A 40 year old station wagon still at work is a sight that will cheer most readers of this site, and this 1977-78 Chevrolet is as good as example as one is likely to find. Found just north of Red Hook, Brooklyn, where several years ago William Stopford spotted classic Fords and a New York icon Checker Marathon, this Chevy was in the process of being loaded with cargo by a young father and his two little children, doing its job four decades after it rolled off the assembly line. Identifiable as a 1977-78 by its grille, it has lost the nameplates that would identify it as a Caprice or an Impala, but after this many years, the difference really does not matter any more.
The owner, named Chris, was very friendly when I interrupted him loading his wagon and explained that he loves it and intends to keep it as long as possible, although his wife wants to get rid of it. Having my own history with a similar Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser, identical aside from having an Olds 307 instead of a Chevy 305 or 350, an Olds front clip, and an Olds dashboard, I know exactly how he feels about his wagon and hope that he holds on to it longer than I did mine.
This encounter occurred entirely by chance, because I had stopped and parked on the other side of the street to visit the Union Garage motorcycle gear shop, visible in this photo with three bright lights and a large eagle logo over its front door. It was two good experiences at once in one of my occasional visits to New York.
COAL: 1986 Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser
CC Global: Swedish B-Body Team — GM Full Size Wagons in Stockholm
CC Outtake: Classic Volvo at Work
It’s an Impala judging by the side lights and front end.
Clearly a ‘77 Impala…
Grille and wheel covers are 77-78 Impala
Grille is ’77 only; ’78 has horizontal bars and the bowtie emblem above the grille.
Open rear door also identifies it as an Impala, with the large woodgrain insert. Caprices has much less woodgrain and a large grab handle there. Bel Airs (Canada only) were like the Impala but without the woodgrain insert.
Caprices also got wider chrome rocker panel moldings with black paint dividing it into two sections.
I can’t believe I remember this stuff but this is from when I was a pre-teen and probably at my most avid car-spotting abilities.
Yes, it’ s an Impala, this generation won the Motor Trend Car of the Year in 1977 when they debuted. As a young 7th grade MT subscriber, I was mortified at the downsized cars, they just didn’t look right. Thank god my father had his 74 Caprice land yacht…
Cars needed to get better gas mileage. If GM held on to the boats, they would have went bankrupt with 1979 Oil Crisis. Styling isn’t the be all, end all. One reason US makes declined, was relying too much on styling.
The Caprice from this period had wrap-around front turn signal lenses and a different grille.
I really liked seeing the 1977 GM downsized models. They looked so new and fresh compared to the “bloatmobiles” of the early 1970s.
You mean the sidemarkers. The Caprice’s turn signals—clear all the way from ’77 through ’90, as a matter of fact—were in the front bumper, and visible only from the front. The sidemarkers wrapped around the corner of the front fender from the outboard edge of the headlamp bezel on the Caprice. The ’77-’79 Impala had the turn signals above the bumper, directly below the headlamps and also visible only from the front, and the front sidemarkers—as seen in this article’s pic—were completely separate with no wraparound.
I thought these cars were quite nice when they came on the market. My favorite versions were the 2-door with the unique rear window and the wagon. They were a huge improvement over the cars they replaced.
I was never a fan of the GM clamshell wagons. I was glad when GM switched to a conventional 2-way tailgate.
I remember the massive ad campaign GM had for the new Impala/Caprice Classic. They were simply known as “The New Chevrolet.”
https://youtu.be/I-bSB4xSNCg
Even 3 years later (after the sheet metal was revised), the 1980 model was still called “The New Chevrolet” throughout magazine ads; here’s an example:
http://www.ecrater.com/p/24838035/vintage-1980-chevrolet-magazine-advertising
Just found on YouTube the first ad I saw in 1976 for The New Chevrolet, introducing the “That’s More Like It” jingle:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsN6JgZHWBs
That’s the dinky li’l short version. The full-boogie version is here.
Your link doesn’t work
Let’s try that again: Here.
