My sister bought a used one of these in light blue and it got her through some tough times. She's pretty well off now and can afford any vehicle she wants but to this day talks fondly of her blue "fast back" Cutlass!
Worked at an Oldsmobile dealer circa 1978-83. We referred to these as Gutless salamis. You're right, the overall quality of these was much worse than the previous generation, which helped the 75-77 keep their resale value and demand higher, especially the Broughams
“I hate it! I wouldn’t buy it. I wouldn’t drive it. I wouldn’t even say Good Morning to it!” - my 13 year old self loved this quote from a 1979 issue of Motor Trend where they road tested both the 260 and 350 V-8 diesels (in this case the 260 was in a 2-door Cutlass Supreme. That quote cracked me up then, and still makes me giggle to this day.
Yup - I remember reading that article as a kid..I think it was a test of all the diesel cars on the market in 1979. Back in the days when the car mags were entertaining reads and not just extensions of corporate marketing material assembled together by a content algorithm.
I was starting law school as an adult, I was dead broke, and I needed a car. Found a 1979 Cutlass 2Dr sedan. The owner thought the engine was going because the oil sending light was on. But the engine was quiet and there was no blow by from the oil cap, so I knew it was the oil sending unit. Bought the car for a hundred bucks, twenty dollars for an oil sending unit, and after a tune up and filters, I was good to go. In three years, that Cutlass did not miss a beat! It had the 231 V6, never burned oil, and started on the first turn of the key, even in bitter cold. Never spent a dime on her. One day I drove through a puddle which concelaed a huge pot hole, and the rear bumper came off. There was too much rot to weld the bumper back on, so I could not renew my plates. I almost cried when I had to junk her. What a great car - dollar for dollar, best car I ever owned!
I have a '78 Cutlass Salon with a 305/ 4 spd. Its an aguired taste but always liked these from new. Finally bought one two yrs ago. Yes they are rarer than hens teeth.
I still remember my 4th grade teacher getting this and comparing it to my mom’s 78 Cutlass Supreme and thinking there was something terribly wrong with my teacher’s car.
I remember when these came out. I thought to myself "What were they thinking?" Also noticed the door pull falling off on the image - typical GM quality. I had a '79 Grand Prix with the same' feature.'😂
Parents had a ‘79 Malibu sedan. Vinyl and no A/C. As a child; being in the back seat in the summer was excruciating with only minimum flow from the manual wing windows.
You could roll the rear door windows down in a 4 door Chevette. I never could understand why they were so cheap and lazy not to do this on the midsize.
Take a '67 Mustang. It had these vent boxes under the dash if you wanted some air to breathe. "Yeah, it has climate control, roll down the dam windows!".
The early Chrysler K Cars were the same. The early models had fixed rear windows for the 4 door models. The roll down rear windows didn't arrive on the K Car until 1982 or 83.
What a color combo on this green example...quintessential 70's! I also didn't know that these had that fixed rear window...a true travesty of a corporate decision that begs the question, why?!?
Because of the intrusion of the rear wheel well into the back door, you can see that if the back windows did go down, they wouldn't be able to travel very far at all. Other manufacturers had similar issues, but they tended to address the problem by putting a fake (fixed) vent window in the rear of the door glass...so now the door glass could pretty much go straight down. My guess is that Olds and Buick didn't want to do that for fear of messing up their well-conceived (???) body design...or perhaps GM was just being cheap.
I grew up with a ‘78 Chevrolet Malibu Classic. Fixed rear windows, but vent windows at the C pillars. Terrible riding around in back when my dad drove, because he rarely turned on the air conditioner. Had a 3.8 L V6. Stripped to the bone. Good times.
I'm glad you mentioned the 260 Diesel. Consumer Guide stated in their 1980 Used Car Guide " The Cutlass is overall a great value, but avoid the seldom-ordered 1979 260 Diesel V8 ". And one more thing. Chrysler must have liked the fact the rear doors didn't roll down. The 1981 K-Cars also have no roll down rear windows. But unlike GM, Chrysler, would add roll down rear windows for 1982.
Mom n Dad bought a new 1979 Pontiac LeMans wagon. It had the 231 Buick V6 and TH200 trans. I took my drivers test in it in November 1982. That car got passed to all 4 of us kids and had 143k on it when Dad used it on a trade in when my sister bought a 1991 Beretta. When Pete Rose passed Ty Cobb on September 11, 1985, we all were at the game, so I drove the Lemans wagon. That lack of rear window roll down can be problematic if someone over celebrates at a baseball game.
Those 1978 and 1979 Oldsmobile Cutlass Salons and Buick Centurys reminded of updated versions of cars from the 1940's. When GM restyled the sedans into the notchback look for the 1980 model year they looked far better especially the Cutlass Salon sedan. The worst thing about the 1979 Cutlass Salon 4 door was not the styling but the fact that the rear window did not go down, only a vent window opened sideways.
I had a '78 Pontiac Lemon in pale blue. the rear vent windows kept falling out of the cheap clamp holding them, the dealer finally had to use Permagasket to solve the problem. That and one day the throttle stuck wide open (I was parked at the time), alternator bracket was bent, sloppy quality overall.
Some GM designers stated they used it as an influence. You know , like how Madonna would say her influence is Etta James, lol. What’s even more horrific is that the designers appear to be self aware by actually acknowledging they designed the POS.
Oh those rear windows…brings back painful memories of my mom’s 1978 Malibu wagon and my dad’s 1979 Cutlass Cruiser wagon. Having a tendency for carsickness as a kid, this made long road trips miserable. The rear vent windows were next to useless. Fortunately neither car lasted long. The Malibu had the horrible 200 CID V6 and wound up throwing a rod. The Olds had the sluggish 260 V8 that suffered from vapor lock on hot days. That car blew its transmission at 70k, about a year after the Malibu died and to my delight, went away.
I’m surprised to learn it didn’t sell well because I remember a lot of them being on the road, but now that I think about it’s probably because they looked so strange and disconcerting that I noticed them every time I saw one. I always wondered why people would want one because they always gave me an uncomfortable feeling when I saw one.
Did you know this interesting fact? Yes, the 90 horse 260 V8 Diesel was available for 79 only in the Supreme and Salon, a very rare find if you can located a survivor today. When they self distructed, Oldsmobile was instructed to install replacement 350 D block diesels. Dealerships had piles of broken 260 diesels behind the service shops to be returned to the factory, however, most were just tossed. To find an original 260 diesel today is almost impossible. GM also offered the 260 diesel with a 5 speed manual transmission! According to GM archives, only 265 were built. When it ran right, 35 mpg on the highway was possible in overdrive. I know of a survivor, a beautiful white 79 Salon Brougham coupe with a red interior, fully loaded, power everything, plus the 260 diesel with 5 speed! I asked the owner many times to sell, however the owner will not sell.
I was the second owner of a '79 Cutlass Cruiser with a 260 V8. Mine had rear door windows that went down, as well as power vent windows in the rear of the wagon. Happily, I didn't experience the quality issues you mentioned, Adam. My "baby V8" towed small trailers reasonably well and, while it WAS gutless, it survived a hard life from my "young and invincible" self, lol! I have fond memories of that car! 😉😎
I remember seeing these aerobacks when I was a child in the 80's. (I was born in 1978, the first year these aerobacks debuted). Even back then I thought they were odd looking.
Spot on: The Cutlass franchise was the right car at the right time in automotive history. The Salon design was simply weird. I always wondered if the Cadillac Seville bustle back was the last dying gasp of this particular design strategy. The avocado green model shown was so 1970’s 😊. At least then cars were differentiated in color from today’s white, black and 50 shades of gray.
I bought a new one in 1979 as the first new car for my wife. You forgot to mention that they came equipped with the deadly Firestone “721’ radials that split. Picked it up on a Friday and Sunday when it had 65 miles on it the right front tire exploded. Could have been killed. Mine was maroon and the paint job had no primer/undercoat and since it was not garage kept it faded out to nearly white in a year. Transmission lasted 13,000 miles. I didn’t know the rear windows didn’t open until a friend was riding in the back seat and told me. Dealer said it was designed that way. It was a total p o s. 45 years later I can proudly say that was the last GM car I ever bought.
You are mistaken about the tires. The Firestone tire you are thinking of was their Radial 500, which ended up being recalled, and Firestone was fined a bunch of money for hiding consumer data, a scandal at the time. The 721, which GM did use on their downsized intermediates was an excellent tire, with no history of issues.
@@jamesw1659 That's correct. The 721 was installed on all the vehicles which had Radial 500s on them that were under recall in 1978-1979. I worked at a Firestone dealer during this period. The recall only covered tires that were manufactured from the 35th week of 1975 until the 17th week of 1976.
My dad got a 79 Cutlass Salon as one of his company cars. As I recall, he had the Olds gas powered V6, I assume the 231 cu in with an automatic transmission. I would imagine his company got a very good price on a lease for a fleet of these cars. I am going to push back on some of the things you said Adam. The car was reasonably comfortable, thought certainly not attractive. Dad ended up buying out the lease and put more than 200k miles on the car. When he got rid of it in the mid 80's it did not burn oil and had the original engine and transmission still intact. The car never let him down and he sold it for a few hundred dollars to someone looking for cheap transportation. Dad was very good on keeping up with maintenance, probably was lucky in that he got a good example.
Ain't it stange. The oligarchs that ok,d this car for production are like the present day oligarchs that what us to eat food made of insects. They say we will love it.
Those '78/'79/'80 Cutlasses were ugly ducklings compared to the '77 and before cars but by the mid-'80s Olds got the styling right again and I think they looked pretty good especially the '87s with the euro style front end
While in high school in the late 70’s we had a new cutlass salon used for driver’s ed, and will never forget how trim parts kept falling off. There were so many we just made a pile of them in the trunk.
My mother had a new 79 Cutlass Supreme Brougham with a baby blue velour interior and the 231 V6. The TH200 transmission was indeed a grenade. It had numerous problems with hard shifting and finally exploded on Interstate 95 during a long trip. If I remember correctly, when the car was initially lifted by the tow truck, the driveshaft fell out of it. That was the end of the Cutlass. Unfortunately, my parents immediately bought a new 84 Cadillac Eldorado from our local Olds - Cadillac dealership, of course with the equally terrible 4.1 "hook & tow" Cadillac V8.... which later exploded as well....
