(first posted 3/6/2013) Incredibly, it’s already been 17 years since you could last buy a brand-new Oldsmobile Ninety Eight. But those years of absence are dwarfed by the staggering 55 years during which your friendly Oldsmobile dealer sold them. Ninety Eights were always the longest, most luxurious Oldsmobiles you could buy, and at 232.2 inches, the 1975 models were the longest ones ever.
Cosmetically speaking, this one is a mixed bag–a little rust, several dings and dents, and a few ill-executed body repairs. But this being Indiana, it’s remarkable this beast survived at all, especially with its owner driving it during the snowy months.
The interior appears to be in decent shape. Those pillowy seats look only a little ruffled after all the years of use they have certainly received.
Pillowy seats were exclusive to the Regency; the lesser LS (Luxury Sedan) made do with plainer upholstery. But all Ninety Eights shared opera windows (on sedans) or fixed rear-quarter windows (on coupes) and rectangular headlights, both of which were new for ’75.
This behemoth’s standard engine was the 455, but you could order the 400. Both engines were mated to a three-speed Turbo Hydra-Matic.
GM introduced rectangular headlights on many of its top-trim luxury cars in ’75. That exclusivity was short lived, however, as most other GM cars got them the following year. But let’s give credit to Oldsmobile for trying to blend those squared-off sealed beams into the rounded Ninety Eight body. Most ’76 Oldsmobile front ends featured rectangular headlights set in flat, rectangular front ends; it looked completely tacked on and wrong against the rounded bodies. Nevertheless, those square faces did foreshadow the lines of the 1977 cars that waited in the wings.
When you make a car for as long as Oldsmobile made the Ninety Eight, you have to keep adapting it to the times. The Ninety Eight’s overall mission never changed, but the way it fulfilled that mission most certainly did.
In view of the march toward fuel efficiency, no subsequent Ninety Eight would be as big as the 1971-76 generation. The styling of the 1977 downsizing still looks good today, but even those cars were mammoths compared to the downsizing to come. The next generation shrunk to a size on par with mid-sized Oldses of a generation before! Thankfully, the shrinking trend reversed slightly for the Ninety Eight’s final generation, starting in 1991.
The industry-wide shrinking of automobiles since the 1970s gives this Ninety Eight a commanding presence today. Nothing parked around it, not even minivans and SUVs, can match it. Who cares if it’s a little rough? It owns this parking lot.
Interesting comment about about the Pontiac 400. This was a credit option ostensibly as an “economy” option.
This was 2 years before the big $hit$torm about Chevy engines in BOP cars, but precedents had been set before that.
Even before this, in fact. The 1971-72 Nova based Pontiac Venturas had the option of the 307 Chevy. Nobody bitched about that one either.
There were even earlier precedents than that: For example, for a while in early to mid-60s, Oldsmobile’s base six was the Buick 90-degree V-6, and after the demise of the OHC six, Pontiac switched to the Chevrolet 250 (which had been related to the OHC six anyway).
The 215 inch six in 1964-1965 Tempests/LeMans was a Chevy six with a bore half-way between the Chevy 194 and 230 sixes. Undoubtedly, built by the Chevy plant too.
The Buick 3.5 V8 was available in the Tempest too.
Nor the standard Chevy sixes in Firebirds, Tempests and Ventrua II’s beginning in ’70 and ’71 . . . .
Quick – somebody give Syke some Brougham-O-Seltzer! 🙂
I look forward to the day when the last of those disappears into a tiny little pile of rust. Which is all that they were ever worth.
When I think of large vehicles turning quickly to a pile of rust, the first one that comes to mind is always the Grand Wagoneer.
Mine is the Volare/Aspen, which was, in spite of its “intermediate” labeling, a big car.
Syke generally hates fullsize RWD American cars, but I know he has a soft spot for the GW. 🙂
The Volare/Aspen are only large by modern standards, certainly not compared to today’s featured Olds. In their day, The Volare/Aspen were actually classed as compact cars, then reclassified as intermediate, which seems more appropriate IMO.
