Ah, the Cavalier. Or Cadavalier. Or Crapalier. Or “Cockroach of the Road”. What other denigrating terms are/were there for these? Dozens I’m sure. But did they really suck so bad? Now, as we look around and realize there aren’t all that many genuinely cheap cars around anymore, perhaps we can appreciate what we once had. But surely there was a reason why they were cheap. I don’t really know, I’ve never owned one, I just kind of eyeball them covertly when I see them nowadays, I’m still not sure what specifically drew me to this one at first.
The Cavalier did kind of suck when it debuted, but in typical GM fashion it did improve somewhat over the years. By 1992, a full decade after its debut, it was available as a sedan, a coupe, a convertible, as well as a wagon. Two engines, two transmissions, lots of color choices, and even standard ABS starting that year, making it the least expensive ABS-equipped car in this market.
I was convinced this was a VL trim level, presumably standing for Value Leader. Or Very Lacking. I mean, look at that black Rubbermaid bumper! But no, I realized in my research that in 1992 if it had that little inlet at the bottom of the grille, then that denoted it to be an RS model. Rally Sport? Really Super? I don’t know, but let’s go with the RS which it turns out doesn’t mean much in this case.
I believe Chevy charges at least $185 these days to replace their brass-colored bowtie badge with a black one. In 1992 they hadn’t yet figured out that people would actually pay for that, back then it was just cheaper for them to do it as a default on this cheap car. It’s a plus in my book all day long. Never mind that a brassy badge on a gold-colored car just wouldn’t work anyway if you have any sense of color theory whatsoever, not that that stopped Chevy from doing it on millions of cars and trucks.
The gold color still holds up more or less although the hood has lost its gloss. Two black door mirrors and black trim all over in sort of either a EuroSport way or just as a lucky coincidence that chrome was pretty much on the outs. And cheaper this way so everyone’s a winner. To get the biggest status bang for your buck you’d need to order the car in black, then nobody could tell the black plastic isn’t painted the matching body color. You’d still have a Cavalier of course but you’d perhaps fool someone somewhere. Or not.
For 1992, the 2.2liter OHV four gained multi-point fuel injection. No less a personality than John Davis of MotorWeek, the host of America’s favorite (read as “only”) automotive television program, pronounced it “refined”. Okay then! This mill now produced 110hp and 130lb-ft of torque along with quite good fuel economy. The same engine was standard across the range, although one could opt for the 3.1l V6 in most models.
Even with the revised engine and some other notable upgrades for 1992 sales were down a bit from 1991 to 225,633 units across the lineup, still though leaving it GM’s most popular car line. Was it its least profitable or biggest loser too? Who knows but the domestics have not had a good track record as far as that went. Sales picked up again the next year though, so maybe GM lost even more or perhaps even made a little bit after all the sums were totted up.
Looking beyond the filth of a well-used car in a junkyard, there is actually some semblance of style to be seen. The revised dash has shape that didn’t occur with just a straightedge and an eye on the clock for quitting time while the door panels have also had some thought put into them.
Carpeted lower section, power locks standard (!) and automatically engaging at 8mph, but manual windows, door mounted seatbelts so as not to need to re-engineer and pay for airbags (bad idea), and even little Cavalier badges so you can remember what car you are in. By the way, this seems to be a peculiarly American car thing, to pepper an interior with the model name. Is it difficult to recall the model of car you are driving? Do any foreign makes do this?
A two-tone dashboard, a little shelf between the sections, and in the middle between the vents is a 2-cup pullout cupholder that I failed to deploy for you. The saddle blankets are obviously an owner’s touch to avoid sitting on likely to have been soiled seats. So now there are soiled seat covers instead.
GM made a big deal about apparently buying millions of gallons of ScotchGard, a space-age liquid polymer that makes fabrics stain-resistant, and using it across their platforms, even on every lowly 1992 Cavalier. But this back seat shows that even ScotchGard has its limits. Scotchgard by the way was voluntarily discontinued by 3M in 2000 after the EPA apparently figured out it was far too toxic for use around people, animals, and nature. Did you drive a GM car in the ’90s? Have your buttocks and back itched and sported a tartan-pattered red rash since then? You may be eligible for compensation, contact a lawyer today!