@@jacknapier7740 One of the slowest cars I ever drove was an '83 Century Wagon with the 231 - you really had to wait for traffic to clear before pulling out on the road... The other was a '73ish Dart with a Slant Six and automatic.
@@DanEBoyd That makes me wonder what Buick's 3.2 L V6, which was only sold on the '78 and '79 Century, I believe, was like. It could only have been slower.
@@jacknapier7740 I had a new 1981 Cutlass Supreme Brougham 2 door coupe with that crappy 231 V6. At the time, nobody was buying V8’s and I was worried about being able to resell it in a couple of years. By 1983 everyone wanted a V8, even if it was an anemic 260.
Parents had a 1980 Century with the 231 v6. Had about 200k miles on it when it was done. Transmission was terrible, but that slug of an engine kept on going!
My family had a 1978 Cutlass Cruiser station wagon when I was young. And not having operable rear windows in the Summer with the cheap vinyl interior was hell. The rear vent windows were not powered in ours and they were difficult to operate for kids. We would have to open all the doors, start the car and open the rear (back) tailgate window in order to let the heat out. I was too young to know which engine we had, but from what I remember it was reliable. We used it until the 1985 GMC Safari minivan van came out.
back in the early 80s 1 of my friend's mom had the Buick wagon variant. She would pick us up from little league, all sweaty and nasty, and let us sit in the cargo area with the window down on the drive home. We all hated that car.
Second degree burns from Naugahyde seats are a badge of survival for people over a certain age. The thickness and texture varied a lot. Some cars had "Almost leather", at least until you sat on it. Others seemed to have the same thickness as the sidewalls of the tires. Living in Florida they retained heat really well. Any parking spot with shade was a premium. My former mother in law was from Minnesota. She said they were like sitting on a block of ice in the winter. Very hard and pulled heat from your body no matter how many layers you were wearing.
@@carlasghost656 My dad's 1977 Chevrolet C20 pickup had a vinyl centre portion to the bench seat and stupid metal squares in the outboard parts of the seatback. The vinyl retained heat in the summer and the stupid metal squares could brand you!
My wife had a 1979 Buick Regal Turbo Sport Coupe with the turbocharged Buick V6. The relatively flimsy switchgear, the suboptimal interior build quality, and frustrating engine and turbo seal oil leaks were disappointing compared to our previous earlier generation dependable Century. In all, that unhappy '79 Regal model, like these sad looking Cutlas Salon models, was the beginning of the end for our previous unshakeable allegiance to GM. I always wondered what was the underlying management philosophy of Tom Murphy, then his successor Roger Smith, and of the GM board which led to decisions so deeply wounding GM going forward in the late 1970's and 1980. Adam, if you have any insights into these management and failing product decisions that led to such sad products like the 1979 "buttless" salon, please share those thoughts with us. Thank you again for another great video.
Reply to AmitAmir: No neither of us abused that Turbo Regal. In fact I doubt that my wife would have ever gone above 2,500 rpm., she always drove without aggression. Even I tried to be careful with that Regal Turbo, also teaching my wife to let the turbo run down with a one to two minute idle before a shut down. We had bought that Regal as a discounted dealer demo, so the turbo and turbo seal damage may have already been done before we took delivery. The engine always leaked oil and we had a constant under hood oil smell that our dealer could never isolate or repair. After four years we traded the Regal Turbo for a Saab 900 automatic Turbo which had much better fit and finish, but had, as we learned classic Saab front brake wear issues. In actuality I liked both the Regal Turbo and the Saab 900 turbo, although the Saab was the better wintertime car for Great Lakes winter snow. Cheers.
My mother bought one of these in 78. It was the first and last time she would have a car of her own, bought with money she had saved and registered in her name. She had gone to buy a Malibu, but the salesman offered her a better deal on the Cutlass, and she was thrilled that she would have an OLDSMOBILE. Not just a lowly Chevy. Mum was of an era when such things had meaning, and my parents, who came of age in the depression, had always been very thrifty. So the thought of owning an Oldsmobile was to be a source of pride for her, as long as she owned that car. I thought the car was hideous looking, but I didn’t have a vote. It had the 305 V8 and drove well. It definitely handled better than dad’s Monarch…though I’d rather been seen in the Mercury!
I bought a Cutlass in 1980. I was a 68 model. Rocket 350. That was the car of my youth. As such it remains vivid in my memory. How I drove it from school straight into life as an adult.
Buick was saddled with the same design for their Century. Really odd was the Turbo Sport Coupe version, complete with duck tail spoiler. The brochure says the turbo was also available in the Century sedan, I bet those are really rare.
Maybe if someone makes a movie or show about a drug dealer driving one of these cars it will suddenly be discovered by collectors. It worked for the Aztec.
I love a “5-door” body style! I believe the issue was that the Citation and Phoenix X-car sedans and these mid-size sedans were NOT 5-doors? They should have been offered in a “formal” roofline and a 5 door hatchback as an alternative. As for the rear windows? I’ve owned 3 of these models: I never, ever cared because I previously owned “Colonnade” models, including a 1975 Cutlass, where the coupe windows didn’t go down either.
1981 model year Chrysler K-Cars did the same thing with the rear door windows. That changed when Lee "Brougham" Iacocca wanted a landau top on the 4-door sedan LeBaron and Dodge 400 to be introduced for 1982 which eliminated the vent windows and required roll-down sections which were then applied to all subsequent 4-door K cars once the original parts were used up on the line (and I've never seen an '82 with the large fixed/small vent windows in real life, even though they were in all the early ads and brochures).
My brother bought a '79 4 door salon with the 260 Diesel. He sold it to my Dad because he lived up in the hills of LA and it was too slow. (Going up Sepulveda hill south bound on the 405, you had to get in the right lane because 45 is all the car would do going up the hill) Eventually at about 45,000 miles, the head gasket blew and since my Mother was driving it, overheated it and the engine siezed. We then had a 350 Diesel installed, but then found out the Turbo Hydro 200 trans couldn't take the torque. We had a Turbo Hydro 350 transmission installed and no longer had any transmission problems. Well that 350 lasted about 30,000 miles before the block cracked. We then had another 350 installed and that went up to 125,000 miles when the injection pump gave out for the second time. I paid the junk yard $250 to haul the car away. Other than the engine and transmission problems, it was a great car to drive with very little wrong with it. It handled well, A/C and heater worked well, no cruise control. If the car had a Chevrolet 350 V-8 in it it would have been a great car.
Thank you Adam great video! I noticed that you’ve been mentioning a lot of small GM V-8s that disappeared in the early 80’s ( 260, 265,,267, 301 cubic inches). These engines are much less common now than the 305s 307s and 350s which are most commonly found in surviving cars. Have you considered doing a video on the strengths and weaknesses of these lesser known engines?
I think Adam brought up why the 260’s disappeared and it wasn’t because the engine but that horrendous transmission it pulled around. Mom’s ‘76 Olds with a 260 was lucky to get 40k miles out of a transmission.
The small V8s from the late 70s/early 80s were introduced to help comply with CAFE standards. In reality they were no more fuel efficient than their larger siblings and had significant power reductions. Control technology was just not capable enough to take advantage of these smaller engines and V8 internal friction stayed about the same. They all went away and were replaced by the corporate 5 liter from Chevrolet or Olds. Interestingly enough, Chevrolet did bring back the 'small' V8 in 265 cu. in. form as the LT1s little brother the L99. Only used on the '94-96 Caprice I think..
Yes GM design really loved the bustleback and finally “won” for this, it’s Buick mate, and the 1980 Seville. That 1980-85 Seville destroyed any equity built from the 1975-79 Seville…..opening the door further for European and Japanese upscale offerings.
Same general shape and just as ugly. Very misguided design direction and arrogant decisions. Unfortunate - GM had so much potential yet lacked market awareness and strategy
Same non-operable rear windows in the 1980 Malibu wagon I grew up with. Which was an issue when a high school buddy decided to light an M80 and wanted to throw it out the window - he wasn't the brightest bulb, of course.
My parents had a 1980 cutlass with the buick 231. My dad rebuilt the engine at one point. I can attest to the gutlessness of it. You could floor it but it seemed to make no difference in acceleration, it just made more noise :D
I remember Citroen was doing the same with their DS4's rear door windows in the late 2000s, explaining it like "we wanted our window to be one piece for design purposes" and "why would you need to open them if we have AC included in the base trim?")
We had an 81 Cutlass Cruiser wagon and the rear windows didn't go down, but it did have those stupid little vent windows! lol Fortunately, the air conditioning worked. I wish I would've gotten that wagon for my first car, it was a trooper!
Soon GM won't be building cars for anyone. Marry Barra will be their last CEO, EVER. Ford won't be far behind them, Chrysler is already gone, although they will soon offer an EV Fiat to complement their ICE Fiats that Americans love. And Stellaris will still sell you a minivan.
My great uncle thought it was a hatchback, which he deemed kinda handy. Once he got to the showroom he was rudely awakened. He ended up buying a Supreme coupe with the 305, in triple blue. That car got stolen so many times, that the insurance company dropped him, and the last time he got it back, he sold it.
Hard to believe Oldsmobile put the 442 name on a version of this. Harder to believe Hot Wheels sold it as the "Flat Out 442". My "Flat Out 442" was Orange.
Adam, you said the Cutlass Salon was introduced in ‘78. It was actually introduced in 1975. I had a ‘76 and a ‘77, loved them both. You could even get a ‘76 with a 190hp 455 4bbl and the ‘77 with the 403. Mine were both 350 4bbl and were plenty fast. The ‘76 had wide plush buckets and the ‘77 used the Astro buckets. Both reclined. I, like everyone else, was disappointed with the ‘78.
Came here to say this, but actually the Salon was introduced in 1973. It was the top model of the Cutlass line, but starting in 1978 that was no longer the case. This slant back version lasted until 1980 (when it was coupe only), but the Salon name would reappear once again as a top-line sporty model in 1985 (replacing Calais which was used for that slot from 1978-84). The reason for that was that starting in 1985 Calais was used for a much smaller front wheel drive N body car. Complicated!
@@chrisgreen67 You’re right, 1973. From ‘73 - ‘77 they were beautiful cars. probably why they were so successful and Olds sold so many. ‘78 on, not so much.
