(first posted 1/29/2013) In their respective heydays, Chevrolet and California were made for each other. California was the land of milk and honey, with a fabulous climate, gorgeous coastal areas, and was the place where the beautiful people went to live and play. Chevrolet was unique among lower-priced cars in that it was almost invariably the most beautiful girl at the party. The folks at Chevy could certainly cut corners to keep prices down, but these cuts never came at the expense of styling or trim. Pretty much from the end of the Second World War on up into the 1970s, Chevrolet seemed to be the gateway to the Good Life.
Chevrolet’s California connection even showed up in the cars themselves, beginning with their first hardtop coupe in 1950, which Chevrolet chose to name for one of the premier residential addresses of the era, one that suggested to all of America that the car was somehow special: Bel-Air. As the 1960s got underway, Chevy was right there again, pitching youth and sun and surf with the Malibu, named after a Pacific Ocean beach known to youth all over America.
The 1970s brought a new era: that of the Brougham. As the ’70s got underway, luxury and elegance were the traits of the hottest selling cars, and the sporty motif that had topped so many model lines during the 1960s was foundering. This transition caused some trouble at more than one automaker, as some had a bit of trouble with the transition; the Plymouth Satellite comes to mind.
The Chevrolet of the early ’70s was still the king of the hill, with an advantage available to few others. After the smashing success of the Monte Carlo, Chevrolet was able to chase both the luxury/brougham buyer and the sports coupe buyer with two similar yet very different cars. Through 1972, Chevy chased the performance buyer with the tried and true Chevelle SS. Being an American car company of that era, however, they decided it was time for a new name. Just as the Impala and Caprice had piled on and pushed the old Bel-Air downmarket, 1973 brought us a new car and a new name: the Laguna.
Named for another famous Southern California beach, the Laguna was a marriage of sport and luxury reminiscent of the Ford XLs and Chrysler 300s of the mid- to late-1960s. The Laguna topped the new line of mid-size Colonnade coupes, sedans and wagons, but somehow, something went wrong. While the Laguna Coupe did modestly well, with nearly 43,000 units produced, the other body styles tallied up production figures more Studebaker than Chevrolet–and mind you, this was in a year of record automotive sales in the U.S. Somehow the Laguna did not strike the same chord with buyers as the Malibu had done (and continued to do). For 1974, the Laguna was sacked as Chevy’s A-body flagship and replaced by the Malibu Classic. That turned out to be the right decision, as the Malibu Classic was good for nearly 234,000 total sales (up from the ’73 Laguna’s 70,000-unit total), even in a year, socked by recession and high gas prices, which saw an overall drop in Chevy’s A body sales.
The Laguna name, however, continued to live on in the only model where it had shown any life–the sporty coupe. The Laguna’s sole model in the 1974 Chevelle lineup was the S-3. Could this have been a bone thrown to the dwindling number of Chevy A-body performance buyers who no longer had a Malibu SS? Perhaps. Although the newer car lacked the all-out performance of the departed Malibu SS, it would still get up and move with an optional 454 V8 and several other performance goodies. By the end of the year, however, Chevrolet had proof that the performance market was melting like an ice cube in a cup of hot coffee: Fewer than 22,000 Laguna S-3s found buyers in 1974.
The car was given another opportunity in 1975, largely due to Chevrolet’s need to supply NASCAR drivers with a winning Chevy. The S-3, now with a new and more aerodynamic front fascia, would serve as the Chevy of choice on the stock car circuit. Introduced in January 1975–well into the 1975 model year–the S-3 was hardly a retail success: even considering its short 1975 run, 7,788 sales of a sporting Chevrolet A-body was dismal. The car did little better in 1976, selling 9,100 examples for the year. The final year of the Colonnade A-body would not have a Laguna S-3 in the lineup. These low sales figures were not overlooked at NASCAR which, after the 1977 racing season, disqualified the S-3 as a limited-edition model. Certainly the car was not intended to be a limited edition model, but the car-buying public made it one.
I saw this bright green Laguna S-3 in the summer of 2011. When I saw it, I realized that I had forgotten all about the Chevy Laguna. I passed it on the street late on a sunny July afternoon and turned around to look for it. I succeeded, finding it in a supermarket parking lot. Now, before any comments on the pictures, I know that my CC posts are not being picked up by any photography blogs. We all have our own gifts, and I freely admit that photography is not one of mine. But these bright sunny conditions gave the old JPC BlackberryCam all it could handle and then some. I was not too happy with the pictures I got, but I held out hope of seeing this car again. Well, not only have I never seen this one again, but I have never seen another–nor has any other CC contributor done a piece on one of these cars. So, sorry– bad pictures or not, I could not sit on this one any longer.
When this car was new, I was anything but a Chevy fan, and thus paid virtually no attention to these. All these years later, I find in this car an undeniable appeal. Although I like big V8 sleds, I have always preferred sporty to broughamy. By the time this car was built, in 1975-76, there was really nothing else like it on the American market. Sure, Plymouth was still offering a Road Runner package, but on the new “Small Fury” body it came off like a 50-year-old accountant wearing a Speedo. This particular S-3 clearly bears the scars of a long-time Midwestern daily driver. But even after its hard life, this S-3 still has enough swagger to make it my new favorite Chevrolet Colonnade.
The Laguna was one of the rare flops that came from Chevrolet in that era. It didn’t work as a luxury/sports coupe, nor as a sporty, performance-oriented coupe. I guess this is why John DeLorean is known as the Father of the GTO, and not as the Father of the Laguna–which he very much was, as the head of the Chevrolet Division during its gestation and introduction. It was the car that proved that the performance era was over, and that the Brougham era was not to be stopped. It also proved that although one California beach can be a very popular place in a new car showroom, another may not be able to draw a crowd. As they say in real estate, location, location, location.
Can say that I rather liked the original Chevy Laguna Type S-3. And, I very much liked the 1975-6 Chevy Laguna Type S-3 with the racy, sleek, aerodynamic front end. Had I been in the market for and been able to afford a new car, that would have been one of my top choices. And, as a matter of fact was a NASCAR fan, going back to the latter part of 1969, when I first saw the outrageous 1969 1/2 Dodge Charger Daytona. Yes, out of less than 500 Daytona made, I saw 2 in my home town not long after they were released.
The very name “Laguna” sounds ugly to me. I tend to want to gag when pronouncing it.
The first Laguna I saw was in a Chevy dealership in Sacramento in that exact color in early 1973!
My first impressions was: “What… ???”
All that plastic covering the front end, adding unnecessary length and being ill-fitting and warped besides, gave me serious pause and was the second nail in GM’s coffin for me.
The first were the Colonnades, no matter how grudgingly I liked the Grand Ams.
Once you’re dead and down in Hell, this is the car they’ll issue you. For all eternity. And the door’s window risers won’t work.
…and that bottle of Gatorade next to the console? Nope. Six pack of Fresca.
Mmm…Fresca…love the stuff – once in a while!
