Imagine an advertising agency employee in the early 1970s, working on Allstate Insurance Company’s latest campaign. One particular ad aims to call people’s attention to the scourge brought upon American roads by unsafe, uninspected vehicles… and that ad requires an eye-catching example of such a clunker. To be believable, it must resonate with people – a car that would elicit disapproving stares in well-kempt neighborhoods… the type of car from which safe drivers would steer clear. For the resulting 1971 Allstate ad, the clunker of choice wound up being a nine-year-old Studebaker Lark.
Studebaker made for an easy target. The company shut down its automotive operations five years earlier, so Allstate didn’t have to contend with a company upset about its products being unfavorably portrayed. Additionally, Studebakers and their drivers didn’t exactly have a fashionable reputation in the 1970s. But for us, an equally interesting aspect of this ad is that a car less than a decade old made for a believable clunker at all. So, let’s examine this ad, and what prompted it.
Car insurance companies don’t often make people’s lists of favorite businesses. This was particularly true in the early 1970s, when rapidly increasing premiums caused considerable hardship among drivers. Insurance rates became a leading factor in the demise of muscle cars, but even drivers of non-performance cars got hammered as US insurance rates rose an average of 90% between 1958 and 1970 – nearly three times the overall inflation rate. On top of the rates themselves, drivers despised insurance companies’ arbitrary policy terminations and seemingly illogical rate structures. Little wonder, then, that the promise of lower insurance rates became a common selling point for cars during this period.
Insurance companies occasionally responded to negative public sentiment by portraying themselves as crusaders for good – and by claiming that exorbitant rates resulted not from insurers seeking high profits, but rather from negligent behavior of individuals or other industries. This wasn’t a new tactic in 1971, as evidenced by the above 1956 ad highlighting ten highway safety recommendations. Note that #9 calls for “Nationwide Car Inspection,” the same topic on which Allstate’s clunker ad focused 15 years later.
This type of public relations gambit propelled a 1971-72 Allstate campaign called “Let’s Make Driving a Good Thing Again,” which included booklets, television commercials and numerous magazine ads. Allstate focused on the era’s big auto safety issues, such as bumpers and air bags, though the company also highlighted regulatory topics as shown in the ad to the left, which professed to support accident victims’ access to justice (though it was a thinly veiled attack on no-fault insurance laws).
Whether these PR moves helped the insurance industry’s image or not is debatable, but it was a favorite approach for many companies to posture themselves as the good guys in the battle for lower insurance costs.
Our featured ad (also part of the “Let’s Make Driving a Good Thing Again” campaign) followed that same approach — in this instance focusing on the lack of annual vehicle safety inspections in many states. According to the text, this oversight permitted nefarious clunkers like the pictured Studebaker to menace our streets. The ad states that:
Allstate, for one, is working to get the clunker off the road. To do it, many states need to pass tough laws, as recommended by the National Highway Safety Bureau. Laws that require every car to be inspected regularly. That demand every car have lights that light, brakes that brake, horns that blow. And more.
Readers are led to believe that the pictured 1962 Lark would be taken off the road by such an inspection. Judging by the picture, that is entirely believable. With numerous dents, a hood strapped down by a cord, and a non-functioning headlight, this seemingly fit the role of a public menace. It was also only nine years old.
Here’s what a 1962 Studebaker Lark looked like when new. The compact Lark was the bread-and-butter offering from a manufacturer straining for relevance at the time. Larks were solid, well-built cars that offered good value and a decent set of equipment, though the brand was doomed to failure regardless of this car’s attributes. Studebakers developed a rather frumpy reputation by the 1960s, a status that was often passed on to their owners as well.
That status certainly didn’t improve after Studebaker quit producing cars altogether, so when the Allstate ad was printed, the world’s remaining Studebaker owners found themselves on the fringes of automotive respectability. If anything, the clunker that Allstate chose for its ad reinforced what had become somewhat of a stereotype of Studebaker drivers.
Today, a nine-year-old (i.e., 2010 model) clunker is hard to imagine, since the average age of a car on US roads is close to 12 years. For that matter, a beat-up car of any sort is rare – after all, when was the last time you saw a car matching the condition of Allstate’s Studebaker actually on the road?
