me to I like it it's a great car I'm gonna buy one..we still have it in Iraq and some of them are in a great condition...and the new one approaches 7000$'
As of March 2020, I own a 1982 Buick Century variant of this car with the same 4.3L Diesel engine; I can say honestly it's a strange car to drive. It's incredibly noisy, it smells, it smokes, it's quite difficult to work on, and the parts now are incredibly rare. Also because it uses pre-ignition chambers to make starting much easier, and with the use of aluminum heads in the FWD cars, you can't just start these and take off when stone cold. They need to idle and warm up, for give or take 5 to 8 minutes to run correctly and safely. With that said, it's a heck of a novelty to own and drive, it sounds like a truck, but a Buick pulls up, that always throws car people off. I get people walking up to me fairly often asking about it and some being completely shocked when I tell them it's Diesel, hence the smell and noise. The Oldsmobile 4.3L Diesel engine is no relation to any gas engine, it was designed to be it's own thing. The engine was not longer being used in cars at the end of 1985 however Oldsmobile continued to produce this engine until somewhere around 1993 for Generac Diesel Power Generators.
The Olds 4.3L V-6 diesel was a PROPERLY redesigned departure from the "done in desperation" Olds diesel V-8s, and also saw option in the G-body platform--including the El Camino/Caballero--through the '85m/y. Only making 90hp(net), it still produced torque comparable to a gasoline-fueled V-8 of the time. But, bead reps being as they are, it didn't see much production & after the Rochester TBI system was widely introduced on passenger-cars in '86, along with President Reagan's move to temporarily hold-back CAFE/EPA mandates, it was seen as no longer necessary. Shame they didn't turbocharge it... The improved clamping of the cylinder-heads [via more bolts] would've certainly allowed for it, even at relatively low boost levels w/o a inter-cooler.
Actually the El Camino/Caballero and the Monte Carlo/Grand Prix (as well as the G-body Bonneville) no longer had the LF9 after the 1984 model year (the LT6, what the Grand Prix and Bonneville never had, was dropped a year earlier).
I asked my dad his thoughts on this car and he said he bought one back in 1983! His was white. He said every third tank he'd fill it with white kerosene and it would burn the trash in the diesel fuel and he'd get 55 mpg.
Nutz4Gunz45 Toyota gets a pass when their shitbox Tundras catch fire and their Prius' accelerate on their own though, even getting caight red handed trying to sweep it under the rug... right? What's funny about all this is Ford and Toyota were both in bad shape sales wise at that time and at the rate they were going would've had no choice but to call Uncle Sam (our tax dollar) and file. Speaking of Ford Fiascos, anybody remember the Firestone debacle? Yeah, must be Ford at their best!
Well Mercedes was only getting 67-80 HP out of it's 4 and 5 cylinder diesels at the time and it took a turbodiesel to get power into the 120 bracket so it wasn't all that out of line.
@@ponchoman49 but they were 2.4liter 4cylinders and 3.0 liter 5 cylinders. The nonturbo 3.0 (om617) made the same power as this 4.3. and with a turbo it made almost 40 more horsepower.
@@SuperLabonte43 And the Merc was also so reliable that there are still lots of them around with unopened engines and several hundred thousand miles on the clock.
My first car was a 1991 Ciera with the 3300 V6 (160 hp @ 5200 rpm, 185 ft-lb torque @ 2000 rpm) with 3-spd auto. Got 224k miles out of it, with the engine/trans being bullet proof. Still runs/drives today even on old gas (no longer highway worthy after it side-swipped someone who pulled out into oncoming traffic. We drove it home, but was not financially feasible to fix being worth less than $1k. We use it do drive around the property). It was also much faster with 0-60 times around 8-8.5 sec. My mileage was also in the mid-upper 20s.
_"These were the cars that caused the huge growth in Japanese market share in the US."_ Well, no. That all happened in the 70s, especially with the oil embargo and CAFE standards, among other factors, catching the big three flat footed along with the Japanese having the right product at the right time. Then, as the Japanese competed for market share, they would begin to better understand the American market, thus adapting their offerings to better suit that market over time, making them even more competitive and essentially assuring that they will continue to serve the American market for many years to come. By the 80s, the big three were only just starting to stop their bleeding and turn things around for themselves, which they would eventually do once they found their footing around the mid 1980s onward. But, goodness gracious, did they have a lot of tumbles when trying to relearn how to walk in that time, especially GM with debacles like the X-body cars, the 5.7L diesel V8, the Cadillac V8-6-4, the Cadillac HT4100 engine (cast iron heads on an aluminum block, what could go wrong?!), and a half-assed attempt at a smaller Cadillac by making the Cimarron out of the J-body (the same platform as the Chevrolet Cavalier).
These cars had little to nothing to do with America's love affair with Toyota and Honda. It was more to do with the 2 massive oil embargoes that caused drivers to seek out the most efficient small cars they made and Detroit was late to he party.
Our East Cleveland Diesel specialty shop, applauded these models. We experienced a fraction, of the repairs, from previous models. Such a departure, from the RWD problematic 350's. This platform, either gas or diesel, was a fine performer. Wouldn't mind having one as a daily, right now.
+Dan McCarthy That engine was one of the worst things ever produced by any automaker. Legendarily bad. I agree with you. But VWs early diesels in this era didn't help either.
