I had mixed feelings when I came upon this 1975 LeMans at the Mecum Spring Classic. I’m always pleased to find any older car in good original condition there – and it doesn’t get much more original than this LeMans, which has less than 3,000 miles on the clock. But it was a Colonnade.
Even though I was just five years old when GM introduced the Colonnades in the fall of 1972, I knew they were ungainly, bloated turkeys. It was the first time I felt disappointment with General Motors, because I knew they could do better. The previous ten years of GM intermediates, which were still common sights on the road, all proved it.
Let’s follow the Pontiac intermediate line back, shall we? The previous generation LeMans, Endura-nosed and aggressively bumpered, had a muscular look. (Read this car’s story here.)
This generation debuted in 1968 with its signature divided loop bumper and smoother sides. (Read this car’s story here.)
I’m sure we all have our favorite GM intermediate, and this is mine. Its upright greenhouse mates well to its Coke-bottle flanks for a confident look overall. (Read this car’s story here.)
In 1965, the LeMans looked like a Grand Prix in 7/8 scale: sharp, clean lines with a touch of elegance. (Read this car’s story here.)
Even in 1963, when the LeMans was just a top-trimmed Tempest (and was considered a compact), it wore a tight, cohesive look. (Read this car’s story here.)
And that’s why the Colonnades seemed like such a letdown. Compared to the cars that had preceded them, it was hard to find a pleasing line and all too easy to find design elements that just didn’t harmonize with the rest of the car – like this fender, which seems oddly disconnected from the rest of the body.
There wasn’t much about this car that was clearly, absolutely Pontiac, except for the badging. If GM had placed Chevrolet badges on this, and Pontiac badges on what we know as the Chevelle, would anybody have wondered why the Chevy looked like a Pontiac and vice versa? Well, we might have, because we’re car nerds. But the average buyer probably wouldn’t have noticed or cared, because these cars just weren’t very different one from another. It’s not like this was the first time GM used the same basic body across several of its divisions, but at perhaps no time before had a set of related cars lacked brand identity as much as the Colonnades.
You would not believe the uneven seams and wide body-panel gaps on this thing. I remember seeing this sort of sloppy fit and finish when I was a kid and assuming it was the way things had to be – until I saw my first Toyota.
GM didn’t whiff this ball entirely. The Colonnade dashboards are generally clean, pleasing designs. But I do wish GM hadn’t skimped out and had instead placed a white dashboard and steering wheel in this white-upholstered car.
Also, this greenhouse felt larger and airier than the previous generation’s. Sitting in the back seat of a 1968-1972 GM midsizer felt like being in a cave. The Colonnade two-door back-seat experience was just enough better, despite tight legroom, that I can almost forgive the fixed rear windows.
And it’s hard to go wrong with wheels like these.
I lingered over this LeMans for quite some time with eyes that have gained 40 years of experience since these cars were new. I’m reluctant to say that the style has grown on me. But I certainly accept these cars now for their place in automotive history, and feel kinder toward them than I did when I was five.
I can’t defend the Colonnade, but this might be the best looking one. The full quarter window makes it look lighter somehow.
I was 10 years old when the Colonnades debuted in the fall of 1972, and my reaction was the exact opposite of yours. I thought they looked very futuristic and sleek, particularly the Pontiac Grand Am and Oldsmobile Cutlass Salon.
In the summer of 1973, my family drove from Pennsylvania to Florida to visit Disney World, and I remember being envious of the people who were driving brand-new Colonnades. I thought that our 1967 Oldsmobile Delmont 88 Holiday sedan looked like a 1957 model in comparison.
What really hurt the Colonnades was the Arab Oil embargo in late 1973. Suddenly, everyone was concerned about fuel economy, and even the Colonnades looked big and bloated.
Another problem was that GM did not do a very good job of anticipating the federal bumper standards when it designed these cars. GM basically hung a chrome railroad tie at each end for 1974, and the bumpers made the cars look REALLY ponderous and heavy.
Granted, the Colonnades were supposed to debut for the 1972 model year, but even then GM had to know that these cars would run for several years after the strict standards took effect.
At any rate, for the mid-1970s, the Colonnades were about as good as it got if you were buying a family sedan or coupe. For many of us in small-town America, the idea of dad driving home in a BMW or Mercedes or even a Toyota was about as remote as that year’s Miss February moving in next door.
