Bravado — derived from the Old Spanish world, “Bravada”, it is defined as an ostentatious display of bravery or defiance, often in order to make a false impression or mislead someone. I doubt few could have anticipated the irony when the Bravada was first commissioned back in 1990, but this term very accurately describes the final Oldsmobile Bravada, a promising premium SUV that could have been a big success for the ailing brand. Unfortunately, no less than two days after its first press introduction, GM made the announcement that they would promptly kill off the Oldsmobile brand over the next couple years, sealing the third generation Bravada’s fate before it even went on sale.
Previous Bravadas were little more than rebadged versions of the Chevrolet Blazer and GMC Jimmy with higher specification equipment, differentiated by prominent lower bodyside cladding and monochromatic exterior trim, unique grille, fancier alloy wheels, an interior with higher grade leather upholstery and a few extra options, and permanent all-wheel drive, dubbed Smart Trak.
The first generation Bravada was sold for the 1991-1994 model years and the second generation for the 1996-2001 model years. No 1995 model was offered, as it was rumored Oldsmobile was in talks with Isuzu to base a larger and more luxurious Bravada off of the Isuzu Trooper. No such plan ever came to fruition, and the second generation Bravada continued on the path of the first.
Although differentiation over its siblings did increase a tad over the years, nothing could hide the fact that the Bravada was little more than a high-spec, gussied-up Blazer/Jimmy, collectively, SUVs that were becoming painstakingly outclassed and outdated by far more more capable competitors.
By comparison, the new third generation Bravada sought to address its predecessors’ shortcomings. First and foremost, it was treated to far more exclusive exterior styling more in line with Oldsmobile sedans, for only the windshield, front door panels, roof and tailgate were shared with its Chevrolet and GMC siblings (later Buick and Saab variants would recycle more of the Bravada’s sheetmetal).
Inside, the Bravada received its own dash board, door panel, and seat design, in addition to the expected standard amenties befitting of its premium status. Mechanically, the third generation Bravada was highlighted by and all-new DOHC, all-aluminum 4.2-liter inline-6, making an impressive 270 horsepower and 275 lb-ft torque, increases of 80 and 25, respectively, as well as a new load-leveling rear air suspension.
While the third generation Oldsmobile Bravada offered significant improvement and finally, a healthy dose of distinctiveness over its predecessors, it did have its shortcomings, chiefly in the fit and finish realm. I mean, Kate Moss could fit between the body panel gaps. Still, while the Bravada couldn’t match rivals such as the Acura MDX and Lexus RX in overall refinement, it was a very formidable competitor to rivals such as the Mercury Mountaineer Premier and Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited.
It’s debatable whether or not the third generation Bravada would have been a success. It was the right car at the right time for sure, but although an improvement, it wasn’t perfect. Add that to the fact that Oldsmobile’s image and prestige were ever muddled, and that the Bravada would soon share five rebadged siblings, getting it ever lost in the shuffle. Unfortunately, we’ll never know as the final Bravada’s fate was sealed before it even went on sale, making it a car befitting of its name.
Related Reading:
I’m still amazed that Cadillac, Pontiac, and Saturn never got a rebadged version of this platform. They were the only divisions to miss out.
To me the real travesty is that the first two generations of Bravada were distinguished by having standard AWD. The third gen was available in RWD as a “base” model, which to me was just stupid if you were trying to make a case for the Bravada somehow being a step up from its siblings.
The Trailblazer and its siblings are an ugly bunch of vehicles. Body on frame minivans. The Explorer and Durango from these years also looked ugly and bloated. The 90’s designs were a lot better proportioned.
Agreed. My grandmother has one, a red Envoy with tan interior. She calls it Big Al and it is the ugliest, cheapest, thirstiest piece of crap. It is constantly breaking down, leaking, pieces of trim falling off, electrical gremlins, and it has that awful GM smell on the inside. She had it for about 4 years before the heads cracked and now she drives a Honda CR-V and loves it. Big Al has been a lawn ornament for about a year and half now. I wish she would just sell it to a junk yard for parts but she says she is holding on to it until my younger cousin graduates high school and then she will pass it on to him like a nasty virus. I feel sorry for him.
