(first posted 5/13/2015) Oldsmobile and Cadillac had had a certain affinity over the decades. Their new 1949 V8 engines were really quite similar, as were the C-Body cars that they first appeared in. And there’s been other cases where the two seem to have shared a bit more than average for GM sister divisions, such as the Hydramatic and FWD. Buick preferred to go its own way whenever possible.
You’d be forgiven for thinking you’d just stumbled into a Coupe De Ville from some distance, as the there’s obviously quite a bit of similarity in their C-Body, right down to some details like the little fins and the rear fender skirts. Of course, a closer look reveals the Olds-specific blistered wheel openings and a slight upkick in the rear side window line.
Olds’ decision to bring back fins in 1971 was a surprise.
Well, Olds was using a very Continental-esque bladed rear fender up to that point (1970 above), which were not exactly considered fins, but there’s no way not to call what sat on the top of the all-new ’71’s rear fender anything other than a fin.
The high-set front headlights are also a throw-back, and rather evoke Cadillacs from the 1959-1964 era. Well, this 98 was clearly targeting buyers looking for a lot of Cadillac cues with a lower price. The base 98 coupe started at $4748, vs. the Cadillac Calais at $5771. And the 98 Luxury Coupe started at $5009, vs $6168 for the De Ville. Equipment levels may have been somewhat different, but that $4748 for the 98 base coupe adjusts to some $26k in today’s dollars. A lot of car, in terms of inches, pounds and cubic inches for the buck.
This appears to be the Luxury Coupe, due to its higher-trim interior, which looks to be perforated ‘Morocceen’ (vinyl). Cloth was available too.
And of course, in 1972 Olds offered the limited edition Regency, which really competed with the Cadillac. Its interior appointments pushed up into Fleetwood territory, which undoubtedly was one of the reasons Cadillac came out with the famous Fleetwood Talisman.
If I had to guess, this car was repainted and most likely had a vinylroofectomy, as they inevitably trap moisture and cause rust around the back window and at the C Pillar. Lemon meringue pie that was left in the oven too long; but still tasty.
I hadn’t really thought about the extent to which Olds did bring back the fin in ’71. Most cars after 1964 used some varient of fender blades for fender tops for the next 20 years or so, but this indeed qualifies as a fin.
Olds toned these down a bit and by the final year of this generation, it was again more of a fender blade.
Nice clean coupe, but that brown over bright yellow paint is a bit, ummm, not the greatest.
The somewhat rare cornering lamps are styled in quite nicely – they remind me a bit of the ’69 Imperial’s shark fin cornering lamps, probably the coolest cornering lamps ever done.
I am wondering if the yellow is a factory color.
This shade seems a bit too taxi yellow – Olds used a softer yellow on many cars in the mid ’70s, my ’76 Olds Cutlass Supreme Brougham was a case in point. It had the quite popular “Buckskin” vinyl skull cap over it – the most common color over soft yellow.
Yeah, a butterscotch yellow would be more appropriate for a big car of this era. Save the sunburst yellow for your sports car.
I spotted this ’68 Ninety-Eight convertible a few weeks ago. The paint looks a bit faded, but is probably closer to a factory Olds’ yellow.
Exactly the color I had in mind as being correct for a mid ’70s Olds.
I believe this color was called “Saffron”.
“Bamboo” (code 50) was one name that Olds used for a pale yellow that was used on Ninety-Eights and Delta 88s.
My dad had a 1970 Ninety-Eight Luxury Sedan in that color, with a gold vinyl roof and gold brocade interior. At the time that shade of yellow seemed pretty popular to me, but as is usually the case it’s likely because we had one.
This shade seems a bit too taxi yellow – Olds used a softer yellow on many cars in the mid ’70s, my ’76 Olds Cutlass Supreme Brougham was a case in point.
I agree. There was a Cream Yellow that was popular on Oldsmobiles of that era but it was more pale than the color on this car.