If the fixed rear door glass was that big an issue, it would have affected sales of all the A-bodies. But the Malibu was outselling the old Chevelle by 79, and it and the LeMans gave GM all the evidence it needed to ditch the fastback for both the Cutlass and Buick Century, after just 2 model years. The door glass was a nuisance, but it had only a minor effect on sales.
Something I’m surprised you didn’t mention was that in ‘79, the 442 was available in the Cutlass Salon body style. You may consider it ugly, but one of the coolest looking cars from the Hot Wheels line 1979 was the “Flatout 442”, which was in stock car form and looked great with a tall trunk spoiler, chin spoiler, side pipes, small hood scoop, flared rear fenders and rear window slats. Nice detailing between the black plastic lower body panels, grille and hood scoop, polished metal headlights, taillights and lake pipes, and orange body with racing decals. There’s a mint in package one on fleabay for $250 right now. I still have mine from when I was a kid.
I bought a new 78 Cutlass Calais coupe with the 260 V8, that ran great, but the transmission went out at 20,000 miles. Fortunately I had purchased the extended warranty, so it was replaced at no cost to me. That unit shifted better than the original ever had. I was concerned from day one that the transmission was not going to last, the shifts were terrible, the new one was fine.
When I was a kid, my eldest brother had a brand new 1969 cherry red convertible Cutlass with white interior. What a beauty! I was already a Cutlass fan so being so close to the real thing was a thrill. When I saw the '79 disaster, my heart sank. I thought, "Who is making ruinous decisions like this at GM?"
I was so pre-pro GM back then that I really really tried to like anything new that came out from them, but just couldn’t wrap my mind around this, it doesn’t work.
It is difficult to understand some of the design decisions made during the mid to late 1970's, unless you lived through that period, which I did. The CAFE standards prompted US manufacturers to downsize their cars. The 1973 oil crisis had passed, but people even 5-10 years later had vivid memories of it and there were periodic price spikes during the late 1970's and early 80's which kept the fear of another oil crisis alive in car buyer's minds. Even when adjusted for inflation, oil prices on average never dropped down to what they were before 1973. And, perhaps most important, there was a prolonged period of "stagflation" (combined price inflation and stagnant growth) that was eating into almost all Americans pocketbooks and making them settle for smaller cars. Manufacturers were under great pressure to cut both weight and content, to save fuel but also to decrease their costs. There was overall a mood of austarity that lasted well into President Reagan's first term. And, it was a time of diminished expectations with regard to family cars. The mood really didn't change until the mid to late 1980's, when more advanced cars that were both more powerful and economical began to appear.
There is a solution to the CAFE standards (apart from avoiding them through SUV's) and that is aerodynamics. But no, they kept making boxy designs with large and heavy engines with heavy automatic transmissions. Overall, no willingness to innovate cost them their market. Look at the Japanese (and later Tesla) what to do.
There was that second oil crunch in 79, but not as bad as 73. I have a receipt from my dad that I found among his things after he passed, dated 5/79. Regular fuel was $1.10, and he scribbled on it, "1st time paying over a dollar per gallon for reg gas" I assume it was leaded fuel.
I remember my parents buying a 1980 VW Rabbit in the Fall of 1979. It was a nearly loaded car with air conditioning, sunroof, automatic and the deluxe interior. It was a rather expensive little car and by far, the smallest car our family had ever owned. But there was the fear of high gas prices continuing, along with economic uncertainty, which motivated even middle class US consumers buy cars which were smaller and less substantial than purchased before. To me, the 1978 Cutlass perfectly fits the mood of lowered automotive expectations during that time. However, most of the people I knew drove the Cutlass Supreme 2 door coupes, which as I recall were generally well liked, perhaps because they were more stylish than the 2 and 4 door sedans.@@adamtrombino106
Knew a salvage yard owner that had one of the 442 versions of the hatchback coupe towed in with a rusty frame and the 305 chevy tick and miss and some rust/ faded paint, deals and chrome. Later he swapped a frame from a retired chevy malibu police car with a 350 police v8 and th350 that ran in enduros and everything bolted in. The cutlass ran good and he drove it around for few months but the inner door handle clips and heater/defroster broke and then later ran it in stock drags and then enduros, it surprised many people but at 105k the original 305 had 'the tick' and the trans had already been replaced with a rebuilt tag and original 442 owner replaced with it a used 85 cutlass v8 salon sport coupe and felt that was the car this one should've been but it got him thru college and was still better than the new x cars gm pushed in dec 79. Great video, saw one for sale years ago and had seen one since. that green paint looks good on the car.
I owned a ‘78 Cutlass Salon 30 years ago. Styling was polarizing but, mechanically, it was exactly the same as the rest of the Cutlass line. The 260 was a bit underpowered and the automatic transmission was a little fragile and really needed to be “nursed along” to make it last. The same transmission was later shipped of to GM of Europe who beefed it up slightly and tacked a fourth gear overdrive onto it. My ‘95 BMW E36 has one … and I nurse it along, also. Yeah, I can remember hating them when I was a kid and they first came out but as they got older and rarely seen on the road by the early 1990s, I began to like them more. I always assumed that the lack of the movable rear door windows was done to “encouage” customers of low end models to option up into buying air conditioning. Other than being underpowered, I didn’t find the construction quality to be bad at all. My car had nearly 200,000 miles on it when I sold it and it still looked and ran good at the time. While that doesn’t sound impressive today, for a 1978 American car, that was not bad at all! Would I like to own another one? You bet I would! You never, ever see them anymore! I wouldn’t, however, be willing to pay the bloated price I would have to part with to buy a clean, well cared for low mileage car these days … but if I located a “deal” on a nice one, I’d have it! I believe the features you were picking on, especially the interior features like dashboard and instrument designs and seats, were used GM wide and not just on the Cutlass Salon. You must understand when comparing the pre 1978 Cutlass to the post 1977 Cutlass is that the downsizing was done to meet customer demand. Had Olds retained the massive 1977 body and larger engines, sales would have completely fallen off a cliff when the ‘78 gas crisis began. The smaller Cutlass bodies kept Oldsmobiles selling well through the early 1980s with a variety of smaller engines (yes, they were all underpowered but even the Corvettes were underpowered and emissions choked during this period) which is exactly what buyers demanded at the time. I will concede that the 1978-81 Cutlass Salons had love it or hate it styling with the buying public and probably everybody who wanted one had bought one by the end of the second production year. Today, I kind of see them today as a 1970s rendition of the old Hudson Hornet and I applaud Olds for taking the risk of making them. As far as the entire 1978-87 rear wheel drive Cutlass line, I believe the downsize (not unlike the downsized Mustang II in 1974) had to happen to keep Olds profitable and in step with the competition. Those cars, as well as the downsized Eighty-Eight and Ninety-Eight cars of 1985 were tremendously popular and made Olds one of the top selling US brands in the mid to late 1980s. Those not old enough to have been around and of a certain age might not be able to appreciate how popular Oldsmobile’s cars really were back then! The reality of what happened to Oldsmobile between then and the early 2000s was a tragedy!
I learned to drive in ‘78 Pontiac LeMans as that’s what my HS used as driver ed cars, never cared for that fussy flat front end or sitting in the back seat, but I loved the ‘78-80 Gran Am (and the Ford Fairmont). Didn’t see many ‘areobacks’, but a friend’s mom had a low spec brown Cutlass 4 door that I thought looked weird. Why GM didn’t make these into versatile hatchbacks one will never know, it’s no wonder the 1983 Camry started to capture domestic market sales.
I think they chickened out on making these cars hatchbacks because the extra noise, squeaks and rattles didn't fit the established image of an Oldsmobile or Buick.
Cutlass Salons were actually introduced in 1973 as the top of the line. The Cutlass was redesigned for 1973 using GM's new "Colonnade" A-body platform. The model lineup consisted of the base Cutlass, Cutlass "S", Cutlass Supreme, Cutlass Salon, Vista Cruiser station wagon, and the 4-4-2 appearance package on the Cutlass "S" colonnade coupe.
I had several Cutlass models as a teenager and loved them all. My favorite was a 1979 Cutlass Calais with the Hurst/Olds package. That car had an Olds 350 V8 and T-tops. While not saying much, it was faster than the mid-eighties Monte Carlo SS's that were popular at the time. I miss that car, they only made slightly over 2000 of them and not many of them were as loaded with equipment as mine was.
My mother bought a new 78 cutlass supreme with some help from my grandparents. It went 7 years without too many major problems. It had the 6 cylinder and had trouble maintaining speed of 55 up hills. By the time I was 15 in 1985, the car probably had 80k miles and was about worn out. We had gotten a used little buick and my mother asked me to sell the Cutlass. I negotiated a price and sold it in front of our house. It was already a little bit of a hoopdy cheep collector car. Those Salon cars were so obviously ugly - everyone thought that it was made by mistake or something.
I've seen so many reviews of the beak-nosed Skylark that say the car was very attractive. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, of course, but in my opinion, the Skylark with the ungainly beak on the front end and the equally-ungainly "built-in rear fender skirts" was nothing short of nauseating.
@@bobcarlino7280 Buick called the 1992 Skylark “Lyrical”…. “Ludicrous” was more like it. As it happens I rented one in May 1992 and was embarrassed to be seen in it. The thing was just plain ugly.
I remember when the 79 Cutlass Salon came out, it really put the "UG" in Ugly.... It was worse than the Aztek, at least with the Aztek one could go camping and mild off-roading.
My Dad nailed it when he first saw the car. "That car is the meaning of basic mode of transportation". I was a kid and couldn't have agreed with him more.
I have never liked any of these slant back GM cars except for the 1980 to 1985 Seville which was done much better. However, for some reason this two tone green one in your video is great. For some strange reason, I like this one and the red (maroon) one on the advertisement you showed. Mabye my eyes are getting bad in my older years. haha.
I had the 1979 Oldsmobile Cutlass, Calais, pastel blue with all the chrome trimmings, bucket seats and "T" handle shifter with the Turbo-Hydramatic transmission. Too bad it came with the 231 buick V-6 with all the smog pumps. The car was sporty looking, two door, with a trunk. It was just way too heavy for one hundred horses to move it around, especially with the 2.71/1 rear axle ratio. The dash cracked and things broke constantly. The valves got weak and "floated" at anything over 4,000 rpm. Just a real piece of junk. I never bought a new GM vehicle again, ever.
