1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass - Midwestern and Proud Of It

 

The first Oldsmobile Cutlass was an experimental sports coupe designed in 1954. Its platform was quite similar to the later compact F-85, which was not introduced for seven more years.

 

One of the disadvantages of growing up in "Greater New Yorker" is that the area is a giant bubble isolated  from the rest of the country. I had a suspicion this was the case when I stilled lived there but many years post, "the move", (actually several) I realize that I was correct in that assumption. The rest of the country does things one way while New York does it their way. Do they do it better? That's a matter of opinion. I can tell you that New York is so different, particularly Manhattan, that it might as well be a city in another continent.
 

When the F-85 made its debut in 1961, "Cutlass" was the top of the line model.  

Case in point, while the rest of the U.S.A. was buying Oldsmobile Cutlass' in the 1970's and 1980's by the bushel full, making it the number one selling automobile in this country, you'd never know what a strong seller the car was if you lived in the New York City area. Trendsetters or taste makers in New York didn't drive something as bourgeois as an Oldsmobile; they drove Mercedes Benz, BMW's and the occasional Audi. If you are what you drive what did an Olds Cutlass say about you? That you were modest, pragmatic, Midwestern at heart and proud of it.

 

Disappointing sales of the compact F-85, along with the introduction of the mid size Ford Fairlane in 1962 prompted GM to enlarge the compacts for the 1964 model year.

 
Having lived most of the last ten years in the Midwest I can tell you that, for my family at least, life is a whole lot better here than in New York. Better cost of living, better schools, better housing, less congestion and depending on where you are, Cleveland not being one of them of course, better weather.



 

Oldsmobile dropped the Cutlass moniker after 1999. General Motors dropped Oldsmobile after 2004.

 

Friends ask if we'd ever consider a move back to New York and my wife and I are adamant that the situation would have to be pretty darn awesome to make us give up what we have here versus going back there. We have several friends who've made similar moves out of the New York bubble and feel as strongly about the Midwest as we do. Even if the quality of life here in the Midwest means rubbing elbows with people who drive what some New Yorkers would make out to be a less than sophisticated automobile. The trade off is worth it.

 

 

 

 

 

2014 Dodge Viper - Old Guys With Money

Chrysler made some minor headlines the other day when they announced that they were dropping the price on their slow selling Dodge Viper by $15,000. That means a new Viper still stickers for a shocking $85,000.

How slow is Viper selling? Dodge sold just 38 of them in August while Chevrolet sold 2,679 Corvettes. That's incredibly vexing for Chrysler in a market that has seen luxury sports car sales soar by 35% this year. What's more in a new car market that's the best its been in eight years, Chrysler sales over all are up an industry leading 14.3% through August and market share increasing a full percentage point. That's due largely to demand for its stable of trucks and sport-utility vehicles but still, that's impressive growth.

Why are Viper sales so bad? Several reasons the least of which has to do with the physical car; this Viper is awesome.

 

First, the market for high performance, two passenger cars is tiny and at least in the United States, Chevrolet literally owns the market with Corvette. What's more, Viper has to compete with this spectacular new Corvette that offers comparable performance for considerably less money. Even luxury car buyers appreciate value. Well, the ones that have half a clue as to what got them in a postion to have the kind of money it takes to buy one. 

When Dodge came out with Viper in 1992, despite its overall lack of refinement, it was a stronger performing car than Corvette. It's then eye watering $50,000 price tag (Dodge claims the $15,000 price cut on the new Viper puts it in line, adjusted for inflation, with the '92 Dodge Viper) seemed somewhat acceptable given the high level of performance its 400 horsepower V-10 engine provided.  The 1992 Corvette ZR-1 developed similar power to Viper but as for the base Corvette versus a base Viper, Corvette couldn't compete.

That's not the case anymore. Even the base Corvette is now a world class sports car the equal to anything even a 10 cylinder Viper can muster. What's more, buyers of these cars, those stereotypical "old guys with money", unless they're car collectors, usually don't have room for more than one "sports car" and if they did it's debatable if they'd buy a Viper to go along with whatever else they've purchased.

If you're so inclined, get your game face on and go into your local Dodge dealer and make them offer. You might be surprised by the kind of deal you get.

