Monday, March 11, 2024

1955 Cadillac - Profit Margins


This 1955 Cadillac Series 62 Coupe deVille is part of Cadillac's first major update of their seminal post war models that debuted in 1948. 


That update occurred for model year 1954 with the '54's being longer, lower and wider than what they replaced. The tailfins, which first cropped up on 1948 models, were bigger than ever too. 


1955 was a big year for General Motors as they became the first company in history to net a profit of more than a billion dollars - in a single year. Actually, they made around 1.22-billion and their profit margins were an absurd, especially for an auto maker, 10-percent. 


By comparison, Walmart today has a profit margin of maybe 2-percent. You almost can't blame GM for wanting to keep their profit margins at those stratospheric levels. 


Problem was, to do so, they began skimping, especially on what made a Cadillac a Cadillac. Even by 1955, many of the features that were once unique to Cadillac had trickled down to General Motors "lesser" models. 


For instance, you could even get air conditioning in a Chevrolet not to mention a V-8 engine. Although, that V-8 engine in a Chevy was tiny in comparison to the brute under the hood of a Cadillac. 


Maintaining those huge profit margins of 1955 left Cadillac with little more to market than styling and the prestige of the brand. 


Didn't seem to matter for about ten-years, though, but by the mid-'60's, buyers of the means to afford a Cadillac were beginning to catch on that their Cadillac wasn't anything more special than a Buick, Oldsmobile, Pontiac or, heaven-forbid, a Chevrolet. 

Thursday, March 7, 2024

1988 Pontiac Grand Am - Hollywood Had it All Wrong


Funny how Hollywood paints a picture of '80's cars as everyone driving a DeLorean. In reality, back in the '80's it seemed everyone was driving a Pontiac Grand Am like this 1988. 


If the insurance premiums on a Pontiac Firebird were too rich for you and you still wanted to make a fashion statement, and you somehow had the means to afford a new car, there was a good chance you drove a Pontiac Grand Am. These things were everywhere. Now a days they're as hard to find as a Members Only jackets, Guess Jeans and Milli Vanilli. 


These were the third cars Pontiac called Grand Am and they were by far and away the best-selling ones up to that point. They replaced the Pontiac version of the infamous Chevrolet Celebrity that was known as the Pontiac Phoenix. 


Somewhat curiously, although planned as four-door sedans from the get-go, when these first debuted in 1985, they were only available as two-door coupes like our '88 here; they came with the four-door versions starting in 1986. 


These cars shared their chassis and running gear with the Oldsmobile Calais, Buick Skylark and Somerset. Chevrolet's Beretta and Corsica rode on a similar chassis. 


The Grand Am was a staple of GM's long gone Pontiac division through model-year 2005. Pontiac replaced it for 2006 with a model they called the G6, G6 denoting the sixth generation of the Grand Am. 



















Saturday, March 2, 2024

1979 Mercury Marqus (Coupe!) - Hypocrites!


What do you get when you cross a panther and a gas crisis? Why, a Mercury Marquis, of course. In this case not just any Marquis but a 1979 Mercury Marquis coupe. You don't see these every day and you didn't see many "back in the day" either. 

Years ago, it was the rare sedan that wasn't offered in both four- and two-door guises. Four-door sedans were sold at a premium, you wanted to save a buck or two, you bought a two-door. 


With the increase in popularity of four-door sedans, what with their comparative impracticality in relation to them, sales of two-door sedans began to diminish with, at best, their offering little more than a tad more styling elan than the four-door version. In the case of this '79, Mercury marketed its, ahem, sporty roofline to appeal to the fashion conscious. Like many things, what's sporty and what's not is a matter of taste and opinion. 

Somewhat ironically, though, in the 1970's, while sales of two-door sedans dropped off, sales of personal luxury cars, which were exclusively two-door models, soared. In retrospect, especially in this day and age of do-everything-well sporty-utilities, it's a bit of a challenge to understand the appeal of personal luxury cars to say nothing of two-door sedans. You either get it, like I do, or you don't. 

