(first posted 2/4/2016) The cost of rehabilitating a “damaged” nameplate can be high. So is the cost of introducing and marketing an entirely new nameplate. If you introduce a high-quality, competitive new model but saddle it with an outmoded predecessor’s name, you will encounter resistance from buyers. “This looks nice but, oh, it’s a Cavalier? And you’re charging how much?” In the 2000s, GM simply decided to drop 19 decades-old nameplates, 12 of which were covered in Part 1 and Part 2 of this series. Today, let’s look at the remaining 7.
Cadillac Seville
Final year? 2004
How old was the name?
Cadillac first used the Seville nameplate from 1956 until 1960. For 1956, the Eldorado Seville was a hardtop coupe in the Series 62 line, a companion to the Eldorado Biarritz convertible. A hardtop sedan arrived the following year. Although the Eldorado Biarritz continued well into the 1960s, the Eldorado Seville was discontinued after 1960. The name remained in disuse until the 1976 model year when it was dusted off for a new sedan that would simultaneously become both the smallest and yet the second most expensive Cadillac line (after the Series 75 factory limousines). The new, small Cadillac was the brand’s attempt to reach new buyers more concerned with manoeuvrability and fuel economy instead of sheer size; GM also had recognised the rising popularity of German luxury brands and the Seville was generally Cadillac’s bulwark against Mercedes and BMW.
How was it looking?
Cadillac launched the final generation of Seville in 1998, touting its performance luxury sedan credentials and announcing it would even be sold in Europe and Japan. It sat on a stiffer chassis and once again packed the powerful Northstar V8 in two states of tune. At the time of the Seville’s launch, though, Cadillac executives were already discussing the importance of rear-wheel-drive in the luxury car market and were looking ahead to new RWD models. When the new century dawned, Cadillac launched a splashy new advertising campaign and introduced razor-edged new products like the CTS. The Seville, although only launched in 1998, started to look very old very fast. It didn’t help the exterior design was only a gentle evolution of the fourth-generation Seville. Extremely minor cosmetic tweaks were made during the fifth-generation’s run and high-tech options like satellite navigation, parking sensors and Magnetic Ride Control were made available in 2002. But sales decreased each year of the fifth generation’s run, never besting the most prosperous years of the previous generation: 39k Sevilles were sold in 1998, but only 18k in 2003. For 2004, the Seville STS was retired and a lone Seville SLS stayed pat.
What replaced it?
Cadillac did re-use a name for the Seville’s replacement: STS, after the sportier of the two Seville models. Despite crisp new Art & Science styling, the use of the rear-wheel-drive Sigma platform, and new V6 and all-wheel-drive variants, the STS was a sales disappointment. Much as the fifth-generation Seville had never topped the best year of the fourth-generation, the new STS never exceeded the best year of fifth-generation Seville sales.
Did it make sense to scrap the name?
Cadillac had never had a very consistent approach to developing and marketing the Seville, as I’ve outlined previously in my features on the second, third, fourth and fifth generation models. The Seville name was elegant and had heritage but Cadillac had been placing increasing focus on the STS nameplate since its debut in 1988. With the switch to three-letter designations for their passenger cars, it was only logical for Cadillac to use the STS name for a Seville replacement. This also allowed Cadillac to position their new RWD sedan as more of a sport sedan than a luxury cruiser.
Cadillac DeVille
Final year? 2005
How old was the name?
The first production car to wear the “de Ville” name, as it was then known, was the 1949 Series 62 Coupe de Ville which along with that year’s Buick Roadmaster Riviera and Oldsmobile 98 Holiday were GM’s first pillarless hardtop coupes. Most of Cadillac’s numerical designations disappeared over time and Coupe de Ville and Sedan de Ville became the heart of Cadillac’s range. The coupe disappeared after 1993.
How was it looking?
