At least on the old B-bodies the Buick had that goofy shovel nose going on to tell them apart from the rest. You could accuse the various C & H bodies of having the same problem. But there is that infamous Newsweek(?) cover story of the four Front Wheel Drive A-bodies in red lined up next to each other, and only a true car buff could tell them apart. Maybe they lost the plot with the styling? Although the sedans are bores next to the Taurus, the coupes turned out to be the best lookers of the whole C/E/H/K downsize debacle. Space efficient, peppy, aerodynamic and economical. All the more amazing considering that in a few key configurations they were remarkably similar. Meanwhile everyone, GM included was confused on what exactly to do with the H-body cars (at least the first generation cars). The Taurus is still lauded as a milestone Ford. But the perception of the two platforms couldn’t be more different. General Motors reportedly spent 3 Billion dollars on the H-Body cars, about the same amount of money Ford spent on the Taurus/Sable. Or another solution would have been to forget developing the GM-10 W-body cars and pump redevelopment money back into the B-bodies for all of the customers that were crying foul and reintroduce “proper” DeVilles, Electras and Ninety Eights for 1991. But GM was too willing to milk the cash cow. If General Motors had any real ego left, the Cutlass Supreme would have disappeared/been rebadged as the new aero-back Cutlass Ciera Coupe in 1986 to make room for the new Eighty Eight. “You want me to pay more for ‘less?’ Show me that Cutlass Supreme with a ‘real’ rocket.” Add in the fact that the Cutlasses still had a V8… and… we can see where some of the backlash became legitimate. Nearly 2 feet shorter than they had been, once again playing that awkward showroom game of having “mid sized” Cutlasses actually being slightly larger (and cheaper). Although the FWD C bodies first went out the door to meet the disaster, the former B-bodies became Wagon only, and their sedan and coupe nameplate mates became the “H” Bodies. Get a little overzealous with the engineering and the blowtorch, that’s what. New CAFE Standards, threats of $3.00 a gallon gas, and tanking sales of the B-bodies? What is General Motors to do?
Although they were more rational than what proceeded them, They were not much more than the Cutlass Supreme across the lot in a crisply tailored pair of bell bottoms. And I’m here to offer the counter defense that you are far better off in rain, sleet or snow and at the gas pump if you embrace the H-body.Īlthough the 1977 B-bodies were downsized, they weren’t (overall length-wise) all that much smaller than the 1961-64 B-body cars. I understand that for a lot of people, there’s no other way to make your average American sedan other than an overhead valve V8 mated to a driveshaft driving the rear wheels. ( first posted ) I’m well aware of the Church of the B-body.
0 kommentar(er)