Although Ford advertised that their models were still full-sized for 1977 and 1978, they too downsized come 1979 when they introduced a line of new full-size Ford and Mercury models that were up to 17-inches shorter and 700-pounds lighter than what they replaced. No one seemed to notice or care Ford appeared hypocritical when they downsized their big cars for 1979, seemed all but inevitable anyway. 


All but inevitable as The Big Three all downsized to make their cars more fuel-efficient to be in compliance with federal fuel-economy standards. 

Ford built their smaller big cars on what they referred to internally as the panther platform, named such, legend goes, to differentiate it from the Fox-platform or chassis that was introduced in 1978; the Fox platform named after the Audi Fox that purportedly inspired its design. The panther nickname was also, no doubt, a reference to the Mercury division's mascot. 

Incidentally, a panther and cougar are different names for big cats; cougars are found primarily in north and south America; panthers can be found in the America's but are primarily found in Asia and Africa. Other names for big cats are mountain lion, catamount and puma. 


Amazingly considering Ford introduced the Panther chassis as a stop gap with plans to discontinue it after 1982, Ford built the panther-based Marquis, in one form or another, along with the Ford and Lincoln versions for 33-model years making it one of the longest running production platforms in American Automobile history. 

The Mercury Marquis nameplate had dated back to 1967, was built on a longer wheelbase version of the chassis the Ford LTD was on and was offered, somewhat ironically, at first as only a two-door hardtop. When Ford redesigned their big cars for 1969, the Marquis was offered with four-doors as well as two. 

When Ford rolled out the panther-based Marquis and LTD for 1979, for the first time, both cars rode on the same chassis with the same wheelbase length. They shared all but the same body as well. You wouldn't be alone in thinking this was a Ford LTD; it all but is. 


Lincolns moved to a longer-wheelbase version of the panther-chassis for 1980. They got a unique body as too. 

Despite the smaller external dimensions, like the downsized GM big cars, these cars were roomier inside than what they replaced, Ford advertising up to 11-cubic feet more of interior volume, along with greater glass area improving visibility. Credit that to engineers calling the shots first, stylists called in after to do what they did. I think they did a nice job with these coupes, then again, I'm sort of partial to them. The four-door versions? Meh, not so much. The improved interior efficiency highlighting how space inefficient the models these cars replaced were. The days of form over function were over. 

Ford made these handsome coupes through 1987 but, again, they sold poorly. Ford monkeyed around with the moniker starting in 1983 moving it to a Fox-body, four-door sedan for 1983 through 1986, it was replaced ultimately by the Mercury version of the Ford Taurus that was known as the Sable. Since the 1979 to 1982 Marquis actually sold fairly well, well, the four-door models did, Mercury kept the car around calling it the "Grand Marquis" from 1983 all the way through 2011; big difference being they were four-door sedans only. The Grand Marquis had been an interior trim package on the Marquis brougham going back to 1974. 

1979 was the best-selling year for the Marquis coupes with more than 20,000 sold. Sales cratered in 1980 and never recovered making our '79 here fairly rare if not unique. 

Sunday, February 4, 2024

1982 Chevrolet Caprice (Coupe!) - Blue Bonnet


General Motors "Class-of-1977", downsized full cars get an inordinate amount of praise from automobile cognoscenti that are of my age group and roughly ten-years older and younger. Not to be contrarian, but while I agree they were better transportation conveyances than what they replaced, aesthetically, there's not much of an argument they were nowhere near anything GM had come out with in the thirty-or-so-years prior. The dawn of the dutiful, disposable automotive appliance was upon us and for better, worse or indifference, with some exceptions, the automobile industry hasn't looked back. One of those most pleasant of exceptions was, my blog, my opinion, of all things, Chevrolet's 1980-1986 Chevrolet Caprice coupes. I found this 1982 for sale on Marketplace with a, "I guess the Pandemic is really, really over" asking price of $4,250. 


