Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
I think people were a lot more brand loyal in those days, so IMO at least, having those four car lines made sense. In fact, GM's A-body accounted for 3 of the top ten selling cars in 1985, as the Celebrity, Cutlass Ciera, and Century were all strong sellers back then. The Pontiac 6000 sold reasonably well, but not quite enough to make the cut.
My guess is that they easily sold 1M A-bodies for 1985. If you took away 3 of the nameplates and just went with one car, I seriously doubt that one car would have sold anywhere near 1M units. A Buick Century buyer would probably be happy with a Cutlass Ciera, but I have a feeling the Celebrity would be too "plebian" and the 6000 too "boy racer". Similarly, a 6000 buyer would probably think a Celebrity too plain, and a Ciera or a Century too stuffy and old fogey. And the Celebrity buyer, perhaps that's all they could afford, or wanted to pay for a car, so the extra expense of the others would be lost on them.
Personally, I'd take the Terrain over the Equinox as well. I don't care for the SRX though. I think its price point cheapens the Cadillac brand.
Rebadging is still alive and well, that will never go away...
Not to mention, the Captiva is the old Saturn Vue. I don't think too many people will mistake it for an SRX, the way some folks might between a Ford Edge and the Lincoln equivalent, with the same sheetmetal.
Too bad, I actually like the looks of the Captiva better than GM's other small SUVs.
But it doesn't, that's my point. Not much data to even go by.
Edit: dieselone beat me to it.
They also had said there were different reliability results for the Torrent and first Equinox, which is really ridiculous
Now that's not true because they didn't have a large enough sample of Torrent to report on those.
This is kind of like our "Automobile" magazine discussion about Sonata recalls last year.
Point is a slight difference should not be a surprise. Squeeks and rattles come from things like interior moldings, which differ from 'nox to Terrain.
It's not like one was a star and the other was a lemon.
Why don't you own a '55 or '57 Chev, man? They are awesome. I always remember everyone (OK, almost everyone!) always left out the '56 Chevy amongst their favorites, but I kinda like it. Not as much as the '55, which is my favorite. The '57 comes in 2nd for me.
The one I really want ta get is a '62-'65 Chevy Nova II. Love 'em!
I'm gonna go back in time and respond ta steve's comment that came after this post. I don't like the column shifters either, unfortunately, Chevy loved them at that time. The '62 Nova II had them, too. One sorta like this, though this looks more like a '64 Chevy Nova.
Nope-I was thinking I poached a white Nova for this pic, but this
one is a legitimate '62 red Nova II. Dig it.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
I'd rather have the gutless '59 automatic we had for a while than a '57. The flat fins were much cooler.
I had no idea it was that many.
In a way, so true. I remember Bob Lutz asking the beancounters a few years back that if today, they had $4000 "on the hood" of a new Impala, and by investing another $500 in better quality materials allowed them to take $2000 of the $4K "off the hood" would they not be making an extra $1500?
Their answer; "I guess, that's one way of looking at it, but we don't see it that way"
All they saw was "spending" an extra $500 per car.
THAT type of thinking leads to bankruptcy.
That's partially a corporate culture problem. You're hiding the loss on the car by disassociating the expense of selling it from the cost of actually building it. So year, that $500 saved means you're making $3000 on the car, yay!! The fact that is costs an extra $4000 to sell the car in the first place is someone else's problem.
Easy way to tell from the back, is the '65 is the only one of those years that has one square taillight next to one backup light on each side.
The '53 Buick in the family rusted out the front passenger side floor first for some reason.
Actually, the way the salt is going here in the UP, I may wind up watching the road go underneath my feet in our rigs in another couple of years.
Back to the '57, fortunately it belonged to a friend who taught me shifting on it, so I didn't have to deal with it much.
Easy way to tell from the back, is the '65 is the only one of those years that has one square taillight next to one backup light on each side.
I will go with your thinking on this and I do know the taillight configuration you're talking about. And it is great. I want one even more now.
Anyone know Jay Leno's cell number?
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
He's the guy for 1,000 horsepower '66 Toronados and Bugattis.
The '56 is my favorite of those three years. With the '55 I didn't like the too-small grille, and the turn signals gave it sort of a droopy, sad look. And the shape of the taillights and the way they jutted out seemed a bit old-fashioned. They actually remind me of the taillights on my Granddad's old '53 DeSoto...although on that old 1949-designed body, they made it seem a bit more modern.
