(first posted 12/10/2015) Was there ever a truly appealing J-car? I’ll be the first to admit that I’ve never been a fan of any J-car. But if I was forced to pick the the most appealing J-car out there (at least visually, as I can’t imagine how bad NVH is in the convertible body), this 1992 Pontiac Sunbird convertible would be high up there on my list.
Predominately marketed as cheap econoboxes (the Cimarron being an exception), GM’s J-car lasted for over two decades and included variants for every GM North America passenger car division in that time, as well as some overseas GM divisions such as Holden and Opel. Somewhat fitting of their entry-level position, the J-cars never featured much in the way of cutting edge technology, exciting features, or even much refinement relative to competition or larger GM cars, and are often ridiculed for this.
Introduced as a 1982 model, Pontiac’s J-car Sunbird (initially called “J2000”, then “2000”, and then “2000 Sunbird”, before finally settling on “Sunbird” in 1985), was arguably the sleekest and most attractive of the original J-cars, combining aggressive front and rear fascias with sporty trim for a look that was neither unadorned or overly tacky like its various corporate siblings.
A substantial facelift came in 1988, which smoothed things out a bit with semi-hidden headlights on higher trims, and for 1989, composite headlights on base LE models. Coupe and convertible models received a faster roofline, with the convertible’s new top mimicking the more fastback shape of the new coupe.
A new interior arrived in 1989, bringing with it redesigned door panels and dash for the “cockpit” look that was more modern and a tad more premium than the old basic J-car interior. Typical of late-1980’s/early-1990’s Pontiacs, a substantial number of controls and buttons on the dash added some excitement to even an entry-level compact from GM’s “We Build Excitement” division.
The large black square at the top center of this car’s center stack typically housed the car’s radio faceplate. It appears to have been removed along with the Delco tape deck positioned below the climate controls. I suppose the current owners just prefer wind noise, engine noise, and pleasant conversation to music.
Maybe it’s just me, but does the stitching on of the vinyl seats and door panels tends to evoke the look of the car’s exterior lower bodyside cladding? Regardless, like the majority of convertibles in the last several decades, back seat space looks rather tight and best reserved for children or only in a pinch, adult passengers.
Retailing for $15,403 (about $5K more than the SE coupe and $6K more than the base LE coupe) in 1992, the not-so-cheap Sunbird SE convertibles came relatively “loaded” as far as J-cars went, with many features optional on other trims coming standard. Power windows, power locks, tinted windows, and floor mats were among these features. Anti-lock brakes were also standard, and proudly made known by a small emblem placed on the trunk. This car also features the optional wing spoiler, BBS-style alloys, as well as red lower bodyside stripe for a sporty, and dare I say attractive, look.
By 1992, the Sunbird’s engine choices were either the standard 2.0L LE4 inline-4 or the optional 3.1L LH1 V6. The LE4 I4 produced 110 horsepower and 123 pound-feet of torque and boasted multi-port fuel injection for slightly more power and better fuel economy than the previous LT2 version of the same engine. This convertible’s 12-valve LH1 V6 makes 140 horsepower and 185 pound-feet of torque. A 5-speed manual was the standard transmission, with a 3-speed automatic optional, and present on this Sunbird.
Personally, I don’t find any J-car appealing, and I shudder at the idea of owning one. But if I had to say, drive one around for a few hours on a sunny afternoon, this ’92 Sunbird convertible would be my pick. BBS-style wheels, black mask effect taillights, wing spoiler, a hint of ribbed lower body cladding, red bodyside trim, AND it’s bright aqua? Pure early ’90s style at its best (or worst, depending on your perspective).
Related Reading:
1982 Chevrolet Cavalier (GM Deadly Sin)
My grandfather had a 1988 Cimmaron with the 2.8L V6 — it went about 225 miles between fill-ups as the gas tank size was likely not designed for a car of this weight and engine originally . . . despite this being a top end J car from the original run, I would personally take one of the fastbacks — ideally a Skylark with the larger engine. A real style replacement for the Monza, etc.
Yes! I, too, was a fan of the later model Skyhawk S/H (Sport/Hatch), especially with hidden headlights and alloys. Depending on where one lives (where slashed convertible tops could be a frequent possibility), the ‘Hawk hatch might be my first choice of J-car.
Have to agree with you there. Those upper-trim Skyhawks with the hidden lamps may have been the best-looking J-cars, even deprived of a second generation as they were. Though the Sunbird GT was also a looker.
No thanks my father had a new 83 Camira bought just before I left NZ and it wasnt really much of a car and for a week before returning I had a 92? Camira wagon rental it was a piece of shit so no J cars for me thanks all the same.
I don’t like j cars and I especially dislike Pontiac versions with plastic body cladding. I think the best j would be a Chevy v6 convertible with cimaron. Header and rear panel swapped along with the interior if you forced to havea j car.
For me it would be a tossup between this or the ’84-’87 Cavalier convertible.
I haven’t been in a J car, but based on other small convertibles, I’d say the back seat is ok for AN adult, just don’t try to make that plural.
By far, the 1985-87 square Pontiac Sunbird GT Turbo convertibles, look the best with their flip-up hideaway lights, fender flares and rear spoiler…
Plus, that factory two tone color scheme adds the right amount of class.
I like that much better. The feature car looks rather feminine to me. My second choice for a J would be a z24.
That one is the clear winner for a convertible. The SE isn’t bad-looking but those lamps, those wheels, that two-tone. It just works.
