1977 Chevrolet Monte Carlo - Nothing Is As Necessary As the Unnecessary

1973-1977 Chevrolet Monte Carlo's aren't for everyone, but they most certainly are for me. And this 1977 I found for sale on Facebook Marketplace with an eye-watering asking price of $25,000 is the best looking one I've seen in years. 

This one is just the way I'd order mine back in 1977 with Chevrolet "Rally rims", no moronic landau vinyl top, "Special Custom Interior" and a god's-green-earth, 170-horsepower Chevrolet 350 cubic-inch V-8 under hood. Shout out to fans of Rochester Quadra-Jets too. The 145-horse, Chevy 305 was the base engine and most '77 Monte's I've seen have that engine, not the 350. 

About the only thing I do to this delicate flower is swap out the whitewalls for BF Goodrich Radial T\A's with raised white letters. Ahem, you can take the 1970's and 1980's away from the boy, but you can't take the boy away from them. 

I was too young when these came out to have remember if I had any opinion on their crazy styling, but since these were everywhere in the 1970's and into the '80's when I came of driving age, I remember not being enamored by them; my now appreciation for them being a long, slow boil. When I was a kid, I thought their overt, swoopy fenders overbearing and I much preferred the cleaner, simpler lines on the oh-so-similar Malibu Classic. Now I see a Malibu of this vintage and I can't help but wonder what it was I once saw in them. Funny how my taste in cars has become more juvenile the older I get. 

1977 was a literal big year for Monte Carlo sales with Chevrolet moving more than 400,000 of them. Think about that - 400,000+ grossly impractical, big on the outside, tiny on the inside personal luxury coupes sold. Makes no sense now, of course, but in the salad days of disco, for a Corvette, one of these was what you wanted to be seen in. These were the perfect second cars for upwardly mobile families too; a station wagon or sedan for him and one of these for her. And he would be perfectly at home driving this too. A perfect, "non-gender specific" ride if you will. 

Driving wise, they were run-of-the-mill GM fare for the day. A reasonably compliant ride, adequate but hardly sporting thrust (especially with the 350), good brakes and benign if comfortable enough front seats that were fine for the non-aggressive driving. Cornering? Please. That wasn't what these were designed for. The back seat was fine for adults on shortish jaunts, I wouldn't want to be stuck back there on long trips. You can see in the above photo just how much leg room there wasn't in one of these. 

Which is crazy considering the overall size of these cars. Chevrolet Monte Carlo's and Pontiac Grand Prix' rode on the four-sedan version of General Motors 1973 vintage intermediate chassis. And all the extra girth was in front of the firewall where it made absolutely no sense other than designers were able to draw up the largest hoods of any car on the road at the time. Come to think of it, probably of all time too. While it makes no sense, it makes total sense to me. I believe it was Winston Churchill who was quoted as saying there's nothing more necessary than the unnecessary. 

The styling was an exaggeration of the 1970-1972 Monte Carlo's "suitcase fender" motif that it and of itself was a tip of the fedora to the "classic cars" of the 1930's. If that's not readily apparent, it is when it's pointed out on the 1973-1977's models. The best was these cars became fashion statements above and beyond what they portended to be. That's what I call hitting the bullseye of a niche target and enjoying wide, mainstream appeal.

GM rode the tailpipes of these cars to the bank. Shame what they replaced these with come 1978 were so damn cartoony looking. Those homely little cars I swear I will never warm up to. Meanwhile, I'm saving space for one or more of these in my "Jay Leno Fantasy Garage". 

1974 Dodge Charger - She Said He Was Crazy

Seems like a lifetime ago when I turned down the chance to grab a 1972 Dodge Charger, not unlike this '74, from Brenda, a woman I slung hash to doctors and nurses with in a Long Island hospital cafeteria.  She wanted to dump it to upset her husband and she wanted all of $1,200 for it. Despite its propensity to stall out like many an early emissions system clogged car would, it was in solid condition. I passed on it because I knew better. She said her husband was crazy. 

I was maybe 21, maybe 22 and she was an "old" 26; she had two kids and a husband she claimed was abusive. She might as well have been 40. Or at least 30. I had convinced myself she had a thing for me - maybe she did. I don't know. She was a terrible flirt, smokin' hot too and even if she did "like me", it was probably a distraction for her. Nothing ever came of it. When you're that young, getting mixed up in something so "adult" was above my pay scale. Still is. 

