That Chevy truck would be worth pouncing on. These old haulers are only going to go up and up. You should check it out!
The 50s Bentley is a money-sucking Blivet of a car and a right-hander to boot, albeit somewhat charming in its own dowager sort of way. It needs to go back to the UK, where they are champs at rust repair and where spare used parts still abound. I helped a friend rebuild a Bentley engine of that era and it was frighteningly difficult. Parts sourcing alone took months and the crankshaft overhaul was a nightmare to behold. No thanks on that one. Buy one already done for $20K.
Most people in 1983, including auto writers, didn't have 32 years of the future to look ahead to.
Seriously, I'm sure some of it was price and dealer availability, but most all the mags said positive things about the F-41 suspension available on those cars.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I loved the '78 Olds Delta 88 I had. 350 Rocket 4-bbl, THM350 transmission. Almost bulletproof, and moved the car along nicely. Smooth, quiet, rode and handled well, scads of room. The later ones in the '80s with the 307 were not close to as good IMO.
That Bentley/Chevy pickup sure are an odd pair. Friend restored one of those pickups, let me drive it - now I know where 'rides like a truck' came from. Neat to look at, and it was built the year he was born, so that's why he got it.
andre--I remember how in '82, I couldn't believe that there was no visible change in full-size Chevys from the year before. That was an absolute first. There were new colors.
Frankly, I didn't like the '82 model year at Chevy. I did like the Camaro Berlinetta with the gold trim, although still too small inside for me. They dropped the two-door Malibu and Impala and Caprice Classic models, and dropped bucket seats in Monte Carlos. The buckets returned for '84 and so did the Caprice Classic coupe.
I agree--the '83 and '84 305 4-barrel was a great improvement over the 267. My parents bought a new '84 Monte Carlo in Dec. '83 and it felt like an absolute hot rod--seriously--compared to their '80 V6 Monte and my '82 V6 Monte. About six years later, and with only 43K miles, the 305 would blow some blue smoke at start-up but didn't really use any oil. I've heard that was common with those cars. Honestly, I could enjoy owning a clean '84 Monte 305 now--and not an 'SS'.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I don't know if you're familiar with those articles, but they're not all expensive, exclusive cars. Is a 1983 Honda Accord worth big money? Somehow, I doubt it.
At 56 1/2, I'm old enough to remember when a lot of car mags liked the downsized Caprices with the F-41 suspension. I could still like a '77-79 coupe.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
That Chevy truck would be worth pouncing on. These old haulers are only going to go up and up. You should check it out!
My neighbor has a newer one sitting in his drive, with four saggy tires. Not sure what his wife thinks about the never-ending project but I have a pretty good inkling of what my wife would think.
And if I did get an oldie, it'd be a Miata. At least it wouldn't ride like a truck. Not exactly....
About six years later, and with only 43K miles, the 305 would blow some blue smoke at start-up but didn't really use any oil. I've heard that was common with those cars. Honestly, I could enjoy owning a clean '84 Monte 305 now--and not an 'SS'.
The blue smoke on startup was also an issue on my '77 LeMans with the Chevy 305. Bad valve seals, I was told, a common problem on the SBC. Oil would leak though them from the top of the cylinder heads after they had sat for a while.
Not just back then. My '96 ES300 had the blue puff on starting, apparently common on the Toyota V6 at ~100k. As were leaking valve cover gaskets. Great engine otherwise.
My Granddad, who was a mechanic in the Marines in WW2 and worked on cars nearly all his life, had the attitude about the Chevy smallblock that it was good for about 100,000 miles, and then you rebuilt it, and got maybe another 25-50K out of it.
He usually drove short distances though, and around here a lot of the roads were dirt and gravel, plus the dust that would come from the farms and fields, so 100K miles in those days was a world of difference compared to today.
I do remember him saying that he had to do a valve job around 70,000 miles on their '72 Impala's 350 V-8. They sold that car in 1982 to some friends, with around 100,000 miles on it, and they kept it a year and sold it. As far as I know, that valve job was the only engine problem it had.
I also remember his '76 GMC 3/4 ton crew cab truck, that we did a lot of camping with. He sold it in 1986, and I think it had around 100,000 miles on it as well. I can't remember if it needed any major engine work. The only thing I can really remember was on a long camping trip in 1982, it started acting up as we were driving up the long road that goes to Mount Whitney in California. I think it was just a ballast resistor or something like that.
