Winter has returned to Chicago with full fury, with this past Thursday, January 31st, 2019 bringing some of the coldest temperatures ever recorded in this city on this date, at -21°F . The first Saturday of the new year was deceptively warm, with afternoon temperatures approaching sixty degrees Fahrenheit in some parts of the city. Strangely enough, this past Superbowl Sunday weekend brought temperatures all the way back to the Forties, and today may reach Fifty.
Mental and emotional illnesses are to be taken very seriously (psychology major, here), but with these wild swings in temperature, it has crossed my mind more than once that Mother Nature could use some prescription antidepressants and/or some counseling. There should be no shame in seeking help, and I’ve seen a life coach for some years now. These ridiculously low temperatures all seem worth it, though, when summer in the Windy City, with its plethora of fun activities, finally arrives. C’mon, summer.
What’s interesting to observe when it’s this brutally cold outside is just how deserted places become that are normally bustling with activity. Sidewalks seem mostly empty, even during morning and evening rush hour. One can almost always find a seat on the CTA “L” trains, which is not always the case. There’s also a noticeable absence of street traffic. Nobody wants to drive in weather like this, especially after all the precipitation on the ground has frozen solid and it’s too cold even for the sky to shed flakes.
Both driving and neighborhood street parking can be a dicey proposition during this time of year. I’ve detailed the oft-dire “duck-duck-goose” parallel parking situation in my neighborhood in a previous post, and when I think about what the snow, ice, and cold would add to such a scenario, it makes me want to just shut down, both physically and emotionally. I still don’t own (or need) a car, but on many winter mornings while walking somewhere in my neighborhood, I can hear the cringe-inducing sounds of people scraping ice off the windows of their vehicles, and of tires spinning on caked ice and snow in sometimes futile attempts to extract cars and trucks from their tight, curbside parking spaces. In fact, just this past Tuesday, I had helped four other neighborhood strangers push a previous-generation, rear-wheel-drive Dodge Charger out from its curbside parking space.
Back in the 1970s, when many cars were lower, longer and wider than many popular vehicles of today, I don’t know how people in Chicago did it. That’s when I think about how, among the solidly upper-middle-class set, a car like an early second-generation Olds Toronado like our featured car would be a decent choice among luxo-cruisers. “But, Joe, how many of these Toronados do you think were actually parked on the street, as opposed to in garages and carports?”
If myriad, period pictures from the mid-’70s as featured in photographer Bob Rehak’s excellent photo-book, “Uptown: Portrait Of A Chicago Neighborhood In The Mid-1970s” (a book I absolutely treasure) are any indication, the answer is quite a few. I can imagine that in the mid-’70s, when front-wheel-drive was still considered something of a novelty, the winter traction of these FWD Toronados made believers out of their owners and drivers.
Several weeks ago, Eric703 had posted an excellent article about the car insurance industry, bumpers, and federal regulations. Aesthetics be darned, the above shot illustrates how, especially in cold, slippery weather conditions, larger bumpers were useful. I doubt the front of this Toronado had sustained no more than a tiny bump up front before looking like it now has a severe underbite. Granted, it could look worse, but it most certainly used to look so much better before making contact with something.
I remain a fan of the Toronado in nearly all of its model years (including the final models). Though my hands-down favorites are the first-year 1966 and ’67 models, I also like the more overtly brougham-look ’71 redesign. It looks formal, dressy, and buttoned-down in a way that doesn’t look stuffy to me. The second pair of brake-lights that were mounted just underneath the rear backlight (window) were a fascinating, little detail – introduced on these cars over a decade before the federal government mandated this feature.
Nineteen Seventy-Two saw the third-highest level of annual Toronado sales, at 48,900, trailing the 55,900 sold the following year in ’73, and close to 50,000 even for the newly rightsized ’79 models. The second-generation cars started out with a very respectable level of popularity. Among the premium personal luxury coupes sold in ’72, the controversially-styled Buick Riviera (though gorgeous to my eyes) sold 33,700 copies, Cadillac moved 41,000 more-expensive Eldorados, Ford sold 57,800 Thunderbirds, and 48,600 Lincoln Continental Mark IVs found buyers. The Toronado wasn’t even the least-expensive option, with a base price ($5,341) topping that of both the Riviera ($5,149) and the Thunderbird ($5,293), even if only marginally so, with a price spread of less than 4% among these three cars.
As someone who likes to express his individuality, I like that these Toronados were both “different” (being front-wheel-drive, a trait shared only with the Eldorado among its peers) and popular. Even if the full benefits of FWD were limited by the overall size and weight of these cars, I like to think they provided an increased level of manageability for those who opted to travel in just a bit more style than the average driver. I can only imagine what kind of heat blasted (probably instantaneously) out of the dashboard vents of these 455-cubic-inch V8-powered cars, with at least 375 horsepower on tap (the optional engine had 400 hp). In its day, and for all of these reasons and more, the ’72 Toronado, including this fine specimen, was most certainly a good brougham for winter in the Midwest.
