I had actually thought about naming this post “Another Clapped-Out Colonnade”, given this car’s less-than-showroom condition. However, when I gave this car a few more looks, I wanted to present a more sympathetic take on what I had considered for much of my life my least-favorite year, make and model of any GM A-body coupe of this generation. This car is evidence that opinions can change over time. It’s still not my favorite, but its baroque styling has grown on me.
This ’74 Regal variant of the mid-size Century line is one of almost 57,500 coupes produced for the model year, which represented a steep, 37% drop from the 91,500 or so posted for ’73 for this body style. Production of the ’74s started in September ’73, exactly one month before the first oil crisis. Regal coupe production mostly held pat at 56,500 for ’75, then ballooned to over 124,000 units with the handsome ’76 restyle. The clean, purposeful looking ’73s are my favorites of this generation, but I wouldn’t kick the right ’76 or ’77 out of my driveway.
The issue I have with these top-shelf Buick midsizers versus their corporate cousins is that when a Regal would get to this kind of imperfect condition, it seemed to wear its battle scars a little less gracefully than the other A-bodies. Being a Buick, the Regal was ostensibly a near-luxury car, styled and accessorized to present an upscale image. The Chevy Malibu, Pontiac LeMans, and Olds Cutlass (in ascending order) all could look reasonably sporty in certain guises and in their slightly downmarket sheetmetal. I’ve seen worn examples of each of those other three cars which still looked alright. Even the tony Cutlass Supreme could look badass in rough shape with the right wheels, paint, and suspension rake.
The Buick, however, had all of the fussy, old-lady styling cues of concurrent LeSabres and Electra 225s (sweeping, bodyside character lines, sloping rear panel, heavily sculpted hood), and seeing one in beater status was not unlike seeing your grandma in sweatpants and a tank-top with a bunch of exposed tattoos you somehow never knew about. Still, there’s something endearing about this particular car, one which could have been straight from my high school parking lot in the early 1990’s. It’s also like the car you would expect your favorite waitress at the 24-hour diner you had frequented for years to have driven since she bought it when it was four years old.
So where’s the sympathy I initially spoke of? To bring this back to my original premise, I’ve softened to these floridly-styled Buick A-bodies for several reasons, including their relative rarity. Compared to the Colonnades from Chevy, Pontiac, and Olds, I just never see any Buicks – at shows or on the street. (Spotting the same ’75 Buick Century Free Spirit Indy pace car replica at Back To The Bricks in 2010 and 2011 was the first and only such car I’ve ever laid eyes on in the metal.) Another reason I like this car is because when looking at it, there’s no way on earth barring severe cataracts that I’d ever confuse it for anything but a Buick. It is, proudly, what it is.
To my eyes, the complexity of this Regal’s styling isn’t too far removed from that of a same-year Chevrolet Monte Carlo, which has similarly flowing lines and an even stronger identity. But from certain angles and referencing the title shot, it’s easy to see what allure these Regal coupes might have had with Buick customers in the 1970’s. In theory, it would distill the luxury of the LeSabre into a smaller, less-inefficient package in a sculptured shape that was still easily recognizable as a Buick. I hope this particular car has more than a few years left to roam the streets of the Vehicle City.
Downtown Flint, Michigan.
Wednesday, August 13, 2014.
Related reading:
Curbside Classic: 1973 Buick Century Regal – The Confident Colonnade?
Cohort Outtake: 1975 Buick Century Free Spirit Indy 500 Pace Car Replica
Cohort Sighting/Vintage Ad: 1976 Buick Regal – Call The Fashion Police
Not my favorite style either, but you managed to make Flint look interesting and somewhat attractive. The setting of the car itself on the cobbles is perfect as well, the colors go together. Nice how the newer Buick Enclave is in the background in one shot too. One of them heading one way, the other, 40 years later, another way…
Ditto. Great shots, as always.
And that goes for your description: grandma in sweats, tanktop and with tattoos showing. Perfect!
Thanks, guys. I did notice that Enclave, and thought it a cool coincidence that it was passing by as I was photographing this Regal. Downtown Flint really has come a long way from even 10 years ago, and light years from the 20+ years since I was a Genesee County resident. I hope to write up some of my more interesting finds from this year’s Back to the Bricks car festival.
I like these grandma eyes.
At the time, I liked the Buick’s conservative look as well as I liked any of these, but the more youthful Cutlass Supreme and Monte Carlo stole the spotlight.