My mother would occasionally have a concoction of Gordon’s Vodka and Fresca. — Not as bad as it sounds, actually! ?
I suspect that the ’73 Laguna is several inches shorter than the other Chevelles with the chrome battering ram front bumper.
you would be correct. A 73 Laguna is about an inch or two longer than a 72 model, but its about the same as a standard 73.
The 75-76 Laguna is a touch longer due to the shovelnose.
Even my sedan is about 6″ longer than a 72 sedan thanks to the big bumpers.
The 1972 Chevelle 2-door was 198″ long. A 1973 Chevelle 2-door, was 203″ long, for a 5″ difference in length. A 1974-75 Chevelle 2-door was listed at 207″ long, while for 1976-77 they listed the 2-door at 205.3″ and the 1976 Laguna at 207.3″ long.
The Chevelle Coupes from 1968-72 were similar in size with the 1975-79 Nova – All body styles. 197.5″ for the former and 196.7″ (197.7″ for the 1975 Nova Custom and 1976-77 Nova Concours models) for the latter. Even the 1973 Chevelle Coupe at 202.9″ was still within the Nova size range. The length of the 1974 Chevelle Coupe at 206.9″ and the 1975-76 Chevelle Coupe at 205.3″ while the 1977 at 205.7″ can still be subject to debate along with their several inches larger 4 Door Colonnades Sedan respective year counterparts. Does Chevrolet just like Ford cheat their overall lengths by counting the bumper guards sticking via the front and rear bumpers or not? FWIW, the standard Malibu Coupe on the average was only around 9″ (take or add a few millimeters) still much less than a foot longer than the one size “smaller” Nova.
The ’73 Laguna is my favorite Colonnade Chevy. The front end proves that Chevy stylists could put something non-generic on these cars, and I love the twin round tail lights on the ’73s.
Re: cell phone photography on the street: Your BlackBerry camera clearly can’t deal with bright light. That’s common among cell phone cameras. I’m so glad I upgraded to an iPhone 5. My previous phone, a Palm Pre, was just not up to the task and returned similar results to your BB. The iPhone handles funky lighting conditions so much better. But really, I ought to just carry my Canon S95 everywhere, as it is a fabulous performer under most any conditions.
I thought the “Laguna” was an ugly car, then and now. Back then, I didn’t know Laguna was a beach, thought it was some kind of lizard or amphibian. In the hideous green, it reminds me of the Geico lizard.
The “regular” Chevelle and Monte Carlo are much classier, in my humble opinion.
The shovel-nose Laguna’s don’t do it for me. I like the 73 the best. It really wasn’t any larger than the 68-72 cars, the round park lights tie the front better than the 74s square park lights and make it visually look smaller.
i’d love to have a 73 Laguna sedan or wagon, but those are rare as hens teeth now and I’ve yet to see one in person in 36 years. I guess I can build my own, using my 77 sedan body with the 73 nose.
I had read somewhere where Nascar let these cars run a fair bit longer into the 80s
“….Nascar let these cars run a fair bit longer into the 80s”
No, as stated in article: “after the 1977 racing season, disqualified the S-3 as a limited-edition model”
NASCAR didn’t run Lagunas in the 1980’s at all. The swoop nose was made for NASCAR. But since S3’s won so many races, they were not allowed into the 1978 season, when the Olds 442 body was allowed.
I saw that.
I’m thinking I read it in a book somewhere a while back that they used it well after the 78 downsizing because it was a more aerodynamic design than the 78-80 cars. It’s been a while since I read it. Might have been in the Standard Catalog, or another buff book. I could be wrong.
NASCAR is one of those events that I don’t really care about enough to even know what’s going on. Been to a couple races, I’d have more fun sitting in a lawn chair on the side of the expressways in town than at a race.
I agree the 73 is the best looking. The “NASCAR inspired” sloped nose looks like a fat 76 Chevette front end. Maybe it’s just me.
One of the interesting options I was drawn to as shown in two of the advertisements on this car was for a swivel seat; though Chrysler previously offered swivel seats back in the 50’s, (and on the Imperial mobile director where I think the front seat could rotate 180 degrees) I can’t recall swivel seats being made available on a car since this one offered them (probably ending in 1977).
Though undoubtedly a victim of move to power seats and airbags, I have thought this would have been a neat option to offer as population ages…my father has mobility problems where he’s in a wheelchair and has trouble getting in and out of his car, and a swivel seat would probably help him (he has a rotating “turntable” he can put on the seat to help,but if the whole seat swivelled I think it would allow him to more easily get his legs in the car and not have the seat back in the way getting in or out of the vehicle). I guess that seats are getting a bit too complex with electronic controls for other movement, heat, cooling, and airbags, but swivel would be a neat feature even for non-handicapped people I’d think. I guess there’s only room for this to work on 2 door model vehicles (to avoid the center post) and since the trend has been away from 2 doors this is probably also a reason this offering isn’t being made, because it could only be offered in limited models where it could fit.
As for the Laguna itself, most of the people I knew that had Chevrolet intermediates thru 1977 had the Chevelle model or Monte Carlo….guess this was supposed to be sporty version of Monte Carlo back then?
I believe the swivel seat option was discontinued due to safety concerns. Maybe there was no way to latch the seat so it didn’t turn? But I agree that many people, handicapped or not, would probably appreciate a rotating seat for ease-of-entry/exit.
There was a way to latch them forward, as they had the seatbelt guides on them.
“…guess this was supposed to be sporty version of Monte Carlo back then?”
No, the Laguna was sporty Chevelle, and there was plain Malibu with puffy Malibu Classic. 73-77 Monte Carlos all had chrome bumpers.
The Laguna was Chevy’s Grand Am, same formula, same soft nost, same window gingerbread, and like GA it used the dash from its uplevel brother, the Monte Carlo in this case.
Cars like the Grand Am, Laguna, Cutlass Salon and et al were sort of where the muscle car intermediates went or where marketers though those buyers were going in the 70’s, though they seldom met.
I once rode in a 73 Laguna with swivel seats. I am trying to remember if there was an interlock – the seat would lock into place until the door opened. I also believe that there was a manual latch to release before turning the seat. Then, you sit down and find something to grab onto to swing the seat back forward. I found it an awkward set of motions to get into the car, a bit less so for getting out. Of course, as a teenager, I found the old slide-in method much faster and easier. For women in dresses and folks with mobility problems, I could imagine the swivel being an improvement.
I would also imagine it to be quite expensive. The swivel joint would have to be massive to hold the seat in a collision.
I don’t believe that the swivel seats really caught on with buyers. Even in the intermediates, quite a few buyers preferred the full-width, divided front seat. They didn’t care about a floor-mounted transmission shifter.
The swivel seats also looked as though they weren’t very generously padded. Based on appearnce alone, those seats wouldn’t have been too beckoning to people coming out of a Caprice Classic or a Delta 88 Royale.
