(car pictured is a 1981; the story is about a 1980)
(first posted 10/26/2012) My GM’s Deadly Sins Series has generated more than a bit of controversy. I called the Citation “GM’s deadliest Sin” Of the over 200 comments, maybe a few disagreed with the Deadliest-Ever judgment; and so it is. Nevertheless, it’s good that nobody ever asked me about my personal experience with an X-Body, because I drove one for two years and it really wasn’t all that bad. How ironic is that? Now, mine was a Buick Skylark, and maybe there’s some magic to that name. It also might just have been luck. Or that I’ve sold out and now get paid to write nice things about GM? Maybe my benefactors will be willing to kick in a little extra if I called this one a GM’s Greatest Hit?
The X-Cars were GM’s most important automobiles ever; they were the platform from which the company would vault into the modern era. They were the third, final and most-important step in GM’s massive downsizing program of the late ’70s (in fact, that program represented the largest investment by an industrial corporation since WWII). Despite being considerably smaller, lighter and more efficient, each newly downsized GM car was mandated to maintain or expand the interior dimensions of its predecessor.
The first step resulted in the excellent and beloved B-Bodies, in 1977. By slimming down so painlessly, these full-sizers got big American cars back on the track they rather foolishly abandoned in the late ’50s.
New A-Bodies replaced GM’s mega-midsize Colonnade cars in 1978. There was some considerable toe-stubbing with these: Unloved Aerobacks, undersized transmissions, non-opening rear windows, feeble engines…but the coupes were a hit, and when the restyled sedans appeared, they became a staple of the American automotive diet. Neither a Greatest Hit nor Deadly Sin, this A-Body was merely a snooze.
Step Three was the X-Cars. Here were GM’s first modern front-wheel drive cars, internationally sized and configured, which were to be the giant leap forward into a future that would usher in an endless stream of GM front-drivers. The rather bold, modern and cleanly styled Citation hatchback (as well as the fairly rare Citation notchback coupe), looked quite unlike the rest of the Chevrolet family.
In contrast, the Skylark broke no new stylistic ground. Essentially, it was a compressed version of Buick’s bigger, rear-wheel drive sedans. Overall, it really didn’t work out so well, but all the traditional Buick stylistic cues (except portholes) were present and accounted for. And, of course, there was its size. In a rather remarkable feat of downsizing, the new Skylark was 19″ shorter and almost 800 lbs lighter than its predecessor (below), but had bigger interior dimensions in virtually every category. Of course, the RWD NOVA X-Bodies were hardly paragons of space (and weight) efficiency.
The Skylark not only looked quite unlike the ill-fated Citation, its sales trajectory was decidedly different. as well. The Citation had an explosive first (extended-length) year, but sales quickly wilted in the face of numerous glitches, recalls, cheap materials and a quickly-spreading word-of-mouth reputation. All in all, it was nowhere near ready for prime time.
The Skylark was the second-best selling of the X-factors, with the Pontiac Phoenix and Olds Omega a rather distant third and fourth, respectively. But unlike the other three, all of whose post-1982 sales fell off a cliff, the Skylark hung in there reasonably well, almost tying the Citation in 1982 and beating it thereafter. But why? Maybe it’s the demographic: Let’s face it: Unlike the other X-hausters, the Skylark’s mini-Electra styling clearly targeted an older demo. So what was I doing in one?
As some of you might recall (it’s been a while since my last installment), in 1977 I found myself in LA, working in various production department capacities for KSCI, a new TV station owned and run by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi’s TM organization. I was driving a white Peugeot 404 sedan, and Stephanie drove a 404 wagon.
One of the station engineers was a GM true believer, and had bought various GM cars for different TM organizations as a fleet purchaser. In 1980, he ordered four almost-identical white Skylark Limited sedans–probably unlike any other Skylark Limiteds ever built–for the use of a bunch of TM twits that were “running” the station and living in a couple of expensive rental houses in Brentwood.
The option box had been duly checked for every possible heavy-duty and performance item, including the 110 hp, 2.8-liter V6, automatic, heavy-duty suspension, higher-effort power steering, wide wheels shod with plump 205 70R-13 “performance” tires, transmission cooler, HD cooling system and anything else that caught his engineer’s fancy. They were loaded; not in the usual way, but well-equipped for both drivers and passengers, with cruise control, tilt wheel, A/C and other amenities. I shudder to think of how much they must have cost–they might have been the most expensive Skylarks built that year.
