When I saw this ’77-79 Chevrolet Caprice coupe and this 2007-12 GMC Acadia in Condesa in Mexico City, I was struck by how much GM’s full-size offerings have evolved.
For example, that Caprice is 212 inches long while the Acadia is only around 201 inches long. Despite this, the Acadia fits in three rows of seating for up to eight passengers. The Acadia is also both more powerful and more economical.
Interestingly, both the featured generations of Caprice and Acadia had lengthy production runs and both remained competitive against their direct rivals. The difference was the Caprice had a dwindling number of direct rivals, while the Acadia entered a booming segment.
The Caprice’s elegant, creased styling has aged well and the coupe’s bent-glass rear window is highly distinctive. These old Chevys may not quite be rolling across the block at Barrett-Jackson but they enjoy the attention of a relatively large number of enthusiasts, including lowrider and donk aficionados.
Time will tell if the Acadia will ever enjoy the same level of attention. Never underestimate the power of nostalgia, or an unexpected spotlight—did anyone ever think an AMC Pacer or Ford Torino would become iconic?
…. and of course, full-size is a relative term. Just as calling a dog’s tail a “leg” doesn’t really make it a leg, the seating for eight isn’t real, and cannot be comfortable even for short trips. At least with the older GM version Cheech and Chong could still slip some guys into the drive-in.
What’s a drive-in?
My fondness for old cars never had anything to do with nostalgia, as this Caprice predates my existence by a decade+, but I still know which one I’d rather have.
The 77 B bodies were among the last distinctive and properly differentiated American car designs from GM, and one of the last noteworthy products GM had when they still had the greatest market presence. The Acadia on the other hand is purely anonymous, part of a cynical and redundant division from a shell of a once great company. The statistical and potentially practical merits are there for the newer GMC, sure, but one could slap a Honda badge on it and most of the public wouldn’t bat an eye.
The Pacer can’t really be compared, regardless of it being polarizing and a commercial flop, it was truly distinctive and unconventional. Even if it was a joke it stands out and even becomes endearing. The Acadia on the other hand is average. The Torino is a better comparison, but on the other hand the Torino had more than one flavor in it’s 9 year lifespan, it had five bodystyles, numerous options and could be looked back on as a bloated malaise barge of the mid 70s(ala Big Lebowski), or a late 60s muscle car depending on which one you see. The Acadia is a one trick pony, a grey, white, or black CUV
Yes, GMC is very redundant. I don’t understand how they continue to exist in the consumer market doing nothing but cloning Chevrolets.
GMC is basically a truck line for Buick dealers (or less probably Cadillac dealers). A Buick dealer can’t sell just Chevrolet trucks.
Yep GMC is “Buick Trucks” – I know a guy who buys a new Buick every few years and his trucks are Always GMCs – I guess for a Buick (or Cadillac man), a Chevy wouldn’t be “upscale” enough.
Ironically, there is a giant America sign behind, in Mexico city.
Geographically (depending on how one defines terms), Mexico is part of America. Its also the United States — of Mexico. We even share their currency symbol.
I learned more about Canadian geography in school than Mexican, even though we lived in a state formerly part of Mexico. It therefore is unsurprising we are perceived by Europeans as geographically clueless.
This is a fine illustration of the effect Paul N was mentioning not long ago (here), that we’re recently seeing a return (correction?) back to shorter-higher-narrower from what seems to have been an aberrant period of longer-lower-wider.
With the popularity/takeover of SUVs, it’s a return to ’20s/’30s proportioning.
I’d be ok with that if I could have a business coupe!
Yup. Put a ’47 Chevy four-door in front of the ’77 and you’ll have a hamburger. Round buns on the ends with a flat patty in the middle.
A modern 2-dr Impala would a better item for comparison with a ’77 Caprice coupe.
Wow! That is a nice looking car!
I can’t tell how you mean, but if this what you just said had come from me, it would have been entirely sarcastic. That is a car that looks like every other generic thing GM have marketed for at least the last two decades.
No sarcasm, I really do like it.