The only Buick I had was 78 LeSabre sedan with the 231. This car had a/c and a radio, that was it.Not even dual outside mirrors. The 231 was 'manageable' around town, but if I had 4 people in it and wanted to merge onto an expressway, well, I needed a lot of room, and forget about having that a/c on in the process. That engine looked completely lost in the bay. As a result of the oil filter sticking way out in front and hanging low, they would get packed with snow in our Chicago winters and the filter would freeze. My friends that worked at a local Buick dealer told me that during the 79 blizzard, they replaced several engines that got starved for oil. What killed my Buick at just 80ish K was indeed a broken exhaust valve that its cylinder beat snot out of. I was on I57 when that happened. It destroyed the head and that cylinder. I junked the car because I was so angry. Mistake, rust had not gotten hold of it yet. I should've dropped a Buick 350 and 350 trans in it and called it a day. The tan interior was perfect.
It seems to me that one of the bigger problems is that Oldsmobile put the Cutlass name on almost everything they made. "Let's take the name of our powerful luxury muscle car land yacht and slap it on our 4 cylinder front wheel drive econobox!". This Cutlass Salon was one of the steps in between.
Chrysler did the same dumb fixed rear door glass on the first year or two of the K cars... Actually, l liked the styling of these and the similar Buicks... but l guess there's only about two of us 😄
I love this channel! You discuss cars of my early driving years. I still have the car I bought at 21 years old……a 1958 Ford Torino GT. It was 15 years old when I got it and everyone was driving crap like this 79 Cutlass
10:02 . . . Olds 260 V8.... *110 HP* ... 7.5:1 compression ratio. Is that the most anemic engine in automotive history??? From eight cylinders?? Why not just get the Buick 231 V6 with 105 HP and call it a day ?
The glass would not have fit down into the door with the cutout for the rear wheel arch. We had the ‘80 LeMans 4 dr with a 229 V6 that could not get out of it’s own way.
That's when you fit a post in it so the larger part goes down while the quarter light don't. Well, they did just that for the '81 refresh but they chose to make the quarter light open but not the main part of the window. No matter what their excuse is it's utter bullshit, because exactly everybody else succeeded in doing it but they. It's a cost issue nothing more, and they didn't want the extra cost.
Great video explaining the sales catastrophe of the “buttless Cutlass!” This bodystyle persisted in coupe form through 1980, and despite the anemic engine range, Oldsmobile had the temerity to offer a 4-4-2 package on the coupes all 3 years. Sales were so bad in 1979 that the Cutlass Salon coupe and sedan, combined, was actually outsold by the Cutlass Cruiser wagon. Same with the ‘79 Century. The “Little Limousine” look of the 1980 sedans was so successful, Oldsmobile kept producing the Cutlass Supreme sedan through 1987, ending production just 4 months or so before the Cutlass Supreme Classic coupes did in their abbreviated 1988 run. The Buick Century version suffered a similar fate, but Buick offered its own divisional dog of an engine: The 3.2L V6. 90hp and 160lb-ft in 1978 increased to 105 in 1979, when the turbo 231 was added to the lineup. At least that engine provided respectable performance in the Sport Coupes for 1979-80, even if way less than 3,000 were sold over those 2 years.
It’s also worth noting that “Cutlass Salon” had been a special “European-inspired” trim level that sat in the range above the Cutlass Supreme from 1975-77. Olds then ported the Salon name over to the Aeroback coupes and sedans for 1978-80 before mothballing the name. From 1978-84, the “Cutlass Calais” replaced the “Cutlass Salon” at the top of the personal luxury coupe version. Calais had taken a brief 1-year pause after a 12-year stint as the cheapest Cadillac model, before Olds added the moniker to their top midsize for ‘78-84. Then, in 1985, Oldsmobile ported the Calais name over to the new N-body car and replaced the top-level G-body coupe with… the Cutlass Salon again. The Cutlass Salon name’s 2nd act lasted from just 1985-87, as the final G-body coupes only came in Classic and Classic Brougham trim. Oldsmobile loved to play the shell game with their Cutlass nameplates in this era.
I love these … they’re so bad they’re good …. 😂 Combine one of these with the one year only (79). 4.3 - v8 diesel and you have something really special. Edit : I heard you mention an upcoming video on the 4.3 v8 diesel after making my initial comment . This engine intrigues me as it was one year only, I look forward to seeing what you come up with !
I changed numerous heater cores in the A/G body coupes and they weren't difficult at all and in fact way easier than any of the garbage on the road today that often requires dismantling the entire dash and all the electronics. Was there something different for the sedans? The first year 1978's indeed had some hiccups with quality control and the 200 Metric transmission was best avoided. 1979 improved a little save the ridiculous 260 diesel or its problematic 350 brother with the 231 Buick V6 gaining 10 HP now up to 115 with free breathing refinements making it a peppier base engine in these Oldsmobile's than what Ford/Mercury and Chrysler was using at the time. The 305 was offered with a 2 BBL and 4 BBL for 1978 and 4BBL only in 1979 for the Olds so power was more than adequate and about the same as the previous much heavier generation with the 350 Rocket so power was not as bad as people make out and better than some competitors. Note that the 305 4BBL made far more HP than Ford's 302 or Chryslers 318 as used in the Granada and Lebaron. The two tricks with the 260 gas V8 was to order them with the optional 2.93 rear gears and to bump up the factory base timing to where it was supposed to be as often it was tuned from the factory retarded as much as 10 degrees to pass crazy emissions testing. The styling was homely for sure but that two tone green one does look pretty neat!
Авто/Мото
![NOSFERATU - Official Teaser Trailer [HD] - Only In Theaters December 25](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/b59rxDB_JRg/mqdefault.jpg)
My sister bought a used one of these in light blue and it got her through some tough times. She's pretty well off now and can afford any vehicle she wants but to this day talks fondly of her blue "fast back" Cutlass!
My sister had one as well and I remember she never had any real problems with it. I always liked them.
They were a lot better car than most believe.
Just kidding. These were among the worst cars ever made.
@@eriklarson9137
Yes the 6 cylinder ones were trash. The V8 ones held up well.
She OWNED a ROLLING MIRACLE!
Worked at an Oldsmobile dealer circa 1978-83. We referred to these as Gutless salamis. You're right, the overall quality of these was much worse than the previous generation, which helped the 75-77 keep their resale value and demand higher, especially the Broughams
"Gutless Salamis" 😂😂😂 I literally busted a gut laughing.
@@jrussellcase The '73-'75 and '76-'77 were much more substantial cars, regardless of quality, as well.
@@DanEBoyd I owned a 73 Cutlass back in the early 90s, and it was a beast. I loved that Rocket 350. Wish I still had it.
I owned a BEATEN, UGLY '76 Cutlass! After this, I had an '81 and '83 Cutlass! The '76 WAS GREAT! The '81 and '83 were GUTLESS CRAP!
“I hate it! I wouldn’t buy it. I wouldn’t drive it. I wouldn’t even say Good Morning to it!” - my 13 year old self loved this quote from a 1979 issue of Motor Trend where they road tested both the 260 and 350 V-8 diesels (in this case the 260 was in a 2-door Cutlass Supreme. That quote cracked me up then, and still makes me giggle to this day.
Those cars were fine. However, the 1978 Oldsmobile Delta 88 was better.
…but that baby poop green interior is SO attractive!
@@NorthernChev hahahaha - I think the color on the GM order sheet was “Bile Duct Green”
@@kcindc5539 Stop! 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Yup - I remember reading that article as a kid..I think it was a test of all the diesel cars on the market in 1979. Back in the days when the car mags were entertaining reads and not just extensions of corporate marketing material assembled together by a content algorithm.
I was starting law school as an adult, I was dead broke, and I needed a car. Found a 1979 Cutlass 2Dr sedan. The owner thought the engine was going because the oil sending light was on. But the engine was quiet and there was no blow by from the oil cap, so I knew it was the oil sending unit. Bought the car for a hundred bucks, twenty dollars for an oil sending unit, and after a tune up and filters, I was good to go. In three years, that Cutlass did not miss a beat! It had the 231 V6, never burned oil, and started on the first turn of the key, even in bitter cold. Never spent a dime on her. One day I drove through a puddle which concelaed a huge pot hole, and the rear bumper came off. There was too much rot to weld the bumper back on, so I could not renew my plates. I almost cried when I had to junk her. What a great car - dollar for dollar, best car I ever owned!
it was a poor, old man and you took advantage of him.
You remember what year this was?
@@tommurphy4307 Actually I bought it from a teenage kid.
@@crazyhomer777 Yep. 1996
I am so sorry for your lose!! I am praying that you seek comfort and peace of mind!!!
I have a '78 Cutlass Salon with a 305/ 4 spd. Its an aguired taste but always liked these from new. Finally bought one two yrs ago. Yes they are rarer than hens teeth.
I always liked them from new too and drive one for 2 decades now. Everyone loves it.
I still remember my 4th grade teacher getting this and comparing it to my mom’s 78 Cutlass Supreme and thinking there was something terribly wrong with my teacher’s car.
The '78 Cutlass Supreme was NOTHING to "write home about" either.
Did your teacher have to rev the engine hard in the winter mercilessly punishing it hard for 10 minutes
I remember when these came out. I thought to myself "What were they thinking?"
Also noticed the door pull falling off on the image - typical GM quality. I had a '79 Grand Prix with the same' feature.'😂
Parents had a ‘79 Malibu sedan. Vinyl and no A/C. As a child; being in the back seat in the summer was excruciating with only minimum flow from the manual wing windows.
Like being in a cop car....😎
I’m with you. I took a 3 week trip to Louisiana in ‘84 with my grandparents in their Impala. Was a dealer demo with vinyl…no AC.
My parents bought a 1980 malibu wagon with the vinyl seats and the rear windows would only go half way down and of course no AC
You could roll the rear door windows down in a 4 door Chevette. I never could understand why they were so cheap and lazy not to do this on the midsize.
Take a '67 Mustang. It had these vent boxes under the dash if you wanted some air to breathe. "Yeah, it has climate control, roll down the dam windows!".
I loved the 77 Cutlass so much I had 2 of them at the same time. A Supreme and a Salon with buckets and console.
My aunt bought a new 78 Malibu that had the fixed rear door glass. I remember my dad and I being shocked by it. It just screamed "cheap".
Starting in 1974 many US cars had fixed rear seat windows.