5-speed manual. Good. Although vague and notchy per John Davis. No AC on this one, nor anything to get an audiophile excited beyond an AM/FM radio with four (only four!) presets. Beats a blanking plate I suppose. At least the smoker’s package was still standard in 1992. But the tan dash, carpet, and upholstery work well with the contrasting black plastic on top here. The handbrake lever even has a stitched leather (or pleather) cover on it.
The steering wheel was the first (and last) inkling that made me question if it really was the VL trim as I had initially surmised, it just seemed too not-cheap. It looks leather-wrapped and has the most obvious stitching ever (BMW does it around the edges, guys, not on the front surfaces!). And it’s meaty as well. But the gauge cluster tells a tale of woe.
First things first though, Holy Crapalier! 362,609 miles! That does not suck at all, about 1000 miles a month and likely put on in a steady ongoing way over the last 31 years. It’s very impressive actually for a car that started at an MSRP of $9,474 for the VL sedan and $10,674 for the mechanically identical RS sedan. That base price equates to a little over $20,000 in today’s money. I don’t really know what that extra $1,200 ($2,500 today) got you beyond the steering wheel and a slot in the grille plate to make it an RS model.
The instrument panel I must pronounce as another GM Dash of Sadness in a long line of them. The font, colors, and overall size are fine for once (yay!), but the placement of the gauges is just miserable (boo!). Why a ginormous fuel gauge that doesn’t match the speedometer and then a small coolant gauge front and center? And another reminder of what model you are in. Jeez, this is crying out for a combo fuel/coolant gauge on the right sized the same as the speedo. If you ordered the handling package you got two more gauges but it’s still a bit of a mess with maybe too much crammed in there. At least there are no obvious blank gauges here, so GM had progressed since the 1980s in that regard.
Unfortunately, whatever care and attention including a replacement door in a slightly different shade was lavished on this car over the last 31 years was all for naught as it sadly had its life cut short. I can’t really say it was before its time as it did better and covered far more miles than any other Cavalier I’ve ever seen, but I had secretly hoped that those Rubbermaid bumpers really did work like those at the bumper car tracks of my youth, simply repelling any impact. Alas, they do not.
I wonder how many more miles this car could have had left in it. We’ll never know as it now has a date with the crusher.
The GM “J” body cars were what they were. They were built to a price, snd by the end of their lifespan had become uncompetitive with their imported competition.
Still, they were somewhat rugged, if uninspired.
They had “become uncompetitive” by the end of their lifespan?
Unfortunately, the Cavalier/J2000 were uncompetitive from day they were released to the marketplace.
This reminds me of my lament for a particular variety of cheap used car. There used to be two kinds – used cars that were cheap because they were brittle, failure-prone and sure to cost the next owner plenty of cash to keep on the road, and used cars that were cheap because they were decent cars that were simply unpopular.
Cheap used cars of the second kind, like this Cavalier, have gone virtually extinct, or have at least become endangered. A car like a Cavalier (if you can find one now) could be had for a song, and if you could live with a total lack of pleasure in your car, you would have a durable thing that would run for a long, long time.
A used Cavalier would not interest me (I have at least SOME standards) but the world is full of people barely getting by who need a car like a used Cavalier. I can’t say I like it, but I can at least respect it.
I helped my son buy his first new car: a red 2 door with the “updated/restyled” skin; can’t even remember what year it was. While basically a “appliance”, not a desirable driver’s car, his Cavalier gave him 106,000 basically trouble free miles. I did help him trade it on a new ’08 Honda Civic tho……which he did like much better! 🙂 DFO
A niece and a nephew had new (or newish) Cavaliers that were probably purchased with some parental help. They both fulfilled the role of providing cheap reliable transportation without tempting any exuberant driving. A very good choice for this situation.
The odometer reads well over 300,000 miles. That indicates to me that this was a well-made car that was built to last a long time.
I agree, I’m a Japanese car fanboi, but I nodded my head when I read that odometer. Respect.
As JIm pointed out, that represents quite heavy use for its age. 300,000km would be respectable; I’m amazed this reached 360,000 miles!