The 2000 DeVille may have featured smoother styling but it still had the attributes Cadillacs had long been renowned for: a smooth V8 engine, innovative technological features and ample cabin space. Unfortunately, the loyal Cadillac buyers that had purchased DeVille buyers for years were exactly the buyers Cadillac was trying to wean itself off. The quest for volume in the 1970s and 1980s had eroded Cadillac’s prestige and although the DeVille had a modern, powerful Northstar V8 and technological advances like Night Vision, it had developed a reputation for being a car popular with senior citizens. Front-wheel-drive, once seen as an innovative feature, was now utterly déclassé in the luxury car segment and the DeVille was also showing its age mechanically. It had only a four-speed auto, when rivals were offering five- and six-speeds. The Northstar V8 was no more powerful than it had been in the previous decade, either, although it had become more reliable. In the new millennium, Cadillac’s lineup had been dramatically overhauled with edgy new rear-wheel-drive offerings like the CTS and SRX, clothed in Cadillac’s polarizing new Art & Science design language. Next to them in the showroom, the DeVille – although just two years older than the CTS – looked very old-fashioned.
What replaced it?
DTS, or DeVille Touring Sedan, had replaced Concours in 2000 as the name of the sportiest DeVille. As Cadillac’s new passenger cars were switching to three-letter names, the DeVille’s replacement assumed the DTS name. Styling was crisper, although the design was more Art & Science Lite. But it was still unmistakably the same car, especially under the skin where few improvements were made. The DeVille had been an intriguing and much cheaper alternative to equivalently-sized Germans in 2000; the DTS was simply a relic in 2006.
Did it make sense to scrap the name?
Keeping the DeVille name would have been no worse than keeping the actual DeVille around, which is what Cadillac effectively did with the DTS. Three-letter designation aside, there was no fooling buyers into thinking the DTS was anywhere near the breath of fresh air the CTS, SRX and STS had been for the Cadillac brand. Cadillac would have done best to retire the car as well as the name, as I’ve mentioned previously.
Chevrolet Camaro
Final year? 2002
How old was the name?
It debuted in 1967 on Chevrolet’s direct response to the Ford Mustang. Although Chevrolet had offered the sporty, practically-sized Corvair Monza before Ford’s pony car hit the scene, the Mustang had taken the market by storm. Chevrolet slowly wound down Corvair production and the more conventional Camaro would become the Mustang’s arch-nemesis for several decades.
How was it looking?
A little dated but still a credible Mustang rival. In fact, critics generally agreed this generation of Camaro outperformed the Mustang. Performance figures were definitely superior: the 5.7 LS1 V8 had between 310 and 335 horsepower, depending on the tune, while the Mustang’s 4.6 V8 had only 260 horsepower. Even the V6 engine was more powerful than its Blue Oval counterpart, with 200 horses from a 3.8 V6, 10 more than the Mustang’s 3.8. So why, then, did the Mustang cream the fourth-generation Camaro in the sales race year after year? In 2000, for example, Ford sold 173,676 Mustangs while Chevrolet sold only 42,131 Camaros. Rumors of the GM F-Body’s impending demise had been circulating for some time and 2002 was the last year for the Camaro and its Pontiac Firebird platform-mate.
What replaced it?
Nothing really. The front-wheel-drive Monte Carlo coupe gained a supercharged V6 for 2004 and a V8 in 2006, while sportier SS variants of the TrailBlazer, Impala, Cobalt, Malibu and HHR appeared in turn. It was a good time for variety in Chevy performance but not necessarily a great time for raw V8 muscle: the two Chevy passenger cars with bent eights were hobbled with front-wheel-drive.
Did it make sense to scrap the name?
GM had once considered moving the Camaro to a front-wheel-drive chassis with the GM-80 platform, but the costly program was scrapped. When the FWD sport coupe segment faded away in the mid-1990s, GM likely gave precious little thought to developing a FWD Camaro again. With no suitable RWD platform available and sales sliding, Chevrolet retired the Camaro nameplate. However, development started shortly thereafter on an entirely new Camaro derived from Holden’s Zeta platform. The fifth-generation Camaro’s debut was drawn out and much buzz was generated, so perhaps the absence of a lameduck fourth-generation helped promote the new Zeta Camaro. The Aussie-developed Camaro has proved to be a much stronger seller than the final F-Body and has regularly outsold the Mustang.
Pontiac Firebird
Final year? 2002
How old was the name?
Like its fellow GM F-Body, the Chevrolet Camaro, the Firebird debuted in 1967. Although GM considered killing the F-Body coupes in the mid-1970s due to flagging sales and the increasing importance of fuel economy, they sensibly kept the coupes alive and were rewarded handsomely in the late-1970s when sales surged. The Firebird also outlived and enjoyed a far better reputation than Ford’s rebadged Mustang companion, the Mercury Capri, which was axed in 1986.
How was it looking?
