(first posted 11/25/2013; Updated with several revisions) This GM Deadly Sin has been long overdue – the 1991 Oldsmobile Ninety-Eight. At such a critical time for the division, why did they ever go ahead and roll out one of the most illogically styled cars in the history of automobiles? Could this be the car that killed Oldsmobile?
To answer my own question, “No”. This is not THE car that killed GM’s oldest division, but it’s certainly one of the reasons Oldsmobile went dissolved a decade later. You see, Oldsmobile was once a cash cow for GM. Its middle position in the GM “step” hierarchy meant that Oldsmobile could compete with both ends of the spectrum. Olds could offer Chevrolet levels of equipment with more show, as well as near-Cadillac levels of luxury without the ostentation – and everywhere in between.
For the most part, Oldsmobile was always seen as an “upscale” brand, making it especially popular with upwardly mobile clientele. Olds’ portfolio offered plenty of options to keep these customers returning and trading up. Cutlasses would be traded up for Delta 88s, which in turn were traded for the Ninety-Eight, the largest Oldsmobile one could buy. The Toronado was a possible pinnacle to this succession, but reserved for only the most elite Oldsmobile clientele.
Ninety-Eight sales remained strong through the ‘70s and ‘80s, despite threats such as questionable interior materials, the energy crisis, and two downsizings. However, by the late-‘80s, consumers’ automotive tastes were decidedly different than in previous years. Opera windows, pillowed velour seating, and total road isolation, qualities that had once made the Ninety-Eight so popular, were falling out of favor. Full-size American luxury cars were no longer the ultimate expression of success, nor what most hard-working Americans aspired to. Instead, both old and young drivers alike, but especially younger individuals, aspired to own cars from European or Japanese premium/luxury brands or SUVs.
Without that important consumer group to target for a future customer base, the Ninety-Eight’s purpose in life was threatened. Adding insult to injury was that with the 1985 redesign, to the average person, the car’s anonymous shape could easily be mistaken for almost anything under the GM umbrella.
Thankfully, GM recognized this and began designing cars that actually looked different from one another. So what became of this scrawny, generic-looking Ninety-Eight? Well…
THIS. Yes, this was what buyers were greeted with for 1991. You wanted something distinctive? You got it.
Let’s start with the good. In attempt to correct the ’85-’90 model’s “compact” appearance, the Nineteen Ninety-One Ninety-Eight (sorry, that never gets old) was nearly 10 inches longer and 2 inches wider. Power from its 3.8L Buick V6 was also up slightly compared with its predecessor. Its 4-speed automatic transmission was now electronically controlled. I’d continue, but I think that’s all there is. Regarding the bad, where do I even begin?
Although considerably longer, wheelbase remained the same, resulting in considerable front and rear overhangs. And then there are the skirted rear wheels. This styling feature stopped looking good on cars somewhere around the time of Watergate. Still, GM kept trying to make this look work on a number of models all the way through 1998. Combined with the convex body sides, it gave the car a bulging look in my opinion. A scaled-down “beached whale” B-body, if you will.
Moving up, we get to the greenhouse. Notice how it appears to sit on top of the body, rather than be integrated with it like just about every car design since 1970? For another throwback, designers gave it a long and flat trunk that was just… so awkward.
I’m not sure if this was the intent of the overall design, but the 1991 Ninety-Eight’s profile actually evokes that of the 1961 Ninety-Eight, albeit the front- and rear-ends reversed. Some retro styling features return to prominence, but not everything is destined to come back in style. I don’t think we’ll ever be seeing Dagmars or tail fins again.
Add that to a sad, droopy face, with an egg crate grille and protruding front bumper. Then there’s the horribly tacky (and very cheap, as we all soon found out) lower body trim. I was surprised to find it all intact on the one I photographed.
However, you can see how damaging a minor scuff could be to it. The majority of Ninety-Eights saw their trim pieces peel off in a matter of years. Now here I really could go on, but I think I’ve made my point clear: This was one stylistically challenged car.