In 1972, Oldsmobile offered a “Sunfire Yellow” on the Cutlass series, but it was not available on the full-size cars, according to the brochures. But the color of this car seems even brighter than the yellow Oldsmobile did offer on the 1972 Cutlasses.
Is this your Sunfire? If so, could be the same as this 98’s yellow. Hard to tell without them being right next to each other though (or this Cutlass might not be sporting original paint. But it is a ’72.)
I really like these especially in Regency form. A great way for a successful man to enjoy his luxury privately, not rubbing it in everyone’s face. I preferred it when people tried to conceal how well they were doing.
The thinking man’s Cadillac. Better priced, and in this era the interior materials were generally better quality in the Olds.
Today it’s easy to overlook the prestige that nameplate carried for decades. I know my father, who came of age in the 1950s, had the ambition as a young man to some day be able to afford an Olds Ninety-Eight.
Dad’s turning 80 this year. He now drives a (certified pre-owned) Mercedes S Class.
For a certain type of professional, a local bank president, politician or a senior clergyman, It was inadvisable to be flashy, but formality and presence were expected. The 98 Regency fit this bill to a tee. I wonder if part of the decline of this type of vehicle was due to the relative decline in esteem for this type of person.
Yes, a bank president indeed. My only ride in a Regency from this era was when I traveled with my dad on business in summer 1975. His job was with the Federal Reserve and he would make calls on member banks. The president of a bank in Kearney, NE took us to lunch at his country club in his. One of his managers drove the car, maybe due to his advancing years. A perfect black over gold 1974 Regency 4 door hardtop. Perhaps still the most impressive car I’ve been in.
The decline was in esteem for restraint and as far as I can tell, it happened in the go-go Gekkko 80s. Showing off your money, whether it be with a new 450 SEL or XJ6, the crocodile or pony on your Polo, the “designer” suit rather than Brooks, all were the trademarks of the yuppies who rose to power at that time. They eschewed the older, WASPy culture of restraint. It also reflects a gradual evolution of who you were being dependent upon your “social” status to who you were being dependent upon your wallet and how much brand name stuff you had. Discretion was out. Bling was in, as long as it was the “right” Bling, and it was no longer considered tacky to show off as long as you were showing off the “right” brand of stuff. Been that way ever since. In that changed world there is no room, really, for an Oldsmobile 98 or Electra. If you have cash you spring for the S Class to show that you’re a big deal but still have good taste because “it’s a Mercedes”. The closest thing is a Lexus 4 series and go figure it’s mostly bought by older rich people trying to keep a low profile.
Fair point Orrin, although I wonder how many people today actually pay cash for Benzes or anything else. That’s another sign of the times; modern culture is much more enthusiastic about financing. And bankruptcy is not so disgraceful as it once was, part of what I call the Purge of Shame.
I’d say the VW Phaeton was that sort of car – it wasn’t a prestige nameplate, and the styling was sober, but it was a big, comfortable, technologically advanced vehicle worthy of spending quite a bit of coin on. Almost nobody did so because of the VW badge, and because it wasn’t flashy enough to get noticed.
In an odd way, I almost wonder if the Hyundai Equus is the closest modern equivalent. Yes, they have large chrome wheels and a prominent grille just like everything else does today, but they don’t scream “LOOK AT MY MONEY” so loudly as would something like an S-class, 7-series, Escalade, etc.
My vote would be for the Chrysler 300. The 2011+ is less flashy and not as prestigious as a foreign car. But the smart money knows it has a great V6 or Hemi V8 that are a lot easier to maintain than a European engine.
I think there were some non US nameplates that fit this bill. In England, the higher end inline 6 Farina bodies like Wosely,(Buy Wisely, buy Wosely),or the earlier Rover P4/P5, in Sweden the Volvo 164E or later S90/960GLE and the French Pug 604. I may be off on the 604, it stayed mainly in France and didn’t share much styling with the 504/505, so may have created a different impression.