For a few years, the Colonnades were sleeker and “hipper” than any full-size car, and made the Ford, Chrysler and AMC intermediates look old hat. The Chrysler and AMC intermediates, in particular, were what your grandparents drove.
I agree, these probably looked pretty good before the bumper standards.They look good with the Endura/rubber noses like the Grand Am and the Chevelle Laguna, too bad something like that didn’t spread across the lines, the Oldsmobile and Buick versions seemed to handle the big bumpers better than the Chevrolet and Pontiac versions.
The flip side of this coin was that the personal luxury versions of these sold like hotcakes, the Monte Carlo, Grand Prix and Cutlass Supreme.
Geeber is my generation and I was 11 and saw these as the future, at least until Oil shock, and they sold like hot cakes. Car magazines dissmissed the 72’s as ‘old and outdated’. The ‘classic 60s’ cars certainly had their share of mismatched body lines, rust, and breakdown issues when new. Now, with over-restored, trailered, A bodies at B-J, car nuts don’t remember or know reality.
Sure, can go on and on about muscle cars, leaded gas, ‘roll down rear windows’, and 400 ‘gross’ HP. But, reality is buyers moved on, rear windows were not really used, and gross HP numbers were unreal.
GM is a business not a museum, charity, or non-profit.
“GM is a business not a museum, charity, or non-profit.”
Must. Not. Comment. Doh!
I agree with you. I thought these were awesome looking when I was 8 in 1973.
These were very popular growing up in Chicagoland. There was always a strong, “what if” look to them which I find happens to me when a design idea gets lost somewhere in the execution of a car during production.
What if those giant ugly bumpers weren’t looking like that? (Pontiac’s Grand Am was the answer to that question, and it had to gall some that their Le Mans looked so bad comparatively.) What if the front fenders matched the rear fenders? What if the tail lights weren’t melted down into the sloping rear fenders?
Between the nasty front bumpers, the mismatched fenders, the tail lamps that looked like they were sliding off the back of the car, the rear windows that didn’t open, and the craptastic build quality – I might be interested in this car. Uh – no – I wouldn’t, really.
This one is red because that is the only color besides black that could make the car look better. Normally, these cars were burnt orange, avocado green, chestnut brown, and the pallet of colors found across Chicagoland homes at that time.
America was ripe for a car company that could build attractive, smart and high quality cars. Datsun, Toyota and Honda took a decade to do it, but America’s brands had a decade to blow it too. Which they did, btw.
Intermediates in this era were bad. Would you really have a Torino instead of this? Or what about a Coronet? If we lined up Detroit’s intermediate cars that year, it wouldn’t surprise me if NO ONE would want any of them. They were that bad.
yes, another car despised in youth that looks OK now…I always chalk it up to the general euroasian crappiness of modern car styling.:)
Careful now, lest you be reminded that, all things being equal, the styling of American cars prior to 1986 is very damaging to you, pedestrians and the environment and nostalgia for it is very backward thinking!
When I was a kid in Plattsburgh, New York, the colonnades were still puttering around up until about 1990. When I thought of “disgusting American car,” that’s what came to mind. But, the equivalent LTDIIs, Torinos and Satellite/Fury/Coronets were gone. I think one neighbor may have had a Cordoba but that was it.
Nearly 30 years later, I have an appreciation for these cars and understand their popularity when new. After all, whether or not there was truth to it, the equivalent Mopars were seen as lacking quality and the Fords were wallowy. By all the accounts I read, they had better performance and the most novel styling. This LeMans, in particular, seems to have taillamps which are well-integrated with the fenders and a simple front end.
They were a lot more expressively styled than the competition, and very easily tailored to suit the buyer, with several different rooflines and front/rear clips and interiors. I can understand the fun in showing up someone’s Chevelle with a Cutlass Supreme and, in turn, out doing someone’s Cutlass with a Monte Carlo. In the context of the time, they’re hard to criticize. What was GM going to do, pre-fuel crisis? Roll out a more honest product which eschewed these cars’ sense of occasion?
I’m rambling here, but it’s nice to have four decades worth of perspective, isn’t it? To have a problem with these cars really means having more of a beef with the spirit of the era.
You raise a good point: these were probably the best available intermediates in the early-mid 70s. And as I think about it, my experience matches yours: these lasted the longest. I guess that’s the bottom line.