I have no disrespect for the Cavalier. They were everywhere for a very long time, doing just what they were meant for. A former business partner bought one of this generation as a commuter. I had the misfortune of driving it a couple times and loathed it, but during the time he owned the little coupe it was hit several times and put back together. He claimed that when he traded it in (on 2000ish Lumina), the roof was the only body panel that hadn’t been replaced or repainted. He wouldn’t go so far as to say he liked the car, but it was proclaimed to be a “Good” car. I suppose that’s pretty much all anyone could ask.
Personally, I just could never get past the front license plate placement on these. It’s one thing to drive a cheap car, but did the designers really have to add insult to injury? The front plate mount, stuck over on the edge of that cheap looking bumper just screamed, “I give up”. Maybe it’s just me, but I found it tremendously annoying for some reason.
Nice post. The Cavalier rests in my “All Time Top 3 worst rental cars”…the other two being a Gremlin (late 70’s) and a Reliant/Aries (mid-80’s).
As I remember Pat Bedard of Car and Driver once saying – “inserting the key in the ignition was about the same as inserting a rat-tailed file” – my recollection exactly.
I didn’t mind these cars, especially after the first few years of production. They were inexpensive to buy (especially with the hefty dealer discounts) and relatively durable. If a driver didn’t mind a dull and not-terribly-refined car – it wasn’t a bad choice.
Noisy though – and it’s amusing that your interior shots show a pair of earplugs in the ashtray.
On a random (and completely useless) note, I never remember seeing these cars with color-keyed seatbelts (i.e., the seatbelts are black, but the interior gold). Maybe this was a VL/RS item during these years, like the black bumpers and mirrors, but I just don’t remember seeing it before.
It probably is peculiarly American, but I can think of one foreign brand that did this too. Saab put the model name on the glovebox door for their 99 and 900 cars:
The ’82 Nissan Stanza and ’83 Pulsar hatchback (not NX) we had in the ’80s both had the car names on the steering wheel; the Pulsar also had the name stitched into the front seats.
I knew you guys wouldn’t let me down. At least Saab likely had it in the budget, I’m surprised the beancounters left the badges on the interior door panels in place for so long, it had to cost something (times millions of these things).
Wait until you see the new 2024 Toyota Tacoma, it sports badging on the dashboard about as big as on the tailgate.
Just found this… 1979 Toyota Celica Supra, with “Celica” embossed on the rear speaker grilles!
My ’69 Alfa Berlina had “1750” on the right side of the dash, along with a logo. On the outside it appeared on the back, but “Alfa Romeo” did not actually appear anywhere on the car, inside or outside, except possibly as part of the crest.
I’m late but I had a 2001 Buick Regal LS that had a badge near the driver side that said simply “Buick Motor Division.” Which was mostly a placeholder I think cause on GS models it read “Gran Touring Suspension.”
But still, seemed very circa 1970 to remind me daily my car was made by (full name) Buick Motor Division.
The high miles, the used ear plugs in the ash tray, and the soiled rear seat all say to me that whoever owned this car probably was involved in some serious labor (mining, road construction, ??) and drove this thing a long distance every day to and from work. The rear seat got that way because they may well have carpooled with other members of the work crew. I’d be willing to bet that a lot of that dust and gravel inside the car didn’t get there once it got to the junkyard, but was there already.
You’ve got to respect a car that can run up 300K doing work like that. And the fact that it could handle it is another reason why these were such stalwarts of the rental car lot.
5 speed and no tach, I haven’t seen that since we owned a Mercury Topaz with a stick.
Anyway this Cavalier is the same sort of beast, cheap car with a rough grunty 4 cylinder that doesn’t like to rev anyway. I too slightly bemoan the loss of unrefined cheap transportation. For other people that is, I still wouldn’t want a Cavalier.
Our ‘93 Corolla was 5 speed with no tach. If I recall correctly it was actually a standalone option which our car didn’t have. As someone from an older generation, who had owned quite a few manual trans cars with no tach before that but not for a few years, I found it annoying but no big deal. Neither my first-gen Ducati Monster nor my Suzuki DR650 have tachs either.
I know you’ve told me this before, but I still can’t wrap my head around the idea that neither of those bikes had tachs. In the late 60s and 70s, every crappy little Japanese bike had one. And all the classic Brit bikes. Why would they omit a tach on the Ducati Monster??