The early Chrysler K Cars were the same. The early models had fixed rear windows for the 4 door models. The roll down rear windows didn't arrive on the K Car until 1982 or 83.
They did this on a fkuking 4 DOOR SEDAN. @@randyc8171
@@donaldwilson2620 The first year for the K car was in 1981. My parents bought a 82 K car 4 door and the windows did roll down.
What a color combo on this green example...quintessential 70's! I also didn't know that these had that fixed rear window...a true travesty of a corporate decision that begs the question, why?!?
Starting in 1974 many US cars had fixed rear seat windows.
The color matches the Avocado Green appliances found in homes across America at the time.
Because of the intrusion of the rear wheel well into the back door, you can see that if the back windows did go down, they wouldn't be able to travel very far at all. Other manufacturers had similar issues, but they tended to address the problem by putting a fake (fixed) vent window in the rear of the door glass...so now the door glass could pretty much go straight down. My guess is that Olds and Buick didn't want to do that for fear of messing up their well-conceived (???) body design...or perhaps GM was just being cheap.
I grew up with a ‘78 Chevrolet Malibu Classic. Fixed rear windows, but vent windows at the C pillars. Terrible riding around in back when my dad drove, because he rarely turned on the air conditioner. Had a 3.8 L V6. Stripped to the bone. Good times.
I'm glad you mentioned the 260 Diesel.
Consumer Guide stated in their 1980 Used Car Guide
" The Cutlass is overall a great value, but avoid the seldom-ordered 1979 260 Diesel V8 ".
And one more thing. Chrysler must have liked the fact the rear doors didn't roll down. The 1981 K-Cars also have no roll down rear windows.
But unlike GM, Chrysler, would add roll down rear windows for 1982.
90 horsepower was the published rating for the '59-'60 Studebaker Larl VI (pronounced _six_ )
Mom n Dad bought a new 1979 Pontiac LeMans wagon. It had the 231 Buick V6 and TH200 trans. I took my drivers test in it in November 1982. That car got passed to all 4 of us kids and had 143k on it when Dad used it on a trade in when my sister bought a 1991 Beretta. When Pete Rose passed Ty Cobb on September 11, 1985, we all were at the game, so I drove the Lemans wagon. That lack of rear window roll down can be problematic if someone over celebrates at a baseball game.
These make the Gremlin and Pacer look like the best looking cars I've ever seen.
LOL...but I couldn't agree more! The fastback Olds and Buick intermediates of the late 70's were unbelievably ugly.
Indeed. 👍
Agee, I'm glad that the Cutlass went back to the much better-looking formal sedan in 1980.
Yeah, they really should’ve made them as standard sedans, then they would’ve probably sold better.
@CoolCars1-jl7rh Yes, my 1978 Buick Regals are so plush and comfy
Those 1978 and 1979 Oldsmobile Cutlass Salons and Buick Centurys reminded of updated versions of cars from the 1940's. When GM restyled the sedans into the notchback look for the 1980 model year they looked far better especially the Cutlass Salon sedan. The worst thing about the 1979 Cutlass Salon 4 door was not the styling but the fact that the rear window did not go down, only a vent window opened sideways.
I had a '78 Pontiac Lemon in pale blue. the rear vent windows kept falling out of the cheap clamp holding them, the dealer finally had to use Permagasket to solve the problem. That and one day the throttle stuck wide open (I was parked at the time), alternator bracket was
bent, sloppy quality overall.
Some GM designers stated they used it as an influence. You know , like how Madonna would say her influence is Etta James, lol. What’s even more horrific is that the designers appear to be self aware by actually acknowledging they designed the POS.
Oh those rear windows…brings back painful memories of my mom’s 1978 Malibu wagon and my dad’s 1979 Cutlass Cruiser wagon. Having a tendency for carsickness as a kid, this made long road trips miserable. The rear vent windows were next to useless.
Fortunately neither car lasted long. The Malibu had the horrible 200 CID V6 and wound up throwing a rod. The Olds had the sluggish 260 V8 that suffered from vapor lock on hot days. That car blew its transmission at 70k, about a year after the Malibu died and to my delight, went away.
I’m surprised to learn it didn’t sell well because I remember a lot of them being on the road, but now that I think about it’s probably because they looked so strange and disconcerting that I noticed them every time I saw one. I always wondered why people would want one because they always gave me an uncomfortable feeling when I saw one.
Yeah, they stuck out like a sore thumb.
The general shape was also followed by the Citation. Which originally, at least, sold really well.
Probably a lot of factory rebates helped dealers unload them onto less than enthusiastic customers 😆
Did you know this interesting fact? Yes, the 90 horse 260 V8 Diesel was available for 79 only in the Supreme and Salon, a very rare find if you can located a survivor today. When they self distructed, Oldsmobile was instructed to install replacement 350 D block diesels. Dealerships had piles of broken 260 diesels behind the service shops to be returned to the factory, however, most were just tossed. To find an original 260 diesel today is almost impossible.
GM also offered the 260 diesel with a 5 speed manual transmission! According to GM archives, only 265 were built.
When it ran right, 35 mpg on the highway was possible in overdrive.
I know of a survivor, a beautiful white 79 Salon Brougham coupe with a red interior, fully loaded, power everything, plus the 260 diesel with 5 speed! I asked the owner many times to sell, however the owner will not sell.
I was the second owner of a '79 Cutlass Cruiser with a 260 V8. Mine had rear door windows that went down, as well as power vent windows in the rear of the wagon.
Happily, I didn't experience the quality issues you mentioned, Adam. My "baby V8" towed small trailers reasonably well and, while it WAS gutless, it survived a hard life from my "young and invincible" self, lol!
I have fond memories of that car! 😉😎
A 79 Cutlass Cruiser with roll down rear door windows was not built by GM.
That 260 was bulletproof. Essentially a slimmed down Olds 350 which was a great engine itself. The 260 made so little power it couldn’t hurt itself!
I remember seeing these aerobacks when I was a child in the 80's. (I was born in 1978, the first year these aerobacks debuted). Even back then I thought they were odd looking.
"You think you hate it now, but wait 'til you drive it"
LOVE the reference to the Griswold's Family Truckster!!!!
I had a 79 Cutlass Salon! Dropped a 307 in it and it was FAST! White with red plush interior.
The 307 was a good motor. It just never had the aftermarket support it should have.
Let me guess. It had rare Hemi heads on it that someone’s father’s friends brother had in their garage that were of some secret design.
dropped a 307 in..thats a new one
@@brianfeeney3936 had a tired 260 in it before.
Spot on: The Cutlass franchise was the right car at the right time in automotive history. The Salon design was simply weird. I always wondered if the Cadillac Seville bustle back was the last dying gasp of this particular design strategy. The avocado green model shown was so 1970’s 😊. At least then cars were differentiated in color from today’s white, black and 50 shades of gray.
That avocado green color is the only good thing about the car in the video!
The Fox-body bustle-butt Continental came out a few years after the Seville.
To me it looked like they originally designed a hatchback, but then decided to add a Seville trunk.
Bustle back is the ugliest Cadillac till the current batch of generic chrome clad global crossovers w/ lame 4cyl engines that aren't even smooth
I bought a new one in 1979 as the first new car for my wife. You forgot to mention that they came equipped with the deadly Firestone “721’ radials that split. Picked it up on a Friday and Sunday when it had 65 miles on it the right front tire exploded. Could have been killed. Mine was maroon and the paint job had no primer/undercoat and since it was not garage kept it faded out to nearly white in a year. Transmission lasted 13,000 miles. I didn’t know the rear windows didn’t open until a friend was riding in the back seat and told me. Dealer said it was designed that way. It was a total p o s. 45 years later I can proudly say that was the last GM car I ever bought.
Typical GM experience in the late 70s through 80s.
My folks had the Buick version and the transmission died at 20,000 miles. Last American car my WWII vet father ever owned.
I call BS.
You are mistaken about the tires. The Firestone tire you are thinking of was their Radial 500, which ended up being recalled, and Firestone was fined a bunch of money for hiding consumer data, a scandal at the time. The 721, which GM did use on their downsized intermediates was an excellent tire, with no history of issues.
@@jamesw1659 That's correct. The 721 was installed on all the vehicles which had Radial 500s on them that were under recall in 1978-1979. I worked at a Firestone dealer during this period.
The recall only covered tires that were manufactured from the 35th week of 1975 until the 17th week of 1976.
My dad got a 79 Cutlass Salon as one of his company cars. As I recall, he had the Olds gas powered V6, I assume the 231 cu in with an automatic transmission. I would imagine his company got a very good price on a lease for a fleet of these cars. I am going to push back on some of the things you said Adam. The car was reasonably comfortable, thought certainly not attractive. Dad ended up buying out the lease and put more than 200k miles on the car. When he got rid of it in the mid 80's it did not burn oil and had the original engine and transmission still intact. The car never let him down and he sold it for a few hundred dollars to someone looking for cheap transportation. Dad was very good on keeping up with maintenance, probably was lucky in that he got a good example.
The V6 that Olds used was the 231 Buick V6.
Thanks I never knew that.@@randyc8171
My FIL had one as a company car for a while. He threatened to quit, I recall.
GM management: "Hey, Oldsmobile! See all the good ideas in this 77 Cutlass? Let's NOT do that for 78. Okay? They'll LOVE it!"
They fixed something that wasn't broken and by fixing it they broke it.
Ain't it stange. The oligarchs that ok,d this car for production are like the present day oligarchs that what us to eat food made of insects. They say we will love it.
Those '78/'79/'80 Cutlasses were ugly ducklings compared to the '77 and before cars but by the mid-'80s Olds got the styling right again and I think they looked pretty good especially the '87s with the euro style front end
LOL!
GM being GM.
"hideous" is a wonderful description of these cars.
Not quite…
While in high school in the late 70’s we had a new cutlass salon used for driver’s ed, and will never forget how trim parts kept falling off. There were so many we just made a pile of them in the trunk.
😂😂😂😂
I was getting some nice trim in high school.
The students were breaking the turn signal stalks off on them.
My mother had a new 79 Cutlass Supreme Brougham with a baby blue velour interior and the 231 V6. The TH200 transmission was indeed a grenade. It had numerous problems with hard shifting and finally exploded on Interstate 95 during a long trip. If I remember correctly, when the car was initially lifted by the tow truck, the driveshaft fell out of it. That was the end of the Cutlass. Unfortunately, my parents immediately bought a new 84 Cadillac Eldorado from our local Olds - Cadillac dealership, of course with the equally terrible 4.1 "hook & tow" Cadillac V8.... which later exploded as well....