The swoopy, bullet-shaped fourth-generation Firebird received a fussy facelift for 1998. Sales stayed pat from then on, sitting around the 30k mark and only dropping in the Firebird’s final two seasons. When the F-Body’s epitaph was read, many reasons were speculated for the demise of the 35-year-old nameplates: the popularity with young drivers of sporty compacts like the Honda Civic Si and Acura RSX; the increasing popularity of pickup trucks and SUVs; and the advancing age of the fourth-generation F-Bodies.
Did it make sense to scrap the name?
Whatever the reason for the F-Body’s waning popularity, it is worthwhile nothing that Mustang sales declined noticeably between 2002-04. Once a redesigned Mustang bowed for 2005, though, Ford enjoyed the spoils of having a segment all to itself before rising gas prices hobbled the Mustang’s sales. Even still, in those lean years of the late 2000s, the Mustang still sold better than the Camaro and Firebird.
What replaced it?
The Firebird was indirectly replaced by the 2004 GTO, a rebadged, Australian-built Holden Monaro. Although both were rear-wheel-drive, two-door coupes packing powerful pushrod powerplants, the GTO had much more milquetoast styling, a more luxurious interior and a base price around $3k higher than the flagship Firebird Trans Am. Consequently, the GTO sold about half as well as the Firebird had.
Chevrolet Blazer/GMC Jimmy
Final year? 2005 (Blazer), 2001 (Jimmy)
How old was the name?
The Blazer and Jimmy names first debuted in 1969 on a Ford Bronco rival derived from the full-size Chevy truck chassis. Blazer and Jimmy were prefaced with “K5”; in 1983, the S-10 Blazer and S-15 Jimmy debuted, based on the new compact Chevy S-10/GMC S-15 trucks. In 1995, the smaller SUVs dropped the S-10/S-15 prefixes and around this time the K5s were renamed Tahoe and Yukon.
How was it looking?
The larger, more comfortable TrailBlazer was launched in 2002 but Chevrolet kept the Blazer around for a few more years. After all, the TrailBlazer – like many new SUVs – had no two-door variant. The four-door Blazer was also carried along, although by the Blazer’s final year, only the two-door was available to retail buyers. Poor crash test ratings, a cheap interior with poor build quality and yet a stout powertrain (the 4.3 Vortec V6) were attributes shared with the Chevrolet Astro, also axed after 2005. Unlike the Astro, whose GMC variant remained on sale until 2005, the Blazer’s GMC Jimmy clone ended its run in 2001. The Blazer outlived the equally outmoded Explorer Sport 2-dr (final year: 2003) and was ultimately, in two-door guise, in a class of its own.
What replaced it?
The TrailBlazer briefly enjoyed sales heights in the 2000s that exceeded those of the Blazer during much of the 1990s, peaking at 283k units, but things eventually slowed down; the same held true for the new GMC Envoy. Tougher competition from a redesigned 2006 Explorer likely played a large part in this; the new GMT-360 trucks may have had superior powertrains but the TrailBlazer’s interior in particular was dreary and cheap. GM exited the mid-size truck market after 2009. Chevrolet did, however, enjoy great success with the Equinox compact crossover. Although it lacked the off-road ability of the Blazer, it had superior on-road refinement and may well have appealed to former Blazer buyers.
Did it make sense to scrap the name?
Given the increase in size, it made sense for Chevrolet to make use of the Blazer’s 1999-2001 uplevel TrailBlazer nameplate for its new SUV. GMC did the same, using the Envoy name previously applied to uplevel Jimmy SUVs. Also, considering GM decided to keep selling the 1995-vintage Blazer alongside the new offering, a new nameplate was entirely warranted.
Cadillac Eldorado
Final year? 2002
How old was the name?
It first debuted in 1953 on a range-topping, limited-production convertible. Priced at $7,750, it was a cool $2k above even the Series 75 factory limousines. The Eldorado would become the most stylish and, in some years, the most powerful Cadillac. In the early 1960s, it was considered part of the De Ville series before officially becoming the Fleetwood Eldorado. The Eldorado line shifted in 1967 to the new, front-wheel-drive GM E-Body platform shared with the Oldsmobile Toronado but not shared with any other Cadillacs. After 1993, the Coupe de Ville’s last year, the Eldorado became Cadillac’s only coupe.
How was it looking?