Indeed it’s true, I can’t understand that either. Behold the DR650 gauges, no tach. In my brief Google search on that I also saw lots of “how to add a tach to a DR650” posts
The philosophy behind the Monster was a combination of “minimalism” and “of course the accessories catalog has at least three different gauge clusters with which to replace the stock one”. And, if you were really lucky, Ducati America would have at least one of those in stock.
The owner at Ducati Richmond decided he needed a company bike, so he pulled a 750 Monster Dark (the flat black ones) from inventory, had the Number Two mechanic tear it down to the frame, had the frame powder coated a brilliant metallic blue, wheels powder coated to match, blue polka dots on the paint, added a Velorex sidecar (so his wife and daughter could ride, matching of course), and then had me (his parts manager) go absolutely nuts finding the flash chrome five gauge cluster from the accessories catalog. Which had me tearing my hair out, because of course Ducati America hadn’t seen one of those for at least six months. Managed to do a parts trade with a dealer in New England.
And then had Number Two mechanic put it all back together . . . . . priority, of course, over the backlog of paying customers we had at the time. And conveniently ignoring that the dealership was rapidly heading for the toilet, because bookkeeping and cash flow were concepts he didn’t quite understand. I think he rode the bike for a year before the shop went under.
Actually, most of our Monster customers weren’t bothered in the slightest about the lack of a tach, seeing that this was the first Ducati that was: a. Easily available, and b. Did not cost an obscene amount of money.
I’d still love to have one, single cam air cooled please, currently making do with my stripped down Cagiva Alazzurra.
GM probably thought this wasn’t a sporty car (correct) so it didn’t need a tach (a reasonable inference). Never mind that the competition often included one. I sometimes wonder whether buyers of Hondas and their ilk knew what to make of a tach anyway. I’ve always shifted manuals by ear; my one car that came with a tach (Mazda 3) still had enough engine noise that I didn’t really need it.
They may have also thought that with that engine you wouldn’t need a tach. Probably true; would all the sound insulation they could pack in be enough to block out the noise and vibration? But all the blank space on that instrument panel doesn’t make a good impression. Even a big analog clock would have looked better.
Life oddity. Cars with automatics – tach is a redundancy. Cars with manuals – we’re not going to give you any help in knowing when to shift.
I drove a manual car, I think it was a cavalier like this, and I remember it had a light which warned you had to shift.
Selling an upgraded RS model with a stick and NO TACH should have been illegal.
SMDH
In 1992 a buddy of mine wanted the cheapest and lightest way to get the sprightly 3.1L V6 so he bought a brand new Cavalier RS coupe in the most terrible teal with a stick. A Z/24 in disguise, and very quick. But that color, and those plastic wheelcovers. Yechh. At least it had a tach.
Lack of a tach in what was supposed to be a sporty model betrayed ye olde out-of-touch GM mindset. Examining the bottom line with an electron microscope, but not even thinking to look at the import-brand competition.
I don’t think any of the contemporary C-segment imports had a tach on base models either. On the Corolla, Civic, 323/Protegé, Sentra, Colt, and I think the U.S. Golf, you got a tach on the high-end or sportier models, but not on base trim. With the E80 and E90 Corolla and its Nova/Prizm derivatives, you could theoretically order one as a standalone option on a base car for something like $60, but I don’t think many did.
It was obnoxious because the high-end trim levels were often quite a bit more expensive, enough to be out of reach for buyers.
A shame a rear-end collision took this one out. If not for that, it might still be on the road, today.
One of the first cars I wrote about for CC was my wife’s ’92 Cavalier. When we sold it in ’06, it had 189,000 miles, and I still saw it around town for two or three more years. My wife still speaks fondly of it for its relative durability. Keeping a car on the road past 150,000 miles becomes a cost/benefit/laziness equation, however, so it got the boot before I had the chance to truly start hating it.
Is it bad that I knew the fake grille slot meant RS? LOL
But on an Old Man Tan 4 door it’s like they were ashamed of the RSedness and wanted to disguise it.