Agreed-a friend had a ’74 Monte Carlo with the swivel seats. The cushion was so deeply set between the bolsters that it initially seemed easier to hit the lever, swivel the seat out and slide in, then find something to hold onto-or brace your foot against the firewall-and swivel back into place. Easier if you were driving, as you could grab the steering wheel. After a few times, however, that got old and you would just jump in (unless your waist was a little large for the space between the seat and the wheel). Probably would be useful for someone with reduced mobility, but Chevy wasn’t marketing to those folks. (I have seen Japanese market cars with something similar, can’t recall if those also slide partway out of the car-anybody recall?) The seats were actually very comfortable and supportive, for sitting, but the backs didn’t recline separately-like the seat in the AMC Reliant-so you couldn’t really sleep in one on a long trip. Another second-best solution.
I guess when GM was getting “better ideas” from Ford (two way tailgates), They also grabbed up some late 50s Mopar seat designs.?
The swivel was to allow easier access to the Back seat (without the front passenger getting out), not the front.
I never saw one on the street only once in a magazine a few years ago.not long after Pontiac brought out a sales flop called the Can Am which disappeared after1 year despite being better looking
1977 Can Am was not a “flop”, but a limited edition performance model. Cut short from shortage of Grand Prix dashes and spoilers.
I stand corrected,I’d sooner have a Can Am than a Laguna
I’ve always heard it was cut short when the mold for the rear spoiler broke.
That’s what I’ve always heard. As much as I hoard ’70’s Pontiacs, the CanAm never did it for me.
It struck me as a LeMans trying to be a Grand Prix and a Trans Am at the same time. It didn’t have the classiness of the GP nor the performance of the T/A….not to mention they were all the same color.
That was supposedly how Pontiac came up with the Grand Am name. It was supposed to combine the luxury of a Grand Prix and the performance of the T/A.
It was both. The mold for the spoiler broke, but Pontiac was also selling every Grand Prix it could build in 1977. Pontiac thus had no incentive to divert Grand Prix dashboards to the relatively low-production Can Am, particularly if another issue interfered with Can Am production.
When I saw the front end of the white/red Laguna in the brochure pix I immediately thought Mustang II.
When I was a lad of 16, I thought these to be rather sharp, but couldn’t find a good one at the time. (I settled for a ’75 Mk I Capri 2.3, followed by a ’72 Skylark Sun Coupe). Strange, that. I should have known better, given that R&T had nothing good to say about the Pontiac equivalent (Grand Am?) .
As of this writing, it isn’t as attractive as I remember it being (I’ve not seen one in years), but it isn’t as offensive as some other domestics on offer at the time. Could be brain bubbles, but it seems to me that this was the Hawaiian Tropic stocker featured in some scenes of ‘Cannonball Run’, while other scenes featured a Monte Carlo with the same paint scheme.
In the interest of full disclosure, it pains me to admit any knowledge of ‘Cannonball Run’.
As long as you dont admit to knowing about Cannonball Run II.
One of Chevy’s more painful lessons in “no the public will not swallow anything you spit out.”
Always liked the fresh styling of these, and the Grand Ams too. They looked great, but were rare as can be, even back in the day.
Only reason I can think of for their poor sales is that they competed directly with Camaros and Firebirds. And, given the choice for a sporty coupe, the Malibu and Le Mans brands were more like the Accords and Camrys of the day, whereas the F body’s were more like…F body’s, so people looking for an affordable, stylish, sporty coupe went that way.
For example – woud the Rockford Files have been as great if Jim was tooling around LA in a Grand Am version of the Le Mans?
“[Laguna S3] was the car that proved that the performance era was over”
Well, it proved that performance era in mid size cars was over, since the Firebird and Camaro took nearly all the sporty car sales in the 70’s.
And, 1982 brought back 302 Mustangs, and new F bodies. Then 1987 the 5.0 FI Stang era, so really performance always comes back some other form when auto writers decide it’s “over”.
The radical plastic bumper covers for the colonnade era Laguna and Grand Am were just too out there for Middle America. They still wanted real chrome bumpers. While car critics hated 5 mph bumpers, Mr and Mrs America loved them at the time. Saw them as ‘safety’. It was’t till the 80’s that body colored plastic bumper covers came into mainstream.
One other thing, it’s Chevelle SS*, not “Malibu SS”! Malibu was a trim level on Chevelle line, until 1977. The muscle car mid size Chevy was never branded “Malibu SS” during the era, 1964-72.
*with engine size, after SS, i.e. 396, 454
Good call on the Chevelle SS, I have made that change to the piece. As for the “end of the performance era”, I recall the time as one of lowered compression, power-sapping smog controls, and performance packages consisting largely of tape stripes and white letter tires. You mention a couple of exceptions like the F body, and omit maybe the best of all in the 360-powered Volare Road Runner that was (I believe) quicker than a then-current Corvette. However, those exceptions relied on big cubic inches in small platforms that while good for that time, were widely considered as pale imitations of “real” performance cars of a few years earlier. Of course, as you point out, performance always finds a way back, and certainly did so in the early 80s.
1965 Malibu Super Sport. Or do you mean strictly the “SS” designation?
I see we’re thinking alike today! I was trying to decide whether to use the ’64 or ’65, but I guess I made the right choice.
Not true in 1964 and 1965; it was Called “Malibu Super Sport”
Good catch, but the spelled out ‘Super Sport’ was a trim package with any powertrain, even 2 speed Powerglide. Not the true muscle car as the Chevelle SS396/454.
The current car collector hobby does not call them “Malibu SS”. If one called a 1970 SS454 LS6 a ‘Malibu’ at a car show, they’d get funny looks.
It’s not as simple as that either. Only from 1966 – 1970 was the SS396/454 something approaching a separate model, meaning one couldn’t buy a plain SS (without the big block V8). But starting with 1971, that was not the case; the SS reverted to being a trim package available on Malibus, and thus called Malibu SS. And it came standard with the 307 V8. So most years, it really was a Malibu SS, and even when there was a SS396/454, the brochure says the package “can be had with eith either the Malibu Sports Coupe or Convertible”. Meaning that the underlying car was a Malibu as its basis.
I’d say the current car collector hobby is indulging in a bit of wishful thinking, or trying to re-write history.
OK, but the Chevy Mid Size car line’s name was Chevelle and it was the “underlying car”. The ad copy says “This is what purist think of when you say Chevelle.” Not really promoting it as “Malibu SS”, just stating the the SS has “the standard features of the Malibu and then some”, but it’s Chevelle at its core.
To avoid insurance premiums, after 71, the SS was a package available on Chevelle Malibu trim line, but not on base Chevelle. But still, no Chevy gear head called them “Malibu SS’s”. This was the start of downgrading the Chevelle name, leading to only Malibu of 1978-83.
To me, “Malibu SS” is the silly trim line offered on FWD Malibus before 2008, on even the Maxx body. But it was dropped when Chevy Managers decided “no car would get SS name unless a true performance car.”
It gets to be an issue of semantics, at least in part.