Though I wasn’t around in 1971, I do remember clunkers plying the streets in the 1980s… but rarely in the last two decades or so. Such cars do still exist, of course, as this recently-featured picture from CC’s tbm3fan demonstrates. However, the above Pontiac Bonneville is 40 years old. Our featured Studebaker was less than a quarter of the Pontiac’s age.
Times were different in 1971. The average age of a US car was only five years, and by the age of nine, many were effectively worn out. By way of example, 102,000 cars rolled off Studebaker’s assembly lines for 1962, but by 1971, when they would have been nine years old, only 37,000 were registered on US roads.
Today, the typical nine-year-old car looks something like this – doesn’t quite stoke fear into the heart, does it? But 48 years ago, a scary, almost-decade-old Studebaker was probably judged as an effective and believable way to deliver a message that states should inspect vehicles for roadability.
Incidentally, vehicle safety inspection programs are no longer held in widespread esteem. Only 15 US states require regular (annual or biennial) safety inspections. At one point, that number was higher, but several states have discontinued or scaled back their inspection programs, as lawmakers and the public came to regard them as more of a nuisance than a safety benefit. Tellingly, some states now exempt cars from safety inspections for several years after their date of manufacture. In Missouri, that exemption stands at five years – which was about the average age of a vehicle back when our Allstate ad was published. Now, a five-year-old car is considered too new to worry about safety defects.
Despite how the safety inspection thrust ended up, insurance companies continue to promote public relations campaigns regarding safety initiatives (distracted driving, for instance). But few ad campaigns come with a juicy, fear-mongering picture of a frightening-looking car like our featured Studebaker. This 2007 Allstate ad about teen drivers features a cartoonish, angry-looking fiend of a vehicle to substitute for the real thing.
These days, though, even that wouldn’t evoke fear, since ordinary family sedans now look as mean as Allstate’s caricature.
That ad agency employee in 1971 did his job well. He typecast the ideal car into the role of the Clunker – probably so believable at the time that few magazine readers likely noticed the car as much as the message. Of course, much has changed in the 48 years since this ad was published – some for the better, and some for the worse – but at least these days, we don’t have the specter of scary Studebakers haunting our roads any longer.
In California I see cars that would probably qualify as “clunkers” from time to time. Just yesterday I saw a Chevy Celebrity that might meet the definition, although that one wasn’t that bad, just obviously showing its age. But I’ve seen things like second-generation Accords that were definitely clunkers. But as you point out, those cars were all several decades old.
My own car hit the 10 year old mark this year, and really the only signs of its age are the somewhat cloudy headlights and the lack of features like infotainment screens and backup cameras. Although I suspect the dealership gave it a respray before putting it on the lot; it might look more weathered with its original paint.
Lambert, a man I worked with, drove cars like that Lark all the time. Ten year old clunkers, held together with ratchet straps and duct tape. He had a 1994 Toyota Camry who’s exhaust was being held up by the rubber bushings alone. It looked like a meatl twig was hanging underneath the car as it drove. I also had the steering wheel from a go kart! I’m not kidding!
They should have used an Allstate car instead. 🙂
Would a 10 year old Suzuki be the modern equivalent? Maybe a Mitsubishi? I see those, at around 10 years old, looking like they’ve been through the ringer a time or two already.
My wife’s 2009 Lancer is quite safe because I keep it maintained.
However, its clear coat is starting to peel, which is surprising since my 2007 Mustang’s original paint still looks great.
Of course this crowd would say my wife’s car is developing a “nice patina”.
If the Japanese suck that bad at painting their cars, this does not give me a warm fuzzy for my 2016 Civic!
My Toyota has very thin paint.
The only domestic I ever owned that I though was poorly painted was my 82 Celebrity which experienced clear coat failure, although that was back when the automakers were just introducing clear coat.
My Grand Prix GTP (a 1997) was the only other car of mine that had a clear coat failure, but only on the plastic parts like the spoiler. I had those parts reshot, and my body guy did an amazing job. My GTP was “That 90’s Teal” and I thought there was no way he could match that paint, but he absolutely nailed it….
My Black 1993 Camry has lived in Washington County its whole life and if I bother to clean it the paint still shines for the most part. I can even see my reflection in the paint.
Answer: Chevy Aveo. The drivetrains and bodies were so cheaply built, I’ve seen more than a few that looked like that Studebaker, complete with clouds of blue and grey smoke belching from the exhaust. The only reason they aren’t spotted more often is because when they finally do break something major, they’re definitely off to the boneyard.