Two-door sedans were quite fashionable after World War II and GM came with a full-range of them for the "Great Downsizing Epoch". While I'm partial to the 1977-1979 "D-body" Cadillac and Buick two-door sedans, giving credit where it's due, though, I have to applaud the efforts Chevrolet's design team for what they did on their B-body Caprice coupe. Doesn't mean I liked it, though. Above is a 1977 Impala. 


The unique roof line of these cars has its fans, I'm not one of them. I don't get it and I think it looks out of place. My initial reaction to it was I thought it off-putting; they might as well have put tailfins on these cars. That far-out rear windshield was made by placing glass over hot-wires and slowly, literally, bending the glass over them. The process was time consuming, expensive and the failure rate was absurdly high. 


Not surprisingly, come 1980 and GM's mid-cycle reboot of all of their full-size cars, the ambitious and pricy rear window or "backlight" was gone and was replaced with an all but bolt-straight roof treatment straight off the 1976-1979 Cadillac Seville. It also helped create my third favorite General Motors "1977" behind the aforementioned Cadillac deVille and Buick Electra coupes. Sometimes less really is more. 


I actually like this bluebonnet so much that I know if I didn't have two "classics" already, I might lobby the wife for it. I mean, look at this interior! There's so much to work with here although there's much to be done, apparently. 


Kudos to the poster of the ad who made the effort to photograph it so it looks, apparently, better than it is. Although the frame and pans are solid, there's rust issues. The driver's door has the tin worm, and the passenger door is so bad, they say it could or should be replaced. Well, again, snaps to the poster of the ad, you'd never be able to tell. Thanks for being so forthcoming. 


It's got a busted brake line and although it runs and moves under its own power, it's sat since 1999 so it's going to need a good going over or two or three. Bring a trailer, literally and figuratively. 


Under hood, the poster of the ad claims that's a "4.3 V6" but unless someone swapped in that engine, it can't be that. Chevrolet didn't offer the 4.3-liter V-6 on the Caprice until 1985, again, this is an '82, so if it is a V-6, that's Chevrolet's own 3.8-liter V-6 that's not to be confused with the Buick 3.8-liter chuffer of the era. The 4.3-liter V-6 replaced the 3.8-liter Chevrolet V-6. 


It looks a tad long to be a V-6, though, sorry, that was the only picture of the engine in the ad, and since the poster said it was a "4.3", perhaps they're mistaking that for, "4.4"? In that case, and this makes sense, it would be Chevrolet's "L39", 4.4-liter V-8. Chevrolet made that boat anchor from 1979-1982. Also known as the "267-cubic inch V-8", it made 120-horsepower and 215-foot pounds of torque and it's most "powerful". Even in a "downsized" Caprice, you ain't going anywhere fast with it under the hood. Chevrolet also offered the 267 in the Monte Carlo and Malibu. 


The reasonable asking price is also, I take it, reflective of the fact that this car doesn't have at least Chevrolet's vastly superior "LG4", 5.0-liter (305-cubic inch) V-8 which, for 1982 (engine choices above), made a fairly respectable 145-horspower and 245-foot pounds. The LG4 is also vastly tunable, the L39 is not, and there's an entire cottage industry devoted to making it more powerful. 


Another Achilles heel this car has is its transmission. This probably has GM's infamous THM-200 which is a lightweight version of their venerable THM-350. I'd use the rust, the engine and the transmission as bargaining points. Given the interior and the frame being solid, this is very well bought closer to two-grand. 


Take the savings and get the doors fixed and plop in a proper powertrain. Keep in mind, you don't have to "LS-swap" it. There's plenty of engine and transmissions out there that for very little money could transform this handsome blue bonnet into the sleeper of your dreams. Or nightmares. 













1982 Chevrolet Caprice Classic 2dr Coupe, 4.3 v6 auto. The car runs and moves under its own power but currently has a bad brake line. The car has sat since 1999 and could use a good going over before putting on the road. Car is not perfect, it has some rust spots around the car, all rather small. The worst rust on the car is in the doors. Passenger should be replaced, drivers could be fixed but its not great. Aside from that, the frame is 100% rot free, no cracks or holes. Trailing arm pockets are very solid. Floor pans, trunk pan, rockers, hood and deck lid are all very nice. Best part of the car in my opinion is the interior, front and back seat are very nice, headliner is solid and the carpet is intact. With minimal cleaning it would be pretty darn nice.


