Joseph Dennis recently posted a CC Capsule on the C4 generation Corvette, which prompted discussions on the relative merits of that car’s design. General Motor’s Design Chief at the time was Irv Rybicki, who presided over the bleakest period ever for GM styling. Whether or not you are a fan of the C4 Corvette, it was arguably one of the better styling jobs to emerge from GM during that dark era. But was it the best?
First, the timing parameters. Rybicki was appointed as the Vice President of Design in August 1977, just the third person to ever hold that title. The first was the legendary Harley Earl, who led GM (and the entire industry) to showcase style as a selling tool.
Earl’s successor was the equally talented Bill Mitchell, whose taste and temperament were outsized, leading to some of the most beautiful mass market cars ever produced.
Chuck Jordan was as brash and gifted as GM’s first two design bosses, and particularly since he had shown real flair with small car styling during his stint with Opel–a critical need in the energy conscious era, he would have been the logical successor to Mitchell for the late 1970s and beyond. In fact, Jordan would ultimately get the top design job in October 1986, but only after it was too late and GM’s design leadership had been squandered.
So what happened in between August 1977 and October 1986, you ask?
General Motors had decided that they no longer wanted a strong willed Design Chief who was ready, willing and able to battle with Finance, Engineering, Manufacturing and divisional General Managers to protect and showcase trendsetting styling. Rather, GM’s top leadership decided that after Earl and Mitchell they didn’t have the stomach for round three with Jordan. So they opted for “go along to get along” Rybicki, who was the consummate corporate player, always “there” at the right time and place, but arguably never really leading anything. When accountants would demand cost cuts, Rybicki apparently nodded “yes.” When Engineering and Manufacturing wanted commonality and easy-to-execute solutions no matter what they looked like, Rybicki seemingly shrugged. When executives decreed that a mere badge could turn a Chevrolet into a Cadillac (Cimmaron), Rybicki was right there.
With all the corporate group think and lowest common denominator designs, were there any styling bright spots during Rybicki’s tenure? Which cars could be counted as the result of his leadership?
Let’s start with the cars that can’t be included. Some of the attractive GM designs of the early 1980s, like the 1980 aero reskins of the B- and C-Body full-sizers, had been underway in the Mitchell era, as this design study from 1974 will attest. The same was arguably true for the 1981 A-Special coupe reskins.
The decently differentiated X-Bodies that launched in the Spring of 1979 were also mostly locked and loaded prior to August 1977.
Ditto the 1979 E-Bodies that arrived in the Fall of 1978.
Even the F-Body Camaro/Firebird for 1982 was apparently mostly a Mitchell-era creation that was simply late to market (it was originally planned for the 1980 model year). This design concept hails from late 1976, and certainly hints at the final design direction that would later appear.
So what does that leave? Well here’s the roster:
The scintillating 1982 J-Cars, one for every U.S. division!
The highly differentiated FWD A-Bodies for 1982. These were so good GM opted to keep certain variants in production with minimal changes for 14 years!
Besides the C4 Corvette, another Rybicki era “sporty car” was the 1984 P-Body Fiero.
The sleek, flowing FWD C-Bodies for 1985.
And their sisters-under-the-skin H-Bodies, that starting arriving for 1986.
The impressive 1985 N-Bodies, all set to redefine “personal luxury” and convince Yuppies to abandon their Hondas and Toyotas.
And who could forget the downsized 1986 E-Bodies? Clearly the luxury flagship coupe of the world’s largest car maker!
Along with the related K-Body ’86 Seville as the flagship sedan aiming right at the heart of those Mercedes 300E prospects….
The ’88 L-Body Corsica/Beretta was essentially round 2 of the N-Body and exclusive for Chevrolet, after someone finally realized that perhaps the vertical backlight “formal look” just *might* have been getting stale after 12 years…
The culmination of the Rybicki era was the GM10 W-Body coupes that launched for 1988. Differentiated skins were back with a vengeance, layered over identical platforms all with the same underwhelming old-school OHV V6.