@@jacknapier7740 One of the slowest cars I ever drove was an '83 Century Wagon with the 231 - you really had to wait for traffic to clear before pulling out on the road...
The other was a '73ish Dart with a Slant Six and automatic.
@@DanEBoyd That makes me wonder what Buick's 3.2 L V6, which was only sold on the '78 and '79 Century, I believe, was like. It could only have been slower.
What did they buy after the Eldorado?
@@jacknapier7740
I had a new 1981 Cutlass Supreme Brougham 2 door coupe with that crappy 231 V6. At the time, nobody was buying V8’s and I was worried about being able to resell it in a couple of years. By 1983 everyone wanted a V8, even if it was an anemic 260.
Parents had a 1980 Century with the 231 v6. Had about 200k miles on it when it was done. Transmission was terrible, but that slug of an engine kept on going!
6:45 ah, the broken GM door strap. I remember using the biggest self-tapping screw I could find to fix my old Grand Prix.
I had a 1978 cutlass salon with a 260 v8 loved that car
I had a girlfriend that had one I drove it a lot, it was a nice driving car good build quality
My family had a 1978 Cutlass Cruiser station wagon when I was young. And not having operable rear windows in the Summer with the cheap vinyl interior was hell. The rear vent windows were not powered in ours and they were difficult to operate for kids. We would have to open all the doors, start the car and open the rear (back) tailgate window in order to let the heat out. I was too young to know which engine we had, but from what I remember it was reliable. We used it until the 1985 GMC Safari minivan van came out.
back in the early 80s 1 of my friend's mom had the Buick wagon variant. She would pick us up from little league, all sweaty and nasty, and let us sit in the cargo area with the window down on the drive home. We all hated that car.
The 1985 model year is the only year the GMC Safari and Chevrolet Astro have a carbureted 4.3L V6.
Second degree burns from Naugahyde seats are a badge of survival for people over a certain age. The thickness and texture varied a lot. Some cars had "Almost leather", at least until you sat on it. Others seemed to have the same thickness as the sidewalls of the tires. Living in Florida they retained heat really well. Any parking spot with shade was a premium. My former mother in law was from Minnesota. She said they were like sitting on a block of ice in the winter. Very hard and pulled heat from your body no matter how many layers you were wearing.
@@carlasghost656 My dad's 1977 Chevrolet C20 pickup had a vinyl centre portion to the bench seat and stupid metal squares in the outboard parts of the seatback. The vinyl retained heat in the summer and the stupid metal squares could brand you!
My wife had a 1979 Buick Regal Turbo Sport Coupe with the turbocharged Buick V6. The relatively flimsy switchgear, the suboptimal interior build quality, and frustrating engine and turbo seal oil leaks were disappointing compared to our previous earlier generation dependable Century. In all, that unhappy '79 Regal model, like these sad looking Cutlas Salon models, was the beginning of the end for our previous unshakeable allegiance to GM. I always wondered what was the underlying management philosophy of Tom Murphy, then his successor Roger Smith, and of the GM board which led to decisions so deeply wounding GM going forward in the late 1970's and 1980. Adam, if you have any insights into these management and failing product decisions that led to such sad products like the 1979 "buttless" salon, please share those thoughts with us. Thank you again for another great video.
I have 3 78 Regal Limited that came fully loaded with the Chevy 305 5.0L The seats will put you to sleep lol
Did she rev up the engine hard in the morning
Reply to AmitAmir: No neither of us abused that Turbo Regal. In fact I doubt that my wife would have ever gone above 2,500 rpm., she always drove without aggression. Even I tried to be careful with that Regal Turbo, also teaching my wife to let the turbo run down with a one to two minute idle before a shut down. We had bought that Regal as a discounted dealer demo, so the turbo and turbo seal damage may have already been done before we took delivery. The engine always leaked oil and we had a constant under hood oil smell that our dealer could never isolate or repair. After four years we traded the Regal Turbo for a Saab 900 automatic Turbo which had much better fit and finish, but had, as we learned classic Saab front brake wear issues. In actuality I liked both the Regal Turbo and the Saab 900 turbo, although the Saab was the better wintertime car for Great Lakes winter snow. Cheers.
My mother bought one of these in 78. It was the first and last time she would have a car of her own, bought with money she had saved and registered in her name. She had gone to buy a Malibu, but the salesman offered her a better deal on the Cutlass, and she was thrilled that she would have an OLDSMOBILE. Not just a lowly Chevy. Mum was of an era when such things had meaning, and my parents, who came of age in the depression, had always been very thrifty. So the thought of owning an Oldsmobile was to be a source of pride for her, as long as she owned that car.
I thought the car was hideous looking, but I didn’t have a vote. It had the 305 V8 and drove well. It definitely handled better than dad’s Monarch…though I’d rather been seen in the Mercury!
I bought a Cutlass in 1980. I was a 68 model. Rocket 350. That was the car of my youth. As such it remains vivid in my memory. How I drove it from school straight into life as an adult.
The Cutlass Salon name was used before 1978. I owned a 1977 Cutlass Salon with the Hurst T-Tops
@jacknapier7740 Yes it was, although I've replaced it with something cooler since then with my 69 lol.
Buick was saddled with the same design for their Century. Really odd was the Turbo Sport Coupe version, complete with duck tail spoiler. The brochure says the turbo was also available in the Century sedan, I bet those are really rare.
That could make for a really fun sleeper car.
Poor sales then = highly collectible later. I almost forgot about these cars, it has been so long since I have seen one (even at a car show).
Never going to be highly collectible.
Not desireable when new = not desireable when old!🤷
Maybe if someone makes a movie or show about a drug dealer driving one of these cars it will suddenly be discovered by collectors. It worked for the Aztec.
I never buy power windows no wonder Olds went away!
If you think that the Buick 231 was slow, the Centurys of the same era had a 196-cubic inch V6 standard.
I love a “5-door” body style! I believe the issue was that the Citation and Phoenix X-car sedans and these mid-size sedans were NOT 5-doors? They should have been offered in a “formal” roofline and a 5 door hatchback as an alternative. As for the rear windows? I’ve owned 3 of these models: I never, ever cared because I previously owned “Colonnade” models, including a 1975 Cutlass, where the coupe windows didn’t go down either.
1981 model year Chrysler K-Cars did the same thing with the rear door windows. That changed when Lee "Brougham" Iacocca wanted a landau top on the 4-door sedan LeBaron and Dodge 400 to be introduced for 1982 which eliminated the vent windows and required roll-down sections which were then applied to all subsequent 4-door K cars once the original parts were used up on the line (and I've never seen an '82 with the large fixed/small vent windows in real life, even though they were in all the early ads and brochures).
My brother bought a '79 4 door salon with the 260 Diesel. He sold it to my Dad because he lived up in the hills of LA and it was too slow. (Going up Sepulveda hill south bound on the 405, you had to get in the right lane because 45 is all the car would do going up the hill) Eventually at about 45,000 miles, the head gasket blew and since my Mother was driving it, overheated it and the engine siezed. We then had a 350 Diesel installed, but then found out the Turbo Hydro 200 trans couldn't take the torque. We had a Turbo Hydro 350 transmission installed and no longer had any transmission problems. Well that 350 lasted about 30,000 miles before the block cracked. We then had another 350 installed and that went up to 125,000 miles when the injection pump gave out for the second time. I paid the junk yard $250 to haul the car away. Other than the engine and transmission problems, it was a great car to drive with very little wrong with it. It handled well, A/C and heater worked well, no cruise control. If the car had a Chevrolet 350 V-8 in it it would have been a great car.
Thank you Adam great video! I noticed that you’ve been mentioning a lot of small GM V-8s that disappeared in the early 80’s ( 260, 265,,267, 301 cubic inches). These engines are much less common now than the 305s 307s and 350s which are most commonly found in surviving cars. Have you considered doing a video on the strengths and weaknesses of these lesser known engines?
I think Adam brought up why the 260’s disappeared and it wasn’t because the engine but that horrendous transmission it pulled around. Mom’s ‘76 Olds with a 260 was lucky to get 40k miles out of a transmission.
Think I'd group the 301 with the 305 and 307.
Buick just never bothered with those 5.0 and 4.2-4.3 sizes.
@DanEBoyd My 1978 Regals I have came factory with chevy 305 5.0L engines.
@@grandamWhich like he said, is not a Buick engine
The small V8s from the late 70s/early 80s were introduced to help comply with CAFE standards. In reality they were no more fuel efficient than their larger siblings and had significant power reductions. Control technology was just not capable enough to take advantage of these smaller engines and V8 internal friction stayed about the same. They all went away and were replaced by the corporate 5 liter from Chevrolet or Olds.
Interestingly enough, Chevrolet did bring back the 'small' V8 in 265 cu. in. form as the LT1s little brother the L99. Only used on the '94-96 Caprice I think..
My dad got the Buick Century with a 4.9 litre V8 on the cheap. Beautiful riding car that you couldn’t kill. I loved it.
4:20 Rare Cutlass with both cornering lamps and fender lamp monitors.
I remember the absolute shock. Nice save with the Seville like notchback sedans.
Yes GM design really loved the bustleback and finally “won” for this, it’s Buick mate, and the 1980 Seville. That 1980-85 Seville destroyed any equity built from the 1975-79 Seville…..opening the door further for European and Japanese upscale offerings.
@@DD-dj4jr These Olds Cutlass and Buick Century aero cars were NOT bustlebacks. Only the unfortunate 1980 - 1985 Seville was a bustleback.
Same general shape and just as ugly. Very misguided design direction and arrogant decisions. Unfortunate - GM had so much potential yet lacked market awareness and strategy
Great video, well scripted, consistently interesting and informed. My favorite kind of car history video.
Same non-operable rear windows in the 1980 Malibu wagon I grew up with. Which was an issue when a high school buddy decided to light an M80 and wanted to throw it out the window - he wasn't the brightest bulb, of course.
My parents had a 1980 cutlass with the buick 231. My dad rebuilt the engine at one point. I can attest to the gutlessness of it. You could floor it but it seemed to make no difference in acceleration, it just made more noise :D
I remember Citroen was doing the same with their DS4's rear door windows in the late 2000s, explaining it like "we wanted our window to be one piece for design purposes" and "why would you need to open them if we have AC included in the base trim?")