For me, one of the reasons I tend to think of it as a Malibu SS is because that’s how it started out, and in the early mid-sixties, there was also the Impala SS (not Chevrolet SS), and the Nova SS (not Chevy II SS). The break really came in 1966, with the SS396, because for a few years, there was no Malibu SS anymore.
How we chose to interpret the mixed signals after 1971 is not something I’d care to argue any further; clearly there’s ambiguity in the brochures. So if the Chevelle/Malibu SS fans want to call them all just Chevelle SSs, I’m down with that.
One more thing, the bottom of the pic says ‘SS Sport Coupe’. That is all.
IINM, the SS was actually a separate model only from 1966-68, when it was based on the Malibu but not badged or reffered to as a Malibu in any way. From 1969-73, the SS was an option package. At least in 1969, it was available on any 2-door Chevelle, and was not restricted to Malibus. I don’t know if this changed in future years. I also don’t know if 1969-73 Malibus ordered with the SS package carried any Malibu badging. I would agree with Chicagoland that people don’t generally refer to Chevelle SS’s from this period as Malibus even if that’s what the underlying model of a given example was. Chevy’s motivation in opening availability of the SS to the cheaper base models (“Chevelle 300”) in 1969 was presumably to better compete with the Plymouth Road Runner.
1969 was the only year there were ever 2-door pillared Chevelle SS’s. The pillared coupe had historically been restricted to the cheaper Chevelle trim levels, while the Malibu (on which the SS had always been based up to that point) came only as a hardtop. After ’69, the pillared coupe was dropped, and Chevy began offering a 2-door hardtop in the lower Chevelle series.
Even though the SS became an option package in 1969, it continued to carry an engine lineup similar to what had been offered in 1966-68 through 1970. It 1971 it dropped down to a 350 as its base engine (I think with a 4bbl carb, but not positive on that), then in 1972 to the lowly 307 2bbl, before moving back up to a 350 2bbl in 1973. An odd bit of trivia about the ’73s is that, for some unknown reason, the SS package was available on both coupes and station wagons that year.
I believe Tim and Paul are correct about the 1964-65 Chevelle SS’s: they were a distinct sub-series (not an option package) which was not only based on the Malibu but was actually called the “Malibu Super Sport”. As Chicagoland noted above, they did not carry a high-performance V8 standard but were simply available with the same mix of engines offered in other Chevelles. (At the time, Chevelles had a 194 cubic inch six standard, with a 230 available as an option. I’m not sure if the 194 was available in SS’s, but the 230 definitely was.) Again, I don’t know whether these cars carried Malibu badging or if people referred to them as Malibus.
The Pontiac Grand Am did the concept much better, with a better sounding name that lasted decades. La Goon Na……..you don’t put “Goon” in any car name! The Creature from the Black Lagoon-a? They could have called it Coronado (good), Pismo, Redondo, Huntington (not so good)…….they all would have been better! Ventura, Newport and Monterey were already taken.
Nice find! I haven’t seen one of these in a while.
I’m amazed that it was still on the road, being in the Midwest and all…
In Lime of all colors — it would be even snazzier with white interior!
My favorite Laguna would have to be the ’73 model. I’m not wild about the round taillghts but the ’73’s had body-colored rear bumpers which went well with the attractive nose. It would be nice to find a four-door…but there are very few left.
Agreed! But if you want to see that, check out Chris Green’s 1976 Monte Carlo!
It looks like it was penned in high school by the designer of the Aztec.
My grandparents had a 1973 Chevelle Laguna sedan, in blue. To this day I have never been able to find a photo of a Laguna sedan, except for a taillight sneaking in to one of my dad’s photos from when he was a kid.
From what I could find, Chevy only made about 19,000 Laguna sedans. For perspective, this was roughly the number of Canadian Studebakers made in 1965.
I had totally forgotten that any colonnade car after 1975 still had round headlamps.
The sentence “Sure, Plymouth was still offering a Road Runner package, but on the new ‘Small Fury’ body it came off like a 50-year-old accountant wearing a Speedo” suggests that the 1975-78 “small Fury” coupe was actually smaller than the 1971-74 Satellite/GTX/Road Runner coupes that it succeeded. In fact “the new small Fury” was just marketing, a renaming of the same chassis with a different body shell. Of course I agree that the Road Runner decals, etc., on the Fury coupe body looked silly because of the formal roofline and upright front end.
Regarding the Fury Road Runner, what’s funny is originally, the Plymouth Fury was the top of the line sporty model in the late 50’s. But as with most car names, over time they degrade to base models.
Fury means ‘rage’, yet, by the 60s/70s for Plymouth it meant a sedate family car. Did Gran Fury mean ‘even more rage’? It was if the Charger name was made into a sedan…..Oh wait! Just kidding.
Judging by the sales of the Malibu Classic vs. the Laguna, people liked the Classic’s mini-Monte Carlo look much better than the plastic noses offered by the Laguna. The S-3’s nose just seems so…awkward.
The 73-74 Lagunas seem to be the more attractive of the trimline, the shovelnose of the 75-76 cars is just meh.
If you want wild, look up 1977 Chevelle SE – a dealer option that added a Z28 style spoiler and wider turbine style wheels with a gaudy stripe package on a standard Malibu Classic coupe.
Now that’s what Chevrolet should have made in the first place.!
Great article about one of the more interesting Chevrolets of the 1970s.
I remember, as a kid in the early fall of 1972, trying to figure out where the Laguna fit into the Chevrolet intermediate line-up. I knew what a Malibu was, and I knew what a Chevelle was.
But then why do some intermediate Chevelles come with this strange front-end?
Wait – they are called Lagunas! But what, exactly, is a Laguna…is it the cheapest model (it has no front bumper!) or the most expensive model in the intermediate Chevrolet line-up?
And if it’s supposed to be the top-of-the-line model, why doesn’t its front end look expensive and exotic, like the one on that spiffy new Pontiac Grand Am that I want my father to buy?
Judging by the car’s sales figures, I wasn’t the only one who was confused.
Around 1980, where was one 1976 Laguna Type S-3 in our town – a dark blue and white coupe. It was owned by a someone about five years older than I was. He worked at the only men’s clothing store in our small town. It was a nice-looking car for that time, and he did keep it excellent condition. He seemed to know what he had. The store is long gone now, and I wonder if the Laguna Type S-3 was traded, or if he kept it.
I love the Colonnade A-bodies, but I’ve always considered myself more of a Pontiac man so my favorite would be the 73-75 Grand Am (I would LOVE to have a 74 coupe one day!). But the Laguna S3 has to be one of my favorite 70s Chevrolets. Really, all the performance Colonnades appeal to me: Century Gran Sport, 442, Cutlass Salon, Can Am…
And this S3 really pulls off that usually unpleasant green. But what does S3 mean? 3rd series of Chevelle?
It could be interesting if someone did put the 1975-76 Laguna S3 nose on a Chevelle sedan or wagon.