This would be my 2nd runner up, for next best J-car body style…
1985-87 Chevy Cavalier Z24
Sign me up for the hatchback version of this Z24 – still like ’em.
I owned a 1987 Z24 coupe in black. It was a good car, and I liked driving it. It was reliable and comfortable.
Looking at the interior, two things jump out:
1) What on earth is that square “screen” above the A/C controls. It can’t be a nav screen–what is it? Prominent placement for an unclear feature…
2) The quality of the plastics and/or build quality was just so bad on GM cars of this era. Look at how the plastic does not line up on between the dash pad and the instrument cluster and control panel. No wonder the Japanese brands were viewed as miles ahead back then…
In response to your first question, please refer to the article:
“The large black square at the top center of this car’s center stack typically housed the car’s radio faceplate. It appears to have been removed along with the Delco tape deck positioned below the climate controls.”
Got it. I was thinking all the audio controls were below the A/C controls. Very ’70s to have the tape deck separate from the rest of the audio.
A friend of mine had a Sunbird of this generation. The radio looked cool. It looked very “high tech” back then. Sadly, the Sunbird suffered engine failure and subsequently abandoned when only a few years old on a road trip to Vermont.
Actually this car has the radio delete package. This comprised of a square delete plate over the hole where the radio control unit was and also one at the bottom where the tape deck would have been.
For some reason the owner has removed the trim piece that went over the pod where the tape deck would have been. The cassette player would have mounted in the smaller hole(above the ash tray) across from the shifter. The bigger hole housed a cubby hole when the tape deck was ordered. If the CD player option was offered then the CD player would have been in the top hole and a smaller cubby hole would have been mounted in the hole the tape deck would have been mounted to.
The “radio” in the dash is simply a control head the actual radio box was mounted in the dash behind the HVAC unit.
radio options you could get in this car were the following:
Radio Delete
FM/AM radio
FM/AM radio with CD player
FM/AM radio with Tape player
FM/AM radio with CD player and tape deck
Its odd that this car has the radio delete but power windows and locks
I’m wondering if its a legit radio delete or if someone put a block off plate there, sticking a “standard” radio in the cassette bin was and still is a common solution to radio replacement on these odd “box” remote-satellite style Delco radios.
hmm…. you could be right about somebody putting the block off plate there. It would also answer why the car has almost every option offered for that car but a delete plate.
That may be why the trim was missing where the tape deck would go. Perhaps it was removed because an aftermarket radio was installed.(I cannot see how that would detract from the looks of the car interior so that the owner felt he/she had to remove it for the car show. but to each his own.
Oh and welcome back Carmine. We missed your GM insight
Leon’s reply fit perfectly in the screen of my i pad. I thought, hmmm, is that you Carmine? And I scroll down and there’s Carmine response. An LOL moment.
And, welcome back Carmine.
Thank you.
I’d say odds are good that part of that dash has been out at least once, given that the radio’s no longer installed. Once you’ve pulled a dash, you’ll never get it back to the right spot. You just pray you don’t get a new squeak or rattle after you’ve done it and hope for the best. Not to say GM was perfect, but I don’t think this example’s a fair one from which to assert GM had terrible build quality.
It was quite the parlor trick slipping the 2.8 and later 3.1 V6s in the J car. Suddenly Cimmarrons were faster than 318i or 190e or even 325e. Cavalier Z24’s were faster than Preludes and Celicas that were not Si or GTS. Faster than 8 valve GTI’s and Scirroccos. So the haters will talk about NVH, and then stammer out how a 60 degree V6 is so unsmooth compared to inline 4s. Well no, I guess I was talking about the four, and only the first year because that was the only road test done and it told them what they wanted to hear and already knew.
It is perfectly understandable for import buyers to hate the J. GM was offering a car their size, with a long options list and at a price so low only the most ardent will have to consider it. They may have to face the truth that driving an American car is not who they are, and ask themselves the uncomfortable question why. They can kid themselves that the same car in Europe that was such a revelation there were tuned massively differently instead of the real difference of tiny engines.
J cars had a big sales boost around 92-93 as hp went up 15%, abs was standard and the interior was given 90s style. The price got ever more reasonable has the tooling paid off. Production remained in Lordstown and did not move to Mexico like it could have.
So my friends, when you see a late J Car, look away. Preconcieved notions are at risk, and that is bad for your stomach.
“It is perfectly understandable for import buyers to hate the J.”
And it is utterly ridiculous to believe that serious import buyers gave the J a second thought, much less a first one.
John, The great majority of import car buyers weren’t looking for hot rods, but a combination of qualities (and just quality) that they couldn’t find in the J Car.
GM didn’t lower the price of the J-Car because of having amortized the tooling. They did it for one reason only: in order to keep sales volume up in the face of weak demand. They desperately needed large J Car sales volume in order to meet CAFE.
GM acknowledged publicly that they lost money on every J they were building, because of its low transaction price, but they had no choice, because it offset the low EPA fuel mileage from all the profitable trucks and big SUVs they were selling.
Once the initial’81 J-Cars failed in their intended mission to compete against the Accord, GM lost any serious interest in them and refused to invest major sums to improve them to be competitive against the imports.They just adjusted the prices to whatever it took to keep them rolling out the door.
That made them a boon to folks who were looking for low-end transportation, and many of those buyers didn’t really care that they weren’t built like the imports. Most of those buyers hadn’t been exposed to a Honda yet.But eventually that all petered out too. Eventually there just weren’t enough buyers left who didn’t appreciate the difference between a J and a Toyota or Honda.