I've had three Chevy smallblocks in my possession. First was a 1980 Malibu coupe with a 229 V-6 (okay, it was a sawed-off 305...) Mom gave it to me with around 79,000 miles and I took it to 100,000, and then sold it. The second was Mom's '86 Monte Carlo with a 305. Mom gave it to me with around 179,000 miles, and I got t-boned delivering pizzas around 192,000...just three short months later. The third is Granddad's '85 Silverado 305. After Granddad died, Grandmom gave it to my Mom and stepdad. They put some money into it, and sold it to me, with around 109,000 miles on it, for $1200. Currently has about 143,000 on it.
All three of those cars were purchased new, and while they all had their problems, none of them ever had their engines opened up, as far as I know. They'd have things fail like alternators, water pumps, those fuel rails that pump oxygen into the exhaust, etc. And get an occasional problem with the choke, carb, etc. The Monte Carlo did puff a bit at start-up, and under hard acceleration, but it was more grayish-white, and not the bluish tint I associate with something that's burning oil. The Silverado will puff a bit as well.
I did overheat the Silverado back in October 2013...bad enough that it stalled out on me. I had the mechanic do some work to it, which did include messing around with the choke and some some other stuff, to the tune of about $400. But for that low of a price, I don't think they would have torn into the engine.
My Consumer Guide used car guide, from the late 80's, mentions that one weak point for the 305 was premature crankshaft failure. But they said regardless, it was still a pretty good engine.
Oh I'm sure the car mags had legitimate things to praise, but Car & Driver also named the Renault Alliance as one of the Ten Best for 1983, so really you have to question their overall credibility. If anything, the mediocrity of the list shows us how slim the pickins' were in 1983.
I saw that yesterday online. The Alliance was also MT's Car of the Year, although I hated them and an Encore was probably the worst rental car experience I ever had.
The full-size Chevy of the '77 redesign, with F-41 suspension, was a darling of many of the mags at the time.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
That black Bentley isn't on the market (yet) but the black Chevy pickup is (it's a '53 - one off from my birth year so I have another excuse to pass on it).
I'm surprised that chart shows a dropping off from 1983-85. But if "light vehicles" also includes small pickups, SUVs, and half-ton standard pickups, that might make more sense.
By 1985, GM was still dominating with cars. Seven of the top ten selling cars that year were GM. (Cavalier, Celebrity, Caprice, Delta 88, Cutlass Ciera, Cutlass Supreme, Century). Only two were Ford (Tempo and Escort). And the one Japanese contender was the Datsun Sentra.
However, when you throw trucks into the mix, The Chevy C-series ("Silverado" was just a trim package then) and Ford F-series were very strong sellers, and might have already been outselling the top selling car by then. FWIW, I can't remember which car WAS the top seller...might have been the Cavalier or Celebrity. I remember the Cutlass Ciera was #4 and the Supreme was #9...they had reversed positions from 1984. But, I remember a lot of smaller trucks like the Ranger, Bronco 2, and Jeep Cherokee being very popular. And the Voyager/Caravan minivans were an instant hit. GM had the S-10 pickup and Blazer, and they were popular as well, but I don't know how they stacked up to Ford.
As for those car sales, for 1986 I remember GM had 6 of the top 10. They added the Grand Am, which was offered only as a coupe in '85 but added a sedan for '86. However, the Caprice and Delta 88 dropped off. I can't remember what the non-GM models were, however. I think the Escort, Tempo, and Sentra might have still been on that list. Ford's Taurus was showing promise, but in 1986 was still sharing showroom floors with the small LTD, and wouldn't really hit its stride until 1987.
I was also under the impression that GM was taking a beating in the later 80's, but that chart shows market share leveling off. But then again, the market as a whole cooled a bit, so that may have helped GM maintain. Also, they were probably relying more on trucks, so they held onto market share even as car sales dropped.
When Consumer Reports tested a few '77 B-bodies, in the section where they list the disadvantages, all they would say is "None significant enough to mention". Now, when is the last time CR had something that nice to say about a GM car?
Sometimes though, I'm still not totally convinced that it was as "all new" as GM would have liked you to believe. I've often wondered if they just dropped a new, modern body down on the 116" wb version of the '73-77 intermediate frame? And then extended it, as needed, to 119" for the Electra/98 and 121.5" for the Cadillacs?
By 1979 though, CR was losing a bit of their love. But by then, a new round of emissions regulations came around, that choked power, and no doubt made them harder to start, easier to stall, etc.
