1981 Pontiac Phoenix - Rising From The Ashes

I don't tell many people this, but I failed my first driver's test in the fall of 1981. Yup. "Car guy" me failed it hook, line and sinker. And I was mortified. Especially since I had told "the gang" I aced it and I would be driving them "all over the place" in my old man's Cadillac as soon as the confirmation of my glorious passing came in the mail. 

To make matters worse, a three-month backlog to reschedule meant the B.M.O.C. life I dreamed of would be significantly shortened. Might as well spend it in detention or worse, on my aging Ross 10-speed like some sophomore. So, I hedged my bets. 

Swallowing hard on my enormous sense of self-worth, and really with no other choice since getting into a driver's ed class after school had already started was not possible, I enrolled in a driving school. Twice a week for the three months leading up to my rescheduled road test, a driving instructor would pull up to my house after I got home from school, and we'd go driving. On paper it was pure, unadulterated and unfiltered humiliation bordering on self-mutilation. In reality, it was a most pleasant experience despite the car the driving instructor showed up being a brand spanking new, 1981 Pontiac Phoenix. This junker here looks just like it.

   

I was not a fan of the all-new-for-1980, boxy and not good looking, front-wheel-drive Chevrolet Citation and its very similar minions introduced in the spring of 1979 as "early" 1980's. At first, however, it seemed I was alone with that sentiment as Chevrolet sold some 811,000 Citations for 1980 making it one of the most successful vehicle introductions in GM history. Legend has it that if factories where able to keep up with demand, they could have surpassed 1 million sold in an elongated 1980 model year. Throw in sales of the similar Buick Skylark, Oldsmobile Omega and the Pontiac Phoenix, they most certainly did. 

The implosion in sales of what were known internally at GM as the "X-bodies" is the stuff of legend. However, the ultimate failure of the Citation, Omega, Skylark and Phoenix had nothing to do with their appearance and all to do with how terrible an automobile they all were. Contrary to what many might think, looks aren't everything in the car business. After all, the car that inspired the X-bodies, the Volkswagen Rabbit, was certainly no looker but it was well-built, sensible, economical, efficient and affordable. Precisely what Middle-America was looking for in the darkest, deepest throes of what is referred to as the "Malaise Era". 

My instructor was a young man who was maybe ten years older than I was at the time. Affable, friendly, supportive and kind, he immediately put me at ease, and I got the feeling that things were going to work out fine for me. Especially after a couple of days instruction where he was impressed with my driving; he felt I may have failed my road test because the evaluator thought I was "too comfortable" behind the wheel. That's funny when I think about that in retrospect; my ability to appear comfortable in situations I was actually uncomfortable in readily apparent at the tender age of seventeen. That Phoenix I drove had an interior identical to this one. 

The Phoenix may have had something to do with my coming across as a competent young driver to a qualified, licensed driving instructor. Up to that point, the bulk of my driving had been behind the wheel of my father's oafish 1972 Cadillac Sedan deVille. An oversized, shuddering, phlegmy mess, I actually never felt totally at ease driving it but the diminutive, responsive Phoenix felt like a go-cart in comparison. Dare I say, I thought it fun to drive. In "Driver's Ed" the summer before my senior year, a gaggle of us shared time behind the wheel of a 1976 Plymouth Volare which was a paragon of performance compared to my father's Cadillac. 

Looks aside, the Phoenix wasn't perfect. Although it had that "new car smell", it had a mild vibration through it at all times and when parallel parking, if I locked the wheel too hard left or right, the engine would stall. My instructor sheepishly grinning and shrugging simultaneously. Aside from those foibles, it felt "modern", new and given its maneuverable size, was a good car to learn to drive in. I felt as though I could do anything behind the wheel of it except look cool or good. I took my rescheduled road-test in it and passed with flying colors. 

In many ways, that Phoenix reminds me of people I've met in life whom some thought despicable but that I never took exception to. That doesn't make those people not despicable, but while I give people the benefit of the doubt that they're not a-holes, they need to prove to me firsthand that they're either scum or saints. Prior to that experience in a GM "X-body", I had heard much about how bad they were, but that Phoenix did alright by me as my driving life began anew...rising from the ashes. 