That’s the major reason there aren’t the number of clunkers on the streets there once was; it’s simply too difficult and expensive to keep them going when something breaks. You need more than duct tape and bailing wire to keep a derelict POS modern car running.
Very true, lots common machines neons, pt cruisers, the Chevy version, Contours all disappeared. I see more old pickups, a lot that would qualify a clunkers.
Eric 703 got a new Virginia inspection sticker, as all were larger and yellow before.
That Lark’s modern equivalents are all over St Paul, MN. I was passed on I35 last night by a 2003ish Malibu whose passenger door was bungeed “closed” (ie there was a 3 inch gap). Bit chilly for that malarky.
No inspections here of course, but the clunkers are more like 15-20 years old, not 9.
The modern clunkers that I see are invariably “ricers” whose primary, sacred feature is the coffee can sized exhaust.
….. like the terrific 1993 Civic Si, that was stolen from me …. surely for its rice potential …..
The amount of TV ad time insurance companies buy for their little “skits” seriously makes me question any supposed safety concerns these big powerful businesses actually have for the public. They didn’t want 9 year old Studebakers off the road for public safety, and the children, they wanted them off the road so the owner buys a new car, with full coverage, that they provide. Allstate’s self righteous propaganda in particular always turned me off of them and the slimy auto insurance business as a whole.
Oh yeah, my cars are 10 and 25, well maintained, no state inspection and minimum coverage. Eat it, Allstate.
Yeah. Anyone who believes these insurance companies are out for anything other than profits might be as dimwitted as the people in those Liberty Mutual ads.
“Like, all I did was scuff his bumper, I could have touched it up with this marker. And then I’ll do my happy dance!”
Any time I see those Liberty mutual ads the Statue of Liberty background conjures up images of Saul Goodman’s office.
Whenever I mention that I drive a nearly 20 year old car to work every day, folks say “Oh, you so you have a beater, a clunker.” Uh, no – it’s a solid, clean, inexpensive car that is in safe and serviceable condition. Why would I abuse it because it’s old and not worth $20,000? Its ability to deliver me to my destination is priceless though.
Another strategy i have seen is using a beat to crap clunker to guarantee right of way in traffic. People in their half a house cost cars yield immediately.
I do completely agree with you. One of my trucks is a 78.
Reminds me of a time back in the 80s when I was about to get my Nova repainted. It wasn’t clunker status, but the original paint had seen far better days and it was in need of a little rust repair. I drive to a concert and was looking for a parking spot when I saw a 5-series BMW double parked (insert stereotype of entitled jerk here). Well, since I was still in who-cares mode, I parked right next to him so that my passenger door was about an INCH or 2 from his driver’s door. After the show, the Bimmer had departed, and I figured he or she did performed whatever contortionist act was necessary to crawl into the driver’s seat. I had a good laugh at the least.
I think that automotive safety inspections were a good idea. I remember that California had a random program that ended I think, sometime in the 1970s. After that it was the responsibility of the local Police to check a motorist’s car while they were stopped for any traffic matter. Since then I think that it has been the increased price of gas that has driven many older cars off the road. Also the biannual smog check has killed off a bunch, of older cars. The “cash for clunkers” program also did it’s part to rid the streets of older cars. I was on another forum where a reader referred to any car over fifteen years old as a “jalopy!” Come on, the new term is hooptie.
Of course it isn’t the age that makes a car a clunker, it’s the failure to maintain it in a safe condition for driving. Cars that have little value don’t receive the maintenance that they require. I don’t see too many real “Classic Clunkers” in the SF Bay Area or in LA when I’m down there. Today’s clunker would be a 1990’s model with that characteristic squeal of brake pads worn down to the metal, tires worn to the cord on the insides of the tread, and with collision damage that has broken one of the headlights. And maybe with a sheet of opaque plastic stretched over a broken window.
“Also the biannual smog check has killed off a bunch, of older cars. The “cash for clunkers” program also did it’s part to rid the streets of older cars.”
And California it’s own program similar to “cash for clunkers”. If your car fails the biannual smog check, the state will pay you $1000 (or $1500 if you qualify as low income) to “retire” it. That’s not a bad deal if you have a car that’s probably not worth that much that you wanted to get rid of anyway. That’s where my old Saturn went once it hit 20 years old.