This is for sale near Indianapolis with an asking price of $4,500. I find it hard to believe this is worth that much, but you never know. I'd choke on handing over what Brenda wanted for her for this. What Brenda was asking for her '72 years ago was a bargain even back then. 

Poster of the ad claims this is a 318 from a 1968 Coronet and ran great when parked; that seems like a while ago. Charger SE's came standard with a 318 but could have been ordered with a 360, a 400 or even a 440. Brenda's had the 400, two-barrel; sorry, us car people remember those details. I'd love to see what this would be like after it was gently power washed and buffed out. Looks like it may have been a light blue? 

These 1971 era "fuselage body" Charger and Fury coupes aren't for everyone but I love them, the four-sedans, known as "Coronets" not so much. Then again, I'm not a four-door girl. These came in Coronet wagon guise as well. Big two doors like this were everywhere when I was a kid, it's what we drove to tell the world we weren't driving our parent's car; kids today it seems don't care so much about that sort of thing. Their falling out of favor as fashion statements was a long time coming and I find it almost as hard to believe that cars like this don't exist anymore as much as it's hard to fathom they were as popular as they once were. 

This car is based off the famous Plymouth\Dodge "B-body" that was Chrysler's defacto intermediate chassis back in the day; the Chrysler division used it to underpin their Cordoba from 1975-1979 too. I used to kid myself that my '75 Cordoba was actually a Dodge Charger like this or the General Lee in disguise. I wasn't far off the mark either. 

The B-body was made famous back in 1962 when Chrysler executives mis-interpreted intel that GM was downsizing their full-size line. To counter, over reactionary Plymouth and Dodge came out with a stretched version of their A-body compact as their new-for-'62 big cars and the rest is history. Turned out GM was coming out with the Chevy II which was a compact car. Oops. Chrysler kept the old B around after 1965 when they rolled out new properly sized big cars. 

Nothing about this seems too bad save this big dent in the driver's door. Something tells me the latch mechanism doesn't work either on it. 

I passed on Brenda's offer because I knew her husband would either kill me or demand I give it back to him. I mean, he had guns, drank to excess and had that menacing look in his eyes that he might do things that most people wouldn't. I lost touch with her after she left the hospital. A friend had told me she was still with him but that was at least thirty-five years ago. I have no idea what happened to her Charger. 

 

1976 Mercury Comet - For Old Time's Sake

Seeing a 1974 Mercury Comet four-door sedan was my first car, how could I not stop on this Facebook Marketplace find and blog about it? This one is a 1976 and is gold on the outside where mine was red and the interior a similar golden hue where mine was a dreary black. Aside from that, same car. Let the self loathing begin. 

The search for my "first car" began in earnest shortly after I got my driver's license in the fall of 1981. With a modest budget of around $1,000, money I somehow culled together working at Burger King the previous summer, my choices were quite slim. While I wanted a sexy, V-8 powered, General Motors personal luxury car, ala Monte Carlo, Cutlass, Grand Prix, etc, a thousand bucks wouldn't cover a third of the price of admission to that tony club. Down in my low rent district, I was stuck with dorky trash like what I ended up with. To this day, I swear, my first car is the reason why I have never driven another four-door sedan as my daily driver. Well, save for a time in the late 2000's when I was semi-forced by my wife to take over her 2002 Ford Taurus SEL but I digress. Soon as I could I pushed that thing into Lake Eerie, metaphorically of course, and got my "gone but not forgotten", Dale Earnhardt Chevrolet Monte Carlo SS. 

My current ride is a 2009 Toyota RAV4 and while it may have four-doors, actually five, it's a crossover SUV so it doesn't count as a sedan. I swear, the stuff we convince ourselves of so we can sleep at night.  

Ah, but this isn't your typical Mercury Comet four-door like mine was but one that has been worked over. Apparently big time too. I knew something was up with the off-set, heavy-duty breather poking up through the hood that's resplendent with a racing stripe and hood pins. I know, I first thought it was a cheesy hood-scoop too. Hood pins mean power! 

It's off-set because it's a fixed to a carburetor that's feeding the intake manifold of the bane of Comet's mere existence, Ford's 250 cubic-inch, inline six. While a smooth if dutiful not-so-little motor, in stock form it made 91 net horsepower and 190 foot pounds of torque. Yes. Ninety-one horsepower. I kid not when I say that my 17.5-horsepower, 38-inch Craftsman garden tractor has a better power-to-weight ratio. 