 

 

 

1978 Chevrolet Monte Carlo - Godfather Part 2 This Ain't

In film, a good sequel doesn't require the audience to be aware there was a "Part 1" let alone require of them to have seen Part 1 to appreciate it. Makes me wonder if I would have been as disappointed in the 1978 Chevrolet Monte Carlo had I not have been such an admirer of the car it was based on. Did the masses that bought these cars between 1978-1980 like it for what it was or for what it reminded them of?

The car it was based on, "Part 1",  was the iconic, much lauded and lamented, 1973-1977 Monte Carlo. Part of GM's "Colonnade" series of cars introduced for 1973, the 1973 Monte Carlo was the  most flamboyantly styled of the "Colannades" not to mention Chevrolets offered for sale in the 1970's. Its bulbous and exaggerated lines right up there with another '70's automotive icon, although it was introduced in 1968, the C3 Corvette.

With sales each year never less than 290,000 per year and more than 410,000 in its final year of production, those are tremendous numbers, you can't blame Chevrolet for scribing a 7/8 scale version of it when the corporate mandate came down to put all mid size cars on a diet for 1978.

 

Although only a foot shorter and an inch narrower than the 1973 - 1977 Monte Carlos, the 1978 Monte Carlo appears lilliputian in a side by side comparison. Like someone who's lost too much weight, it looks like somethings not quite right. Those tiny 14 inch wheels don't help either. Wouldn't you know it, though? Taste being like armpits, it sold extremely well.

The 1973 Monte Carlo, again, "Part 1", was an exaggeration of the original Monte Carlo which came out in 1970. The Monte Carlo being Chevrolet's answer to corporate cousin (more like sister or brother) Pontiac's Grand Prix which itself was an answer to the question, "what comes after muscle cars?" The answer was (and oxymoronic at that) personal luxury cars. Or cars that looked luxurious. After all, what's a luxury car above and beyond a conveyance that makes it owner appear to be successful? GM's stylists inspiration for the 1970 Monte Carlo's design?

The "Great Gatsby" or "classic" cars of the 1920s and 1930s. Seeing that 1973 was a mere 40 years or so hence, people in the late '60's and early '70's looked to Great Gatsby cars like the 1928 Rolls Royce as an example of automobilia at its finest. Not unlike the way we admire muscle cars of the 1960s as supreme examples of cars made now not being "what they used to be". Note the fenders, long hood and single, isolated headlamps.

As much as the '73 Monte drew from "classics", another example being this delightful 1932 Dusenburg Model J (note the fenders and how much of the car is in front of the windshield), like a gimmicky hit record, the "Great Gatsby" inspired Monte Carlo became a phenomena above and beyond its inspirational starting point.

  

The 1978 Monte Carlo owes much of its design to The Great Gatsby cars as well if only indirectly. However, by 1978 that concept had been all but forgotten and replaced by what the design had become itself. Like so many sequels, though it didn't live up to the original. Godfather Part 2 this ain't.

 

 

Chevrolet updated the Monte Carlo in 1981 with this much more restrained and cleaner styled model. By 1981 though, the market for personal luxury cars had already begun to shrink. The '70's were over, baby.

 

 

Mattel X-15 - The Pain. Oh, The Pain

 

 The object of my early childhood dreams

I don't think I could have been any more clear with Santa when I told him, point blank on that late December weekend before Christmas in 1969 that I wanted a Marx Big Wheel. I even went so far as to tell him that there were other Big Wheels out there but the Marx Big Wheel was the one I wanted. 

 

 

Not the object of my childhood dreams 

 

So, Christmas morning when I found this fully assembled Martian tricycle under the Christmas tree I was most perplexed. My angst was two fold since growing up in John and Betty's fun-house, not showing extreme appreciation for something they did for us could get your head, feet and hands chopped off. Even on Christmas morning. What's more I knew that with this thing fully assembled, meaning my father had actually lifted a finger to do something and it being under the tree, there was no way I'd ever get my Big Wheel. My disappointment, as hard as I tried to hide it, was apparently palpable. "Well," said my mother incredulously as she took a long drag on her filter less cigarette and talking while blowing the smoke at me, "they were out of Big Wheels and the man said this was better because it's heavier since it's made of metal."  Although confused by her statement seeing that I asked Santa for a Big Wheel and not her, I was mortified and terrified at the same time. Through my tears I was able to squeak out a life saving, "Oh...it's cool!"  Save nothing for the fact that I knew then that Kris Kringle couldn't be trusted.