1978 Buick Skylark - Blurple

I found this heavily repainted "blurple" 1978 Buick Skylark on Facebook Marketplace this morning with advertised with just 60,000 miles on its ticker and an asking price of $4,000. In a day and age of hyperinflation on used cars, that seems almost reasonable. There's not too much info in the ad about it; looks to me from how jacked up the front end is, this may be missing its engine. That being either Buick's own 3.8-liter (231 cubic-inch) V-6 or a Chevrolet built 5.0-liter (305 cubic-inch) V-8. Legend has it a seriously detuned Chevrolet "350" was also available in high altitude regions of California. 

Buick's "Skylark" template had been around for over forty-years in a number of different guises by the time they offed it for good after model year 1998. Our '78 here part of the class-of-'75s that were built on the same chassis as the Chevrolet Nova. In 1973 and 1974, to jump on the space craze that was already dying down if not all but dead and buried, this car was known as "Apollo". Pontiac and Oldsmobile built a "Nova" back then too. Pontiac labeled theirs "Ventura" from 1971-1977 and then "Phoenix" from 1978-1979. Oldsmobile's was "Omega" from 1973-1979. Technically, Cadillac didn't get one, what were known internally at GM as "X-body", but they used the bones of an X foundation for their polarizing 1975-1979 Seville. 

It's hard to say if General Motors offering essentially the same car at four of their five automobile divisions was ultimately part of their demise or not. There were so many circumstances transpiring to send GM to their slow, interminable death years ago that it's unfair to point to one misstep and say it was, "the one". That's worth noting since Alfred Sloan's venerated pricing ladder was still in full bloom when a Buick was allegedly significantly "more" than an Oldsmobile, Pontiac or Chevrolet. 

Seeing how similar the Nova, Omega, Ventura and Apollo where (NOVA, get it?), to impish and impressionable young me at the time, I understood it and "got it" simply because it was all that I knew. And me being the trust everyone first kind-of-girl I was at the time, if "Buick" said that an "Apollo\Skylark" was somehow and way superior to a Chevy Nova, then by golly it must be so. Sigh. I sort of kind of miss that "me" too. Although my mother made me wear plaid tough skins.  

Historically, this '78 is somewhat interesting. There was a 1979 Skylark, but it was out of showrooms as soon as GM made the new front-wheel-drive "X-body" Skylark available. So, what we have here is a Skylark from the last full model year a rear-wheel-driver was offered. That may or may not get your automotive juices flowing positively. 

I'm all but certain the engine is missing from this the more that I look at it. Seeing it's for sale here in Cleveland, Ohio, if it's "clean", meaning no rust, it could be made into something a whole lot zestier than it was when it came from the factory in the deepest throes of what many refer to as the "Malaise Era" of automobile-dom. Perhaps you can work out a deal where the seller keeps the gawd-awful "dubs" and even the Crager's seeing how they really look out of place on it. To me at least. Swap on a set of GM "steelies" that I know you have lying around and shop far and wide for a set of Buick rallies after you make it into what you want. 

 

1964 Ford Thunderbird - None of that Ever Happened

A Ford Thunderbird just like this is what my parents brought me home from the hospital in back in early April of 1964. My father had just gotten a fat bonus check from raking a client over the coals and he blew a good portion of it on it along with putting a substantial down payment on an inground pool my mother wanted. Mom wanted the plushier looking "landau", she had a tendency to appreciate things that were Liberace gaudy, but the John Wayne meets Frank Sinatra of a man my father was, he put his boot down and insisted on the hard top. Good for you, dad. 

Of course, that's complete nonsense. My father was far from a corporate raider, frankly, I don't know what he did for a living, and I was brought home in either a worn out, early '50's Desoto or a 1961 Rambler Classic. And I can't say which one of those bombs I would have preferred to have spit up on my mother in. My mother claimed I was a cranky, colicky baby, I love that fact, and I'd say a major reason for that was that I didn't approve of the car they had. 

If my parents were of the means to afford a new Ford Thunderbird when I was born, honestly, GM girl that I am, I would have much preferred they'd have a Buick Riviera. But I wouldn't have kicked one of these out of my basinet. Sigh. I sometimes wonder what my life would have been like growing up had my parents been wealthy and indulged themselves and their three sons materialistically. Knowing what I know now, whomever it was who said money can't buy happiness really did know what they were talking about. Although, it can make things seem a whole lot easier. If not fun. Having money means you just have one less thing to worry about and growing up in that household, there was a whole lot more to be concerned about. 