I bought new in 92 as well, and from GM – a bright red Grand Prix coupe with the all-new Twin Dual Cam 3.4L V6, kind of the Quad4 of 6 cylinders. She had some scoot.
This car, which debuted in the spring of 1981, seemed ancient by 1992, despite several facelifts. I had the Pontiac version of the first year model and the doors look like they would interchange with this car from 11 years later. I like that GM eliminated the notoriously brittle plastic filler panels between the front fender and grille that my car had, and always seem to be a bit warped and a slightly different shade of paint.
The inside was completely renovated at some point and unrecognizable from the original which looked like the brochure photo below.
…and it was on the third dashboard of this generation. Here’s the original – still very ’70s American style with a bluff woodgrained dash and lots of chrome trim. A tach was available to fill the empty space on the right dial.
And that dash was still on there until 1990? I need my Facebook barfing emoji.
Yep, minus the woodgrain and chrome which was CL-trim 1982 only.
Starting around 1985 though, sportier or more-upscale-trimmed Cavalier models got this dash, which was different than both the original 1982-90 design and the ’91-94 version seen in the subject car. There were both digital and analog versions.
Four preset Delco radios – many of them would yield an additional preset if you pushed two adjacent buttons at the same time. So I had seven preset stations on my Delco in my ’91 S10 Blazer.
Same with every one I had. Eventually GM exploited the “bug” and labeled those additional combinations on Saturn radios. Oh wait Saturn was a different kind of car company….
The lead photo made me think of something, with that first-generation Lumina behind it. I was always a little confused as to why Chevy had refreshed Cavalier styling for 1990 after having given it such an extensive makeover only two years before.
Looking at this Cavalier’s sloping header panel, which mirrors that of the new-for-1990 Lumina behind it, maybe the update was to try to establish some sort of Chevy visual brand identity. Even the front side marker lights have a similar shape between the two cars.
The ’88 and ’89 Cavaliers had a flat front header panel.
The 90 was styled like the 88/89 as well. That was my favorite look of all the Cavaliers. It seemed like GM cheaped out for 91.
Interesting cars to be sure ~ they were derided by all fanbois from new, we had a large fleet of them that only lasted a few years in city use, I remember seeing those teal colored ones forever then they were all *gone* .
Now I read they were stout and reliable .
Agreed that’s what the world needs but few would ever want to buy such a thing these days .
The rear seat looks like it was used as a yard car awhile before being dumped in the rows .
They often have very nice cars and pickups I’d cheerfully buy as yard car at the various LKQ’s in So. Cal. .
-Nate
Engines and transaxles in these cars are very rugged, if crude. Since rust is their biggest threat, the southwest would be their ideal home. They would run for decades with a little care.
Thanx Jonathan ! .
It’s a really tough crowd here =8-) .
-Nate
Dang, 300k? Not bad. I did 300k on a 96 Maxima.
Was it its least profitable or biggest loser too?
The Cavalier (and the rest of the J-Car family) were perennial money-losers. They couldn’t generate a high-enough ATP compared to the Japanese, so GM just sold them at a loss because they absolutely needed the CAFE credits from them to offset their very profitable trucks.
I’ve got those same seat covers on my Honda Element, now pushing 185k miles. Hope to keep it for many more years.
I have a 1990 Cavalier VL four door, which was originally silver. 2.2 , THM125, ps, pb, radio delete. I installed an Audiovox AV932 for tunes. She turned over 100,000 miles about two weeks ago.
RS – We used to joke that RS stood for Red Stripe because most had a red tape stripe.
Strikes me as better-than-good odds that’s actually what it meant.
Maybe it’s just Aussie slang, but I’ve always interpreted ‘RS’ as ‘Rat S**t’.
Bryce, is this NZ usage as well?
I bought a new 1987 Cavalier new in spring of 1988 so I got it for a great price. It was the 2 door Z24 hatchback in arrest-me red. I thought it was a very sharp car and as it was a serious upgrade from my previous car, (1978 Ford Fairmont Futura), the handling and power were great. It had the 2.8 liter V6 making all of 160 HP (not bad for its day).
I only owned the car for about 2 years as my wife and I were saving for a house and the car payment plus the insurance premium were too much. Also, it was not driven much as my wife also had a car and I rode a bus to work. I really liked the car and had no problems with it in the time I owned it, plus the hatchback was quite handy for hauling things.
