Now I've never owned (at least not for long) any of the cars in "Automotive Atrocities: The Cars We Love to Hate", but I was surprised to find two--technically three--Oldsmobiles in there among the Yugos and Trabants.

In the "Fake Muscle Cars: Embarrassing the Motor Gods" section it names the 1983-1984 Hurst Olds and 1985-1988 442 Olds, saying things like, "Oldsmobile's trip to the glue factory began with the 1983 and 1984 Hurst Olds" and "These half-breed muscle cars are semi-collectible as representatives of the final death-wheeze of American performance coupes."

You'll find Olds in the "Loathsome Luxury: Badge-Engineering and Rich, Corinthian Leather" section as well. This time it's the 1987-1992 Olds Toronado Trofeo, Oldsmobile's "palsied attempt to buck up the latter-day Toro's almost complete lack of style."

Are they REALLY that bad? Sure, the Hurst and 442 cars were down on power, but so was EVERY OTHER CAR in that era. And while the latter Toronados weren't great, they weren't THAT bad to look at, Trofeo or no.

All of us can come up with a better list than the one this hack put together for his book overall, but I have to ask: are there REALLY any Oldsmobile "atrocities"?

[The Roger Smith-era doesn't count; putting an Olds badge on a crappy GM-wide platform doesn't make it an Oldsmobile...]

Drew

 

At the risk of pizzing off a few people here, I've always said that the Rallye 350 (motto: all the looks of a W-30 without the pesky extra horsepower) was the first of the paint and decal "musclecars" that reached zenith (or perhaps nadir is the better term) with the screaming chicken T/As and the Mustang II King Cobra. Sadly, 180 HP does not make a musclecar. Only a few years later, the Quad 4 made 190!

I still want an 83/84 H/O, however.

 

Had an 83 H/O, sharp looker, pretty peppy with the 373 gear. Did the Pontiac GP or Monte SS make that list? They were about equal in performance. These cars were about the last RWD sporty cars from GM. They lacked Musclecar HP but still were fun cars. Would not put them in the Turd category for sure.

 

You ever hear of a "Buttless Cutlass" AE?.

buttless.jpg

My mom had a pacer, it was like driving in a fishbowl.
I've always wanted a Levi's Gremlin myself.

 

I bought an '86 442 brand new (after looking at the Monte SS, Grand National, and Pontiac 2+2) and LOVED it and, to this day, regret ever getting rid of it. Putting it in the proper perspective, the 442s and H/Os of that period WERE the best that GM was offering and were pretty peppy (relatively speaking) and handled and rode very well and were very well appointed. I have to hand it to GM for even offering such cars at a time when it was DEFINATELY out of fashion.

 

Whats wrong with a pacer?
All you had to do was put a check mark in the "add a Blown 455 w/ Nitrous" box when you ordered it.....


Blown 455 with Nitrous Olds Pacer.jpg

 

Just to add to that. The H/O and the later 442's looked much nicer than the Monte SS or GP.

 

I've always liked the "Buttless Cutlass," especially the sedan version. Then again, I'd love to have an early 80's Omega SX...those awful stick-on graphics are cheezily wonderful.

 

Other cars listed as "fake muscle" include: Mustang II (1974-1978); Chevy Camaro Z28 (1977-1981) and "Iron Duke" (1982-1983); Pontiac Trans Am Turbo 4.9 (1980-1981); Dodge Aspen R/T and Plymouth Volare Road Runner (1976-1980); Chevy Corvette 305 "California" (1980); Pontiac GTO (1974); and the Chevy Cosworth Vega (1975-1976).

[Though I wouldn't consider them to be muscle at all--fake or otherwise--the Renault Alliance GTA and Fuego Turbo, Geo Storm, Fiat X1/9, DeLorean, Bricklin and others are here, too.]

Seems to me like the author found a half-dozen authentic poseurs (Mustang II King Cobra, this means you) and had to "flesh out" the rest of the section picking on names that were carried forward without all the power and prestige they originally had (like the Hurst/Olds and 442).

 

I know the 80's was mostly forgettable when it comes to performance cars but I liked most of the GM RWD cars of that time, especially the Cutlass, Regal, Grand Prix and Monte SS. Maybe by today's standards most of the decals were tacky add-ons, but I thought they looked good then.