Interesting points, I have never heard the CAFE loss leader argument to explain the early nineties sales surge of Js. If true, it seems a weird thing to do to add the V6 to such a small car and let the four go from 1.8 up to 2.2 liters. They were selling them in Europe with1.6s or even 1.3s. And trucks are counted separately with their own lower CAFE goal. I did hear that was why the much later HHR and PT Cruiser were claimed as trucks.
You’re right about the trucks having a separate CAFE requirement. But GM was still selling lots of big cars in the 90s that didn’t meet the 27.5 mpg requirement for passenger cars.
GM and Ford publicly acknowledged that they could not make their small cars profitable, but had to keep making them to meet CAFE as well as because it was often cheaper to make them at a certain loss per unit than to close down a factory, which entailed huge expenses, job banks, etc..
You know, there was a real actual reason why GM went bankrupt: they couldn’t build and sell their passenger cars profitably.
You make assumptions about what it means to build a car profitably that are not based on the facts. The other day you were quite certain that the Chrysler New Yorker and Dodge Dynasty had to have been profitable. You forget that Chrysler slaes of these cars were dropping at the time; a factory has a specific break-even point; unless it’s capacity is utilized at the break-even point (often 70 – 80%), the cars being built are actually losing money.
It has little or nothing to do with the amortization of tooling; the fixed overhead of running a plant is huge, and when the plant runs at below capacity because of weak sales, it loses money.
That’s a primary reason GM kept prices low on the J cars: they lost less money overall by keeping the plant utilization high than if they had raised prices and lowered production. This is the essence of what was killing GM: high overhead, and passenger cars that couldn’t be sold at high prices, because they were inferior (or perceived to be) by the market. So they had to discount them heavily, and sell cheaply to fleets, which was still better than the alternative. But obviously, that strategy was not not sustainable.
Now they know better: they build more competitive cars, price them accordingly, and of course their overhead is now lower, having ditched their pension and retiree health care costs and a lot of debt, as well as kept labor costs low. That’s why they’re making money on cars now.
And that’s why the imports were making money on small cars back then: they built higher quality cars, and the market was willing to pay a higher price for them.
Car business 101. And no tuition charge for you. 🙂
Always glad for and in need of further education Paul, one of the reasons I come here, I do learn a lot. From you and your many fine contributers
I didn’t know that the Dynasty/New Yorker were selling at lower volumes than the Eclass K car New Yorkers/600/Caravelles that they replaced. Perhaps 93 when the new LHs were out, but earlier? A underutilized factory can have fewer shifts but below that is obviously a big money loser. You seemed to be comparing them to Taurus/Sable sales, which no Chrysler would have ever matched. It was a time when some rationalization needed to occour. and was with the loss of the Horizon, Diplomat and even the Grand Wagoneer. It was also a time of big cash needs with LH, Grand Cherokee, a first since 72 redo of the pickups, with Neons and clouds in the wings. Chrysler needed a boom year to pull all that off and 91-92 was not that.
I still think peoples preconceived notions are heavily at work. Like late Js having terrible NVH, only compared only to cars cost 40% more, and even then not much. Or Hyundai selling 250k not ready for prime time Excels at a low price on the basis of an Asian name.
“How do they sell them so low? Volume! Volume, I tell you!”
So, it appears the corny local car commercials were simply relaying the truth.
Who knew?
Chrysler brand sales dropped more than in half from 1988 to 1991. 1992 was only slightly better. Here’s the numbers:
1988: 251k
1989: 224k
1990: 174k
1991 123k
1992; 138k
1993: 179k (of which 56k were the new Concorde)
1994: 207k Chrysler was recovered, due to the Concorde and NY/LHS
If you were to look at Dodge and Plymouth (Dynasty/Acclaim, etc) you’d undoubtedly find similar drops and recoveries, except for the minivans.
It’s a well-documented fact that Chrysler came precariously close to bankruptcy in 1991 (along with GM). Their boxy K-car derivatives were past their sell-date, and it was killing them. Jeep and the minvans is what kept the lights on.
John: I highly recommend buying a copy of the Encyclopedia of American cars. A bargain ($37 used) given all the info, including sales stats back to 1930 and lots of good basic historical info.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1412713544?keywords=encyclopedi%20of%20americn%20cars&qid=1449778399&ref_=sr_1_sc_1&sr=8-1-spell
I will buy the book. Thanks for the tip
@ Paul
I own the Encyclopedia of American Cars and it has proven to be a very valuable resource in writing articles 🙂
The J-cars at least were rightfully perceived as inferior to their competition in the market. Compare this car to the absolute jewel that was the 1992-1995 (and 96-99) Honda Civic. Just the evident interior materials quality was a light-years distance, and this car would have been the one (with a 5-speed, natch) I would have bought through the military overseas program had I not been in a bit of lockup over what to buy. I ended up buying a used ’87 Accord that was still better in every way for less than 1/3 the price when I returned to the States.
By the early 90s Europe had replaced the J car with the Vectra, only GM NA and GMH in Aussie not NZ were still selling Js even NZ had the newer Vectra cars the market had moved on.
What I don’t understand is why GM would let the basic car soldier on without the necessary upgrades to make it more competitive, but then spend money on a convertible version, which wasn’t what this segment was clamoring for at the time.