+Dan McCarthy If the bean counters didn't insist on using the same assembly line as the gas engines these would've been great. Even so, they are one or two fixes away from being really reliable. Of course those fixes should've been done at the factory lol
+Dan McCarthy It was pretty much the C.A.F.E. mafia crushing the industry with unrealistic MPG demands overnight,they had to come with new engines off their asses otherwise they'll be heavily taxed or forbidden to sell high demand models,they didn't had time to long time testing and shit happened,all the diesels were lemons,the Cadillac 4.1 was a POS among others,Mercedes-Benz thrown the towel and paid the fines,even the Japanese had to reduce the HP to ridiculous numbers,it was a hard time to be in the auto industry,i was working at Ford back in the day and I remember very well,it was all the C.A.F.E. assholes fault,like a conspiracy to fuck up everybody at the same time,when the government gives opening to special interest groups to intervene in the market with stupid rules and regulations capitalism and free market stops working,the same thing is happening right now with the Global Warming bullshitters,well,and the C.A.F.E. is still around fucking up everything,so when you look at the new cars and say "They look like crap,i don't want to buy it" you know whom to blame....
Except for the diesel option, the Cutlass Ciera was considered one the most reliable cars during the 80's and 90's according to JD Powers. That says something because many American cars were considered crap during that era.
Yes, they did last. I don't know why these cars lasted despite their small size. Back in the 70s and 80s, the only really good American cars were full size, and these cars. The related Buick was also good. I don't know why the Chevy and Pontiac variants sucked.
these were neat cars - not too big, not too small, relatively luxurious and less than $10K new. now everyone thinks they need a gargantuan SUV or super duper duty dually pickup.
This one was most definitely appreciated! Thank you for digging up the old GM footage. I appreciated this one and the others released today. I look forward to more GM footage.
Over the years my family had 3 of these exact cars. 2 84's and an 85. We never had any trouble with them and generally loved everything but the poor handling. The 4.3L Diesel was super heavy and as such the handling was terrible. Larger rims and lower profile tires would have helped. All in all, not a bad car, just too late to save the GM Diesel reputation in the US.
We had an '84 Ciera (gasoline version) and it was total garbage. Less than a month after buying we took it on vacation and the AC malfunctioned...my dad about lost his mind. It became my first car in early '91. It double clutched every time you accelerated from a full stop. It fishtailed on DRY pavement if you hit the brakes hard. In wet pavement it slid like you were on ice. It was so front heavy thats why it fishtailed and I tried putting bags of rocks in the trunk. That just made it slower. It also shook like crazy at any speed over 30 because you couldn't correct the alignment. If you used the AC you could watch that fuel gauge drop like a rock. Pinned the needle (85 mph) and thought the thing would explode. Timed it in 13 seconds 0 to 60. Replaced radiator hoses at least once a month. It took 2 people to open the hood because it was too heavy for the spring so when it froze up driving alone I was screwed. Transmission died at 85k miles and my dad said screw it, we traded it in for the value of a tow to the dealership. The biggest turd of turds.
Not sure where some of you folks got your information or experiences, but I owned a 1984 Oldsmobile Ciera Brougham 4.3 litre diesel and WOW! what a great car. I was in college at the time and got a constant 40 mpg city and highway combined. My worst mistake was trading the car for a 1983 immaculate Grand Prix Brougham (V-8 gas) because the rack and pinion was going out on the Olds .(damn rack and pinion). Spotted the same car 10 years later for sale and it was stilling running fine (with well over 100 K miles) and still looked great. I now own a Dodge RAM 2500 Cummins Diesel.
19.5 second quarter mile...lol...I could probably run the quarter, stop, then run it again in my GT-R given that much time. 🤣 It's INCREDIBLE to see how far cars have come over the years. "Show" these days was pretty decent back then! lol
I wish they would bring back bench seats, more comfortable and more leg room to spread out. BTW, I’m 19 and I think a lot of people my age would agree!
first car was a 1987 Celebrity Eurosport with the iron dookie engine. Still took 5 girls to the beach and had great times in the back seat during high school!
+vector6977 My parents had one of those when I was a little kid. Somehow we managed to take the family 1500 miles to Florida in it. Driving through the mountains required that the A/C be shut off so that it was able to make it up the hills!
+vector6977 My soon to be wife's first car was a Celebrity, on the way to the mall black smoke poured out of the AC vents forcing us to stick our heads out of the windows. It was traded in for a brand new 90 Sunbird within a few days but the back seat was full of good memories.
My first car was an 87 Ciera and i miss it....but ive had my share of A bodies and currently have 2 its safe to say i love em. I wouldnt mind one with a diesel.
grew up in the 80s and 90s and a whole lot of those cars (cutlass ciera) stuck around for a while, but I don't recall seeing any diesels for very long. The cieras and the buick centuries (assume that's the same car) stuck around for a very long time in dollar general and wal mart parking lots (and I'm sure they can still be seen there periodically). Grandpa and grandma still gave a 10 cent tip at the local diner so that they could afford a bigger car with a V-8 (generally speaking) unless grandma was a little short on cash.
