(first posted 7/8/2016) My neighborhood of Edgewater in Chicago’s north side really comes alive in the summer. Clean, sandy beaches along Lake Michigan attract a melting pot of students from nearby Loyola University, families of all different ethnic groups, and mere sun-and-fun seekers. Vendors selling frozen treats walk along the sidewalks and waterfront, pushing carts accompanied by the sound of tinkling bells that make my mouth water like one of Pavlov’s dogs. It is against the backdrop of this neighborhood beachfront paradise that I spotted this Dynamic 88 Celebrity in the driveway of a neighborhood building. Model year ’66 would be the Dynamic’s last.
The “Dynamic” moniker has been discussed before within the CC forum in comments, with reactions ranging from thinking it sounds stupid, to defense of the imagery of motion and power that word conveys. Personally, I like the name and find it a lot more honest-sounding than the “Olds Rocket” / aeronautical associations of its upmarket “Delta” and downmarket “Jetstar” siblings. The Dymamic 88 itself was no less dynamic than a same-year Chevy Impala was like an antelope. In today’s alphanumeric hodgepodge, I’d be more driven to purchase or lease something “dynamic” than something that sounded like a callout from a Midwestern bingo hall.
This particular example had a few aftermarket accessories, including chromed fender skirts, custom wheels, and fat exhaust tips. It also appeared to be loved and well cared for – which will always be my defense when it comes to haters of the so-called “donk”. The look of this car is very much in keeping with the multicultural character of this neighborhood, and of Chicago as a whole. Much like disco music had been maligned in the late-70’s by some who were less than friendly toward sub-groups to whom that music primarily appealed, I wonder if dislike of the donk sometimes simply veils prejudice against certain ethnic groups most commonly associated with these types of cars. I’ll just say that if this car was my toy and I owned it, I’d be damned if I let someone else tell me how to play with it.
That said, we like what we like, and there are folks who will genuinely cringe at the sight of a donk because they simply don’t like the way they look. It’s also true that some mild customs are done more tastefully than others. I wouldn’t exactly call myself a purist, but I do tend to like my classic cars looking factory-stock. Nevertheless, I would be incredibly bored if absolutely everyone shopped at one clothing store, listened to the exact same music, watched the same movies, and never otherwise stepped out of a box of some sort. It’s cliché, but it’s true: variety is the spice of life, and age has only reinforced this idea within this Michigan kid from a cross-cultural and multi-ethnic background.
I happened to meet the owner of this Dynamic 88 one day while walking past this building on a Saturday afternoon, and he was more than happy to show off not just this car, but also his ’64 Impala that was parked below in the garage. There’s a certain kind of excitement that spills over to you from the owner when they’re telling you about his or her car that he or she loves – it was there when my now-friend Adam showed me his ’81 Chrysler Cordoba. It’s this very type of enthusiasm that brings us car-lovers together – especially within the CC community, regardless of where we come from or what cars make our individual motors rev.
I managed just a few shots of this car, as I was late for my spot on the sand, but I was happy for this interaction with its owner. This car was just one of just over 38,700 Dynamic 88 pillared “Celebrity” sedans produced for ’66, out of just over 95,800 total that year. It was the most popular bodystyle of four, accounting for about 40% of total sales. (The least popular Dynamic 88 that year was the convertible, of which only about 5,500 were sold.) The $3,013 starting price for the Celebrity sedan translates to just over $22,100 in 2016 – a bargain, if you ask me. A 300-hp 425-c.i. Olds Rocket V8 was standard, to power this two-ton car.
Olds may be gone, and this car may not be stock, but I am thankful for the flavors and colors – both figuratively and literally – associated with this season in my kaleidoscope of a neighborhood. Well-loved examples of once-workaday cars like this Dynamic 88, tricked out by their adoring owners to their liking, also make me smile for the experience of being a part of this community. To quote Salt-N-Pepa, “you only live once and you’re not coming back…so express yourself.” Amen.
All photos taken in Edgewater, Chicago, Illinois.
The Olds was as photographed on Saturday, June 2, 2012.
The ice cream man was as photographed on Sunday, September 4, 2011.
Related reading from Paul Niedermeyer: Curbside Classic: 1966 Oldsmobile Dynamic 88 – The Best $3,000 Big Sedan In 1966?.
I always preferred the 67 restyle of the 88 to the earlier and later versions (Especially if it’s in police trim, just like the CHP customized them when they had them). But, I do think this car certainly has some character, even if the paint is not my thing.