 

Saturday, February 3, 2024

1973 Oldsmobile Cutlass - Three On a Tree On a 1973 Oldsmobile Cutlass??


The new mid-sized Oldsmobile's were not in early for 1973 as a labor strike delayed them long enough that models slated for 1972 came as 1973's. All GM intermediates were new for '73 and were referred to as "Colonnades" denoting their center-posts, columns or pillars; there were no hard tops. What makes this '73 Oldsmobile Cutlass unique and different enough that it deserves a minute or two of our time is that it has a manual transmission. Please accept my apologies, the poster of the Facebook Marketplace ad for this only put up four pictures. 
 

What we have here is a column mounted, three speed manual shifter. I know, it looks like an automatic in PARK, but that's what was known as a column-mounted manual shifter that's locked up in in REVERSE. First gear is down and out, second up and away towards the dash, third below that. There are three pedals down there too - I know they're hard to make out but they're there: clutch on the left, brake in the middle and the gas on the right. 


I was perplexed by it too then I checked a brochure for 1973 Cutlass' and, sure enough, the standard transmission on the 1973 Oldsmobile Cutlass is a fully synchronized, 3-speed manual with column shift. A synchronized manual means that the gears are spinning at the same speed so when you shift, you won't grind the gears.  


Manual transmissions are one thing, a three-on-three is something else altogether. These things were an anomaly even when I was a kid growing up in the '70's. My only "experience" with one was seeing my friend Andy's mom rowing one in their 1967 Buick Special station wagon. I was slack-jawed at the amount of work the poor woman had to do to keep the car moving. It seemed quaint and old-timey at the time, and we are talking, gulp, fifty-years ago. Good grief. 


Chrysler is given credit for pioneering the steering-column mounted three-speed shifter when they introduced it on their 1939 Plymouth's; shifters were always floor-mounted up until then. GM, Ford and other manufacturers quickly followed suit with their own "three-on-a-tree".  Incidentally, automatic transmissions wouldn't appear en masse in cars until 1948 with, ironically enough, Oldsmobile and their "Hydra-Matic" two-speed that was also available on Cadillac's. I know, just like the internet, you thought automatic transmissions were always around but that's simply not the case. Even Cadillac owners had to row-their-own. 


It's open for debate what the actual benefits of a column mounted shifter were. Their linkage was more complicated than a floor-mounted shifter that connected directly to the transmission and with the driver constantly rowing the "tree", if there was a middle passenger, they'd have to sit far enough away from the driver to enable them to swing their arm wide enough to make the shifts. Not unlike with a floor mounted shifter. Again, what was the benefit aside from, perhaps, in theory, the middle front seat passenger having more leg room. 


Seems odd now but steering column mounted manual shifters were quite common in the 1940's, '50's and '60's, they began to wane, though, in the '70's. Fun facts, kids, the last GM car to feature one was the 1979, rear-wheel-drive, "X-body" Chevrolet Nova (the above diagram is from a 1979 Nova owner's manual). 


Chrysler's last models to have one was the 1978 Dodge Aspen and Plymouth Volare, Dodge Monaco and Plymouth Fury; good luck finding one of those. Ford offered it on their all-new-for 1978, "Fox-body" Fairmont but discontinued it afterwards. 


Not only was 1973 the last year for a three-on-tree for the Cutlass, but it was also the last year a four-speed manual was available on the performance oriented 4-4-2 model. Oldsmobile would offer a three-speed manual again on the Cutlass starting in 1975, but it was floor-mounted backing either a Chevrolet built, inline-six or Oldsmobile's new 260-cubic inch V-8; both power trains were for customers looking for improved fuel economy.  