My first car was my grandparents 84 Ciera 2 door with a 3.0 carbureted engine. It’s was poop brown with a vinyl top but somehow a good looking car a fun to drive despite having 110hp from the factory. At 75k miles the thing ran like crap, I probably couldn’t even get it to run right today after being an auto technician for 10 years. The only carb I know how to fix is on my John Deere. Had a rope rear main seal that leaked faster than oil could be poured in. If I had the time and money and a pole barn to have a hobby car I would have kept it, but I sold it in 2013 for $400 and saw it driving around a couple times after that. I’m glad it got to be used instead of rotting away somewhere like I had let it do for 10 years
This car was looking ahead to the first front wheel drive 98, the look was strictly oldsmobile and unmistakebly 98 as well, the diesel was icing on an already rich cake 4.3 liters torquey and very economical, the engine that was ready to replace the 5.7L engine.
I owned a 1985 Buick century diesel, I loved it. The only real complaint was how hard it was getting to find parts for the car. I had to finally let it go to a diesel collector.
I bought a new CC Broam new in 1983, 4-s OD trans and the 4.3 ran flawlessly for about 140k mi until the harmonic balancer came apart; wife then ran it for a couple of hours and the cast crank broke in half. She loved that car, always started and ran clean and never smoked, had great driving torque and got super mileage. Never spent a dime on repairs. Super engine, crappy cheap harmonic balancer. If I got a running 4.3 today, I would immediately replace or rebuild that balancer.
That engine was offered in the fwd Cadillac Deville in 1985. Making it the only non V8 offered in a Cadillac for years aside from the four banger offered in..ahem ..the Cimarron until the Opel based Catera came out.
@@pmvaldez1 They had both for a year or 2 if memory serves me right.The V8 came out for 1982 model year replacing the V8-6-4 that was offered for 1981.
Actually not a bad car for the time and apparently most of the "bugs" had been worked out of the 4.3 diesel. The gas mileage would have been nice. The interior was reasonable for the time. Not overdone and loaded with too man ridiculous "brougham" touches.
had one loved it. yea it had its gremlins but once ya got over it it was a great lil car. used mine to pull my friends out of ditches or snow mounds. miss my lil tank
My parents had one of these when I was a kid. I remember it was a bit of a dog and it didn't do so well in the WI winters even with block heater. I wonder if part of that was '80s diesel fuel quality tho.
I'm sorry...can't see myself getting this in Diesel, when the 3.3L V6 gasser (de-stroked 3800) came in this car, and got twice the HP, and 80% of the MPG.
I had a new same year Pontiac 6000 with the 4 cyl 2.5 which was great on gas and super comfortable and roomy. It had enough low end grunt to be ok in city driving but long interstate hills were ugly; you had to get to 100mph on the bottom of a long hill to not get under 60 by the top of the next crest. I currently drive a 2014 diesel Chevy Cruze which while a bit small for a family (I also have a 2016 Suburban) this is honest to God the best car I've ever owned, incredible mileage as expected from a modern 2.0 diesel but the effortless torque makes it feels like a V8! Great handling, braking and as quiet as a Cadillac on the highway. I can't believe it's built by GM! They should go bankrupt more often!
It is funny. John talked about bad brake proportioning. The much criticized X-body cars had the same issue. The A-body cars were built from the same chassis as the X-body cars. Nobody said a word about the A-body cars. I owned an 1985 chevy citation. Was a very reliable car. The A-body cars lasted well into the 1990's because of their reliability.
I had an '84 Ciera diesel. Golly, I miss that car. I shot it with ether. I changed the fuel filter & it wouldn't start. It was a hard learned diesel mistake I learned the hard way
My mother used to own a 1991 Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera with the 3.3 Liter V6 and it was a very good car and had very good power on the highway, I've thought the 1989 redesign of the Cutlass Ciera was the best of the 1982-96 A body cars.
Great looking car. I wouldn't mind driving one, or for that matter even *seeing* one. I guess they were about as bad out of the box as their big brother, the infamous Olds 350 diesel.
I owned a 1984 Ciera V6 diesel and as long as you stayed on top of routine maintenance, especially oil changes and glow plugs, they run forever. I'd still be driving mine if it weren't for rust as a result of Detroit area salt. With the 4 speed auto, I got no worse than 37 mpg and I got 48-50 mpg on trips. Besides the Geo Metro, it took an automaker over 20 years to building a car that got anywhere close to this kind of mpg.
People were afraid to buy an diesel from GM because of how hard the 5.7 sucked. Even if those V6 diesels were great, nobody would be willing to take the chance. In fact, I'm certain those diesels ruined the sales of every diesel not made by Benz.
@@devonnewest7990 Better? Maybe. "quite reliable"? No. I worked with a couple of older GM mechanics who dealt with these V6 diesels when they were new -- said the heads stayed on better than the V8s, but they broke the crankshafts instead.
A great, often underestimated car. It had a very good mileage, better than many european rides at that time. And the engine was more reliable compared to the 5,7 diesel!
The cutlass ciera, second in command only to cutlass supreme this car was definitely a step in the right direction, and add to the mix the world,s first front wheel drive diesel V6 engine with strong and quick acceleration 85hp@4800/165lbsft torque @ an incredible 1600rpm, combined with a 90 degree block even firing short throw large diameter crank shaft and roller hydraulic lifters, and an estimated 28/city 44/highway, the car was good but it was the engine made the cars so outstanding.
As long as this type of vehicle has safe highway acceleration, you need no more engine performance than that. This diesel offers that, with diesel torque, and excellent fuel economy. This was an excellent car.
they kept running . body didn't rust out . horrible to have a vehicle last ur life time . hate to save a million dollars . hahah. modern version be nice .. better milage than hybrids no hybrid . just horrible cars .