Not that the Ford Thunderbird was ever meant to be a "driver's car", but the new-for-'64's obliterated any pretense of performance the "bullet 'bird" it replaced did. Weighing 4,700-pounds with a full-tank of premium gas, the near two-and-half-ton curb weight due to the hefty unibody it shared with the Lincoln Continental, the oh-so-softly sprung '64 sprang from zero-to-sixty in 11.5 seconds. The quarter mile breezed by eventually at 18 seconds and 76 miles-per-hour. Despite the zoomie sheet metal, top speed was just 105.  

The good news was it was closed, bank vault quiet at speed. Nice to know new-born me wouldn't have had to endure any undue road noise on the jaunt from the hospital to our North Shore mansion with the inground pool under construction in the backyard. 

Oh, sorry. I keep forgetting none of that ever happened. 

 

1978 Buick Regal Sport Coupe - "Turbo" Means Fast, Right?

This 1978 Buick Regal Sport Coupe is for sale over in Butler, P.A., as the natives here on the eastern frontier of the mid-west refer to Pennsylvania, with a scant 39,000 miles on its analog, forty-four-year-old ticker. Asking price is $10,000. To me, that's all the money in the money in the world for a 1978 vintage, downsized GM intermediate. In fairness, this is somewhat special aside from being "original" and a museum quality, automotive time capsule. 

What makes it special is its historical significance. 1978 Regal Sport Coupes, along with LeSabre Sport Coupes for '78, were the first factory production cars powered by Buick's turbocharged, 3.8-liter V-6. That's denoted by the handsome little bulge in the center of the hood. Boost gauges are on the back of the bulge. No idea if they work or not, I'd assume so. Seems sort of out of place on a car with so much chrome, let alone a Buick. 

Thar she literally blows. Buick built two different versions of this thing for 1978, one with a two-barrel making 150-horsepower, the other with a four-barrel making 165. Sadly, this is the only under hood picture from the ad and I have no way to tell if it's the two- or four-barrel version. Seeing the red induction plumbing, can we assume it's the four-barrel? Red denotes speed and power, no? And "turbo" means fast, right? 

1978 Regal Sport Coupes also provided buyers with a suspension with heavier spring rates, thicker anti-roll bars, significantly quicker steering, like a full turn quicker, and bigger wheels and tires. Buckets, console shifter and sport steering wheel are optional. Stuff, unfortunately, you could not even order ala carte back then on "regular" Regal's or LeSabre's. 

The first Buick to have a turbo was the 1976 Century that was the pace car at the 1976 Indianapolis 500. Spooled up to 22 psi of boost, that engine made 306-horspower and 370 foot-pounds of torque. Of course, it being the 1970's, it was deemed way too exotic for the general public and the motor that they eventually offered made about half as much power. Fun fact, for 1978, the Buick Regal and LeSabre Sport Coupes made up exactly half of all turbocharged cars sold in the United States that year. The other two were the Saab 99 and Porsche 911. 

If this were closer to me, I might waste my time and the seller's time feigning interest just to kick its tires and see what the turbo feels like. Contemporary road testers actually loved the performance kick it provided although they did note there was considerable "lag" and that the boost didn't last long when the gas was stabbed. Buick sorted out most if not all those issues by the time they put the whole turbo thing to the curb (for good) after it was offered in the 1989, twentieth anniversary, Pontiac Trans Am. 

Once again, the story behind this car and its originality is probably the most interesting thing about it. How this has survived this long with its original powerplant and hasn't succumbed to a small or big block Chevy being dropped into it is one I'd love to hear. 

 

1973 Pontiac Luxury LeMans - What is a Luxury Car?

A fellow member of a car group I belong to on Facebook says they recently bought this 1973 Pontiac Luxury LeMans to "save" it. "Saved" a term as broad as the rear fenders on it. It hails from the state of Washington so at least it's been spared the rust-breeding brine they put on roads up here in Northeast, Ohio during wintertime. Still appears to need everything if it's going to be truly "saved". 

I remember seeing GM Colonnade's like this as a car crazy nine-year-old running amuck at the New York Auto Show in the fall of 1972. Shout out to the long since demolished New York Coliseum in Columbus Circle in Manhattan. Their extended front bumpers with shock absorbers built into them were all the rage and made anything that didn't have them appear old and outdated. That's really funny now that I think about it given that cars made before 1973 are generally worth more now primarily because they don't have the battering ram "safety bumpers". 