Is this the last example of GM taking a visibly common body and allowing four different Divisions to stamp their unmistakably unique image onto the car. This car is every bit as much of a Buick as the Cutlass was an Olds or as the LeMans was a Pontiac. The generation to follow would lose out, as the Divisions’ distinct personalities were lost to compromise to costs and other corporate management issues.
I think these cars marked the transition between distinct divisional identities (even with the same basic bodies across divisions) and mail-it-in badge engineering. The Colonnade GTO post from a few days ago really illustrated this point for me. Before that, you’d think, “that’s a GTO.” After the Colonnades debuted, you’d think, “that’s a GM A-body with a GTO front clip.” Even with the ability of the divisions to mold the cars into their respective images, the real distinctiveness was gone, particularly in the case of Pontiac, which I think suffered most from this and the next generation of A-bodies. It’s as if 1973 was the point at which Pontiac was reigned back in after its successful ’60s and began its long twilight.
That said, this is still an attractive car. Somewhere in the San Gabriel Valley there’s an immaculate Special, maybe a ’76 or ’77, that I used to see on my commute every day. When kept up, these can be good-looking if a little dated.
I couldn’t disagree more. The previous generation of A-Bodies all had visually similar bodies and were even more alike in appearance after the 1970 facelifts when the Buicks lost their distinctive side detailing and the Chevelles had new front fasciae.
The Colonnades were more differentiated, with bolder side detailing between the models and quite different front and rear styling. After 1976, the Regal coupe and Cutlass coupe more closely resembled each other but otherwise these Colonnades were as visually differentiated as the As had been in the previous generation, possibly more so.
Agreed. For all the bad in the Colonnades they were well differentiated out the gate, the 72s all looked quite similar(albiet much better). If anything the problem is all the detailing that made the Pontiac a Pontiac, or an Olds an Olds, or a Malibu a Malibu in this new neoclassical design language was a bit unclear, Buick actually being the only one of the bunch with some heritage behind the heavy handed sculpting.
Big problem in my eyes is the move to single headlights (also a neoclassical feature). If there was anything that took away distinguishing features between brands it was that, and I always felt it looked cheap and dorky to have cars that massive to have itty bitty single headlights mounted on the flanks(the Buick was the worst). The Chevelle was the only A in 1972 to wear them, and every other brand had a sort of established identity with the headlight to grille relationship by 72, and few retained that in the Colonnade transition
These always reminded me of a 70’s version of a 41 Buick. Kind of a Jackie Kennedy charm in those eyes.
From what I understand that was the intent of the design team, hence the change in name to ‘Century’.
I like this shape. Really like that over-the-hood night shot. Found this pampered one recently in more palatial surroundings.
Very nice shot. It looks suspiciously like a ’73 but I don’t see the gentle kick-ups on the edge of the front bumper so it must be a ’74. The slightly different ’73-only front bumper looks so much more integrated to me despite its massive size.
Don, that’s a great find and shot! I’m thinking that’s a ’73 by the texture of the grille. I like that this historic-looking house has a carport. That’s old-school cool.
A Colonnade, in our country? I would have lost my mind! Years ago, I saw a ’76 LeMans sedan – base model, drab paintjob – on Carsales for only $3k. I had no idea about maintaining an older car and it was in a different state but I very seriously considered checking it out for a hot minute.
I got some closer shots, the owner allowed me on the property but I’ll write it up some time in the future. Co-incidently, there was a 68/69 GS400 parked around the corner so maybe I’ll make it a twofer CC.
There’s been a black Pontiac 4 door driving around but I haven’t seen it in a while.
Fantastic write-up Joseph. I never liked the Buick version of the A-body until recently. I now have a different feeling towards them than I did in the past. Maybe it is because they weren’t the sportier of the bunch, and that they had a somewhat frumpy look to them when compared to their GM cousins. Today I can see how a Buick customer which usually was an older demographic would have preferred this body style to say, a Grand Prix or Cutlass. Picturing a customer on the showroom floor back in 1974 makes me think that seeing a larger Buick may have been somewhat intimidating so the smaller Century Regal would work out nicely for them. Not to mention the Regal name should have been utilized as a stand alone model from the beginning. Calling it a Century and with the Regal upgrade made for some confusion, I believe.
Thanks, Tom! I think that Flint probably had a greater concentration of Buicks than the rest of the population at large, just because Buick was headquartered here, many Buicks were built here, and many Flint residents had GM employee discounts that allowed them to purchase “up” the Sloan hierarchy into Buicks. I have come to like the muted maturity of the Buick Colonnades, and their family resemblance to other Buicks.