 

Joe, I agree with about the Rallye 350, but I wouldn't lump the King Cobra in with the Trans Am! Performance was gone after 1974 (catalytic converters and single exhaust were the new standard), but the 1975-1979 Trans Am still had a 400-455 cube engine and terrific handling. All those Trans Am spoilers and scoops were functional (not the hood scoop, but everything else). While 200-220 hp isn't much, I think Pontiac carried the performance torch through the 1975-1982 period, when other manufacturers were putting stickers all over their cars, and nothing under the hood.

The 83-84 HO is a pretty car, but no competition for the 83-84 Mustang GT, Z/28, and Trans Am. I think that's why they placed the HO in there. The car looked like it would be a front runner, but in reality was a low 16 second car.

 

I had another car that they list as fake - '79 Z28. I don't think the person writing that article ever drove any of these cars. My Z28 had the LM1 350/4-bbl and a Borg-Warner Super T-10 4-speed with 3.73:1 gears and was a TON of fun. It was fast and handled great and looked great!

 

I still have a 1987 Monte Carlo SS. Although it's down on power, it's a great driver. And I love the style. It's almost like the "old" cars....quotation marks cause now the 87 is old, hell I can get HISTORIC plates for it in Maryland.

That vintage Cutlass (the mid 80's) was a super popular car. The 442 trim just made it that much more appealing.

Opinions, opinions, opinions.

If you came across one of those butless Cutlass's in good shape with POP POP driving it, wouldn't you want it? HELL YEH!!

 

LOL buttless cutlass! said that at work all day

 

They were also big enough and rode well enough to make them good long-haul cars. I would not want to try that in a stang or camaro.
Even my Cutlass fits that bill if you were not interested in stoplight drags.

 

Thanks Blue, I love it when others use my car as an example, whether good or bad.

 

I can agree with that list. But I also agree that the H/O badge never should have been used in the 80's.

Motors were just pathetic in them after emissions choked the end of the original Muscle car era.
The Mustang II's aka Pintostangs were the ugliest car ever made from a "Muscle Car".
It was in Charlies Angels and it was absolutely hideous.
Ford actually marketed the Mustang towards secretaries back then.....

Looked the role....yes. But lacked the power in stock trim.

Engine: 350 LM-1 V8 with Revised exhaust, carburetion, and ignition timing, dropped horsepower to 175
for 49-States versions and 170 bhp in California. Torque was also slightly lower this year.
http://www.nastyz28.com/camaro/camaro79.php

I own a 1978 z28 still....the stock motors were pigs. Great body lines, fun torque, but no power.
1/4 mile was 16.4 ET which is pathetic. Most 350's in the late 70's through the 80's were pigs.
One misconception I learned growing up is everyone just assumed a 350 was a good strong/fast motor.

The worst was the LG3 350 ......which had an ASTOUNDING 135 hp.....
That's why mine now has an LS1 in it.

 

Great post Aceshigh.

And again, I would never lump the Trans Am into the 'sticker car' category. Trans Am's may have appealed to secretaries in the later 70's, but that was because they were men's cars, marketed towards performance. But my Pontiac friend educated me on those Trans Am's. They were always performance cars from nose to tail. ALL Trans Am's came standard with posi, functional air extractors, bucket seats, a full set of gauges with tach, beefy sway bars, huge tires, and later with 4-wheel disc brakes. All those spoilers actually worked, they weren't tacked on.

The hood bird (a.k.a. screaming chicken) was an option, it wasn't standard. Most people ordered the hood bird though. It was just a popular thing at the time. Other companies tried to cash in on the Trans Am image, so we had embarrassing cars that were TRUE sticker cars, like the Buttless 442, AMC Spirit AMX, Royal Knight El Camino (OMG, remember that one?), Lil Red Express Dodge Trucks, Ford King Cobra, Monza Mirage, Buick Skyhawk Nighthawk, the list goes on.

Dark days for American performance cars, but the Formula and Trans Am were always pure performance cars.

I personally love the 83/84 H/O's. It's a shame that Oldsmobile couldn't manage to hop up the 305 a little more, or even develop a turbo the way Buick did. But at the time, Oldsmobile was focused on diesels.