Peugeot 604 was sold in the States with the PRV V6, but it couldn’t hack German competition. I liked it but it was never numerous enough to be more than a curiosity. Another Lost French Opportunity; now, that category is owned by the insufferable “German Engineering” chauvinists.
The Audi A8, the only F-segment car with some discretion. I can’t come up with anything else in that segment. And a Volvo S80 for the E-segment.
The rear bumper is is just a bit out of shape at the driver’s side corner. A fairly fragile design – likely a contributing cause to the Fed’s interest in bumpers over the next several years.
The front bumper on the 1972 Olds Ninety-Eight was spring-mounted, and specifically designed to absorb low-speed impacts. I don’t know if it could withstand a 5-mph impact, as the front bumpers on all 1973 passenger cars were required to do by new federal standards. It was definitely stouter than the typical bumper, and Olds advertised that feature.
As memory serves, ’72 models were required to withstand 2.5 mph in front. Sort of a phase in to the 5 mph standard for the next year. The government should have stayed at 2.5 and not gone to 5 mph. IMHO if you keep driving into things at 5 mph you shouldn’t be driving!
There were no federal bumper requirements for the 1972 model year, but GM decided to equip the B- and C-body cars with the equivalent of 2.5 mph bumpers.
Those stupid 5mph bumpers actually worked once: While driving my ’81 Escort wearing borrowed shoes (with smooth outsole), my foot slipped off the brake when approaching a red ? & I rear-ended a VW Rabbit at low speed. We got out to inspect, saw no damage, & went our separate ways. I was livid about those shoes.
RE : 5 MPH bumpers :
In the late 1970’s I came home late and zipped into my driveway in my 1946 Chevy pickup truck , smacking into my 1929 ‘A’ Model Ford TuDor Sedan still going a good 10 + MPH although my foot was on the clutch ~
The spring steel original rear bumper on the Ford bounced my truck back down the (short) drive way and clear into the middle of the street before I knew what was happening .
Not more than scratches on either one , both had bad original chrome (Nickle on the Ford) bumpers so it was a wash .
-Nate
I’ve seen both the 1972 Cadillac DeVille and the 72 Oldsmobile 98, and while I find them both attractive cars in the GM stable, and while some elements may look very similar, they also both look very different from each other.
All that extra money got one got a little more engine in the Coupé deVille, though I don’t know how much practical difference 17in³ made. I grasped the appeal of these torquey barges after I punched the accelerator on my grandfather’s ’72 deVille. Of course he never would’ve let me drive it while he was alive.
I love these big Oldsmobiles, especially in convertible form. 1972 isn’t my very favorite year for them, but man is that interior nice! The dash of course is cheaper looking compared to a few years prior, but those seats look really luxurious.
A few years before this the feds mandated soft dashboards for crash protection. The handsome dash on the early MGB was covered with a thick soft covering that some MG fans called the Abingdon pillow. Dashes designed after this government mandate were simply going to use less wood and metal. Given that change is always expensive, in many cases the automakers had to spend more to give you less. At first glance, a plastic dash will appear cheaper. Over time Mercedes and Jaguar figured out how to make wood safer using complicated veneers sandwiched with other materials to not hurt anyone in a crash and the original 90 Lexus LS400 came up with a new upscale look, much copied.
When I was a teen I hated to see these old boats, they were everywhere and most of them were a faded green. After many years of not seeing them I admit that the absence has made my heart grow fonder of these. I would gladly knock down a wall in my home and extend my garage to have one.
My sentiments exactly. Didn’t give them a second look back in the day. But now, depending on they colour, they have a presence and style that is very appealing.
I used to see heavy metal rockers Saxon turn up at shows in a 4 door Regency 98 in the early 80s. The fuel bill must have had them in tears being Yorkshiremen!
Was its interior Denim and Leather?
LOL it was in brown(could it be leather as these were a range topping car?).The car was a similar colour to the feature car
Yeah but you can fit like 8 people in them….split that way, its not TOO bad. You know what they say: “Ass, gas or grass, no one rides for free”.