They tried to cut corners because they were in a hurry to get better fuel economy. GM ended up destroying the reputation of diesel engines for American car buyers for decades.
Because they decided to rush production by both not testing the engines properly and basing them off 350 olds gas engines...which is why the 5.7 olds is one of the only over square diesels you can buy.
Basing it off a pre existing car petrol engine meant that Detroit Diesel (a GM subsidiary at the time) weren't involved in the development rather being taken on by the car engineers unfamiliar and inexperienced with diesels
Авто/Мото
Am I the only one that LOVES these old car reviews? they are addicting. Thank you MotorWeek.
me to I like it it's a great car I'm gonna buy one..we still have it in Iraq and some of them are in a great condition...and the new one approaches 7000$'
This lamb concurs.
Right here with you!!!
Love this old school info
Lawrence Hodge NOPE. I love them. On a binge.
Every school teacher I had in my early elementary years had some version of this car. One rebel teacher I recall, had an Audi. Her husband was "rich."
As of March 2020, I own a 1982 Buick Century variant of this car with the same 4.3L Diesel engine; I can say honestly it's a strange car to drive. It's incredibly noisy, it smells, it smokes, it's quite difficult to work on, and the parts now are incredibly rare. Also because it uses pre-ignition chambers to make starting much easier, and with the use of aluminum heads in the FWD cars, you can't just start these and take off when stone cold. They need to idle and warm up, for give or take 5 to 8 minutes to run correctly and safely. With that said, it's a heck of a novelty to own and drive, it sounds like a truck, but a Buick pulls up, that always throws car people off. I get people walking up to me fairly often asking about it and some being completely shocked when I tell them it's Diesel, hence the smell and noise. The Oldsmobile 4.3L Diesel engine is no relation to any gas engine, it was designed to be it's own thing. The engine was not longer being used in cars at the end of 1985 however Oldsmobile continued to produce this engine until somewhere around 1993 for Generac Diesel Power Generators.
The Olds 4.3L V-6 diesel was a PROPERLY redesigned departure from the "done in desperation" Olds diesel V-8s, and also saw option in the G-body platform--including the El Camino/Caballero--through the '85m/y. Only making 90hp(net), it still produced torque comparable to a gasoline-fueled V-8 of the time. But, bead reps being as they are, it didn't see much production & after the Rochester TBI system was widely introduced on passenger-cars in '86, along with President Reagan's move to temporarily hold-back CAFE/EPA mandates, it was seen as no longer necessary.
Shame they didn't turbocharge it... The improved clamping of the cylinder-heads [via more bolts] would've certainly allowed for it, even at relatively low boost levels w/o a inter-cooler.
Actually the El Camino/Caballero and the Monte Carlo/Grand Prix (as well as the G-body Bonneville) no longer had the LF9 after the 1984 model year (the LT6, what the Grand Prix and Bonneville never had, was dropped a year earlier).
It must have been a heavy motor for these relative small light cars.
@@777jones for sure! A fully dressed olds 350 diesel weighs 850lbs this at least weighs 650ish
Imagine a 4.3L V6 TD in an S-10? or 1500?
@working_country ___ Hunh, nice! Happen to have a link?
I asked my dad his thoughts on this car and he said he bought one back in 1983! His was white. He said every third tank he'd fill it with white kerosene and it would burn the trash in the diesel fuel and he'd get 55 mpg.
GM at its finest. Brand new from the factory and 2 faults including total electrical failure.
And they wonder why they lost the market to foreign autos and needed bailed out... They brought it upon them selves...
+Nutz4Gunz45 LOL -- this is a GM vehicle that they wished they can sweep under the rug. My dad had an 81 Buick Electra Diesel.
+Nutz4Gunz45
We had an '83 6000 LE, the power window motor failed leaving the dealer lot new.
+Nutz4Gunz45 Hey, that happens in the present day with Audis !
Nutz4Gunz45 Toyota gets a pass when their shitbox Tundras catch fire and their Prius' accelerate on their own though, even getting caight red handed trying to sweep it under the rug... right? What's funny about all this is Ford and Toyota were both in bad shape sales wise at that time and at the rate they were going would've had no choice but to call Uncle Sam (our tax dollar) and file. Speaking of Ford Fiascos, anybody remember the Firestone debacle? Yeah, must be Ford at their best!
85 hp out of 4.3 is very modest even by naturally aspirated diesel standards.
Well Mercedes was only getting 67-80 HP out of it's 4 and 5 cylinder diesels at the time and it took a turbodiesel to get power into the 120 bracket so it wasn't all that out of line.
@@ponchoman49 but they were 2.4liter 4cylinders and 3.0 liter 5 cylinders. The nonturbo 3.0 (om617) made the same power as this 4.3. and with a turbo it made almost 40 more horsepower.
@@SuperLabonte43 And the Merc was also so reliable that there are still lots of them around with unopened engines and several hundred thousand miles on the clock.
Twin turbo that thing if you can even find the engine somewhere.
It was the 4.3 torque that mattered; drove mine 143k mi and the lo rpm power was always there.
I knew about the 350 V8 diesels, never knew these existed at all! Thanks Motorweek from 1984
My first car was a 1991 Ciera with the 3300 V6 (160 hp @ 5200 rpm, 185 ft-lb torque @ 2000 rpm) with 3-spd auto. Got 224k miles out of it, with the engine/trans being bullet proof. Still runs/drives today even on old gas (no longer highway worthy after it side-swipped someone who pulled out into oncoming traffic. We drove it home, but was not financially feasible to fix being worth less than $1k. We use it do drive around the property). It was also much faster with 0-60 times around 8-8.5 sec. My mileage was also in the mid-upper 20s.
