(first posted 12/9/2016) 1975 was the last year for these GM B-Body convertibles. Did the owner buy it knowing that? There was an almost 50% uptick in sales of them that year, so undoubtedly many did, knowing that the days of the big American ragtop was apparently over.
Although convertibles did make a bit of a comeback, it was never quite the same. If for no other reason than the fact that there would never be cars this size. Or engines this size. That alone makes these the end of an end.
This is how vinyl tops are supposed to look: with a real purpose in life, not a pretense.
Posted at the Cohort by nifticus
I remember my parents strongly considering buying a 1975 Buick convertible and talking about the last year of the full sized convertible when I was 6 or so years old. We ended up in a 1975 Jeep Wagoneer and a 1975 Mercedes 300D, so I guess the pull was just not quite strong enough.
I did my damnedest to talk my mother into the Viking Blue (with white top and trim) Cutlass Supreme convertible sitting in the showroom of Collins Oldsmobile in Fort Wayne when she was shopping for a new Olds in 1972. Much like this one. No sale. I should have pushed the “collectors item” angle harder, because it was the last year for that one too. 🙂
+1 on that one, JP… This is actually one of the few brown cars I would pick:
And to think then the intermediate Cutlass and others GM A-body was originally planned to be restyled for the 1972 model year but got delayed for the 1973 model year which allowed to the A-body convertible models to get one more year.
But so not interesting to me primarily because it was basically the same car the other GM divisions were making. Its saving grace is the droptop.
The librarian in my high school bought one of these. He was a younger guy and considered himself a stylish fellow, so the car kind of fit. Right down to the color – baby blue with a white top and interior. And the Buick road wheels. I wasn’t much of a GM guy, but had to admit that it was a good looking big Buick. And we have to give GM credit, because they kept the open-air party going longer than anyone else.
I found it sad watching the big convertibles die off one by one as the 70s progressed. Fortunately, there was still a decent crop of older ones around then so that a kid in high school could buy one as a cheap first car.
I was happy to see them come back, but as you note, all of them are much smaller cars. I really wish that Chrysler had built a convertible version of the Challenger. I think they would have sold a bunch of them to folks who like to cruise in the open but who need a back seat occasionally.
“ I really wish that Chrysler had built a convertible version of the Challenger. I think they would have sold a bunch of them to folks who like to cruise in the open but who need a back seat occasionally.”
I think the addition of the required top stack equipment would kill any size advantage a Challenegr coupe’s back seat has over the final Sebring droptop; the leg room in that Sebring is already larger than a Challenger coupe, for one.
They would look good, though.
What a gorgeous profile that Buick has. I bet the owner added the Rallye wheels, sport mirrors and red canvas. They really make the car.
The wheels and mirrors were options, so I don’t doubt they are original. I’m not sure about the top if red was originally available. Not seen very often, that’s for sure.
While I think that some vinyl tops try to imitate the convertible look, the first vinyl tops were more about adding a different look to the top in a contrasting color. Two tone paint was going out of style or was not offered as an option by the early to mid sixties.
I remember that the 1976 Eldorado convertible was to be the last. At the time I know that there were people buying them with the idea they could resell in a year or two at a profit. I also remember looking at advertisements for these cars at quite high prices a year or two later. I think it was a hard sell.
I thought the 60’s vinyl roofs reached back to coach-built closed cars with padded leather or fabricoid roof toppings.
Vinyl roofs in the sixties were glued to the roof with little padding. This LINK ad for 64 Buick Wildcat shows a typical vinyl roof. What Ford and GM found was that people would pay extra for the vinyl roof which was cheap to put on.
That’s really more the 70s, with a rare few cars ahead of that curve in the 60s – 67 Tbird with the landau bars immediately springs to mind – but the vast majority of vinyl roofs in the 60s were “tight”, and in not at all faux convertible fashion wrapped down the A pillars.
I agree it’s way more about contrast than it is faux convertible carriage, I draw a massive distinction between tight vinyl roofs, and puffy padded ones with creases landau bars and opera lights. I despise the latter. The former can really make a car pop, the 67-70 Charger IMO looked even better with a vinyl top since it had the effect of enhancing the coke bottle waves of the beltline.