As far as the Donk look goes, this isn’t the most egregious or offensive example I’ve seen. Not to say that I like this look, but I’ve seen worse. The thing that I never understood, was why you would put wheels on cars like this. Having ridden in my dad’s custom 58 Apache he bought, 20 inch rims and old car suspension don’t mix at all. Especially considering the appeal of these old cars, was the fact that they were softly sprung couches on wheels. (I haven’t ridden or driven these kinds of true barges, but I have heard plenty of times the wonderfulness of how smooth the rides on these cars were), so to take away one of the key appeals of the car is just odd. Sacrificing comfort for what someone else assures me is “style” doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me.
I guess you’ve never seen a pair of gorgeous legs in a pair of high heels? (Talk about sacrificing comfort for style!) Anyway, even though I would not have chosen the trim seen above, I have to acknowledge that this Oldsmobile exists only for the pleasure of its owner, and it makes me happy to see that he’s gotten it tricked out to his liking. That makes PERFECT sense to me.
Folks have been making their cars ride hard for a wide variety of reasons since the early days of the automobile. Hot rods, sports car handing, low riders, drag racers, etc…Not everyone places a soft ride above other qualities. The high heel analogy being a perfect example. Remember when men wore platform shoes?
Paul writes; “Remember when men wore platform shoes?”
We called them cowboy boots.
When walking the mean dark streets of NYC in the 1970s, they made us look bigger, more threatening, and less muggable.
Also, I’ve seen the damage that a life time of high heel shoes can do to an aging woman’s feet. Not pretty.
http://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/understanding-hammertoes-basics
Another great piece Dennis. Growing up in the midwest with its relatively short summers and distinct seasons I recall how summer really did have a special feel about it. Living in Florida now our seasons are more subtle and summer is not the one with the perfect weather.
As far as the car is concerned, this era of Olds full sizers never really did it for me. The Chevys and Pontiacs are my favorites as well as the 64/65 Olds Cutlass. That first side shot shows just how small the roof is compared with the massive body and long hood and trunk.
I share your sentiments on the donk-hating since I actually like modified cars as much or more than stock ones. Wheels and stance don’t do much for me, but I have a pretty deep appreciation for the role of cars as self expression. There are distinct cultural trends in automotive expression and I think that we have to try and appreciate that connection even if we don’t subscribe to the aesthetic. I like my cars low and raked forward but one of these Donks always makes me smile because, lets face it, who ELSE was going to take this relatively boring 4 door sedan and shower this love on it?
Word to everything you just said, my friend! And thanks.
Another excellent article, Joe.
It wouldn’t surprise me if there was some racist element to some people’s criticism of donks, bandied around by the same people who are quick to rant about “welfare queens in their Cadillacs”.
Personally, I don’t like the giant wheels on donks but this one is subtle compared to the scissor door and candy-apple red paint treatment on other donks. But most importantly, someone is keeping one of these classics alive. It’s not as though he snatched it from the hands of somebody who was going to keep it in concours condition and bone stock. A lot of the bechromed Caprices rolling around were probably not long for this world when somebody decided to shower some love (and a lot of money) on them.
I like it! Plus the owner obviously puts lots of care and effort into it so more power to him! Now, I’m not from the USA and pardon my ignorance but what actually is a Donk car? What are the essential characteristics? Clearly big wheels are in the mix.
Ashley, thanks for reading, and for asking. Generally speaking, a donk is an older, American full- (sometimes mid-) sized car with extra-large custom rims and low-profile tires, sometimes also with custom paint and extra chrome accessories.
Our featured car wouldn’t be in the urban dictionary next to the word, but I felt it worked for the purposes of this article.
Donk is derived from Donkey which is the slang term for a Impala, from back in the day when they were the most popular car to turn into a low rider, often with Hydraulics. Some of that crowd changed direction from the 13″ wheels to the ever increasing diameter wheels as the came to market. For what ever reason the term Donk started being used for any car that was lifted and had large diameter wheels.
Joseph, As you stated, I too “… tend to like my classic cars looking factory-stock”.
Then William said “… someone is keeping one of these classics alive”.
I don’t even like modern factory stock low profile tires and big wheels on today’s cars and trucks. My 2013 Tacoma has 15″ wheels and tall tires; a friend’s 2015 Ram has 20 inch wheels and rim protectors. C’est la vie.
That old Oldsmobile is in beautiful shape; someone loves it and I am happy to see that.
Thank you for posting this.
“I don’t even like modern factory stock low profile tires and big wheels on today’s cars and trucks.”