I used to go weak in the knees over stuff like this. Seriously. However, my recent restoration of our 1977 Corvette has me appreciating a weekender that has a little something extra and really different from my daily drivers. The way I look at it these days, if your "classic" is going to break your heart and bank account, at least make it worthwhile to the seat of your pants. Your opinion may vary. See dealer for details.  

The first Pontiac LeMans was a top-of-the-line trim level on the weird and wonderful 1961 Tempest (above). With its canted, "half-of-a-389", inline four-cylinder paint-shaker and flexible, cable like driveshaft feeding torque to a transaxle, what's referred to colloquially as "rope drive", built on the same chassis that also underpinned the Chevrolet Corvair and Buick Skylark, the Tempest was arguably the oddest of a really odd bunch. That said, I really like 1961 and 1962 Tempests, I'll pass on the '63's.  And I'll take mine stuffed with a 326 cubic-inch V-8 although that saucy mill wasn't available until 1963. '61 and '62 Tempest's could be ordered with Buick's alloy, 215 cubic-inch V-8. No six-cylinder was offered on 1961-1963's Tempests and LeMans'.

For '62, LeMans became its own model line although it really was still a top-of-the-line Tempest. LeMans and Tempest were fused at the swing axle through '63 and were siblings through their more conventional GM A-body intermediate phase through 1970. For 1971 only, Tempest was replaced with something Pontiac called "T-37", also available in GTO knock-off guise as the "GT-37". From 1972 through 1981, LeMans was Pontiac's intermediate model. 

As muscle cars or cars with a whiff of performance got insurance surcharged up the tailpipe, they were replaced with "luxury" cars. Or anything deemed or termed remotely luxurious. Hence the madness of the "personal luxury car" niche of which, to some degree, Pontiac's "Luxury LeMans" could be lumped into if no other reason by what it's labeled as. Pontiac debuted the first Luxury LeMans in 1971, abovie is a 1972. I guess a luxury car was anything that the manufacturers said it was.  

These 1973-1977 "Colonnades" are nothing if not distinctive although, again, I'm a tad foggy on what the "Luxury" moniker really denotes on these otherwise mundane LeMans'. Aside from the fender skirts which were rare back then on anything that was considered "full-size". Somehow, they work, don't you think? 

New owner claims this has a "455" although there are no pictures of it. You don't post a picture you can claim anything you want. Seeing this is fairly devoid of most obvious luxury accoutrements like bucket seats and a console, I'd venture to guess this has a Pontiac 350 with a teeny-tiny two barrel. Just a hunch. You could technically get a "SD455" in one of these too although those only came with 4-speed manuals. 

Can you imagine this fender-skirted behemoth with an SD455 and a stick? That's something that even this recovering personal luxury car fan might be able to get his arms around. 

 

1997 Ford Taurus SHO - Ugly Car Hall of Shame

I guess you had to be there, but from 1989-1995, the Ford Taurus SHO, while not a big seller, was America's first legitimate "sports sedan" and was subsequently a veddy big deal. Especially amongst us car wonks. My only experience with one was with a 1993 that I found while quite quick, I also found stiff and creaky. While I thought such things odd on a "family car", I did find it a whole lot more sorted out than my Chevrolet Lumina Z34 I had at the time. Ford never offered a two-door Taurus for sale otherwise I honestly think I may have jumped on one. 

Coupe lover me sort of salivated at the thought of the next generation SHO due for 1997 that was rumored to have a Yamaha built, transverse mounted V-8 (!) with a block supplied by Cosworth driving the front wheels. Could this be a four-door that I would be caught dead in? 

Err, no. Taurus SHO "II", technically "III", was based on the awful "jellybean" Taurus Ford introduced in the fall of 1995 as a 1996. Funny, I don't like actual jellybeans and I find automobile designs based on them equally unappetizing. "Too swoopy" as my son would say. Not that I ever thought the 1986-1995 Taurus' handsome by any means but the 1996-1999's took a questionable design and left it overnight in the deep fryer. I held my breath for the SHO coming in 1997 that maybe, just maybe would cure all the sins of the '96. Not unlike what an '89 SHO's dress up kit did for an '86. 