I never thought about the correlation between the decline of two tone paint with it, but I think that’s spot on, the effect is the same and using vinyl probably gave a sense of refinement compared to just simply painting on the contrast. I’d go further to say what may have ultimately supplanted the “tight” vinyl top wasn’t the broughamy padded abominations, but racing stripes. Until the late 60s almost all the Ponycars and muscle cars had vinyl roof options, but by the end of the decade racing stripes, only previously used as subtle accents or more obnoxious on hardcore race oriented submodels(shelbys, Z/28s), became much more elaborate, often flowing with the ever more swoopy bodies, the GTO Judge being possibly the most noticible example (and of significant note, The Judge was not available with a vinyl top like regular non-striped but still sporty GTOs were), and as stripes got bolder and bolder through the paint on performance 70s tight vinyl tops on sporty models were basically gone. Plus there were quite a few examples of vinyl roof treatments that by design weren’t even close to emulating a convertible top, and most definitely used as accent – forward half tops like the 71 Mustang and 71 Dodge Charger, the Halo top used on the 69 Camaro, and probably the most egregious example the Marlin, which was basically done in the classic 50s two tone fashion.
My 71 Riviera had a tight vinyl roof. I did not think it did much for the looks. On the other hand, my 76 Riviera had a short padded vinyl roof on the C pillar with a stainless steel band that fastened it down from B-pillar to B-pillar, which I thought looked OK.
One problem with vinyl roofs is that after long exposure to the sun they will deteriorate. The carriage style, which started in the 80’s I think, is not a good look. Some cars look far better than others with vinyl roofs.
And Oldsmobile…
I know Paul doesn’t like these, but this was the last full sized Ford convertible, The ’72 LTD:
The wheels aren’t period correct, so this one is probably a better example. I’ve always had a soft spot for these, and the only made just over 4200 of them.
1972 was Ford’s last hurrah as far as big convertibles go.
Actually, there is only one choice for a big 70s convertible.
That’s a nice looking fuselage right there!
Oh, yes. As long as the top’s down. Never a big fan of the 60s through 70 Mopar top design – too flat and an odd angle on the rear panel. OTOH, these B-Body convertibles have really elegant tops.
I’d also nominate the ’69-’70 DeVille. Great way to go out in that body style.
The “72 Chevy full size” softops always looked good to me.
It’s as big as a whale…
Go ahead, pour the salt! A couple of weeks ago I had to talk myself out of a 1975 Delta 88 Convertible on craigslist. One owner, very nice driving condition, no rust, good paint, rebuilt engine, and an asking price of $2800!!! Kicking myself now.
Gaudy though it may be, I’m a sucker for those final Eldorado ragtops. White with red leather would be ideal (though I once saw a photo of one in pale yellow with green interior that was surprisingly attractive).
I also wouldn’t mind one of Chrysler’s last big droptops, the fuselage 300.
Nice colors on this though–the red top is quite striking.
I bet quite a few of those collectors of the “final” Eldorado convertibles were more than a little upset at GM when this came out
There was a lawsuit filed by a few 1976 Eldorado convertible owners.
I don’t have the details, but it was either when the 1985 Eldo convertible was available, or even earlier when the 1982 Buick Riviera convertible was available. Either way, it was a GM product.
The lawsuit yielded no results for the owners. Probably what the technicalities of litigation boiled down to was that GM/Cadillac never issued a formal, written document saying that there absolutely would be no more Cadillac convertibles ever. And when the buyers bought them, it was probably just a “this is the final one” verbal conversation. Without something in writing, and signed by a GM official, what grounds do you have?
In my late high school years (1983), it was easy to find these in good shape for a bit under $4,000. Just a bit rich for my blood, and parking one outside seemed a shame.
Still, it was an opportunity I wish I had not missed. There is a nice one e-bay today for $22,000. Fifteen years ago that was about $10,000. Definitely an appreciating asset.
They’ll probably be $50,000 by the time I think about getting one in retirement.
Here’s the Oldsmobile Delta 88 version, also a final breed in 1975.
And the only non-Cadillac one to have rectangular headlamps in 1975, the Pontiac Grandville Brougham convertible.
Man that’s a great looking car. Always liked it. Remember those quad lamps coming in and thinking wow that’s cool. I was all of 12.
I think that the Pontiac Grandville was the best looking of those final B body convertibles. Chevy, Olds and Buick had an awkward transition where the beltline abruptly kicked up to what would have been a C pillar. The Pontiac’s beltline had a smooth flow into the rear quarter panel in a treatment that none of the others used.
We always had a convertible in our family so when they announced the last of them my Dad ordered one and it came missing some options like wire wheel covers and split bench seat. When we came to pick it up it was on the showroom turntable and wh n we mentioned the discrepancies he salesperson said he could sell t several times over so it was “take it or leave it”! Too large to reorder so we took it unhappily but that was the arrogance of GM in those days.skip forward and seven years later my Dad had a stroke and couldn’t drive so I took off my mothers. Hands as a wedding present in ’82.. Flash forward with 68k but a rusty body I got origiinal body parts and did a body off repaint. 45 years later I am still married one son and use it as a summer car show winning contestant with 108k miles. My son is is forbidding me to sell “Oscar” ( every car should have a name) and wants to bring up his offspring in a car seat he was brought up in this car. It”s white with a bordello red interior has been a eye catcher for many years. If I had a dollar for every one that says they or someone they knew had one, the conversation ends when they say it was a 2 or 4 door sedan or hardtop. Many more years ahead!