I agree, just lopping off the doors isn’t enough to make it appealing. The current gen Impala isn’t exactly a remarkable looking car, no at least more than today’s featured W body based versions were when they were fresh, or better yet a 2 door Lumina(“Monte Carlo”)
There is no more unique styling from the General, or most companies in general. They can say all they want that it is due to the requirements needed for economy and regulations, but in reality, that is all BS. They can make things that look different to be different, like Nissan does with the Juke, or they can make it look stylish, but that may add $0.37 per car to the price, and they use that as an excuse to not do it (just like the savings on the ignition, right?). When you have nothing that sets you apart, you are just a part of the herd, and lack any individuality.
That said, it seems to work in the market. Look at colors. Gray. Black. White. Beige. Just those, and maybe a few reds, greens or blues to appeal to the “daring” buyer. But no interior color save Black or Greige (that horrible grey/beige combo that some have called ‘artificial limb’ tan). If there was a demand, the companies would fill it, but there apparently is not a demand. Same with style. No real demand for anything but sameness. How sad for us all.
So true, the massive shift to gray-scale vehicles with black interiors is not only boring, but it is sad. I remember when you could get 5 or 6 different interior colors in a Corvair!
This lack of creativity has spread to the auto restoration shows on TV. They take a beautiful pastel blue or green pickup truck and paint it black and then put chrome wheels on it. Yuk!
+1!
Nice chop!
Of course, the true equivalent to the Acadia in 1977 would be an Olds Custom Cruiser or Pontiac Catalina Safari.
As william , these caprices and other full size gm cars are being converted into low riders and donks. that is an absolute shame,they are destined to be classics and looked for by thier generation and turning them into those things really ruins the car and its originality. i like low riders but how many 64 impalas are being ruined by the hobby? and others.
I appreciate what the article is saying, there is some similarity to their place in the market of their respective eras and it must be kind of rare to see two big Chevys next to each other in Mexico. I tend to think, though, that there is no modern equivalent to the old full size car lines. Those lines could be many things to many people: stripper sedan, sporty personal coupe, semi-luxury sedan, family hauler wagon, prior to 1975 carefree convertible. The Acadia and Traverse check only the family hauler box and choices only range from well equipped to even better equiped with leather and lots of electronic dodads. In my opinion, the Impala/Caprice did its thing with a lot more style and grace.
I think the last car line from the Big Three to really have soup-to-nuts under one nameplate was the original (’00-04) Ford Focus. Four body styles, strippo to hi-po variants, a real wagon that didn’t pretend to be anything else but.
I had to reread the first line to figure out how old the SUV was. ’07-12? There’s nothing I can see on it that says that vehicle ceased production six years ago. Unlike many GM vehicles pilloried here, I can’t see anything that dates it. So where is modern styling going?
Funnily enough, for 2013 they revised the styling… and gave it the rear end of the also 2007 vintage Saturn Outlook.
We are clearly due for some new automotive styling trend to appear (please?). All these SUVs and CUV’s look very similar.
As long as we’re talking about trends repeating themselves, I think there is a lot of the 1958/1959 fin-de-siecle feeling to the current styling of Toyota and Honda…. grotesqueness resulting from pushing a styling trend too far in search of distinctiveness.
Who will bring forward the “63 Continental” that will save us from these blobs with scowling insect faces?
I have an affinity for those full size GM’s. We owned a ’77 Caprice Landau Coupe (Firethorn Red with a White Top and interior. My dad said it looked like Santa’s sleigh). Had a sedan and two wagons as well, before they got big, fat, and round. Two Grand Marquis have been in my garage as well, although I never liked the styling as well as that Gen of GM B-Body.
There is a full-size successor to these cars though, I think. One of them is in my garage. My 2nd Charger. The first was a ’69… love to have that one back. But the V8, RWD full-size american sedan still lives.
Evolved?
Mutated is more like it.
Evolution is when the majority mutates.
While I can see that this Caprice two door has a unique look, all of the four door sedans are pretty much the same from all of the divisions.
While today’s crossovers sort of look like old bodies from before WW2, the interior layout is quite different. Before luggage compartments were built in (beginning around the mid 1930’s), the rear seat was located all the way back.