No such luck and no trunk lid spoiler, body cladding or trick V-8 engine could save a 1996 vintage Taurus from the ugly car hall of shame. Our 109,000-miles young subject here is for sale up here for a shockingly reasonable $4,697. That's saying a lot in this crazy used car market too. Why so cheap? 

The 1997-1999 Taurus SHO had more problems than just being homely and awkward looking. For starters, that Yamaha V-8 displaced only 3.4 liters and made all of 235-horsepower and 230 foot-pounds of torque. The V-6 it replaced made 220-horsepower and 200 foot/pounds; the 3.2-liter V-6 offered on SHO's with an automatic ('93-'95 only) made 220-hp and 215 ft-lbs. Ford built a larger DOHC V-8 they stuffed in Mustangs and the Lincoln Continental Mark VII but it was a 90-degree design and was too wide to put in these things. The Yamaha V-8 was banked at 60-degrees so it was narrowly enought to fit. If snuggly.  

To make matters worse, 1997-1999 SHO's were only available with automatics. In a 3,500-ish pound sedan, roughly three hundred pounds more than the old SHO, you don't have to be a mathematician, physicist or automobile enthusiast to surmise that V-8 powered SHO's didn't have much more go than the V-6's SHO's. Oh, but wait. There's more. 

On approximately 1,200 of roughly 20,000 engines built, around 50,000 miles or so, cam shafts "walked" off or out their chains and the valves all slammed together leading to engine failure. Warranty fixes didn't always stay fixed either. So, not only is she ugly, but she's also got a really bad temperament. 

Since so few of the Yamaha V-8's were built, that means there's a scarcity of parts for them these days. I've had a handful of "unique" automobiles over the years and there's nothing quite like the chill of old car you have trouble getting parts for. I love how the poster of the ad writes that this car is the "perfect first car for someone". Yeah. More like perfect first car from hell. 

Ford did an about face with the much cleaner although far less distinctive Taurus they introduced, sans an SHO model, for 2000. Seemed like someone upstairs insisted on an adult being in the room when the styling was done. 2000-2007 Taurus' are terrific "first cars" and I whole heartedly recommend them as such. Second or thirtieth cars too. They're spacious, comfortable, efficient and when you're done with it just take it to the junkyard. Or make a planter out of them. 

Ford brought back the SHO for 2010. Read what I had to say about them here. 

 

2003 Mercedes Benz 500SL - I'm Ready To Get Hurt Again

2003 Mercedes-Benz 500SL, 71,000 miles. Asking price $9,500. I'm ready to get hurt again. 

This isn't the only M-B from the early 2000's that I'm smitten with. I'm a big fan of the CL500 from that era too. His and hers? Although I think we'd be fighting over who got which. Both are really, really affordable and most I've seen listed have far less than 100,000 miles on them. What's up with that? 

Well, they might be overpriced considering how stupid expensive they are to fix. I mean, it's just insane and shade trade garage hacks like me, please don't call me "handy", might not have much luck since many of the repairs require not only special training but special tools too.  

One of the most problematic issues with these cars is their electro-hydraulic, "active body control" systems or "ABC". It adjusts very quickly if not instantly to road conditions and driver input through a series of computerized sensors throughout the car that interact with a hydraulic pump that feeds the just right amount of (veddy expensive) fluid to the struts to keep the car neutral in handling maneuvers. It's the stuff of dreams and makes people better, safer drivers than they really are. And it's all wrapped up in a package that's, god damn, the best-looking thing since the Lamborgini Miura. 

When that system fails, however, it ain't pretty. The cars sit and ride at weird angles and heights and repairs bills can be ghastly. Like to the tune of $2,500 on the low end and to around $20,000 if you're really. really unlucky. And that's not the only pricy thing that can go wrong either. I don't know any owner of an older M-B that brags about their reliability either. 

Whenever my wife sees an SL or CL of this vintage, she googles them to see how much one would run us, and she gets all excited about how cheap they are. Then she gets equally annoyed when I tell her that they're dreadfully unreliable and super expensive to fix. 

For ten-grand these days, if I dig long and hard enough and I'm willing to make a trip, I can get a 2005 Toyota Camry XLE with similar if not less mileage on it. While certainly not sexy and nothing if not ambiguous if not invisible, that would be one with the 3.0-liter V-6 too, at least I know it has "brag about it" reliability. At the end of the day, that's what makes one car "better" than another.