Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
The CV uses the same 6" stretch. I think Wiki is wrong on the wheelbase. It shows the TC as being 3" longer. I don't believe that is accurate for 92+ models.
In the boxy years the TC had a longer WB than CV/GM and even the AOD transmission had a longer tailshaft.
***Edit*** after checking a few sources it does appear that the TC is still on a longer WB.
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
I think if I were you I would consider a 300 over a Charger. The interior is just so much nicer.
You've mentioned the Lucerne before, but even though I like Buicks, I was never all that enamored of them. The 3800 would be overmatched, and the 3.9 is derived from the Chevy V-6s which I always thought were crude. BTW, GM never put the 3.6/6-speed combo in either the Lacrosse or the Lucerne. The Lacrosse 3.6 had a 4-speed. Something about the package with the 6-speed not fitting in the engine cradle or whatnot was the reason. I know I was surprised how tight the 3800 was in the engine compartment of my Lacrosse. The power steering pump was hard up against the firewall and barely accessible.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
But, starting in 1993 (odd, since the changeover was 1992), my book shows the Crown Vic going to 114.4" through 2002, which is as recent as my book goes. I wonder if that's a typo though, because the Grand Marquis stays as 114.3 all the way through 2002.
This same book shows the Town Car going from 117.3" to 117.4" in 1991, and then to 117.7" for 1998.
Sometimes, I wonder if those are just rounding errors. For example, I've seen some of GM's '77-90 B-bodies listed at 115.9", and some at 116.0".
For 1977, the Newport/New Yorker are listed at 124.0", 123.9" for 1978.
And one oddity...the 1974 LeSabre is listed at 124", 123.5" for 1975, 124" for 1976.
I'm sure most of those must be rounding errors, or in the case of the LeSabre, a typo. I can't imagine the auto makers doing such minute changes to the wheelbases like that.
Strange considering they found a way to put the 3.6/6 speed in the Impala.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
That's what I'm thinking. When the Lucerne came out, its sales were way down compared to the LeSabre it replaced. However, the LeSabre was becoming a fleet queen, itself, with most of the Custom models being sent that way. With the Lucerne, they cut back seriously on fleet sales.
So, the ratio of V-6 to V-8 models probably was more evenly split than most people would think. But, like you said, the V-6 buyers probably dumped them more quickly, where the V-8 owners would cherish what they had, and hold onto them longer.
I probably could get by with a 3.8 or 3.9 Lucerne, as it's not all that often I floor the Park Ave, or my Ram for that matter. Most of the time, I'm trying to see how high I can get the instant mpg readout on the Park Ave to go (or in the Ram, get it to where the readout says ECO ON, which means it's running on 6 cylinders). But, it's nice to have that power when you need it!
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Umm, for lack of a better excuse, separation anxiety?
The editor's page talks about the ugliest cars he and submitters determined to be the Aztek and the 1961 Plymouth--all of them.
Now he's asking for submissions for most beautiful car. I'd give him this for one of my memorable cars.
1949 Roadmaster convertible sedan. Even the license plate says "beautiful."
Makes me remember the movie On Golden Pond. Add Audrey Hepburn driving with a scarf blowing in the wind behind here and the car would be complete.
Click picture for 600x800 version
">
">
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
That Buick has great lines!
There are lots of cars with a pretty front and a butt ugly back, (or vice-versa) or with fabulous fins and nothing else to recommend it, or a lovely front and back and a very bad roofline----you get the picture.
If one says that "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder" then you would have to agree with anyone who said an Aztek was "the most beautiful car on earth".
So watch what you say! :P
No doubt a beautiful car.
Someone once told me that the car designer's best friend would be someone standing behind his drawing board or computer, wielding a baseball bat.
Then he'd know exactly when to stop.
Perhaps it's been restored since then--it sure needed it.
No other compact had a convertible in '60, although that of course soon changed.
I'm not really a big-Buick fan of that period, but I think they way the hood opens is cool.
I don't think Buicks really started exciting me until 1955-56. The '54 was the same basic body, but I just didn't like the droopy look of the headlights.
That '49 is nice, though. I think it looks nicer than most of its peers. The DeSotos and Chryslers are pretty stodgy in comparison, and even GM's own Oldsmobile really isn't that attractive to me...front end has sort of a big-mouth bass look to it. The Lincoln looked a lot more modern IMO, but was nowhere near as attractive. If anything, kinda vulgar. And that year's Packard was in major need of a C-section!
I remember certain Buicks of that '54-56 period actually had an emblem on the decklid that said "1955 Buick" and the like! Talk about planned obsolescence!
I think Cadillacs actually said "Nineteen-Fifty-Six" on their instrument panel, on the passenger side!