These were the cars that caused the huge growth in Japanese market share in the US.
Nice Guy Eddie: Honda was the worst car I ever had.
+Robert Koscinski must have been old used junker honda is better than bmw and Mercedes Benz
Brandon Murphy: Honda sucks!
_"These were the cars that caused the huge growth in Japanese market share in the US."_
Well, no. That all happened in the 70s, especially with the oil embargo and CAFE standards, among other factors, catching the big three flat footed along with the Japanese having the right product at the right time.
Then, as the Japanese competed for market share, they would begin to better understand the American market, thus adapting their offerings to better suit that market over time, making them even more competitive and essentially assuring that they will continue to serve the American market for many years to come.
By the 80s, the big three were only just starting to stop their bleeding and turn things around for themselves, which they would eventually do once they found their footing around the mid 1980s onward.
But, goodness gracious, did they have a lot of tumbles when trying to relearn how to walk in that time, especially GM with debacles like the X-body cars, the 5.7L diesel V8, the Cadillac V8-6-4, the Cadillac HT4100 engine (cast iron heads on an aluminum block, what could go wrong?!), and a half-assed attempt at a smaller Cadillac by making the Cimarron out of the J-body (the same platform as the Chevrolet Cavalier).
These cars had little to nothing to do with America's love affair with Toyota and Honda. It was more to do with the 2 massive oil embargoes that caused drivers to seek out the most efficient small cars they made and Detroit was late to he party.
30 years later I just realize how classy these cars are. Slow as hell, faulty electronics, but classy lines.
It needs a modern engine to give it some power.
I wish I had 5 or 6 of these. These are fine engines if you don't dog them out!
Steve Holsten These engines were horrible.
The 3300 was the best engine this platform got. Many are still around today.
@@davidmeyers6884 1984-1988 could get the 3.8L. It made 10 fewer hp but 15 more lb-ft than the 1989-1993 3.3L.
Our East Cleveland Diesel specialty shop, applauded these models. We experienced a fraction, of the repairs, from previous models. Such a departure, from the RWD problematic 350's. This platform, either gas or diesel, was a fine performer. Wouldn't mind having one as a daily, right now.
I love these old Motor Week Retro reviews, their so awesome. 😎👍
How old is this guy? He hasn't aged since I was a little kid 30 years ago!
+DieselQuads Hair is a bit thinner now, but still looks good for his age.
Pat goss also not aging..huh?
+DieselQuads He's 148 now.
He is immortal just like Dunkin McCloud from Highlander, lol ! ! !
He'll be 69 this month, +DieselQuads
I'm among the school who believes that GM pretty much singlehandedly killed the Diesel as a viable powertrain option for passenger cars in the US.
+Dan McCarthy That engine was one of the worst things ever produced by any automaker. Legendarily bad. I agree with you. But VWs early diesels in this era didn't help either.
+Dan McCarthy If the bean counters didn't insist on using the same assembly line as the gas engines these would've been great. Even so, they are one or two fixes away from being really reliable. Of course those fixes should've been done at the factory lol
I have always said this.
+Dan McCarthy It was pretty much the C.A.F.E. mafia crushing the industry with unrealistic MPG demands overnight,they had to come with new engines off their asses otherwise they'll be heavily taxed or forbidden to sell high demand models,they didn't had time to long time testing and shit happened,all the diesels were lemons,the Cadillac 4.1 was a POS among others,Mercedes-Benz thrown the towel and paid the fines,even the Japanese had to reduce the HP to ridiculous numbers,it was a hard time to be in the auto industry,i was working at Ford back in the day and I remember very well,it was all the C.A.F.E. assholes fault,like a conspiracy to fuck up everybody at the same time,when the government gives opening to special interest groups to intervene in the market with stupid rules and regulations capitalism and free market stops working,the same thing is happening right now with the Global Warming bullshitters,well,and the C.A.F.E. is still around fucking up everything,so when you look at the new cars and say "They look like crap,i don't want to buy it" you know whom to blame....
And just when you thought that the diesel might be making a comeback in cars in the US, VW dealt it another disastrous blow to it's reputation!
Did not even know that this existed. Thank You MotorWeek!
Love the Retro Reviews.! Very cool
love these retro reviews
Every school teacher I had in my early elementary years had some version of this car. One rebel teacher I recall, had an Audi. Her husband was "rich."
They should've called it the Gutless.
Clever
Shots fired
I've always called this generation the Olds Nutless! 😆😆😆😆
Except for the diesel option, the Cutlass Ciera was considered one the most reliable cars during the 80's and 90's according to JD Powers. That says something because many American cars were considered crap during that era.
+dwilsonjr78
You can still go on Craigslist and see them from the 80's and 90's for sale.
+scott9050 They make great used cars.
Had an 87 and just bought a 61k original mile 1996. Great little bomber cars that are cheap and easy to fix.
Yes, they did last. I don't know why these cars lasted despite their small size. Back in the 70s and 80s, the only really good American cars were full size, and these cars.
The related Buick was also good. I don't know why the Chevy and Pontiac variants sucked.