“The New Chevrolet” tagline is a relic from the period starting in 1960 when the marque names were sometimes meant to signify only the full-size models rather than the newfangled “compact”, “intermediate”, or various specialty cars like the Mustang or Corvette. For example, full-line Ford advertising circa 1963 would list the cars Ford made as “Falcon – Fairlane – Ford – Thunderbird”, with “Ford” in that context meaning the big, full-size Fords, you know, the *real* Fords which is how they were apparently viewed at the time. It was the same thing over at Chevy – in 1976 I was at a dealer and saw the brochures on the wall for “1976 Nova”, “1976 Monte Carlo” etc., and one booklet called “1976 Chevrolet”. I assumed the last one was a full-line brochure, but it was actually just the Caprice and Impala – the “real” Chevrolets, the full-size ones. So “The New Chevrolet” meant “the new full-size Chevrolet”.
The last time I remember seeing a marque name used this way was in the 1981 deluxe Pontiac full-line brochure. In the back were specs for “1981 LeMans”, “1981 Phoenix” etc., and for the Catalina and Bonneville, “1981 Pontiac”. I’m guessing an old-timer at Pontiac prepared that; for people my age (teenager), the Catalina was just another Pontiac, not the “real” one.
Calling the full size lines the brand make really throws younger car fans for a loop. Some will call all big Chevys from 50’s/60’s, Impalas, and go “what’s a Biscayne?”
Yup – Impala.
My father’s employer picked one just like this up cheap and used as part of his fleet of B-body wagons. It was so basic it had a vinyl interior, V8, and AC – that was pretty much it. It stood out because so much of the rest of the fleet (all being purchased used) were nicely optioned cars with power seats, windows, even a few cassette players.
I’d love to have a basic Impala wagon with 350 V8, AC, and HD suspension as the only options. It would be tough enough to run for decades and decades.
@principaldan: I’d love to have a basic Impala wagon with 350 V8, AC, and HD suspension as the only options. It would be tough enough to run for decades and decades.
You are aboslutely correct. Mine was hd suspension 350/350 and I used it to support my industrial arts program with a daily 100 mile commute. Sometimes with a 16 foot trailer loaded with construction materials.
I dumped the car with it’s 13mpg. Should have dumped the commute instead. When I moved to a local school from the adaptive behavior center it was actually a pay raise.
Shoulda, coulda, woulda. It looked exactly like the one in the picture down to the exact color. 77 impala. No second guesses. I would have been stuck in the rainy pasture last week if I was still driving it. The 4runner gets better mileage as well. You can’t go back.
I am classic cars collector. 2 years ago I bought All original 77 Pontiac Bonneville Landau Coupe (base not brougham) brown exterior with cream color landau top and beige cloth interior 350 4B, tilt steering, power windows, factory AC, factory AMFM radio has 8K original miles with all documentation and manuals. I paid 11K for it. beautiful GM B body!
Nice find. I had a couple of those wagons, both Caprice’s. Great cars. Funny thing- both were sold because of people asking to buy them. It was a thin market for those cars, but there were also darned few wagons out there.
Fond memories…We had a ’78 Caprice Classic Wagon (burgundy, with burgundy vinyl seats and woodgrain trim)…my Father bought new at Shearer Chevrolet in South Burlington, VT, after looking at the new, smaller sized ’79 Ford LTD wagons which had just come out (funny to think that these were once new models now)…not sure what turned him off, but he decided to go with Chevrolet…he bought in the Fall of ’78 so I guess he got one of the leftover ’78’s, but it was pretty fancy, and the only car I remember him actually buying that was in the showroom (and he was a frequent new car buyer back then). It had the 305, probably the trailer towing package (we still had our poptop camper and since the ’73 Country Sedan that it replaced had it, he would have made sure that the Caprice also had it)…first car we had with power windows (our Country Sedan had power locks), A/C, AM/FM stereo (no tape), and also 6 passenger (my Father really liked the extra space under the floor for storing things when camping, and we didn’t need the extra seating capacity). It had some sort of storage on one side in the back opposite the side containing the spare tire/jack/tools, and the common at the time vacuum gauge (the Caprice instrument panel had several circular gauges instead of the strip speedometer that the Impala used…in fact this same panel ended up in the ’86 Pontiac Parisian). My Dad was a fan of the Ford style tailgate (didn’t like the GM clamshell which is big reason we owned the ’73 Country Sedan rather than a GM car. Funny thing, for some reason I don’t think he ever shopped any of the Mopar wagons (we never owned one) even though they would have satisfied his tailgate preference.