The colonnades were a good example of ‘something for everyone’. While I’m personally partial to the Buick (particularly the Gran Sport versions), it’s easy to see others preferring one of the other variants from Chevy, Olds, or Pontiac.
As someone else pointed out, the side sculpting is reminiscent of the Monte Carlo, only more tastefully restrained. This actually makes sense since Buick didn’t have an intermediate personal luxury coupe like Chevy and Pontiac. Like Olds’ Toronado, Buick still had the full-size Riviera. So, the Buick Regal and Olds Cutlass were the de facto competitors to the Chevy Monte Carlo and Pontiac Grand Prix, and their better styling than the Malibu and LeMans reflected this.
Those panel gaps are huge, it looks like you could put a thumb in them
There’s a reason for that other than poor build quality. With those conventional scissor hood hinges the back of the hood drops slightly when the latch is released before it is lifted. Since the front of the doors are on the same vertical plane as the back of the hood there had to be a large gap to account for that. I think they matched the edge of the fender to the edge of the hood in an effort to disguise that as the lower door / fender gap is much tighter. You would see the same thing on the 78 – 80 Monte Carlos which had a similar design. (Believe me, after having spent many hours making tiny adjustments on my ’75 to try to minimize this I consider myself an expert)
For some reason this little capsule reminds me of a story my Dad’s car salesman best friend would tell about a little old lady who bought Buicks faithfully but her biggest requirement was that there be an upright hood ornament. She used it to locate the car within her lane on the highway.
The styling didn’t bother Kojak!
Beat me to it! Seeing that Regal set in an urban environment (or at least as urban as Flint gets) with an overcast sky reminded me so much of Theo’s stripper Century on the streets of Abe Beame-era NYC.
Who loves you, baby. Supposedly, Kojak’s had a 455 in it.
I was never keen on Buick’s take on the Collonade body, and while I’d agree the 74 was the weakest of the Regal coupes, 76 and 77 stacked headlight sedans wearing the carried over body(after the coupes got squared off) were the worst ever. I never liked any of the Collonade single headlight front ends period, the Buick is the worst offender given how far they’re placed on the flanks, leaving a massive dead space occupied by those dinky parking lights and filled with a boring blocky grille.
One of the odd things I find about the Regal is just how much more dowdy it looks than the Cutlass Supreme sharing the identical roofline. The side sweep on the Buick actually favors the much more rakish fastback roofline on the regular coupes and Gran Sports, therefore giving the overall design some legitimate cohesiveness. The Cutlass is the flipside to that where the formal supreme roofline looks more natural on it’s body than the fastback.
No, Joseph. I don’t hate you. We all have our favorites, not so favorites and downright dislike when it comes to cars. I always say, love them or hate them, they are all art. This car is a tired, sad looking example of what I considered to be a really nice looking car. My ’75 was a Century Custom in Ruby Red with a black roof. I considered it to be near luxury and I kept it looking that way right up until the day I sold it. I still remember the look on the face of the guy who bought it. He was thrilled to have it. I hope someone finds a nice example to post. There is something odd about the feature car. The rear bumper looks like that of a ’73, not the large 5 mph bumper which came in ’74. Yet, the entire front end is clearly 1974. It’s possible that this is a ’73 which, due to some mishap, was repaired with parts from a ’74. That could explain the poor fitting panels. Do you have a photo which shows the back more clearly? In ’76, most American cars got rectangular headlights. I didn’t care for them, and thought the early designs to accommodate them lacked style.
Good eye: you may be right — it looks like it may be a ’73 with a ’74 front clip. If it’s a ’74, the rear bumper is missing. The front fenders are definitely ’74-’75 due to the side marker light placement and the front bumper is obviously ’74-’75.
Excellent! I’m glad I didn’t offend. I feel like with writing these posts, it’s important to have a decisive opinion. Your car sounds like a great combo. Do you have any pictures to post?
The featured car was definitely a ’74 that was missing its rear bumper. Unfortunately, I didn’t get any rear shots of the car.
I did like the rectangular headlights on the ’76 and ’77 coupes which were placed horizontally, but to agree with XR7Matt’s comment above, the stacked quads of the sedans were definitely not my favorite.
Unfortunately, I don’t have a photo of my car to post. I did find one of a ’75 which is very close to the one I had. There are three differences. My car had a more slanted back light and the vinyl top was the landau style. And last, my car had stock wheels and covers instead of the nice rallys on this car. They identified this car as a Regal, but the entire front fascia is purely Century.
