Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Memories Of The Old GM And Its Cars
383 messages, Last post on Nov 12, 2009 at 5:33 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: blh7068 (Jun 04, 2009 8:24 am) I had a 77 Cutlass with the 350 Quadrajet. That's the best sounding car I have ever owned when I put my foot into it. The exhaust note was great and the engine moved out. |
|
| Way back in '93, my Dad bought his first new car. A 1993 Chevy Silverado extended cab pickup. 5.7 Liter V8, automatic, short step side bed, the nicest interior you could get without going for leather. Captains' chairs/console, etc. That summer, Dad decided to take my Mom and I on a vacation. Camping in Northern Arkansas. Which for a kid from Dallas was interesting. We rented a cabin and drove up in the truck. Somewhere along the way, we stopped for lunch. While getting out of the back (remember when extended cabs still only had two doors?) the driver's side seat sprang forward and caused the horn to honk. Odd...but possibly normal. When we went to leave, I noticed Dad would have trouble driving because when he sat behind the wheel, he was laying horizontal with his head in the backseat. Seemed the seatback broke. So, since it was me that "broke it" meaning I was the last one to touch it, I had to support the seatback while he drove the last half of the trip. Lord, my knees and arms were killing me. Dad is a bit hefty. Once we got to the cabin, I removed the seat's cover and discovered that a couple of the bolts had snapped. I replaced them and the seat was fine. But Dad wouldn't let me live it down that I damaged his seat for a Whopper w/cheese. We got back to the Dallas area, and waiting in the two week supply of mail was a warranty notification..."Please bring your truck into the dealer as there is a possibility that the seatback frame's bolts could snap off, causing a loss of support." GREAT timing for me, GM. Dad's response? "You probably still had something to do with it." That's one of my fondest memories of a vacation now. | |
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Jun 04, 2009 8:04 am) Regards, Dale
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sure this will cause some uproar with a lot of people. But GM has been nothing but Chevy for decades now. Why...because they are cheap. There are plenty of other engine platforms...BOP that are easier to work on, better designed, and lasted longer than that "corporate" engine. Not until recently has anything been much more than a re-badged Chevy...and now that there actually is some individuality coming back they are dropping the brands....Olds, Pontiac...etc. I hate to see it for our economy, and for the people that rely on those jobs. That's the ones I wish we could help. But GM has been dead to me for 20 years. So strap in for more look alike cars and cheap overall quality. I've got my '78 T/A, a '68 Firebird 400 and a '67 LeMans. Back when cars were still somewhat individualized and you actually had a choice of models, engines and styles. And yes...I know the '78 is a Camaro twin. But at least it's REAL PONTIAC POWERED. I love my OLD GM cars. So aside from the thousands of families it is hurting.....let GM die. Glad to see that hack company go under. And they won't really go under. They'll just find new funding and continue putting out the same drab, dull, uninspiring clone cars they have for years. Drop the GM and just call it Chevrolet. That's what it's been for 20+ years anyway.
|
|
|
Replying to: iwant12 (Jun 04, 2009 8:56 am) There's a website devoted to the '73-77 LeMans in particular, and A-body in general. http://www.abodysite.com. If you go there and click on the "readers rides" link, there's a bunch of pics of various '73-77 A-bodies. It hasn't been updated in awhile, though. The most recent posting is by the guy I bought my car from. He posted some pics of it, as well as some pics of a '74 Grand Am he bought. He loved the '76 LeMans, but after awhile, got hungry for more power, so he went out and found the Grand Am. How long did you have your '76 for? Which engine did it have?
|
|
|
Replying to: bryan23158 (Jun 04, 2009 9:09 am) Well be glad you didn't get a California/High-Altitude model '78 TA, or you would've ended up with an Olds 403 instead of a Pontiac 400!  I know what you mean, though...I miss the old days when the different divisions had more identity, and I prefer a Pontiac car to have a Pontiac engine. Heck, I passed on a '79 Bonneville once, and one of the reasons was because it had a Buick 350 rather than a Pontiac 350. However, that might not be Pontiac's fault. I've heard conflicting stories, but the Pontiac 350 might have been discontinued by that time, so they would've had to use Buick or Olds 350's in its place. For 1980 I think they were down to the Olds 350. I was also leery of that Buick 350 because I had an '82 Cutlass Supreme with a Buick 231 V-6 that grenaded at an early age. Well, that Buick 350 looked an awful lot like the 231, just with two extra cylinders, and it brought back bad memories and spooked me a bit, I guess. At that time, I had my grandmother's '85 LeSabre, which had a 307, and I was disappointed that the 350 Bonneville felt slower than the LeSabre. However, the LeSabre had a 4-speed automatic and a 2.73 axle, while that Bonneville probably had a 2.41. So that probably made a difference. Plus, by 1985 they really improved the driveability of these cars, even if the peak hp numbers didn't seem like anything to brag about. |
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Jun 04, 2009 9:14 am) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Jun 04, 2009 9:14 am) I was thumbing through the book GTO: Pontiac's Great One and learned that the 1973 Grand Am coupe was originally going to be the GTO. Never knew that. I'd still take a '73 or '74 Grand Am...
|
|
|
Replying to: roadburner (Jun 04, 2009 11:06 am) At one time, the Grand Am was supposed to get a 310 hp SuperDuty 455, an engine that the Trans Am did get. Damn shame it never came to be...I'm sure that an SD Grand Am would've been a car to be proud of! As it stands, I think the strongest engine you could get in a '73 Grand Am or GTO was a 250 hp 455. I guess if they really wanted to, they could have just called the Grand Am "GTO", but I guess they wanted the magic of a new name. Plus, GTO's never were really all that luxurious, and luxury was becoming all the rage in the 70's. The Grand Am was supposed to be the mating of Grand Prix luxury with Trans Am performance...although it only came with a 170 hp 400-2bbl standard. I wouldn't mind getting ahold of one of those "1977.5" Can Ams. They only ran off like 1377 of them. They had the 200 hp 400 out of the Trans Am. I know that sounds lame, but the regular 400 only had 180 hp! They also had a 3.23:1 rear, and would scoot from 0-60 in about 8.8 seconds. Which sadly, is about the most you can hope for in a two-ton 70's domestic. But at least they look good. 
|
|
|
Replying to: roadburner (Jun 04, 2009 11:06 am) Starting in 72, the GTO was an option as opposed to being offered as as separate model(65-71...64 it was an option, too) Yes, in the development stages the 73 G/A it was supposed to be the GTO, but it was decided to continue to offer that as an option on the Le Mans as they did the prior model year. 74 saw the platform changed to X-body( Ventura) but was again offered as an option. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Memories Of The Old GM And Its Cars