An 80s vintage Fifth Avenue doesn’t feel all that big even now but does feel old given its more or less a plush Volare. Premium cars are still roomy inside now but the biggest thing that has been lost between then and now is the trunk.
Disagree with you there, Syke. Olds 98s were big comfortable cruisers that would suprisingly give you Fleetwood style ammenities at a much lower price. Its mission was not to stay glued to the tight curves of California Highway 1 in Northern Marin County, but to take you and four-six people (with luggage) on comfortable road trips or for an elegant cruise around town for two or four.
My favorite 98 is the ’65 LS . . . . Fleetwood Sixty Special ‘lite’ . . . and fortunately, at least in California, there are some good clean 98’s left. Trunks big enough to carry a new Chevy Spark. Mondo cool!
Growing up during the 1970s with a series of Ninety Eights and Delta 88s in our household, there is a distinctive sound that those 455s made when starting and idling. I always knew when Mom’s Olds was pulling into the garage, as opposed to Dad’s company car, a Chevrolet.
My three sisters never understood how I could tell the difference; but then, years later I never understood how they could be in another room and know which of their babies were crying! 🙂
This was a topic of conversation years ago with car buddies of mine. I too grew up in an Olds house and I could tell my Mom’s ’65 Starfire, or later her ’75 98 from my Dad’s Ford or Chevy government cars. He was a regional inspector for the Federal government and got a new one every four or so years.
The boys were blown away by my ability to discern Olds motors from others, especially at idle or on start up. I had a ’68 442 at the time with a non matching 455 with a W-30 cam and in tail pipe comparisons only one friend could get a grip on what I was talking about. His 440 Cuda sang a different song. The Camaro and Mustang guys didn’t get it.
All the toys & all the size of a Cadillac, for (slightly) less money. Great cars indeed, even the old soldier in this article.
You know there is just something so brutally real, or honest I should say about that car compared to all the cars around it. I admire the owner for still keeping it running. It really could pummel any of the other prissy tin cans in the photos. For me this car just sums up what I like most about old cars, it makes no excuses or compromises for what it is. The downsized models after this were worlds ahead but man these cars have such personality when they get to be in this condition, they just become absolute beasts! That one must’ve been garage kept for some time in it’s life, it still has it’s vinyl top and the paint hasn’t burned off. I don’t know, I love this thing, it’s so ugly it’s beautiful! Good article!
Yes, exactly. I keep coming back to this generation of GM luxocars. I’ve had two Sedan deVilles, two Fleetwood Broughams, one Electra Limited and one Custom Cruiser wagon. They really are the last generation of cars that did not apologize for their existence in any way. Also, for all that people say about 70’s car quality or the lack thereof, they are very hard to kill, and the interiors are often surprisingly sturdy. The 1977-79 version of the same Regency seats would have long ago been in complete tatters.
I dunno–I have heard the opposite about quality–the ’77-79 Bs were great but the cheapening began in ’80–nothing bigger than the 305/307/4.1-249 in the Caddies and only 350s in cop cars.
From ’77-79 you still had the 350/400/403/368/425 and the newer, leaner Bs.
I would love to own one of these. If not one of these, then a `71-`76 Custom Cruiser.
We had a ’71 Custom Cruiser in our household. My Dad bought it new in October of ’72 (a discount as the “72’s ARE HERE!). 455 four barrell. A lot of heft to move off the line, but once underway, watch out. 127” wheelbase wagon. A great road car. Not so hot trying to parallel park, even in the 70s.
Scary to drive down Doyle Drive coming off the Golden Gate Bridge, but, damn the torpedos, kick in the Quadrajet secondaries and fly all the way down to Marina and Divisadero!!
I know y’all will call me a heretic, but I actually love the square headlight treatment. To me it incorporates much better into the front end than the previous round quads, which to me have a “googly-eye” look to them. I’ve never seen a 75 98; I really dig this ride. New list object…throw in a modern crate motor but keep the TH 400…now that’s a fine sled.