By 1985, they did a comparison test of a Crown Vic (or maybe a Grand Marquis) a newly downsized Electra, and an M-body 5th Avenue. Of that bunch, they liked the Panther the best. They also mentioned that the Caprice, which they had tested previously, would have been a strong contender, but it was coming up short in their reliability ratings by that time.
FWIW, from around '77-79, the B-body did pretty well right from the get-go with regards to reliability. For 1980 it was more average. Then from around 1981-85 it often rated poorly its first few years out, but did better, like a fine wine, as it aged.
Ford, two years behind in downsizing (and not as attractively, MHO only), said their old full-size cars had "road-hugging weight" compared to GM's.
When you think about it, to take what was long the most-popular nameplate in the country (OK, I know Cutlass took that in '76), take 700 lbs. out of it, get rid of hardtop body styles, and offer a six-cylinder as standard engine, that's pretty bold. And to have it impress the critics and sell like crazy on top of that, well, that's memorable to me.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Ford tried to get cute with their advertising in '77 by saying "Only Ford gives you TWO choices in full sized cars...Traditional size, or new trim-size!" That year, they took what had been the Torino, re-skinned it to make it look more modern, called it the LTD-II, and tried to pass it off as a downsized full-size.
Needless to say, not too many buyers fell for it. The T-bird, on the same chassis, went down as the most popular T-bird in history (even if it's not the most collectible by today's standards), and even the Cougar XR-7 sold well. But the LTD-II and Cougar coupes, sedans, and wagons fared pretty poorly.
revolutionary? Maybe by Detroit glacial standards---okay.
I don't think there was anything really revolutionary, with regards to technology at least, in a '77 B-body. However, GM did experiment around with crash protection, crumple zones, etc. Not to the degree that they do today, but it was a start. But considering the direction cars had been moving since the horse and buggy days, the B-body really WAS a revolution. It was considerably smaller than the car it replaced...smaller even than the midsized cars on the market at the time, yet it was as big or bigger in every dimension inside, with the exception of shoulder room, than the outgoing '76 model. The only thing they really gave up, IMO, was towing capacity, and in the wagons, cargo volume. The '76 models could tow up to 7,000 lb, but that was down to around 5,000 for the '77. As for the wagons, I think cargo volume dropped from something like 105 cubic feet to around 87-89. Still roomy. However, closer in scope to a '77 Malibu (85 cubic feet) than the mastodon clamshells.
They also handled very well for the time, and for their size, although the F-41 suspension was definitely suggested...notable improvement in handling, with a very slight loss in ride quality. Fuel economy was good as well, and performance was decent, if you got the right engine. And, they set the tone of automotive style for years to come; although I guess you could really trace that back to the '75 Seville. It really wasn't until the 1986 Taurus that the rounded, aero styles really took off, even though the Taurus wasn't the first. Oh, yeah, on the subject of aero, the '77 B-bodies were also subjected to wind tunnel testing. Not to the degree that later cars were, but aerodynamics did play a small role in their design. It would be a greater role in the '80 refresh, with the lower, more sloping hood and raised deck, which also gave a slight bump in cargo volume.
I wonder...did any magazine ever compare a '77 GM B-body to the big, outsized '77 LTD or Gran Fury? I know Consumer Reports made a comment that nobody needed a car bigger than a B-body, so they refused to test those mastodons starting in '77. That year, they put an Impala (or Caprice) up against an LTD-II, a Fury (or Monaco), and a Cutlass Supreme.
Also, around that timeframe, Consumer Reports eliminated the term "midsized" from their lexicon. They grouped cars into either subcompact, compact, or "large". "Compact" included cars like the Nova, Volare, Granada, and Fairmont, but also the newly downsized '78 Malibu and its siblings. "large" included the old school intermediates, as well as the full-sized cars, both downsized and non-downsized.
The last big mastodon test I can recall was either C&D or MT in '76. IIRC, they pitted a Caprice 400, Gran Fury 400, and LTD 460 against each other. I can't remember which one they decreed the winner, as they seemed to waffle on about the pros and cons of each car. Also, IIRC, one of them was a coupe, while the other two were sedans. And I seem to recall that the 460, despite the extra cubes, ran out of breath pretty early. It was a bit quicker than the other two from 0-60, but in quarter mile the other two were catching up.