Near South Side, Chicago, Illinois.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010.
Click the following links for related reading from Jason Shafer, GN, and my own, later shot of this car posted to the Cohort four years ago.
Kickarse photos, Joseph.
Ditto. It reminds me of some of the brutalist architecture that was popular at the time.
Thank you, gentlemen. I got these with my old Canon point-and-shoot. That PowerShot was a great, little camera.
They really are quite something, Mr D.
Didn’t this car have a longitudinally mounted engine and chain drive ? That would give it something in common with Chrysler’s LH cars.
No, Chrysler LH cars use the longitudinal-mounted engine with gearbox behind the differential gear housing like Audi and some early Renaults.
Yes it did.
Great find! I’ve always been curious as to how these big Toronados handle relative to their RWD counterparts. From my experience, front-wheel drive cars, especially ones with long wheelbases have always handled inferior to rear-wheel drive on dry roads, exhibiting the expected torque steer. I can only imagine with the sheer heft of these cars what it’s like from behind the wheel.
To answer your question about handling, you might want to read the article in November 1965 issue of Road & Track.
Torque steering is largely addressed by using the equal lenght torque shafts between axle and differential gear housing as well as careful configuration of steering geometry. Oldsmobile spent a several years researching different techniques of eliminating the torque steer before introducing Toronado in 1966. In fact, the first-generation Toronado, along with Cadillac Eldorado, was the most powerful front-drive cars for many years until the advent of front-drive pocket rockets from Japan and Europe.
More extensive technical focus can be found in Ate Up With Car column:
Oldsmobile used (telescoping CV joints), along with careful attention to steering geometry (including a slight negative scrub radius), to almost completely eliminate torque steer. (The telescoping halfshafts were replaced for 1967 by three-ball-bearing CV joints, which worked almost as well and cost less.) The right halfshaft also incorporated a rubber torsional damper that could twist up to 7.5 degrees to absorb driveline shocks and vibration.
https://ateupwithmotor.com/model-histories/oldsmobile-toronado-1966-1970/view-all/
Great write up!!! I have always felt that the Olds division cars always had a look that transcended throughout it’s lifespan. The Toronado especially embodies that character. Although i like the Cord inspired 1st gen best. Like Joseph i like all of them. especially the ponderous 1974-1978 giants.
I never did much care for these styling-wise, but I can still hear the distinct sound of an Olds 455 out the back.
There’s hardly any grille either, I wonder if they were prone to overheating.
That’s a great point… the ’73s had even less grille up front. I’d like to hear an owner, past or present, chime in on the overheating thing.
well, don’t let it idle on you lawn while airing up a tire or it will scorch your grass. No over heating issues but she does run hot. Don’t park in dry grass on a hot summer day or you could start a brush fire or forest fire….
Not a 1972 model, but there’s some good screenshots of a 1973 Toronado on IMCDB from a mid-1970s French-Canadian movie named “La Gammick”. http://www.imcdb.org/vehicle_1100616-Oldsmobile-Toronado-1973.html
Front drive was what drove my father to get a Toronado, though the later down-sized model (the first year of that generation I believe). I still remember him switching out the rear tires on our Ninety-Eight to what now would be described as work-truck tires, as well as the weights he placed in the trunk (rectangular BB-filled boxes). I think I still have one somewhere! He finally had it and got a Toro. It was an OK car, I don’t recall any issues. He definitely appreciated the performance of the Toro, especially with the V8 pushing down the front wheels in metro Detroit winters.
These seemed normal to me in 1971-72 but now I look at the front end and see a symphony of the bazarre.
I rode in one once, a carpool mom for some activity or other used the one owned by her visiting father one day. Bright red with a white vinyl top. I sat in the middle of the front and got to soak up the luxury of that flat floor.
These seemed normal to me in 1971-72 but now I look at the front end and see a symphony of the bazarre.
Well, we grew up in the same era, and what we now see as bizarre was completely normal then. Taste is subjective, and the taste of the 1970s was one of being completely different for different’s sake. Different was modern, different was a break from the past. Garish prints, wild color combinations, and new and novel fabrics ruled (remember doubleknit polyester bell bottom dress pants?). It was the norm if not normal back then.
I once drove a near new 67 Toronado and can attest that there was minimal torque steer, at least as you think about it in reference to a modern FWD hot hatch. You did feel a bit of front end pull that you didn’t feel with a contemporary RWD car.