The '57 was, in my opinion, a bit too glittery in its attempt to become a baby Cadillac, and the style just seemed reactionary rather than revolutionary. To be fair, it was in its third model year, and had to face lower, sleeker, all-new designs from Ford and Plymouth...and the public WAS demanding more glittery cars. So, Chevy did the best with what they had.
But IMO, the '56 seems the best of the bunch. I like its agressive, forward thrust that gives it a sporty look, and the styling in general just seems a bit more crisp and tough than the '55, which seemed a bit "softer". My only criticism of the '56 would be that the grille, while I do find it attractive, does have a Ford resemblance to it.
The unasked question here is, would the Impala sell the same number of units with $2K on the hood as it did with $4K on the hood, and would 'better quality materials' really make themselves all that apparent to MOST owners or really make a noticeable quality difference down the road? Who could say.
I'll also confess that I'm probably one of the few people who prefers the '58 Ford to the '57...
Yup. All that article says is that once Nissan's plant in Brazil is up and running, South America won't have to rely on Mexico for supply. Hence capacity in Mexico will be utilized to supply North America.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCbfGBPnGiI
Brazil tends to get stuff from europe, though. TVs were PAL and not NTSC, for instance. They got the Corsa not the Cobalt. The Fords there were always European designs, too, Ka and Fiesta but no Taurus.
Seems silly that they build American branded cars but they're european designs, and it's all built in (South) America.
When North America formed NAFTA, they banded together to form Mercosul.
They should work together, not form pacts to exclude each other.
Stude beat Chevy, Pontiac, and Packard by a few model years with an OHV V8. Although it wasn't high-horsepower, at least those first few years, I heard a colorful Stude engineer once at a meet in South Bend say 'we basically copied the Cadillac V8'.
A '55 Commander coupe is a handsome car, for sure.
Import tariffs effectively double the price of a car.
They started sending it to Europe instead.
To make this car related, the Fittipaldi family owns orange groves in Brazil. Anyone remember his faux pas, gulping OJ instead of milk after winning the Indy 500?
US and Brazil should work out some sort of reciprocal agreement and lower tariffs on different products, I think it could be mutually beneficial.
Brazilians love American corn, strawberries, peaches, and apples. Just some of the things the US could export.
Meanwhile they have more OJ and sugar cane than they know what to do with.
Seems like it was 50 cents a gallon at one time.
Edit: here's an updated article on that...
http://riotimesonline.com/brazil-news/rio-business/us-opens-market-for-brazilian- -ethanol/#
Hey, any country that was willing to keep producing the Dodge Dart through 1981 is A-OK in my book!
They just stopped producing the VW Bus this year!
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
IIRC, that tariff was more to protect the sugar industry in the US which wanted to sell domestic sugar cane to the ethanol industry.
I consider '58 a transition year and in 1959 things just got weird. My favorite was the '61 Impala bubble top. ( I had one and wish I still had it)
The '56 Olds was a great looking car, and my favorite Ford was the '56.
Those Crown Vics were great looking.
Although the styling was getting over the top in 1959, I loved the split front end on that year Pontiac.
It seemed pretty comfy up front for me. It was a bit tight in the rear, but then it's also a compact car, not a limousine. Compared to the Cruze, the Dart seemed bigger in the front seat, smaller in the rear. I'd consider one if I was in the market for a smaller car. But I still think I'd be more comfortable in something a bit bigger, like the Charger.
I think the '59 DeSoto and Mercury were good looking that year as well. They looked a bit out of date compared to a '59 Olds, which would've been their closest competition, but I never liked that front-end on the Olds, with the widely-spaced headlights.
I agree on the '56 Olds. I think the '57 was really nice looking as well. It was all-new, but I guess didn't look different enough from the '56, so it wasn't a very hot seller.
I always thought the '61 Pontiac was a really sharp looking car. But, I've read enough about the horrors of the "slim jim" transmission, that I guess if I want one, I should seek out a Bonneville or Star Chief, which still used the older, 4-speed HydraMatic? Olds went slim-jim all the way, but for some reason, Pontiac only used it in the Catalina and, starting in 1962, Grand Prix.