Here in the states, rockers usually roll in cargo vans, especially if youre actually IN a band.
Recently bought a ’75 98 Regency Sedan. It is striking how much it resembles a Cadillac–from a distance. Although I like how the ’75 integrates the square headlights, I really wish they had kept the fins this high for a few more years. Close up, it’s much easier to tell that it’s an Oldsmobile; those fender skirts and fins are certainly distinctively Olds and even carry over to the downsized ’77-’84 a bit. I’m a big hardtop fan as well. Most of the benefits of a convertible without the hassle.
The ’75 and I recently took a shakedown cruise to the Carolinas. Those regency seats sure are comfortable on long trips. It is powder blue, so it was very popular in Tar Heel country. One thing surprised me, how few people under 30ish realize that Olds and Buick also used to make “Cadillac” sized cars. Their point of reference is the last-one-standing Brougham and I guess they are too young to remember even the downsized RWD Electra and 98. So they see an especially big car and just assume “Cadillac”.
Orrin, congratulations on your new acquisition. I know you have had several of the 77-92 generation C bodies, lucky guy. I was wondering how the two generations compared in quietness, solidity, seat comfort? Also does the 455 feel better than the Buick 350 you had in your later Electra, or does the extra weight of the older model negate the advantage. GM tried to keep the downsized model from feeling like a downgrade, how do you feel they did?
Well, the critics of the ’71-’76 are right to the extent the older car is a lot more juddery, at least in 4 door hardtop form. You really have to slam the doors to close them and it will rattle over big bumps. The ’77 Buick is a lot tighter structurally which shows over bumps, the doors close much easier. They’re both quiet cars.
Leg room is about the same. My Buick has the base seats, so they’re less comfortable than the Regency upholstery. You can really drive 600 miles in the Olds and feel fine. There’s more room across in the older car. The dashboard is deeper.
I would say the 455 has a bit more pop than the 350. You’ve got 45 more horsepower but more importantly 350 lbs feet of torque at 2000 rpm as opposed to the Buick’s 275 at 1800. I feel like it’s got better pickup getting on the highway. Although, not strikingly so. It’s no race car. I think it also has less difficulty cruising at 75/80. The Buick will do it, but you can tell it prefers hanging out at 65.
The Olds (other than some rattles) has the better ride. It’s not nearly as floaty as I expected, it filters out bumps great of course, but overall feels very controlled. My Buick actually feels a bit waftier. Both have new shocks.
The Buick obviously handles a bit better, its 10 in shorter and 900 lbs lighter. But the Olds is not bad at all. It’s an extraordinarily easy car to drive, and as I said is isolated without feeling floaty. Somehow, almost no wind noise gets in despite it being a hardtop and 455 is smooth as hell on the highway. Both have great visibility though I do like the wraparound windshield on the Olds.
The real difference is in the feel of the two cars and part of it is materials. There are some quality touches on the older car that didn’t make it to the downsize…the Cadillac style pushbutton door handles, the bow headliner, metal headlight bezel, metal ashtrays, deep glove compartment, three point shoulder belts. The newer car is more like cars today, glued in headliner, more plastic, generic GM doorhandles. And it handles more like cars today. The Olds is just so wide and long.
It goes without saying mpg is better in the Buick! I like them both.
Thanks for all the interesting perspective. I am glad those loose pillow seats can still impress after all the years. Some scoff at the innovation, but how many of our wives made us get expensive, copycat mattresses. The velour must have been as durable as it was jaw dropping when new. I was also wondering if the ride on modern tires was less than designed. At the time you may remember, GM had a GM spec radial tire, that was identical no matter who manufactured it. There is a lot of talk in Jaguar circles, for example that the early Jaguar XJ6 lost some of it’s great ride handling compromise when not on it’s original Dunlops.
What Oldsmobile? All I can see is Paul’s F-100 in the first picture, I like Fords, I cannot lie!
