean Pepe Le Pew in the checkerboard sport jacket? Pretty creepy stuff.

uplanderguy

RE.: Hypocrisy--I'm reminded when one of the domestic auto mags goofed on the high-mounted corner taillights of the GM dustbuster vans--only to later compliment Volvo on doing the same thing, LOL.

Mr_Shiftright

Any number of British cars lived off their previous reputations for far, far too long. Once magnificent cars like Jaguar and Rolls and MG and Triumph were just god-awful in the late 1970s. The U.K. should have just stopped making cars in around 1974 and saved some of their earlier glory.

fintail

Those longer lower wider Rolls-Royce Spirit and Spur are a guilty pleasure of mine, but I wouldn't take one for free, so that helps. Corniche cabrio and Camargue are also guilty pleasures, and those have a high depreciation floor keeping me out of the market. Good thing, maybe.

I saw a GMC Syclone and 70s Scout in traffic this morning, both were immaculate. An older woman was driving the scout, which made it seem that much cooler.

More malaise era material from across the pond - maybe things weren't all bad over here?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BFrE4GiSZU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlELPabeWuk


Most of the cars I find desirable would have been insanely expensive. I guess this is one reason there was demand for the lower line MBs at the time, a little stodgy but solid.

In NA at least the emasculated V8s still had torque, and design themes were often pimptastic, but the cars were comfortable.

uplanderguy

I'll concede that the early '70's Datsun 510 was a good-looking car, and available in a four-door wagon which was unique. It looked substantial for a small car; something my eyes didn't see in other early '70's Japanese cars.

Mr_Shiftright

Very collectible today, as well. They even still race them in SCCA.

andre1969

One thing I'm curious about...they mentioned that '74 Mercury would cost 4598 Pounds, while the Eldorado was about 7235, an the Ambassador wagon was "around" 3600, to start. From what digging I could do, it looks like the exchange rate in 1974 was about 1.33 Dollars to the Pound. So that would put the Mercury at around $6100, the Ambassador around $4800, and the Eldorado around $9622. That's actually not a lot more than what those cars cost here in the United States, at the time. Somehow, by the time you factored in shipping costs, the much smaller quantities they sold for in England, and so on, I figured they'd be more.

Still, I guess when you figure that simply owning a car is considered more of a luxury in the UK than it is here in the United States, and was probably even moreso back in the 70's, these things were still considered expensive.

texases

Expensive and BIG. Not suited for their roads at all. 

andre1969

Yeah, there was that...the size, and the fuel economy. One thing I've always wondered though...when you figure they have trucks, buses, and so on in England, and the roads would have to accommodate those, wouldn't a big American car actually be okay to drive? It would just be a pain when it came to park it, most likely. I think I read somewhere that roughly 5 meters was sort of a magical threshold, because the standard garage depth was around 5 meters? I also seem to remember that Chrysler imported 300Ms to the UK, and called it "The Five Meter Car", because that's about the length it was. 196-197", IIRC. However, I don't think they sent Intrepids or Concorde/LHSs over, because they were something like 204" and 209", respectively.

Does the UK tax cars based on displacement, as well? I believe Japan does, and that's one reason why a domestic car, no matter how fuel efficient it might actually be, could still end up being extremely cost-prohibitive to own.

omarman

I found several online sources putting the Dollar-Pound Exchange Rate at $2.34 in '74 which would put the Mercury price over $10K over there. (see what I did there?)

texases

The back roads are REAL narrow. Truck drivers get paid to deal with it. I wouldn’t want to do it for free. 

Mr_Shiftright

Like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxvD21ncogo

andre1969

omarman said:

I found several online sources putting the Dollar-Pound Exchange Rate at $2.34 in '74 which would put the Mercury price over $10K over there. (see what I did there?)

Yeah, I just looked again, and found a range of roughly $2.20-2.40, depending on what point you picked in 1974. I have no idea where I found that $1.33 figure. So yup, at $10K, that Mercury suddenly doesn't look like such a deal. Heck, even that Mustang II, didn't they say that started at around 2600 lb? That would be $6,084, at $2.34 per pound. Back here in the States, that was. For comparison, a Mustang II started at $3134 for the base notchback. And other than the Thunderbird, which started at $7330, there was no other Ford car offered in '74 that started anywhere near $6084. The priciest I could find was the LTD Country Squire 3-seat, which started at $5018. Of course, you could tack several thousand bucks worth of options o them, in those days.

omarman

There was something missing in that Thames lineup of Detroit test cars. No Mopar. And at a time when AMC was known for building smaller more economical cars than the Big 3, they picked a '74 Ambassador 8 passenger station (estate) wagon to test.

Ironically the only test car in their lineup that I wouldn't want is the Mustang II. Seemed to be their "pick" of that Ugly American dog and pony show.

stickguy

I drove a brand new land rover (disco sport) down some roads in Ireland about that big. Could get a bit nerve wracking.

I was amazed at some of the roads the tour driver could whip a bus down though.

fintail

I've always rented larger cars in Europe, where the roads might not be much wider than the UK in many areas. It can be an experience, I've more than once folded in the mirrors while driving in tight areas just to make it easier.

There's a new resident in the garage where I store the fintail, guess what kind of car it is:



Car on the right is the 64 Pontiac convertible that seems to never move.

Also saw a late 70s Ranchero today, looked to be in excellent condition, and actually hauling a lawn debris trailer - working harder than many behemoth modern trucks. Soon after saw a nicely kept final generation El Camino.

An unusual sighting is this pair of old Fords, with For Sale signs in the window (no prices). I assume the one on the right is a 60, and the left maybe around a 55. I've seen the one on the left parked there often over the past few years . These are sitting out in a very nice neighborhood - the charming 20s era cape cod style house they belong to zillows at around 3.5MM.

uplanderguy

The one on the left is a '56, as that is the only year that '53-56 cab had a wraparound windshield. They also had an instrument panel a little similar to '56 Ford cars. '56 Ford pickups and '61-63 Ford unibody pickups are my favorite Ford trucks of all.

fintail

Not something you see every day, and even the 56 with its patchwork panels looked very solid. This is how cars age here.

Are these just both heavy models, or could the one on the left maybe be a 4x4?

andre1969

I have a feeling the '56 is a 4x4. Might be a heavier truck as well, like a 3/4 ton. I think the red one is actually a '59. Probably a one-ton model, judging from the stake bed. Maybe even heavier? Hard to tell from the pic because of the shadow (and my eyesight), but did it have a dually rear axle?

I always thought the '57-60 style of Ford truck had a really modern, ahead-of-its time look about it when it first came out, with that broad, flat hood and more squared-off lines. I guess it must have caused quite a stir too, because Dodge, and to a lesser degree GM, seemed like they tried to square off some, raise the fenders, and flatten the hood.