Awful GM smell. Strangely, I know that exactly.
It’s kind of a musty smell, almost like damp clothes but not quite.
“…and then she will pass it on to him like a nasty virus.”
That had me laughing.
SAAB engineers massaged their version and it was, by far, the best. However the whole exercise amounted to putting lipstick on a pig.
I thought about looking for a low mile Saab 9-7X when I was shopping for a CUV/SUV in 2014 just for the “wut the fuq is that?” comments that I’m sure I would have gotten.
One of those products that many people didn’t know existed.
Yeah, the 9-7X was really cool. It was even better if you got the Aero, which had the same 6.0-liter V8 and advanced AWD system as the TrailBlazer SS. What I thought was really interesting was that GM went through the trouble of–for the 9-7X–taking its then-corporate key fob and giving it a unique casing that included the key blade, then giving the 9-7X a center-mounted ignition slot, just like other Saabs. It’s dorky when you consider that it’s one of the only ways GM probably tried to distinguish that car from its platform mates, but it’s interesting nevertheless.
The 9-2X, which was a Subaru WRX by another name, with improved materials and comfort, was rarer still. It originated when GM had part ownership of Fuji Heavy Industries, which is Subaru’s parent company. Best of all, thanks to GM’s generous incentives, the 9-2X sometimes cost *less* than the WRX version.
And the 9-4X was the rarest of them all. By then, GM had sold Saab and was building the 9-4X under license at its Ramos Arizpe, MX factory, alongside the related second-generation Cadillac SRX. Saab defaulted soon after production began, and fewer than 400 9-4X units were made and sold. I bet there’s a big stockpile of spare parts somewhere, because the production batches for some of the parts had to surely be bigger than 400 units worth’.
Saw a 9-4X in Providence, RI, last month!
(For some reason, my picture isn’t attaching. Yes, it’s a JPEG.)
I did remember the unfortunate timing with the car’s introduction and the almost simultaneous announcement that Oldsmobile was being killed.
That inline 6 was a puzzler, first why it was made at all, and second why it never found another application, like trucks and vans.
The inline 6 was sort of recycled into the GMC Canyon and the Chevy Colorado. Unless I am mistaken, and I apologize if I am, the 6 had one cylinder “chopped off” to make the 5 cylinder engine for these trucks and 2 cylinders for the base 4 cylinder engine.
It puzzles me why the 5 cylinder wasn’t made the new base engine when the up spec engine became a V6. Perhaps there wouldn’t have been a big enough difference in horsepower and/or fuel economy?
The 5 cylinder version used in the Canyon/Colorado and Hummer H3 was a worst of both worlds engine offering 4 cylinder power and 6 cylinder gas mileage. Putting it in the SUV would have made a mediocre vehicle worse. What GM should have done was put the I-6 in the trucks, but apparently they needed to keep the I-5 to make CAFE numbers
My parents bought one of those after GM announced that it was phasing out Oldsmobile. Needless to say, they got quite a deal on it.
It was typical of GM offerings of the time – the drivetrain was better than the rest of the vehicle. The inline six was quite nice. I also liked the styling of the front-end ensemble. The build quality and level of interior materials, however, did not support GM’s desire to have the Bravada seen as a premium entry.
It later developed some problems around 90,000 miles, and was replaced with a Buick Enclave.
If I recall correctly, Car & Driver was impressed by the new in-line 6 cylinder engine when they tested these beasts back in the day, and judged to to be superior to the optional V8.
It’s about the only time I can recall when the base engine was better than the more expensive option.
Very puzzling they didn’t use the 4.2 in more applications. Didn’t it even win a Ward’s Best Engines award? It had very good power and torque figures for the time — the optional 5.3 in the other GMT-360s really didn’t move the needle much in power/torque.
Had the opportunity to buy a green over tan leather first gen back in 1999 from my “buddy” at the local Olds dealer. I couldn’t get past the horrible fuel mileage and high price for a Chevy with a cheap disguise.
Once you start channeling the British Leyland logo for your wheeltrims, you’re probably doomed…
Brilliant!