I can live with them on sports, sporty and performance cars. But in my on-again, off-again search for a truck or SUV to eventually replace the Ranger, I’m always amused by the AWD and 4WD SUVs with the optional big wheels and, as you call them, tires that are mere rim protectors. I keep wondering how those will hold up after the roads are torn up following a winter storm, or after we make a few runs up and down the mile or so of gravel and dirt road that leads to our lakefront property.
Apart from appearance, is there a performance advantage to having them on a midsize SUV or CUV?
No real advantage, simply appearance. I believe I’ve even seen some posts about how a larger rim simply ads unsprung weight that makes things tougher on suspension engineers when they try to make their designs work over a wide range of conditions.
I’m so happy my 2010 Highlander actually has a 65 series tire on it, that’s a decent amount of sidewall in the current automotive world and the ride quality is better for it.
Another downfall of huge wheels is the towing capacity is hindered. Looking at a towing chart a while back at Ford Fleet, it stated for the year of my pickup (2007) towing capacity is decreased about 10% or so across the board for units having the 20″ wheels vs those identically equipped with smaller wheels. Mine, at the standard 17″, work to its advantage in this regard.
That’s good to know, because if I get an SUV I’ll need a folding utility trailer to haul the occasional 4×8 sheet of plywood, plants or bags of mulch from the home center, approximately one mile away.
Gee, don’t strain your equipment pulling that heavy load for such long distances.
For the trailers I have pulled, had my pickup been cursed with the 20″ wheels, I would have had it overloaded by not insignificant margins a time or two as I was at the upper ranges for the standard 17″ wheels.
“Gee, don’t strain your equipment pulling that heavy load for such long distances.”
Yes (chuckle), guilty as charged. I’m afraid I’m a bit conservative when it comes to putting stress on my vehicles, which is probably why my current truck has lasted 16 years. But it’s nice to know that I have the towing capacity in reserve, just in case. And who knows? One of these days I may decide to buy a small camper.
Embarrassed… I thought I better check my above comment and I was wrong; the truck’s wheels are not 15″, they’re 16″ with P245/75R16 tires.
I must have been thinking about the Miata.
I get those two mixed up all the time.
A car with a Rocket 425 and the THM 400 for $22100 adjusted to start is a heck of deal. Sure a car that size would run just fine with a small block and a powerglide and indeed would be adequate with a 230 six and three on the tree. The 425 was really where the differentiation was with the lesser brands. These were roomy smooth cars with some of the best drivetrains in the industry. Well worth it. Thanks Joseph.
John, for that price you got a stripper. As I said in my ’66 Dynamic post: But best of all, it was the only car in its class to come standard with a 425 cubic inch (7 liter) V8; not bad, for an inflation-adjusted $21,600. That is, as long as you were good with manual steering, manual brakes, crank windows, no air conditioning and a three-speed manual on the column. Maybe that part wouldn’t exactly make wifey any too happy; better get ready to cough up some more white-bread dough.
Realistically, a decently optioned Dynamic would have run over $30k in today’s money, about the same as a modern sedan with a V6, plus lots of other features and goodies that weren’t yet dreamed of back then.
And the Turbo Hydra-Matic alone was something like $230 in 1966, which, without loading the CPI calculator, is equivalent to around $1,500 now!
In August 1966 my father bought the same Olds 88, white w/ blue interior. Biggest engine, auto, power everything and God bless, air conditioning. He payed $3500.
Nice Oldsmobile and it is good to see a classic being enjoyed, I am not one to quibble with the form the enjoyment takes.
Personally I think it would look just as sharp being enjoyed on period correct wheels, but that’s a personal preference.
Not my choice of shoes, but nice ride.
You only live twice:
Once when you are born,
And once when you look death in the face.
– Ian Fleming, after Basho
Wonderful way to start my morning. Joe, your timing was great.
As the keeper of an old four-door sedan, a couple of random thoughts are bouncing around my head…
Major kudos to the owner. He’s keeping the old girl going and showering it with affection. More people need to realize the intrinsic fun with old cars isn’t an inverse relationship with the number of doors it has. Frankly, more doors allows for more stiff-jointed people to get it and enjoy the experience.
Many mourn cars that have been donked, but those alterations are often reversible. It seems fewer mourn the instances when a less prevalent car has its suspension butchered and driveline jettisoned for something entirely different, and a reversal is not so easy. Which is the true crime and which is focusing on what meets the eye?
Good point about reversibility of mods. Wheels and paint can be easily changed. Engine, suspension and frame mods are usually forever.