I worked at a Ford dealership during the Cash For Nice Cars b.s. About two thirds of them were OK-decent to good cars. A few of those were in excellent shape. I don’t understand wasting perfectly good machinery.
Exactly. I was at my peak junkyard junkyard rat stage at the time and the cars that flooded the yards were NOT clunkers. The program was purely based off of gas mileage and the vehicles had to be in running condition to qualify – so dealers could pour liquid glass into the crankcase at wide open throttle(super green!) – It did nothing to rid the roads of clapped out econoboxes expelling blue smokescreens from very stoplight.
The big problem with the program is that you needed to buy or lease a new car to take advantage of it. You did get the rebate to offset a bit of the cost, but at the end of the day you were still purchasing a new car. And the dealer was most certainly charging MSRP for it too, because they could.
The end effect is the real clunkers stayed on the road since those are mostly driven by people who could not afford a new car, even with the rebate. The people could afford a new car but instead drive an older car generally can afford to take care of it, and these were the people who were drawn in by the free money. So we ended up with a bunch of relatively clean, inexpensive used cars destroyed instead of being allowed to go down to the next rung on the ladder.
I’m looking for a solid cheap car for a friend of mine.We have narrowed down our choices down to a 1987 Honda Accord, or a 1974 Monte Carlo, both for the same price. I think most folks would call them clunkers, but I plan on keeping whatever he finds in good shape for as long as he needs it.
I remember this ad (and the corresponding TV commercial) from my youth. I never particularly remember the Lark so much as how bad the car was, with it smoking, dented, and barely holding together as it motored along.
This one, and the Indian with a tear streaming down his cheek as he stood beside the roadway only to have a bag of trash tossed at his feet, are the commercials I really remember.
Perhaps the commercials worked better because more eyes were focused on them. There were only a few channels one could watch back then, before cable, and no internet to browse. A well placed national ad on ABC, NBC, or CBS, or in print via the local newspaper or Time, Newsweek, or similar basically reached the entire country.
As to the poor Lark, today, with a small amount of sympathetic restoration, would bring so many smiles rather than the overwhelming disapproval it generated in this ad. One wonders what car would be used if done today? A sedan? A SUV? An orphan make or a disguised car, or a foreign car not imported over here? I could see a beat to hell mid-70s Tatra brought over from central Europe fitting the bill. Most people would never know what it is, nor care, and just be terrified of seeing it on the road beside them.
In 1971, I was nine years old, and the family car was a 1965 Chevrolet Bel Air wagon with the 327 V-8. It was already showing signs of age, although my parents weren’t too religious about maintenance in those days.
Around that time, GM recalled all 1965-69 Chevrolets equipped with a V-8 because of faulty motor mounts. I remember my parents talking about this.
In 1972, they bought an elderly neighbor’s mint 1967 Oldsmobile Delmont 88 Holiday sedan with 19,000 miles on the odometer, and the Chevrolet was relegated to beater duty. (With the purchase of the Oldsmobile, we became a two-car family for the first time.)
I remember the Chevrolet being very worn by 1972, to the point where my mother was reluctant to take it on interstate highways. This was even though it was all of seven years old, and had about 100,000 miles on the odometer.
As a budding car enthusiast, I was very fascinated by cars from the early 1960s, as they were not a common sight on the road by 1972. The early 1960s Mopars, in particular, seemed like something from another world!
Today in Pennsylvania, vehicles don’t really start disappearing from the roads in large numbers until they hit about 15 years old.
Allstate was careful to use a car from a defunct company. Despite no accidents or tickets for the last couple of decades, they still manage to raise rates on a regular basis. Even with landlord and homeowner policy discount. Not my favorite way to spend money.
At least my vehicles are old enough (15 & 33) to not justify added expense of collision, and second vehicle charge is minimal. Wish they had lower rates for low mile, low risk drivers.
Allstate was extra slimy in the 1970s, when I was in my early 20s with a clean driving record and no claims. After a series of bills sent late with just a few days to pay, followed by cancellation threats which crossed my payments in the mail, they sent me a bill whose postmark was after the due date. I cancelled Allstate, and have been well served through independent agents ever since.