Back in 2009 I scored my 1972 Olds Delta 88 for $1600, and even wrote a CC article about it. Thanks to both personal health issues and aging parents, it’s still sitting covered up in outdoor storage rather than on the road. Hopefully one day soon I’ll get it running again.
What a shame that the new design of folding top frame that was introduced with the 1971 big GM convertibles died along with them. It allowed a nearly full-width rear seat because the rails above the side windows were hinged to fold inward instead of front-to-back. As far as I know, every convertible manufactured since then (including conversions by outside companies) has returned to the old-fashioned design where all side rails fold front-to-back.
I never liked their interiors, though; the seat upholstery and the dashboards were especially unattractive, except perhaps for the Eldorado. (My basis for comparison is the 1966 Bonneville convertible that I drove from 1974 to ’91, so I’m biased in that regard.)
AMC introduced that style of folding mechanism with their ’67 Rebel and Ambassador convertible. The back seat of those could accommodate 3 persons!
The “parade boot” was standard on these final Buicks, IIRC.
Much can be said about the final big B bodies that isn’t flattering, but it’s hard to argue they didn’t make for some fine looking convertibles. I’m neither a fan of the 71-76 Bs, Convertibles, or even Buick for that matter, but this one presses all my right buttons. It’s sad that the only convertibles since are basically compacts, in this size class it may drive like a boat but with the top down it surely is as fun as a boat.
I have never been able to find an angle from which the ’71-’76 B-bodies don’t look drunkenly-drawn, and generally hideous. Random swoops and mishmashed lines, melted-bar-of-soap-shaped windows, morbidly obese…yuck.
The taillamps are probably the least offensive part of the package; enough so that Chrysler lifted them seemingly intact for the M-body (Diplomat/Gran Fury/New Yorker Fifth Avenue/Caravelle).
I have thought that the LeSabre was styled to look ugly so that more Electra’s would sell. But even the C-bodies are too big in this time frame.
I have always wondered if those taillights were the same!
I am afraid I am one of the reasons convertibles went away and never truly came back.
as a child in the 60’s and 70’s, my aunt and uncle always had convertibles and when I became a teenage driver in 1979 one of my main chores in life was to get the keys to my dad’s toy…a 67 xl500 convertible from him every chance I could.
I looked at convertibles in later years but always seemed to pass. now in my 50’s, I realize I would only take a convertible with a/c and probably be lucky if I put the top down 10 days a year.
I think we have maybe become too pampered a society. as said above, I wouldn’t be willing to give up my a/c in summer and my son looks a me like I suffered great child abuse when he complains about the winter cold as he sits in the heated seat of my car and I tell him about fighting over blanket space with my cousins and seeing frost on the INSIDE of the roof of my uncle’s 64 parklane convertible going to hockey games as a kid on a chilly winter day.
Did anyone mention that this is a “Scissor Top”.
Yes, gottacook mentioned it, about six posts above yours.
Mind if I rattle on about the top for a minute?
The inward-folding top and “greenhouse” components were identical and shared across the board from Impala through Eldorado.
“gottacook” I suppose this type of top design faded away due in part to cost. Also at least partly because in practice the inward-folding, or “scissor” top was troublesome. Among other issues, headers would deform easily and bow connecting links would flip during operation and create all sorts of havoc. Motors probably weren’t as robust as they should have been. When aged, a top with a fast smooth synchronous fold-up was a rarity.
The tops were actuated by a unique electro-mechanical drive system, as opposed to then-common electro-hydraulic system. The top’s power system consisted of an electric motor with integral reduction gear which was located center behind the rear seat’s back. The motor was connected via two “speedometer cable” drive cables that transferred rotary motion to two (left and right) gear actuators. The gear actuators were located just aft of each rear quarter glass. The gear actuators were linked to the top’s folding frame linkage.
Originally the back window would be “real” glass; as opposed to quick-yellowing plastic of many previous folding tops. Unfortunately the glass was subject to breaking from fold-up malfunction, as well as by items inadvertently left in its “parking space” at the bottom of the top well. The original glass was often replaced with a plastic window. The pictured car shows tell-tale wrinkles of a replacement plastic rear window.