I used to like C&D better than Motor Trend back in the day, as their writing style was definitely more irreverent. But now, I only thumb through them on the rack at the supermarket on occasion, and I'm usually left yawning, as there are so few new cars out anymore, unlike the old days. I had to laugh, on Facebook the other day, in reference to someone's post, I saw Jamie Kitman post a response. He has written for Automobile magazine. Bob Merlis writes for them on occasion, about older cars. He wrote a hilarious article for C&D in 1983, about the Studebaker Drivers' Club international meet in South Bend. That was before I belonged to the club. It was hilarious. On the opening page was a pic that mimicked the opening of the TV show "The Twilight Zone", showing an eyeball and a road sign that said "Needles 30; South Bend 2,205" or something like that. Bob was a member of SDC at that time.
In fact, now that I think about it, the article was called "The Studey Zone".
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I can't think of if it was this thread that '70's Sevilles were being discussed recently, but a friend sent me this completed auction for a '78. I love the car, and it sold for $25K!! 9K miles. Geeze, is that car "delicious". Love the interior pics, now that I've waited long enough for them to load! I always liked that simple '77-78 or so steering wheel. I think it's funny that the seller consides 8,979 miles "8K miles"!
When my parents got our red '77 Impala coupe in early Nov. '76, I remember a bag boy at the supermarket (remember them?) say, "It looks like a Seville!". I do think the large round wheel openings front and rear, the windshield, and general simplicity of line down the sides were similar.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
That Seville looks amazing, has to be among the best left. You get what you pay for, as I bet some trim pieces in mint condition are unobtanium. GM learned that at least being mildly subtle, and not too huge, can earn sales, just as it did for MB. Then the bustleback replaced the boxier Seville, and GM forgot all about subtle
I think the B-body "sport coupe" with the wraparound window is kind of cool.
Oh, dear, now everyone with a low mileage Seville will think his is worth $25,000. Bidding was somewhat exuberant to say the least. Impressive for a car from the Malaise Era, however. And these Sevilles do have their fans. I'm thinking $15,000 was all the money and then some, for show quality merchandise.
Here's a mint one with 9,000 miles on it, and I bet you could bargain off the $20K asking
Presentation, presentation, presentation--it's too bad there's only one pic of the car. I can't tell if that's an aftermarket CHMSL in the rear window or just something put up on the shelf there.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Since eBay, I do think that generally, bidders determine the value. It was an excellent ad with lots of quality photos and I think that makes all the difference in the world. Some time in my life I'd like to at least ride in one of these cars. Anybody here in NE OH? LOL
A friend in Studebaker circles, amazingly, who also now owns '62 and '70 Coupe deVilles, is the son of a (late) couple who bought new Cadillac after new Cadillac, over the years. They had two of these Sevilles, he said--a '76 and a '78. The '76 he said was navy blue, white vinyl top, and red leather interior--for the bicentennial! He said despite the pic one gets in their mind of that, it was sharp! LOl He said his mom really lobbied his Dad to buy one last big Cadillac but his Dad liked the Seville, and his mom was really wowed by the blue/white/red combo on the Seville.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
It's been interesting reading here about cars of the 70s and early 80s. During that era I was fascinated by the crash programs of the big three to meet CAFE. Motor Trend and other car mags would have articles talking about how, for instance, the Chevy Citation of 1979 (MY 1980) was several inches shorter, a few inches narrower, and several hundred pounds lighter than the car it replaced, and so was able to get significantly higher mpg while still having similar interior room. The engineers were clearly working furiously on all-new clean slate designs. From RWD body-on-frame monsters with huge V-8 engines they were creating FWD cars with a unitary body/chassis running on 4 cylinder engines with fuel injection. In some ways, it's not surprising that quality was like s*** hitting the fan. It was a simultaneously fascinating and yet nightmarish era. Badge engineering, as we all know, also reached a peak or nadir at this time.
Anyway, is there anywhere online that has scanned copies of those old car magazines? If so, I might be amused to take a trip down memory lane reading a few breathless articles about the "New X-CARS!" "Suddenly it's 1980!" etc. lol.
PS I remember reading a c. 1975 Motor Trend that had the Seville on the cover.
58 bids on that $25K Seville; I'd guess that was more than the old 'all it takes is two bidders' saw.
I notice that the hood sits lower on the right side...quite noticeable in those close-up pics, above the right headlights . That does make me wonder a little bit. The Seville was probably the best the U.S. had then, in quality. I remember them advertising how bolts were encapsulated in some kind of plastic coating to keep them from coming loose, rattling, etc.