It was a good car…I remember driving it to Pennsylvania twice (without parents) to pick up my Grandparents to take them back to mine and my sister’s college graduation, guess my Grandfather had stopped driving distances by then, though we stopped at a nice hilltop hotel in New York that he remembered from previous trip (when I travelled with my Father we always drove straight through and wouldn’t have stayed overnight..I hadn’t quite started my first “professional” job so I had the free time to shuttle them back and forth)…I also seem to recall borrowing it to transport a cot and some other of my belongings to my first apartment…though I somehow fit a dresser and other furniture into my Datsun 710, the wagon was obviously a much easier hauler.
They kept the Caprice until sometime in mid ’84, it was their only air conditioned car when they moved down to Texas, (my Dad had a newer Dodge Omni but he bought it in Vermont with no AC) so it was pretty heavily used to avoid the heat. My Dad was showing his Aunt and Uncle around Fredericksburg and they had an accident, for some reason my Dad didn’t get the Chevy fixed, instead trading it on a much smaller car (and likely the worst car my Father owned, a ’84 Pontiac Sunbird…it would be a while after that until he was to buy another GM car..though the last car he bought, and the car my Mother currently drives is also GM).
Having experienced both when new, it is not hard to see how your father would have preferred the Chevy. The 79 LTD did not give the feeling of solid substance that the earlier version had, and that the 77+ Chevy did. I remember driving a 79 LTD shortly after they were introduced. I was really, really disappointed by how cheap and thin it felt compared to the Fords I had become used to.
I never had the opportunity to drive a pre-Panther LTD wagon, but my father once owned a Grand Torino Squire and then a ’77 Cougar Colony Park (I know – it really was just a fancy Grand Torino). The ’79 Grand Marquis Colony Park he had seemed really nice in comparison to the prior mentioned wagons. The only thing I found strange was the seating position height. The height made me feel like I was in a goldfish bowl.
In the early 80s I had a summer job at a small (and dying) wholesale auto parts distributor. There were two salesmen who drove around to small town garages, dealerships and auto parts shops to keep them in parts. Each of those guys drove an identical 77 or 78 Impala wagon – painted that light silver-blue color with blue interior.
Those wagons were getting old and had serious miles on them (I have forgotten how much but it really stood out at the time). I can never look at a Chevy wagon of this vintage without remembering my summer there filling orders for Les and Wayne. GM really nailed it with these wagons.
I see it has the most common feature of pre 90s cars, a missing wheel cover. My immediate and extended family has many Impala and Caprices of this generation but no wagons. Great cars.
Oops make that “family has” a had
“…it has lost the nameplates that would identify it as a Caprice or an Impala, but after this many years, the difference really does not matter any more.”
On this site? With all the hardcore carspotters who post here? You’re kidding, right? And yes, it’s a ’77 Impala.
Always liked these. GM did a fine job of repackaging their full-sizers into a more manageable size, while still retaining all the room of the former beasts, plus better seating and the wagons could still carry a 4 x 8 sheet of plywood too. This has to be an Impala as there is not enough brightwork for it to be a fancier Caprice.
In comparison, the Ford Panther wagons were ugly boxes on wheels. The GM full-size wagons still had plenty of style.
It didn’t really have all the room of the ’71-76 models. The cargo area in the wagons was considerably smaller (as the official figures acknowledged), and the third row seat when so equipped now faced backward instead of forward and had less legroom. Even in the first and second rows, though legroom and headroom were slightly up, hip and shoulder room were noticeably tighter. The edges of the rear (2nd row) seat were almost unusable due to intrusion from the wheelwell, the shortening of the edge of the seat cushion to make sliding in through the narrower doors easier, the seat belt protruding about 6″ from the edge of the seat, intrusion from the ladder frame edge rails, and the tumblehome of the roof and pillars. The center floor hump was bigger than in the ’76s too. Sitting three across in a ’77 B-body wagon was much tighter than in a ’76 – I know, I carpooled in both.