 

On a side note,
I forgot to add that the 1979 and 1978 years were the best selling Camaro and Trans Am years of all time.
I think Smokey and the Bandit was a large part of that reason.

As much as they could be for that era anyways.
The Smokey and the Bandit movie propelled the reputation of the Trans Ams into massive overdrive.
1979 the T/A with the W72 400ci did a 14.6 in the 1/4 muuuuuuuch faster then anything else IIRC.

The only Oldsmobile 442's faster then that were 1968-1970 which were PRE-emissions.....and close.
http://musclecarclub.com/musclecars/...-history.shtml

But they did such a great job at it, that it's the ONLY 100% classic vehicle
that I know of that's been reproduced in limited quantities priced up to $125,000
and all built in house at Year One.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGyNjpnU0_o

http://www.yearone.com/yodnn/home/tabid/54/default.aspx

 

Obviously by my signature you can tell where I fall on this debate. Being a kid of of 80's I loved these cars. Yeah I would not call them muscle cars but they were fun to drive. They definitely were the best looking cars on the street and sounded better then any camaro or mustang at that time.

Wayne

 

Actually reading Aces info on the 78-79 Z28 has raised my respect for the 83-84 H/O. Olds took a 307 and had it outperform those Z28's in a heavier car. 15.7 in the quarter is not sparkling, but it seems pretty cool to know your 307 can walk a late 70's Z28 350!

The Turbo Trans Am was a total turd, I drove one. The 403 powered '79 T/A is a damn fun ride with true duals, I got a ride in one.

 

Oldsmobile rated the 1983 Hurst olds for a 0-60mph @ 9.8 seconds. (some say that was wrong)
It did mid 16's in the 1/4 mile. I'm not sure where you got the 15.7 ET from.
If it's from a forum and word of mouth......you know how that goes.

http://www.oldcarmemories.com/content/view/70/113/

Same info on a GM Insider forum thread as well.

None of these were fast by today's standards.
They're all slower then family sedans with 4cylinders these days. lol
They were great LOOKING cars though, and IIRC mid 80's was the best selling year.

I'm also a teen of the 80's and I remember these Cutlasses were EVERYWHERE and
they were first cars for many people because they were very inexpensive thru the 90's.

 

Remember, TONS of musclecars in the late 60s and early 70s ran high 14s, low 15s in the 1/4 mile too in stock trim. Just about every stock 4-cyl car made today can run that!

 

It's been my experience in testing cars old and new that it's all a matter of "efficiency." Modern econoboxes can turn better times than classic muscle cars for many reasons, but mostly because of advances in tires, suspension, transmissions, fuel-injection and the like.

I've driven "ringer" muscle cars like those by XV Motorsports--which I would consider the modern equivalent of the "spirit" factory engineers had in the 1960s arms race on Woodward Avenue--and they'll stomp just about anything into the ground, including modern Corvettes.

But even with new tires and the suspension mods alone otherwise stock "classics" are quick and fast enough to show their tails to most new cars. It's about getting all that torque and horsepower to the ground, something in my experience that 1960s' and '70s' cars' suspensions/tires/etc. couldn't really do (at least not as well as they can now).

 

Actually,the 'buttless' in the picture looks pretty good with those rims.Lets see,some engine work,nice paint...Yeah,those rims look good!

There were some pretty crappy cars tghat were touted as "muscle' after 70-72,that were nothing but stick-on graphics.Others really moved,compared to what was being made at the time.The Trans-Am 'chicken' sticker was big when 'Smokey and the bandit' came out.There is a primo one in storage near me,the guy is starting to clean it up,and it actually looks good!
As far as performance,yes,these new cars are quick,handle great (mostly) and can also get good mileage.A lot of this is in the computer.I had an Altima that had the computer chip changed out,and the handling package beefed up,you could throw that through a set of S curves that would leave the cops in the dust.But how many of these cars end up as anything but scrap? What has been made that people are going to collect in 10 or 20 years? Think Olds parts are hard to find? Try finding stuff for a 15 year old car now.
Most of those type books have to fill the pages in each category,and face it,most of the guys writing them aren't really car guys.So they go for the easy ones,and toss in some others for filler.
I guess I missed the big-block version of the Pacer-I wish they had that when I had my Gremlin! ---bil