Especially so when you compare it to the redesign of its platform mate, the Buick Park Avenue. How could the redesigns of two heavily related cars, once 99% identical in appearance, go so differently?
image: autosofinterest.com
I came across some early design sketches of the ’91 Ninety-Eight that reveal a stronger resemblance to the Park Avenue.
image: autosofinterest.com
Here is a prototype with a more Park Avenue-esque roofline, shorter overhangs, and open rear wheel wells.
image: autosofinterest.com
And here’s a more slab-sided model that bears a strong similarity to the production model. The Cutlass Supreme-inspired front- and rear-fascias, simpler lower trim, and squared-off appearance do it wonders. It’s a shame this much more stately, almost Town Car-esque Ninety-Eight didn’t make it into production. More images can be found (here), as well as many design sketches for the 1985 Ninety-Eight.
Things were marginally better on the inside, which actually greeted occupants with a fairly attractive design, considering they even wanted to open the door to step in. The dash and door panels capitalized on the in-vogue “cockpit” look, despite the expected 55/45 divided bench seat and column shifter being standard in Regency and Regency Elite models. The limited-production Touring Sedan gained special Lear-designed bucket seats with many power adjustments, as well as real polished burl walnut trim and a console with floor shifter.
One only has to wonder what would’ve happened if the Aurora could’ve made it to the market a few years earlier. It certainly would’ve made a better 1991 Ninety-Eight in every aspect. Cutting-edge styling, luxuriously appointed interior, and return to V8 power. Or just badging it as the 1991 Aurora, and dropping the Ninety-Eight altogether could have made even more sense. That was part of Oldsmobile’s struggle. Trying to modernize its image without alienating its traditional clientele — neither of which it was able to successfully pull off.
Fantasizing aside, the fact is that this was the production Oldsmobile Ninety-Eight. As you can guess, it didn’t draw in many buyers. In fact, sales for ’91 models actually decreased over the outgoing ’90 models, whose design was 6 years old. As a young child when they were new, I never saw many of these cars. From a pathetic 54,000 units in 1991, sales steadily fell to a measly 15,000 by 1996, the Ninety-Eight’s last year on the market.
My own personal account to add, is that my grandfather owned a 1992 Medium Slate Gray Metallic over Garnet Red velour Ninety-Eight Regency (pictured above in the driveway of their Cape house, Falmouth, MA), and it was a car I spent a lot of time in the first four years of my life. In fact, it was the first car I ever rode in as a living human being, on my way home from the hospital as a newborn.
(Photographed: Surf Drive Beach, Falmouth, MA c. 1995-1996; Clearly not in summer)
I actually never really cared for the car in particular as a child, as the all-burgundy interior wasn’t so easy on the eyes, and combined with the minimally opening rear windows and the fact that my grandmother always over-bundled me up in layers, made for an uncomfortably hot riding experience. Nevertheless, it is a car I very much associate with both my grandparents, and my happy young childhood in general. For those reasons, this car will always hold a special place in my heart, despite its many shortcomings and its ramifications for the Oldsmobile brand.
I used to have a 1991 Park Avenue Ultra. While I didn’t like the car much, I think it’s styling still looked great when it was about 10 years old! But the mechanical issues made me want to stay away from GM products in the future! I still have 3 old Buicks that I like but they are pre-1980 models!
As for the Olds version, I think it has strange exterior styling.
As a non-resident, non-American, I feel able to say this was a striking car. All the features Mr Saur dislikes endear it to me. I’d really like to own a car like that. When I saw one in California circa 1995 or 1997 I made a point of photographing it. That was about 20 years ago (plus minus) and I recall it vividly.
Later: I’ve reviewed a lot of images. The market left the car. And GM were confused about the positioning. Stylingwise this car has a clear concept and the bodyside has a simple profile to spell out length. The front and rear graphics say “width”. It’s opulently modern with retro-touches. I think it’s superb. We don’t do this kind of car in Europe so it has extra impact for me. I believe it’s also fitted with among GM’s best interiors – a title shared with the equivalent Buick.