I too did not care for the stacked quads on the ’76 sedans and wagons. As for the ’76 and ’77 coupes, the lines were clean, but I thought the fronts were lacking.
Absolutely agreed. The ’76-77 Buick Century/Regal were a step-back, visually. The stacked headlights on the sedan/wagon were derivative and awkward, and the coupe lost its neatly detailed taillights and side detailing and just looked like a blander Cutlass Supreme.
I want to add a bit of history pertaining to my ’75 Buick Century. I saw that car in the front row of a Dodge dealership while riding with a co-worker in a company van. I headed down there as soon as I got out of work and took it for a test drive. It had 9000 miles on it. The previous owner had traded it for a conversion van. It had a 350 V8 with a THM transmission, ps and pb, pleated vinyl seats, bench in front with a center arm rest, AM radio, map light and tilt wheel. I made the deal on Wednesday, June 18,1975 and picked it up on Friday. I traded a ’72 Matador sedan with a salvage title and $3650 for that Buick. I took a loan and paid $121.60 a month for three years. I drove it until 1982. Money well spent. Some cars, you just don’t forget.
What a sharp-looking car (even if this isn’t a picture of your actual one), and great story. $3,650 in 1975 money translates to about $16,500 in 2015, which seems like a steal for such a nice ride. I really like that you remember the actual date of the transaction. That’s something I also probably would have made a note of
Hey, Dennis. I said that I hoped someone would post a nice example. I was curious to see if there were any out there for sale, so I checked Craigslist. Well, it’s not a Century, but close, and in very nice condition. I’d go for this in a heartbeat! Wish they had posted pictures of the interior. In fact, I tried out a new Special identical to this one at a Buick dealership before I found my Century. I didn’t like the side windows. That has changed.
http://southjersey.craigslist.org/cto/5084141179.html
Very nice! And it’s got a 6. I always liked the look of the cursive-font “Special” emblems – they had a look of motion to them. The flag-shaped rear-quarter windows of the base Colonnades to appeal to me.
Lets see. If I sell the Cross Country or the LTD, steal a few bucks from my home equity account, this could work. I really can’t justify doing it, but that’s beside the point. I’d better go mow the lawn.
I had forgotten that I took pictures of this 1963 Century three years ago. It was for sale at a small family dealership. They collected cars as well as selling them. This car had a 350 V8, but was rather spartan. It had the steering wheel with just a center button, vinyl seats, AM radio and rubber floor mats, not carpeting! Iirc, it had less than 30,000 miles. Summer before last, the price was at $5500. These folks would bring a few vintage cars to a nearby car show to sell. I looked for it last summer, but it wasn’t there.
When I posted that picture of the “1973” Century sedan. I grabbed the wrong photo. Here’s a decent shot of the front.
As for that white ’75, I have considered giving it a serious look. I’ve got a lot going on right now, so I thought, maybe a small loan. I called J.J Best. Due to a number of reasons, one being that many states do not title cars of this age, which prevents Best from putting a lien on them, the minimum they will loan is $6000 after you have put down 20% of the purchase price. Their rep said that having needed maintenance done on the car before purchase, closing the gap, would make the car eligible for a loan. So, for a hundred some odd bucks a month, you can be driving a nice collectable car or truck.
Thanks for posting this. 1974 Colonnades are few and far between…with the Buicks being the scarcest. It looks like the lighting was too poor for interior shots, but these cars had quite posh interiors — a few early Regals got the bucket seats & floor shift.
I find the ’74 and ’75 front bumpers on these a lot less attractive than the ’73 and feel the same way about almost every GM product with the one exception being the 1974 Chevelle & Monte Carlo. For some reason, Chevrolet toned down the front bumpers on both vehicles, especially the Malibu, making both cars a lot more attractive (to me anyway).
I really wish I had gotten some interior shots, but it was late afternoon, I had just gotten back to town, and there was a part of me that didn’t have it in me to try to (honestly) explain that I wasn’t disrespecting the owner or his/her car.
The front seats were definitely aftermarket – that was clear from the sidewalk.
I’ve got the same issue with interior shots. You can never tell how an owner might respond and besides which, I wouldn’t be too happy if I found someone taking shots of my interior. Maybe I’m being a bit squeamish, but hey.
Eew! You’re right. My back is starting to hurt just looking at those seats.
The sedans were quite striking though. Except for the Malibu.
Outstanding find. And I think for many of us here at CC, our feelings about the Colonnades have softened over the years.
The program ‘Muscle Car’ on the TNT network did a rework on a Buick Regal in 2010.