My rule of thumb (which is only partly in jest) is that the farther your insurance company’s home office is from Chicago, the better off you are. Excepting Joe Dennis’s employer, of course. 😀
Hey now! 😉
In the 60’s, my late Dad was a pretty loyal Sears client, in that like lots of people we shopped there regularly and he had Allstate insurance (for the house and 2 cars). In 1967 he took our ’65 F85 Wagon there to buy my twin sister and I bicycles for our birthday…they loaded up the back of the wagon with the boxes and ripped the headliner in the car. They said they’d take care of it (I guess my Dad thought they’d put it on their own insurance) but they found out he had an Allstate auto policy and put the claim on his policy…which raised his rates the next renewal. My Dad promptly cancelled his Allstate policy and would not consider them for any insurance. He used to refer to them as the “slippery hands people” (though the transgression might have just been the store, which misled him and put the claim on his policy. Though my bike is long gone, I still have my Sister’s 1967 Spaceliner tank style bicycle…designed by Victor Schrekendost, though I don’t ride it and am planning to sell it.
My other surviving sister now has the distinction in our family of having the longest ownership of a car, with her 1997 Nissan 240SX.. It has pretty low miles on it and people keep trying to buy it from her (guess it is popular model as a drift car) though it has automatic transmission. I’m not far behind with my 2000 Golf (standard transmission). In my younger days a 22 year old car would really stand out as old, not just because they didn’t last as long in general, but the body styles seemed to change much more often, so cars looked older sooner. To my eyes at least, there isn’t a whole lot of difference
in the appearance of her 22 year old car than today’s models (of course, her car isn’t made any longer, and newer 2 door sporty cars are an endangered species these days, but other than that).
A few years ago, there were definitely some clunkers on the streets and roads of Detroit. Even here, they’re getting harder to find thanks to the better economy. That said, there are still plenty of old work trucks that, somehow, continue to ply their trade for their seventh owners despite sags and rust you can see through.
Worth noting, though, that this very car was roaming our roads as recently as three years ago.
Looks like the Buick Century I saw in the local Walmart last week. Parked in a handicapped spot, the whole left side front was pushed in, a hood held down with a bungee cord and a plexiglass side window. Sad, as it was full junk and might have been the owners home. I was too embarrassed to take a photo
Ah, the perennial car insurance gripe. In my province, British Columbia, hikes in car insurance in the early 1970’s were so much, the NDP government of the day formed the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, or ICBC as we all know it, and gave themselves a nice monopoly on basic converge.
Fast forward to 2019. ICBC is in huge financial mess, caused by two things: the previous raiding of their funds by our previous right wing government, and their insane “no discrimination rule.” This means that a 54 year old married male with no tickets for decades pays exactly the same basic rate as a 18 year old driving a Ferarri. What is more, by law, ICBC must sell all applicants insurance.
Thus, this is probably the only place in the world where a 17 year old can put any exotic car on the road for less than $1500 for the basic $200,000 pl/pd. This is the reason Vancouver’s insurance is 40% more expensive than anywhere else in the province.
I remember the TV version of the ad clearly. The car was thumping, screeching, hissing, and steaming from all portals. It couldn’t stop at a red light.
Despite the averages, 9-year-old cars weren’t usually that bad. Lots of people had ’62 Fords and Chevies in fine shape. 20-year-old cars WERE that bad.
I remember that add clearly too. Didn’t he drive the car to a scrap yard where he got out and it was crushed into a cube?
And I thought it was Allstate that was showing the severity of a 60 mph crash. They put (yet again another Studebaker) on the side of a high rise building and dropped it to the pavement.
To those of you outside the US, some of the adds on bumper protection were pushed by insurance companies trying to save paying out on low speed collisions, and why we got those huge battering ram bumpers. I remember an add showing a guy walking at a brisk pace into a wall and walked away uninjured. Then a Model A Ford into a wall at 5 mph with “$15” damage. A late model car was driven into a wall at 5 mph making hundreds of dollars of damage. The problem with these “battering ram” bumpers was a crash at 10 mph or thereabouts was significantly more expensive than a car without them.
Now I believe the insurance companies are pushing to make cars more sacrificial to minimize occupant injury, as that has now become their largest expense. Cars and trucks today I believe do last longer, But insurance companies find it cheaper to total the car and not pay the huge injury costs, at least in the US.
Also I believe insurance companies make better choices in whether to raise or lower rates. Some retired folks with a Corvette or muscle car may pay less than some Mom’s with a minivan or CUV. Based on driving record and number of miles per year.
Bob
Please don’t post the video of the ’59 Chevy crashing into the Malibu. That is way too painful to watch.I’m sure everybody here has seen it.
