I was born in the mid-1970s to a family of Volvo owners (yes, boo), so I am not going to rely on my own impressions (especially as every two "reference" works on the subject seem to disagree) to answer this question:

Where did/does Oldsmobile fit into the "GM Five"?

Granted, Chevy was on the "bottom" (lowest-priced) and Buick and Cadillac were at the "top", but half of the time people put Olds "below" Pontiac vs. others' putting Olds smack in the middle.

I've been through guides to models and prices that span the 20th century, and there's no clear "winner" in terms of MSRP (though Olds does seem to have the edge in "aspirant" models).

Here's an example ["Car Wars" by Jonathan Mantle, 1995]:

"The young, upwardly-mobile first-timer would opt for the moderately-priced Chevrolet. When he was promoted and earned a few dollars more, the first thing he did after buying a bigger house was to buy an Oldsmobile. The next step up the latter brought a Pontiac, then a Buick. He was at the top of the ladder when he acquired a Cadillac."

Thoughts?...

 

In order from low to high, in 1958, from a 1958 issue of Mechanix Illustrated:


1. Ford, Chevrolet, Plymouth (the "low-priced three")

2. Edsel, Pontiac, Dodge

3. Mercury, Buick

4. Oldsmobile

5. DeSoto

6. Chrysler



I'll add in this:

7. Cadillac, Lincoln, Imperial


In 1958, Chrysler had as many lines as GM (Plymouth, Dodge, DeSoto, Chrysler, Imperial to mimic Chevrolet, Pontiac, Buick, Oldsmobile, Cadillac). Ford had just added Edsel to give it Ford, Edsel, Mercury, Lincoln.

Everyone was trying to mimic GM's very successful corporate-hierarchy-of-models idea so one buyer could stay with the same company as their economic status improved through life.

 

I have always thought of it as this :

Chevy
Pontiac
Olds/Buick
Caddy

I've seen many that put Olds on the higher rung of the food chain vs Buick.

I've seen many that put Buick on the higher rung of the food chain vs Olds.

But the above ...

Is how I always saw it with Olds & Buick being about equal.

 

Cadillac
Buick
Oldsmobile
Pontiac
Chevrolet

Each division had their own low and high end models, but this was the divisional hierarchy set forth by GM. You have to look through all the GM publications, GM Annual reports, and other non-biased material to see how they marketed their 5 divisions. Looking at the price structures isn't a very good way of determining the marketing strategies, because some of the models had more standard equipment than others, so their base price(s) may be higher.

Chevrolet had the biggest budget, which is understandable they sold the most cars to the widest array of buyers. From a cheap Vega to a high end Corvette, from a Chevy II to a luxury Impala, they had the bases covered. Chevrolet also had the biggest budget for developing high performance cars and parts.

Oldsmobile focused on upscale middle income buyers. Not the pure luxury buyers, that was targeted for Buick and Cadillac. As we know both Buick and Oldsmobile had high perf models, but Oldsmobile was far more committed to high performance than Buick was.

Pontiac was of course GM's high performance division.

Cadillac used to be the standard of the world, and it was a real status symbol to have a Caddy back in the old days, before Lexus and other import luxury models tarnished the Cadillac crown.

Oldsmobile was just the best all around combo of performance, style, and luxury.

 

+1.

Chevy → Pontiac → Oldsmobile → Buick → Cadillac

This was the Division hierarchy, and it never changed.
It was enshrined in a number of places, most obviously in the VIN Division codes, form at least 1067 to 1985, which were:

1. Chevy
2. Pontiac
3. Oldsmobile
4. Buick
5. GMC Truck
6. Cadillac
7. GM of Canada

- Eric

 

I think the sequence of the first digit in the divisions' VINs and the way that GM viewed the divisions in terms of level of status have nothing to do with each other.

After all, by the reasoning above, GM of Canada, which isn't even a make, is more prestigious that Cadillac. GMC Truck is more prestigious than Buick. Do either of these make any sense? I don't think so.


Can you name any of the other places where this was "enshrined?" This one's coming up short.