I always liked the styling of these. Not crazy about the interior styling. I thought of getting one once upon a time, to pair with my Aurora.
well the Bravada has the distinction of being the “last RWD Oldsmobile” (I don’t thing the Olds version ever got the V8) and the Aurora has the distinction of being the “last V8 Oldsmobile.”
As a trivia note, the Isuzu talks actually ended up going the other way with Isuzu replacing the Trooper in the US with the Ascender, yet another GMT360 rebadge.
I didn’t know that GM was considering a Trooper-derived Bravada. What year were they discussing that? I ask because Acura was already selling a rebadged Trooper in the latter half of the 1990s and it would’ve been so strange to see a truck rebadged concurrently as both an Acura and an Olds.
The Trooper, particularly after its last facelift, was a handsome truck and looked good in up-spec trims (like our flagship Holden Jackaroo Monterey) and it was better-built than the GMT-360s. But the final Bravada looked great with its unique sheetmetal and strong visual links to Oldsmobile’s sedans. It was some nice differentiation from the other GMT-360s although GM should’ve spent some more on the interior… not just for the Bravada but for all the GMT-360s.
One of the car magazines’ future model grids showed Trooper based replacement for 1996 for at least two years, maybe 93 and 4. I like the final blocky Trooper, but Oldsmobile wouldn’t have done better as it got the dreaded “unacceptable” rating from CR for being rollover prone.
The little car phone antenna in the rearmost driver’s side window…one can only imagine how much the original owner paid to have it installed in 2002, only for it to be completely outdated around 2008 when analog networks were shut down (and smartphones were taking off).
Yep. Not to mention the analog OnStar receivers became outdated and unusable as well. At that time, OnStar wasn’t a wholly-owned GM subsidiary, so it was used by other automakers, including Acura and Volkswagen (on the Phaeton).
Indeed. GM took the Bravada’s unique body shell and began using it on the Saab 9-7X and Buick Rainier. It isn’t the only time they cannibalized from a dead brand.
The Saturn Outlook had a body shell that was mostly identical to that of the GMC Acadia. The major difference was that the Outlook had a wraparound rear window and squared-off taillight apertures. Of course the Outlook was discontinued once Saturn went belly-up. When the Acadia (and the other Lambdas) were facelifted for 2013, GM quietly switched it to the Outlook’s body shell, where the squarer taillight openings, in particular, were a closer match to GM’s then-contemporary chiseled, masculine look.
And of course, the second-generation Saturn Vue and the Pontiac G8 (which were themselves rebadges of overseas vehicles) were discontinued, and then became the Chevrolet Captiva Sport and Chevrolet SS, respectively.
Meanwhile, I feel like the best comparison to the Saab 9-7X was probably the contemporary Lexus GX 470. Both were truck-based and probably priced similarly, but the Lexus was far better built and much more luxurious, and sales reflected that. The 9-7X’s crosstown rival, the Lincoln Aviator, was similarly pathetic, in that it failed to disguise its origins as a chromed-out Explorer. It’s a shame that both automakers flubbed their luxury-midsize SUVs so badly, as this was during the heyday of the so-called “Hummer Loophole”, formally known as Section 179, where you could write off the entirety of a vehicle with a GVWR of at least 6,000 lbs, provided you used it for “business.” Ford and GM both sold a lot of vehicles under that program, but they missed out on plenty of luxury sales from more-discerning buyers by making crappy, underwhelming luxury models.
I always loved the refreshed Acadia with its more butch front end and its Outlook-cribbed rear.
I thought the Aviator was a nice step-up from the Explorer/Mountaineer, though. Baby-Nav styling, a completely unique and MUCH nicer interior, more luxury features (e.g. cooled seats), different suspension tuning, and a unique powertrain. It even got some pretty positive reviews from the automotive press.
Contrast that with the 9-7X which had different suspension tuning and some minor cosmetic tweaks and… well, that’s pretty much it.
I believe the Aviator’s lack of success could be attributed to two factors: one, the Explorer/Mountaineer were already handsome trucks and two, people in this market probably just preferred to pony up the extra cash for the Nav which barely guzzled any more fuel.