Was Tim Conway in the tv commercial? I remember an ad that had him waiting at a valet station outside a nice restaurant. That Studebaker rolls up and Tim overhears a lady say to her escort “let’s see who has the nerve to get into THAT”. I always thought it was for a bank/finance company though…
Would love to find either ad on the web, but no such luck yet.
Recollections of those years locally bring to mind many clunkers in daily operation but this is a rural, small town area where it was recognized the poor folks needed transportation too, even if that was all they could afford. Because rust killed them off so quickly, Studebakers were rare on the road by the early 1970’s. Ramblers were the clunkers of choice since they were plentiful and dirt cheap. I rode to my job for a while with a working fellow with a large family that drove a clapped-out ’62 Rambler Classic about in the condition of the Studebaker in the ad. It was a stick shift that required stirring the lever around to find the next gear. Oddly enough, we were never stopped by police and the cussed wreck never let us down, not even in the coldest weather.
If you just want to stir up a hornet’s nest, sign onto the Studebaker Driver’s Club Forum and bring up this insurance company advertisement…..
I have no sympathy for the insurance companies. Unless a hurricane comes along, they have obscene profits, I’m sure. I don’t live too far from Hartford, Ct, the ‘Insurance Capital of the World’. Yes, this is what Connecticut’s capital city is famous for. How can they be proud of this??
I can picture a late 90s Explorer Sport being the modern equivalent in an ad. I see them all the time around here. Plastic rocker panel trim all missing and rusted fenders. Mismatched rims and balding tires. Look like they will tip over during any quick maneuver. Naturally covered in stickers. Towing wiring harness hanging on the ground.
Or better yet, the Chevy equivalent: The “Extreme” Blazer. It is just so extreme, brah! Yellow, with most of the racy body cladding gone. How can it be so extreme without extreme cladding?
Pretty much any Pontiac Grand-whatever from the 90s. Cladding broken. Sunroof duct-taped. Mirrors duct-taped. Inside mirror gone. Seat reclined into Victorian-England- prostitute-in-the-window-chaise-lounge position. Limo tint on most of the windows. Rest of the windows replaced and/or duct-taped.
Ex-cop car/taxi Crown Vic. With skulls spray painted on the doors. Tint on the top half of the windshield. This car is in my ‘hood. Wipers don’t work but stereo is bangin’! Muffler removed (fell off) for increased power, yo!
All of these of course have half-inflated tires. You know, for the ride comfort. And the extremeness, of course.
Loved this read, and I remember seeing some of those Allstate print ads from 1971 & ’72 in old National Geographic magazines my parents had at the house.
Insurance is my industry. I think some (not all) grasp that insurance companies need to be profitable (i.e. through good risk selection and adequate premiums) in order to make money… to stay in business and *pay claims*. We do no one any favors by writing bad business at too-cheap prices – not to our policy holders, nor to our shareholders.
Having said all that, I do lament that an indirect consequence of bad loss experience by many auto insurance carriers led to the demise of many cars (and types of cars) of which I am a fan.
Eric, I applaud your informed, entertaining take on this subject in your well-written piece.
There’s a Pontiac 6000 still roaming the streets in my area that resembles the condition of the pictured Studebaker. Way more than nine years old though. One day I hope to catch it parked next to the Chevette at Wally World. One was leaving the lot while the other was coming in and that was the closest encounter so far. ONE DAY though. Mark my words. On the other hand there’s a ten year old Ford SUV in the next block down with a ratchet strap keeping the hood down. And the neighbour’s Contour wearing a temporary spare since last summer that occasionally, the car not the tire, leaks like the Exon Valdez. Huge oil stains and dotted lines to where it parks on the street. Plenty of clunkers out there, most still look fairly decent.
I suddenly remembered a neighbor of ours from when I was a kid in the hinterlands in the 1980s. Mel, along with his wife and a couple of teenaged kids, lived just shy of a mile further up the road from us.
And every year, sometimes two, Mel’d be driving past with a new clunker. They were always giant, and they were always junk, enough so that I as a poor kid in a trailer house could recognize it. I distinctly remember a gold one-if memory serves it was an Buick Electra from the ’70s. I also remember a dark blue one-that was a mid-’70s Caprice I think. At the time, they’d have been roughly 10 years old. Giant, rusty, loud, banged-up junk.