 

Thanks Bil. That pic was taken about 15 minutes afte it got off the trailer from Ohio. Car had very little rust. A little behind the d.s. rear tire(you can barely see it in the pic). Car has been completely stripped to bare metal, rust and dings repaired. The 260 had a knock, so it's gone. When I pulled the engine, I tore it down just to see how bad it was. 1 piston pushed down 1/16" at least. Building a 78 350 block for it. New color is a 2000 cheb truck dark metallic blue. It's a salon, but strange thing is, it has a bench seat. wheels are 14s and I'm planning on keeping it that way for a while(sleeper effect), car will appear totally stock. http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/5306/sdc10328.jpg

 

My all-time favorite Buttless.

 

My wifes G6 has more hp (225) than my Olds (185). Yeah my car has more torque but her's is so much better on fuel.

 

POPULAR Performance cars will always be collectible, and parts are still very abundant. Parts are available for all 5 generations of Camaro's, and Trans Ams from TONS of vendors still today. In fact, besides the Corvette I think the F-body has the largest aftermarket. Honda Civic VTEC's, Lancer EVO's, Subaru WRX Sti's, Dodge Neon SRT4's, tons of aftermarket for that stuff as well.

Same goes for all 6 generations of Corvettes, parts vendors up the yin yang. IF the car is a popular performance vehicle, parts will always be available because there is a market for them.

Now a 1995 Oldsmobile Aurora or Cutlass for example ?? Not popular. A Pontiac G6 won't be collectible at all, but a G8 will be. The sad reality here for most Oldsmobile enthusiasts to grasp IMO is Oldsmobile was never much of a performance brand after the 60's and early 70's. So performance parts won't be as readily available because of that.

Most new family sedans....yeah. Not modern V8 performance cars though.

Most people modify their engine internals to get more HP out of them while claiming they're still stock.
It's just the name of the game out in the car hobby.

Pre-1972 = SAE Gross Horsepower
Post-1972 = SAE Net Horsepower.
http://neptune.spacebears.com/opine/horsepwr.html

So if we took those 455ci 360hp figures and measured it by today's standards (SAE Net),
it would be losing a chunk of HP on paper right off the bat to be comparative
to modern standards of measurement.

 

That's why they teach the use of "many" and "most" on your first day of journalist school...

And I know I'm not telling anyone anything they don't already know, but that's what makes the "Stock-APPEARING Drags" my new favorite form of racing. [http://www.stockappearingdrags.com/]

Though I wouldn't go so far as to say that it's "The Most Fun You Can Have With Your Clothes On" (which THEY do), it's incredible to watch Hurst/Olds, 442s, Yenko Camaros, LS6 Chevelles, GTOs, etc., being used in anger just like the "old days" (I was born in '74. Give me a break...).

As for Neons (even SRT-4s), Scoobie-roos and Lancer Evos, I can't see them being anywhere NEAR as long-term popular as American muscle cars. They are complicated enough to cost SERIOUS money to overhaul, technologically-advanced enough to break in all manner of dumb ways and popular now because they're the state-of-the-art, a target that is in constant motion.

Will people ever pull a WRX out of a junkyard and "clone" it as an STI? Can you see ANY of the mass-produced cars you mentioned--including certain Corvettes--selling for anywhere NEAR as much as some muscle cars do? (Million-dollar Hemi 'Cudas, I'm talking about you.)

Heck, given how many are being built, even throwbacks like modern Challengers, Camaro SSes and Shelby-ized Mustangs aren't likely to sell for big bucks unless they were owned or raced by someone famous, had VERY low serial numbers or the like.

I just can't see my children looking back on the 2000s as a time where ANY mass-produced car was lust-worthy (Vettes, Vipers and certain other high-performance cars, especially German and Italian ones, excepted)...

 

auto_editor, great post!

I may disagree with your take on the EVO's and Neon's. To the kids that hop these things up, they view our 1960's and 1970's Oldsmobiles the way we view a 1949 Oldsmobile or 1952 Chevy. They look nice, but they're for the 'old people'. They can't figure out why we waste time setting timing, changing jets, etc. They do it all from their laptop. As they grow older, and we begin to fade away, there won't be much call for the older cars, other than from a historical standpoint. Too expensive, too much work, and you can't drive them very easily. That's why their values have gone down in the last few years.