As other have mentioned, most certainly a 77 Impala. If the wagon was an original N.Y vehicle I might have had some input into the assembly.
I’m going back 40 + years. As I recall every 5th “B” vehicle was a wagon. I was part of the pit crew at that time. We loved wagons because the gas tank had already been installed before body drop. All we needed to do was the gauge ground wire, and slide the rubber hoses onto the steel fuel lines. If we found ourselves falling behind the wagons caught us up.
For the guys up top, it was a whole different story. Hood, and fender install was pretty well the same as the sedan or coupe. However, fender, and hood fit was a nightmare. The Engineers had the guys leaving the rad support bolts loose, so the hood fitters could pry (or swing as we called it) the front clip. Almost always to the left. One guy leaned on the pry bar, while his partner tightened the rad support bolts. Certainly a back breaking job, we were practising “job rotation” 25 years before it became the buzz word.
Then there was Jack install that involved dropping the tail gate and laying on your back with a plastic wing nut. I shudder to think how many of those babies went out the door with that wing nut cross threaded.
We ran “B” Chev “B” Canadian Pontiac, and “B” American Pontiac from 1976 right up to the 85 model, till late 84. Lots of O.T. As an hourly worker those cars kept me in a job and helped me pay for my first house.
Very rare, but I still see the odd old B still on the road. I will always look at one with nostalgia .
Cool. So you most likely helped build my dad’s 1977 Parisienne!
Sounds like you are describing work at the Oshawa plant, yes? If so, you probably helped build my folks’ ’84 Caprice and maybe their ’78, too. I recall seeing a YouTube vid of a Canadian TV news piece from 1984 about the end of full-size car production there, but I can’t find it at the moment.
Your description of assembly—bolts left loose so panels could be pried and shoved into what passed for alignment; zero heed paid to the injury guaranteed to result from a thoughtlessly-specified job, etc—stands in very stark contrast to what I saw at Windsor nine years ago.
I remember seeing that clip too. All of the Oshawa built GM cars we have owned over the years were very well built and held up fine. Despite the practices of the plant, at our dealership, the head body guy claimed Oshawa cars had the best quality of all the GM plants, while Ste. Therese had the worst. I guess it’s all relative to the other stuff GM was pumping out at the time.
My impression was that the Oshawa plant did the best they could, but that the ’84 was a much less sturdy car (by design and specification) than the ’78, though both cars were very similarly configured. Everything felt, sounded, and seemed cheaper, lighter-weight, tinnier, cruder, and cheaper on the ’84: the glovebox, the doors, the floors, the windows, the controls, everything. And the THM-200R4 trans in the ’84 was repeatedly problematic and gave poor shift quality even when it was working, where the THM-350 in the ’78 had been completely trouble-free. And the R4 A/C compressor in the ’84 was noisy and leak-prone where the A6 in the ’78 had done its job without complaint or leak. And on and on and on.
We had an 84 Parisienne. It was built in Oshawa as well. That was daily driven until 1998 and it was one of the most reliable vehicles anyone in my immediate family has owned. The only issue of any significance it had was the Hydro Boost brake booster leaked on it when it was still under warranty. GM fixed it without issue. Mind you it was a very bare-bones with literally almost no options. Aftermarket cruise control and a radio were added afterward. Being a Canadian car it had minimal emissions controls and a mechanical Quadrajet. That car gave over 300,000 kilometers of reliable service. The body held up really well too but Rust Check helped.
I agree with you but the cars built from 1980 onwards or significantly lightened. However these cars especially with the overdrive Transmissions got significantly better gas mileage. I remember some family members complaining about the crank windows. I’m 1980 they went to a tape drive mechanism to save weight but they cranked backwards from other cars. The doors were much lighter on our 84 than our old 78 Olds. The 78 felt more solid and heavy while the 80s cars felt lighter but also more agile IMO.