I’ve always thought the early 70’s Oldsmobile Ninety Eight’s were far better looking than the Cadillac Deville’s of the same vintage, I can see why the Ninety Eight’s were selling very well by this period, the Ninety Eight’s of this era were like 80-90% of what Cadillac had to offer.
My Uncle had a new 74 or 75 Olds 98 Coupe…Burgundy paint with red cloth interior……That car rode nice and quiet….
Ok, now this one hits close to home. My mother drove a 1971 Olds Ninety-Eight, and as a young car nut, I knew that thing inside and out. So, to geek out on this one, here are a few details that I know were modified. The color is definitely not original: my guess is that the car started life in Bamboo, likely with a black vinyl top. Inside, the seats have been recovered, and the filigree at the top of the seat backs was covered over. That detail was one of the defining features of the posh LS, versus the more straightforward base model that my mother had (though it was still nice, even if the black vinyl seats got scorching hot in the Louisiana sun). Here is a picture of the interior from the ’72 brochure with the seat detail.
Here is the ’72 Olds color chart, with the Bamboo for the big cars.
Nice looking Oldsmobile though its headlights are in the same category as the taillights of that droopy butt Honda Accord next to the Volvo V40; a design oddity. Good choice removing the vinyl or cloth roof roof and is the roof’s color a deep Chocolate Brown?
Anyone notice the Cadillac floormats in the rear? My first car was a mint condition 1974 Pontiac Grand Ville hardtop coupe that I foolishly sold before starting college. I always will miss that car!
Plus you get the fine Olds 455 rocket.
Nineteen feet of sheet metal to have to keep track of in underground parking garages and other tight spots, is about three feet of sheet metal more than my limited attention span can handle. So I restrict myself to cars 16′ or shorter. But I must say, this 98’s back seat sure does look comfy. Lotsa leg room for a coupe; as well as a pull-down center armrest, which is always a plus in my books.
I like that the owner solved the vinyl roof problem but still kept the two-tone effect by painting the metal.
I was thinking the same thing…
Horrid, horrid color. Sad, ’cause otherwise I really like the car.
I dunno…on this particular car with the brown roof and cream interior, I think it works…for what the car is. It could be much worse…Ive see similar sleds all donked out and painted metal flake lime green….
I owned a ’72 Regency for 5 years and loved it. I agree with some of the comments here, though, that the front end styling is a little awkward. The ’71s are beautiful, and don’t have the stacked headlamps/parking lights that give the ’72 a bit of an alien eye-pod look. Even though I owned the Regency, if I got one of these early ’70s Olds again, it would be a Delta. I really like the sportier profile and finless rear styling with (literally) Delta shaped taillights. The cars themselves are almost the peak of the GM big car as far as I’m concerned…designed for interstate highway travel and oh so good at it!
Wow, very nice car there, Chris.
Thanks. It was a huge but wonderful car.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mistergreen/sets/72157611923626504
What a beaut, Chris!
Of course I am of the “Huge IS wonderful” school.
That was a very special car for Olds. They brought out the Regency as a limited addition in 1972 to celebrate their 75th anniversary. Only one color inside and out. I think you had a choice of black or off white vinyl roof but can’t recall. Only as a 4 door that year. Didn’t they even have gold plated keys with “Regency” on them? Vaguely remember the adds.
In ’73 the Regency became a regular production (top of the line) model available as a 2 or 4 door with more color choices.
You could order it in Gold or black. The keys were sterling and could be dropped in any mail box and would be returned to you via Tiffany Co. It also came with a dash mounted Tiffany time piece, and embroidered signature armrests.
A car that only has 2 doors yet room for 4…or damn near 6, yet no sporting pretensions is just preposterous to me. This was way before my time, so I guess that’s some of why I don’t get it, and still, this car is like the direct polar opposite of something like a Subaru STi, or Mitsu Evo which in concept have no reason to be sedans.