I spotted on IMCDB, a rare picture of a 1973 Chevelle Laguna sedan
http://www.imcdb.org/vehicle_168620-Chevrolet-Chevelle-Laguna-1973.html
Somebody wants a Laguna sedan?
http://sanantonio.craigslist.org/cto/3535508151.html
Distance and a divorce are the only things keeping me from calling this guy… It’s got the rare Turbine wheels and it’s not brown, gold or beige: Wow — that car’s a steal.
Wow, I’m more anti-sedan, if it was a coupe….
Yeah, Chevy was trying to make a ‘Caprice’ within the Chevelle line with Laguna, to the Malibu’s ‘Impala’. For ’73, there was a base ‘Deluxe’. Maybe should have called it ‘Long Beach’?
At least tried to offer an alternative to the huge Malibu bumpers. But as in another post, Middle USA wanted “real bumpers”!
“Maybe should have called it ‘Long Beach””
I have driven through Long Beach and am laughing right now. I had always imagined a very picturesque place. No. Maybe El Segundo (site of a waste treatment facility as I remember)?
Or the “Port Hueneme”.
It’s difficult to imagine many of the inhabitants of Laguna Beach, Malibu and especially Monte Carlo buying one of their namesake vehicles.
Somehow I’d never made the Laguna Beach connection with this nameplate. Now that I know…it’s still a stupid name. Obviously, the well of phonetically-pleasing So-Cal coastal towns had run dry.
Regarding the name Laguna S3
Think Laguna Seca Raceway.
Think new Laguna S3 being one “S” better than the old Chevelle SS (2 S’s).
The 73-74 Laguna front end was a big cosmetic and areodynamic improvement over the standard front end.
The 75-76 Laguna front end was more radical in design, often called the slope nose, or shovel nose for its even more streamlined styling which improved areodynamics further.
The body style also had rather large wheel flares and wheelwells allowing the fitment of very large wheels/tires used for racing with no body modification.
The model was used extensively in stock car racing. Won a ton of races and championships.
Is it me or does the front end of the 73 Laguna look like the 74+ Mustang2?
I believe the reason why the S3 was illegal in NASCAR after 78 was because of King Richard. He had jumped from the Dodge bandwagon in favor of the 442 and was experimenting with the slant rear window Impala coupes. He wanted to race Dodge Magnums. Something like that, so I read. Politics.
“For 1974, the Laguna was sacked as Chevy’s A-body flagship and replaced by the Malibu Classic. That turned out to be the right decision, as the Malibu Classic was good for nearly 234,000 total sales (up from the ’73 Laguna’s 70,000-unit total), even in a year, socked by recession and high gas prices, which saw an overall drop in Chevy’s A body sales.”
I don’t think the Malibu Classic really replaced the Laguna. I think that what happened to the non-Laguna Chevelle lineup in ’74 was just a shuffling of series names: the “Malibu” name was shifted down to what had been the Chevelle Deluxe, and the Malibu Classic took over for what had been the “Malibu”. As a result of this, all non-Laguna Chevelles were now called Malibus; there was no longer a “base Chevelle”. The Laguna sedan and wagon were simply dropped due to slow sales (or there might have been a Chevelle Malibu Estate introduced to cover the top end of the wagon market, if there hadn’t already been such a model). I have always seen the new-for-1974 Laguna S-3 as kind of a replacement for the Chevelle SS.
Echoing what geeber said above, I’ve never quite understood what purpose the Laguna and Grand Am were supposed to serve. Adding to the confusion, their model lineups and history are not entirely parallel. IINM, the Grand Am came as a coupe or a sedan, but not a wagon. It continued to offer both body styles through 1975 (even though the 1974 and later Laguna came only as a coupe), after which it was dropped completely (one year earlier than the Laguna). It then inexplicably returned in 1978 (even though the Laguna never did), as a coupe only, continuing through 1980.
There actually was a Grand Am sedan offered in 1978 and 79, though judging by the size of the picture, they didn’t do much to promote them.
http://www.oldcarbrochures.com/static/NA/Pontiac/1978%20Pontiac/album/1978%20Pontiac-13.html
Great find, although I think these look sharpest in the white and red paint scheme. I’ve actually seen several Lagunas with bench seats, so I don’t know if it was available certain years and not others.
There was actually a Chevelle/Malibu SS model for 1973 only, though I imagine they’re incredibly rare: http://www.hemmings.com/hmn/stories/2007/07/01/hmn_feature9.html
Bench seats were standard with swivel buckets (AN7) being optional in all years. I am not sure if the swivel buckets were available on the ’73 sedan though but they very well could be considering…..
they were available on the ’73 Chevelle SS Station Wagon (a vehicle I could only dream of finding).
Console was not included with AN7 as I’ve seen several column shift examples (yuck!).
If you enlarge the 6th photo from the top, it says that the swivel buckets were standard. On the other hand, the info in the brochures was, as they say, “subject to change.”
By Grange your right. This comes as a total surprise to me as I had it my head that the swivels were optional throughout Laguna production. Bad assumption passed on as a fact. My apologies.
It’s all good, I’m only going by the brochure. It’s not unlike GM to gradually de-content the cars to keep down the price increases, so the swivels might’ve been standard in 74 and optional after that.
So if Chevy shot the Laguna ad in Monterey, did Mercury shoot a Monterey ad in Laguna?
The Laguna! I didn’t know it existed until a couple years ago when I saw a 75 “shovel-nose” for sale on craiglist. I drove an hour to check it out, dreams of owning one of the most hideously beautiful and rare 70s machines around. But alas, the car was too far gone (roof rust under the vinyl padding was apparently a SERIOUS issue) for me to drop $1000 (which I talked the guy down to from some ridiculous amount). I still think about that car though. There was something awfully wonderful about it.
This car looks somehow like Gumby and not in a good way…
The Laguna was widely produced with all any options for 1973.I believe the front end did not fair well in crash tests? In 1974 Chevrolet had to disguise the performance name of the S.S., due to insurance reasons,as did most other car makers.Nascars’ demand of the discovered flat nose laguna ’73/4 made popular by everyone that needed an aerodynamic advantage used on super speedways and won every thing in sight ,also causing nascar to limit engine size to try evening the field,allowed G.M. to slick the front end a bit more toward s an advantage as did many other body styles over many years until Nascar came up with body templates.I believe Pontiac might have been the last with their 2+2,after the aero coupe Montes’.The pressure was too much as to the demise of the muscle car. The only cars that really survived that era was the Pontiac firebird/Chevrolet camaro,leaning towards handling styling,as they stayed steady through 1981.I’ve had 6 and this one is for sale! 2,995
“In 1974 Chevrolet had to disguise the performance name of the S.S., due to insurance reasons,as did most other car makers.”
I don’t think this statement is correct. Chevrolet offered the ElCamino as an “SS” from 73-77, as far as the colonade style went. And S3 is just another way of saying SuperSuperSport. Than there was the Nova that also had a SuperSport model all the way up till 1976. Now I ain’t bragging that these were “Muscle Cars” as they were in the 60’s but I doubt Chevrolet or anybody else was worried about the Insurance companies that they had to plead the 5th when trying to market anything that hinted at performance. Another example would be the RoadRunner previously mentioned.