The fabric of this example sure has a beautiful snug fit!
Thanks for all that detail on why the scissors design had problems. Regarding my old Bonneville, I did have occasion to replace the electro-hydraulic motor behind the rear seatback when the original failed, and I also disassembled the entire top frame, had it sandblasted and reassembled it (thanks to the GM shop manuals in the Minneapolis central library, where I was living at the time), so I’m familiar with the more common setup. I didn’t know that the imperative to create a wider rear seat led not only to the inward-folding frame but also to the decision to use an entirely cable-driven system with no hydraulics.
Breakage of the original glass rear window isn’t always the reason for switching to plastic. When I replaced the top on my ’66 in the mid-’80s, I couldn’t afford the replacement top with glass – it cost a great deal more than the top with plastic window.
Nice “dropping line” like the new Mercedes-Benz.
Inspired by the post a couple of days ago on classic cars in music videos, I will risk making some people hurl by giving probably the most memorable moment involving a 1970s Buick convertible for those between the ages of 40 and 50: the video for the New Kids on the Block’s “Right Stuff”.
So anyone have the scoop on why GM discontinued these after ’75 rather than leave them in production for the big B-body’s final year in ’76? Did they want the Eldorado to bask in its glory alone?
I don’t know for a fact, but you may have guessed correctly.
They built 14,000 1976 Eldorado convertibles. Possibly, if more tops could have been made, more could have been sold. So I think that production of the full size convertibles was discontinued during the 1975 model year to give Cadillac as many convertible tops as possible, as they expected a huge demand for the “last” convertibles. The Eldorado’s convertible top was the same as Chevy, Pontiacs, Olds and Buicks. Sales of convertibles in the early 70’s were not great.
Production of convertibles for all of GM’s full size lines ran over 20,000 during the 1971 through 1975 models year, with 1975 production over 20,000, so I don’t see that they ran out of scissor tops, but perhaps there was some other limiting factor. My guess is that dealers probably ordered more than they thought they could sell to start with. Once demand picked up, it was probably too late to order more toward the end of production.
Interesting thought. One other possible reason could be that they knew there would be no convertible in the downsized B-Bodies, and dropping them for the last year of the old bodies meant one less change buyers would need to wrestle with in 1977.
Also, while the Eldo might have snagged some LeSabre and Delta 88 customers, and visa versa, it was a pretty steep climb from a Caprice or a GrandVille.
I had a big ’64 Cadillac convertible in the mid 70s and it was as fun as cruising on a boat. When I first got my ’96 Mustang back in the late 2000s I would drive it with the top down all the time. Even my Wife seemed to enjoy it. We once took a nice trip up to Tahoe on Hwy 50 and with the top down, you can really enjoy the unobstructed view of the scenery. I’ve still got the Mustang, but I find that I don’t put the top down as much during daily use. If I use the car for a special trip like going up to SF, it’s great to drive across the bridges on a nice day with the top down.
I have been led to believe (whether true or not) that there was a limited number of convertible parts available and GM wanted to use them up given the reduced demand for convertibles over the years and wanted a bang up farewell for the bicentennial Cadillac. Who knows?
I owned one of these 75 LeSabre convertibles in the 90’s. I paid $3800 for a pretty nice example in 1992. Red with white seats and top and the optional 455. I loved the car, but did not come away as a big fan of the scissor top.
I think of it as similar to the clamshell tailgate on this generation of wagons: neat concept but not well engineered. It’s a really space efficient top mechanism. The back seat lost nothing to its better sheltered bretheren. Also, IMO, top up it is one of the nicest looking convertible tops ever. My problem with it was, as mentioned above, the motor was weak and the scissors didn’t align well when lowering the top. The way the fabric folded when lowered, the large area in the “C” pillar would get folded very tightly and creased. Over time, this would wear on that section and make the vinyl tear.
I’d guess that at least part of GM’s motivation for developing the inward-folding top
(with its mechanism located behind a standard-width seat, rather than having mechanism packed inside of wide trim panels beside a convertible-only narrow rear seat)
was to allow convertibles to be manufactured using rear seats and trim shared somewhat in common with closed cars.
Especially in the fading convertible market of the ’70s it would have made sense to “trim out” unique components wherever possible.
Are there any cinema & TV buffs out there who noticed that David Lynch has a certain fondness for these final B-body converts?
Looked rather well in “2016”. Hope it’s still doing well. So many of those “final edition convert’s” had white tops , as I recall.
Remember a darker green/black top “Olds”, i used to see my last year or so of college commuting. ((1983))
Just sitting inside the car, watching the convertible top and it’s wild mechanism go up and down, is worth the price of admission.