Chris Green’s 4 dr h/t seems a much more logical execution for this bodystyle. The proportions are just more pleasing that way.
Most 2 doors back in the day were common family cruisers or commuters, not sporty or ‘muscle cars’. It was easy for kids to hop in back sets of biggies. Buyers would get a 2 door so save $.
These cars were about the pinnacle of sleddom and by this time, GM was making cars that actually went where you pointed them and that weren’t dangerous going down steep grades. This was the last year where emissions didn’t really bite, and a 455, even with lower compression, was a real bull off the line. It was easy to burn rubber in them.
I remember driving around one on a weekend and it went through 100 liters of fuel in two days. Before or since have I ever seen a car that drank gas like that one. It had been a grampy wagon and was in beautiful condition and I got it for $200. It was practically worthless by 1988. Nobody wanted them, and they were too thirsty for taxis. I sold it to a punk band a friend of mine played in for $500.
I think the fins work well on this, given the vertical tailights that were a 98 trademark from the mid ’60s? right up to the end.
Also, it seems like there are a lot of throwback design cues from GM in the late ’60s/early ’70s. Its like they were trying to invent retro, but hadn’t quite figured out what to do with it.
The car pictured in the article is a near twin, except for the paint and roof, for my “uncle’s” (My dad’s cousin actually) 1972 98. It was their “last car”, they always had Olds cars, and went from a smaller one to the big Battle Cruiser, a bad gold with a black vinyl top and tan interior. My “aunt” always drove as my my “uncle” had been legally blind for years. Problem was, she had dementia due to hardening of the arteries and a bunch of mini strokes. Two days after my father died, they were on the way back from the funeral home and she drove up a freeway entrance ramp, hitting a Cadillac exiting, killing the driver instantly. My “uncle” died about two weeks later, from pneumonia and complications from broken legs and pelvis. My “Aunt” was barely injured and died about 10 years later in the nursing home she was put in after the wreck, as their daughter lived in Cal, and she couldn’t live alone. I saw the car and couldn’t believe anyone could have survived to even make it to the hospital, let alone walk away from the wreck, like my “aunt” did, nearly being killed by cars passing the wreck.
What a sweetie ~ it’d look better in a more subdued yellow like Alaska or Yukon Yellow , maybe even Saffron .
Conspicuous consumption has and always will be tacky and the hallmark of ugly people .
This was indeed a fine car ~ not what I’d ever buy but a bit of true Americana in the flesh so to speak .
I miss cars like this having traveled in them quite a bit when they were new .
I am not ashamed to say I really like the tail fins and think they make it look sharp .
I’m an MG Fanboi and apologist but the ‘ Abingdon Pillow ‘ is an insult just as that damned glove box less dashboard was .
-Nate
If you ever need to know why I like American cars, look no further.
If you ever need to know why Europe finds American cars hard to understand, look no further
One of the big problems with these old 70’s barges is that because of their sheer size, you really have to like the color because there is just so much of it.
Never liked these, especially the weird split-mount headlights that look like something Moe did to keep Curly from poking both his eyes.
Pretty much every big GM barge looked great in 1970, and then, the next year…they didn’t.
Finally, someone other than me that doesnt like the Olds separated headlights. I do agree that this particular one (and the taillights w/fin) does evoke the 1964 Cadillac, the main point of this article. Almost any ’70’s American car just lacks the elegance and detailing of the 1960’s. Part of it was safety requirements, but cost cutting is also visible.
I love the big coupes from that era and this one is especially nice.
A convertible of this same car would be the perfect car for the Grand Marshal of a Memorial Day Parade in some medium sized Midwestern city.
My favorite choice for the Olds 98 for 1964. the four door pillared “LS.” Search for images of it and you’ll see what I mean. It’s all about understated luxury!
The first year for Regency trim and it really meant something when first brought out. As with most top trim names, eventually was the ‘common’ model.