Dated. Although rumors were rampant in the mid-1990s of an upcoming rear-wheel-drive replacement, these plans were scrapped and the Eldorado soldiered on with few changes. The Seville moved to the more rigid G-Body for 1998 (although GM still referred to the Seville as being a K-Body) and the DeVille followed in 2000, but the Eldorado stuck it out on the aged E-Body chassis even while lesser Buick, Oldsmobile and Pontiac full-size models were getting more sophisticated new underpinnings. GM evidently saw little point in keeping the Eldorado fresh as personal luxury coupe sales were declining and rivals like the Lexus SC and Lincoln Mark VIII were axed.
What replaced it?
Nothing, really. The XLR arrived as a halo roadster in 2004, assuming the mantle of the most stylish and “personal” Cadillac, but it was quite different in concept from the Eldorado with two seats, rear-wheel-drive and a folding metal hardtop. It also cost around $30k more and was consequently much lower volume.
Did it make sense to scrap the name?
Cadillac hadn’t used the Eldorado nameplate on a four-door model since 1960 and there was no coupe to use it on after 2002. A coupe Cadillac wouldn’t return until the 2011 model year, and that CTS variant was dramatically different from the final Eldorado.
GM may have axed 17 nameplates in the 2000s but they reversed course on some of those decisions. Camaro famously returned, as did Regal, while Park Avenue, S10 and Blazer/TrailBlazer remained outside North America. GM appears to have learnt the mistakes of its mass culling of names: while the first-generation Colorado and LaCrosse were mediocre offerings, GM has continued to use those names on dramatically improved replacements. Toyota has used the Camry and Corolla nameplates for decades. Perhaps in thirty years, you will still be able to buy a Chevrolet Malibu or Cruze.
Related Reading:
Curbside Classic: 1976-79 Cadillac Seville
Curbside Classic: 1967 Chevrolet Camaro
Although it probably made sense from a business perspective, I was never a fan of Cadillac (and Acura) switching the naming convention for their products. Personally, I prefer Legend and Sedan de Ville to TL and DTS. I used to follow these two makes in particular, but I lost track after they switched naming conventions. But that’s just my preference.
I don’t mind that Caddy switched–but they should’ve stayed with the first crop of names they had. The only alphanumeric Cadillacs with more than one generation were the CTS and the SRX, both moderately successful. Replacing the STS and CTS after only one model was unnecessary.
This has been a nice series. I wish I had thought of it. In some cases killing the name was justified but the name was better than the product it was attached to. Names like Seville and Eldorado are superb, freighted with imaginative potential. The Seville name came attached to some sharp-looking cars and even the front-drive Eldo looked rather space-age and futuristic. I have seen one here in Denmark, driven by an old bloke, naturally. And I went to see an 80s Coupe de Ville (I think it was) and marvelled at its baroque opulence.
Inspired by the frankly shocking shape of the 2000 deVille, I penned this:
http://driventowrite.com/2016/02/04/2000-2005-cadillac-deville-design-review/#more-16659
It might interest people here. Can anyone tell me, was this car a facelift of something else or was it built on a new-for-Cadillac plaftorm? If anyone understands the ins and outs of GM´s platform names it´s the scholars here.
The final Deville was built on a unique LWB (115.6″) version of the FWD G platform–longer than the 112.2″ version of the Bonneville, Aurora, LeSabre, and Seville.
Absolutely the worst styled Cadillac ever, after the Cimmaron. Though even the Cimmaron had more expensive looking tail lights.
For me this final DeVille ranks as a Cadillac low point. I didn’t find the Allante or 92 Seville all that special, either. These three were as well styled as a quarter block of margarine.
Good write-up at your link, Richard. Spot on.
The Cimarron was styled – who knew? 😉
Have they found the guilty party yet?
I’ve said it before. I don’t know why Chevrolet doesn’t borrow some of the old Pontiac names. I’m sure GM still holds a patent on some, if not all, of them.
What’s wrong with Chevrolet Firebird? Or maybe make it an optional package for Camaro?
Oh well.
Ouch! I think that would backFire badly.
Aftermarket companies will build you a Firebird or a ‘Cuda now, based on the Camaro/Challenger. Having it as a separate package wouldn’t be a bad idea.