Who knows what this thing is making. There isn't much disclosed in the ad about what has been done down there but there is a cottage industry for inline-six enthusiasts. I think I see a four-barrel under the breather and what I have to imagine is a performance intake. She got a "cam"? Who knows. I know I see headers, a Davis Unified, high energy Ignition (D.U.I), performance coil and who knows what else. I say this is probably good for 150-200 net horsepower. In a car weighing a lamb's breath under a ton-and-a-half, no doubt this literal golden oldie is quite quick if not fast. "Fast" being relative, of course. 

The go-fast goodies probably added at a substantial savings over swapping in a hot-rodded 302 or whatever; Comet and Maverick four-doors with the V-8 from the factory were rare. The big, heavy Ford Windsor engine's additional 47-horsepower and 56 pounds of torque over the inline six mostly lost on having to haul the extra weight of it around. That's why souping up granny's sixer makes a lot of sense. And the car will still handle better as well. 

The poster of the ad discloses that the C4 automatic transmission slips but shifts and needs what they claim is a cheap rebuild. Seeing they want $6,500 for this thing I wonder how cheap that will be. I guess all their money went into cutting a hole in the hood. They do claim there's a lot of money "in this car". 

My Comet was the worst car I ever had and was a fitting "first car" for me considering how miserable my childhood and teen years were. Why shouldn't my first car have sucked as well? My Comet didn't have a bushing in its suspension that wasn't worn out, had a plywood paneling floor because it had rotted out, the transmission died within a week of my purchasing it and the best was it inhaled gas like a V-8 powered car would. I made amends with myself ditching it just over a year after I bought it replacing it with, drum roll - the poor man's Chevrolet Monte Carlo, a Chrysler Cordoba. 

This thing? Well, at the end of the day, all you have is a four-door Comet. Albeit probably a way more fun one to drive, slipping tranny and all, than what I had. Poster of the ad cuts to the quick that if "four-doors" aren't your think to keep on scrolling. You got that right, brother but if this was closer to me, it's a good three-and-half-hours away, I might just waste their time kicking its tires. If for no other reason than for old time's sake. 

 

1965 Oldsmobile Dynamic 88 - Number's Matching?

My wife and I went to a small "classic car" show last weekend and I remarked afterwards how old the crowd was that was in attendance. For the most part, the only "young people" there were young children stewarded by their parents who placated them with ice cream, Italian ices, hot dogs and pretzels. Those in charge of them were of grandparents' vintage too, twenty to forty-somethings were few and far between, that doesn't bode well, in my opinion, for the future of classic cars not to mention what's going to happen to this 1965 Oldsmobile "Dynamic 88" I found on Facebook Marketplace with an asking price of $7,500. 

Let's define "kids" today as anyone under forty and they are, in general, not into cars to say nothing of oldies like this 88. Granted, kids that are into old cars or cars en masse are as ribald as any generation before them, but there's just not that many of them. The ones that may find the old stuff like this "cool", spend but a second or two behind the wheel and are put off by them too. My 26-year-old son, who's semi- "into cars", has a hard time understanding how pleased I am about how improved the driving dynamics of my 1977 Corvette improved since I rebuilt the front and rear suspensions. He thinks it still handles like a junky old truck. Truth hurts but I see his point. I tell him to not hate it for what's it not but to appreciate it for what it is. That can be a long and tough putt for someone who drives a 2017 Chevrolet Camaro. 

In fairness, "car shows" have always skewed an older crowd. The first serious show I ever attended was in the mid-'80's and most everyone there was a good ten, fifteen, gosh, twenty-five years older than I was at the time. Sadly, that twenty-to-fifty-year old car-loving bubble hasn't grown in the subsequent years and these days it's shrinking. And although these days what defines a "classic car" by Haggerty Insurance is quite broad, a "classic" only has to be twenty-five years old or older and an "antique" forty-years old, it doesn't mean the appeal of old cars has grown any either. It's a shrinking interest and the cottage industries that have sprung up around classic and antique cars is only seeing a boom in revenue because they're charging exorbitantly. Their customer base is certainly not growing either. 

There are many reasons for the younger generation's ambivalence. First, cars today are so good that even though the older stuff may appear to be inherently more interesting looking, and that's subjective, from the seat of your pants perspective, they're not even close. No one buys a 1977 Corvette these days because it so outperforms their 2009 Toyota RAV4. 

Secondly, regarding styling, what with government regulations tapping down on the free-for-all that was car design years ago, there really hasn't been anything truly compelling pushed out by any manufacturer over the last fifty years or so. Sure, there are some semblances of the automotive elan that got, for instance, myself interested in them, but by and large, automobiles are no more than mere transportation conveyances these days.  