The tufted interior (Regency in Oldsmobile’s trim nomenclature) was a limited production (5000 units) in 1972. Demand must have been good enough to continue the trim in a new model. I think the Regency was the top trim for the Olds 98 until the end unless you consider the Oldsmobile Turing Sedan.
This car has the vinyl interior which I had on my 71 Buick. It looks like leather but is not quite the same, although it is easy to clean.
Just wanted to add that when bladed fenders replaced the little fins in the 1975 98, the Custom Cruiser wagon retained the fins.
I love these cars. My memory of being in one was when I was in elementary school, a friend’s Mom had one. She gave me a ride home in it several times. It was dark brown with the light tan vinyl interior. I thought the clock built into the back seat was so cool. At the time my Mom had a 1972 Toronado, and I remember thinking how much bigger the back seat was in the 98 vs. my Mom’s Toro.
I love cars like this and I know for a fact many of you are on The Brougham Society as well. I have always liked muscle cars but those were always so out of reach. Granted,I had a ’64 Impala,a ’72 El Camino(which was fast) and a ’70 Impala but it really wasn’t until I had watched The Seven Ups again years later I became a lover of big engine land barges. Now for something funny-I have had 2 2 door Grandvilles and the ’71 was not as gnarly as my ’73. I’m actually hoping to pick up a ’74 Olds 98 pretty soon if everything works out.
I dont think younger people realize that big two doors were considered “halo cars” from the 50s thru the 70s. They were featured in advertising and sold for more than four doors used. Most people would end up buying the four door for practicality but the coupe was the “cool” one. Then suddenly in the 80s that just collapsed. It seemed to coincide with the second wave of downsizing.
Why are there pull straps on the rear seat side panels?
Sorry GM fans, 1972 was not the best year of styling. The wide spaced apart rounded off squares with circles in them pointing in opposite directions..not pretty. Fixed in 74.
This is so strange.
Before I sat down to visit this site, I was out and about and ended up behind a remarkable 1972 Buick LeSabre in avocado. I had a chance to really get a look at it and notice things about it that I hadn’t before. Being a Chicago kid back then meant you spent a lot of time in these vehicles and I have a lot of memories of them, right up to the new 1977s.
Then you posted this.
There is a remarkable difference between the Buick and Oldsmobile. The dash, the front end, side, rear end – very different. Yet, both cars use the same body. As we all know, as Olds moved on, especially after 1977, the differences between a full size Buick and Oldsmobile were increasingly cosmetic.
Not in 1972.
The Oldsmobile definitely looks like the more expensive car. While I have never liked the odd headlight bezel design used that year, (it reminds me of looking into the eyes of a flounder), the overall appearance is richer – more Cadillac – than the Buick of the same year.
The Oldsmobile has a nice appeal, but then, do does the Buick. It is very cool how GM use to differentiate the division, while still using the same basic car.
> As we all know, as Olds moved on, especially after 1977, the differences between a full size Buick and Oldsmobile were increasingly cosmetic.
Actually, follow the successors to these 1972 models (Olds 98 and Buick Electra) and you’ll see while they at first become more and more alike, GM later sees the error of its badge-engineered ways and they later become even more differentiated than they were in 1972:
– 1971-76: completely different sheet sheetmetal and trim except roof/greenhouse. Inside, different dash, different door/seat trim, although the door panels from the armrest down are shared. Mechanically, GM’s big cars long ago went to shared frames and THM transmissions, but engines are still division-specific.
– 1977-84: Olds and Buick doors now shared. Fenders still different, but shared doors forces fenders to be more similar (i.e. no more Buick sweepspear). Inside, they still have as much differentiation as the previous generation, including different dashboards. 1980 facelift includes the return of fender skirts to Olds 98, but also the use of Olds V8s in both brands.
-1985-90: the downsized FWD models are when the 98 and Electra become most alike. Shared doors/different fenders arrangement continues, but overall shape of the two brands now looks more similar than ever. Inside, still different dashboards, but again they’re not as different from each other as in 77-84. Both brands have identical drivetrains, usually the Buick 3800 V6 and a four-speed automatic.