We had an 81 Cutlass Cruiser wagon and the rear windows didn't go down, but it did have those stupid little vent windows! lol Fortunately, the air conditioning worked. I wish I would've gotten that wagon for my first car, it was a trooper!
Adam, I think it is safe to say that you are not going to "Have One Built For You" 😉
Soon GM won't be building cars for anyone. Marry Barra will be their last CEO,
EVER.
Ford won't be far behind them, Chrysler is already gone, although they will soon offer an EV Fiat to complement their ICE Fiats that Americans love.
And Stellaris will still sell you a minivan.
As a teen of the 70's i liked these..i might be weird :D
TBF it looks much better as a 2 door than 4 door
When Pete Estes retired from GM he had a list of regrets, one was that the Cutlass Salon and Buick Century were not hatchbacks.
My great uncle thought it was a hatchback, which he deemed kinda handy. Once he got to the showroom he was rudely awakened. He ended up buying a Supreme coupe with the 305, in triple blue. That car got stolen so many times, that the insurance company dropped him, and the last time he got it back, he sold it.
Hard to believe Oldsmobile put the 442 name on a version of this. Harder to believe Hot Wheels sold it as the "Flat Out 442".
My "Flat Out 442" was Orange.
I think I have that too!
WTF moment here
Oh yeah…. Had one too! 😂
I had one too, but mines was gold colored.
Your narration is silky smooth and very easy to listen to !
I've always enjoyed that about all of Adam's videos!
Thanks Adam. I love any Oldsmobile!
i remember seeing a 442 w/ram air model on the show room floor as a kid rear spoiler was a neat touch
They actually made a Hot Wheels of that one... the "Flat Out 442".
@@buckykattnjmissed it
Adam, you said the Cutlass Salon was introduced in ‘78. It was actually introduced in 1975. I had a ‘76 and a ‘77, loved them both. You could even get a ‘76 with a 190hp 455 4bbl and the ‘77 with the 403. Mine were both 350 4bbl and were plenty fast. The ‘76 had wide plush buckets and the ‘77 used the Astro buckets. Both reclined. I, like everyone else, was disappointed with the ‘78.
Came here to say this, but actually the Salon was introduced in 1973. It was the top model of the Cutlass line, but starting in 1978 that was no longer the case. This slant back version lasted until 1980 (when it was coupe only), but the Salon name would reappear once again as a top-line sporty model in 1985 (replacing Calais which was used for that slot from 1978-84). The reason for that was that starting in 1985 Calais was used for a much smaller front wheel drive N body car. Complicated!
@@chrisgreen67 You’re right, 1973. From ‘73 - ‘77 they were beautiful cars. probably why they were so successful and Olds sold so many. ‘78 on, not so much.
If the fixed rear door glass was that big an issue, it would have affected sales of all the A-bodies. But the Malibu was outselling the old Chevelle by 79, and it and the LeMans gave GM all the evidence it needed to ditch the fastback for both the Cutlass and Buick Century, after just 2 model years.
The door glass was a nuisance, but it had only a minor effect on sales.
Something I’m surprised you didn’t mention was that in ‘79, the 442 was available in the Cutlass Salon body style. You may consider it ugly, but one of the coolest looking cars from the Hot Wheels line 1979 was the “Flatout 442”, which was in stock car form and looked great with a tall trunk spoiler, chin spoiler, side pipes, small hood scoop, flared rear fenders and rear window slats. Nice detailing between the black plastic lower body panels, grille and hood scoop, polished metal headlights, taillights and lake pipes, and orange body with racing decals. There’s a mint in package one on fleabay for $250 right now. I still have mine from when I was a kid.
I bought a new 78 Cutlass Calais coupe with the 260 V8, that ran great, but the transmission went out at 20,000 miles. Fortunately I had purchased the extended warranty, so it was replaced at no cost to me. That unit shifted better than the original ever had. I was concerned from day one that the transmission was not going to last, the shifts were terrible, the new one was fine.
I remember these cars, made the Fairmont look good. Ford thanked Olds for free sales.
I am the odd man out I liked the slant back look. Also I had a 80 Malibu and yes the rear window didn't move.
I never thought it was that bad. It was a product of its time.
You are not alone. Read my prior comment upthread.
When I was a kid, my eldest brother had a brand new 1969 cherry red convertible Cutlass with white interior. What a beauty! I was already a Cutlass fan so being so close to the real thing was a thrill. When I saw the '79 disaster, my heart sank. I thought, "Who is making ruinous decisions like this at GM?"
I just recently subscribed after seeing your videos pop up in my feed; been enjoying the hell out of em. Keep up the great work!
I was so pre-pro GM back then that I really really tried to like anything new that came out from them, but just couldn’t wrap my mind around this, it doesn’t work.
3:21 It looks like a Citroen SM and a Toronado had a good night behind the barn..
It is difficult to understand some of the design decisions made during the mid to late 1970's, unless you lived through that period, which I did. The CAFE standards prompted US manufacturers to downsize their cars. The 1973 oil crisis had passed, but people even 5-10 years later had vivid memories of it and there were periodic price spikes during the late 1970's and early 80's which kept the fear of another oil crisis alive in car buyer's minds. Even when adjusted for inflation, oil prices on average never dropped down to what they were before 1973. And, perhaps most important, there was a prolonged period of "stagflation" (combined price inflation and stagnant growth) that was eating into almost all Americans pocketbooks and making them settle for smaller cars. Manufacturers were under great pressure to cut both weight and content, to save fuel but also to decrease their costs. There was overall a mood of austarity that lasted well into President Reagan's first term. And, it was a time of diminished expectations with regard to family cars. The mood really didn't change until the mid to late 1980's, when more advanced cars that were both more powerful and economical began to appear.
There is a solution to the CAFE standards (apart from avoiding them through SUV's) and that is aerodynamics. But no, they kept making boxy designs with large and heavy engines with heavy automatic transmissions. Overall, no willingness to innovate cost them their market. Look at the Japanese (and later Tesla) what to do.
There was that second oil crunch in 79, but not as bad as 73. I have a receipt from my dad that I found among his things after he passed, dated 5/79. Regular fuel was $1.10, and he scribbled on it, "1st time paying over a dollar per gallon for reg gas" I assume it was leaded fuel.
I remember my parents buying a 1980 VW Rabbit in the Fall of 1979. It was a nearly loaded car with air conditioning, sunroof, automatic and the deluxe interior. It was a rather expensive little car and by far, the smallest car our family had ever owned. But there was the fear of high gas prices continuing, along with economic uncertainty, which motivated even middle class US consumers buy cars which were smaller and less substantial than purchased before. To me, the 1978 Cutlass perfectly fits the mood of lowered automotive expectations during that time. However, most of the people I knew drove the Cutlass Supreme 2 door coupes, which as I recall were generally well liked, perhaps because they were more stylish than the 2 and 4 door sedans.@@adamtrombino106
Perfectly explained
@@ronaldderooij17741% drive electric, probably the same drive manual. That won't effect CAFE minimums.
Knew a salvage yard owner that had one of the 442 versions of the hatchback coupe towed in with a rusty frame and the 305 chevy tick and miss and some rust/ faded paint, deals and chrome. Later he swapped a frame from a retired chevy malibu police car with a 350 police v8 and th350 that ran in enduros and everything bolted in. The cutlass ran good and he drove it around for few months but the inner door handle clips and heater/defroster broke and then later ran it in stock drags and then enduros, it surprised many people but at 105k the original 305 had 'the tick' and the trans had already been replaced with a rebuilt tag and original 442 owner replaced with it a used 85 cutlass v8 salon sport coupe and felt that was the car this one should've been but it got him thru college and was still better than the new x cars gm pushed in dec 79. Great video, saw one for sale years ago and had seen one since. that green paint looks good on the car.
I owned a ‘78 Cutlass Salon 30 years ago. Styling was polarizing but, mechanically, it was exactly the same as the rest of the Cutlass line. The 260 was a bit underpowered and the automatic transmission was a little fragile and really needed to be “nursed along” to make it last. The same transmission was later shipped of to GM of Europe who beefed it up slightly and tacked a fourth gear overdrive onto it. My ‘95 BMW E36 has one … and I nurse it along, also. Yeah, I can remember hating them when I was a kid and they first came out but as they got older and rarely seen on the road by the early 1990s, I began to like them more. I always assumed that the lack of the movable rear door windows was done to “encouage” customers of low end models to option up into buying air conditioning. Other than being underpowered, I didn’t find the construction quality to be bad at all. My car had nearly 200,000 miles on it when I sold it and it still looked and ran good at the time. While that doesn’t sound impressive today, for a 1978 American car, that was not bad at all! Would I like to own another one? You bet I would! You never, ever see them anymore! I wouldn’t, however, be willing to pay the bloated price I would have to part with to buy a clean, well cared for low mileage car these days … but if I located a “deal” on a nice one, I’d have it! I believe the features you were picking on, especially the interior features like dashboard and instrument designs and seats, were used GM wide and not just on the Cutlass Salon. You must understand when comparing the pre 1978 Cutlass to the post 1977 Cutlass is that the downsizing was done to meet customer demand. Had Olds retained the massive 1977 body and larger engines, sales would have completely fallen off a cliff when the ‘78 gas crisis began. The smaller Cutlass bodies kept Oldsmobiles selling well through the early 1980s with a variety of smaller engines (yes, they were all underpowered but even the Corvettes were underpowered and emissions choked during this period) which is exactly what buyers demanded at the time. I will concede that the 1978-81 Cutlass Salons had love it or hate it styling with the buying public and probably everybody who wanted one had bought one by the end of the second production year. Today, I kind of see them today as a 1970s rendition of the old Hudson Hornet and I applaud Olds for taking the risk of making them. As far as the entire 1978-87 rear wheel drive Cutlass line, I believe the downsize (not unlike the downsized Mustang II in 1974) had to happen to keep Olds profitable and in step with the competition. Those cars, as well as the downsized Eighty-Eight and Ninety-Eight cars of 1985 were tremendously popular and made Olds one of the top selling US brands in the mid to late 1980s. Those not old enough to have been around and of a certain age might not be able to appreciate how popular Oldsmobile’s cars really were back then! The reality of what happened to Oldsmobile between then and the early 2000s was a tragedy!