Are you sure your 84 had a TH2004R? Ours was a TH700R4 as were most Chevrolet powered cars from this vintage. Later 305 cars used the TH2004Rs. Our TH700R4 was trouble free and behaved well. Our Oshawa cars were more solid than the Arlington built b-bodies I also owned. And i agree the R4 compressors were crap.
Yup, those stupid plastic-tape window lifts that felt like they were about to fall apart with each of the approximately 57 turns (the wrong direction) from fully open to fully closed or vice versa, until the tape broke (again). Lighter weight I’m sure was the advertised reason for the change—along with dumb claims of resultant better fuel economy. The real reason was lower production cost. The American auto industry did exactly the same thing with halogen sealed beam headlamps: rather than keeping the wattage the same and using the efficacy increase (more lumens per watt) to give the driver more and better seeing light, they reduced the wattage to the minimum that would allow a legally acceptable beam. The small rectangular sealed beam used on the Caprice, for example, had a 60-watt low beam filament on the plain tungsten version, but a 35-watt low beam filament on the halogen version. They claimed this was to help reduce fuel consumption, which is risible given the mix of vehicles the US automakers were selling in the ’78-’85 halogen sealed beam phase-in period. The real reason was cheaper, lighter-duty wiring and switches (which did not stop GM charging Caprice buyers extra money for optional halogen sealed beams through ’84). This kind of stupid crapola can be iterated again and again and again. Windows, headlamps, okeh; also bumpers and just any number of other components and systems.
The ’78 was a 305/2bbl. The ’84 was a 305/4bbl (E4ME feedback with 1-wire O2 sensor, because US emissions—’84 was the last year there was a difference from Canadian emission specs). You are probably right about the trans in the ’84 Caprice being a 700R4. It took the dealer many tries to fix the shifts, which were unacceptably harsh and abrupt—very much more so than the notoriously, ah, businesslike shifts of the automatics Mercedes used in the ’60s-’80s. Even after the dealer finally got the transmission to stop trying to kick us in the spine, its shifts were clumsy and sloppy (same complaint on my subsequent ex-police ’91 Crapiece) and it made an assortment of unsettling noises. Nothing at all like the pleasantly efficient, unobtrusive shifts of the ’78’s TH-350 and its melodious 1st-gear whine, which I really missed in the ’84.
GM managed to sell those R4 compressors to a whole lot of other car companies. I guess its short depth was attractive, but man, what a pathetic piece of engineering. The A6 was enormous, but almost as bulletproof as the Chrysler V2/RV2 without that paintshaker’s vibration issues.
My bias against hydroboost might be irrational, but I’ve not found a reason to reconsider it.
I think many of these changes can be attributed to CAFE and had the happy side effect of costing less besides. Every ounce of every system they could cut out would add for to that necessary incremental boost in mileage. This was most crucial with the profitable big cars.
Interesting stuff about the lights. I appreciate when you share your expertise. I agree much of the changed to the B-bodies in the 1980’s was for cost savings, but they did actually reduce the weight of the cars significantly in 1980. All those little changes did make a difference in curb weight, but some were poor changes like the tape drive windows. They also started using the 7.5″ rearends pretty much on all sedans and they were terrible. At least the wagons and police cars stuck with 8.5″ rears.
GM really started this crap in the late 70’s, with stuff like the TH200 transmission. It was supposed to be for fuel economy, but it was under engineered from day 1. Then there was the issue with the cams metallurgy that started around this time too. Overall though, I still think these B-bodies were great cars, and certainly better than the other “stuff” GM was pumping out at the time. I’d love to get another one day.
The Canadian Emissions didn’t catch up to 1988 IIRC. I know my ’85, and 86’s I had were still M4MC Q-Jets and had no ECM’s, but my ’88 had an E4MC.
Oops, right you are, ’88 was the first year Canadian emissions standards were commonised with (i.e., brought up to the same level of stringency as) the American ones. I misremembered because ’85 was the year Volvo and some other makers started selling only US-emissions-compliant vehicles in Canada.