That’s the different perceiving of automobile designing. As a person enduring those Honda Accord and other similar imports cars in few ways during my earlier stage of life, I dislike those cars as much as how the perceived customer base wants to distant from the traditional American larger sedans. Each of the deadly fault from Oldsmobile 98 can be found with a corresponding deadly fault from Acura TLX, or Lexus ES ( few more faults from Infiniti ) and I would say either type of Oldsmobile 98 or Acura Legend is all up to preference.
I am back again having re-read the article. To my surprise I have already said what I want to say: all the features that the author doesn´t like make me see this as a then-modern interpretation of the characteristics of the earlier 98s. I´m not in a position to do so but if I was going to import an American car, this is the one I´d go for, with perhaps a late 80s Cadillac de Ville coupe or perhaps a Buick Park Avenue as runners up.
Later: I’ve reviewed a lot of images. The market left the car. And GM were confused about the positioning. Stylingwise this car has a clear concept and the bodyside has a simple profile to spell out length. The front and rear graphics say “width”. It’s opulently modern with retro-touches. I think it’s superb. We don’t do this kind of car in Europe so it has extra impact for me. I believe it’s also fitted with among GM’s best interiors – a title shared with the equivalent Buick.
I don’t know if it was a “best” interior, but it’s comfortable and inviting. It’s the right interior for a road car like this.
It missed the market styling boat and the shift towards SUVs, that was its actual problem.
What I get tired of now that the Brougham Epoch has decidedly ended is the Cult of Sport. Nit everything should, or even can, be sporty. If you’ve ever driven a real sports car or sports sedan, all the appliances with a “sport” model are laughable, some are just straight up appearance packages.
But, I suppose that’s the way things go. We had a time where Cutlass Cieras were loaded up with fake wires, white walls, hood ornaments and all that to try to make a fleet queen look “luxurious” and now we have Cruzes loaded up with RS badging, more aggressive front clip styling, “sporty” rims and all that to make a fleet queen look “sporty”.
I can imagine few marketing people in the car companies cursing, those stupid customers! Can’t revert the trend though.
My brother and I had one of these for a rental car when on vacation in south Florida. It was quiet, comfortable, and able to eat up the miles in a hurry without tiring the occupants. And the couple of days we spent in Key West, I swear it was the biggest car there. Would I buy one? No way. That IS my fathers Oldsmobile. And with Florida so far away from Oregon, I didn’t have to worry about anybody I know seeing me in it 🙂
It was ok, except for that ribbed body cladding. That just looked stupid, same with the Pontiacs that had that feature but at least they were supposed to be “sporty” (sic).
I actually kind of like the last generation 98, it was bland compared to the Park Avenue and was straight up forgettable compared to the old RWD Regency 98 Broughams. They could have at least had a hood ornament.
All the GM luxury and near luxury cars of this era were nice but kind of a let down at the same time.
I would take the white over silver one pictured in a heartbeat…guess I’m in the minority, as I always liked these.
Something got lost in translation with Old’s take on this generation of H and C body. Buick really nailed their versions of these, and they ended up in middle class driveways everywhere. The Old’s just doesn’t look special. I think the squared off rear end with the side skirts really kills the look. Don’t knock that greenhouse though. That’s one of my favorite elements of these cars. It makes them really pleasant to drive, especially combined with the excellent powertrain.
While I agree that the 91 Olds 98 is not nearly as good as the Park Avenue, both car are ever so much better than the 85 versions, which looked too much alike.
The Regency interior is flashy, but not really all that great. When this was first introduce (1972) it was new and different. Buick’s comparable interiors (which came a few years later on) were more refined I think. Certainly my 76 Rivier R/
S interior was much nicer than my 78 Olds Regency.