The extravagance was ironic, given that the station was falling into financial distress. The TM movement’s headiest days had ended in the late ’70s, and the station really couldn’t afford to broadcast Maharishi’s lectures and the daily “good news” anymore. The station had been cut off financially and told to swim or sink: It was sinking fast.
I had an idea, one that sparked a palace coup. The outcome was that one day in the spring of 1981, I found myself the General Manager of KSCI, and I had my choice of the Skylark harem. I tried them all out, and one clearly ran lustier than the others, so that became “mine”. Hey; it’s a free car! And with air conditioning, no less. I duly sold the 404 to the GF of a coworker, and aged 28, became a Buick driver. Not exactly the typical demographic.
Mine had a blue interior like this one, but seeing it was a Limited, it had a much plusher one, with “loose pillow” upholstery and such.
Like this, actually. Its superficial similarities to the Citation were not nearly as obvious, but underneath that tufted upholstery hid a Citation seat, including a wicked steel bar that crossed the seatback near the lumbar region. I never took the Skylark on any really long trips, but it made itself noticeable all-too soon. The Skylark was about as different as a car could be from the Peugeot, the seats being perhaps the most extreme example.
This example has the Iron Duke 2.5, not a 5 liter. Bad choice; its agricultural ways were all wrong for what should have been a world-class new car. It was just one of the many shortcuts that cut away at GM’s market share in the eighties. Anyone who had ever driven (or just heard) a Honda Accord’s sewing-machine four could only chuckle (or cry) when first encountering an Iron Duke.
I drove the roarty but smooth-enough V6 Skylark hard, and never failed to be impressed by its torque-steer on my daily full-throttle run on the Santa Monica freeway on-ramp after the staging lights turned green. Actually, it was more than that; call it “front sub-frame steer”. In an effort to give the X-Bodies that traditional quiet GM big-car ride, the front subframe was mounted to the body with a number of very elastic mounts, might have been Silly Putty. The whole front end shifted to one side, but it picked up its skirts and hustled right along, given that we’re talking about 1981. The V6 X-Bodies were brisk for the time.
And with its quick steering and HD suspension, the little Limited surprised a few folks I engaged with to make the miles go faster and the smiles come faster. It was essentially a Citation X-11 in Buick drag; only the fat tires gave it away. Never seen one equipped that way again.
And oddly, our Skylark fleet didn’t have the common malady of abruptly-locking rear brakes, which was dangerous, and threw quite a few X-Bodies into the ditch, if not the rear end of the car in front of it. Did it have HD brakes? Was it the big tires? Or?
For that matter, I don’t remember the Skylarks suffering from any particular typical Fragile-X Syndrome issues. Now, I didn’t have to deal with any service or maintenance costs, and I’m not really sure of how trouble-free the whole fleet was, but for the two years I had mine, I have no lasting memory of any memorable problems or issues. Not paying for anything may have colored my memory, but you know if it had been a POS, I wouldn’t have waited all these years to write it up, eh? It struck me as a typical new American car at the time: not exactly lovingly put-together, but seemingly reliable enough. Have I lost credibility in my GM-railing ways?
The Skylark really was impressively roomy for its stubby length, and anyone that’s ever sat in an A-Body from 1982 to its long-overdue end all-too recently will confirm that they’re adequately roomy. Yup, the A-Body is nothing but an X-body with more glass, longer front and rear end, and European-influenced styling. If you can’t fight ’em, join them. I mean, try to look like them. It sure lost that stubby look pretty effectively. And as we all know, these cars eventually ended up being indestructible; it just a decade or two to get there, in typical GM fashion. Who’s in a hurry?; “bankruptcy is not an option”.
Although I had some fun in the Skylark, it being my first somewhat “fast” car, I never developed the slightest bit of genuine warmth for it. I fundamentally hated its mini-Electra styling, and its faux-plush interior was only skin-deep. By 1983, the station was making lots of money to fill Maharishi’s coffers, so one morning on the way to work, I decided I needed and deserved a change. I was done with the dorky Skylark, and when I pulled into the office parking lot about an hour later, I was behind the wheel of a new 1983 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe, one of the first in West LA.