As I recall, the last “B” to come through my group was a blue 4 door Impala.
We had just came of a brutal strike. The strike of 84 was the catalyst that precipitated our divorce from the UAW, and the creation of the now defunct CAW.
If anyone is interested check out “The Final Offer” on you tube, or whatever. That was filmed on the “A” side . The documentary was very well done, for its time.
The last “B” off the line was scheduled for mid morning day shift. However with the demolition crew, running a few weeks behind and literally gutting the plant behind us, GM let the line run, and afternoon shift built out.
The media was all gathered the following day to witness the end of an era going back to late 1954. As it turned out the end of line flat top was empty. The Blue Impala was on its way to Ohio.
Mangement grabbed a Blue 85 Caprice out of the OK area, and backed it up the line. All the power feeds had been cut to the flat tops. That Caprice did not roll down the line. It was driven !
Sorry to tell you this folks . The whole” last car” thing was staged .
Nice car. I always liked the b-bodys. They were official imported to europe back then, but only as Caprice. Not that they were big sellers over here, when I was a child you once in a while saw one of these down on the streets. And everyday in tv;-) I would say, for people in my age these were the epitome of a american automobile. Now they are very scarce here, I haven´t seen one for years.
Don’t be so sure about that “only as Caprice” idea. Here are some European-specification Oldsmobile and Cadillac B-bodies (courtesy Oliver Twist). I don’t have pics of export-spec Buick or Pontiac B-bodies, but I would not be surprised to learn they exist.
Don’t be so sure about that “only as Caprice” idea. Here are some European-specification Oldsmobile and Cadillac B-bodies (courtesy Oliver Twist). I don’t have pics of export-spec Buick or Pontiac B-bodies, but I would not be surprised to learn they exist(ed?).
That was meant in terms of Chevy. I thought that the Impala wasn´t avaiable here. I´ve probably expressed that unclear. I did know about the Oldsmobile, but not about the others. So thanks for educating me.
Daniel’s right. I have never seen the export version of Buick LeSabre (prior to 1992) and Pontiac Bonnesville/Parisienne.
Buick LeSabre had three different taillamp designs with amber turn signal indicators from 1977 to 1980: stacked design from 1977 to 1979, side with horizontial bar in the middle for 1979 only, and new ribbed (perhaps for pleasure) design for 1980 only. On the ribbed taillamp, the red colour had overtaken the amber turn signal indicator for 1981 to 1983.
A couple more things: Buick wanted to differentiate the LeSabre T-Type by adding the amber turn signal indicators from 1987 to 1989 for the domestic market. For its seventh generation, LeSabre finally got its turn at export market, and it was one of most popular GM North American vehicles in Europe.
Despite the fact that LeSabre had amber turn signal indicators for the domestic market, it was never exported to Europe while Chevrolet and Oldsmobile had least-common-denominator red taillamps for the domestic market and export version with separate amber turn signal indicators. Oldsmobile Delta 88 gained the amber turn signal indicators for 1984-1985.
I came across the export version of Oldsmobile Delta 88 that looked very similar to the 1984 domestic version, but they’re different design. Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/nielsautos/15163383740/in/photostream/
Here’s a Pontiac Bonneville with its first registration in the Netherlands, that’s on January 26, 1978.
Most likely it was sold by Hessing De Bilt back then, a privately owned Dutch company that imported pretty much all US brands (as in new cars) for many, many years at a stretch.
I see no amber in the taillight units, though. They could be replaced by US units of course, somewhere in the past 40 years…
Here’s the sales ad: https://www.autowereld.nl/pontiac/bonneville/6-6-bn-69-24471659/details.html
The export versions usually have the flagpole external rear view mirrors because the American version is fixed to the door and does not yield upon impact with pedestrians or other vehicles without damage or injury. The design is similar to one on Jeep Grand Wagoneer. This Pontiac has ‘stab-in-the-thigh‘ fixed mirrors, which are illegal in Europe.
Of course, there are many private enterprises in Europe that specialise in the importation of North American vehicles not officially imported by the manufacturers. Dodge Ram trucks are one example.