 

Chevy
Pontiac
Olds
Buick
Caddy

Plymouth
Dodge
DeSoto (at one time, Dodge was higher, but I believe that was switched by the early-1930s)
Chrysler
Imperial

Ford
Edsel
Mercury
Lincoln
Continental (for a very short time)

 

Um, Cadillac tarnished its own crown.

 

If I had to hazard a guess, I would say that these numbers were assigned based on the sizes of these divisions, perhaps as reflected in annual vehicle sales, at the time.

 

Not to say sound argumentative ...

But I really wouldn't care if someone came along with some yellowed old musty crusty document scans rumored to come straight from the General himself .....

I will always feel Olds & Buick are about equal.

 

Im pretty sure buick was ahead of olds

In quality/cost that is

 

If you look at anything as a whole - the hierarchy at GM top-to-bottom looks like this (it gets tight in the middle):

1971 (# of car series offered)
Cadillac (-6-)
Buick (-12-)
Oldsmobile (-14-)
Pontiac (-15-)
Chevrolet (-21-)

The '50s hierarchy is easy - as business became more complicated - it wasn't as obvious, but things stayed the same.

 

You have to be careful here. "Quality" is an entirely different thing from cost, and higher cost doesn't always mean higher quality. I think that if GM was ever asked to rank its divisions in terms of "prestige" or "market segment they were targeting" or something like that, they would have said Chevy-Pontiac-Olds-Buick-Cadillac or something similar as everyone has been saying.

But if you had asked GM to rank its brands in terms of quality, they would have said (as would have Ford, Chrysler, or anyone else if asked about their brands) that quality was high across the brands. Now the reality might have been a little different in the eyes of the public, and it's probably not surprising that a car that cost $4,000 in 1955 would have been perceived to have higher quality than one that cost $2,000. But what they probably would have meant is higher levels of trim, options, and refinement and not really "quality" in the sense of quality of construction, fit-and-finish, and that sort of thing.

 

Being born in the mid 50s and that my family were all car nuts and working for 5 different car magazines I feel the order is bottom to top Chevy-Pontiac-Olds-Buick-Cadillac. This impression was what I had since growing up and Buick and Olds are very even and Olds was the experimental division of GM but Buick edged out Olds very slightly. I am a die hard Oldsmobile nut but this is also how many of the editors of the magazines and the staff felt. At least in the GM line up, not counting all the other manufacturers. When you look at the numbers of cars sold per year Chevy in 1969 sold 86 thousand camaros alone thats almost as many 442s that were made from 68 to 72!

 

The first 4 on the above list started using the 1-4 for "division" in their VIN#s in 1965. Cadillac started using the "6" in '71. WAG Trucks & GM Canada being 5 & 7 had more to do with spaces available and the federal gov't standardization & such.

 

Touche, my good man. I stand corrected.

 

Thank you.

- Eric

 

One way to approach the order of status would be to compare prices for similar models. For example all the GM divisions marketed B body 4 door V8 sedans in the '60s, if we add options on some models to bring them into line with others that have as standard equipment features such as power steering, automatic transmission etc I'd suggest the prices for each make would give us an idea of how GM at least viewed the divisions.

On the same subject the ill fated Edsel division is hard to place in Fords hierarchy, their cheapest model was less than an equivalent Mercury, their most expensive cost more. So was it above or below Mercury?, I dare say potential buyers couldn't decide either so bought another make instead, as if Edsel wasn't in enough trouble.

Roger.

 

According to Ford's own marketing people back in the '50s, the company felt that it had no equivalent to Pontiac or Dodge in its lineup. When someone was ready to "move up" from Ford, the next step was Mercury, but that step was too large financially for many of its customers, at least as Ford saw it, and Ford saw many of its owners move on to Pontiac or Dodge. Ford felt it had an equivalent to Buick/Olds in Mercury and then Lincoln to equate to Cadillac.