Count me in as one who did not like these cars at all when they debuted. I was much too fond of the preceding generation – my best friend had a gorgeous 69 GTO from new that we both loved. However, over time they grew on me. When another, new CA friend traded in his very nice 75 Olds Cutlas for the new generation Pontiac Grand Am in 78, I thought he was making a mistake. And indeed I think you are right: the quality/reliability of the Olds was even better than the quality of the new Grand Am and a heck of a lot better than corresponding products from Ford, for example.
I too thought that the Colonnades were bloated and ugly when they first debuted, but I have grown to appreciate them. I tend to think of them now as sort of the last gasp of the full size, body on frame car, at least for vehicles that were sold in huge numbers. This may not be exactly true but it is how I look at it. For me the worst thing about the Colonnades is that the build quailty tended to be all over the place. Back in the day it was fairly common to see 3-4 year old examples starting to rust through, and, in addition, many suffered driveabililty problems related to emission controls. It didn’t help when GM stuffed gutless V-6 engines into these vehicles and coupled that with a high geared rear axle. Acceleration really suffered and in the real world they weren’t any more economical than the V-8’s they replaced. I don’t know that I would run out and buy a Colonnade this week but I wouldn’t dismiss the idea out of hand either.
The LeMans is OK but the Grand Prix colonnades are genuinely good looking cars and have all the classic Pontiac lines.
Maybe the whole point of these was to make the A-Specials look good. All of standard collonade A bodies look pretty frumpy, but the ’73 Monte Carlo, Grand Prix, Cutlass Supreme and Regal hold up much better today.
My first car was a Colonnade. Take a deep breath and say:
1974 Chevrolet Chevelle Malibu Classic Colonnade Landau Coupe.
Horrible car, really. The frame was too narrow for the bloated body, and all the chassis bits were under-specced for the mass of the car. That car ate front-end bits like a stoner with a bag of Doritos. The 350/2bbl put out a whopping 145hp, and when combined with a 2.73 axle, it could barely get the 4,000 lbs of poo away from a stop light. If driven gently on the highway, I could squeeze a whole 17mpg out of it.
I loved that car because it gave me the freedom one’s first car gives. But looking back without the rose-tinted glasses – what a heap of dung that car was!
How do you really feel?
My favourite years for the LeMans are the 1965, 1968, and 1969. Those later than 1969 are, IMHO, have the ugliest looking nose appearance on any car in the GM lineup.
The world truly ended with the last of the 1972 GM mid-sizers and the death of the pillarless hardtop when the 1973 models arrived.
However, at the onset, I must admit GM as a whole, and in that year Pontiac pulled it off the best with the 1973 Grand Am, and later, the Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme. Notice there was not a Chevy mentioned – The Chevelles were pretty ugly at that point.
Compare the GM models with the other OEMs and see which ones you like best!
In any case, it wasn’t pleasant to be in the back seat of one of these coupes if the A/C wasn’t on or working!
Give me roll-down back windows, or give me sedans!
I wonder if they would have kept the 4 headlight set up instead of changing up to a 2 headlight set up?
If I could add a “correction” to the article, they NEVER had a white dash, at least not since the 1950’s. The black dash was pretty much always there, even before the Colonnades, its not that GM cheaped out, they never offered a white dash with white seats, the dash would be the color of the carpet and seatbelts usually, even in Cadillacs which had a much wider variety of colors available, they never had a white dash, white seats were usually combined with red dash and carpets, or another contrasting color, like blue or even….green.
Mom’s 74 had another odd combo – a dark red interior but white vinyl seats. I think we established here once that this was an available option. I had always assumed that someone swapped seats between two cars on the lot for a picky customer.
I’ve seen that before too, where the seats were the only white colored thing in the car and everything else was a contrasting color, like red or blue.
My grandparents’ ’77 LeSabre was burnt orange with a burnt orange interior and white vinyl seats. Like the LeMans featured here, it was a base model that didn’t have the “custom” seat belt option, so the belts were black.
Ever driven a car with a white dashpad ? The reflections in the windscreen will drive you crazy.
There’s a good reason dash pads are dark coloured.
For the record, I like white interiors. The red works well with the white IMHO, and looks vastly superior to many of the horrible ’70s colours.
And don’t even get me started on the colours of todays new cars……
I am a huge fan of the 1974-75 LeMans, for some reason. Maybe it’s that my mother bought one – a 74 Luxury LeMans sedan with fender skirts. No cool wheels, though. I never liked the pinched-off rear of the 73, but Pontiac nailed the 74-75 rear end (bumpers excepted).