The 2.8L V6 had as low as 110 HP with a carb, 125-135 once fuel injection came along about ’85. I also had an ’87 Z24 and loved it. Digital dash! Then I had a ’90 Z24 (stick) with the enlarged 3.1L and that had 140 HP and really scooted. Not until ’94/95 when they made revisions and renamed it “3100” did it ever have 160 HP. A Beretta with the 3100 is a very decent driving car.
My sister had an 88 or so Z24 with the digital dash, 2.8 and 5 speed. That car was quick!
In 97 or 98 I test drove a white 90 RS wagon with rally wheels, 3.1 and 5 speed. Never seen another like it. Must have been a rare combo. Wished I would have bought it, but I had other priorities at the time.
I’d choose the flat top 3.1 MPFI anyday. Less HP in the high end, but seemed like a lot more low end grunt for everyday driving. And without the infamous intake gasket problem. Nicer sounding exhaust too. I hear time and time again about the flat top going easily to 300k, including my own.
Ugh. I hate everything about these damn things with the ferocity of a much-bigger-than-average hill of fire ants. They’re unnecessarily awful to drive and to work on. That’s the really galling part; every moment you spend in or around one brings a new mountain of obvious evidence that they could’ve made these so very much less lousy without spending more money.
They are very much terrible to work on. I had to replace the belt tensioner on a freezing cold night so my wife could get to work the next morning, and there is no pecuniary or engineering-based rationale that could explain away that half-assed piece of engineering. Let’s not get started on the time I had to replace the ignition module in the parking lot of her workplace. It’s on the back of the engine, mounted low, only accessible by jacking up the car and replacing it from underneath. That was my second experience with a Chevy 2.2 ignition module, and both times my will to live flickered.
“That’ll Do” engineering.
That description is several very large notches too diplomatic.
There should be a Briggs & Stratton logo on the air cleaner. You can actually feel it vibrate through the steering wheel. Once on the freeway, it seems to settle down and hum along. Changing the oil and filter makes the engine run noticeably better, as if it’s saying “Ah , thanks, I needed that ” .
See, yeah. Exactly. Compare this to its direct-competitor ’92 Plymouth Sundance and there’s just no versus; the Sundance is a basic, inexpensive economy car, too, but it manages to be a giant lot easier to live with and work on.
I’m going to guess that this is a base Cavalier VL that had an RS-type grille installed on the assembly line. It most assuredly would not have been the first time an incorrect trim piece was installed at the factory.
IIRC, the four-preset, base Delco radio actually had eight presets; there was a relatively simple way to switch to the second set of presets but I don’t recall it.
After 360,000-odd miles driving this, I have to wonder what the owner thinks of his or her new car.
Perhaps they traded up to a 2005 Cobalt, Chevy’s next bright idea.
Great images. And thank you for sharing your thoughts. If only the General could have found a way to imbibe the J-Cars with personality.
Adam Wade’s recent Cimarron purchase, is a refresher (for me at least), of how characterless these cars were.
Interesting… I saw the Cimarron as being a pretty decent car, at least on the used car market. There’s no way I would have paid the premium when they were new, but they’re not too shabby when viewed as being a much nicer Cavalier. Would have been nice if they had offered the 5 speed with the V6 (or at least an overdrive automatic), but still should be a reasonably entertaining drive, as the car weighed well under 3 kilopounds.
I’m also pretty okay with the brick-y Irv Rybicki era styling, even though the re-re-rehashed 1976 Seville schtick was a bit worn out by the mid 1980’s.
Or anything else worthy. They claimed to have done it for the Australian market, but…no.
Hmm. I’ve always wondered why these cars are immediately met with such hate… After having experienced quite a few four cylinder compact cars from the 1970’s-90’s, I can’t say that any of them inspired me to give a full two thumbs up. My 1987 Honda Accord did look and feel much nicer to drive, but it had a surprising amount of stuff that was not skookum. Warping brake rotors, weak CV joints, glitchy automatic transmission, and a shockingly flexy body. Yet the torqueless engine was smooth and quiet, the assembly quality was good, and the interior materials didn’t feel cheap as I was driving down the road on rock hard seats. With all of its faults, it didn’t feel like I was being punished.