Looking at the pictures from the brochures, I would have to say that the best angle for viewing these cars is offset front, about 6-10 feet off the floor…at least in my opinion. From pretty much any other angle the look a bit odd. For example, the hood appears to be only slightly longer than the trunk. For that matter, the passenger compartment looks small, but to make it bigger would have diluted the personal part of this luxury coupe. And I have always been torn in my feelings about the grille treatment. They almost look like afterthoughts, yet were probably styled to fit in with the rear end treatment.
Sorry, but after the 66-67 Toronado, Olds never really hit it out of the park again with this car. Buick and Cadillac didn’t do much better but I would rather own one or the other instead of this.
The real question here is whether you would take a clean 1972 for $17K
https://www.hemmings.com/classifieds/dealer/oldsmobile/toronado/2218048.html
Or a time-capsule 1988 for *chuckle* $21K:
https://www.hemmings.com/classifieds/dealer/oldsmobile/toronado/2215513.html
Would I? F#$k no, you would need to pay me that $17,000 to take it off your hands.
And $21,000? I can’t imagine anyone wanting one of these that would even pay half that price.
Now that I think about it, do you suppose that the stylists for this car were even a bit influenced by the Tucker?
And finally, what’s up with the headlights on these cars? I have always thought that they look like they were originally designed to have hidden headlights but the design was changed at the very last possible minute.
I had a ’67 Toronado that was my daily driver in N.E. Ohio from ’77-’82. It was a beast in the snow. Blasting through snowdrifts like nothing, until I hit one that was a little too tall. I had to dig out the snow from under the car, back up and try again. I was a little more cautious after that.
Never had an issue with torque steer. Handling was on par with the RWD Riviera.
Didn’t really care for the styling of the ’72 era. From swoopy to box. It just wasn’t the same car.
To me ,the ’66 Toro was the last car GM got right from the beginning for a long time. The ensuing years brought cars / drivetrains that were problematic. Vega , Citations, diesels, THM200 etc.
“… coldest temperatures ever recorded in this city on this date, at -21°F ”
Actually, the record for coldest temp in Chicago wasn’t broken last week. [From Chicago Tribune’s e-paper] The record still stands at -27 F, way back in January, 1985. But, was still one of the top 5 coldest days!
Thanks for the correction, and I fixed it. (Darn it! I wanted to be part of a record-setting day. 🙂 )
Well, it was record setting for me, as I didn’t live in Chicagoland during 1985. So the dreadful Polar Vortex certainly broke my personal record as a displaced Louisianian for worst possible, most abominable cold imaginable. Needless to say I could buy the theory that Hell is cold rather than hot….
Joe, -21 may not have been an all time Chicago record, but it was still a record for that date. So, you’re still correct.
Way back in my college days the parents of one of my friends came to visit and had a new ’71 Toronado. Thought the high level stop lamps cool. IIRC, they also flashed with the turn signals. Looking back, FWD on a platform such as this was really a waste. While FWD makes sense on a small car for space utilization and efficiency purposes, its merits are lost on such a large, luxo-cruiser. It’s big 455 would be better off driving the rear wheels.
So, I wasn’t crazy! 🙂 It can be tricky with posting statistics, and I thought for sure that I had adequately researched that temperature-related fact before finishing my final draft. (I already amended my text, so I’ll just leave it alone.)
Those two days were, for sure, the coldest I had ever experienced. I worked from home and didn’t leave my house for, literally, over 48 hours. I had so many layers on (inside my own house), and I was still a little cold. I can’t imagine what some others less fortunate must have been dealing with.
…And those high-mounted lights remain some of my favorites of features of any car of that era.
Didn’t mean to be too picky, but I sure remember that late Jan. 1985 weekend. I was stuck in De Kalb at NIU, in apt off campus. Was Super Bowl weekend, though.
Maybe sometime will run into each other in Chicago, when its nicer out.
And, I’ll remember last week’s cold, too. Record for the date, at least.
Such a frustrating car. All that effort to make a smooth-driving big, powerful, V8 front-driver, only to largely squander its benefits on a huge PLC that doesn’t take advantage of FWD’s superior space utilization. Olds should have used this platform for a Ninety Eight or Vista Cruiser, where the flat floor could have made a really useful 6 or 8 passenger full size car that would have been perfect in the pre-crossover, pre-minivan era. When they finally did shrink the length and make it more efficient in 1979, they also made it too narrow to comfortably seat three across anymore, despite the flat floor.
Does yours have the (rear-only) antilock brakes? The ’72 is nice, but I’d prefer the ’74-’76 for the (optional) dual front airbags that were available those years. The airbags, along with ABS, high-mount rear lamps, and FWD made this a way ahead of its time car.