The front was not bad either, and nor was the body side sculpting. This LeMans grille from 1975 looks like the Luxury LeMans grille for 74.
These were big cars – 116 inch wheelbase on the sedans, 2 inches longer than a modern Crown Vic. Heavy too. Mom’s 74 had a 2 bbl 350 and it was a real dog. But with sway bars, it cornered flat as a pancake. I wonder if my mother ever wondered why the edges of the bias belted tires wore out so quickly. Yes, panel fit was not always the best, but hindsight tells us that these were the best overall midsizers made in those years.
I’ll back you on your points. I’m not sure the skirted Luxury versions were appropriate for Pontiac in the long run, but what a great guilty pleasure! This tail light was a natural on this body, my favorite of the bunch. Your mom’s car missed good performance by 2 bbls. I was always enjoyed the Olds 350 4 bbl in both ’73 and ’76 models.
A broader defense of the Colonnade. This is what new cars looked like when I turned 8 in the fall of ’72. I was quite accepting, but did quickly come to understand that there is a truly magical pull to mid ’60’s cars. Still, GM put a lot if individual sheet metal in the various cars and it was easy to identify them. The frumpiest of the lot were low end Chevelles with their horribly pieced together seam ridden rear ends beginning by about ’75. However, carping on the subject car’s gaps is maybe a stretch. This car is missing its wheel lip mouldings, testimony to 40 years on the road and some body work. Many reading this know that these cars were the roots of GM’s wildly successful next generation of full size cars. These had some decent DNA.
Many Colonnades were quite sharp in their day and GM had the hottest mid sizers going. These made me and a lot of my friends very happy in high school.
In nicer shape than the one I spotted earlier in the week, ‘though that one had buckets and console (yours for $3,500 CAD):
https://www.flickr.com/photos/47912141@N04/14373204804/in/pool-curbsideclassic
I disagree the collonades were more generic than their predecessors. Take off the front clip and rear bumper of a ’70-72 GM intermediate and you’d be hard pressed to tell which was which. On the other hand the colonnade LeMans’ pesudo-pontoon fender styling differed from the Cutlass’ skegs, the Century’s swoopy front dender and the slab sided Chevelle. The differences were toned down a bit on the ’76-’77 refresh.
+1
“…why the Colonnades seemed like such a letdown.”
These cars increased sales in model year 1973, before the Oil Crisis. Now, with B-J auctions, some assume that back then “everyone” was upset about model changover. Reality is the WW2/Depression era generation were main car buyers, and they loved GM’s road cruisers, along with Gran Torinos. They couldn’t care less about “Muscle cars”, 0-60 times, and cruising parking lots.
And even at that, many Boomers were “over” muscle and flocked to Cutlass Supremes, to make it a #1 seller. So, take that haters!
I guess that is as good as reasoning will get. I never did understand Oldsmobile dealers with 300 car inventories showing that as 45 days supply. Those were hell days on the inventory control staff. Acres of Cutlasses. Indistinguishable.
Not only crazy inventory, but crazy ordering combinations too, not like today, where is basically the choice of option group A or B, back then there were 3 or 4 engine options, several rear ends, deluxe seatbelts with deluxe lamp group but no clock, 750,000 color and interior combinations, etc etc etc.
Even in Australia. I remember poring over brochure back in the mid-seventies, trying to select which engine/trans rear I really needed, and which other options. Then: reality check – the price!
But more than that, I remember the rich palette of interior and exterior colour choices you could get. I remember trying to choose – brown or green. Which brown? Which green?
Do today’s designers only see in black and white? Why are they afraid of colours?
Also remember that the Colonnades sold well right up until their final year of production (1977). Sales dipped in 1974-75 because of the gasoline shortage and resulting severe recession, but for model year 1976, sales recovered.
If I recall correctly, sales of the personal luxury variants of each division again INCREASED for 1977, even though these cars had been on the market since the fall of 1972 without any major changes.
The Oldsmobile Cutlass was the number-one selling vehicle for 1976, and was only passed by the all-new Chevrolet Impala/Caprice for 1977. But the Cutlass still scored an increase in sales for 1977 – just not as much as the new Chevrolets.
Of course, almost everything sold better in 1973 than in 1972. 1973 was a record-setting sales year across the entire industry.
That’s true, but I believe it’s telling that the Colonnade cars – particularly the personal luxury variants – sold well right up until the end of their life cycle.