It looks as though this one hasn’t been raised except maybe if the overall wheel/tire combo is a bit taller.
Engines/drivetrains are easily reversed, this car is reversible, when the wheel wells are cut out or the openings enlarged to fit WAY bigger wheels, not so much. I don’t like the Pro Stock look for the same reason.
I’m thinking 30s and 40s era cars with Mustang II front suspensions and engines that require creative fabrication to install. Not so easily reversed.
This car could likely be reversed with a set of 15″ wheels and little else, but why bother? It looks great as it is.
Ah gotcha. In the case of these A bodies I was thinking just about any combination of bolt in motor/transmission mount is readily available for them for many (probably Chevy) motor swaps
The Mustang II suspension swap is so nauseating popular you don’t even need a Mustang II anymore. It’s all available aftermarket. One swap I do like, however, is the 2002 up Crown Vic front suspension on a 67-72 Ford F100…
“Frankly, more doors allows for more stiff-jointed people to get it and enjoy the experience.”
Brilliantly stated, Jason! As a forty-something, I can appreciate this statement. I’ll state that some of my joints (i.e. knees, elbows) now sometimes make popping noises that surprise even me. LOL
Yup I hear ya. I live in a two story house, and at 50 I am already starting to dislike the staircase. 28 years as a professional mechanic, mostly marine, did this body no favors
So is it a crime that I put a 302 and C4 in my ’83 Ford Ranger 4×4 25 years ago using mostly Ford parts, including the transmission to transfer case adapter? For those lost souls out of the loop, Ford used the C5, a lockup converter version of the C4 in these early Rangers. All I had to do was go to the Ford parts counter, and order the output shaft and tailshaft housing for a C5 equipped 4×4 Ranger; they fit right in my ’79 C4 that came out of a Fairmont. Best part? Less than $200 for both, as opposed to the $500 Advance Adapters wanted. Still driving the truck to this day, and it has worked it’s arse off. Wish I had a picture of when I had not one, but two fully dressed marine Ford 312’s in the bed to go to the machine shop to get rebuilt. Those weighed a wee bit more than a bag of mulch, and try that with the stock 2.3L and Mazda 4 speed the truck left the factory with. Some powertrain swaps are a blessing.
Like I said earlier, I’m thinking more about the 30s era Hupmobile with a Mustang II front end and a 350. That sort of thing. It’s obvious you aren’t putting your Ranger under any banner of antique or classic car, which is often the case with such conversions on cars. Your Ranger is still late-model in my mind.
Funny you mention that Jason, I too consider my Ranger a late-model rig, despite the fact I have dated women younger than it. And the cool comments I get from kids who were not even born yet when it was made is priceless. I bet you get the same from your Galaxie.
To me there are two reasons why these wheels work with that car. The car has clean flat surfaces with beveled edges like a beveled glass mirror. That is also true for these wheels. It shows perfectly in the first picture. The second reason is that clean and shiny paint.
The donks I don’t care for are the $500 “runs good” rust and bondo clunkers with $2000 sets of 22″ wheels. But I am not hating on them. I notice them and that’s it. After all I once put a bicycle ape hanger handle bar on a moped. That didn’t make it a chopper either.
I appreciate your attitudes towards ethnic identity and expression. Some 20 years ago I visited Chicago (the real Chicago) including a stroll through the flea market. It was amazing how separated yet neighborly the various ethnic groups coexisted. It’s not like a melting pot, it’s more like a salad bowl where the ingredients remain distinct.
I agree. If there is a single 60s design that almost begs for oversized unique wheels, it is the 65-68 B body Olds. Those big, perfectly round wheel cutouts demand something to show off. It was always a crime to see these with blackwalls and poverty caps.
I’ve noticed this, as a rule I don’t like bigger than the biggest factory wheels on cars of this era, but I’ve come to realize that’s because the wheel openings on the vast majority of them are squared, asymmetric, or slightly skirted, while the ones with true round wheel openings like this Olds and a few others work quite well upsized.
Wolfgang, I really like the “salad bowl” metaphor – and the more I think about it, it fits better within the context of Edgewater than “melting pot”. It will be reused. Thank you. 🙂
I like these cars better now than I did when they were common. When the 65 Olds came out with its full hips and big round full wheel cutouts, I hated the look. But how predictive those open fenders turned out to be, still the norm 50 years later.
I must say that I have never seen fender skirts on a 65-68 Olds 88 before. There are few designs that are less hospitable to skirts than these, and I do have to give the owner props for giving the look a try.