CaptainSpauIding It was not a good engine.
these were neat cars - not too big, not too small, relatively luxurious and less than $10K new. now everyone thinks they need a gargantuan SUV or super duper duty dually pickup.
This one was most definitely appreciated! Thank you for digging up the old GM footage. I appreciated this one and the others released today. I look forward to more GM footage.
Over the years my family had 3 of these exact cars. 2 84's and an 85. We never had any trouble with them and generally loved everything but the poor handling. The 4.3L Diesel was super heavy and as such the handling was terrible. Larger rims and lower profile tires would have helped. All in all, not a bad car, just too late to save the GM Diesel reputation in the US.
Yes! We need more late malaise-era, abysmally low specific output diesel vids! Also, Love it how John Davis used to say "ought omatic"
+スバル Well, how would you pronounce automatic?
+TheRealE1337ist Dunno, there's just something very John Davis about the way he says it at 2:18 !
lunaazul Agreed on pro-nunciation. Love malaise era vids too. "A mostly benign pre-version," JD might say
I owned a Ciera with the Iron Duke 4 banger. It was super slow, but that car got great mileage and was incredibly comfortable. I kind of miss it.
I had the same one too.... It ran forever tho
+Biker Jim My mom had a 93 brand new, I miss it somedays, it had a 4 cylinder, but it broke down when I was little.
You had to really try hard to kill the iron duke
I remember my neighbor having one of these, could hear him coming down the street, it sounded like a truck.
We had an '84 Ciera (gasoline version) and it was total garbage. Less than a month after buying we took it on vacation and the AC malfunctioned...my dad about lost his mind. It became my first car in early '91. It double clutched every time you accelerated from a full stop. It fishtailed on DRY pavement if you hit the brakes hard. In wet pavement it slid like you were on ice. It was so front heavy thats why it fishtailed and I tried putting bags of rocks in the trunk. That just made it slower. It also shook like crazy at any speed over 30 because you couldn't correct the alignment. If you used the AC you could watch that fuel gauge drop like a rock. Pinned the needle (85 mph) and thought the thing would explode. Timed it in 13 seconds 0 to 60. Replaced radiator hoses at least once a month. It took 2 people to open the hood because it was too heavy for the spring so when it froze up driving alone I was screwed. Transmission died at 85k miles and my dad said screw it, we traded it in for the value of a tow to the dealership. The biggest turd of turds.
Another pleasant "GM experience"...
My dad used to say that Chrysler had good engines but lousy designs and Oldsmobile had nice designs but lousy engines. He had a point.
Awesome video, thank you motor week!!
Took a road trip in one of these right after I was out of high school back in the late 80s. Entering the freeway was frightening.
I can only imagine lol
Our Family had 3 of this model,our favorite was our /87 with a 2.5. Our current/10 fusion ranks right up with this Oldsmobile.
Not sure where some of you folks got your information or experiences, but I owned a 1984 Oldsmobile Ciera Brougham 4.3 litre diesel and WOW! what a great car. I was in college at the time and got a constant 40 mpg city and highway combined. My worst mistake was trading the car for a 1983 immaculate Grand Prix Brougham (V-8 gas) because the rack and pinion was going out on the Olds .(damn rack and pinion). Spotted the same car 10 years later for sale and it was stilling running fine (with well over 100 K miles) and still looked great. I now own a Dodge RAM 2500 Cummins Diesel.
I had one of these, no problems, I loved it.
Such improvement in braking in the next decades... can you imagine the distracted drivers in a car like this?
The gauge cluster is top notch tho...
That size car with a 4.3 L v6 in today's turbo diesel designs would be a super fast ride.
19.5 second quarter mile...lol...I could probably run the quarter, stop, then run it again in my GT-R given that much time. 🤣 It's INCREDIBLE to see how far cars have come over the years. "Show" these days was pretty decent back then! lol
I wish they would bring back bench seats, more comfortable and more leg room to spread out. BTW, I’m 19 and I think a lot of people my age would agree!
first car was a 1987 Celebrity Eurosport with the iron dookie engine. Still took 5 girls to the beach and had great times in the back seat during high school!
+vector6977 My parents had one of those when I was a little kid. Somehow we managed to take the family 1500 miles to Florida in it. Driving through the mountains required that the A/C be shut off so that it was able to make it up the hills!
+vector6977
My soon to be wife's first car was a Celebrity, on the way to the mall black smoke poured out of the AC vents forcing us to stick our heads out of the windows. It was traded in for a brand new 90 Sunbird within a few days but the back seat was full of good memories.
+vector6977 I didn't actually know you could get a Eurosport with the 4-cylinder engine. All the ones I remember as a kid had the 2.8 V6.
+Tuneman1984 You are right. Eurosports didn't have 4 bangers.
+Hella Good Um yeah they did.
Gotta love those A-Bodies!
My first car was an 87 Ciera and i miss it....but ive had my share of A bodies and currently have 2 its safe to say i love em. I wouldnt mind one with a diesel.
grew up in the 80s and 90s and a whole lot of those cars (cutlass ciera) stuck around for a while, but I don't recall seeing any diesels for very long. The cieras and the buick centuries (assume that's the same car) stuck around for a very long time in dollar general and wal mart parking lots (and I'm sure they can still be seen there periodically).
Grandpa and grandma still gave a 10 cent tip at the local diner so that they could afford a bigger car with a V-8 (generally speaking) unless grandma was a little short on cash.