Still, to my eyes, there is simply not a bad line on that car. I love the interior too. I can't think of another GM car I can say that about, IMHO only, other than the 1965 Impala 2-door hardtop.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Still, to my eyes, there is simply not a bad line on that car. I love the interior too. I can't think of another GM car I can say that about, IMHO only, other than the 1965 Impala 2-door hardtop.
I can agree on the Seville. It's a car that I would call, for lack of a better phrase, "proportionally perfect". It may not be a style that's to everyone's liking...for instance, if you want a Miata or a Corvette, this Seville will do nothing for you. But, I don't think there's anything you can do to its basic design to improve it. Some details, perhaps...for instance, I like the vertical grille of the '78 better than the '82-83 Malibu-esque grille of the '76. But, there is nothing else on the car that you could shorten, lengthen, widen, lower, slope-off, square-up, etc, that would improve the looks of the car.
Oh, and comparing that eBay '78 to the burgundy '76, I think it's all in the pictures. That eBay '78 just looks perfect, glistening, and brand-new from every angle...although I noticed the misaligned hood, too. But the pics of the burgundy '76 weren't nearly as high-res, although it still looks like a nice car.
Actually the more bidders usually only increases the frenzy. I call it the "auction day free meatball syndrome". Ever go to a banquet where they are serving greasy little meatballs? No one wants them until they see everybody wanting one.
58 bids on that $25K Seville; I'd guess that was more than the old 'all it takes is two bidders' saw.
I notice that the hood sits lower on the right side...quite noticeable in those close-up pics, above the right headlights . That does make me wonder a little bit. The Seville was probably the best the U.S. had then, in quality. I remember them advertising how bolts were encapsulated in some kind of plastic coating to keep them from coming loose, rattling, etc.
Still, to my eyes, there is simply not a bad line on that car. I love the interior too. I can't think of another GM car I can say that about, IMHO only, other than the 1965 Impala 2-door hardtop.
I think those holes might actually be where the letters "F O R D" went around and above the top of the center 'bullet' section of the grille.
I was just thinking the other day how I could like owning a '51 Ford. I like shoebox Fords in general--they must have seemed absolutely futuristic when introduced--but I like on the '51 how they chromed that brow or crease that ran down the rear quarters to the taillights. The old timers here will remember that.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
When I was very young, a guy down the street had a 1949 Ford. He told us kids that he could pull a lever and that center grill piece would shoot out like a rocket and blow the car up that was in front of him.
One of my uncles has a '51 Ford 2 door sedan. When I was a kid, I thought the '49-51 was kind of ugly, but as an adult I can appreciate them more. By the time the 1955 cars rolled out, just about anything that came before looked ancient, but I imagine in 1949, compared to a Chevy or especially a Plymouth, the Ford did look futuristic for the time.
Something about the styling of the '49-51 Fords makes them look small and stubby to me, but I don't think they were any smaller than competing cars.
Is there much market for a '52-54 Ford, I wonder, or are they under-appreciated? They're another car that doesn't do much for me, style-wise, but again, compared to a Chevy or Plymouth, I think they look more modern...although Plymouth tried, none-too-successfully, for '53-54 when they went to those stubby, slab-sided little cars.
The Victoria Hardtops and Sunliner Convertibles are still quite popular in 52-54 Fords but in general, the 1946-1954 postwar cars are suffering in the marketplace. Their fan base is just dying off.
The '52-54 Fords never did anything for me. I like the '49-51 club coupe (not sure if that's what they called it). The '54 got the Y-block V8 if I remember correctly (maybe not; I'm not a Ford guy generally) and was the first year for the plexiglass top, a sort-of neat feature I think although very rare.
I think the '49-54 Chevys are rather dumpy in styling although I've read they were well screwed-together. In hindsight, I could enjoy a Fleetline (fastback) '49-52 or a station wagon. I remember seeing a fair amount of Chevys of that era when I was a kid--usually somebody's Dad's 'work car' by that time--but I don't believe I even knew they made wagons until I was an adult--I never saw them.
Of the '53 and '54, I like that horizontal grille-bar look of the '54 better.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
If I was going to take a pick from the '49-54 era, I think I'd prefer Chevy in just about every year...even though the styling may have seemed old-fashioned compared to the Ford. I like the '49-52 the best...the '53 seems to be trying too hard to be a baby Cadillac, although I agree, IMO the '54 looks better.