What's more, since the advent of electronics and computer controlled everything, older "modern" cars are quite difficult to not only repair, but find parts for. My wife and I know that her 1995 Lexus SC400 is doomed should anything major happen to it; whether that's an accident or mechanical failure.

So, with the lack of earth moving designs, complexity and cost of less old "classics" and kids today more so connected these days to friends via their phones and social media, don't hold your breath holding out for a new "golden age" of automotive design in the near future. Sure, there are one-off's like Ford's Bronco, note that's the "Bronco" and not the Bronco "Sport", but the days of the original Ford Mustang changing the automotive paradigm are gone forever. 

What's, then, to become of this 88? Well, I think the closer you or I can get it closer to five grand the better. It's going to need a paint job, and a real good one soup--to nuts may run you ten-grand and the interior needs to be done too. Figure a cool three-g's for that. Mechanically, well, that's easy these days. Just throw a crate engine in there or, gulp, LS-swap it. No one's going to care if it's "numbers matching" anyway. 

And kids be like, "number's matching"? You mean as phone numbers? 

From the Facebook ad:

1965 Oldsmobile Dynamic 88 with a 425 big block 75000 original miles runs good shifts good automatic transmission. Needs some brake work and the rear bumper straightened or replaced . No more pictures and a bunch of silly questions please if you're interested come check it out I'll take you for a ride. No negotiating on here come show your interested and bring cash to negotiate. Thanks 4 door parts car included have clear titles for both cars

 

1969 Oldsmobile Toronado - White Elephant

If you're interested in getting into the collector car universe, don't want to spend much, don't want some broken down jalopy and tend to lean towards the quirky or unusual, might I interest you in this 1969 Oldsmobile Toronado? Facebook Marketplace asking price for this Martian spaceship is $10,000 but seeing how old the listing is you might be able to get it for less; the closer bought to $7,500 I think the the better. Why is this seemingly solid oldie going for so little? Good question. Has it been wrecked? Implicated in a crime? Lost title? There weren't many details in the ad for it. More than likely there just aren't many takers for these cars - especially in this rather unfortunate color scheme. "Toronado" is a made-up word, but it might as well mean, "white elephant"? 

This car harkens back to an age and time when General Motors' myriad divisions were at the top of their autonomous and inter-company competitive powers. Legend has it Oldsmobile was jealous of the success that Buick got within GM with their Riviera, which is ironic given that the Riviera was a "corporate" design offered to all GM divisions, even Cadillac, and was turned down by Oldsmobile. Not to be out done by Buick, Oldsmobile came with a personal luxury\personality car for 1966 that was, arguably, one of the most outrageous cars GM had ever come out with. Certainly the craziest Oldsmobile ever. 

Crazy in design, no doubt, but the "Twilight Zone" styling overshadowed engineering that GM had never offered before: front-wheel-drive. It was also the first domestically produced front-wheel-driver since the Auborn owned Cord of 1929-1932 and 1936-1937 fame. 

Things was, despite the superior traction that FWD affords a vehicle, all of the interior packaging efficiencies of it were all but mute on such a large car. Who needs more room when you have all of it in the world to begin with? Can a car be too big? Take it from someone who's maybe only five-foot-nine, yes, they can be. 

This car and it's Cadillac Eldorado corporate kissin' cousin of the same vintage are so big, I can't have my left elbow out the driver's side window meanwhile having my left hand on the wheel. 

Oldsmobile had experimented with an intermediate sized front-wheel-drive design but GM executives reasoned they would not be able to amortize development costs on a mid-sized car. Therefore, a compact car would have made even less sense; the thought being smaller cars mean small profits. Sad thing was, when front-wheel-drive became fashionable during "The Great Downsizing Epoch" of 1977-1986, none of the engineering that went into pulling instead of pushing these cars was used. 

To push instead of pull, all Toronado's from 1966 through 1985 utilized what GM referred to as the "Unitized Power Package" or "U.P.P.". In a nut shell, torque was diverted from the rear of the engine to a transmission mounted under it. The "package" was so compact, despite the use of enormous engines, GMC and other manufacturers used it to "pull" motorhomes. 

Driving dynamics wise, one of these drives and handles not unlike just about every other full-size GM make and model of the era. That's damning the U.P.P. with faint praise - it was so good no one noticed it was there. And with there being no tangible benefit to it, these cars were, if anything, a technical or engineering novelty. 