Now you all be nice in the comments; I don’t want that check from GM to bounce.
I was given a 1982 Skylark sedan in a hurry after some idiot put my beloved Alfa Romeo out of commission in 1986.
Three worst things had happened to my Skylark. One was the large bolt connecting the subframe to the chassis. Other was strange engineering decision involving the carburettor. My last straw was inaccessible spark plugs in the rear of V6 motor.
One day, I started to feel something rattling right under the pedals and poked around. I found a large bolt that connected the subframe to the chassis had broken in half. Ah, I can easily replace it. Well, no, it wasn’t that easy! The top part was encased in the sheetmetal: accessing to it involved cutting up part of firewall to remove the top half. Geesh!
I was replacing the fuel filter inside the carburettor and didn’t realise the evil engineering trick: the thread was reversed, meaning you don’t turn anti-clockwise to loosen the cover. You turn clockwise. That partially ruined the thread, leaking bit of fuel onto the manifold. Result: flambé special! Fortunately, a guy in old souped-up Camaro showed up all of the sudden with fire extinguisher. Just another lousy luck: no repair manuals showed me how to reconnect the spaghetti tubes for emission control. It took me three weeks of visiting the secondhand car forecourt to look at the similar car and trace the hoses. After I succeed in getting it fixed, the V6 motor had horrendous appetite for fuel. So bad that I had to fill up tank every two or three days. Like five mpg in city.
My last straw was those spark plugs in the most inaccessible place ever. I had to do it by feel and to be VERY careful turning the socket wrench. Changing angle of socket wrench slightly meant broken ceramic body.
I was so happy to get rid of it by selling it to a guy with dubious provence. Three months later, I received a letter from Immigration and Naturalisation Service (predecessor of post-9/11 ICE), stating that ‘my’ car was confiscated for illegally smuggling people across the US-Mexican border. I guess the driver failed to factor its vigorous appetite for fuel in its smuggling operation and was caught when its tank ran dry. It asked me to identify myself as the ‘owner’. I wrote back, stating once again that I had sold it and had nothing to do with it anymore.
Yeah, I had a soft spot for Buick Skylark, but…
I’d have to take issue with the ’80 X-bodies being GM’s first modern FWD cars….. do the downsized ’79 E-bodies not count for anything? Still a longitudal engine I know (and lower sales volume due to their price bracket), but these were a hit and in stark contrast to the X-body remained popular throughout their 7-year run. Some Rivieras even had a turbo V6 – seems modern to me.
Geez. Was the X-body really that much worse than a first-gen Escort or K-Car? I seem to remember several neighbors and family members with X’s that drove them into the ground and had them for years. Can the same be said of a VW from the same era? How long did those hold up as daily drivers, and yet they’re usually praised as being these wonderful icons of the 80’s.
Love the Xs. Thanks for the article. My Dad’s 84 Olds Ciera started my fascination and I wanted something similar. Yes, my interest in GM was directly because of the influence of my “Father’s Oldsmobile”. Suck it GM. Could you have gotten it more wrong ?
I had an 84 Citation 2 door notchback [“Club Coupe”] with 2.5, auto, two tone champagne and dark brown paint and mag wheels. Good looking car. The right size. Interior room was great. Ride was good and it was quiet.
It was my first “nice” car as I had been driving my 63 Valiant Signet for 10 years and it’s a 3 speed manual with non power steering and brakes as well as a non working aftermarket AC system. Plus I suspect the odometer had been around twice before I bought it with “13,000” miles.
Torque steer, yes, but it squatted down and handled LA freeways beautifully.
At 88,000 miles it was developing “morning sickness” common to the rack and pinion steering of both Xs and As. That meant that before you had steering boost, it had to be driving a bit before it started assisting the steering.
And then the torque converter lockup switch went, which, had my mechanic known would have been repaired or disconnected, rather than warranting the replacement of the entire transmission. When the TC switch failed to unlock, it felt as if one was driving a manual in the highest gear when coming to a stop: lots of bucking jerking and finally stopping and stalling. Feels pretty scary.
It also pinged whatever gasoline was put in it. There was even a disclaimer in the owner’s manual that said some pinging was normal and allowed for the best fuel economy.
The interior dimensions of the Xs have been the benchmark for what I look for in a small car, that and overall size.