Which brings up…how many big block Colonades have you seen in the flesh? My only experience would have been a hand full of 73-74 Buick GS455s,some Stage1, built as Centurys. And the mentioned GrandAm,GrandPrix,73GTO,CanAm with either a 455 or 400/4V along with any Hurst/Olds with a 455. BBC Colonades are scarce. Even a 400 SBC was rare. As a matter of fact the only one I can recall seeing in the flesh was a 73 MonteCarlo “S” one of my HS buddies drove. Maybe Chevy was ashamed to call that model a true “SS” as they only gave it 1 “S”?
Well Ford changed Torino GT to “Gran Torino” in 1972 and Dodge renamed the Charger and Challenger R/Ts “Rallye” in 73. I doubt that was coincidence. If the automakers could generate a few more sales from having the “performance” packages off the insurance companies radar for a bit, I don’t see why they wouldn’t.
I’ve tried to buy every big block Colonnade I could find but there are few left. I bought a trashed silver/white bench interior ’76 Cutlass Supreme 455 out of a scrapyard but could not keep it. I was sadly shocked to find a 455-equipped lime/white bucket seat ’76 Supreme in a Birmingham junkyard and a loaded ’75 455 Salon in Triple-terd-brown. I kept the build sheets out of them as a reminder. My father’s scrapyard got in a T-code ’76 442 body, triple black and totally stripped out..
I bought a ’73 GS455 and ’73 Regal 455 when I lived in Alabama and knew of two ’73 Stage One Centuries in Birmingham. One was a rough maroon one like mine and the other was a gorgeous bright blue with white interior: the blue car was perfect when I first saw it but the next time I saw it it was all thugged out with stupid rims, an offensive boom-boom stereo, and some body damage.
The first BBB Colonnade I ever saw was when I was sixteen and riding home from the B’ham airport back in ’89. A mechanic-looking guy passed us on 20/59 in the fast lane in a beat-up ’74 Gran Sport Stage 1 (1 of 478 built). I remember he had the column tilted upward which showed off the beautiful optional Sport Steering Wheel.
I bought a ’73 GTO 400, ’73 GP 400 ,’73 GA coupe 400, engineless ’73 GA sedan, ’75 LeMans Safari 400-4, and finally a ’73 GP 455.
The Safari is long gone and all but the 455 Grand Prix still rot away in AL. The Buicks are coming up here later this year, what’s left of them. I last drove my GS probably fifteen years ago. It’s the only vehicle I ever owned that literally gave me the shakes whenever I drove it — it was a bullet.
I’ve seen one junked 454 non-SS el Camino and a guy brought in his T-boned ’73 Monte Carlo 454 carcass into my dad’s scrapyard many years ago. He transplanted the drivetrain sadly into his POS pickup truck: what a waste. Hardly every see BBC Colonnades — no doubt most were raped of their drivetrains by the Bubbas who blowed up the motors in their pickups and racecars.
I always had mixed feelings about the Laguna Chevelles. The styling was never quite there for me. I prefer the 1974 Laguna S-3 with the smaller 1/4 windows and I prefer it’s front end to the 1975-76 front end. The 1973 Laguna didn’t really seem to have any serious performance aspirations as the SS model still existed. It seemed for 1974 they made it more performance oriented. However, the “performance” aspects seemed to be primarly in the looks department and didn’t really improve the car’s performance.
One issue with these Lagunas noses is the plastic does not age well and they are hard to restore. Further they are very, heavy and add significant weight on the front of the car compared to a stock Chevelle/Malibu front end.
The feature car is pretty rough, and the colour is not very attractive in my eyes. I thought that the 1975-76 looked good with a dark red body and white stipes. They also looked sharp in black. Here’s a nice example:
http://www.hemmings.com/users/150662/gallery/1508.html
The Laguna S-3 was the top of the line for the Malibu. Even though they didnt sell well back in the day, Now is the time to get one. I found mine on ebay a few years ago, and did a complete rebuild, its a rare car. I take it to car shows, and the interest ( and a few awards) is the front nose. made out of rubber.
My dad left me one just like this. She is a rust bucket from sitting for 20 years, but I just had her moved to Louisiana and plan to begin restoration next year.
Good looking car buddy!
My first car was a ’74 Malibu Classic coupe. I wish I could remember it with rose-colored glasses.It was a well-built car (lasted over 400k) but a horribly engineered and designed car.
It was close to 4000lb. I think the front steering/suspension components dated back to when the Chevelle line was around 3300lb. That car ate more tie rods/ball joints/pitman & idler arms, etc than any car had a right to. Meanwhile, it handled like a La-Z-Boy on a bed of marshmallow Fluff.
The car was pretty big outside, but had little usable room inside. the back seat and trunk were virtually useless.
The Malaise Era 350 was choked down to 145 HP. The 2-bbl carb was of no help. The 2.73:1 “highway economy” axle made it a slug off the line, but didn’t really help economy any. 15 city/18 highway. The THM350 needed a rebuild about every 40k.
I loved that car for all the reasons a person loves one’s first car, but in hindsight, it was a reliable, but expensive to maintain pig.
My 1st car was a 1976 Laguna S3. It had the floor shift and swivel seat. The factory 350 had been replaced with a 400 short block. The gas mileage was bad, it wasn’t the most comfortable, but I could run with anybody on the road. I traded it in on a new 1985 Jeep CJ7. I miss that car. While it may not have been a popular car among the public, It was a good solid car and sharp looking going down the street.
I’m still driving my beloved ’76 Chevy Laguna Type S-3. I’m the original owner. I wouldn’t part with it for the world. It’s driven almost every day. The 400 motor was rebuilt three years ago. Now, I’m saving up money for the exterior, which has been repainted twice before, and an all new interior will come a few more years down the road. These things are expensive, but, to me, it’s well worth it. This car will outlast any car that anyone buys new today, I guarantee! I’ve watched ’em come and go over the years, shrink to a pitiful size, and have to use air bags instead of steel. I feel much safer with a heavy door any day! Fifteen years ago, I bought a second car as a back up. Don’t need it. It sits out in the street rotting while I keep driving in my swivel-bucket seat and enjoy my louvered windows. I feel like a million dollars driving it! I get many, many compliments on it quite often, especially in the summers when sitting at stoplights with the windows down. I’m also the nicest driver on the road since so many people see my car and know whose it is! And my car is so easy to find in any parking lot!
I own a rust prevention company! Bought
My 76 Laguna s3 from a customer 23 years ago!
Just finished a 4 year frame off rotisserie
Restoration on it I love This car it rides like
Caddy and goes real fast for a two ton car!
LOVE the car. COOL to be different! 70’s cool..