I thought the Plymouths actually cleaned up pretty nicely for '51-52. The '49-50 seemed old, even for 1949, but the '51 update was pretty nice, I thought. Made them look a bit Chevy-ish. When I was younger, I used to think that the police car they had in "War of the Worlds" was a '49-52 Chevy. It wasn't until years later, and seeing it in higher quality, on a bigger tv, that I realized it was a '51 Plymouth...
Comments
The 50s Bentley is a money-sucking Blivet of a car and a right-hander to boot, albeit somewhat charming in its own dowager sort of way. It needs to go back to the UK, where they are champs at rust repair and where spare used parts still abound. I helped a friend rebuild a Bentley engine of that era and it was frighteningly difficult. Parts sourcing alone took months and the crankshaft overhaul was a nightmare to behold. No thanks on that one. Buy one already done for $20K.
Seriously, I'm sure some of it was price and dealer availability, but most all the mags said positive things about the F-41 suspension available on those cars.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Frankly, I didn't like the '82 model year at Chevy. I did like the Camaro Berlinetta with the gold trim, although still too small inside for me. They dropped the two-door Malibu and Impala and Caprice Classic models, and dropped bucket seats in Monte Carlos. The buckets returned for '84 and so did the Caprice Classic coupe.
I agree--the '83 and '84 305 4-barrel was a great improvement over the 267. My parents bought a new '84 Monte Carlo in Dec. '83 and it felt like an absolute hot rod--seriously--compared to their '80 V6 Monte and my '82 V6 Monte. About six years later, and with only 43K miles, the 305 would blow some blue smoke at start-up but didn't really use any oil. I've heard that was common with those cars. Honestly, I could enjoy owning a clean '84 Monte 305 now--and not an 'SS'.
At 56 1/2, I'm old enough to remember when a lot of car mags liked the downsized Caprices with the F-41 suspension. I could still like a '77-79 coupe.
And if I did get an oldie, it'd be a Miata. At least it wouldn't ride like a truck. Not exactly....
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
He usually drove short distances though, and around here a lot of the roads were dirt and gravel, plus the dust that would come from the farms and fields, so 100K miles in those days was a world of difference compared to today.
I do remember him saying that he had to do a valve job around 70,000 miles on their '72 Impala's 350 V-8. They sold that car in 1982 to some friends, with around 100,000 miles on it, and they kept it a year and sold it. As far as I know, that valve job was the only engine problem it had.
I also remember his '76 GMC 3/4 ton crew cab truck, that we did a lot of camping with. He sold it in 1986, and I think it had around 100,000 miles on it as well. I can't remember if it needed any major engine work. The only thing I can really remember was on a long camping trip in 1982, it started acting up as we were driving up the long road that goes to Mount Whitney in California. I think it was just a ballast resistor or something like that.
I've had three Chevy smallblocks in my possession. First was a 1980 Malibu coupe with a 229 V-6 (okay, it was a sawed-off 305...) Mom gave it to me with around 79,000 miles and I took it to 100,000, and then sold it. The second was Mom's '86 Monte Carlo with a 305. Mom gave it to me with around 179,000 miles, and I got t-boned delivering pizzas around 192,000...just three short months later. The third is Granddad's '85 Silverado 305. After Granddad died, Grandmom gave it to my Mom and stepdad. They put some money into it, and sold it to me, with around 109,000 miles on it, for $1200. Currently has about 143,000 on it.
All three of those cars were purchased new, and while they all had their problems, none of them ever had their engines opened up, as far as I know. They'd have things fail like alternators, water pumps, those fuel rails that pump oxygen into the exhaust, etc. And get an occasional problem with the choke, carb, etc. The Monte Carlo did puff a bit at start-up, and under hard acceleration, but it was more grayish-white, and not the bluish tint I associate with something that's burning oil. The Silverado will puff a bit as well.
I did overheat the Silverado back in October 2013...bad enough that it stalled out on me. I had the mechanic do some work to it, which did include messing around with the choke and some some other stuff, to the tune of about $400. But for that low of a price, I don't think they would have torn into the engine.
My Consumer Guide used car guide, from the late 80's, mentions that one weak point for the 305 was premature crankshaft failure. But they said regardless, it was still a pretty good engine.
The full-size Chevy of the '77 redesign, with F-41 suspension, was a darling of many of the mags at the time.