The rectangular headlights were very well integrated into the styling of the 1975 Monza 2+2.
Negative Jeremiahmusic. The 455 Olds Rocket V-8 is in a league all in it’s own. Even the smoggers have that big Olds V-8 burble and freight train “right now’ torque. They’re strong and reliable engines.
I like this and the Electra much better than the Caddies from the same years…those seats looks so cozy and comfortable I think I’ll have problems driving one without falling asleep !
Mind blown. I can’t believe it, but I guess I’ve never seen the front end of a ’75 Ninety Eight. I figured it wore the round lights for another year. The big Oldsmobiles wore that same front end without major changes from ’71-’75, so I guess I never paid enough attention.
The rectangular lights combined with that front clip make the car look like some sort of foreign market or bizzaro world reject. It’s so unfamiliar, yet familiar at the same time.
> Nothing parked around it, not even minivans and SUVs, can match it. Who cares if it’s a little rough? It owns this parking lot.
Yep, he’s got both the law of tonnage and the law of paintjobs on his side, so the owner can pretty much do whatever he wants.
” Nothing parked around it, not even minivans and SUVs, can match it. Who cares if it’s a little rough? It owns this parking lot.”
Duh! It’s parked in a handicap space!
But all aside that’s the norm in some parts of town. A 40yo clunker with a handicap tag. What really amazes me is when I see a high end car with handi-tags parked at WallyWorld(or Meiers). Makes me wonder if we really need more tort reforms or whether some people have their priorities screwed up or a combination of both. This driver just might be owner number one or two if you look at the clues. Extra cushion on the seat, looks like some of those bead seat cushion thingys sitting on the package shelf. Really clean interior for it’s age. Half ass driveway repairs.Normal slow speed collision dents. I’d almost bet somebody whose to old to still be driving is still driving this car. Original hub caps instead of some other GM division rally/road wheels. The reason I say that is because todays misguided urban utes consider this a “donk”. As in Box,Bubble,Donk. If it had been rolling down the boulevard with a crappy chameleon paint job on 24’s you wouldn’t have given it a second glance. Which sadly today is what happens to most of these cars.
This one was parked at Meijer!
In Pennsylvania, at least, you can get a handicapped tag if you have a heart condition or a disease such as multiple sclerosis. Those conditions don’t just occur among poor people.
> Duh! It’s parked in a handicap space!
Mr.Grey’s point was not that there are no other vehicles parked around it, it was that this Olds has a commanding presence that no other vehicles in the parking lot can match.
The first Regencys were “Tiffany” editions for 1972 used to promote Oldsmobile’s 75th anniversary. Like often happens with GM, most of the edition’s features were available the following year as a regular Regency minus the special clock.
I was looking to see if this car had the ACRS system, which is doesn’t it is really rare. Occasionally you will find 74-76 cars, and more Oldsmobiles than any, with the early airbag system.
I actually have a factory service manual for the ACRS system somewhere in my stuff. I bought it many years later for like a $1 when the dealers stopped keeping it around. GM warranted cars for 12months12k on basics but the airbag system was warranted for like 5 years/50k like the catalytic converter. Oldsmobile was the lead push marque for ACRS back in the day. It was rarely ordered and expensive (like $700 back in the day) and dropped for the 1977 redesign. However, as we all know, they came back and Oldsmobile was the first GM car to offer airbags as an option in 1988, although Cadillac and Corvette made them standard in 1990.
At a car show a few years ago, I saw a Caprice (’75, I think) with an airbag. Now THAT must’ve been a rare beast.
Hmm, it may have been one of those ACRS test vehicle 1973 Chevrolets, though as far as I know, the ACRS was not available as an option on any full size car below Oldsmobiles.
I wondered if this beast had ACRS to, since its pretty loaded with cornering lamps etc. The ACRS cars had a 1-800 number in the glove box sticker,that asked “Has this car been in an accident? Call the GM National Airbag Research Hotline” it was a hot line to report data whenever an ACRS car was in an accident.