Edsel was created with the idea that it would be that stepping-stone between Ford and Mercury. Plus, Edsel really gave Ford owners more "upgrade" options, period. Chevy owners could go to Pontiac, Buick, or Olds, and Plymouth owners could go to Dodge, DeSoto, or Chrysler, whereas Ford owners could only go to Mercury. According to one magazine article from back in the day, Ford figured it was losing 100,000 customers per year in the early/mid-1950s as Ford owners moved on to other, non-Ford brands as their economic station in life improved.

 

I've seen a lot of oddities over the years.

I bought a new Mercury Mountaineer years ago that could technically NOT be optioned as highly as a Ford Explorer ... go figure.

I wanted heated seats & the memory system ... couldn't be had on the Mercury.

1980-1981 Cutlass Calais vs 1980-1981 Toro XSC ...
(both of these trims having came with bucket seats standard)

Why did the Calais come with reclining buckets as STANDARD ... yet the Toro being higher up the Olds foodchain didn't ?.

 

I checked out the 1978 factory prices according to my Standard Catalog for a Buick le Sabre, Chevy Impala, Olds Delta 88 and Pontiac Catalina. All had automatic transmission, power steering, air conditioning, electric windows and 6 way electric seat and the 350 engines.

Here's what I came up with;
Buick - $6680
Chevy - $6678
Olds - $6846
Pontiac - $6597

Less than $100 between them, of course I understand nobody paid list when buying a car back then, and I can't claim to have done an exhaustive study but it seems the GM divisions were competing among themselves.

Roger.

 

In my opinion the "hierarchy" dissolved when GM Corporatized all brands. That being said. in the 50's and 60's I always considered the brands like this:

1) Chevrolet- entry level value priced
2) Pontiac- sporty more performance oriented
3) Oldsmobile- engineering/experimental- (debuted the tri-five styling in 1954 whereas others debuted in 1955)
4) Buick- Senior/luxury
5) Cadillac- Luxury/exclusive


Anyway, this is my 2 cents....

 

Actually, Buick and Cadillac also received the new styling for 1954. Buick Special and Century shared the Oldsmobile body shell; Buick Super and Roadmaster shared the Cadillac body shell.

If you look at GM's publications -- and there are examples of corporate brochures produced for GM's stockholders at the link below (covering many model years from 1955 to 1976) -- you will see that the GM brands are consistently shown in the following order:

Chevrolet - Pontiac - Oldsmobile - Buick - Cadillac

http://www.oldcarbrochures.com/stati.../dirindex.html

 

I don't have any pride in the brand of my car. I just sort of ended up with it. Been a good experience owning it, though. 67 Chevelle is still my dream car, but I prefer my 64 Cutlass over a 64 Chevelle.

 

A Pontiac is just a Chevy with lock washers...

 

[QUOTE=drop top olds;552384
2) Pontiac- sporty more performance oriented
[/QUOTE]

Pontiac became performance oriented under John de Loreans stewardship, they were the last GM division to offer a V8 (1955 I think). Up to then its image was more as solid dependable transport for solid dependable citizens.

Roger.

 

Wow, so many opinions. Buick and Olds were mainly marketed to the more financially elite and blue hairs. Both basically dabbled in high performance with a more upscale twist, but neither were hell bent on competing. Yes, each had a few years of successful performance models. In the long run Chevrolet was the performance arm with Pontiac being second for performance.

Olds and Pontiac went away because they were just stealing sales from Chevrolet. The only reason Buick survived is because of overseas sales and business relationships.

I've always put Olds and Buick on the same level as far as hierarchy in Gm corporate food chain. Neither could find a true identity after the mid seventies. With the exception of the GN's and 442's there really were not any choices that had wow factors. Aurora's and Toronado's for me were eh! The big cars were basically the same ol boring overlapped models.

Cadillac was the standard of luxury, competing with Lincoln and Chrysler

All the car companies quit selling the sizzle. No more big September introductions of new models. They quit selling the sizzle and just moved bacon.

 

Yep prepackaged all cut the same freeze dried bacon!!! Oldcutlass you said it all!

 

Thats how I always viewed It olds and buick were close but buick was a step above olds in hierarchy