GM pretty much demolished the Chrysler intermediates, and effectively fought back the challenge posed by the upsized 1972 Ford Torino and Mercury Montego.
Remember that in 1972 the all-new Torino beat the Chevelle/Malibu in sales – the first time that had happened since the Chevrolet intermediates debuted for 1964. The Colonnades helped GM win back the sales crown, although the ultimate winner would be Oldsmobile, not Chevrolet.
What I remember about the Colonnades most of all was that were so shoddily built that just five years on the road they all pretty much looked like well worn Tijuana taxis. Of course, they look like classic Bugattis next to the hideously inexpressive Olds Cutlass Salons of 1979. Those were the automotive equivalent of Soilent Green (which I think may have been a factory color option).
Panel gaps like your grand canyon, are you sure that car is original and not thrown together under a shade tree after a frame wrenching crash its misaligned everywhere surely GM didnt do a worse job in the US than our local assembly by prisoners on work release.
I can attest to the ‘valley sized panel gaps’ of these “A” body intermediates from 1973-77. Friend’s Dad at the time (1977) had a Buick Century four-door for his business car. Had the V-6 (231 2-bbl with the California air-pump and other extra-restricting goodies added onto an already choked engine). His Dad said it drove OK as long as rapid acceleration was not needed; guy drove regularly from Marin to SoCal (where he did appreciate the 26 mpg highway fuel economy).
Getting to the point – both my friend Dave and I noticed how, on a then brand-new GM “A” body, the panel gaps were uneven and trim pieces did not line up. I believe this feature ’75 LeMans to be correct and original and not wrecked; not too many U.S. cars of the 70’s (especially mid 70’s Mopars) had Toyota-like body panel build quality. You got what you got. As long as things didn’t fall off, the car drove OK, it was quiet and got you up to highway speed – 70’s car buyers didn’t really give a shit . . .
We were spared spangled banner cars of this era thankfully ..instead we had to suffer aussie ones..lol
HZ Holden Belmonts and Kingswoods were even grosser squarer boxes of angular jutting steel encasing strangled asthmatic struggling little inline sixes straight from the late ’40’s.. euggghhh!!!!
Nissan eventually saved the day (in the late ’80’s) with their brilliant OHC sixes in 2.0 and 3.0 versions ! Popped into slimmed-down Holdens by then that suddenly became quite fun to drive ! What engines ! : ))
And there was the little-remembered turbo 3.0 in the Commodore. I don’t think I ever saw one, but I remember the Wheels cover pic.
….never one either ….wonder why??
There was one in Geeveston Tas a Calais while I lived there an absolute rocketship for a Dore but really its only the Skyline turbo but with handling, the NSW cops had some turbo Calais highway patrol cars one was in Orange I remember seeing it I lived in a pub opposite the copshop never saw it in action
Count me as a hater then and now. And don’t count the Cutlass Supreme/Monte Carlo/Grand Prix as “colonnades” because the notchback with small opera window gave them a totally different look and they were the only ones that looked good. That rear side window on the Lemans above never sat right with me and looked like some of the crazy concept stuff that Exner did at Mopar before the axe fell. Look at any of the GM clay models from the late 60’s, they all had a baroque feel to them as opposed to the light airy look of their ’60’s cars. They must have sobered up because the ’78 Malibu was/is great looking and returned them back to the airy look of the 60’s.
the 78 Malibu would have made a great Nova, wouldn’t it?
YES it might have but it was still a bit shorter than a Nova plus the Nova traditionally were never built on a BOF like the Downsized 1978 Malibu which a car of this size was very unusual and shocking though. Most cars on the Nova’s size class had Unitized Body Construction with Front Subframe and rear leaf springs much like the Camaro and Nova’s competitors such as the Ford Granada, Plymouth Volare’ and AMC Hornet/Concord.
Collonades were ahead of their time. Seriously, what 2014 car isn’t bloated and full of awkward disjointed cutlines?
Unfortunately true. And buyers don’t seem to care.
I just saw one of these in a nestea commercial
Jim I agree that the mid to late ’60s Pontiac intermediates were the best of Detroit. I grew up in a Mopar house but I always liked Pontiacs too. As for the Colonnade LeMans, not a great looker but it was a comfortable car. My older sister let me bomb around South Miami in the early ’80s in her ’75 LeMans. It was a great car for that.