My argument and Paul has a different view, was that cars like the J and the Tempo could only be sold at cash flow break even or a little better if there were minimum changes. The volume was also usefull for the dealers. Trying to go premium like was tried with the Contour, just did not work as import buyers were not interested. The system broke down as fewer and fewer middle class could afford new cars. Now the Focus is Mexican and the Cruze is only still in Lordstown because it was required by Bush/Obama has part of the baleout. My Verano only comes from Lake Orion MI for the same reason. The Encore/Trax CUVs that were conceived after the baleout but from the same parts bin hail from Korea.
Comparable Hondas and Toyotas (and even Nissans, at that time) had no problem selling for higher prices because the buyers believed that the higher quality and overall greater refinement were worth the extra cost.
Imagine if Ford had applied the Toyota approach to the Tempo – bring out a revamped version every four years that actually addresses customer complaints about the old model, and offers customers visible improvements and more refinement. Eventually, the Tempo would have gained positive brand equity and people would have been willing to pay more to get a better vehicle. The problem is that the successful implementation of this approach requires a long-term outlook.
The Contour’s higher sticker price when compared to the outgoing Tempo didn’t help sales, but I would argue that the extremely tight back seat was just as much of an issue – if not a bigger one. I liked the Contour when it first debuted, but I sat in one at the Harrisburg Auto Show, and knew instantly that the lack of back seat room was going to be a deal-killer for a lot of buyers.
I’m pretty sure that Chevrolet Cruze production remains in Lordstown, Ohio, because of terms of the UAW contract, not because of any conditions attached to the federal bailout of GM. It’s my understanding that GM is producing the next-generation Cruze in Mexico, while the Lordstown plant will continue to produce the first-generation Cruze for fleet customers.
Focus isn’t Mexican… yet. It will be come next generation. At this time, though, it’s built in Wayne, Michigan at the Michigan Assembly Plant. MAP will be converted to, if the rumors and drips and drabs of the new UAW-Ford contract are to be believed, build new-to-the-U.S. versions of Rangers and Broncos.
Small GM car production was required to remain under the terms of the bailout. Obama, to his credit in my mind made a specific point of it. The USA Cruze, Sonic, and Verano were to be made in Korea by Daewoo. In 2009 they were still making Cobalts in Lordstown and Aveos were Korean.
Unless its written somewhere, I’m not sure that keeping production in the US was part of the GM-Gov reorganization.The Sonic, the Aveos replacement returned to US production from Korea and is built in Michigan, not Ohio.
The J’s were built in Mexico, US and Canada as recently as the 90’s, I don’t think they switch over to Lordstown exclusively until the Cobalt came out.
The cars come from wherever it regionally works for GM, there is a Cruze made in Korea, but it sells in other markets, I don’t think they had the production capacity to supply all of the Chevrolet Cruzes for the US and the rest of the world out of Korea alone.
LTown is a good plant, fairly modern, built in 1966, it has its own stamping facility too.
I believe the Sonic shares the Verano plant in Lake Orion MI. Geeber mentioned above that the upcoming 2nd Gen Cruze was going to Mexico. I wonder if that spells the end of Lordstown. Fleet models of the old model are pretty common at GM for a year or two, but not a good harbinger. Like with the fleet W Impalas in Canada. When I was getting my MBA, the Vega production change over at Lordstown was a case study. The anti GM and anti UAW vitriol from the professor would have been enjoyed by many around here, even I enjoyed it. I don’t remember any great ideas from him or us students on how they should have done it. None of this stuff is easy, and it only gets more tuff when margins are so thin. The $5 fender liner for that or the $9 roll bar for this are often spouted as obvious and easy.
Let me say what an honor this was. It started with a great article from Brendan. You offer what you hope others will find an interesting take. Then Paul steps in with his just amazing level of big picture knowledge. You try in your own way to keep your end up and other great commenters like Geeber offer their take away. Then to have the legendary Carmine step in from out of nowhere with his level of GM knowledge. It feels like you have sipped a sherry and had a great discussion with the best. Thanks.
geeber: regarding the convertible Js: Because they probably didn’t spend a dime on them. 🙂
These were built by ASC, or at least the whole top and associated parts. Undoubtedly ASC was willing to spend the money on whatever engineering was needed to then sell the conversion/parts to GM. Vendors generally do a lot of the development of vehicle systems.
And then there was the pricing: a ’92 Sunbird SE coupe cost $10,386. The Convertible was $15,345. A no-lose proposition, as long as there were enough made/sold to recoup ASC’s cost to tool up the top and related parts.
IIRC, ASC did a very large percentage of the convertibles back then, either direct conversions (sometimes right in the plants of the manufacturers), or at least supplied the engineering and parts.
GM obviously got a substantial cut of that extra $5k, as well as the image benefit of having a rag top. But I suspect these did a good business with the rental fleets. It’s distinctly possible that the convertible Js were the only ones that were actually profitable for GM. 🙂
I had forgotten about the substantial price differential between the coupes and the convertibles. The $4,959 price differential in 1992 is $8,406 today, adjusted for inflation.
I can see these cars as being popular among rental car companies who want to offer customers a low-cost convertible.
That’s a huge price premium for the convertible, when you view it as a percentage of the base coupe price – almost half as much again. Would this be the most expensive convertible on that basis?
If you recall back in the early 1980’s, there was a big stink about convertibles coming back in the motoring press (and other places) especially as they were have to been legislated out of existence in the late 1970’s, by rollover damage laws that were never passed. The US car companies pre-empted the government in the mid 1970’s and cancelled all of their convertible versions, with the famous 1976 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz convertible largely publicized as the “last” convertible.