Along with these scant photos and even fewer details, the poster of the ad for this very rare '73 Cutlass is asking $8,900 for it. Along with the requisite, "will not respond to 'is this available'", they say it runs great although they don't say why they didn't back it out of this garage or storage facility to take more photos. That $8,900 ask seems like a lot, frankly I think it's insane, but, believe it or not, this is priced below market. This is screaming to be resto-modded but the cost of admission, in my opinion, is almost as absurdly high as a three-on-a-tree was in the early 1970's. 












 

Friday, January 26, 2024

1976 Ford Elite - Ford Tries to Build a Monte Carlo

The Ford Motor Company's Ford division was quite late to the personal luxury car party in the 1970's spurred by General Motors' 1969 Pontiac Grand Prix and 1970 Chevrolet Monte Carlo when they rolled out these tarted up Torino's they called "Elite" for 1974. Actually, for 1974 these were called the "Gran Torino Elite"; Ford dropped the Gran Torino pre-fix for 1975 and 1976. My Facebook Marketplace find here hails from 1976. 

Ford apparently saw no need to come sooner with a personal luxury car given they had their Thunderbird in their stable, but the Thunderbird, even the loosely Torino-based 1972-1976 models, were full sized cars, not mid-size like the Grand Prix and Monte Carlo, were (opinion) far less handsome than GM's wonder-twins, were far more expensive and subsequently got trounced at the box office. 

Calling these tarted up Torino's isn't fair, though. They're more like rebadged Mercury Cougar XR-7's. A different grill here, some futzing with the goofy opera windows, adjust the vinyl top and there you go. A Ford Elite. 

These cars remind me of when I asked my mother for a pair of Levi's that all the cool kids were wearing but she bought me Sears Toughskins instead. How I didn't get stuffed in a locker more than I did is anyone's guess. Might as well have been a Ford Elite. 

Taste and armpits, these cars no doubt have their fans, GM fan boy here, I ain't one of them. I would give credit where credit is due if I thought these deserving - for example, I thought Chrysler's 1975-1977 Cordoba quite handsome although it's styling obliviously was obviously a derivative of the 1973 Chevrolet Monte Carlo. I had a '75 Cordoba, and while I loved it, I thought the '76 Chevrolet Monte Carlo a friend had rode and handled better. Far better looking too but us beggars can't be choosers. I was lucky to have new clothing. 

Asking price on this one is a ridiculous $7,950, high retail is $2,900. Reupholstered front seat is an eye-sore - why folks don't spring for the appropriate upholstery vexes me. Maybe it wasn't available, that happens. If that was the case, change the back seat when you're doing the fronts. To us classic car wonks, that stuff matters. And who the heck else is going to be interested in this thing? 

That's Ford's venerable 351-cubic inch "Windsor" V-8, "Windsor" denoting it was built at their engine plant across the Detroit River in Windsor, Ontario. Low-compression, tiny two-barrel carburetor, 154 horsepower - the muscle car era was dead and buried by 1976. Good news is these are easily "souped-up"; how fast do you want to spend? If you're curious, that's not a Folger's Coffee can, it's a reservoir for engine vacuum. 

Might be my "GM myopia", but I have to wonder why someone would buy this car - perhaps at three-grand, maybe $3,500 considering its condition but eight-grand? Seriously? I see no value proposition here but, again, there's an arse for every seat. Ford tried to build a Monte Carlo or Grand Prix and, my blog, my opinion, failed miserably. Chevrolet sold more than three Monte Carlo's for every one "Elite" Ford sold. 

Ford dropped the Elite moniker replacing it in their lineup for 1977 with a restyled car they glued "Thunderbird" to; in retrospect, what they should have done as far back as 1972. Wouldn't you know it? The Thunderbird moniker still had some of the old magic in it as 1977-1979 Thundrtbirds became the best selling T-Bird's of all time. 

Didn't hurt that they did away with most if not all of the quirks of these cars with the 1977 reboot. They were priced lower too - America, then as now, loves a bargain. 




















At ac amfm power steering power brakes 351v8,orginal paint NEW TIRES NEW VINYL TOP JUST SERVICED RUNS AND DRIVES GREAT , GREAT CLASSIC CRUZER.