In biology, a clone is defined, "as an organism or cell, or group of organisms or cells, produced asexually from one ancestor or stock, to which they are genetically identical". Remember Dolly, the sheep? She was a clone. In automotive circles, clones are vehicles modified to resemble one that is similar but by many accounts is quite different. For instance, a plain-jane, six-cylinder, 1964 Pontiac Tempest altered to appear as though it's a 389 cubic-inch GTO complete with all the trimmings, is a classic example of an automotive "clone". Oh, it may look like a GTO, it may drive exactly like one too but in the "numbers-matching", persnickety collector car universe, it most certainly is not. Years ago (car) clones where verboten but over the last twenty to thirty years, particularity with the advent of resto-modding, older cars rebuilt with modern components, clones are less the red herring they used to be.
They're still not for everyone, especially ones priced at our near the cost of the "real" car it's emulating. Which brings us to our subject today, this 1978 Oldsmobile Cutlass Calais impeccably cloned and sort-of resto-modded, although historically incorrectly, into being, of all things, a 1980 Olds 442. Wow. Certainly this is one of the more unique clones that we've seen - especially done up as well as it is. I mean, if you didn't know this car did not exist in this body style for 1978 you'd never know.
Over the years we've prattled on about our disdain for General Motor's 1978-1987 "A-bodies" but this thing here might be an "A-body of a different color". What kills any notion of it for us is that the owner has it listed for sale for $17,000. Yikes. Can't blame them for asking that much as it would seem they have quite a lot "in it" but we'd like to examine the noggin of the person who would pay anywhere near that for it. Yes, they fully disclose it's a"clone" but the dark side of twenty-grand for a clone of a, excuse me, a 1980, 442? That's beach front money for a car that's anything but beach front property.
Now, as we've pointed out before, it's not that the shrunken GM "A-bodies", known as "G-bodies" from 1982-1987, where bad transportation conveyances; they were actually pretty good all things and the era considered. More than a foot-shorter and around eight-hundred pounds lighter than what they replaced, they rode and handled with an aplomb not seen before on a GM mid-size car. Hot-rodders like them too because they have full-perimeter frames and a huge engine bay that can swallow gigantic mills without having to modifying the hood. Blow the hood out and the sky's literally and figuratively the limit. They also had more genuinely usable interior room than the "big on the outside, small on the inside" blimps they replaced. Stylish and oh-so-tasty looking blimps but blimps nonetheless.
Some deride that they were more "up-sized compact" than "downsized-intermediate" but that would imply that size was the end-all and be-all; although their being significantly smaller than the "compact" Nova's, Skylark's, Phoenix' and Omega's which they were sold next to for two-model years (!) certainly didn't help. Nope, the problem was actually quite simple...they...was ugly. The homeliest of the sordid bunch the Chevrolet Monte Carlo with the Pontiac Grand Prix a close runner-up. The Buick Regal was meh; the malaisiest of the lot in the height of the malaise era. However, the Oldsmobile Cutlass coupes where somewhat of an exception, save, of course, for the slant-back Cutlass Salon's. Buick's Century's shared the same hysterically awful body; 1978 and 1979 on two and four-door models, for 1980 on the Century Sport Coupe only. Thankfully someone upstairs thought better of it and banished it moving foward after 1980.
"442" first appeared on an Oldsmobile Cutlass in mid model year 1964 when Oldsmobile cobbled together a sporty version of their new midsize two and four-door sedans as a literal reaction to Pontiac's GTO; it was more or less the Cutlass they sold to police departments. As if Oldsmobile needed to return Pontiac's salvo but back then GM's myriad divisions openly competed with one another. Sounds crazy now but it's amazing what you'll do when you have a near monopoly on anything.
Originally denoting a four-barrel carburetor, four-speed transmision and dual exhausts, 4-4-2, Oldsmobile conveniently changed the meaning of the numberical acronym as they saw fit on and off again for approximately twenty model years. We won't count the 1990 and 1991 Cutlass Calais 442 as a "real" 442 although on a handling course it could slice any previous 442 to ribbons.
Not that the 1978 "442" was real either based on what the moniker had previously "meant" but somewhat amazingly given it was the early days of Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE), Oldsmobile held onto the 442 for 1978 and 1979. But...and it was literally a big butt...they festooned "442" to, actually, more like glued "442" decals to - a coupe version of the Cutlass Salon; if you look close enough to the righy side of the trunk lid just to the left of the right rear tail lens you can make it out. Mercifully, for 1980, "442" appeared, as it should have in 1978, on the notch-back Cutlass Calais as the 1979 Hurst\Olds was. There was no "442" for model years 1981 and 1982; the Hurst\Olds came back for 1983 and 1984 with the "442" appearing again for a last ride from 1985 through 1987. Again, we obnoxiously ignore the 1990 and 1991 442.
Far be it for us to ask why anyone would go through the trouble of building this car but you have to hand it to them, this car is tight. This paint job alone couldn't have been cheap, unless they're a body shop person and did it themselves, and seeing this thing has a TKO600, 5-speed manual, which'll run you a good $2,500 by itself, means they didn't skimp on the details.
Well, maybe they skimped just a little although we don't know how long ago the engine swap was done but that blue paint on the valve covers does appear fresh. At least they kept it "all-Oldsmobile". The Oldsmobile 403, which was never offered on any 1977-1979 GM "A-body" let alone a Cutlass, was a good torquer back in its day, not so much a horsepower maker, but it's no modern General Motors LS engine. This engine was the replacement for the Oldsmobile 455 and was essentially an Oldsmobile 350 with a larger bore. A bore so large, in fact, that similar to what Chevrolet did with their "small-block" based 400 engine, the cylinders were siamesed.
In a 3,400 pound GM "A-body" with a race car inspired 5-speed, the 403's three-hundred twenty pounds of torque no doubt mean this thing can really go. Apparently the 403 has a "mild build" but there's no more info on it than that. No word on the rear end or suspension but with the 442's W-30 handling suspension, that our clone purportedly has, it may have made the most of a humble but adequate base suspension set-up.
There's the issue of the brothel-red interor clashing with the handsome exterior paint job but it's not that out of the question that Oldsmobile could have offered a "real" 1980 442 with this interior\exterior combo. Still, clash is clash can and it might be the only serious ding we have about with this car aside from we feel it way, way overpriced at $17,000. The saying goes, buy a restored car - don't buy a car and restore it. You'll never get your money back. Makes you wonder why some folks do but, bless their hearts, we're so glad they do.
Gosh, so...how much would we offer for this? Maybe...ten grand? And that would be all the money in the world. Perhaps a little more if it had an LS in it and the rear end was built; "real" 1980 442's could be had with as tiny as a 2.56 back there. Certainly seeing what kind of shape this is in and being apparently fresh and all, at least the paint job if not the "mild-build" on the engine, if this was a 1973-1977 "real" 442, shoot, even a clone although that would be about as odd as this thing is, $17,000 would seem almost reasonable. For any 442 at that price in this shape before 1973 you'd pay probably close to $40,000. That's getting up there.
If anything, whomever did this up is is an Oldsmobile person and we applaud a stellar effort of building a car Oldsmobile should have built in 1978 in the first place. Just don't ask us to pay the price of admission to own it.
No comments:
Post a Comment