Scroll forward to 1982, Ford with the Mustang, Chrysler with the E-series and GM with the Buick Riviera and (oddly, to me) the Chevy and Pontiac J-cars getting convertibles back into production. True, American Sunroof Corporation (ASC) had a huge amount of involvement in (I think) all of these cars, but it was considered part of the times. Happy Days were here again, and we were told to celebrate with convertibles!
Additionally, all of the convertibles were farkin’ expensive compared to their more mundane counterparts. GM wasn’t alone in this, as the Mustang convert and the E class converts were substantially more expensive than their more mundane counterparts.
During the 1980’s I worked for the in-house marketing arm for a Tier 1 automotive supplier. My boss, the VP of Marketing bought a nice Cavalier convertible for his new wife, I took a few rides in it with him. I thought it was nicely assembled, but apparently that was the hallmark of ASC. I think he was more amused with it than his wife!
I could never justify the premium spent on a ragtop over the comparable performance version, but you know, different strokes and all that…
A few years ago, my sons and I saw a very nice Cavalier convertible at a local show. As we looked at it for just a second, an elderly lady in a lawn chair started to tell us about how she bought it new and how much she loved it. As we walked away, one of the kids said “I never thought that with all the cool cars here, I would find a Cavalier interesting.” I felt the very same way. It’s really true: Every car has a story.
FWIW, as J cars go, I like this one a lot. I was always a sucker for this bright turquoise.
When I see cars like this at a car show, it makes me feel old. What’s this thing doing here? It’s only… 23 years old. Dangit.
Know the feeling!
Back in the sixties when I was a kid, I really wanted a model kit of a 1940 Ford. Dad asked me why I wanted a model of a new car. 1940, new?
“Now I understand,
What you tried to say to me….”
Sunbird convertibles full of teenage girls being part of my memories of being a teenager during the 1980s, I can overlook the NVH and enjoy some nostalgia for this slightly later Sunbird convertible. On the other hand, the NVH would probably drive me crazy and destroy the nostalgia if I actually had to drive one of these for more than a day.
In 1990 my wife and I rented a red Sunbird convertible during our honeymoon on Kauai. It was perfect for cruising around the island and taking in the sights. Of course, we probably never had it above 40 mph.
I, too, rented a red one in 1990, only this was on Maui. I actually enjoyed it. They had a zillion of them in the rental fleet, mostly red; at the parking lots of the usual scenic locations sometimes I had to walk up to a couple of cars before I recognized the license plate of the one I had rented.
You beat me to it – first thing I think of J-car ragtops are rental cars in Hawaii. The car to drive there as a visitor. Of course, you can feel the “flex” of the body while driving it.
The Most Appealing J-car?
If you mean one I would actually desire – then the answer is yes. Optioned just like this one please with the V6 and manual trans if I could get it.
Honestly I’d rather have this than a non-GT/non-V8 Mustang convertible from the same year.
IIRC the convertibles were practically handbuilt at the Lansing Craft Center, not Lordstown.
The late square-body J cars (sedans especially) rusted like they were soaked in brine at the factory; by around 2000 or so there were some that had huge swathes of rust where the paint peeled from the primer.
That’s correct (at least in the later model years). Cavalier Convertibles ran on the same line as the N-Cars.
The early converts (before 1996) were subcontracted out to Heinz Praechter’s American Sunroof Corporation in North Jackson, Ohio between Lordstown and Akron, Ohio.
The 1996 MY and later were produced at Lansing Craft Centre.
Lordstown never produced a convertible.
I drove a lot of J cars in the late 80s when I worked for a dealership. The base 4 cyl was annoyingly rough and slow. But I did drive.a Buick turbo J car, with an OHC 4 cyl. Much better. It had substantial turbo lag. The engine was pretty soggy until the boost gauge spun around, then the thing took off.
But in the end, the 2.8 V6 gave the same performance without the lag, whick was a bit more in keeping with Buick luxury.
After looking at it on the dealer’s lot for what seemed months, I bought a 1982 J2000 hatch. Mine was a very lightly loaded blue on blue…..at the start, with a manual transmission and A/C. It was one of the last Pontiac J-cars with the Chevy OHV engine. Not a fast car, but not the slowest I would own. Unfortunately, some part of the drivetrain made a “threshing” or sewing machine sound that was heard at speeds under 25mph and at idle in traffic. I think a riding lawnmower would have sounded better. Things did pick up when the exhaust manifold developed a crack one day, making my thresher sound like an old tractor.
Aside from the engine sound what else was a disappointment? The near total lack of steering feel, but then my previous car was a Ford Fiesta.
Strangely (?), there are a few 80s Cavalier wagons in my area, a body style I think is a bit more attractive for a J-car. A V6 Cavalier wagon would be my choice, though I would not pass up a convertible if I ran across one. And as a former owner, I once had 3 tall people in my J2000. You won’t go far without complaints about foot room from passengers if they are older than 8 or 9.
BTW, Isuzu also sold a version of the J-car as the Gemini, before switching to a Honda as their last car.
Isuzu built a version of the J car called Aska it was exported to only one place, NZ had them with Holden Camira badging the one pictured on Wiki was my fathers, a particularly awful cars as far as roadholding was concerned the Japanese suspension tune was lethal but they had a 2 litre engine while the Australian version was a 1600, very very few survive.
My wife had a 92 Sunbird SE 2 door from new till about 1999 and it was a fine 2nd car for her to drive to work. Coupe’s got the cloth interior and that blanked out spot was for the radio head unit- taken right from GM’s trucks. The Cassette player was a separate unit lower in the console. In 92 SE didn’t mean loaded–ours did not have pwr windows. We had cruise added at the dealer (couldn’t tell it wasn’t factory) because we drove the car to FL twice.