The ACRS is cool, but A-it was EXPENSIVE, B-You lost the tilt and tele wheel, C-You got an odd looking wheel
Ah, I found a pic I took! It was at the Greenwich Concours d’Elegance in 2008.
Thats a 1973 Impala sedan which was part of a fleet of 1,000 that were released to fleets, rentals, and a few select testers (but could not be ordered at the dealer). They used an Oldsmobile dash. The original cars were all painted in a pea green type color, can’t tell if that pic is of the original color or an updated metallic green type color.
I’d seen an early airbag Toronado – about a ’74 once . . . .
There was a databox in the dash somewhere that was supposed to record the data involved during a deployment. If the car was ever repaired after a deployment, it was supposed to be sent in. I have seen these cars in person (mostly early on) but never saw one ever having its airbag system serviced.
I remember reading a testimonial about a owner of a 1974 Toronado whose husband was driving the car she was sitting in the passenger seat (unbelted) with a small child on her lap they hit something head on the airbags deployed and they had very minor injuries. Certainly times have changed that woman probably would be charged with child endangerment now.
I imagine that you could hit a freight train with a 1975-1976 Fleetwood equipped with the ACRS and you would be ok.
The stuff I’ve read indicated the Chevys were the most commonly equipped with the Airbag. Part of that was certainly due to the overall volume of the Chevy compared to the rest of GM but as I understand a fair number of them were fleet cars sold to insurance companies.
There was a fleet of 1973 Chevrolet airbag test cars, they used Oldsmobile dashes, but the airbags were not available on Pontiacs or Chevrolets.
Carmine is correct — the 1000-car test fleet in the 1973 model year consisted entirely of Chevrolet Impala 4-door sedans. All had that awful green-gold metallic paint with black cloth interiors and the Oldsmobile dash. IIRC, all were built in December 1972.
The regular production airbags were an option in the full-size and personal luxury Buicks, Oldsmobiles, and Cadillacs from 1974-76. One way to readily identify these cars is that they were not equipped with shoulder belts, just lap belts. It was thought then that frontal airbags were substitutes for shoulder belts.
It would be another decade before Mercedes introduced the concept of airbags as “supplemental restraints,” to be used in addition to standard lap/shoulder belts.
The only cars it was not available on within the Oldsmobile-Buick-Cadillac line was convertibles, wagons and limousines for Cadillac.
Just the B C & E full size cars minus the wagons and convertibles.
I put a pic in the Flickr group of a 74 98 hitting the wall at 35. I read a research report from U Michigan that evaluated the existing test data on ACRS and basically concluded that a person could even survive a 55MPH impact (frontal).
The system was two-stage with two sensors so that it detects hit of various speeds from various angles in front. The airbags will even deploy if you hit say a UPS truck at speed and there is no bumper contact.
It was a dud not just on cost (a/c cost more) but the mere fact as safety wasn’t on the mind or demand back then. This is one of those rare areas where government initiative has provoked a cultural change in a good way.
ACRS wasn’t that expensive of an option. The number I always heard was $300. Nevertheless, it did not sell well.
GM tooled up to offer 100k air bags a year, but only sold about 10k from ’74-’76.
The real problem was that GM was supposedly already losing money on these to begin with. The utter lack of consumer interest ensured that the General lost thousands of dollars on every unit produced.
I heard the joke from a GM engineer was that they sold the airbag for $9000 and threw that Oldsmobile 98 in for free…..
Here’s a 1975 Option List. ACARS was $300
Thats $1200 bucks today, so yeah, it was kinda spendy.
And thats what it was priced at, it cost GM way way way more than $300 a unit.
Also interesting how the rear end treatment resembles a 66 Cad, that long flank with just a hint of skeg fin…especially with the rear wheel well covers.
The finned rear end treatment with vertical taillamps has been a 98 styling trademark from 1963 to the day the model was retired in 1996. It is something that I feel is missed on most cars today, model specific styling trademarks that customers identified with even as cars were redesigned and styles evolved.