I think that this would get a lot of negative publicity from mainly the car community at large, especially from folks who were around when those nameplates were still being used. Look how much flak the car community has about…
the new crossover Chevrolet Blazer… “it’s not a real Blazer, just some crummy crossover. they tarnished a good name”
the new Ford Maverick…. “that will never be a Maverick to me. They ruined that good name” (although my take on this is Maverick is the perfect name for it. The 1970 Maverick was a compact version of a very popular body style. The 2022 Maverick is a compact version of a very popular body style.)
the current Dodge Charger… “a Charger is only supposed to have 2 doors. That’s just a sedan, not a real Charger”. (even though it had available V8 Hemi power and RWD).
The current use of alphanumeric gobbledygook in naming car models comes from a number of sources:
1. The fashion of aping the Germans. Well, when you’re the 800lb gorilla in the automotive industry, getting on the bandwagon is a cheap way to try and sell cars.
2. Social thin-skinnedness. Given our all-too-easily offended society, its a lot safer to come up with something that isn’t in the dictionary. I mean, can you really see the return of the Chevrolet Confederate roadster, or the Studebaker Dictator? Or any name that comes within a thousand miles of some “minority” group?
3. Copyright ramifications: The days of when Triumph motorcycles and Pontiac could agree on the sharing of the name “Bonneville” on the simple handshake agreement that Pontiac wouldn’t make a motorcycle under that name, ditto Triumph making a car under the same name (done twice, in 1959 and 2000 – Triumph cars and motorcycles were separate companies at the time of the first agreement). Nowadays, God help your legal department if you car has the same name as some breakfast cereal not produced in years, but still under copyright.
We can wish for the “names” all we want. It probably isn’t going to happen until the style comes around again. And you can always tell an auto enthusiast who’s firmly living in the past by their constant cries for rear wheel drive cars powered by V-8’s with bench seats, column shifters, and names found in the dictionary.
2. I know, right? Why can’t we go back to the days when it was acceptable to put “Injun” heads on Pontiacs? Caring about the feelings of fellow human beings is soooo overrated.
(/s, just in case)
Polaris Industries owns Indian Motorcycles, which makes Indian Chief and Indian Scout. Indian Chief even comes with an illuminated Chief’s head on the front fender.
Finally (six years later) the “Redskins” are no more. Probably not a lot of Native Americans were good with that one.
Yeah! We cannot tolerate intolerance!
Hey! Native Americans don’t find the term “Indian” offensive. They fine Caucasion characterizations of them offensive, and I can’t blame them. The only depiction of an Indian that didn’t seem to offend anybody was “Chico” – the AT&SF railroad’s mascot. I guess it didn’t hurt that Indians rode for free on Santa Fe trains for many years for them allowing to build the railroad across their lands.
Finally (six years later) the “Redskins” are no more. Probably not a lot of Native Americans were good with that one.
Don’t forget the mass headhunting (see what I did there?) of management from the processed-food and home cleaning product industries, who fetishized a single overarching brand for an entire line of products.
This probably reached its’ logical peak when “Integra” had a higher name recognition than “Acura” and the cool kids, like they do with FR-S’s now (or their younger brothers do, the tuner-era Integra owners now being in their Minivan Years), pry the made-up North America only brand’s emblem off and replace it with the corporate one.
The Cadillac names of Seville and Eldorado were strong names that still had some life left in them. I cannot say the same of the DeVille. In 1949, a European name like DeVille (and is it French, Spanish or Italian?) was the epitome of class and taste. Sadly, such a name had long since descended into parody that reminded us of some self-important snob.
I have long argued that it is not the name but the car that kills sales. DeVille was one of the exceptions. The car was not awful, but the name almost guaranteed that nobody under 70 would be interested in one. C’est la vie, DeVille.
The other names were good too. It strikes me that with all of the fire issues that Ford had during the 80s with their ignition and cruise control switches, it’s a good thing that Chevy got the Blazer name instead of Ford.
Thank you Disney and all those damned spotted dogs!
Hahaha – I had forgotten all about Cruella!
It always amused me that “Coupe de Ville” was French for “Town Coupe” which, with a little Francophile touch of its own, was used for a recycled Chevrolet Vega: the Monza Towne Coupe.
“de ville” would be French for “of the city”. Given that, I think DeVille made more sense when it was Sedan De Ville or Coupe De Ville. A mash-up of English and French, but the intended meanings town sedan and town coupe should be fairly obvious.