 

 

My X-15 looked very much like this one. I don't remember seat belts on mine; perhaps my father didn't install them. 

 

Late that Christmas day the X-15 sat gathering dust and my mother threw me out of the house demanding that I try it out. Obligingly, I carried the back breakingly heavy monster down our front stoop and onto the walkway. Fist thing it did was get stuck in one of the myriad cracks in the broken concrete slabs of our walk way. The bizarre rear steering of the X-15 doing little to help it get over the juts and ruts of that perilous ribbon of moon craters in the front of our house. The "joystick" slapping back and forth perilously close to my face and other personal equipment as I pedaled; I feared for my cheek bones and worse. What's more, a friend saw me pedaling this monument to weirdness and yelled, mockingly, to me, "Nice Big Wheel, Charley! Hahahahaha" My worst nightmares were coming true; I was drawing attention to myself and not the good kind. All I wanted to do was fit in and this thing was doing the opposite for me. The pain. Oh, the pain.

This X-15 looks like it was left out the rain one too many times

 

The Matell X-15 borrowed its name from from the NASA rocket plane that set numerous speed and altitude records in the 1960's. Like the Marx Big Wheel, the Mattel X-15 was direct pedal drive to the front wheel. The similarities ended there.

 

 

Rear steering for the sake of rear steering. There was no benefit.

 

Whereas the Marx Big Wheel is little more than a plastic tri-cyle and steered conventionally, the X-15's steering is by the rear wheels through a cantilevered A arm setup that banks the thing when you move the steering "joystick". The further you moved the stick the greater the bank. The banking increasing in proportion to the degree of turns helped to keep the rider upright.

 

 

My X-15 looked like this one because I never took care of it.

 

This thing flipped over quite easily at speed and that could be quite fun if you crashed onto grass from the sidewalk or street. Not so much fun if it was onto the sidewalk or street. Or a tree or a sign post. 

 

 

Ultimately, I have no idea what happened to my X-15

 

I never enjoyed standing out like a soar thumb riding the X-15 while everyone else rode their Big Wheels. I did appreciate, though how solid it was in comparison to the soft, flexible Big Wheel. However, once I found out how much fun this thing was to flip over on the big hill  behind my house, especially when it was snow covered, I was almost ok with the X-15. Almost.

 

I never did get my Big Wheel.

Parenting lesson taught; if your kid asks for something specific as a gift, nothing else will ever do.

.

 

1984 Mercedes Benz 380 SL - Some Things Never Change

 

Here's a gem from back in the day that looks as good today as it did back when it shiny and new. This 1984 380 SL looking even more spectacular given that it's based up here in car devouring North East Ohio.

 

I wouldn't have been surprised to have seen Florida plates on this baby let alone these older, vintage 2003 Ohio plates that I see a fair number of melting from rust. There is some sentiment up here that road salt, or brine, used in abundance to keep roads safe during winter months never goes away. It lies in wait the blacktop and cement bubbling to the surface whenever it rains spraying our unsuspecting cars with its rust making solution.

 

This masterpiece of German engineering is flawless. At least from what I can tell. These SL's have a reputation for rust and, again, given this is Cleveland, an old Benz in this shape is even more remarkable. The better the condition the more it's worth, of course. You don't see many of these around these days that are in bad shape. What's more, if you see one if great shape, like this one, it's most likely original. These SL's are very expensive to repair let alone restore.

 

 

She's only a 380 meaning she has a 3.8 liter V-8 making all of 155 horsepower. A Buick 3.8 liter V-6 of the same vintage put out only five less horses and similar torque. Albeit with far less smoothness in operation. SL stands for "sport" and "leicht" (light). Sport and light may have been true on older SLs. Our beauty here weighed in at more than 3500 pounds. Light by todays standards, a modern SL pushes down north of 4500 pounds, not so much by even 1984 scales.

 

 

 

Back in the '80s, nothing said "I got it" more than a Mercedes Benz SL. Some things never change.

Buick Reatta - What Were They Thinking?

Seeing this little Buick reminds me of a program director I worked for years ago who, when something would go wrong, would slam us (metaphorically) with his signature admonishment, "what were you thinking?".