Hell, in my own household, around 1987 or so, we bought my great-uncle’s 1977 GMC Sierra pickup so Mom could use the car to get to work instead of having to drop dad off. We literally had to put plywood over the floor because of the rust holes, and chunks would fall off when we drove it down our gravel road. Thing ran like a top, but wow was it not fit for public roadways! Dad would fill it at the gas station at “three-mile corner” and pay the extra 10 cents per gallon just to avoid taking it into town.
It’s absolutely crazy when I think back on this as I drive a 15-year-old Jag with 134,000 miles on it. Mel’s old cars probably only had that on ’em when they gave up!
This was an interesting read, thank you Eric
Perfect timing, as today I saw a white 2000-ish Chevy S10 with a blue fender and thought to myself that I used to see repaired cars like that all the time in the 70s and 80s but not so much today.
Taken care of, cars can literally last forever. Look at all the ’50s American cars in Cuba. Then theres Irv Gordon and his 3 million mile Volvo that literally outlived him. As long as replacement parts are available and there’s a will from the owner, a car never has to die.
My wife and I have tossed around the idea of a new family hauler but we are over car payments and our 180k mile 2002 Durango still looks and runs like new so, why?
FWIW, lots of those Cuban cars have engines and parts from Russian and other nationalities that can be imported. Not all are ‘factory correct’.
I think that’s kind of the point. I know we live in a time now where every device we own is sealed for life with stickers that say “do not open”, “void warranty”, “DANGER, you’ll hurt yourself and everyone you care about if you open!”, but cars, in particular old ones, are pretty simple mechanical devices and it isn’t rocket science to weld up some custom motor mounts to use a GAZ drivetrain in a 50s Chevy. Unless you’re taking it to Concours d’Elegance, who cares about factory correct?
Love it. And to think that Allstate wanted everyone in a nice high quality modern car like one of those new Vegas. As big of a Studebaker homer as I am, a 62 Lark 2 door sedan is about the bottom of my Stude hierarchy. A 6/automatic would nail it.
This piece is highly predictive of something that will run tomorrow morning. Only that one surely took longer than 9 years to get that way.
Regarding that 90% increase in insurance rates: Keeping my comments limited to Pennsylvania, which is where I lived at the time, in 1958 automobile insurance was not mandatory in the state. By 1970 it was, with some pretty severe punishments. In fact, if a cop pulled you over, his line was, “license, registration, and insurance card.” God help you if you didn’t have all three.
Gee, could shooting fish in a barrel get any easier for the insurance companies?
“Gee, could shooting fish in a barrel get any easier for the insurance companies?”
In my state, the minimum legal limits for an auto liability policy ($25k/person, $50k/accident, $10k/property damage) have not been increased during my entire 30+ year career in the field. It has been ‘splained to me that while insurers are happy that everyone has to buy a policy, they are quite content for those basic policies to cover very little in today’s world and have faught every legislative attempt to increase those minimums. Remember that for those of us who buy higher liability limits, the carriers gladly sell us additional coverage against “underinsured” drivers.
In the late 1990s, as many as 1/3 of the cars on the road in the city of Philadelphia did not have the required insurance coverage. This meant that the vehicle could not be legally registered.
In Pennsylvania, properly registered vehicles receive a small sticker to place on the license plate. Thieves would use metal shears to clip off the portion of the plate with the sticker. It got so bad that people were removing their plate every time they parked the car…and the police looked the other way, because they knew why the plate had been removed.
PA killed the plate sticker a few years ago. (Existing ones should be removed to avoid being pulled over when out of state.) Now it’s just the annual windshield sticker (and emissions sticker in most counties) in the windshield.
Ha. I once did see a ’62 Studebaker that had almost surely been taken off the road by an insurance company. This was in the late 90’s at Harry’s salvage yard in Hazleton PA, back when it still had a number of, shall we say, long-term residents. The Lark was a very similar two door post sedan. There were documents in the glove box indicating that it had last been registered in ’68 or ’69. The body was surprisingly good for a Studebaker that had sat in a salvage yard for close to 30 years — except for significant, but repairable, damage to one front fender. The poor orphan coupe was so worthless at the time that a minor fender bender totaled it.
Grandpa had a ’62 Studebaker Lark. Sorry, I know there are plenty of Studebaker lovers here, but it was the ultimate dorkmobile at the time. I was embarrassed to ride in it. The 1953 Chevy Belair it replaced had more street cred. I was happy when he replaced the Lark with a ’65 Plymouth.