EDIT: I remembered that correctly! The guy who lived behind us, who sold Dad our new '67 Chevelle, had a creamy white '56 Sixty-Special he used to pull a trailer with--it had the neat gold wheels. That's where I believe I first saw those nameplates.
http://chromeography.com/post/36351554321/1956-cadillac-coupe-de-ville-by-lauri-- johnston
Styling ages slower today, which isn't a bad thing.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
I enjoy a lot of their one page articles which probably are ones you consider wastes of space. The article by someone who worked in the auto industry in the past, a different one each month, I find interesting.
Everyone is welcome to their opinion.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Generally i agree with most of what they say except when they get to their 'future classics" articles---I really have to scratch my head over some of their choices, because most often their choices are dead in the water in the marketplace and in most people's consciousness.
I'm a big believer in the "loved when new...then loved when old" school of thinking.
This month's HCC has an column on the crashing of the '59 Chevy and '09 Malibu, which we discussed here a couple weeks ago.
Really fin??? I never thought I would hear the words beautiful, W126 and chrome wheels used together by you.
No, I like those, along with the reminiscences articles uplanderguy mentioned. I am referring to the multi-page spreads they seem to do every issue with somebody's list of the 50 best whatevers, which really are not very useful or interesting. I find the Driveable Dream articles very hit-or-miss, with some of them simply being about poorly maintained old cars. The Mechanical Marvels section, while potentially quite good, seems to be written in a way that makes most of them either indecipherable or useless, to the point where I don't even try to finish reading them now. And the columnists are generally uninteresting.
The current issue came this week in the mail and I still haven't even taken it out of the mailing bag.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Now, "Hot Rod Deluxe"...not so.
In my hometown there was a '66 Coronet 500 hardtop (similar) that was bone-stock and painted in a violet color much like Chevy's '65 Evening Orchid. Even as a kid the car stopped me in my tracks. It was owned by the owner of Daisley's Electric.
Here's a car similar to what I saw, with (dirty appearing in this pic) chrome disc wheels:
I do dislike chromes on newer cars. Like this - love the car, hate the wheels
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Chevrolet-Other-GT-Rare-1976-Chevrolet-Vega-GT-Al- l-Original-Near-Mint-5-Speed-Only-35K-No-Reserve-/261153767684?pt=US_Cars_Trucks- &hash=item3ccdfa4104
There are only two things I don't like on this Vega--the venetian blinds on the back window (easily remedied), and the cheap aftermarket side moldings which one has to wonder if removed, if they will mar the paint. Why do people put those moldings on cars? I see it frequently and I'd rather have a parking lot nick than those damn things!
then again, no one ever said I have good taste.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
I thought it was interesting, that in the eBay had, someone is *still* defending the car's engine--or rather making excuses for it---some 35 years later.
You'd think that this wouldn't even be in most people's consciousness after all these years---I mean, who remembers the weaknesses in the engine of a 1976 Cadillac?
About nobody.
But the Vega was such a lightning rod for America's ills that the legend lives on, so to speak.
I think it's fascinating that this controversial car still sparks debate. The Vega is LOADED with memories of the so-called "Decline of the Big Three" and the "Labor Problems with the UAW" and the "Rise of the Japanese Car"---all that stuff still swirls around the Vega.
There are few cars that would start so many conversations at a local show and shine.
If this car were a wagon, and didn't have the dopey side molding, I'd maybe consider it! In a perfect world, it'd have white-lettered tires too.
Someone else said a week or so ago that the '76 Chevy 'sport cloth' looked like a 'Herb Tarlek sport coat' and I agree (!)--it's probably more comfortable than the more-seen all-vinyl trim. The GT with Custom interior option (as the eBay car has) had a nice interior and instrument panel I always thought. An old high-school friend who now has the one Cosworth Vega our small hometown dealer got in--a '75--has the black cloth interior and it's much more tasteful IMO--subtle. If you got the black cloth on a '76 Cosworth, it, too, had the "Tarlek" look.
BTW, the Vega "Custom Interior" (as on this specimen) has the identical seats as the Camaro Sport Coupe, through the years.
My sister and her first husband's first car was a used '65 Coronet 440, with 318 engine.
Her husband's parents at the time had a '65 Pontiac Grand Prix, which I just fell in love with. I couldn't believe a car could have an instrument panel like that!
One summer day I rode with them in the Grand Prix to visit a family friend in Pittsburgh. The Grand Prix sat low, and had rather flat vinyl seats.
When we got back to Greenville, I climbed in the Coronet 440, which sat higher, and had well-padded cloth seats, and the short ride home actually seemed more comfortable than the Grand Prix!
My brother-in-law disagreed and I'd still rather have the Grand Prix today (!), but there was nothing wrong with that Coronet, 'til the tops of the fenders started rusting out a la Vega.