And, an expensive one as it was Oldsmobile's most expensive model, their flag ship so to speak. NADA pegs one of these average retail today at $23,400; even that's reasonable money for a 1969, full-size GM two-door in, again, what appears to be very good condition. If you're interested, comment below and I'll do my best to contact the seller if it's still available.

1969 Buick Skylark GS 400 Convertible - Strong Enough For a Man But Made for a Woman

 

When I was a kid, I felt these uniquely styled Buick Skylark's to be cars exclusively for women. Funny, these days I have to tell myself they're not every time I see one; old habits die hard, I guess. That was probably because my childhood friend Lori's mother had one. A kind although genteel woman, she let it be known to us neighborhood kids in the carpool circuit that it was her car, not her husband's. Lori's mom's car was a 1969 Skylark in "Cameo Creme" whereas my Facebook Marketplace find here is a 1969 GS400 in "Signal Red". Like ads for Secret anti-perspirant used to claim, "strong enough for a man but made for a woman". 

The Buick GS was marketed as a separate model from the Skylark although it was just a Skylark with stronger engines, heavier duty shocks and springs, wider wheels and tires and unique trim pieces and ornamentation. 

For 1967, GM updated what they referred to internally as their "A-body" intermediate or mid-sized models taking out three-inches of wheelbase from the coupes to improve, they claimed, handling, balance and directional stability. For 1968, stylists also whipped up, subjectively, some of the best looking and today some of the most valuable automobiles ever made. The wildest of them all the Buick Skylark and GS. Speaking of value, while this car is not as valuable as say a 1968 Chevelle convertible, Pontiac GTO or Oldsmobile 4-4-2 would be, it still commands and asking price of $24,995. 

Some thought the styling so avant garde they first believed these cars to be a new-for-1968 Riviera as its lines purportedly ape those of the then current Riviera. I don't get that although I do appreciate the "sweep spear" styling detail that would wane as a Buick staple as the 1960's melted into the blur that was the '70's. The convertible top on our '69 here does mute the flying buttress effect of the rear windshield flowing into an all but hatchback inspired trunk or deck lid on fixed roof models. 

The "400" in "GS400" denotes Buick's new for 1967 400 cubic-inch V-8 and was a powerhouse. Making 340-(gross rated) horsepower, it was the big mill that replaced the curious Buick "Nailhead" V-8 engine. The little brother to the Buick 430 and later 455 cubic-inch V-8's, there may have been no difference between the Buick 400 and 430 as GM had a stipulation at the time limiting the size of engines in their intermediates to 400 cubic-inches. There's scuttlebutt there was no difference between Chevrolet's 396 and 427 engines, so anything is in fact possible. 

There was also a GS350 - that car powered by Buick's 350 cubic-inch V-8 engine. Tuned to 280 gross rated horsepower, like all GM 350's back in the day, it was unique to Buick and shared little with other "350's" Oldsmobile, Pontiac and Chevrolet made. Cadillac never made a "350". 

Buick updated the series for 1970-1972 removing just about everything that made the 1968 and 1969 models distinctive making the Skylark all but a trim level of the Chevrolet Chevelle. Not in and of itself a bad thing but being one rung below lordly Cadillac on the GM pricing ladder, you'd think a "Buick" would at least be somewhat distinctive. By the early 1970's GM had long run out of ideas as to why buyers should pay more for one make over another. 

Secret anti-perspirant's famous tag line was introduced in 1972 and to this day remains one of the most famous advertising lines of all time. 

1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme - How To Not Sell a Car Online These Days

I've been meaning to do a blog about what to do and what not to do when posting an ad online for anything let alone cars. As an example of what not to do, today, let's take a quick look at this 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme I found on Facebook Marketplace with an asking price of $10,000. Yes, you read right. Ten-thousand-dollars. 

The poster of the ad says this was his brother's car and he passed away in 2015 so, apparently or obviously, it's been sitting right there for going on ten-years now. Poster of the ad claims it has a Chevy 350 engine and Turbo 400 transmission but there are no pictures of at least the engine. If it does have that engine and transmission it's a bonus as this car was born with a Chevrolet 305 at best. Poster of the ad goes onto say, "It's gonna need work done". You can say that again. 