Seville and DeVille got confused by some non-car folks. Relatives said “we rented a Seville” and it was a DV.
Just as well Cadillac didn’t have any more -eville names then!
I always thought the last Deville would’ve made a nice Chevy (with probably the 5.3 in place of the Northstar).
But it had no business being a Cadillac. That interior, what a turnoff.
I am surprised that GM dropped the Blazer/ Jimmy name in favor of Trailblazer(which was a package on the Blazer) and Envoy. The Second Generation S series Blazer/Jimmy sold very well even at the end, GM could have simply called the new vehicles Blazer/Jimmy and called the old one Blazer Classic (like they do with the Malibu)
I know a lot of folks complained about the Blazer/Jimmy so called unreliability but there are a lot of them still out there. In fact around my way, I swear I have seen more of them around my way in the last 2 years then I did when they were still being sold new(and I worked at a Chevy dealer) and this is in rock salt land(aka my state)
The biggest issue they had was leaking oil cooler lines(not a easy 5 min replacement but not super hard ether)
I see lots of Trailblazers around also. Contrast that with finding a first or second generation of Ford Explorer on the road. The second Gen explorer was most popular SUV out there when it was sold, now you never see any on the road.
I would love to get a 2 door Blazer ZR2 with 4 wheel drive and a 5 speed manual transmission.
The Eldorado name plate is pretty much dead unless they go 4 door (like the 1970’s T-Bird) as 2 door personal coupes are dead, dead, dead.
I still think the Deville name needs to be brought back. It has still has capital in it(quick go ask anybody what is the first model that pops into their head when you say Cadillac, chances are it is Deville)
Owning 1993-2002 Firebird and Camaro was an exercise in patience. The car(especially the 98-02 Firebird) was bloated on the outside it was longer then a lot of midsize cars but it had a cramped interior, it wallowed about like a truffle sniffing pig and it was way too heavy for what it was. Working on it was a true pain for everything. But to me, the biggest pain in the a$$ I had owning my 1999 Firebird was the $%%^^% seatbelt. No matter what you did in was annoying and uncomfortable. This led me to let the car sit for weeks at a time and then sell it as I don’t drive without a seatbelt.
I disagree that the first generation Colorado was a mediocre offering. It was a good truck, it was just priced too high for what it was(a small truck) and dealerships pushed folks that came into the dealer looking for them into spending a few more dollars for a full size truck(in the dealership I worked for, there was a memo given to the sales folks that if somebody came in for a Colorado, to extoll the virtues of a Chevy full size pickup truck) I have a 2011 regular cab Colorado and It is much more comfortable to drive then my old 2010 Ranger was.
I thought Trailblazer was a Plymouth, or was that Trail-something-else? 😉
Trailduster, Pete 🙂
Don’t even get me started on Outlander/Uplander/Freelander/etc!
Highlander!
How did they get away with the “Trailblazer” name? For over 40 years now when whenever I hear that name I think of Portland’s NBA basketball team, not a vehicle.
Names have come and gone. I guess it depends on how much they have tied themselves into your personal history that makes the difference. Some of these nameplates figured very large in our youthful automotive fantasies. Many of my favorite cars never had a proper name. For example, Datsun 240Z, Jaguar XKE, BMW 633CSI, and Mercedes Benz SEC. It would appear that the European manufacturers preferred the alpha numeric designations. It does make it easier to document changes to the engine size, wheelbase or body configuration. Still it’s hard to beat a name like the Jensen Interceptor or Bentley Continental. American manufacturers still have many names for their cars in current use. I do miss one of my favorite nameplates, Cadillac Coupe de Ville, not only the actual cars but the lifestyle image they conveyed.
Women wearing gowns and furs and a jeweled version of the Cadillac emblem with crown and V in the ad (not usually in the same one).
Jewels
THere used to be a Dodge Omni GLH.
Did GLH really stand for “Goes Like Hell”?
According to Carrol Shelby it did.
Don’t forget the Dodge Demon – apparently the Bible thumpers weren’t keen on that so it became the rather flaccid sounding Dart Sport
Yeah – Dart Sport was an awful name. And nobody really knew what it was until you said “like a Duster.”
IMO Ma Mopar either never should’ve let Dodge dealers have a version of the Duster or it should’ve totally replaced the Swinger/Scamp (maybe with wind-down rear windows added to uplevel trims – the Duster/Demon is structurally a hardtop anyway). Even in the coupe-crazy ’70s it was a bit odd to have two compact two-doors on two wheelbases, one a rather dated true hardtop and the other much fresher looking but downmarket with its’ pop-out quarter windows.