I have Caprice originally sold new at Switzerland and it had the tail lights with amber sides for turn signals. I hate that modification and got the original taillights right away. When rules get worst, I give up of red turn signal and started to use yellow LED bulb which turns red light in correct amber light. There is video: http://youtu.be/xHFoaBhEV3A
After several years I was able to buy switchback LED light with white/yellow combination, where yellow is actually stronger then white. So hopefully my complete tail lights will shine red again, only corners will remain amber when activated. It’s way too cold now to play with the car but will get it fitted in 2 months, look forward to see the results.
In my opinion GM made very poor job preparing the cars for EU market legislation, especially the tail lights. Specifically on Caprice, the car seems narrower with the corner taillights switched off in the night which can be even dangerous. If they at least put it in the middle, it won’t look so bad. But understand the budget was tight for such a small market as the Europe has represented.
Lukas,
In my opinion GM made very poor job preparing the cars for EU market legislation, especially the tail lights. Specifically on Caprice, the car seems narrower with the corner taillights switched off in the night which can be even dangerous. If they at least put it in the middle, it won’t look so bad. But understand the budget was tight for such a small market as the Europe has represented.
In fact, GM had prepared many of its North American vehicles for the export market so its budget wasn’t that small. During the late 1970s and 1980s, GM contracted the third party specialist in Ohio to modify the vehicles for ECE regulations.
It has nothing to do whether GM did a ‘poor job’ with taillamps. It has to do with what ECE regulations permit and don’t. Look at Mercedes-Benz S-Class (W116, W123, W126, and so forth) as well as Audi (B3, B4, C4, etc.) and BMW (E21, E23, E24, E30, and so forth) from the 1970s and 1980s. They don’t have what you called the corner night illumination due to the amber turn signal indicators at corner. I am not seeing your point (no pun intended) about them being ‘dangerous’ when the headlamps did the decent job of illuminating the whole rear end of vehicles in front of you, anyway.
It’s really pity that you choose the aesthetics of your vehicle over the safety of yourself and others. Yellow/amber is there to communicate with other drivers of your intention to change the directions. Same with the yellow in the traffic lamps, letting you know that red light is coming up. Europeans know it since the 1950s and Australians since 1964. Even US NHTSA has admitted the merit in its studies a couple of years ago, but the 1972 law is making things more cumbersome for NHTSA.
Oy vey. His objection to the export Caprice rear lamp configuration was just as spurious and baseless in 2016 as it is today, and if optimal safety performance is his goal he’s moving a whole lot further away from it with those unsafe, illegal “switchback LED” bulb-shaped trinkets he’s playing with now. Here’s hoping he’s perceptive enough to quickly see why white LEDs behind red lenses are not OK. Really, if the imaginary “problem” of inadequate perceptibility of the car’s width is keeping him awake at night, the answer is very simple: make sure the car’s rear sidemarker lights are working.
G
I hope he stands firm on keeping his Impala wagon. A cousin of mine didn’t do the same with his wagon…though it was smaller. A blue 1965 Dodge Dart 270 with the 273 c.i. V8 (which I helped rebuild, then converted to Chrysler’s Electronic Ignition from the 1970s) and TorqueFlite, he had inherited it from his father who had inhertied it from his father-in-law. It was useful, nimble around town, and reliable.
But his wife had other ideas and now they drive boring, dime-a-dozen grey BMWs.
This does cheer me, and reminds me of a similar sight I came upon about two years ago. I noticed this Caprice wagon at a marina parking lot, and pulled in and took a few pictures. The owner showed up at that point, and pulled his boat out of the river with the Caprice. Definitely a hard-working Classic.
Great find! I often lament about my old B-body wagons. While they were really out of style when I had them they were very practical and great long distance runners. I used mine for hauling all the time because I didn’t have a truck then. It hauled trailers, 4 x8 sheets of building material, firewood, and what ever else I could stuff into it’s large cargo hold. It was often like a game of Tetris to see how much I could stuff into the cargo area,
These were great cars, and I really liked them. My only complaint was the lack of power from the 5.0L models. The 305s were just okay, while the 307’s were barely tolerable. The 350 cars were good, but with no overdrive they were hard on gas and hard to find in this area.