If you ever want to sell let me know
I’d realized these slope nosed Lagunas were intended for success on NASCAR’s tracks. I’ve also been aware that they were not the same success on dealership’s floors. I personally always liked the Laguna especially the ’74 models which had a sportier grill pattern than the ’73’s and a paint striping detail on the lower body which incorporated the front end with the rest of the car. The “sport roof” and louvered opera windows completed the look. In some respects the ’75-’76 models were something of a precursor to the much more successful ’83-’88 Monte Carlo SS models which also featured a slope nose and similar mid body striping. It was a tough car to market in an era of dwindling horsepower numbers as by ’76 the 400 was the biggest engine available rated at 175 hp. The original S-3 in ’74 featured a performance suspension, bucket seats and a console but due to slow early sales those features were made optional on later ’74’s in order to lower the price. It’s unfortunate so few Lagunas were produced (let’s not forget the handsome ’76 Cutlass Supreme was a best seller in the same market) and how even fewer survived because to me it’s still an appealing car and sharper looking than many new models out there. And the Chevelle SE someone mentioned was built by a Kansas custom outfit named Special Editions which furnished the ’77 model with turbine wheels, front and rear spoilers and special striping. About 50 were built. To this day after visiting car shows for over 25 years I’ve only managed to see just one at Carlisle a few years back.
The Laguna will never be a beach too far for me to visit. Nifty title to this article though.
Yes – the 1977 Chevelle (maybe was Malibu SE) because according the Chevelle books I have the Chevelle name was to have died with the last of the 1976 Laguna Type S3s is one of the hardest cars to locate anywhere. I have only seen (2) for sale EVER on the internet – one was a basket case falling apart and the other was a very good survivor but the owner apparently thought it was made out of gold or silver asking $30,00 for it. Never seen one in person. It is very hard to find much info at all on this 77 SE model. I once stumbled across a site that said less than 75 were made / 100 were planned for release but that number was not reached. The 77 SE was not even marketed much at the time according to the story. Anyone who finds anything on internet PLEASE post it on here for us to see? Thanks
The last Laguna S3 I saw was back in the late 80s or early 90s and was a lime green one with the straked opera windows like the one pictured. The differences? This one was in near-perfect condition and had a big-block v8 in it! Up until then I thought of them as a mamby pamby version of the Chevelle, kind of like the Somerset to Regal.
This is my 1976 Chevelle Laguna Type S3 (they used S3 to avoid high performance insurance premiums instead of SS but by 1976 these de-tuned engines could in no way be called an SS in my opinion) Mine has the 400cui 4bbl dual exhaust and only has about 210 horsepower since rebuild. This is the 3rd Laguna S3 I have owned since 1976. First one was stolen and never recovered. Most Chevelle clubs do not even recognize them as Chevelles even though the GM Standard Catalog Of Chevelles includes the Type S3 and states it is THE LAST Chevelles produced. Photo of mine at Super Chevy Show in 2009. In all the years I have owned and known about the Type S3 Chevelles I have only seen (3) anywhere other than the ones I have owned on a highway or parking lot. When I bought the first (2) in 1975 / 1976 the car lots only kept (1) on at the Dealerships anywhere outside of California.
Love mine she scoots! N loud
Custom cold air induction
Custom stainless exhaust! 1 off tips!
Very loud nascar style tips made exclusively for my car!
Cool car and set up…. Mine was frame off restored from ground up several years before I managed to get it and they went back ALL stock with it. The Laguna I had for 6 years before this one, I sold in the 80s had the 350cui motor that I put headers in and went all the way out the back with tail pipes at the rear bumper. Those headers made a hell of a big difference going from single exhaust to the headers. That car would jump up and take off when cruising around 55 – 65 and then putting your foot in it. I regretted selling it the day after and it took me from 1999 to about 2006 to find one that was not a junk yard rust bucket. These cars are very rare BUT do not have the value that all the hi horsepower muscle cars command these days… People have not forgotten them and a lot of folks are coming around and realize how cool they are with the limited amounts made and all the NASCAR history and wins. There is a web site that lists the Laguna Type S3 1975/1976 as the #3 out of 10 high impact Daytona Speedway car right behind the Plymouth Superbirds and the Ford Torino Talledaga.
Friend of mine did a frame off rotiserie on
Mine, 350 40 over and decked n balanced,
Roller rocker aluminum edelbrock heads noisy Pete Jackson timing gears even my block, driveshaft, a arms rad cradle, inner front fenders have been powder coated as well as the whole frame in and out!
Block was done purple! Had this for 23 years no rust I own a rust prevention shop and bought it off a customer whose been trying to buy it back! This is it on the Dyno!
Guess you can only put pics on here!
My Garden! Tryin ta Grow a spare! This ones had it!
Where did the SS fit in vs the Laguna? Came across this listing for a ’73 SS wagon on Ebay:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Burgundy-with-Silver-striping-Power-steering-brakes-windows-Fact-AC-2-seat-/141453943662?pt=US_Cars_Trucks&forcerrptr=true&hash=item20ef4fe36e&item=141453943662&nma=true&si=kLnweVlbSqQoZHUfWIDCklUtRYw%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557
Great story! I wasn’t really aware of the slanted Laguna front. I finally know what was Matchbox doing with their “Chevy Pro Stocker”
Really interesting cars- I just bought a 1975 Laguna Type S-3, my 4th and my best one. This car has the “Top Engine Choice” 400 small block, though the 454 was available for the first part of the production year, and the New Laguna was introduced in January of 1975, and not available in the fall of ’74 as the other Chevrolet offerings. My New one has every option except for the “Sky Roof” Option CA1 and was 325.00 in 1973. In 1973 Laguna was the top of the line, then Malibu then Deluxe. Only 3 complete series. The SS Option (RPO Z15) was offered only on the Malibu and for the first and only time the Malibu Station Wagon. There was NEVER a Laguna SS. In1974, The Malibu Classic became the Top-of-the-line, then Malibu replaced the Deluxe as the entry level-just the name game. The previous Laguna now called the “Laguna Type S-3” took the place of the Malibu SS option. I always thought the 73 Laguna should have been the Chevelle SS anyway. Here is my thought on the S-3 Designation…We all know the Malibu car was named after the famous beach in California, and the new for ’73 Laguna was named after another famous beach in California plus the Laguna Seca raceway. Here is only my guess on the “S-3” name- It could have been the “S” for Sport Chevelle and the “3” for the third generation Chevelle. or it could have stood for the “Super Sport Successor” which gives you the 3 S’s or “Successor to the Super Sport -anyway it makes for good conversations at cruise-ins. I am fortunate to own also the final produced 1973 Chevelle SS built at the Kansas City Plant-a 454/4 speed car, built so late that GM put a ’74 block in my car. it was a COPO car on the build sheet. I also have a ’73 Chevelle SS Station Wagon matching numbers car 454/400 turbo. You could get a 4 speed in these cars but bench seat only. I also have the 73 El Camino SS with 454 /400 turbo-swivel seats as my coupe-it has 48,000 actual miles and my coupe has 68,000. These cars -the 73 Chevelle SS, the 74, 75.76 Laguna S-3 cars are great cars and what was left of the Muscle Car market.-Guys, enjoy your cars…God owns it all…we are just using them while we are are here-we are just stewards and care takers, it says in His Word-He gives us all things richly to enjoy!…So, go ENJOY!-blessings on this day- Mitch…PS..did you know that the “oval” in wood grain on the ’75 Laguna S-3’s were for the Nascar Oval speedways? Nice touch and on the 75 cars only. In ’76 the door panels button design was shared with the Malibu classic cars.