That was the easiest way to tell a Buick from an Olds at a distance. Vertical or horizontal taillights.
I owned a ’69 Olds with the 455. I was told the different sound came from the ‘positive valve rotation’ . It was a system that supposedly rotated the valves as they did their job. It did sound differently than other GM engines.
Positive Valve Rotators first appeared on all Olds Rocket V8s in 1970.
These were the SUV’s of the time. Customers wanted large and roomy.
Can criticize its size all day, but look at an average traffic jam in any city and see all the big trucks used as “cars”. We still are ‘living large’.
Quite right; I’ve seen lines of upwards of 10 SUVs or pickups in a row. Yet despite this evident obsession with bulk, I once rode in a Chevy Suburban on a trip to NM, & it didn’t strike me as being all that roomy for rear passengers. Trouble was, the seats were low off the floor. Same problem with the rear cargo area. I think minivans are better in this respect (no frame rails or drive-shaft underneath), but of course these project an uncool “Brady Bunch” image to the world.
There is a dealership in Libertyville, Ill. called Weil Cadillac. It used to be strictly an Olds franchise but eventually became a Cadillac and Hummer dealer as well. Back in the day, Ninety Eight Regency sedans were everywhere in this area. You could not drive through Libertyville without seeing a dozen, at least. I guess the “Cadillac-look/style” is what maintained their popularity. My mom must have thought so, too, as she owned a 1983 Regency Brougham a couple of years before the “mini-me” Regency of 1985.
I had (still have a few) relatifves in Northeast Missouri. In my youth, visiting from California, aside from “B” bodies, there were LOTS of Olds 98s running around Eastern Mo/Western Ill. LOTS (ca. 1974-76).
Interesting comment about the square headlights mated with the carryover bodies, as I immediately liked the front of these cars from the first time I saw the photos in the Motor Trend “New Car” issue. In 1975, any car with square headlights seemed very exotic to those of us who had only seen cars with this feature in photos or as diecast Matchbox and Corgi cars.
Oldsmobile pulled it off better than Buick or Cadillac for 1975. The “flat look” used for 1976 on both the Ninety-Eight and Delta 88, however, was not very inspiring. But it did provide a strong degree of continuity with the 1977 downsized models, which was important at that time.
The color of this car is interesting, as it was usually paired with a very light beige vinyl top, and somehow cars with that color combination ALWAYS looked dirty to me.
I liked the interiors of these cars, and GM’s 1971-76 full-size cars were surprisingly sleek, given their size. Of course, they were also surprisingly cramped on the inside, relative to their ample exterior dimensions. My parents had a 1976 Oldsmobile Delta 88 Royale Holiday sedan, and the back-seat room wasn’t very generous. My grandmother’s 1973 Dodge Dart sedan was easier to enter and exit.
These cars also had very little in the way of structural rigidity. I can remember driving that 1976 Delta 88 on some back roads, and watching the fenders and hood flap the like the wings of jet airliner.
The Olds’ are downright sleek compared to bloaty Buicks, all which were extremely comfortable, I’m sure. The way the tail lights are integrated into the ’63 seventh photo down, is a thing of beauty. I’m fascinated by the condition of those tufted front seats in the subject ’75; amazing. I’d love one of these in the garage for a weekend evening downtown.
In the day, I loved the new rectangular headlights. I was duly impressed back in May, 1975 when my dad brought home a Sedan de Ville and I saw it sitting in the driveway for the very first time. Very modern looking for the day.
However, looking back, I’m not a fan of this particular Olds front end. It looks like too much of a mishmash of shapes, and the headlights don’t match well.
Is this car Family Truckster Metallic Pea?
This was such a typical Olds color in the 70s, and I never saw the attraction to it!