I don’t think Olds ever had a “true” opera window on the 98’s.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again…I’m one of this car’s few fans. I love the styling, especially in its Touring Sedan trim. The only thing that bugs me is, just like its other full size GM cars at the time, that useless vent window they made. Other than that I love it.
Tough one. The stylings is off, but otherwise it’s a very good car. A high school friend’s dad had one and though I only rode in it once, it really felt special. The interior feels just as spacious as a D-body Fleetwood and didn’t feel any cheaper (that may be a mark against the Caddy more than a point for the Olds). The 3.8 makes good real-world cruising power and delivers surprising fuel economy.
But sure, the Buick version looks a whole lot better in hindsight. But the Buick version always looks more elegant and understated in hindsight, pretty much since forever.
If I did not know better, I would have not doubted being told this was one of the last ditch attempts made by Russian car makers after the fall of Communism to try and compete with Western cars, now freely imported into the Russian Federation. And I agree with all of those who commented on how Buick’s efforts were so much better; in fact, the Park Avenue sold here in Austria quite well (for a large US-made sedan) – with its slightly Jaguar-esqe silhouette it did not look as out of place as the Oldsmobile would have.
I have to disagree with all of the comments re: the Olds 98. I drove a 1995 98 Regency Elite for a year and a half until last November. The trim never fell off and it was a very comfortable ride. I even liked the styling! Gold w/ Gold Leather. I’m now the captain of an ’05 Park Avenue. The quality of the leather was much better in the 98. With my 38″ inseam I enjoy the column gear shift that both cars have/had.
I actually like the skirted rear wheels. I think they make the short WB seem longer. Heck, all the second-gen C/H-bodies from 91-onward really did their best to make the 110.8″ WB seem like 114 or more.
I really like one of the earlier clays that had a lot of touches from the GM10 Cutlass. It’s almost like every single change they made from that one just made things worse.
Edit: heh, it’s been so long since I last read this article that I forgot this was included!
I will tell you, I never had a truly adverse reaction to these, but the more time passes, the more they grow on me. I like the overhangs. I think I could have really liked this car if it was Caprice-Roadmaster sized.
I guess I’m part of the minority… I never cared for the Buick Park Avenue.. I guess it’s styling was “too busy” for my tastes… the Buick also just seemed bland in the interior..
I LOVE these final generation 98s.. they have a nice, formal look.. kind of Lincoln-esque.. but they also look modern for their time.. the Buick just looked like it was a mish mash of 90s styling mixed with the styling of the previous Electra…
as I said, I love the look of the 98 and the interior is a perfect blend of luxury and sportiness…
And with that, I searched for a 98 Touring Sedan, and now I have myself a 1993 98 Touring Sedan, and I love it! It’s a pleasure to drive and looks fantastic! and yes, it also has the supercharged 3800, and this beast moves!!
I thought the Park Avenue’s IP sucked – so flat and dated looking at the time. But the body was very attractive. I still enjoy looking at these 98s. Can’t agree with everyone all the time I guess. Anything was better than that truncated previous generation.
Are there 3 turn indicators in the lower trim?
I just bought this complete, sitting for only 1 year, 95 Olds 98 at a storage shed auction for $25. Let the fun begin.
Let’s not forget the competition. The 1990 Lincoln Town Car was being heralded by all the auto magazines and won the “Car of the Year”. Compare the Town Car to the Ninety-Eight and it is no contest. Everything about the Lincoln was superb, compared to the Olds. The new Town Car sucked all the oxygen out of the market and had a spectacular sales success at the expense of the other near-luxury and luxury domestics.
GM was outclassed by a set of old Panthers in new bodies. Ford’s Modular V8 released the following year, kept up the accolades for Ford.
I don’t see many Oldsmobiles of this generation. They got outclassed.
I was looking for a late (maybe ’95 or ’96) one of these after the sad demise of my ’62 Lincoln in the mid-2000’s. The deer that leaped in front of it in Maine was the last straw.