I also miss that non-metallic beige color that was universal in the 60s.
Sad part is, when these cars were common, nobody noticed them.
I have the same question as Ashley. Though I’ve seen a lot of cars referred to as Donk, I have no idea where that name comes from, nor what it means. If this car is a Donk, it’s a very mild one. Neither the wheels, nor the fender skirts are to my taste, but these wheels look no odder to me on this Olds than torque thrusts on a ’66 Ford Ranch Wagon. Another stock guy here. But all of that aside, I am thrilled to see the big mid sixties Olds obviously having such love and care given to it and looking quite Dynamic because of it. Thank God that this four door sedan lives on. I applaud the folks who are preserving them. Not too many years ago, this car would have been eagerly relegated to a scrap yard so that someone restoring a two door hardtop or convertible could scarf up all of it’s pieces in order to build their car. I gained a great appreciation of four door sedans after years of being let, or letting others, into and out from the rear seats of two door hardtops. When I bought my ’64 Dynamic 88 Celebrity Sedan, one friend asked me why I would want a four door car. I replied that I prefer comfort over style. An additional bonus was that I love that style. Joseph, I am so pleased to see this CC. It’s great, and I would like nothing more than to meet and talk with the owner about it. Thanks for showing it to us.
According to “Urban Dictionary” – donk can have several meanings but does not give an etymology for the word. My assumption has always been a shortening of the word “DONKEY” and a sly reference to the posterior of a certain build of female. Applying it to cars? Who knows. Nick above may be getting close to the mark with his high heel comment above. Think of a whale Caprice donk-a-fied…
I have read that “Donk” name came about because the Impala was originally the car of choice, and Donk refers to the Impala symbol which some thought looked like a Donkey. (In high school one of my Buddies thought the creature on his 69 Impala’s steering wheel was a rabbit!) Supposedly Donk, Bubble and Box all originated as references to B-body Chevys. Of course the “Box” was the 1977 and up model. Guessing “Bubble” refers to the final B-Body Caprice.
I’ve come across this Impala reference a few time too, and it does rather make sense. Impalas were always the first and most desired for certain customizing trends like low riders, and donks.
This is awesome – thanks for this bit of etymology, J.Metzinger. It makes sense to me.
Also to Principal Dan’s point, I had thought about linking the definitions I found for “Donk” under http://www.urbandictionary.com, but there’s quite a range.
One origin of the term I had read about made reference to “big, old ‘donkey’ tires” – which has seemed to stick with me.
I’ve seen people of all races donk out cars and I still think they look like crap no matter what color the driver of the car is. I draw the line with such mods when they begin to damage the car, as those lifted ones do.
That said, this isn’t really a donk, and what’s been done to it is mostly in character with the car. Except those wheels. Which are awful. I get maybe you don’t want the stock, middle class dad hubcaps that came with, but those just don’t go.
Overall, though, the car is being maintained, so like looking at a man in a well tailored suit but wearing purple sneakers with, points for trying.
“Overall, though, the car is being maintained, so like looking at a man in a well tailored suit but wearing purple sneakers with, points for trying”
Winner! Quote of the Day!
Two fat ladies, 88.
I actually look forward to these posts on Fridays, and this one didn’t disappoint. Sweltering here in Daytona Beach it’s so easy to forget how much fun and sun there is to be soaked up during a Northern Summer. When I lived in NYC the Summer was magical (if hot, and sometimes malodorous), in that everyone was out in the streets as if to celebrate nothing more than the weather. My last NY neighborhood in Brooklyn was chock full of CCs, and many if not most were of the “Donk” variety. I’m not a fan of the genre, per se, but the love and the work and the pride that goes into those rides deserves respect regardless of personal tastes. Besides, a lime green ’78 Delta 88 on glaring chrome 22’s that comes out of its underground garage in May to play in the sun for the few short months before the weather turns deserves celebration. Especially when one considers that someone probably rescued that car from a life of curbside parking, door dings, poor maintenance and almost certain rust and deterioration on the tough streets of the big city. I say if you’re going to save a venerable old car from a rough life as a cheap decaying appliance, then you damn well deserve to dress it up any way you see fit.
Well said! I rather enjoy the some of the wilder ones. Although we only live once, cars really can have a second life in the hands of someone who rescues them. And if you’re going to come back from the dead, why not live it up a little?
I bet most of us might decide to live a bit more flamboyantly and with exuberance if we were revived from our death bed.