 

I have to wonder, with regards to the Buick Reatta, "what were they thinking?" Buick, that is. Not whomever bought one for while I'm not a fan of the Reatta, I can appreciate that someone could be. My issue is with who approved this obviously niche-niche-niche targeted vehicle for production in the first place. Did General Motors really think that a two passenger, pseudo sporty, weird looking Buick would sell? What were they thinking?

As long as I've been on this green earth, Buick has had identity problems and they have been forever trying to change perception as to what a "Buick" is. Just recently I saw a commercial for the Buick Verano where a stereotypical looking grandmother barks out, "that's not a Buick!" What is a Buick anyway? A sporty, junior Cadillac? Then what was Oldsmobile? Alfred Sloan's ladder of marques for GM could be as confining as it was supposed to define what each brand was supposed to be. Years ago being the rung in the ladder either below Cadillac or above Oldsmobile meant that Buick's could get quite stodgy, frumpy. The Buick Grand National and GNX, which were discontinued just as this thing went on sale, played against that type but muddied the idea of what a Buick was just the same as the Reatta. Is Buick for old people or young people? Can you be both? Reatta was supposed to be a vehicle that would show the world grand dad could still cut the rug. To a point. Modest underpinnings and weird styling (did the team that designed the front ever meet the team that designed the back?) can only do so much but for the all important image, Buick wanted the world to know that this was not your father's Buick.

Reatta's biggest problem, aside from the lack of a cohesive design and whether or it was a good idea in the first place, was cost. A two passenger Reatta cost upwards of $5000 more than the car it was based on, the four passenger Riviera. All the hoopla about handcraftsmanship and superior build quality in the world couldn't coax "near luxury car" buying Buick customers to cough up the extra money for Reatta and its two seats as opposed to the Riviera's four. Or depending on the size and number of the grand children you had, five.

Sales of the pricey, two passenger, odd little Buick were, not surprisingly, disastrous. Buick selling just 4700 Reatta's in 1988 against a business case projection of 20,000.  Peak sales were in 1990 when 8500 Reatta's found buyers. A figure reached in part by the introduction of a convertible whose styling did away with the coupe's odd bread basket handle profile. The Reatta was a dead end for Buick and GM quietly dropped it for 1992. 

 

 

Buick then as it is now is a division of General Motors and one would think GM launched an automobile with at least some degree of market research revealing that there was an untapped market for a two passenger, bath tub shaped pseudo sports car. Did they do any research? If they did and it came back that a two seat Buick was viable something got lost in translation. Chances are, as is the case so many times when "corporate" makes mandates, like with that beaten down radio station with that tactless jerk program director I worked at years ago, there was no research.   

 

What were they thinking?

 

Reatta was Buick's second two passenger automobile. Their first was the Model 46 business coupe  they introduced in 1940. It lasted four model years, same as the Reatta.

To the best of my knowledge that guy never worked in radio again after that station went dark.

There Is Nothing Grand About A Pontiac Grand Am

 

 

 

Would I find this car as horrible has I do if it was called anything other than "Grand Am"? I can say with all confidence that I would most certainly would not.

 

 

"There's nothing grand about a Pontiac Grand Am" is not entirely true. An apple of my philandering automotive eye, the original Pontiac Grand Am was introduced in the fall of 1972 as part of GM's new for 1973 "A body" mid sized models. Known as "colonnades" for the new "B pillar" or column (hence colonnade), these cars were derided for their sheer bulk, styling excess and spacial inefficiency (big on the outside, small on the inside). The Grand Am, though was the beautiful swan in a Great Lake of ugly ducklings. However, despite being sexier and cooler than the Grand Prix, Buick Regal/Century and Oldsmobile Cutlass and more masculine than the overdone LeMans and Chevrolet Monte Carlo, Grand Am sold poorly. Pontiac dropped it unceremoniously after 1975. 

 

 

Somebody in Pontiac's model naming department (who names cars anyway?) must have had a serious jones for "Grand Am" because Pontiac brought the nameplate back for another three year run starting in 1978. Now on GM's newly downsized "A body" platform (later called G body), the 1978 Grand Am was but a mere shell of the '73 model but it was a breath of manly, Royal Cophenhagen tinged air compared to the homely lump they put "GRAND AM" on next.  