My only real Cavalier experience was driving a 1987 Type 10 that was loaned to me for a fairly long winter back in 1996, and tearing around one summer circa 2001, when I had a part time gig deadheading rental cars in Montana. I honestly liked the 1987… It had a 5 speed, full instrumentation (yes, with a tachometer), and was well equipped. It zipped along pretty good, and returned gas mileage well into the 30’s. The 122 series 4 cylinder is a pretty robust thing, though it had a fruity exhaust note and felt a bit coarse. Both of my parents had 1970’s-80’s GM vehicles when I was growing up, so the rest of the car felt pretty familiar… There’s both good and bad in that last statement, though I honestly feel that these cars were a credible effort. Another observation is that Cavaliers tended to be driven like a rented pack mule from day one, almost like it was a requirement to make sure the car and everyone else knew that you hated it. Being that I’m fairly familiar with the power train components that were used, I am pretty comfortable guessing that mileage figures like this car achieved would be fairly commonplace if the cars weren’t treated with a “kill-it-with-fire!” attitude. T’wasn’t to be.
What is a fruity exhaust note?
Perhaps one that sounds like a raspberry?
Raspy, fart-y.
While these engines were nowhere near as rude as the Iron Duke, they still suffered from GM’s seeming indifference to keeping NVH in check… and this was most apparent on their smaller/lower cost cars. I’m guessing it was a combination of penny pinching and a general mindset that people should just step up a rung or two if they want something nice, but I do wonder how much better these cars would have been received and remembered if a few more give-a-shits were applied to making ’em actually feel like a quality product. How did Honda make a four cylinder that ran smoothly and quietly? Perhaps spend a little more time making switchgear tactilely pleasant and endow the thing with doors that don’t sound like a bucket of bolts launched at a brick wall when you shut them. I mean, you’ve still done something wrong when you’ve created a mechanically sound product, yet the majority still double dog despise it!
Hey, yeah, they could get a Beretta; a Corsica, or a Lumina. With a bigger engine and a gargle exhaust note!
Have you considered the Capiche Classic? Those are able to proceed without the cacophony of gargles, burps, buzzes, snaps, and fartletting of the junior cars. I know the Classic isn’t available with that red stripe that turns a Lumina Eurosport into an ersatz BMW, but it does have a chrome grille and a stand up hood ornament, just like a Mercedes Benz.
It reminds me a little of the gold 1988Cavalier my wife was driving when we met. Those still had an actual grille and less under bite but were still decidedly second tier. Her car was an ex fleet vehicle from Florida so automatic with AC but no electric rear defroster which looked odd in New York. It was adequate, apart from launching a spark plug once and after two years we sold it and bought a Ford Ranger because she really wanted a pickup. My 84 Jetta was so much better in ride, handling and overall quality apart from the weak AC.
I’m pretty sure this is a VL trim not an RS trim Cavalier. Plus, the RS trim had outside door badges, which the VL did not have. I was selling these little roaches back in 1991; I don’t recall ever seeing a RS with that black trim. But, that was 32 years ago…
I had a 1997 Cavalier that I ran up to 265,000+ miles. The damned thing would not die, after my brother in law, me and my two kids driving the crap out of it. It always started, never once left me stranded and only needed a few things outside of routine service during my 14 years with the car. If the rust monster hadn’t claimed it, I would probably still drive it.
Also, Jim- you owe me a beer. That’s the royalty for the “Cockroach of the Road” usage, LOL…
I had the fraternal twin, a 92 Pontiac Sunbird during the time I spent teaching in Northern Nebraska. I bought it used in 2001.I was good and trouble free during the time I owned it, specially after owning a Civic which literally disintegrated in the middle of Omaha. I remember I was so short on cash that all the tires were different brands and I had to buy them used.
I did a road trip from Eastern Iowa to California, and with the exception of lack of power climbing the Rocky Mountains, it was pretty good during the long drives through the West,
We own a 1978 Ford Thunderbird Diamond Jubilee edition. That car has something like 20 identify emblems or Bird logos on it!!!