Many clunkers on the road don’t look like clunkers unless they are 20+ years old. The last clunker I saw was a first gen Toyota Matrix that would’ve looked pretty good if it weren’t belching out clouds of thick blue smoke.
Most of the cars that match Allstates description get weeded out by our six monthly inspection regime but a well worn Jap import featuring 1 or more spacesaver spares actually in use mismatched panels with duct tape structural points can be seen regularly in use, a lot of them will still run long after its worth driving them.
A few years after this commercial aired there was a similar one which featured what looked like a ’59 (or thereabouts) Rambler Classic. I’m not sure if it was also for Allstate or for a different company.
I went to college at Binghamton with Stephanie “Flo” Courtney from Progessive Insurance. We were in a play together there. “The Crucible”. When seeing those commercials I said to myself ” this gal looks familiar”.
Nearly fell off my bar stool when I looked the actress up on IMDB. “You’ve come a long way, Goody Proctor” !
Flo is hot! I enjoy her commercials, but the talking lizard gives me a better rate. I miss Erin Esurance tho…
My quibble wirh auto insurance companies is using your credit score as a basis for your premium rates. For the life of me I can’t understand the connection. I know good drivers with flawless driving records who have poor credit. I know wealthy people with excellent credit that have poor driving records. Enlighten me!
I feel the credit score is a subtle way to weed out customers:
a) young adults are just starting their careers and building their credit scores. The big insurance companies can politely dismiss (ie: discriminate) via a score without violating Federal laws
b) middle aged and seniors have low scores because they find it harder to gain full employment in the current work environment. Again, a subtle way to dismiss (ie: discriminate) via a score without violating Federal laws.
Al, I am sure that JPC and Joseph D can answer this with more accuracy, but it really comes down to the fact “that they can.” Credit scores tell the company that you are more likely to make the monthly premium payment, so it is in the interest of the company to look at credit scores for that reason. However, should not affect rates, but it does. I suppose they consider it when pricing, as they “discount” for pay in full, but it would be more honest then to charge the people paying monthly a larger amount but calling it a payment premium rather than a discount for those who pay in advance.
Korean cars are the modern day Studebaker. Despite percieved initial quality, these cars are not designed to hold up. I have not seen many 10+ years old Kias or Hyundais that I would want to drive. I feel lile these cars are for those “rough” patches in life. They just seem like a knockoff. I would much rather drive a lightly used Camry over anything new Korean. No offense to the owners of these cars, but like the Studebaker, they mostly seem to attract either bargain hunters or people who have no other choice.
Have you actually driven any Korean car built in the last 10 years?
Thank you for sharing this ad and you should visit Oregon sometime. The lack of safety inspections and rust mean that vehicles last a lot longer around here resulting in clunkers being a more common sight.
Chryslers and Korean cars about 10 years old are the two main examples I can think of off the top of my head. Then there are the various motorhomes that people live in.
I would not consider my 26 year old Camry a clunker since the tires are good and I keep up with most of the maintenance though it has a large dent from an errant driver and the reverse lights are not working anymore.
Your bias is blinding you to some quite good cars. My experience with Toyota (well, Scion) and Kia over the last fourteen years have shown me that Toyotas are very good but incredibly overrated cars, while the couple of Kias passing thru and still residing at my place are quite solid dependable cars while being priced less than a Toyota.
I’m willing to guess that’s why you see so many Korean cars as last gasp beaters: price. When you’re so poorly off that you’re buying that last gasp car, the one thing you can’t afford is a Toyota. Because a Toyota of the same year and condition is going to cost $2-500.00 more than any competing brand. And when you’re in that condition you’re buying the cheapest available.
Note: this was meant for Mike, not Teddy.
Great write-up Eric. I love the collection of old ads. Around here, the true beaters of yesterday don’t exist much anymore. Maybe the odd really rough pickup. It seems that most cars that get sent to the grave now is due to expensive repairs or major component failure when the car has little to know value left in it. Even though cars have vastly improved and stay in good condition for much longer, people tend not to invest much time, money or proper maintenance in cars once they get older. Around the majority of cars over 10 or 12 years old are in the beater class. That said, for those willing to look after their cars and invest in proper care, they can last well beyond that while looking good and being reliable.