And I hear tell that the Demon/Dart Sport came VERY close to being named ‘Beaver’. Now THAT would’ve been hilarious!
And then the subsequent GLHS, which I think was “Goes Like Hell Sum’more” (not sure about the spelling of that).
Although technically not a replacement, though neither was the Monte Carlo, the SSR was sort of Chevy’s pseudo sporty V8 thingy after the F body was killed off. I always lamented that thing – so the F body, whose many many well publicized and easily solved faults that had been ignored for a decade, is unprofitable to continue… So let’s roll out an even less profitable and utterly pointless impractical Prowleresque truck!
For as tacky as I think we’d all agree the 4th gen Firebird was I think it has actually aged the better of the two F bodies. That car looked so over the top aggressive with that 98 facelift that it gave the Trans Ams a lot of presence, they reminded me a lot of the late 70s ones with the flares and spoilers everywhere and the big screaming chicken on the hood. Today that style has trickeled down into everything, including the current Camaro, which in the old days was the clean cut one of the two brands, that’s why those clamoring for a Chevy Firebird won’t ever get that wish… Besides the Pontiac arrow is a way better looking emblem than the Chevy bow tie.
I think you are right about the bowtie. I think the 5th gen Camaro is the only Camaro that had a big stand alone bowtie on the grill of the car. The other 4 generations had a small bowtie in an emblem that had red,white and blue in it.
I do disagree about the 98-02 Firebird aging better then the 98-02 Camaro. As an owner of a 1999 Firebird I feel that the 98 restyle make the car look ugly (especially with the headlight doors closed) they just sort of stuck out and ruined the look. The 93-97 Firebird with its headlights that seemed to melt into the hood when closed looked much better to me. I think the 98-02 Camaro looks much better then the 98-02 Bird.
I don’t think either facelift was an improvement but I must say I think the 98-02 Firebird is a hideous, overstyled mess. I believe it has dated horribly, even more so than other contemporary Pontiacs bar the Aztek.
Oh I didn’t mean it looks better(aging better and looking better are mutually exclusive), but it’s wild unwieldy elements certainly are common in modern car styling, including the 5th gen Camaro, which to me looks almost as OTT. Sort of if the typical cleanness of the Camaro were combined with the typical wildness of Trans Ams into that one car.
Most of these names aren’t coming back to us, I’ve accepted that and I’ll begrudgingly live with it.
The Eldorado name has the least chance of coming back, for the moment, the PLC class of cars is pretty much unfashionable at this point. Maybe if the return of the personal luxury coupe were to come back, we might see the Eldorado name again, but I doubt it. Still, at least the final gen Eldorado meant that the name could be retired with something resembling dignity.
Same can’t be said for the Deville, which really morphed into a retirement home on wheels in its final years. The chances of the Deville coming back are slim.
What I never understood about the discontinuation of the Firebird is why Pontiac said that the car was too expensive to improve. Then two years later, spend even more money importing the Holden Monaro here, changed it to meet U.S standards, slapped the badge on it, and renamed it the GTO. A project that fell flat on its face and lost more money for the brand then if they were to keep the Firebird in production.
Not sure why Chevy replaced the Blazer as well with the bigger Trailblazer, especially given the negative reception of the GMT360 platform. My parents had a Blazer when I was a kid that they eventually sold in 2004 and I loved that car a lot, when they were looking for another car at the Chevy dealer, they got an Equinox instead. I’m guessing their thinking was they didn’t want a car that was bigger than our old one so they avoided the Trailblazer at all cost, the Equinox wasn’t that smart in hindsight, but I can’t imagine the Trailblazer being any better.
“…spend even more money importing the Holden Monaro here…”
FYI, the new GTO was a baby of Bob Lutz, who joined GM in 2001 [ish] and it was too late to keep the F bodies. Lutz expected the Holdens to sell at profit to fan boys, but they had every excuse in the book to avoid it. [Really expected a reproduction 1966-67 GTO]
The other thing was GM brass wanted to close the Quebec F body plant, and used low sales to justify.
The Seville name was also used as a sub model name for the 1956 Desoto. Guess they dropped the name when they found out that Cadillac was using it?