Still collectors out there, but the segment that wanted an old 442 for the performance simply moved on to a new car. More performance, less maintenance. It's easier, which is something that appeals to the Gen X and younger crowd. It's easier to buy a die-cast model than to build a plastic model.

Detroit hasn't made anything in the last 30 years that's original. Everything is just a regurgitation of the 1960's. The same car names, the same options, the same stripes, there's just no creativity in Detroit.

Cut-and-paste. That's the ticket. And that's the generation that's designing cars now. When all else fails, bring back one of the brilliant marketing ideas from the 60's. Stand on the shoulders of giants.

 

Whatif--Is that yours? Nice Car!

 

No, I wish it was!

It's actually sort of a famous car, Hot Rod Magazine Street Machine Of The Year. I'm not sure where it is now, but I thought it was in the Olds Museum for a while?

More info: http://www.hotrodharrys.com/cars/sho...hp?articleID=4

 

Hahahha..."Buttless Cutlass"...gunna have to share that one with my car.
She'll laugh her butt off...whoops; it already did fall off!

They do kind of grow on you after you yank the 260. Varoooom!

.

 

Muscle Cars have such a huge following because for 25 years afterwards Muscle cars sucked and lacked power.

Only the GNX and ZR1 Vette's were worthy of recognition until the mid 90's when the LS1's came out.
That's when the Muscle Car era was reborn.

You think these were all unoriginal ??
The Buick Grand National GNX wasn't a regurgitation of anything.
The Pontiac G8 GXP made from the Holden Monaro, had no predecessor.
The Pontiac Solstice GXP and Saturn Sky Redline were 2 turbo cars that were baby vettes.

As for the new GTO, Camaro, Corvette, etc.......
Most of the classic muscle car names have a cool history of instant recognition.
Why lose that ?? Brand recognition is key to success.

That's why Ford dumped the Five Hundred name and went back to calling it a Taurus.
If Oldsmobile was still alive today and considering a performance car......you wouldn't want a new 442 ?

 

There were hybrids in the 60s? 4 door family sedans that got 30 mpgs and ran 14 second ets?? There were trucks that can blast off 12 second quaters? I hate when people romanticize a time period and say the last blah blah blah had nothing in comparison.

Ford Lightning, anything to compare that to?
ZR1 Vette, power/brakes/suspension/comfort. Whats the equivalent?
Pontiac GTO, nothing but the name was the same.
5.0 Mustang.
Taurus SHO, 4 door V6, now 4 door twin turbo. Could you get that option on a Dynamic 88?

There is a lot more than just lack of creativity that comes into play. Government regulations, price, and the publics general dont give a **** factors into what cars sell and what cars stay as concepts, and what cars never leave the computer screen.

 

Wrong, you need to give the 5.0 Mustangs its due. What other car in the 90s sparked more aftermarket parts, had mulitple magazines dedicated to it, and spawn racing classes and racing series just for one car. Nothing in the past 25 years compares to the 5.0 Mustang movement. Trick Flow, March, Vortech, Paxton, ProCharger, Pro M, K&N, Flowmaster, MAC headers, the list goes on and on. Add in the tuner cars like Steeda and Saleen. Its no contest.

The revolution started in 82, and the Mustang is why.

 

Guess I should have said last 25 years instead of 30, I forgot about the GN.

I didn't mean that they haven't made anything FAST in the past 25 years, I'm talking about marketing, promotion. It all goes back to the 60's, trying to sell new cars to aging baby boomers, and giving them the false notion that they (the car manufacturers) are taking you back in time. "Imagine if you could go back and order a brand new 1969 Camaro SS....well now you can with the 2011 Camaro SS!"

The G8 was nothing new, they did a cut-and-paste of the Holden Commodore. It's an import, just like the 04-06 GTO was.

The Solstice and Sky original? They were called the Mazda Miata in the 80's. Adding a turbo isn't exactly groundbreaking, but at least Pontiac didn't put 1969 GTO hood scoops on it and call it a Judge.

Again, I'm not talking about technology (like a hybrid), I'm talking about their lack of creativity and cut-and-paste tactics top sell performance cars.