I always thought the roof styling was a homage to the early 60’s bubble top Chev’s and Pontiacs–the cars did not have any cladding as this article states–just the wide rub strip with a pinstripe in it–it was painted metal below that.
I can honestly say nothing ever went wrong with the car except the strap holding up the muffler rotted off twice–the exhaust was still factory when we sold the car. I added sway bars from a Z24 and nicer tires when the originals wore out.
Like I said it was a perfect car for what we used it for, we liked the interior, we knew it was just an economy car, we maintained it well and it treated us well. Its too bad so much history is written by people who didn’t experience it.
Actually the radio head in these was similar to what the early W-body Grand Prix and Regal had as radios, the Sunbird one was identical to the Grand Prix’s, they were a smaller square radio a little wider than a cigarette box.
The GP had this radio from 88-89 only, the Regal kept the “box” radio until the dashboard was redesigned for dual airbags in 1995 or so.
The truck radio was a wider affair, smaller than the Delco 2000 “standard” style GM radio, but bigger than these little “box” radios.
These were part of a whole family of oddball non-standard DIN radios that Delco came out with in the 80’s, the Camaro Berlinettas stand up pod radio, the Buick Sommerset Regals pod radio, the GP/Regal/Sunbird box radios, the Allante flat all button radio.
Nice to see you back, Carmine. Missed your GM knowledge filled comments.
I thought Carmine was sleeping with the fishes…
Nice to see you back, Carmine. Rock on!
Thanks for the glimpse of the 1963 Grand Prix parked next to the Sunbird. That year GP is probably my favorite Poncho of all.
I’d like one of these Oldsmobiles. If I couldn’t get the V6 I’d have to swap one in later, but I always liked the looks – the way the headlight/turn signal/headlight pattern mimicked the ’67 and ’68 Cutlass.
Yes, me too. There was a lot to like about a V6 powered Firenza SX hatch…
The 350 Tuned Port – 700R-4 conversion on my 1989 Caprice wagon took the better part of six months, back in 1996. Since this was the family car, we needed a temporary substitute.
So a $200 1986 Cavalier wagon, derisively named “Putt-Putt”, took its place that summer. After whatever I did to it to pass PA inspection…(I truly can’t remember, it didn’t elicit the specific memories my Caprice, or ’57 Chevy, or ’75 V8-4-speed Monza, or ’68 Chevy Truck or ’70 Monte Carlo did)…the Putt-Putt did whatever was asked of it and proved reliable enough for us to give to a needy neighbor when we were done with it. I don’t remember how long they had it but I do recall neglect finally killed it.
A friend drives a 2003 Sunfire 40-50 miles each way to work and he likes the car. The early Ecotec definitely gives the car some scoot, but it’s just not as engaging as the 1993 Accord my oldest son drives.
Eleven years ago I was issued a new Cavalier coupe stripper special while my ’97 Blazer underwent rear-end collision repair (A DHL Delivery van lost its brakes and slid into me). Driving that was abuse. One cross-city trip made me feel 20 years older. (which I don’t get, the Putt-Putt, while basic and less-then-comfortable, was never punitive like the ’04 Cavalier) I turned it back into the rental company and told them I couldn’t drive it. They replaced it with a Kia Amanti, one of the ultimate “lipstick on a pig” rides. That’s a story for another day.
I’ve written elsewhere on CC about the new Sonic I drove last fall. So totally opposite the J-cars I’ve owned/driven. Fun, engaging, plenty of power with even the base engine. I could totally see myself owning one. And everyone I know with a Cruze speaks highly of it.
IF ONLY they’d have put some of that goodness into these old-time J’s.
I drove a ’91 Sunbird until late1999, when I passed it to my sister. My mother eventually used it to trade on her 2000 GP when she passed her ’95 GP down to my sister to take to college. Say what you will about them, but my J-Car was driven for almost 150K teenage-driven miles and aside from its uncontrollable appetite for alternators (which I learned how to change myself on the second one) it never broke down and started up every day without question. In the end I would love to have another as a commuter car. Make mine that Red Firenza GT this time though, please.
I always thought this version of the Sunbird was a pretty decent-looking car. The interior always seemed a bit better put together than the Cavalier’s did, or at least less-cheap anyways. The Sunfire felt like such a nose-dive for the Pontiac J-Body after these cars.
My personal experiences with a 1992 Sunbird come from Driver’s Training (circa 1997), believe it or not. My school was who did Driver’s Training where I grew up, which ordinarily meant learning on the early ’90s Caravans into which the school had installed passenger-side brakes. For whatever reason, though, they wound up hiring an outside instructor for my class, which meant that we used his car-a red 1992 two-door Sunbird with a passenger-side brake.
Compared to the ’86 LeBaron GTS cursed with the automatic and base K-Car engine that I had *not* (ahem) been driving unattended for about six months by then (only when the parents weren’t around and I didn’t feel like riding my bike where I wanted to go), the Sunbird felt downright spritely. That four-banger had a certain familiar droning sound to it. The car handled my deciding I didn’t want to wait to turn and taking the corner at 25 in fine form my second time out.
The front seat was fine, but the back seat was miserable. Our instructor paired us up to save trips and get more students driving time. Of course, he paired me with the tallest kid in our school, a basketball player who already stood 6’4″ as a sophomore. The instructor always had his seat back as far as it could go so he had room to use the brake if needed. My driving partner had his seat back and reclined. That meant I pretty much had a seat back in my crotch if I wasn’t driving.