MTN, I love the urban imagery that comes to my mind from your response. While your former environment in Brooklyn was different from my current one in Edgewater, I love that you paint a similar picture of working-class pride and joy in things and experiences where people can find them.
And I totally appreciate that you (and Paul, and others) seem to get what I was trying to say in this piece from a big-picture perspective.
Although I’d change the wheel covers, the rest of the car looks perfect. I’ve always liked General Motors cars of the 60s. 🙂
I don’t consider this a donk, this is an old car with bigger wheels, no bigger than anything Foose would put on one. I don’t like either mind you but there’s quite a large distinction. True jacked donks truly do mess up the car to the point of irreversible.
As for disco, revisionist history strikes again. That music had a much farther reaching appeal than to sub groups, so much so waning ‘classic rock’ bands were even incorporating the beat and other traits into their sound to cash in on the phenomena. If you did enjoy rock music and resented that fact, it’s really not hard to see the backlash. Personally, today I’d participate in “country demolition” if it were held at the cell today, has absolutely nothing to do with demographics, and I doubt that was the primary motivator then either.
XR7Matt, I’d say that as with many things, the continuum of donkitude is pretty wide. While this car isn’t jacked up on its suspension, it does share a donk’s basic aesthetic and oversized wheels. I also recognize this is something of a mild custom, but is there an actual wheel-diameter-to-opening ratio that once exceeded, qualifies a car as being an actual donk? Perhaps there is, but I’m asking the question for the sake of gathering perspective from others.
Regarding the disco backlash, I agree that the music form’s saturation point by the late 70’s did contribute to its meteor-like fall from favor by, say, 1980. But as a fan of dance music, I’ve read many essays (some available via Google search) about disco’s backlash being a reaction against certain types of folks (urban blacks / latinos, gays) who helped popularize disco in the underground. I also recognize these ideas appear to have been both supported and rejected by scholars in the know, so I can appreciate your and my difference of opinion there.
Hard to say, as I understand with Donks, the wheels shouldn’t “fit”, they’re supposed to give the look like they were yanked from new large SUV like an Escalade and swapped onto an old car like this. I could be way off but as I remember from my 90s-00s childhood cars/SUVs with 20″ chrome wheels were called DUBs, this Oldsmobile fits snugly into that IMO. It’s subtle enough that a more racy spoke design would make it look more like a restomod. I mean on the other end of the spectrum a 63 Impala riding on 13″ daytons with low profile tires and hydraulics is a textbook lowrider, whereas another 63 Impala with 15″ daytons, standard size tires and factory suspension is just an Impala with wire wheels.
Is there probably an element to that with the Disco backlash? I’m sure. But I do doubt every long haired denum clad rocker rushing the field on Comiskey Park did so for that reason, and having listened to Steve Dahl since childhood that wasn’t the underlining intent of the event either by his account. I think the fact that Disco came along with prerequsite for competent dancing ability and that rock fans up to that point probably didn’t have it was as big or bigger of a motivator. Plus it wasn’t the first or last music phenomenon rooted in black, latino, or gay culture, and there was no shortage of white fans of it. Hip hop is arguably more polarizing musically with a much less diverse mix of artists producing it, yet it’s had a massively diverse group of listeners since at least the mid 90s. It’s just more accessible for a casual listener.
Massive fan of both disco and country here. Saw a doco recently where Nile Rodgers from Chic went to a disco and discovered the format. He took to it because he said it was the first time he experienced something everybody could dance to. Then came John Travolta… Really, it was the beginnings of dance music as we know it today. And that’s mostly a good thang.
Dolly gave us ‘Baby I’m Burning’, CW McCall gave us ‘Convoy’, but for me the most fun disco/country hybrid comes from Stevie Wonder:
Don, I like this! I have never heard this before.
And yes – the most recent disco history article I read this week did mention “Saturday Night Fever” and its popularity as the beginning of the end for the genre.
Joseph, there’s a reissue of Michael Jackson’s ‘Off The Wall’ album on CD that includes the home-made demos he put together with his siblings. At the end of one take, they make a comment comparing what they’ve just laid down to the Bee Gees – who was clearly their benchmark. SNF is a so-so film, but the album with those killer BG tracks is a hands-down classic. The butt of many jokes now, but nothing can diminish the power of that music.
Hear, hear, Joseph! Anther great article.
In the summer down here we get a fair amount of lowriders- early 60s Impalas, mostly- cruising down Division and, like the style or not, the amount of craftsmanship put into those cars is amazing. I’d prefer mine stock, but I certainly wouldn’t turn down a drive.