 

 

My drive of a friend's fresh from the showroom, "N-body" '85, just like this little shitter, had me quoting the car salesman from National Lampoon's "Vacation" who was trying to sell Clark Griswold on the virtues of the "Wagon Queen Family Truckster". "If You Hate It Now, Wait 'til You Drive It". 

 

Wouldn't you know it, though? "The Little Car That Could Not" sold in droves. And then some. So much so that during it's inexplicably long twenty one year production run, many times it was one of the best selling cars in America. Right up there with the Taurus and Camry. So what's in a name?

 

Nothing really. You can't accredit the "N-body" Grand Am's sales boom to it's name any more you can blame it for the first two versions lack of success. The N-body or "little" Grand Am sold well because, primarily, it was cheap; significantly undercutting far superior wares from Japan and Europe. Throw in some practicality (the first Grand Am was available as a four door, by the way) and the not so grand Grand Am took off. Even my in laws bought one. A white on grey, 1994 3100 V-6 powered "SE" sedan. Its styling acceptably benign, its overall character one of resigned complacency. They rolled their eyes whenever I waxed nostalgic for the Grand Am of yore.

 

 

Such is the fate of fanatics of whether it be music, film, sports teams, food, cars. The list goes on. What us "experts" find intriguing being miles away from what John Q. Buying Public finds most important. John Q looking for automobiles that are little more than inexpensive, stoic appliances.

A Tale of Two Chevys - The Doppelganger

My Sunday morning routine is pretty simple. Coffee, walk the dog, drive to the gym in the red Camaro we bought for our boys to use, workout, hit Giant Eagle for bagels and muffins and head home. Last Sunday morning, however I deviated from that scintillating agenda to drop $20 gas in what I lovingly refer to as "The Old '96er". Despite my constant lecturing to the contrary my 17 year old son, the primary driver of The Older 96er, has a habit of letting the tank get down very low. Modern, fuel injected automobiles not taking kindly, I remind him constantly, to running out of gas so my generosity was as much "prophylactic" as it was charitable. With Costco being on the far side of town it meant taking the long way home. That long way home had me stumbling across The Old 96er's doppelganger. 
 

You don't see many "fourth generation" Camaros anymore especially up here in Rustville Cleveland. The body on these Camaros might be of a rust proof fiberglass/plastic blend but the undercarriage is  rust friendly iron. To find another fourth generation Camaro is rare; to find another red one just like The Old 96er is just flat our freaky. Finding it so arbitrarily only adding to the delightful randomness of the whole experience.

 

Chevrolet and Pontiac's 1993 update of the 1982 Camaro and Firebird went a lot deeper than just a swoopy, plastic body but this body is all anyone really remembers. A delightfully handsome design that came at a time just as the market for these types of cars was starting to wane. Another example of GM's incredible bad timing and product planning that led ultimately to bankruptcy. GM pulled the plug on these cars after 2002.

 

There's little to distinguish a 1993 Camaro from a 1996 Camaro. However, while The Old 96er has aged gracefully, this '93 looks like it's been put a way wet. Very wet and very often. My "put away wet" vernacular suggesting this car was neglected and abused more than actually driven hard.

Staying youthful looking takes a combination of hard work and luck. Hard work in terms of exercise, diet and clean living. Luck in terms of being born with great, rust proof genes (we all know those people who are born with those great jeans. We secretly despise them.) You don't see many 18 year old Camaros like mine here in Cleveland not to mention a 21 year old Camaro like our well worn doppelganger. Our lovely "Old '96er", on the right, has spent much of it's life pampered by loving owners up to an including me. Who knows what the doppelganger's story is. I'm sure it has some tattoos in some unsavory places.

"Camaro", in case you've wondered, is a made up word. Legend has it that Ed Cole, then president of GM, came up with the name one morning while taking a shower. Us fans of car wish the origin of "Camaro" came from some place with a tad more mystery and intrigue. Perhaps Camaro is a code word for soap on a rope?
 

 

Doppelganger sounds like a made up word too but according to wiki -- 

 

dop·pel·gäng·er

ˈdäpəlˌgaNGər/

noun

noun: doppelgänger; plural noun: doppelgängers

1. an apparition or double of a living person.

   "he has a doppelgänger named Donald, his invented twin brother"