Yes- the Buick Century was on this platform, as well as the Chevy Celebrity and the Pontiac 6000.
My first car was my grandparents 84 Ciera 2 door with a 3.0 carbureted engine. It’s was poop brown with a vinyl top but somehow a good looking car a fun to drive despite having 110hp from the factory. At 75k miles the thing ran like crap, I probably couldn’t even get it to run right today after being an auto technician for 10 years. The only carb I know how to fix is on my John Deere. Had a rope rear main seal that leaked faster than oil could be poured in. If I had the time and money and a pole barn to have a hobby car I would have kept it, but I sold it in 2013 for $400 and saw it driving around a couple times after that. I’m glad it got to be used instead of rotting away somewhere like I had let it do for 10 years
This car was looking ahead to the first front wheel drive 98, the look was strictly oldsmobile and unmistakebly 98 as well, the diesel was icing on an already rich cake 4.3 liters torquey and very economical, the engine that was ready to replace the 5.7L engine.
I owned a 1985 Buick century diesel, I loved it. The only real complaint was how hard it was getting to find parts for the car. I had to finally let it go to a diesel collector.
I bought a new CC Broam new in 1983, 4-s OD trans and the 4.3 ran flawlessly for about 140k mi until the harmonic balancer came apart; wife then ran it for a couple of hours and the cast crank broke in half. She loved that car, always started and ran clean and never smoked, had great driving torque and got super mileage. Never spent a dime on repairs. Super engine, crappy cheap harmonic balancer. If I got a running 4.3 today, I would immediately replace or rebuild that balancer.
Thanks for speaking up for the 4.3 diesel, they were very good diesels 1.5 million miles of testing before production. You are one of the few. Thanks
That engine was offered in the fwd Cadillac Deville in 1985. Making it the only non V8 offered in a Cadillac for years aside from the four banger offered in..ahem ..the Cimarron until the Opel based Catera came out.
@@pmvaldez1 Rear drive DeVilles were available with Buick's 4.1 Liter V6 as a credit option in early 80's
@@emeyer6963 huh, I thought the 4.1 was a v8 as well.
@@pmvaldez1 They had both for a year or 2 if memory serves me right.The V8 came out for 1982 model year replacing the V8-6-4 that was offered for 1981.
I had the exact same car.. Mine had the 2.5.. Ran forever too
Actually not a bad car for the time and apparently most of the "bugs" had been worked out of the 4.3 diesel. The gas mileage would have been nice. The interior was reasonable for the time. Not overdone and loaded with too man ridiculous "brougham" touches.
had one loved it. yea it had its gremlins but once ya got over it it was a great lil car. used mine to pull my friends out of ditches or snow mounds. miss my lil tank
They were good in snow....skinny snows on front = unstoppable
This was my first car. love jt
Once known as the baby 350 and still love em
My parents had one of these when I was a kid. I remember it was a bit of a dog and it didn't do so well in the WI winters even with block heater. I wonder if part of that was '80s diesel fuel quality tho.
I have to admit, I don,t see anything new from GM that even resembles their best innovations, and that V6 was one of many.
I'm sorry...can't see myself getting this in Diesel, when the 3.3L V6 gasser (de-stroked 3800) came in this car, and got twice the HP, and 80% of the MPG.
So now we all know where Rockstar got the sound bites for every old car in GTA Vice City
I had a new same year Pontiac 6000 with the 4 cyl 2.5 which was great on gas and super comfortable and roomy. It had enough low end grunt to be ok in city driving but long interstate hills were ugly; you had to get to 100mph on the bottom of a long hill to not get under 60 by the top of the next crest. I currently drive a 2014 diesel Chevy Cruze which while a bit small for a family (I also have a 2016 Suburban) this is honest to God the best car I've ever owned, incredible mileage as expected from a modern 2.0 diesel but the effortless torque makes it feels like a V8! Great handling, braking and as quiet as a Cadillac on the highway. I can't believe it's built by GM! They should go bankrupt more often!
Makes it feel like an '80s V8 lol
I want a 2-acre barn full of these sweet diesel Cierra's.
It is funny. John talked about bad brake proportioning. The much criticized X-body cars had the same issue. The A-body cars were built from the same chassis as the X-body cars. Nobody said a word about the A-body cars. I owned an 1985 chevy citation. Was a very reliable car. The A-body cars lasted well into the 1990's because of their reliability.
Wow, I had no idea that Olds made a diesel!
I think everyone had one of these not necessarily the diesel. I still see them everywhere.
The two guys from Fargo will want to see this.
I had an '84 Ciera diesel. Golly, I miss that car. I shot it with ether. I changed the fuel filter & it wouldn't start. It was a hard learned diesel mistake I learned the hard way
Ahh my childhood car in silver
What a fantastic American car!
About as powerful as my toaster
You have a 63KW toaster?
You wouldn't happen to be Photonicinduction?
Patchuchan I am ironically
Joel Worsley wait! Is this a real toaster 🤔
I too have a diesel toaster. Good ol cancer toast
The designed energy crunches.
My brother had that same model.ran good but eventually we converted it.
2:25 check out that rear wheel gap and bouncy ride.
My mother used to own a 1991 Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera with the 3.3 Liter V6 and it was a very good car and had very good power on the highway, I've thought the 1989 redesign of the Cutlass Ciera was the best of the 1982-96 A body cars.
The 3.3 was a great engine, very fast in a Ciera and even faster in a Grand Am.