I can’t believe I’m saying this, but if I had been in the market for a mid-sized “sporty” coupe from one of the big three in the mid 70s, it would have been a Buick Century/Regal. The 73 Malibu and Laguna were attractive to me, but on a scale of 1 to 10 the Buick scored a 7 or 8 while the Chevy scored maybe a 5.
But back to the Laguna…for some reason I never associated that name with sporty, but instead saw it as a more….luxury(?) leaning car. I mean, traditionally, a new model/nameplate at any car manufacturer starts at the top…the de-facto luxury position.
Another killer, for me anyway, was the garish-looking colors many of the Lagunas were painted, particularly the 74 on models. The name said luxury while the color choices said Vega…but a lot bigger.
BTW, while it was the best selling model, the 4 door sedan seems to be the model you rarely see. I have seen at least 2 or 3 73 Laguna wagons over the years, and nearly half a dozen 2 doors, but 4 door sedans(?). Maybe 1 or 2.
Regarding the begining of the article, its too bad Californians and Americans to a lesser degeree think that buying a toyota is as patriotic as Baseball, hotdogs and well You know..PS. GM’ s Australian arm Holden had an an advertisement with a similar theme, check it out on You tube.Too bad Holden and all other cars will no longer be made down under. They had some neat V8 cars.
I agree, Even though I’m an American, The loss of Holden (and Australian cars in general.) just makes the industry that much less interesting. ?
In the opening photo the 1975-6 Laguna shovelnose looks like that of a mildly revised 1974 Vega.
Not attractive at all front end.
I felt like the S3 was one of the very few bright points of the Colonnade era, which I totally didn’t get at all. I kind of felt like they were going down the same road Ford had already done. GM’s styling disaster only lasted like 4 years, Ford’s continued until the 90’s, they seemed to make ugly car after ugly car. Now, I don’t get thrilled over Ford’s styling, but it doesn’t totally repulse me as it had for about 30 years.
Speaking of Ford, I’d seen the shovel nose front end of the ’75-’76 S3 somewhere else and it finally dawned on me where: first generation Ford EXP which debuted in 1983. It might have taken Jack Telnack seven years, but he finally got around to copying it.
Laguna shoulda name it La-gooney
The yellow and black Chevy HT seen above is a 1951 Bel- Air
I owned one in Green an Cream back in the 80s…235cu power glide
I’d like to note how that 51 Bel-Air is a perfect precursor to the 70 Monte Carlo! Both are “luxo-sporty” cars based on the “A” body with just enough exclusivity to place it above their “lesser” brethren, even the ads shown are similar in spirit!?
The analogy of the 1973-77 Chevelle Malibu and 1975-79 Nova would be likened very much to the Toyota Camry vs. the Toyota Corolla.
I had a 76 Laguna S-3 as a teenager. I rebuilt the 350 with a hotter cam, 4-bbl, headers, etc. I managed to get it to do 15.7 E.T.s in the 1/4 mile. I think I was handicapped by the 2.73 gears and my lack of tuning ability. I spent many hours working under the hood, and every one of them was made more difficult by that Laguna bumper sticking further out than a regular Chevelle’s would. I still miss that car.
I was just finishing high school when the Colonnades came out, and though I was mostly an “import” (European + Datsun) buff, I loved the new GM intermediates, just as I had the previous generation 5 years earlier. As common as they were on the roads, the styling of both generations was really distinctive, and I like them to this day. Road and Track featured the GrandAm and Cutlass Salon, but to this day I remember being confused by the Laguna name: the Salon was a still a Cutlass, and the GrandAm name at least tied in to TransAm and Grand Prix, but why rebrand a classic name like Chevelle or Malibu? In hindsight I realize that was when the Buick intermediate became the Regal, but Buicks were NOT on my radar in those teen years. So, 3 years late, thanks for the article and especially all the comments. And, minus battering ram bumpers, almost any Colonnade still looks good to me!
“why rebrand a classic name like Chevelle or Malibu?”
Well, the ’73 Laguna was the top trim line of Chevelle line. It didn’t “replace” anything, it was an addition.
But, Malibu is so ingrained and used interchangeably by Chevy fans with Chevelle since ’64. So much so that Chevelle name was dropped for ’78, and Malibu is still used today.
Laguna just didn’t catch on and was unknown outside CA. The rubber Pontiac-ish bumper was new to Chevy, so they were trying a new trim name. But mid size buyers wanted chrome bumpers in the 70’s.
“Echoing what geeber said above, I’ve never quite understood what purpose the Laguna and Grand Am were supposed to serve…”
According to Collectible Automobile and old Motor Trends, the original intent of the plastic front ends was for sporty trimmed Chevelle/LeMans. Penned during the height of Muscle Car era, but delayed a year to ’73 MY, so missed the market. Grand Am nose was meant to be the “Endura” front end for cancelled 1972 ‘colonnade’ GTO.
So, re-imagined as “European Inspired” luxury trims Laguna/Grand Am. But, middle America wanted Cutlass Supremes with velour seats, opera windows and vinyl tops. So, ’74 Malibu Classic with all the plush trimmings came about just in time for big car trade ins. Luxury LeMans was already around, but GP’s sold like hotcakes.
the shovel nose Laguna pre-dated the 83-88 Monte Carlo SS – some lamented that the colonnade A-bodies do not earn the respect like their older counterparts (same with the 75-79 Nova or other malaise era product from Detroit); an S-3 was featured in PHR Magazine prior 2 its demise along with the EcoNova (which was a 76 Nova fitted with a crate LS3); at the time of publiciation TEN Network phased out PHR but kept the Engine Masters SE edition which was absorbed by the Hot Rod Magazine division (as of 2017 CHP and Super Chevy r now TEN assets); once malaise era automobiles enter a mainstream publication esp if its a faded era that no one discusses its reader base goes down
Can anyone tell me if the Laguna S-3 from 1976 came with Posi-trac rear ends?
I just picked up one to build as a ‘throw back’ replica of the #30 that was Dale Earnhardt’s second NASCAR entry at the 1976 World 600 in Charlotte.
I have a 1975.5 with a positrac rear end
Still cool 76 chevelle laguna S-3
You know it was no accident that the S3 logo looked a lot like the old SS logo at first glance.
Here’s an article about Dale Earnhardt Jr’s 1975 Laguna S-3:
https://team.valvoline.com/culture/whips-rides-rods/cars-76-1976-chevelle-laguna-s-3