Then came the road trip. Instructor decided that we all needed to experience freeway driving in order to pass. Trouble was, closest freeway was an hour’s drive away. So, he split some of the partners up and put them with teams that were doing well, to make teams of three. So then we had four people, including the 6’4″ basketball player, crammed into a two-door Pontiac Sunbird for a four-hour road trip so that we could each get a chance to drive on the freeway.
Truth be told, I don’t remember a lot of the details of the car in terms of build quality and whatnot. I remember being crammed into the back seat way too much and that pleasantly familiar droning buzzy hum the car made taking off from a stop. Also, that starter noise is forever embossed into my memory, and to this day I know I’m hearing a four-banger GM from the late-’80s and ‘early ’90s being started before I even turn my head.
My only driving experience with a J-car was also Driver’s Training, oddly enough. 1995 for me and the Sunbird was somewhere in the ’89 to ’94 generation. Base model sedan. Only drove that one once, though–In another interesting parallel, most of my training came in an “outside” car too. All of the instructors were contractors from an outside agency, but ours used her personal car, a ’91 Mustang LX notchback with a passenger brake installed. It was just the 4-cylinder version, but it wasn’t bad looking. Even had aftermarket wheels in place of the stock units. I wasn’t sure at the time why she subjected her personal car to the abuse of teenage student drivers, but in retrospect I’m sure it was a tax write-off.
I drove the Sunbird in one session with another instructor when our usual one was out sick.
Once the 3.1L V6 got the 4-Speed Auto the Js and Ns became decent performers. I rented plenty of these back in the day and they could easily hit the century mark for the times you were running late to the airport.
These cars were precisely the sort of cheap to run junk GM churned out by the hundreds of thousands during the Malaise Era, almost like they intended to make beater rides from the start.
The V-6 J’s never received the 4-speed auto. They stuck with the three speed TH125 all the way up to 1994.
I don’t doubt you’re right. I’m pretty sure the N-Cars did though.
My high school buddy had the Chevy version of this car in the form of a 1988 Cavalier Z-24 convertible with 2.8 and 3 speed automatic. That car was a lot of fun for us high school students and much quicker than most other student’s old beater rides. He had that car well into college with well over 100k on the clock and it never gave him any real issues to speak of. His 1995 Chrysler Sebring convertible was a another matter and ended his affection for both coupes and convertibles but that is a different story.
I like the Z24 Cavalier a bit better, in black please. These always strike me as more feminine (not that the Z24 is exactly macho). The 85-87 GT Turbo posted above looks best though.
J cars in shows??? I’m really old… My wife had a 1990 black and silver Z24 Cavalier with a 3.1 V6. Very nice and fast, she called it “my little muscle car”. That will always be my face J.
I’ve never had much interest in or use for sub compact cars. So, no J car has ever really been high on any list of mine.
I suppose the subject car would be my highest J – a summer car for heck of it if such a car were to ever fit in my life. The early Mopar K convertibles sit in a similar place for me. The ’80s cool version of a mundane car.
I’ve long thought a ’70s GM barge convertible would be the fun summer car, but I’m neck deep in large vehicles now. Something small seems quite appealing.
I have always like the 88-94 J car coupes. The Sunbird coupes were my favorite due to the rocket booster switch like parking brake lever.
I have always saw the J cars from Pontiac and Chevy as being honest cars for what they were. They were cheap cars that were easy to afford and gave a person decent transportation (albeit boring)
True they were not the best cars out there at the time but for a lot of folks it was their first new car and gave years of good service.
I may be a minority on this but I like J cars. We had an 83 cavalier wagon as a kid. I liked the car. Goofy front end and all. A friends mom had a 93 sedan that was a good little car for her. I like this Pontiac too but would prefer a coupe to a convertible. I actually looked at a 93 cavalier coupe a few months back. It had 229k on the 2.2 and ran great. But I passed for my 98 grand am.
I had a 90 Sunbird LE coupe. It was a hand-me-down from my sister who bought it new. She replaced it with a ’96 Civic EX coupe… well done.
Anyway, I loved that car. It was pretty darn reliable up until it blew it’s first headgasket. We replaced the motor on the cheap and it lasted a couple mostly sedentary years until that one blew.
One correction, the door panels didn’t get updated until 1992. I always wanted them but never actually found them. I did replace the seats, install a center arm rest, and then took it too far and painted a bunch of stuff on the dash (the same blue as the exterior) and put some unfortunate stickers on it.
The first picture speaks volumes. The feature car parked next to a 63 Grand Prix illustrates just how not special the J cars were. It also shows how far Pontiac fell from their golden Era.
No, what you’re seeing there is a combination of the effects of government interaction in the car business and a corporation unwilling to step up and produce the best cars they could have.
Bought a new 2004 CavalierVL for about $14000 CDN all in. It was a good, basic reliable car that was all we could afford at the time. We were making 500 mile round trips on a fairly consistent basis, and it never let us down.
I had owned a 2000 Z24 Cavalier, so I do have some affinity for J body cars…..they’re fun, lightweight, quick, great in the snow because of the front wheel drive. The only real downside is that the build quality on them is terrible…..something is always breaking down. That, coupled with the initial cheap price, meant that the cars didn’t hold their value very well. I haven’t owned an 80’s version, but I would assume them to be the same. GM offered the J’s as a low cost, fun, sporty car that was economical on gas, and I think that they had succeeded. The 70’s Skyhawks and Monzas were in the same sort of category.