I’ve never been in a ’71-’78 Toronado or Eldorado, and am curious about how you find the interior space. Contemporaneous reports complained about tight rear seat room for such a huge car, yet I’ve peered through the windows and it sure looks roomy back there. I’m wondering if it was only small compared to the interiors of ’70s land yacht sedans and would seem roomy compared to typical new cars which usually don’t have room to stretch out in back.
Sorry, what’s a PLC?
Personal luxury coupe.
When this car was built, people would be asking “what’s an SUV?”
La673, I’m actually hoping that the owner sees this post and chimes in with the answers to your questions! It has happened before.
My parents borrowed by uncle’s ’69 Toro one time, and we all fit in it pretty good. 2 adults, 4 kids.
Would have been nicer if it had a 98’s wheelbase, and 4 doors, 😉
Love the photos and the car!
I’ve come to appreciate these more over the past few years, particularly the 1971-72 models without the big bumpers and “brougham” styling touches (opera windows, padded vinyl roofs and wide body side moldings) that infested the later models of this generation.
At the time the front-end styling did seem unusual and controversial, but that was to be expected on an expensive, personal luxury coupe. Dramatic and distinctive front-end treatments were more expected in this segment. Putting something like this on a Ninety-Eight or even a Cutlass would have met with more customer resistance.
I have to chuckle at the ads boasting of the supposedly stiff inspection regime for all Toronados. A few years ago, Collectible Automobile ran an article about these Toronados. It featured an all-original 1973 model with a front clip that was painted a different shade from the rest of the body. While the basic color was the same, the difference in the shade was noticeable. The photo caption noted that this problem affected a batch of Toronados that year.
Apparently, those inspectors didn’t have that much authority. At least, they were not empowered to send cars back for a repaint. In view of those advertisements, it’s also interesting to read the owner’s complaints about assembly glitches in their spiffy new 1972 Toronados in the “Owners Report” series featured regularly in Popular Mechanics.
Amazing photos, Joe. I’d buy these as prints.
Thank you so much, Will! I remember the day I took these pictures. I had taken the day off from work to go explore the historic Motor Row district in Chicago’s near South side. This area has so many old, warehouse-y brick buildings, many of which used to house car dealerships.
I had gone there to photograph the buildings, but then this Toronado was there – to complete the experience.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_Row_District
I owned a 1975 Brougham model and my brother in law had a 1976 Brougham model in the 80’s. Yes, they were unstoppable in all but the deepest Northern Indiana snow. The front seats were incredibly comfy, but the rear seats had less legroom than a Cutlass. The Olds 455 and Turbo Hydramatic were like velvet. Front wheel burnouts in these always left onlookers agape. Would have kept mine longer if I had the money to replace a worn out CV joint…
Thanks for reading and chiming in, everyone. I like that I get to “immortalize” interesting vehicles I’ve photographed over the years by featuring them here at CC. These pictures are almost nine years old. I wonder what this Toronado looks like today.
I also always wonder about the status of old cars in good shape (but not perfect) that aren’t really that collectible. Will owners keep up with maintenance? Will they bother to locate specific, hard-to-find parts? Will subsequent owners appreciate what they have?
One question about this Toronado: what color was it? I am always curious in B/W shots to see if my mental image of the car in color is correct.
GN, this Toronado was resplendent in silver metallic – a great, dignified color for it, IMO.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/cohort-outtake-1972-toronado-like-the-one-i-missed-last-night/
Thanks, and I agree the color looks great on this Toronado. I’m guessing that Silver was a relatively rare color for 1972 Oldsmobiles in the “Earth Tone” era. What’s interesting to me is how many light shades (light blue, light gold, light green, etc.) look indistinguishable from actual silver in B/W shots. Every so often, the old Road Test Magazine articles will state the color of the test car, which I always enjoy (and to see if my “guess” on the color was right). This Cadillac, for example, was actually Shalimar Gold.
I remember that color, Oldsmobile called it Silver Pewter. It was not the bright, clear silver that became popular in the mid 70s and beyond, but a very dirty silver that may have used a touch of brown or green in the formula. It was a 1972-only color that was shared by all 5 GM Divisions. And yes, it was not tremendously popular.
A friend’s father had a 72 Cadillac in that paint color. It was paired with an dark-ish olive green vinyl roof and matching olive leather inside. It did not look as bad as it sounds.
Front end looks like a big Pontiac with no grill.
Perhaps, but it really looks like the Eldorado with the nose filled in, which is really all it is.
I wonder if the Oldsmobile phenomenon of being purchased to avoid being as ostentatious as buying a Cadillac applied to this car. To my eyes, it is more outrageous than the Cadillac equivalent.
Toronado was meant to be a mid size car, but costs pushed up the size.
Also, 1966 models only had drum brakes, no front discs until ’67.