-1991-96: here’s where the process reverses and the 98 and Park Avenue become much more differentiated. For the first time since 1976, Olds and Buick use different doors as well as different fenders. Unlike in 1976, the door handles are different too. And for the first time in decades, the greenhouses are distinctively different, with the Ninety-Eight having uniquely-shaped side and rear windows and a thinner C pillar. Inside, separate dashboards and seat trim continue, but now the door panels are entirely different too, including armrests, rather than just the upper trim. Mechanicals continue to be mostly shared though, with NA or supercharged versions of the 3800 V6.
1995/97-onward: the Olds Aurora effectively replaces the 98 (overlapping for one year only), while the Park Ave enters its second generation. Both use variants of GM’s new ultra-stiff G body, but they now look nothing like each other, with the Aurora being much swoopier inside and out. Buick continued with the 3800 whilst Olds used a smaller version of Cadillac’s Northstar V8. I’m hard pressed to think of the last time Oldsmobile’s and Buick’s big sedans looked and felt this much different from each other. Certainly not since 1959.
Buick would replace the Park Avenue with the Lucerne, and Olds made a second-generation Aurora for a few years before the division shut down. These somehow didn’t seem as well differentiated to me than the cars they replaced – they still looked different but likely appealed to the same people, with the Olds becoming more traditional and the Buick slightly less so.
The Olds is actually 2″ longer than the Deville.
“I grasped the appeal of these torquey barges after I punched the accelerator on my grandfather’s ’72 deVille. Of course he never would’ve let me drive it while he was alive.”
My grandmother let me back her ’72 Calais out of the chicken house/garage and around to her back door–at 12 y.o.
Had a friend whose parents had a ‘68 98 Luxury Sedan. It was easily the equal of a Coupe de Ville of that era in luxury and comfort. Many “old money” types drove them.
At 365 horsepower the 455 was no slouch. Had factory dual exhaust, something that Cadillac didn’t offer.
My father had a 1970 with the 455 HO as a company car after the Cougar. I really suspect it was because the company probably had a connection to the owner who was the well know C. Arnholt Smith in San Diego who was also first owner of the San Diego Padres. My father was 44 at the time and after he left in 72 for a new job he negotiated a car allowance and then got a 73 911E Targa and after that a 74 M-B 450SL. Clearly not a big car guy at the time but it was a free company car so don’t quibble. At 17 I loved to drive that car when I could. Rode so nice and that 455 could really spin the tires. like the front better on the 70.
I´ve been reading about the various versions of different GM body-lines for years. To be honest, I´ve not really tried too hard to pin it down. But still, isn´t it pretty obvious that whatever signal or patterns there might be in the way different divisions used the bodies, there is a lot of noise too, by which I mean when the divisions “cheated” and tried to one-up their brand fellows (like this almost Cadillac Olds) or applied devalued names to the “wrong” sized body (e.g a fictional, made-up case: using the top end Pomona De Luxe nameplate on a mid-sized body with low-end trim). I get the idea GM divisions couldn´t keep internal or relative name-plate or body hierarchies straight for long. Further, the idea you could really distinguish Olds from Cadillac from Buick was impossible to sustain when they shared engines and the fundamentals of body architecture and also had to follow/create the same design trends. If Bucky-Belt-Fender-Loop Doodads were in-fashion then all the brands would get them. Otherwise Chuck from one of the divisions who was best friends with Chester in GM head office would gripe on the gold course.
By the the time GM learned manage brands using common technology it was all too late. Meanwhile overt at VAG, they successfully get people to believe Skodas and Audi are a heck of a lot different from VWs. The Skoda buyer thinks she or he get a cheaper car as good as a a VW, the VW buyer believes she or he has one up on the rubbish from Skoda and the Audi buyer can look down on the losers in SEATs.
I swept the ’85 Oldsmobile Nationals with this yellow ’77.