William Garrett shot this rather rare Cutlass Supreme convertible appropriately enough in Sunnyvale, CA. Why the loop-handle? Because the Cutlass’ door handles were embedded in the B-pillar, and GM wasn’t going to spend the money to retool that. And of course it also meant that the coupe’s shoulder belt anchors didn’t have to be relocated either. Convenient, but the visual result is a bit less than ideal.
Presumably the loop handle also made the structure a bit more solid, making the conversion by C&C easier.
That dash isn’t exactly visually ideal either.
The standard engine was the 160 hp 3.1 L V6, and the 210 hp 3.4 L DOHC V6 was optional. Do the quad exhaust tips indicate the 3.4? Are any of these DOHC 3.4’s still on the road? Given their notorious fragility, I rather suspect this one has the 3.1, with its beloved blattty exhaust.
Related reading:
Curbside Classic: 1993 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme – Rehabilitating The GM10 Cutlass
CCCCC Part 13: 1992 Cutlass Supreme – How The Mighty Have Fallen
The overall effect is a bit of a disappointment but maybe GM should have called it the “Cutlass Supreme Targa.:
I always thought that was just a roll bar, similar to the one on VW Golf cabriolets; it never occurred to me it was needed to hold the door handle.
Me too….
Being in the Olds Club of America, I see one or two of these every time our local chapter has a get-together.
I don’t know if this was designed to be a convertible from the get-go (I doubt it), more of a response to revived demand for convertibles after their demise in the 70s didn’t occur and Chrysler and others brought them back. Olds dealers wanted in on the party, most likely.
I would think that the hoop would add more rigidity than if it were not there, and some may like the added protection it offered, real or perceived.
I do recall how striking the small headlamps on these and other GM cars (Camaro, I believe) were when they came out. Not sure if light output was great, but often styling wins over function.
I turned 16 in 1995 and my first vehicle was an 87 F-150 and I remember thinking that 4 of the Olds lights could fit into the giant headlights on my brick of a truck with its huge square plastic lenses. I also thought it was just a roll bar and never noticed the door handles built into the loop. My next car was a 92 Grand Prix GTP and it also had the door handles way up high on the pillar but I never put it together till now about the Olds handles being mounted in the same place. Those exterior door handles on my Grand Prix always felt cheep and you had to “pop” them to get the door to unlatch. If you just pulled gently, they wouldn’t ever release the striker, had to be a quick jerk type of movement.
No, it was never designed to be a convertible in the first place, and it showed with the poor-fitting two-piece rear quarter windows that constantly needed adjustment. I believe it was Motor Trend, or Automobile magazine who incorrectly called the hoop a ‘roll bar’ in a road test, and received a letter from GM afterwards stating it had no structural capabilities of supporting the car’s weight, should it overturn. There, they also admitted they didn’t want to spend the money to reengineer the door handles to be below the belt line, citing the reason why it had to be there.
I thought the hoop was designed to emulate German cars like the VW Cabriolet and the Porsche Targa. I had no idea it was designed to signal GM shameful design.
Yes, this VW is a darn good looking car. Why is it that the Japanese and European cars from the 1980s on always look better than the domestic ones?
That VW looks like a squat box to me.
Nissan 300Z Convertible with hoop. Nissan trying to out GM at being GM.
Here is another car company foolishly using a hoop in their convertible.
I had a 1995 Cutlass Supreme convertable it was fully loaded Torch Red with white interior and white top. I loved that car deeply regret giving it back when the lease was up.
That sounds like a beautiful car. I remember when these came out and really enjoyed the styling. A friend had a 2 door hardtop in red with a white interior. I figured the ‘basket handle’ on the convertibles was to allow the use of the door handles and to provide roll-over protection. It was a bit jarring visually, however.
I have taken these for granted for my whole life, but as they get more rare (although I still see more of these than, say, either generation of Aurora or any modern Toronado, as well as the Sebring competitor/successor), thinking about it now it’s pretty crazy that there was a series production W Body convertible, since it was such a humdrum midsize sedan platform. That 3.4, though…
I’m pretty sure the 3.4 TDC had callouts on the front fenders. Maybe all convertibles had the sportier looking exhaust.
This is one of the few convertibles that looks better with the top up.
The last one I came across was a few years ago when I saw a ’91 Cutlass Supreme convertible parked along a community yard sale route (strategically, it had for-sale signs on the windows… I wonder if/when it was sold).
You mean they weren’t mimicking the Shelby GT convertibles with a roll bar doubling as a surf board mount? It was just GM being cheap? Naw
Interesting note about the dash, Paul, is that it was a design refresh (improvement?) over the previous one, which had a more 80s boxy look about it. This dash, I believe, was meant to coordinate its look with the new Aurora.
As to the loop, I always figured they were structural, never really noticing the door handle issue. It’s hard to cut the roof off a car never designed to be without one without making the chassis a willowy mess.
Really like these. Holding my thumb over the hoop in the picture, the car does look a bit better, but even with the hoop, it’s an attractive car. Was really excited that a Cutlass convertible had returned to Oldsmobile showrooms. If the VW Cabrio gets a free pass for the hoop thing, there is zero reason the Cutlass shouldn’t, either.
*shouldn’t also*
I am blessed to have two of them,the red is a 94and the green one is a 95
I don’t even remember them at all. I’m drawing a blank. Maybe it was a defense mechanism, I don’t know. Now I am biased, I’m not big on Olds, or targas, I mean I do like Porsches, especially lets say, vintage now 911s, but even they I don’t like in Targa mode.
I like that basket handle.
Here’s my 92… and I’ve got another 3.1 I just rebuilt this past summer for her. Hopefully I’ll be getting around to installing it sometime early this spring. I’m 27 years old now and I never plan to part with it, especially after I replace the original 3.1 shouldn’t have many if any problems with it and the car will stand the tests of time with me for the rest of my life 🙂