• Chevrolet brings back the Camaro, with styling touches (and marketing tactics) from 1969.

• Chevrolet resurrects the Impala SS nameplate...on a 4-door.

• Chevrolet brings back Corvette Gran Sport paint scheme from early 60's.

• Chevrolet brings back the Camaro SS nameplate, and a paint scheme from 1969.

• Chevy brings out the same 1940's styling, but in a pickup design.

• Camaro SS returns, with the SS paint scheme and other styling cues from 1969.

• Chevrolet brings back the '427 Corvette', reminiscent of the great 427 Corvettes from 1967-1969.

• 2010 Nickey Camaro, harkening back to the 1960's Nickey Camaro.

• 2011 ZL-1 Camaro, using the name from the famous 1969 ZL-1 option, of which 69 were made. They're making 69 of the new ZL-1 's too.

• At the 2009 SEMA show, a new Yenko Camaro was announced, complete with 1969 stripes.

• The Corvette Z06 is a tribute to the 1963 Z06 Corvette.

• The Corvette Grand Sport is a throwback to the original 60's version, complete with paint job.

• The Corvette ZR-1 is a name from the 1969-1971 period.

• Pontiac brings back the Ram Air moniker in the 1990's, a tribute to, you guessed it, the 1960's.

• Pontiac paints the 1999 Trans Am like a 1969 Trans Am.

• Pontiac paints a 94 Trans Am in 1970-1972 paint scheme.

• Pontiac brings out a new GTO, then when criticized, they adds styling touches from the old days.

• Many aftermarket companies are trying to make a new Camaro look like a 1977 Trans Am, 1970-1972 Trans Am, 1973 Trans Am, or a 1969 Trans Am. Hood birds, shaker scoops, blue racing stripe(s), even the interior is styled from the old days.

• VW brings back the Beetle in the same configuration as the original design.

• Ford brings back the Thunderbird, styled like a 1955-1957 model.

• Ford brings back the GT40 from their original 1966 Ford GT-40.

• Ford redesigns their Mustang to look like a 1968 model.

• Ford brings back the 5.0 Mustang, Mach 1 Mustang, even a tribute to the dark green Bullitt Mustang.

• Ford brings back the Boss Mustang nameplate from 1969.

• Ford brings back the shaker hood, rear window louvers, and side scoops, again, all from the good old 60's.

• Dodge Viper gets a 1966 Shelby Cobra paint job.

• Chrysler brings out the PT Cruiser, with styling from the 1940's.

• Plymouth brings out a 1950's style hot rod called Prowler.

• Dodge brings back the Charger nameplate, with styling cues from 1969.

• The Hemi returns, along with ads harkening back to the old days. And yes, a Hemi Charger.

• Dodge Charger gets graphics packages from the 1968-1971 era.

• The Super Bee bumblebee logo appears on trucks, cars, everywhere.

• Chrysler brings back day-glow paint schemes from the 1969-1971 era.

• Chrysler brings back the 300 nameplate.

• Chrysler brings back the Challenger, and styles it nearly identical to their 1970 model.

• Chrysler brings back the NHRA lightweight Challenger, just like in the 1968 Hurst Cuda and Dart.

• Chrysler brings back the R/T nameplate, and paint schemes.

• Chrysler brings back chrome hood emblems and callouts.

There's more, but I think I proved my point. Just cut-and-paste.

 

They wouldnt do these things if they didnt work. GM, Ford and Chrsyler have something that no other maker in America has, history. They would be idiots not to promote their history, build on their history, and make history with these new Muscle Cars. Toyota cant do it, Honda cant do it, and Nissan cant do it.

So instead of these bad *** cars, you want creativity. How about a car with a polka dot paint job instead of Cobra stripes. A pine tree for a hood ornament instead of chrome hood emblems.

 

That's my point, no creativity. The young designers today are just standing on the shoulders of giants. It was the brilliance of what the guys in the 60's did that is still being felt today. And that was my original statement, that they haven't come up with anything new in 25 years. Instead of moving forward, they've moved backward from a styling and marketing standpoint (obviously technology has moved forward).

That's because cars were 1000 times cooler in the 60's and 70's.

But I think we all knew that. That's why we're on a site called Classic Oldsmobile.