Really. You really have no life, do you.
I learned to drive in ‘78 Pontiac LeMans as that’s what my HS used as driver ed cars, never cared for that fussy flat front end or sitting in the back seat, but I loved the ‘78-80 Gran Am (and the Ford Fairmont). Didn’t see many ‘areobacks’, but a friend’s mom had a low spec brown Cutlass 4 door that I thought looked weird. Why GM didn’t make these into versatile hatchbacks one will never know, it’s no wonder the 1983 Camry started to capture domestic market sales.
Because the X-body cars were hatchbacks and GM didn't want to cannibalize its sales....
I think they chickened out on making these cars hatchbacks because the extra noise, squeaks and rattles didn't fit the established image of an Oldsmobile or Buick.
Cutlass Salons were actually introduced in 1973 as the top of the line. The Cutlass was redesigned for 1973 using GM's new "Colonnade" A-body platform. The model lineup consisted of the base Cutlass, Cutlass "S", Cutlass Supreme, Cutlass Salon, Vista Cruiser station wagon, and the 4-4-2 appearance package on the Cutlass "S" colonnade coupe.
I had several Cutlass models as a teenager and loved them all. My favorite was a 1979 Cutlass Calais with the Hurst/Olds package. That car had an Olds 350 V8 and T-tops. While not saying much, it was faster than the mid-eighties Monte Carlo SS's that were popular at the time. I miss that car, they only made slightly over 2000 of them and not many of them were as loaded with equipment as mine was.
My mother bought a new 78 cutlass supreme with some help from my grandparents. It went 7 years without too many major problems. It had the 6 cylinder and had trouble maintaining speed of 55 up hills. By the time I was 15 in 1985, the car probably had 80k miles and was about worn out. We had gotten a used little buick and my mother asked me to sell the Cutlass. I negotiated a price and sold it in front of our house. It was already a little bit of a hoopdy cheep collector car. Those Salon cars were so obviously ugly - everyone thought that it was made by mistake or something.
We used to call that body style “The Batmobile”. Then in 1992 we applied the same derogatory nickname to the bird-beak Buick Skylark
I've seen so many reviews of the beak-nosed Skylark that say the car was very attractive. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, of course, but in my opinion, the Skylark with the ungainly beak on the front end and the equally-ungainly "built-in rear fender skirts" was nothing short of nauseating.
@@bobcarlino7280 Buick called the 1992 Skylark “Lyrical”…. “Ludicrous” was more like it. As it happens I rented one in May 1992 and was embarrassed to be seen in it. The thing was just plain ugly.
@0:36 I usually hate big, modern rims on classic cars, but DAMN… those actually look really good.
My parents had the Buick version. Century Four door,3.8 turbo . It had velour interior. Gray and silver and it had great looking factory wheels.
I remember when the 79 Cutlass Salon came out, it really put the "UG" in Ugly.... It was worse than the Aztek, at least with the Aztek one could go camping and mild off-roading.
I like how whoever ordered this example apparently thought the car wasn't ugly enough so they picked the most hideous color combination available.
LOL You're correct, my Dad had an Impala with those colors that we called Grandpa's Green Machine.
This would be the perfect sleeper car though. Turbo LS and tremec 6 speed and some susp mods. Would be hilarious.
The color was the best part of it.
I love the two tone green. Far far far superior to the "colors" offered today
I like it 👌
My Dad nailed it when he first saw the car. "That car is the meaning of basic mode of transportation". I was a kid and couldn't have agreed with him more.
I have never liked any of these slant back GM cars except for the 1980 to 1985 Seville which was done much better. However, for some reason this two tone green one in your video is great. For some strange reason, I like this one and the red (maroon) one on the advertisement you showed. Mabye my eyes are getting bad in my older years. haha.
my parents owned one of these. Very peculiar car for sure
I had the 1979 Oldsmobile Cutlass, Calais, pastel blue with all the chrome trimmings, bucket seats and "T" handle shifter with the Turbo-Hydramatic transmission. Too bad it came with the 231 buick V-6 with all the smog pumps. The car was sporty looking, two door, with a trunk. It was just way too heavy for one hundred horses to move it around, especially with the 2.71/1 rear axle ratio. The dash cracked and things broke constantly. The valves got weak and "floated" at anything over 4,000 rpm. Just a real piece of junk. I never bought a new GM vehicle again, ever.
The only Buick I had was 78 LeSabre sedan with the 231. This car had a/c and a radio, that was it.Not even dual outside mirrors. The 231 was 'manageable' around town, but if I had 4 people in it and wanted to merge onto an expressway, well, I needed a lot of room, and forget about having that a/c on in the process. That engine looked completely lost in the bay. As a result of the oil filter sticking way out in front and hanging low, they would get packed with snow in our Chicago winters and the filter would freeze. My friends that worked at a local Buick dealer told me that during the 79 blizzard, they replaced several engines that got starved for oil. What killed my Buick at just 80ish K was indeed a broken exhaust valve that its cylinder beat snot out of. I was on I57 when that happened. It destroyed the head and that cylinder. I junked the car because I was so angry. Mistake, rust had not gotten hold of it yet. I should've dropped a Buick 350 and 350 trans in it and called it a day. The tan interior was perfect.
What's really funny is you could get a 442 in this style , they even had a Hot Wheels of it.😂
It seems to me that one of the bigger problems is that Oldsmobile put the Cutlass name on almost everything they made. "Let's take the name of our powerful luxury muscle car land yacht and slap it on our 4 cylinder front wheel drive econobox!". This Cutlass Salon was one of the steps in between.
That two tone green one with mag wheels would be awesome to have today I think cause they are so rare
Chrysler did the same dumb fixed rear door glass on the first year or two of the K cars... Actually, l liked the styling of these and the similar Buicks... but l guess there's only about two of us 😄
Based on comments here, there's at least 5 of us.
I love this channel! You discuss cars of my early driving years. I still have the car I bought at 21 years old……a 1958 Ford Torino GT. It was 15 years old when I got it and everyone was driving crap like this 79 Cutlass
The management where I work takes this same MO, "If it's not broke, BREAK IT!"
10:02 . . . Olds 260 V8.... *110 HP* ... 7.5:1 compression ratio. Is that the most anemic engine in automotive history??? From eight cylinders?? Why not just get the Buick 231 V6 with 105 HP and call it a day ?
The glass would not have fit down into the door with the cutout for the rear wheel arch. We had the ‘80 LeMans 4 dr with a 229 V6 that could not get out of it’s own way.
That's when you fit a post in it so the larger part goes down while the quarter light don't. Well, they did just that for the '81 refresh but they chose to make the quarter light open but not the main part of the window. No matter what their excuse is it's utter bullshit, because exactly everybody else succeeded in doing it but they. It's a cost issue nothing more, and they didn't want the extra cost.
Great video explaining the sales catastrophe of the “buttless Cutlass!” This bodystyle persisted in coupe form through 1980, and despite the anemic engine range, Oldsmobile had the temerity to offer a 4-4-2 package on the coupes all 3 years.
Sales were so bad in 1979 that the Cutlass Salon coupe and sedan, combined, was actually outsold by the Cutlass Cruiser wagon. Same with the ‘79 Century.
The “Little Limousine” look of the 1980 sedans was so successful, Oldsmobile kept producing the Cutlass Supreme sedan through 1987, ending production just 4 months or so before the Cutlass Supreme Classic coupes did in their abbreviated 1988 run.
The Buick Century version suffered a similar fate, but Buick offered its own divisional dog of an engine: The 3.2L V6. 90hp and 160lb-ft in 1978 increased to 105 in 1979, when the turbo 231 was added to the lineup. At least that engine provided respectable performance in the Sport Coupes for 1979-80, even if way less than 3,000 were sold over those 2 years.
It’s also worth noting that “Cutlass Salon” had been a special “European-inspired” trim level that sat in the range above the Cutlass Supreme from 1975-77. Olds then ported the Salon name over to the Aeroback coupes and sedans for 1978-80 before mothballing the name.
From 1978-84, the “Cutlass Calais” replaced the “Cutlass Salon” at the top of the personal luxury coupe version. Calais had taken a brief 1-year pause after a 12-year stint as the cheapest Cadillac model, before Olds added the moniker to their top midsize for ‘78-84.
Then, in 1985, Oldsmobile ported the Calais name over to the new N-body car and replaced the top-level G-body coupe with… the Cutlass Salon again. The Cutlass Salon name’s 2nd act lasted from just 1985-87, as the final G-body coupes only came in Classic and Classic Brougham trim.
Oldsmobile loved to play the shell game with their Cutlass nameplates in this era.
I love these … they’re so bad they’re good …. 😂
Combine one of these with the one year only (79). 4.3 - v8 diesel and you have something really special.
Edit : I heard you mention an upcoming video on the 4.3 v8 diesel after making my initial comment . This engine intrigues me as it was one year only, I look forward to seeing what you come up with !
I changed numerous heater cores in the A/G body coupes and they weren't difficult at all and in fact way easier than any of the garbage on the road today that often requires dismantling the entire dash and all the electronics. Was there something different for the sedans? The first year 1978's indeed had some hiccups with quality control and the 200 Metric transmission was best avoided. 1979 improved a little save the ridiculous 260 diesel or its problematic 350 brother with the 231 Buick V6 gaining 10 HP now up to 115 with free breathing refinements making it a peppier base engine in these Oldsmobile's than what Ford/Mercury and Chrysler was using at the time. The 305 was offered with a 2 BBL and 4 BBL for 1978 and 4BBL only in 1979 for the Olds so power was more than adequate and about the same as the previous much heavier generation with the 350 Rocket so power was not as bad as people make out and better than some competitors. Note that the 305 4BBL made far more HP than Ford's 302 or Chryslers 318 as used in the Granada and Lebaron. The two tricks with the 260 gas V8 was to order them with the optional 2.93 rear gears and to bump up the factory base timing to where it was supposed to be as often it was tuned from the factory retarded as much as 10 degrees to pass crazy emissions testing. The styling was homely for sure but that two tone green one does look pretty neat!
A Bustleback w/o the Bustle.
Excellently narration and explanations Adam. Enjoyed the video. Thanks!
Looks like there isn't room for the rear window to roll down as the rear wheel well shape cuts into the back door. Thanks for all the great videos!