I think this 98 Regency would go nice with an avacado Kenmore side by side refrigerator
Around 1975, Cadillacs were too Nuevo Riche for most urban suburbanites, Who drove these 98 and Buick’s 225 as less ostentatious displays of wealth. Mercury Grand Marquis also benefitted in a similar softer limelight to Lincoln Town cars.
In 1969 when I saw a Loaded 63 -ninety Eight, I was Impressed with its Cadillac level interior.
.
I’ve tried to warm to this generation of 98 but they just look so awkward! Give me a ’75-’76 Electra instead, they look great!
Yup an Electra or Limited looks so much better than the 98.
Needs boat propellers mounted under the bumper. That’s what I’ve always wanted to do with one of these behemoths, and then give it a personalized plate like “QE2”.
I am late to this one today. I am tremendously conflicted about these cars. Up to maybe 4 years ago, I despised all GM B & C bodies from 1971-76. They were cheaply built, shuddering, juddering, windshield-cracking piles of I don’t know what. I hated the severe side curvature of the windows that translated into a huge impingement in passenger room near the floor where the doors came in so far to clear that rolled down window. I hated the floppy structure and the constant rattles of the plastic pieces in the dash.
I have come to appreciate the first rate mechanical features, and I am also in awe of the size of these big C bodies. The Olds is maybe my favorite. The loose-pillow velour seats were wonderful. There is some strange hold that one of these has on me now, particularly as a beater.
A friend’s dad bought a 75 Custom Cruiser wagon in maybe 1977. 7 to 8 mpg in town. It was just freaking huge, and I was used to big cars then. My favorite styling feature was how they faired the fender skirts into those diagonal character lines near the wheel openings on these C body Oldsmobiles. These used to be much more common in the midwest than the Buicks were.
My dad briefly owned a ’71 Impala, and it ranks as the least favorite car our family ever owned. It just wouldn’t stay running, and that was when it was only a couple years old. I also remember it being more claustrophobic than the ’66 Galaxie it replaced, but I was awfully small then and my memories may be clouded.
So in short, I’m not a fan of the ’71-’76 GM full-sizers either. That didn’t prevent me from saying a few nice things about this particular example, though.
Clamshells = $$$
People who say a car like an S-class or a XTS is huge today, dont know what huge is until they have piloted one of these.
That being said, they are pretty easy to drive, everything is powered so the ease of operation is great, you can just push it around with your finger tips.
That “severe side curvature” of the windows is called “tumblehome” by stylists and was a favorite of Bill Mitchell. The GM Colonnades also had this feature; I remember waiting in line at college for dinner and looking out the ground-level dorm windows at cars in the parking lot. It was quite obvious that this design did not make good use of interior space at all. Plus the severe tuck-in of the lower fenders and doors made them very susceptible to gravel chips and rust, and they were hard to keep clean if driven in rainy, slushy, or muddy conditions.
In college, my roommate and I went to an old drive-in for a burger and a root beer. There was an older couple across the way in an early 70s Olds 88. It was a chilly day, so when the car-hop hung the tray on your window, you would get your food off and raise the window most of the way. The guy in the Olds did this. However, with that severe tumblehome, as the window went up, the tray started to tilt towards the car. I watched the big cup of Coke slowly start sliding towards the car, then the bottom of the cup hit the edge of the tray, tipping the Coke into a perfectly sized opening, right onto the guy’s lap. Luckily for him, this happened in an era before cell phone video and You Tube.
Yup. the 76 and 77 Chevelles I’ve owned, I’ve never needed a sunroof for them, as the top of the windows is almost over your shoulder. Helps make it look visually low, but doesn’t translate well into making the big hips look good with any wheel/tire combo.
I love this car. Would love to own one!
A couple of things I noticed, its parked in wheelchair spot….more or less, there was some sort of personalized or dealer tag in the front that has rusted beyond recognition, in the interior shot the drivers seat is pretty close to the wheel and there is a cushion on the seat too, and the car is unlocked.
Little old lady owner or ???
Seeing how this car and I both rolled off the assembly line the same year, I hope I look a little better for my age!