This chart pretty much tells the story:
By 1985, GM was still dominating with cars. Seven of the top ten selling cars that year were GM. (Cavalier, Celebrity, Caprice, Delta 88, Cutlass Ciera, Cutlass Supreme, Century). Only two were Ford (Tempo and Escort). And the one Japanese contender was the Datsun Sentra.
However, when you throw trucks into the mix, The Chevy C-series ("Silverado" was just a trim package then) and Ford F-series were very strong sellers, and might have already been outselling the top selling car by then. FWIW, I can't remember which car WAS the top seller...might have been the Cavalier or Celebrity. I remember the Cutlass Ciera was #4 and the Supreme was #9...they had reversed positions from 1984. But, I remember a lot of smaller trucks like the Ranger, Bronco 2, and Jeep Cherokee being very popular. And the Voyager/Caravan minivans were an instant hit. GM had the S-10 pickup and Blazer, and they were popular as well, but I don't know how they stacked up to Ford.
As for those car sales, for 1986 I remember GM had 6 of the top 10. They added the Grand Am, which was offered only as a coupe in '85 but added a sedan for '86. However, the Caprice and Delta 88 dropped off. I can't remember what the non-GM models were, however. I think the Escort, Tempo, and Sentra might have still been on that list. Ford's Taurus was showing promise, but in 1986 was still sharing showroom floors with the small LTD, and wouldn't really hit its stride until 1987.
I was also under the impression that GM was taking a beating in the later 80's, but that chart shows market share leveling off. But then again, the market as a whole cooled a bit, so that may have helped GM maintain. Also, they were probably relying more on trucks, so they held onto market share even as car sales dropped.
Sometimes though, I'm still not totally convinced that it was as "all new" as GM would have liked you to believe. I've often wondered if they just dropped a new, modern body down on the 116" wb version of the '73-77 intermediate frame? And then extended it, as needed, to 119" for the Electra/98 and 121.5" for the Cadillacs?
By 1979 though, CR was losing a bit of their love. But by then, a new round of emissions regulations came around, that choked power, and no doubt made them harder to start, easier to stall, etc.
By 1985, they did a comparison test of a Crown Vic (or maybe a Grand Marquis) a newly downsized Electra, and an M-body 5th Avenue. Of that bunch, they liked the Panther the best. They also mentioned that the Caprice, which they had tested previously, would have been a strong contender, but it was coming up short in their reliability ratings by that time.
FWIW, from around '77-79, the B-body did pretty well right from the get-go with regards to reliability. For 1980 it was more average. Then from around 1981-85 it often rated poorly its first few years out, but did better, like a fine wine, as it aged.
When you think about it, to take what was long the most-popular nameplate in the country (OK, I know Cutlass took that in '76), take 700 lbs. out of it, get rid of hardtop body styles, and offer a six-cylinder as standard engine, that's pretty bold. And to have it impress the critics and sell like crazy on top of that, well, that's memorable to me.
Needless to say, not too many buyers fell for it. The T-bird, on the same chassis, went down as the most popular T-bird in history (even if it's not the most collectible by today's standards), and even the Cougar XR-7 sold well. But the LTD-II and Cougar coupes, sedans, and wagons fared pretty poorly.
They also handled very well for the time, and for their size, although the F-41 suspension was definitely suggested...notable improvement in handling, with a very slight loss in ride quality. Fuel economy was good as well, and performance was decent, if you got the right engine. And, they set the tone of automotive style for years to come; although I guess you could really trace that back to the '75 Seville. It really wasn't until the 1986 Taurus that the rounded, aero styles really took off, even though the Taurus wasn't the first. Oh, yeah, on the subject of aero, the '77 B-bodies were also subjected to wind tunnel testing. Not to the degree that later cars were, but aerodynamics did play a small role in their design. It would be a greater role in the '80 refresh, with the lower, more sloping hood and raised deck, which also gave a slight bump in cargo volume.
Also, around that timeframe, Consumer Reports eliminated the term "midsized" from their lexicon. They grouped cars into either subcompact, compact, or "large". "Compact" included cars like the Nova, Volare, Granada, and Fairmont, but also the newly downsized '78 Malibu and its siblings. "large" included the old school intermediates, as well as the full-sized cars, both downsized and non-downsized.