A nice find. A couple of points on the price translation. Everything was optional in those days, so the actual comparable price tag is more like $4000. Then the inflation index applies to a basket of goods, not one item. What really makes the most sense is adjusting your current income back to 1966 to see how the price compares to your income. At the end of the 60’s, beginning of the 70’s I had both an offer, then a job with an income of about $10,000 with a college degree.
Median incomes were about $7,000 in 1966. Would a $4000 car make sense? Median income is now over $52,000 (2014 numbers).
Let’s compare–the 2016 Buick Lacrosse (closest comparison I came up with on a moment’s notice) starts at a little over $31K. Throwing some options on there and adjusting back down for negotiations, you might get out the door with a nicely optioned one for $35K.
$4000 is 57% of $7000. $35000 is 67% of $52000. So that car actually would have been more affordable to a median-income family in 1966 than a comparable car would be today. 57% of $52000 is $29,640, which will get you a reasonably nice sedan or small/midsize SUV, but probably not quite comparable to this Olds.
The advice I found is that one should not pay more than half ones annual income for a new car. What this basically means is that most owners of this car should have had an income of $7000 to $8000 or more. The CPI index factor from then to now is 7.4 which compares to an income is the range of $52,000 to $60,000 today. Assuming that the olds was equipped with A/C and other stuff, it would be more equivalent to todays $30,000 car. I’m not sure that this means anything. But the Olds would have been affordable for those with an income of $8000 to $9000 then, or if your income now is over $60,000, and you could be transported back in time with your current income, it would be affordable.
What the consumer price index tells us it that the value of the dollar is decreasing with time. What once cost a few thousand now costs a few tens of thousands.
You are correct that many items were optional, and the option was virtually mandatory. But this is similar today where many near luxury models have “premium packages” that are virtually mandatory. The real change today is the plethora of lease/ low rate financing/ and cash on the hood.
Automatic transmission power steering, brakes and A/C are now standard on nearly everything. These were about $1000 extra on this car.
Something that everyone is missing is that a car in this size today is not generally available. Cadillac does not have one. The Mercedes Maybach is in the size range. A Suburban is in the size range, but is a truck.
Great writeup and great photos, as usual. And I personally don’t mind the wheels at all. The lifted donks really aren’t my thing, but this one, with stock color paint and upsized rims but no lift required, looks good to my eye. The only discordant piece is the fender skirts, and it’s because the chrome finish gives them a discordant shape/look on an otherwise tan body side. If they were painted the same color as the car, I might like them better–but it would probably be a challenge to match, especially if that paint is original or an older repaint.
But regardless of personal opinions, kudos to the owner for clearly giving this car lots of love and showing some pride in his unique vehicle. The side profile of this generation of Olds may not be anything arresting but there’s a lot of great detail in the grille, the shoulder line, and the rear panel.
My thoughts EXACTLY, Chris. It looks tasteful and clean, though if you could lose the fender skirts, it’d be all the better for it.
Did anyone mention the fact that these big wheels act like flywheels and compromise the already limited braking ability of these old cars? I don’t like donks and it has nothing to do with racism. i also hate the trend of big wheel bagger bikes driven mostly by fat white guys. I hate the big wheels because in my view modifications should also enhance the performance of the vehicle as well as the looks. Doing one to the detriment of the other goes against my thinking.
sheesh enough already
I’ve got to say, I love the CC community. I never thought I’d actually read intelligent / semi-intelligent discourse on the definitions and merits of a “donk”…and it’s all here. Thanks, CC, readers for reading this and for contributing to the discussion, and I’m also a bit speechless about how eloquently and playing-nice-in-the-sandbox many ideas have been expressed today.
I think that over sized wheels are like boobjobs. They are going to make whoever has them happy but to most they just don’t look right.
I’ve always thought that sideview mirror is particularly classy. Not very useful for seeing—like Chrysler’s similarly-sized and -shaped items of the same period, they’re too small—but they look nice while being inadequate for safety.
I was really liking that car until I saw the side profile, which to me looks awkward with a disproportionately compact cabin and over long bonnet and boot..Otherwise, it looks great and I’d love to see it in the flesh. Great photos, Joseph, as always.
Can we expect a 64 Impala soon? 🙂
Thanks, Roger! And, you know, I just remembered I did get more than a few pictures of that ’64 Impala! Great idea. 🙂
I like the particular stance of this car and the wheels are not too big, in my opinion. The wheelwells weren’t butchered to fit these rims. These Olds sedans are very clean looking. I vote for a slightly lowered, slightly raked car with Disco playing on the stereo. Disco is the sound of my young adulthood and it brings back a lot of good memories.