I would say GM B-bodies are quite common cars in area of Germany and surroundings countries. Not as cheap as used to and not many are used as daily transportation any more. But this black wagon with warmed 305 from 79 Monte Carlo is daily driver for many years. Prior that my friends ride was 79 Caprice sedan. He made me to purchase my 87 Caprice 10 years ago, although last 7 years it’s just my weekend ride.
These are sweet rides. I love to drive it on hot day with AC on, windows closed enjoying the looks from others in modern cars with non functional AC 🙂
I always have a soft spot for station wagons because I grew up with them. My Dad bought his first one in 1964 and drove then for the next forty years. All of his were two row, intermediate models. Nowadays even the downsized GM big cars seem just that, too big. My ’96 Explorer seems just the right size, especially compared to my F150 long bed.Though I would love to have one of those big Mercury Colony Park wagons of the 1970s.
I love these. I found this Oldsmobile B-body wagon in a Boston suburb a couple of days ago and decided on a whim to take pictures. The Reverse-CC Effect strikes again!
Friend in Norway has one. This is it- his fishing rig. It’s a ’88, bought in 2010, still has it. Shares garage space with 2 Corvettes and a Jeep (XJ) Cherokee.
A teacher in middle school had a Parisienne, which our whole class ( small class obviously) rode in once when we went on a field trip.
This was the car of my childhood – tan vinyl, faded maroon, same grille, 8-track player. Loved it.
There is a 86-90 Caprice Classic wagon that lives in Laurel MD. I have seen it many times on the roads there(197 and 198) and in the parking lot of my favorite thrift store.
There is also a 86-89 Lesabre Estate wagon that I see all the time going from Laurel MD to Bowie MD. At first I thought somebody was customizing their Buick Electra Estate wagon with Lesabre badges but lo and behold there really was a 86-89 Lesabre estate wagon.
“… the difference [Caprice/Impala] really does not matter any more.”
It is an Impala wagon. But if it was a 60’s car, for collectors, the difference would matter. 1977-90 versions are mainly now called “Chevy B body”.
Impala name dropped for ’86, for base Caprice. At first, was hard to accept seeing once top of the line Chevy as taxi/cop car, but then name became synonymous with ‘tough police car’ with 1991-96 era. Same generation Impala SS became the top dog, for a time.
I saw an ’80 Pontiac LeMans Safari (wagon) parked at Wal-Mart the other night when I needed to do a bit of late evening shopping. Couldn’t get a good photo in the dark, but it was clearly in a well-used but not quite used up state.
@ OliverTwist + Daniel Stern
For some reason, I can not reply to your comments.
Do not makes me a public enemy. Europe is mix of rules, where you can have vintage cars prior 1972 with the red turn signal while in other country even the most exclusive vintage car must be modified with amber turn signals (Austria is very strict for example). On the other hand, Netherland seems to be OK with the red turn signals even on new cars, same for Scandinavia or Switzerland.
My modified tailights are all OK with the local safety inspections I have to pass every 2nd year. I do not feel being dangerous for the others on the road. In the end my turn signal flash amber, as is expected and in my opinion, perform same way as with the export tail lights. Maybe the quality of video does not shows it correctly. Planned switchback bulb wont change it, switchback principle is used on many EU cars.
If the white behind the red lens wont works as expected, I´m ok not to use it. I was waiting long time until this new type of bulb become available, where the white actually do not dominate at the lumens output. It wont flicker between the colours, but works red-amber-amber-amber-red.
With the new technology and progress made on the tail lights in past ten years, I just take its benefit and retrofit technology to the older car until the point local safety inspection accept them. And yes, you are right, my effort is purely driven by the asthetics reasons. I just do not like the EU tail lights made for Caprice.
Btw side markers were illegal in my place until Volvo and VW starts to used them and push for legislation changes circa 10 years ago. So not always the rules makes sense, same as the world is not black and white.
There are people in this world who understand more than you do about vehicle lighting. ¯_(ツ)_/¯