A modern car getting twice the mpg but similar luxury and style plus tons of cubic feet inside and in the trunk. I liked the clean retro styling with the last of the half-open rear wheels and thin roof with graceful semi-full C pillar – much more in common with the Lincoln than any newer Lincoln. Far better than the curvy Buick version. And the dashboard was way better too.
I got the idea when I perused a really nice one parked at a roadside rest area. Hadn’t crossed my mind before that. Still remember it – metallic blue.
I was hoping to find a nice low mileage church lady one, ideally with leather, and that that they might be reasonably priced because of being so unfashionable, but I didn’t and they weren’t. So I went with a more practical but still futurey low mileage and cheap Trans Sport I found – actually with a lot of similarities in style, no doubt by some of the same designers.
I find the comment, that the market left the big Oldsmobile, and they didn’t know how to respond, to be quite insightful. I knew a few people that thought that an Oldsmobile was their perfect fit, a luxurious car that spoke to their success, but wasn’t overbearing about it. Like the corresponding Buicks, they were cars for people that liked “nice things” and could afford more, if they wanted to stretch a bit.
It’s apparent that GM really did lose their way at this time. I had a ’94 Cadillac Seville STS bought a couple of years used, and it was a dream car. Beautiful, brawny, but sleek American styling, supremely powerful, combined with a smooth, cleanly styled upscale interior worthy of a top of the line Audi.
When I went to look for a newer replacement I was shocked. The new Art and Science styling was a bit quirky, but okay, however the interior was such a let down! A grey and black plastic center stack with brushed aluminum trim. What happened to my real Zebrano wood?
That was the end for me, I have never lusted after a Cadillac since. When it comes to luxury interiors, it was Lincoln that stepped up the game with their Navigator and recent Aviator models. American luxury is reborn for me.
Maybe I missed it, but does anyone else think the Buick competitor to the 98 was not the Park Avenue, but the Roadmaster, which rode on the same RWD platform. I mean, along with the ‘bubble’ Caprice/Impala, the 98 was definitely the weak link of the three.
Ninety Eight was on the FWD C platform and had nothing in common with the RWD B body Roadmaster, although the Roadmaster did share its platform with 1991-2 Custom Cruiser.
I always liked the 1991 Ninety Eight; thought it resembled an updated 1965 Ninety Eight. But interest in big cars dwindled after minivans and SUV’s became popular and baby boomers shied away from old man cars.
Oldsmobile did sell one million cars per year most years between 1975 and 1985. The FWD C and H bodies sold well when debuted but sales declined steadily each subsequent year.
Yes, it’s awkward. But it does have a family resemblance to some other Oldsmobiles, which are also awkward. The body cladding (nineties equivalent of tail fins?) is inappropriate, the bumpers jut out too far, and something about the relationship of the rear wheel and C-pillar just doesn’t work for me.
Okay, I’ll ask the unthinkable: Was there a need for a Ninety Eight at all any more? I know it was ‘Traditional’ (since, what, 1940?), but were these still selling in the numbers to make having both an Eighty Eight and a Ninety Eight really necessary? I’m thinking probably not.
98 sales were 169,432 in 1985 (long model year), 124,572 in 1986, 84,762 in 1987, 87,633 in 1988, 73,103 in 1989, and 62,395 in 1990, so I would say the numbers were good enough to have both the 88 and 98, especially since planning for the 1991 model probably started in 1986 or 1987,
Fair enough. Thanks.
Okay I admit I really like these. The Olds and the buick skylark look distinctive and vaguely retro in a way that appealed to me as a kid. and the fender skirts looked amazing on the Sable!
They should have stopped with the prototype in the black and white photo. Pure Oldsmobile. Instead, they went on to give it the full Achieva look. The prototype is unmistakably an Olds- with the round, open wheel wells, the sporty stance, the tail lights. The Oldsmobile cues are all there in a youthfull, sporty package. No need to go in a new design direction, with a new logo, nomenclature, or anything else.