Of course, I'm sorry to hear of his brother's passing. However, first and foremost, the biggest issue with this "Cutty" is the asking price.  I've sold six cars on Facebook Marketplace in the last four years so that makes me a self-ordained crack expert of sorts when it comes to selling cars online. So, I know that price sells - especially on Marketplace. If you want to have folks even nibble on what you have to offer, you have to be reasonable with it and, ten grand for this is not reasonable. Not even close. Without seeing it in person and getting a peek underneath, I don't know if $1,000 is fair - then again perhaps the powertrain might be worth that if, IF it's salvageable. Again, no pictures of it and there are no details if any work was done to it.  

The other obvious issue is these pictures themselves, especially in an ad for a car with an asking price of ten-grand. Again, sad story behind this car sitting and all but if the poster of the ad really wants to sell this, least they could do is clean the area up around it. And, if at all possible, pull the thing out of the holes it's been sitting in, get it onto dry pavement and wash it thoroughly. That might be a tough to do considering it probably doesn't run, but at least clean the area up around it and hose it down if not wash it. 

 

Even if this had a car cover on it, obviously it hasn't, it still wouldn't protect the under carriage from getting wet. From the look of things that driver's door doesn't look properly aligned so rain may have gotten in soaking the insides. Forty-three-year-old GM weather proofing might have a hard time keeping mother nature out in general too. And it rains a lot up here in Cleveland, Ohio. Like, near Seatle, Washington lots. The amount of snow we get up here is overrated. 

These pictures look like they were shot in early to mid-spring and now that we're knocking on the door of the end of summer tells perspective buyers this has been literally if not figuratively sitting on Marketplace for a long time. Good grief, is that a sub-woofer?  

All that said and done, something has to be done about that asking price because even if this car was presented properly, $10,000 is just too high of an asking price for anyone to take the ad seriously. What to ask? Not ten-grand. C'mon. I'd delete and relist this with updated, seasonally appropriate pictures along with at least getting the trash out of the way. If the poster can, take pictures that have at least some semblance of glamor and, of course, work on that asking price. 

1993 Oldsmobile Cutlass Convertible - The Basket Handle

We can probably blame Chrysler's LeBaron convertible of 1980's infamy for Oldsmobile coming with a convertible Cutlass Supreme for 1990. Our subject here is a model year 1993 "Cutty" convertible I found on Facebook Marketplace with just 138K on its thirty-year-old analog ticker, asking price $3,000. That ask knocked down from $4,000. Something's too good to be true here. This makes my stomach hurt too much for me to inquire about it. 

Oldsmobile's Cutlass Supreme and corporate siblings Buick Regal, Pontiac Grand Prix and later Chevrolet Lumina were all new for 1988 and were built on GM's new front-wheel-drive GM10 chassis or platform. Prior to 1988, they were all rear-wheel-drivers. Oldsmobile was the only division to offer a convertible GM10. 

There's not enough ribbon in my figurative typewriter to split hairs over what went wrong with the GM10's (aka W-body). As far as I'm concerned, much went right as I had five of them from 1990 through most recently and adored them all. Google "GM10" or "W-body" to get your chalice's worth of hyperbole about them. The Good, The Bad and the Indifferent. If you read carefully through the lines, you'll find much of the issues with them wasn't the cars themselves but circumstances surrounding them. Namely, foreign competition. 

GM10\W-body fan I am, I never warmed up to these odd little ducklings. Actually, they're not so little. Roughly 200-inches stem to stern and some 72-inches wide, their footprint is actually larger than the cars they replaced and a lamb's tail or two from the same size as the lordly 1964-1972 models. In fact, these cars were the first "upsizing" of a model GM introduced after 1977. Happy Days were, at least as far as I was concerned, back again. 

My time spent behind the wheel of one was pleasant enough. Amply if not softly sprung with more than ample scoot from its 3100 V6 but it was hardly sporty. Not that it was intended to be a rocket. It was a boulevard cruiser with all of the foibles inherent in most convertibles. Particularly domestic drop tops. 

Aside from the car looking lumpy with the top up, the oddest or biggest foible about them is what appears to be a roll bar - that's not a roll bar. It's so Oldsmobile didn't have to come up with a separate door handle design because on GM10 coupes the handles were in the B-pillar; they were phased out with subsequent updates. That hoop offers no structural support or roll over protection and if they didn't cap it off it would look even more bizarre. Might also be a safety hazard for folks getting into and out of the vehicle. 

Oldsmobile pulled the plug on the Cutlass convertible after 1995 replacing what was once the best-selling nameplate in America for model year 1997 with a lightly disguised Chevrolet Malibu sedan. That last Cutty went to cornfield after 1999, the entire Oldsmobile division following suit after 2004.