Huge doesn’t begin to truly describe these cars, yet they are (were) things of beauty!
A note about those seats…As we know, Olds introduced these for their 75th anniversary on the Regency. But this was also the first application of what I call “pillow cushion” seating in a car, and became a hallmark of Broughaminess.
I think I will share this story with The Brougham Society on FB.
I’m happy to tell you all that I’ve still got my Grandfather’s ’76 98 (Beige with buckskin interior). I’ll need to recommission it after many years of slumber, but hope that in the not too distant future I’ll be able to take my wife and two daughters plus my parents on a three generation, one-car, driving vacation in this car, just like we did with my grandparents 30+ years ago.
I always really admired the cathedral taillights on this generation of 98, and the lack of B pillar in a four-door of this size makes going on a summertime ice cream run with the windows down a special treat!
That’s awesome. If you are close to central NC, I’d be happy to help in any way possible. These are great cars and quite reliable when given reasonable care.
Thanks for the offer! If we end up recreating the trip I have in mind, then North and South Carolina will actually be the destination. The starting point is Wisconsin.
My father bought a new 1975 Olds 98 LS coupe in the fall of ’75 as the 76’s were just being introduced. I had just recently gotten my driver’s license and drove this car quite a bit between 1975 and 1980 when he sold it and bought a new 1981 Eldorado. The ’75 replaced his ’69 Olds 98 Holiday hardtop sedan. In retrospect, I prefer his ’69, and I remember preferring the front end of the ’76’s to the 75’s then, and I still do today. The headlights just seemed better integrated with the parking lamps on the ’76’s. But the Cadillacs and the senior Buicks were certainly a step above the Oldsmobiles in my opinion. But these cars rode like clouds and could cover huge distances with little effort and in total comfort. I am a definite fan of luxury cars from this era. Great writeup!
I am a fan of the 1975 Oldsmobile Ninety Eight. It is one of my favorites along with the 1980-1984, 1963, 1965-1966, 1968, and a few others. It was the 1975 along with a few others that inspired me to own one today. I have a 1995 model. I still wish Oldsmobile was here and the Ninety Eight. I imagine the Ninety Eight would be like the Volkswagen Phaeton today styling wise with Oldsmobile styling cues. You cannot beat the luxury for the price and for the fact it is not pretentious. Thank you for the article.
1975 Oldsmobile Ninety Eight:
1975 Oldsmobile Ninety Eight commercial:
Wow, I think the 98 in the commercial has the rare, ahead-of-its-time optional airbags.
Very interesting to see this. I owned the one and only 1975 Olds 98 ever to reside in Australia. It initially saw service in Hong Kong as a US diplomatic vehicle where it was modified to right hand drive. It came to Australia in the early ’80s. My dad and I bought it together in 1993. It was the LS model with a 455 and an anemic 190 horsepower. I had planned to turn it into a Mexican lowrider inspired custom, but it never happened. Ended up selling it to an Olds enthusiast in Canberra.
The 71-72 large GM cars were good looking cars for their time. They got a bit awkward, along with every other car, when the 5mph bumpers were tacked on. I never liked when they changed the rooflines in 74 and added those fixed “opera” windows in the side. They got rid of the true hardtop 2dr and put the huge fixed windows in the rear sides. It destroyed the looks of the car. The 77 downsize was ok. The next one was not as good and looked liked an intermediate. Then the final 91 cars were just fat and bland. No style at all. Truly ugly cars. How the mighty had fallen. Oldsmobile never recovered.
The proportions are just so different to modern cars. Such a long hood. Such a long trunk. So much curvature in the side panels. The interior does look roomy, granted, but then so it ought to be given the wheelbase – does any car short of a Rolls have that much wheelbase nowadays? Those seats look comfy for sure, but you’d need the belts to hold you in place around corners. Oh, and I like the colour. Someone has to.
Do we know why this generation of GM cars were made so big? Wasn’t the previous generation big enough? I’m not against big per se, there’s a place for it and a place for choice, but it just seems GM went too far with these and the Colonade intermediates, and at a bad time in history as it turned out.