The last big mastodon test I can recall was either C&D or MT in '76. IIRC, they pitted a Caprice 400, Gran Fury 400, and LTD 460 against each other. I can't remember which one they decreed the winner, as they seemed to waffle on about the pros and cons of each car. Also, IIRC, one of them was a coupe, while the other two were sedans. And I seem to recall that the 460, despite the extra cubes, ran out of breath pretty early. It was a bit quicker than the other two from 0-60, but in quarter mile the other two were catching up.
In fact, now that I think about it, the article was called "The Studey Zone".
http://www.ebay.com/itm/261778237375
When my parents got our red '77 Impala coupe in early Nov. '76, I remember a bag boy at the supermarket (remember them?) say, "It looks like a Seville!". I do think the large round wheel openings front and rear, the windshield, and general simplicity of line down the sides were similar.
I think the B-body "sport coupe" with the wraparound window is kind of cool.
Here's a mint one with 9,000 miles on it, and I bet you could bargain off the $20K asking
http://www.hemmings.com/classifieds/carsforsale/cadillac/seville/1708725.html
That silver one was just stunning in every respect. 25,000 was a bit much I think but the bidders determine the values. At least for them!
http://classiccars.com/listings/view/563161/1976-cadillac-seville-for-sale-in-monroe-new-jersey-08831
A friend in Studebaker circles, amazingly, who also now owns '62 and '70 Coupe deVilles, is the son of a (late) couple who bought new Cadillac after new Cadillac, over the years. They had two of these Sevilles, he said--a '76 and a '78. The '76 he said was navy blue, white vinyl top, and red leather interior--for the bicentennial! He said despite the pic one gets in their mind of that, it was sharp! LOl He said his mom really lobbied his Dad to buy one last big Cadillac but his Dad liked the Seville, and his mom was really wowed by the blue/white/red combo on the Seville.
Anyway, is there anywhere online that has scanned copies of those old car magazines? If so, I might be amused to take a trip down memory lane reading a few breathless articles about the "New X-CARS!" "Suddenly it's 1980!" etc. lol.
PS I remember reading a c. 1975 Motor Trend that had the Seville on the cover.
I notice that the hood sits lower on the right side...quite noticeable in those close-up pics, above the right headlights . That does make me wonder a little bit. The Seville was probably the best the U.S. had then, in quality. I remember them advertising how bolts were encapsulated in some kind of plastic coating to keep them from coming loose, rattling, etc.
Still, to my eyes, there is simply not a bad line on that car. I love the interior too. I can't think of another GM car I can say that about, IMHO only, other than the 1965 Impala 2-door hardtop.
Oh, and comparing that eBay '78 to the burgundy '76, I think it's all in the pictures. That eBay '78 just looks perfect, glistening, and brand-new from every angle...although I noticed the misaligned hood, too. But the pics of the burgundy '76 weren't nearly as high-res, although it still looks like a nice car.
I was just thinking the other day how I could like owning a '51 Ford. I like shoebox Fords in general--they must have seemed absolutely futuristic when introduced--but I like on the '51 how they chromed that brow or crease that ran down the rear quarters to the taillights. The old timers here will remember that.
Bullet holes make for a better story though, lol. Center bullet section is very appropriate!
We believed him for about five minutes.
Something about the styling of the '49-51 Fords makes them look small and stubby to me, but I don't think they were any smaller than competing cars.
Is there much market for a '52-54 Ford, I wonder, or are they under-appreciated? They're another car that doesn't do much for me, style-wise, but again, compared to a Chevy or Plymouth, I think they look more modern...although Plymouth tried, none-too-successfully, for '53-54 when they went to those stubby, slab-sided little cars.
I think the '49-54 Chevys are rather dumpy in styling although I've read they were well screwed-together. In hindsight, I could enjoy a Fleetline (fastback) '49-52 or a station wagon. I remember seeing a fair amount of Chevys of that era when I was a kid--usually somebody's Dad's 'work car' by that time--but I don't believe I even knew they made wagons until I was an adult--I never saw them.
Of the '53 and '54, I like that horizontal grille-bar look of the '54 better.
I thought the Plymouths actually cleaned up pretty nicely for '51-52. The '49-50 seemed old, even for 1949, but the '51 update was pretty nice, I thought. Made them look a bit Chevy-ish. When I was younger, I used to think that the police car they had in "War of the Worlds" was a '49-52 Chevy. It wasn't until years later, and seeing it in higher quality, on a bigger tv, that I realized it was a '51 Plymouth...