I had a very nice 1997 88 Regency which was essentially a 98 front clip attached to an 88 body and with more gadgets inside than a base 88. I enjoyed the blue interior and bench seat and the controls on the steering wheel to control the HVAC and stereo were really awesome. I had it for about 1 year and the only reason I unloaded it was the 2011 snow storm I tried to drive it through. Ended up making it to the dealership on 4 cylinders instead of 6 and the coolant was making things smell very syrup-y LOL. Never left me stranded though in the year I was driving it!!
Before the Regency, I had a 97 Bonneville that was completely base and even had hub caps and manual bench seats. The Bonne was no non-sense and extremely durable except for an overdrive that would sometimes lock out during hard driving and when the car was running long distances. Of course when that happened I went from 27 MPG highway to about 16 MPG and it was a real money sucker on interstate travel.
Only could afford two fresh tires when I bought it but I got what I paid for it after 2 years of zero headaches and tons of Chicago Winter abuse. Both cars really did well for being over 10 years old and being cheap used cars bought with cash.
I myself drive a 96 98 and it is by far the best car that I have ever had the pleasure of driving. With the many power options, and the plush leather seating it’s like I’m driving a recliner down the road. Unpopular opinion, but I think the 98 was the best car that Oldsmobile ever made. I think the 96-98 was ahead of its time. It has all the features that most car manufacturers are just now putting in their cars in the 2020s.
And the rear door cut line. Ugh.
Everything about the exterior of the 11th Gen 98 grates on me, but especially the chubbiness and the sense that it really didn’t relate to any other Oldsmobile.
After the fiasco of the August 1983 Forbes cover, this was GM’s first chance to redesign it’s two C bodies: the Park Avenue and the Ninety Eight. And because the 1985 Electra and Ninety had been text book examples badge-engineering, sharing doors inside and out, and quite obviously whole elements of their interiors… both Buick and Olds had no choice but to go big or go home. Olds should simply have gone home.
A family friend drove one of these back when I was just out of high school, and I rode in it a few times. It seemed like a pretty decent car, and I only remember that a couple of the buttons below the radio had a hole poked through them… I think his was the same color combination as the featured car. Another thing that always stuck out was that the cornering lamps and that full width reverse light bar were made out of polycarbonate that turned yellow even quicker than the headlights.
Not sure what they were trying to achieve-a with the styling, but it is a bit weird. The tail end looks like it’s trying to be a Lincoln, the ribbed-for-no-one’s pleasure lower trim might have been channeling Pontiac, and the combination of covered rear wheels and the aforementioned ribbed cladding in silver made it look a bit like a road-going bumper car… I always liked the way they integrated the side marker lights, though, as it reminds me of the Olds of old. Overall, I don’t really dislike these last 98’s, but it’s a world apart from the 1995-99 Aurora that I’ve always loved… though the Bumper Olds would end up being much more lovable once the warranty ran out on those Aurorae.
OK everyone now don’t hate on me for this, but in all honestly with how many car-obsessed people there are out there (and certainly in here 🙂 there’s got to be others who feel the same on this, so here goes…
This whole ’88’ ’98’ thing… Oldsmobile in fact did use ’88’ for the 88 nomenclature but they used ‘Ninety Eight’ for the Ninety Eight cars, not 98. To me it doesn’t matter if people say they typed it that way because it was faster or something, the car was not tagged or emblemed ’98’ it drives me nuts… maybe also because i worked at/for Oldsmobile (huge local Dealer) from 1979 thru 1991 & even represented Oldsmobile Division at the Chicago Auto Show for 5yrs consecutive at that time.
So I’d say it bothers me almost as badly as those who still, in 2024 continue to write about or reference the Cadillac Eldorado using the mythical city of gold ‘El Dorado’ as the car’s name. grrr.
So in the end, it is what is is… not an opinion or interpretation, but the car’s actual proposed, assigned, approved, used and correct name.