On the truck front there was the square, clean cut ’82 Chevrolet S-10 and GMC S-15, while 1983 brought their SUV counterparts, the S-10 Blazer and S-15 Jimmy.
Then there was the traditional van made “mini,” the 1985 Chevrolet Astro and GMC Safari clone.
For 1988, the all-important full-size C/K pickup trucks were totally revamped for the first time since 1973.
Hang on, you say, I’m leaving out some great choices, like the 1987 Cadillac Allante. Uh no, that was designed by Pinninfarina.
No, no, no, there was the 1988 Reatta too! Well, that design is credited to Chuck Jordan, developed even before he had been appointed Design Chief for the corporation.
So there you have it. Those are the Rybicki choices (jump in if I’ve missed any, they are all so memorable it is hard to keep track!). For me, the pick as the best of his reign would be the 1988 Pontiac Grand Prix. At least it looked modern and aerodynamic while still retaining Pontiac styling cues. And it looked sufficiently different from its platform mates in the best GM tradition from the company’s styling heyday.
So that’s my pick, what’s yours?
Interesting seeing all the new GM designs of the era in one place. My overall impression is that they are almost all really…OK. With a few exceptions, they are all decent looking cars but none of them are great. They mostly all look like they are trying to do their job without offending anyone (like Rybicki himself, it sounds like).
The lack of differentiation between divisions is something I don’t think can be blamed on Rybicki. How much to spend giving different cars unique designs and sheet metal is a financial decision. Styling works within the limits they are given. GM clearly didn’t want to spend money differentiating the A-bodies, but were willing to put a lot into the W-bodies.
My pick for the best is the 88 truck. I didn’t like them a lot when new, but with time and in the context of the current truck market, I really appreciate their clean design. The original dash may have had it’s functional problems, but I think it looks good. I like it because it is a TRUCK dash. Like the outside, it is very clean, and it’s not trying to look like a passenger car dash. The 95 replacement may work better, but it’s kind of generic and curvy where the outside was angular.
The worst IMO are the 86 Eldorado and Riviera and the Reatta. They all suffer from extremely stubby butts. Totally goofy design for what were supposed to be flagship American cars. The Toronado and Seville had the same stubbiness, but it somehow works better on those cars. The facelifted 1990 Riviera with the extended rear really transformed the car, I think into one of the nicest looking FWD cars of the 80’s and 90’s. The extended rear helped the Eldorado, too, but it was still cheesy looking for a Cadillac.
GM kept the square dash in the medium conventional 5500-7500 series until 2003 when they were replaced by the “cut-down van cab” ones.
The designs were only the tip of the giant iceberg. Every comment states “good design, but…”. The mishmash of cost cutting interiors, half baked, glued on performance/appearance” pieces, abysmal engines and generally middle managed product development concerned only with meeting some corporate target that had nothing to do with creating a good product made a quintessential middle manager head designer the right man for the job. Design at this point really didn’t matter, five watertight compartments were already open to the sea. Eva Braun was an attractive woman, but…
Oh, I think Irv Rybicki gets an unfair bashing here. For one thing, we’re only talking about styling, not quality or engineering or suspensions or engines so:
The J cars were good lookers and came in a variety of body styles. Very handsome.
The W bodies were very good looking, especially the Cutlass Supreme. The Grand Prix has some awkwardness as does the Regal. Yah, the platform was crappy but . . they were good looking.
The A cars took the X and made it much better looking. The X s were a little stunted but the proportions of the A cars were much better. The station wagon had a touch of Audi 5000 before the Taurus appeared.
The Fiero was stunning. Much better styling than any of its competitors, including the CRX, which had almost no styling, the EXP, which had froggy styling, and the MR2, which took angularity a little too far, or the prelude, the 200SX. . etc.
The N cars were quite handsome and the Grand Am’s styling DID win over a lot of Camcord intenders. The quality, of course, was another story.