As an aside,the Cruze has exactly the same rear legroom as the Citation did so long ago. The Sonic has more room inside than the ONION and it’s two feet shorter. Great packaging.
I loved that Citation. Sorry I traded it in. It was influential in the purchase of my first brand new car, a 99 Cavalier 2 door, because it was as close as I could get to that Citation in modern form. No problems with it and I’d still be driving it today if it hadn’t been totaled in a rear ender by a guy driving a BMW.
At least the 86 Olds Calais I traded it for is still in the family and driven and loved by my brother, so it lives on in a way.
So frustrating. GM had success and repeat GM buyers in it’s grasp. On paper. How many thousands of GM car buyers did they turn off with the Xs by taking the shortcut of making them unknowing beta testers of their not ready for sale end product ?
I’d like another one. One of each if I ever win the lottery.
They’re fascinating for me because of what they represent, like the Edsel, the Austin Allegro or the Morris Marina. They are a window into a pivotal moment in automotive, and GM history. Peak auto journalist BS. A Landmark Car on the isle of misfit automobiles.
With Gm badge engineered cars the buicks were always more reliable than the chevys and pontiacs, even when owned by the same demographic.
Many of the infamous X-body bugs were worked out after the first or second year; in typical GM fashion in that era, the later X-bodies were decently reliable and their brakes didn’t lock up that easily. 82 and later models got the new steering rack from the FWD A body that vastly reduced torque steer. By that time X-cars were selling poorly though, partly because of their poor reputation, but also because of new competition from the imports and Chrysler’s K cars, and GM’s own J and A bodies which were only slightly smaller and larger respectively and had more modern styling and a big advertising budget.
The three-step GM downsizing description omits the 1979 E bodies, which granted weren’t as big sellers as the B/C, A, or X bodies, but were very popular throughout their 7-year run and quite profitable.
I was working in Sacramento for BofA when the X cars came out. We had a small fleet of both the Chevy and Pontiac versions. My fondest memory was sliding backwards down an on ramp embankment after experiencing the famous braking ability of these. Quite an experience for a 19 year old. An experience that kept me away from anything GM until 2014.
The funny thing to me is that I knew another person who had one of these, with the 2.8, and also had a good experience with it (as you mention it seems to be the exception with X cars). Not sure if it was the Buick or the 2.8, or just the luck of the draw, but he had it quite awhile…such that he kept buying GM cars at least last I talked to him (more than 10 years ago) he had started a business and bought several Astro cargo vans, which he also liked.
You mention the seats in the Peugeot being very comfortable, I think they are known for it; I’ve only ridden in a 505 as a rental car some 36 years ago and don’t specifically recall the seats, but my Dad owned a new Renault 10, more than 50 years ago, and though they were vinyl, the seats were very comfortable in that car as well. Maybe they put some priority into seating which we don’t.
It just goes to show that there are good examples of any vehicle, maybe an outlier, but odd that Buick with the 2.8 seems (on admittedly limited non-scientific sample) to be the common element…wonder if others had similar experiences?
Thought about this after my prior comment…a coincidence but on a web query a 404 error is infamous for “not found”…maybe your “not found” Peugeot ended up being a Buick Skylark…they are quite different vehicles (despite at least one version of the 404 being a sedan like the Skylark was).
It is too bad that Peugeot pulled out of the US in the early 90’s not to return. It is our loss, I think cars like Peugeot and Renault could have a place here, but have not had much traction in the past, and it is our loss. The US used to be a prime market for consumer goods, but I understand that lots of companies aren’t even trying to market their products here any longer….maybe it is our demographics, or maybe we make it hard for them to do business here. We are losing the chance to try unique products, maybe it is our “homogenization” of products or specific US requirements for emissions, fuel economy, etc. that don’t exist in other markets. Or maybe we’re being too picky about having things “our way”…small example is the turn signal indicator on the dash of my VW, I have an A4 which has two (a right and left side indicator) but I think the A1 thru A3’s only had a single indicator, which suited the task, but isn’t like most other makes…do they change stuff like this just for the US market? This is a small thing, but if you have enough of them, maybe we’ll be bypassed in the world market, as being not worth the bother (partly due to our relatively smaller population versus other countries)?
Don’t mean to be too cute, but that could result in other products being “404” (not found) in the US market…might end up as our loss.