I had a good laugh–I was at the mechanic shop one day and the mechanic was telling the person on the other end of the phone that they needed a front wheel bearing and a front control arm. I asked if it was a 2000’s or so Cavalier and the mechanic said yes. You also see those years of Cavs with the notorious hanging/ bouncing muffler at the back, since the muffler hangers were of such crap quality.
The 3.1 with its 185 ft lbs of torque is a good amount to motivate these cars. The interior of the late 80’s/ early 90’s is very Trans Am/ Firebird-esque…..the fighter jet cockpit look, especially the similarities with the steering wheel (minus all the buttons of a GTA).
We bought my daughter a 1990 Sunbird LE convertible when she turned 16 because my wife’s boss sold it to us for what a Chrysler dealer was going to give her in trade for a new Sebring convertible ($1200, as I recall, in 1998). It had the fourbanger automatic in it.
2 weeks after we bought it, the head gasket blew. So we put a new head/gasket on it for $1200 more. It was still worth buying (my wife’s boss offered to buy it back).
That car was like the Energizer bunny – it ran and ran and ran, and for the most part only needed basic maintenance (and a new top).
It’s the first and only convertible I’ve ever owned. I LOVED that car when it became mine to drive! There was hardly ever a nice day when I didn’t put the top down.
We ended up selling it to a family member who drove it until its engine finally died.
I grew up in the shadow of Lordstown, we swam in the product. Back in the time of these cars, I knew no one who owned one, but knew people who owned the previous version and we’ve had three of the post 1995 versions go through our family.
All of them gave us good service with the plain jane Cavalier going almost 278000 miles in 18 years. Inexpensive cars that are good on fuel and repairs? I can’t complain.
Nice article, and you made me realize I had forgotten all about the 1989-92 Sunbird GT. I remember the earlier versions–I pass one occasionally here in town–but the fact that the refreshed ’89 version still offered the semi-hidden lamp GT had completely slipped my mind. I don’t know how long it’s been since I’ve seen one, but probably at least 10 years.
I wonder where they all went?
Looks just like the car I had stolen off the street in Chicago right down to the missing knob on the center AC vent. It had the original radio but a previous owner disconnected it and installed an aftermarket radio in the console section that is missing.
What an ugly, lame looking instrument panel on that Sunbird convertible. Typical craptastic GM interior designs of that dark era. I sure hope those dreadful teal hues never become fashionable on automobiles ever again! Yeeeesh!!!!
My son owned this exact car. It was on OK car. Had the typical GM trans problem, lock up convertor that wouldn’t release so the engine stalls. Thankfully his dad(me) being an experienced GM employee knew what the fix was, pull the correct wire. Drivers door power window regulator failed, easy fix, but the surprise was GM apparently added the power window system after the inner door panel was designed, the inner door panel had a large hole plasma torched so you could get the power window mechanism in the door. I’m pretty sure it was original as the inner panel paint, plastic sheeting, sealant and clips were intact. I had seen many aftermarket vendor installed power windows and lock and they generally locked pretty butchered once you opened up the doors.
I went from a ’74 Fleetwood to a new ’84 turbo Sunbird at 23. Considering how quiet the Caddy was, the only NVH that bothered me was the serpentine belt squeal until I replaced it. The A/C did moan at idle and the fuel pump buzzed softly. I bought an extended warranty, which was a waste of money. The only big repairs I recall were 2 clutches, which it didn’t cover. Fit & finish were excellent, and it looked great in light maroon metallic and multi-gray interior. Sold it to my brother in ’88 and he blew the turbo within a year. I hadn’t thrashed it much and changed the oil every 3k.
Misread this at first as “…most appalling J-car”. 🙂
Always interesting to see how different ‘world cars’ looked from one country to another. I’m imagining this with a JD Camira front clip.
RENTAL CAR!
We rented these out by the thousands in Florida, Houston, Phoenix and especially Hawaii. We had Mustang convertbles before, and after these years, but for about 2 years, I drove these all over.
What a cheapo ride. Loved the stereo, as it kept one from hearing every squeak and rattle. Awful seat belts. The dashboard used to shake, bounce and rattle like the ten year older Ford Fairmont. The Sunbird body twisted like Chubby Checkers. The convertible vinyl wasn’t robust enough to last many years. This was not as much fun to drive as it looked.
Always thought the JD Camira had a lot of Pontiac DNA in its front clip. A good friend had an ‘83 Camira SJ, the Australian motoring press dubbed it the ‘Standing Joke’ for its total lack of any performance upgrades, save for the alloy wheels and rear spoiler. My friend thrashed his and drove it into the ground with in 18 months. IIRC the front end collapsed after getting airborne over a railway crossing in Ballarat.
THE ONLY ”J”CAR I LIKE IS THE 1956 J STUDEBAKER GOLDEN HAWK WITH ITS UNIQUE 352 CUBE PACKARD V8 ENGINE ON THE COVER OFNOVEMBER 2021 ISSUE OF”TURNING WHEELS” OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE STUDBAKER DRIVERS CLUB//
Now, I’m going to go all out and say that the Cavalier SRI 130 is up there with the desirable J cars.
We found a 1993 vintage of the same car pictured above with 74k original miles on it.. My 15yr old daughter loved it and has been driving for a year and a half now. Yep, pretty roughly put together BUT still makes you smile driving around in that white interior with the top down. My first car was a ’79 yellow sunbird. Worth every bit of the $250 I paid for it!