I don’t know if the ’92?’93 Seville/Eldorado fall into Irv Rybicki’s oversight, but those were stunning cars and showed that Cadillac could make a car without a formal roofline, vinyl roof, or old fashioned styling cues.
Irv Rybicki’s designs were simple, clean, functional, and still better than most of the competition. Do you think the Camry/Accord of the era was better styled than the W body? Or the N? Isn’t a 1986 N body still better styled than a new Civic?
And what does GM make now which is memorable? Cadillac’s arts and sciences styling is noticeable, but hasn’t really won converts. The Malibu and Impala are derivative, I don’t know what a Buick sedan looks like cos they aren’t selling, the Cruze is boring and derivative also. Irv Rybicki’s designs probably aren’t the BEST GM ever produced, but in comparison with the competition, like the Stanza, or what is being produced today, they weren’t as bad except for the E body as you think.
Most Japanese styling was still very derivative and mired in that origami look in the 80s, so it’s a bit unfair to compare(though I still disagree with a few of your references being better, Honda had beautifully designed small cars, they peaked in the 80s). GM design under Bill Mitchell pumped out prettier cars than the Italian design houses occasionally, and in general overall styling was so good and revolutionary that Ford and especially Chrysler would find themselves playing catch up to it more often than not.
Irv Rybicki handed over that style leadership to Ford on a platter, completely inverting decades of being the leader in this area. The Aero look changed the automotive styling forever(for better or worse) and Ford brought it to the masses. And if I’m putting up car vs car the Thunderbird/Cougar/Mark VII made the N, E and W bodies look like cheap toys and the Taurus/ Sable made the A bodies look ancient, and even the fox based LTD prior was still better looking than the As (though I agree, they were handsome wagons). Even the Tempo and Topaz, for as bad as they were mechanically, were good looking designs, at the very least equal to the J cars, but still more forward looking than them.
That doesn’t mean Irv Rybicki was a hack or that I think cars under him were “hideous” but the early half of the 80s were derivative off of themes established by Mitchell in the mid 70s(1982 A bodies were pure sheer look) and the latter half of the 80s were responses to Ford’s Aero designs.
The C/H bodies were beautiful and light looking. Compare with the bathtub Caprice.
the Corsica was simple, clean, and good looking, as was the Beretta. They went on forever it seemed like. Again, better looking than the Tempaz or the modern Cruze or Civic
I would pick the Beretta as well. I also think the 1st generation Grand Am – 1985 – 1987 with the V6 was good choice if you got a good one. My Mom had a 1986 LE V6 coupe and it was nice car and she was fortunate that it was not a total lemon like many were. She had a couple of expensive repair jobs during the warranty period – power steering rack and something else that would have been VERY expensive – cannot remember what at this time. She kept that car from 1986 to 1994 when she traded it on a 1994 Sunbird SE V6 coupe – pretty much the same car in my opinion. She kept the Sunbird until 2008 and the only issue she had was the gas gauge kept working. She said the Sunbird was her best car.
Buick LeSabre, for me. Especially in the 2-door fully loaded edition. Second choice being the Pontiac Grand Prix.
First 2 cars that came to my mind were the C4 Corvette and the GMT400. Seeing the rest of the pictures, I will cast a vote for the S10/S15 twins, the Vectra A and the Kadett.
The trucks are simple and timeless, the C/K having an understated elegance.
The Blazer/Jimmy are also good lookers, and GM did a good job on the 5 door ones making the glass of the rear door and the quarter panel a “single unit”.
C4 Corvette exterior is looking very good to me these days. Has stood the test of time. I think the Astro Cargo van could be built today and its styling still be well received.
Even as a teenager at the time, I always found the best word to describe GM design of the mid 70s through the 80s as ‘sterile’. Safe, and largely uninspired design.
The trucks and SUV’s, fastback Fiero, Beretta and C4 Corvette were all decent looking.