@@davidp8627 The 3.3L 3300 was a shorter deck of the GM 3.8L 3800 Series engine C code started in 1988.
Great looking car. I wouldn't mind driving one, or for that matter even *seeing* one. I guess they were about as bad out of the box as their big brother, the infamous Olds 350 diesel.
uxwbill, this V6 diesel was quite reliable.
I owned a 1984 Ciera V6 diesel and as long as you stayed on top of routine maintenance, especially oil changes and glow plugs, they run forever. I'd still be driving mine if it weren't for rust as a result of Detroit area salt. With the 4 speed auto, I got no worse than 37 mpg and I got 48-50 mpg on trips. Besides the Geo Metro, it took an automaker over 20 years to building a car that got anywhere close to this kind of mpg.
People were afraid to buy an diesel from GM because of how hard the 5.7 sucked. Even if those V6 diesels were great, nobody would be willing to take the chance.
In fact, I'm certain those diesels ruined the sales of every diesel not made by Benz.
@@devonnewest7990 Better? Maybe. "quite reliable"? No. I worked with a couple of older GM mechanics who dealt with these V6 diesels when they were new -- said the heads stayed on better than the V8s, but they broke the crankshafts instead.
This design aged quite well, IMO.
A great, often underestimated car. It had a very good mileage, better than many european rides at that time. And the engine was more reliable compared to the 5,7 diesel!
This was a great car for people who had no idea as to how a car was supposed to drive!
My mom bought a brand new 1983 Cutlass Ciera brougham 4 cylinder. It was loud and slow lol.
Was it a diesel? It was probably the 2.5 liter iron duke gasoline engine.
No it was a four cylinder brougham 4 dr with plush seats.
The cutlass ciera, second in command only to cutlass supreme this car was definitely a step in the right direction, and add to the mix the world,s first front wheel drive diesel V6 engine with strong and quick acceleration 85hp@4800/165lbsft torque @ an incredible 1600rpm, combined with a 90 degree block even firing short throw large diameter crank shaft and roller hydraulic lifters, and an estimated 28/city 44/highway, the car was good but it was the engine made the cars so outstanding.
It's a piece of shit Ray.
As long as this type of vehicle has safe highway acceleration, you need no more engine performance than that. This diesel offers that, with diesel torque, and excellent fuel economy. This was an excellent car.
It needs some betty white stickers on the windows!
Interesting to a UK listener how he says "petrol" halfway through the clip 😀
In the States 'petrol' and 'gas' are used interchangeably.
Austinmini1275 I didn’t think they used the word petrol at all over there. And it’s quite surreal replying to a 4 year old comment lol
The baby 350, 4.3 V6 diesel was the best pushrod V6 engine GM ever made, 2nd only to Buick (3800).
Um, maybe the 4.3L Chevy V6 gas engine, definitely not the Olds 4.3L V6 diesel.....
Yep. Mine still runs great.
what a piece of shit but god damn you can't kill the thing its like a fucking cockroach it just keeps going no matter what breaks.
great car apart from leaving them stranded with that total electrical failure.
Motor week can make a 3 cly metro into the best thing since sliced bread
a 19.5 second quarter mile? That's Volkswagon Beetle territory.
I think the new 3 cylinder cars are faster than that, lol.
Considering it only had 85 HP it isn't that bad
A Beetle needed far longer than 19.5 seconds in the 1/4 mile. That was more like the 0-60 time.
I wonder if there are any of these left on the roads. I recently saw a Ford Tempo diesel for sale.
Still have one, needs head gaskets but still runs well
My right ear loved this video.
My right ear really enjoyed this video. LoL 😁
When they say they don't make them like they used to, thank God they don't !
they kept running . body didn't rust out . horrible to have a vehicle last ur life time . hate to save a million dollars . hahah. modern version be nice .. better milage than hybrids no hybrid . just horrible cars .
TQ can be had at like 2.4 liter gas now with 2.5x more peak HP.😁
Are there any of these left on the road?
15.6 seconds 0 to 60 is actually not bad for an old diesel car. An old Mercedes 200D needed more than 30 seconds from 0 to 60, as did a VW beetle.
My first car in 1993. With the iron duke. What a piece of crap. Good looking car with great seats
@2:18 looks a little nose heavy haha
Over 1 and 1/2 MILLION miles of testing 😱😱😱
Looks comfortable for a lamb to ride in.
I almost died laughing when I heard 85 hp 😁😁😁🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂.
Those were good engines
GM built some of the best buses but couldnt build a decent diesel powered car? Something isnt right with this picture.
They tried to cut corners because they were in a hurry to get better fuel economy. GM ended up destroying the reputation of diesel engines for American car buyers for decades.
Because they decided to rush production by both not testing the engines properly and basing them off 350 olds gas engines...which is why the 5.7 olds is one of the only over square diesels you can buy.
Basing it off a pre existing car petrol engine meant that Detroit Diesel (a GM subsidiary at the time) weren't involved in the development rather being taken on by the car engineers unfamiliar and inexperienced with diesels
Now that is one car that hates curves.
Damn my dad was 8 years old when this video was made
Mark McGarret and mine was 24 so what?
@@roddevereaux1830 it's old.
Tan Ciera! Tan Ciera!
rbrobbi: Great movie!
How the fuck do you split a fuckin' car, ya dummy? With a fuckin' chainsaw?
Holy crap 0-60 in 15.6 seconds