They did an amazing job!
http://www.powerblocktv.com/episode/MC2010-22/blue-collar-buick-interior-and-payoff#.VZQWAxtVhBc
That is one nice ’73! That is custom done *right*.
While we talk of Colonnade Buick, I spotted this vintage road test of a Buick Century GS455.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGYg5GuLqXY
Btw, I wonder why Buick dropped the Skylark name (until they revive it to replace the X-body Apollo) and revive the Century name, last used in 1958?
I hear they’re making a new “Kojak” movie. He had better be in a Buick.
Good chance for GM to get some exposure for the Avenir concept and give them a reason to produce it?
Wow…those panel gaps are awful!
I wonder if those doors were the same on the Monte Carlo. My favorite Colonnade was the ’76-’77 Olds Cutlass Supreme/Salon.
I’ve never been a big colonnade fan in general, but there is something captivating about this one. Nice write-up and I *love* that final, nighttime over-the-hood shot.
The Century/Regal doors were unique, until 1976-77, when shared with Cutlass Supreme. GM was looking to cut costs, to increase profits. But guess what happened in long run?
The square lighted 76-77 Regal were a classier look, IMHO. The single round headlights looked so 50’s, by mid 70’s.
Oh, how I love Colonnades. Decent handling, for a domestic intermediate. Striking styling. Acceptably sized. Plenty of sporty options (love the early Century GS, the Grand Am and the Chevelle Laguna Type S3). The only Colonnades I don’t much care for are just the ordinary Chevelles.
Doesn’t get as many googely eyes as when I bought it in 1993 but still beloved.
Nice! I checked paint chips from the ’75 chart. Looks like Bittersweet Metallic. Code U.
You are correct, and a one year only color. I don’t have any figures but there couldn’t have been too many orange Buicks from this generation made. I’ve seen only two other 75s this color, a Monte Carlo and an El Camino.
One more . . .
Neat car! I love these consoles and the feel of that stirrup shifter. It’s interesting that the car has rear defog, power locks, cruise control, clock but no tilt. I’d take cruise control over tilt wheel but would probably prefer power windows over power locks if I could only afford one of these options.
Ala carte ordering makes all of these cars rarities, especially now. I just noticed no cracks in that dash, not even the knee-banged corner. AMAZING.
Thanks! I agree that PW would be preferable to PL especially on a two door but from my observations, if it was one or the other, it was usually locks over windows. I think it was kind of a loss as a la carte optioning converted more to packages in the 90s. It used to be 3 or 4 trim levels often with different upholstery options within each one and 6 or 8 color choices. And before computerized order forms you could sometimes sneak a ‘forbidden’ option combo in assuming you could wait 12 to 16 weeks for your special car to arrive.
If there’s one think no one can accuse the collonades to be lacking, it’s the interiors. I absolutely love that dash/console
You’re right, the 1976 restyle is handsome. Never thought I’d say this about a car, but where I live, I never really saw these or at least that I remember the 76 Regal coupe. Saw plenty of ’75s. I can’t believe how much of a crib job Chrysler did with their Diplomat/Gran Fury/Caravelle cars to the Regal. Don’t even have to squint my eyes even a little to see the resemblance between the ’76 Regal and M coupe — right down to the wheel covers.
Feeling a little disheartened as I always liked the 1977-79 M body fascia, perhaps reasoning that it was fresh and Chrysler-esque. I may have read how Chrysler did a bit of copying with GM throughout the pages here at CC with regards to the Royal Monaco and maybe even the M cars themselves, but now these pictures solidify for me in how close these cars look to each other. Still, that formal but pretty face by either company looks good.
Not to sound general here, but at least Dodge was unique in creating the original Dodge pickup back in 1994. There. A little solace for my Chrysler soul.
As for the 1975 and prior versions of the Regal, I think the word baroque describes it best. It’s something Ace Ventura would upgrade to from his funky Monte Carlo and dental work…
A teacher of mine who hated me, and still does (It’s a long story, and a funny one, but until she dies, I can’t post it) bought one of these in the always ugly light green. It would be the first of several light green Buicks that she would own until she suddenly appeared in a brown Regal recently. I have to admit, the brown is better than the green. I really never understood how the Colonade cars got approval, but since they sold well, I guess I was in the minority.
I bought a rust-free but somewhat weathered ’74 Century Luxus (WTF is a “Luxus” 😀 ) way back in ’84. Nice driving car if more than a bit ponderous, got awful mileage, but boy, that Buick 350’s torque could sure smoke’em!