Because longer-lower-wider!
Sorry, big…what? What is that word you used after “big”?
You have to put these cars in perspective to the times. The cars of the 50’s and 60’s got bigger and lower with each generation. These cars entered the market in 1971. So they were designed starting in maybe 1968 – 1969. Gas prices were cheap. The 1973 gas crisis wasn’t even considered possible. The world turned. But you can’t design a new car in just months. GM was stuck with these. Ford and Chrysler has similar sized cars. In 1973 – 1974, people wanted anything small. We had Pinto’s, Vega’s and Gremlins’s made in the US. No wonder people starts to go foreign. The 1977 Downsized Full size cars were amazing in that the slab sides allowed for almost as much interior space as the predecessors. Maybe not as much physical volume, but enough space for the body. It’s weird to compare the size of current cars to the cars in the past. A full sized Lexus is about the size of compact from years ago. And a Buick Encore is virtually the same size and height as the 32 Ford. We are right back where we started.
Because America, I guess. 🙂
But they didn’t always get bigger. GM’s ’61 fullsizers were smaller than the ’60s, then size gradually crept back up again. But I guess those would have been designed coming off the back of a recession, while America when these would have been designed was in we-can-do-anything mode. Man on the moon – no problem! To those of us outside the US and Canada, these just seemed impracticably huge outside for not a whole lot of gain inside.
I’m totally with you on how the crossovers and SUVs (which seem to have taken the place of sedans in popularity) have gone back to the proportions of thirties cars. It’s amazing to see how much room ‘small’ cars had back then.
When you had wide open spaces, and most cars were huge, it was just what a car was. There was a lot of wasted space. The VW bug was popular, but it was a niche car. Imports were a tiny portion of annual sales back then. But gas prices, pollutions concerns and then the lack of quality killed the American car business. GM dissected a Honda Accord and all they came up with was the Cavalier. Did you see that Toyota just outsold GM for the first time. I wonder why.
A friend of mine gave my (future) wife and I a ride to Vegas in one back in ’86 for a bowling tournament I was in. About a 1500 mile round trip, but really an excuse to go to Vegas. I’m not sure of the exact year and submodel, but it was really close and definitely an Olds 98. Burgundy. Literally Grandma’s car, though I don’t recall if Grandma was deceased or just not driving anymore. While I hated those dinosaurs when they were out there, because of course they were conspicuous consumption dinosaurs, much like Suburbans today, but it was a fun trip. A bit less fun for the return trip due to record flooding in the area we were returning to, but that’s not the cars fault. Plenty of room of course. Room to sleep in back. Room to sleep in front. Boring enough in the drivers seat to sleep there.
A couple of years later there was a fire up there at the family home, a barn burned down or something and 2 out of about 8 cars and trucks burned with it. Including the 98 sadly. My friend said out the the assortment of cars, that was the only one he cared about losing. But one of those things you don’t get to pick.
Now as a daily driver or commute car, it’s obviously absurd, it’s just too big and consumptive. But 45 years later it would be way cool for a weekend car. But jeez were they big.
For the 1975 Ninety Eight I would feel it would look better with the rounded headlights, to me the squared headlights didn’t look right on the 1975 Ninety Eight’s.
My dad’s best friend’s wife drove a brown 4 door ’76. As she was perpetually pickled, it’s amazing she never hit someone. She put a nice dent in the ugly fence our neighbor put up across the street.
“… and at a bad time in history as it turned out.”
There was no gas crisis in the years 1971-72 and before Oct ’73. Even though some talk of supply shortages, no one could have predicted OPEC embargo. So these were meant for middle age parents.
What was true is that Boomers of the time didn’t care for their parent’s big cars after 1966-ish, and loved mid/compacts, and moved to imports. So there was going to be downsizing even if no gas crunch.
OTOH, Boomers fell in love with full size trucks and SUV’s, hence today’s market.