I can’t add any more to the comments already here, other than to say I have always believed an older car cars appearance is improved by a nice set of wheels and tyres, either factory option or aftermarket. Also that a car can be a personal statement as much as the choice of clothes to wear.
Whilst these are not for me, ( you can’t beat a five spoke design IMO)
On a slightly off topic thought, I have often wondered lately if the idea of the white wall tyre was a way to achieve a larger wheel, lower profile tyre look, sort of by accident.
You may be onto something with the whitewall idea. My Crown Vic has whitewalls installed from the previous owner (my parents) and while I’ll probably replace them with blackwall when the time comes, they do make the 15″ wheels look a little less lost in those large wheelwells. Of course it helps that the alloys have a light silver finish.
From the look of the paint in that close up of the front fender the owner really loves his car. Usually a generation younger than me who has these mods in LA.
Frankly I don’t care what these guys do to their cars as long as they enjoy them. I was taking my folks for a drive in the Brougham one day, cruising along in the carpool lane, when I noticed a ’79 Sedan Deville convertible in the #2 lane creeping along. I said to them “watch this guy is going to notice our car when we drive by”.
If you don’t remember the Sedan Deville convertible don’t worry because this was a custom job in bright, bright red. Just like with the Olds you could tell the owner really loved his car. Anyway we are whizzing past him and I can see his head turn and in the rear view mirror the kid is jumping up and down in his seat and pointing at us. I mean he was jumping up higher than the windshield header, never seen anything like it.
Later that evening I was talking to Dad and he said the look on his face was pure joy.
Great to see you appreciate the multicultural nature of our hobby Joseph, I know I do.
It should be mentioned that this is the type of car that most collectors never cared a whit about. Base model, four-door sedan. It’s a miracle that this basic car somehow never landed in the hands of people who simply wanted to drive it into the ground.
The wheel choice is not my style, but I admit it does work with the car. Better yet, the owner obviously loves it and is keeping it up in great condition. With all the muscle, not many “boring” cars from the 1960s have survived as well as this one. Props to its owner.
I love Oldsmobile ‘ s from the 50’s to the 80’s and the cool names they had. Count me as one of the folks who don’t care for the mods done to this car. I don’t like the style and if I am being honest, it is probably a cultural thing. I’m not from the culture that generally likes that look and those wheels just don’t compute in my head. That being said, any modifications a caretaker of an old car makes don’t bother me at all if they are reversable. I certainly hope the owner kept the original wheels and hubcaps so the car could be put back by a future owner. If that is the case, I say more power to him and whatever helps him enjoy the car. It is good when a less popular 4 door finds a home where it will be cared for properly.
Nice car, but that wheel/tire combo is atrocious.
I on the other hand think the jumbo wheel and tire combo was pulled off very well on this example. They fit perfectly into this cars very large wheelbase. That said 99.9% of cars with this combo look horrible. I moved into Donkville USA a few years ago. As with any automobile design genre the vast majority are slapped together just so they can participate. Some take the time to do things right even for a Donker and they are very cool. I even saw one with a hydraulic setup that went from scraping the ground and then three feet up into the air. The wheels remained completely flat without any camber during the whole process. The suspension system looked similar to the multi-link setups on professional Baja race trucks.
What I enjoy most though are the satirical paint jobs.
Hooked me in the first paragraph. Your mention of frozen treat vendors brought this to mind. I’ll just put it on repeat while I go back and read the rest….
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjylD7esXDo
I can’t say I particularly like the wheels, but I’ve seen worse.
Yes! Love the band and the song. ♪♫
Who couldn’t!
Looking at this car today- the front and rear overhang is really excessive and the greenhouse looks tiny. Of course back in 1966 when my parents drove a ’66 Catalina, nobody gave it any thought. How tastes change. As for the nomenclature of “Dynamic 88” I assume Olds was trying to attract a younger demographic rather than the senior citizens/blue hairs who drove Oldsmobiles.
I don’t know the specific size of those wheels on that Olds, but when I bought my ’17 Flex last year there were two on the lot. An ’18 that didn’t have Nav and the ’17 that I ultimately bought. My Flex came from the factory with 20 inch wheels, instead of the 18’s on the ’18. I feel like a baller when I’m driving that Flex.
The absurd wheels totally clash with the lines and design of the body but it’s at least reversable…TEHO.