“…the Blazer’s GMC Jimmy clone ended its run in 2001…”
I haven’t heard that before, and the Jimmy was certainly available in Canada until 2005, same as the Blazer.
How unusual! I didn’t know that, thanks. In the US, the Jimmy’s last year was definitely 2001. I found that a little peculiar. After all, if you’re going to keep selling the Blazer, why not the Jimmy as well?
I understand Pontiac was a popular brand in Canada and Pontiac and GMC models were sometimes sold at the same dealers, so maybe the Blazer/Jimmy ratio wasn’t as skewed in the Chevy’s favour up north?
GMCs were always sold at Pontiac-Buick-GMC dealerships (now Buick-GMC); anecdotally, I think the Jimmy may have been the stronger seller of the two. The Envoy outsold the Trailblazer every year but one.
Today, the Sierra regularly outsells the Silverado in Canada by a healthy margin, whereas in the US the Silverado led by over 150,000 units in 2015.
I like your style up there! If I were buying a big truck, I’d happily take the GMC over the Chevy. And re: the Envoy/TrailBlazer, the Envoy had a much nicer-looking interior than the Chevy and a more handsome exterior.
As much as I have a lot of love and fond memories of my 1992 Jimmy, I really don’t see any reason why GMC still exists. Every model they sell can be bought with a Bowtie on the grill also so why have 2 divisions selling the same product?
Your point about Corolla/Camry at the end is spot on. Toyota, and Honda, along with the Germans have had much better discipline with their car names – they’ve ridden a general increase in size that matched the overall shift in the market. Today’s Civic is about the size of the first Accord, but has kept its place as Honda’s volume small car. GM especially, was over-committed to changing names with new model generation, confusing rather than guiding their buyers.
As an interesting aside, in Mexico, both the Aspen and Aries continued the successful Dart name. Someone down there knew what they were doing.
GM has a better track record with their niche car names than Toyota and Honda do.
Camaro is still a Camaro. Briefly axed or not it was never renamed, unlike the Malibu-Celebrity-Lumina-Malibu
Corvette is still a Corvette
Whereas…
Celica is an FRS (or will that now be GT86 when the Scion badge is dropped???)
Supra is RC
CRX is Del Sol/Insight/S2000/CRZ???
The mustang always beat the camar cuz from day 1 it was always a easier daily driver while the camaro was more track focused. The low slung back seating in the camaro got tiring for anyone over 25 while the mustang always had more of an upright sedan seating posture with easier entry and exit. Mustang was just an easier car to live with. Over time this gave the camaro a boy racer rep which also contributed it its lower sales.
Guess what readers of 2016: the Bronco and Blazer are back.
I miss that last gen Eldorado.
It was a looker.
Arts & Science styling somehow seems ugly and boring at the same time.
Just as New Edge did before it.
(I miss Old Edge. It was just the right amount of edge)
Still waiting for the ugly/chunky/creasy/trapezoidal
/Ugh-gressive modern styling to go away.
Today I saw a 1997 Camry.
Silver of course.
It was the sexiest thing on the road for miles.
I’m ok with using an alphanumeric moniker on the gen-one CTS. The 2003 model was an Art and Science design, but seemingly done with a lighter touch. The car had a very sporty stance. It’s tweener dimensions were “just right”. The STS I find to be ugly. It was a mistake to go beyond the CTS in any case. I would have kept the Sedan De Ville, with the emphasis going forward on making a better interior. Whoever designed the first CTS might have been consulted on future De Ville designs. Everything starts and ends with someone who has good taste.
Plus the Catera name was damaged goods, and in classic GM fashion of renaming stinkers rechristening its successor CTS worked well whilst actually keeping continuity (Catera Touring Sedan).
I thought the original was refreshing, later art & science designs made me dislike it by association, but at the time it seemed like Cadillac might have actually had something modern, it just didn’t translate up into the traditional lines
As per usual, GM product planning is careening around with their zippers down and lampshades on their heads. But I guess someone fell down and woke up on top of a marketing report showing that “Blazer” and “Trailblazer” were well-regarded vehicles by people who are still alive and buying cars.
I don’t mind the reuse of Blazer and Trailblazer for CUV models in the slightest. I just wish the smaller one was called Blazer and the bigger one Trailblazer.
I’m wondering if they wish they saved Blazer for whatever Bronco-competitor they are considering.