As I recall, most Colonnades wound up with dealer-installed side mouldings…sorta body color with little chrome strips inset in the trim…and plastichrome door edge guards, and bolted on metal wheel lip trim that caused rust where each screw went into the body. It’s kind of nice to see one without all of the extra gingerbread.
I find the Colonnade Cutlass version to be the best looking of the bunch. of course there really is no bad looking A/G body Cutlass.
The Pontiac versions were nice looking also. I like the Pontiac arrow symbol like depression in the hoods of the mid 1970’s Pontiacs.
I have to disagree with all the hate – the ’75 Lemans is my favorite of the Colonades, followed closely by the ’77 Cutlass Supreme. I like the front, sides, and especially the back tail lights. And compared to the prior generations, I thought the Colonades were a big step forward in design. All models seemed more lithe.
The only flaw was the fixed windows…
I feel like I’ve been sucked into a time machine. The dealer logo affixed to the trunklid is from Mikan Pontiac in the town I was living in when that car would have been bought new: Butler, Pennsylvania.
In 1974 I would have been begging my mother to take my to Mikan so I could browse the new Pontiacs (it was a single brand dealer back then). Since it was a town of 25,000 or so I probably saw this car on the road. But it doesn’t jog my memory.
I love it, personally. I generally like the BOP colonnades, particularly the ’73 olds.
BTW, I liked these. I liked the stance the Pontiacs had with their (then) “Radial Tuned Suspension.” Sway bars ‘v-eed’ in back and a set of Pontiac Rallye II’s did give these a sporty look, even though the 350’s/400’s (Olds 403 for California in ’77) weren’t exactly rockets . . . .
Thank you for the interesting story. Thank you for the information. I also enjoy reading the comments as well. I did not understand all the hate for the GM Colonnades. I remember those cars, but I do not remember them as being ugly. I liked the 1976-1977 Cutlass Supreme coupe, the 1976-1977 Pontiac Grand Prix, the 1976-1977 Buick Regal, and the 1976-1977 Monte Carlos with the stacked headlights.
I remember them being popular. I did not care for the headlight designs of the 1973-1975 models. The bodies were fine. I had no issue there. I remember the Pontiac and Chevrolet had all those variations ( Monte Carlo, Chevelle, Malibu, Laguna) and Pontiac had them too( Grand Prix, Grand LeMans, Luxury LeMans, LeMans, Can Am, Grand Am). The interesting thing were all the coupes, sedans, and wagons. Buick had the two variations( Regal and Century). Some how what GM did worked. They looked different, shared parts( instrumentation panels etc.)
GM later did the Regal and Century thing again in the 1990’s.
Buford T Justice’s first car was a LeMans. I preferred the Bonnevilles he drove myself.
So, this line of midsized cars was not all bad.
1976 Pontiac Grand LeMans:
1977 Pontiac Grand Prix commercial:
1977 Pontiac Grand Prix:
1977 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme commercial:
1976 Cutlass Supreme:
1977 Chevrolet Monte Carlo:
1977 Chevrolet Malibu Classic:
1975 Chevrolet Laguna:
1976 Buick Regal commercial:
1976 Buick Regal:
1976 Buick Century:
Fast forward to 2014:
Pontiac and Oldsmobile are dead.
This is what we have:
2014 Chevrolet Malibu:
2014 Buick Regal:
That is pretty sad when you think about it. Those Colonnades do not seem so bad do they? They were at least real, distinctive looking, and looked like GM cars and not globalized designs. They had something the current cars do not have.
The closest thing GM has to the Colonnades today is this:
2014 Chevrolet SS:
An Australian( Holden Commodore) sedan.
I was always fascinated by the coordination in the Cutlass ad where they assemble the Cutlass Supreme around the actor, kinda neat. The 1976 Regal ad was funny,not big? it was as big as the 1950 Buick when it pulled alongside it? It probably weighed more than the 50 Buick too.
Bufford T Justices LeMans reminds me that there actually was a police package for the Colonnade LeMans too, the LeMans Enforcer, it had the 400 from what I recall, there was a Catalina Enforcer available for the B-bodies too, through 1978 or 1979, but I think that was about it for any cop car package Pontiacs.
The Malibu and Regal might share names with the Colonnades, but the Malibu itself is in the Novas slot today, since the Malibu replaced the Corsica in 1997, the Corsica begat the Citation II and I, which replaced the Nova in 1979. The Impala is really the intermediate, going back to the Lumina and Celebrity, which replaced the RWD Malibu in 1982-1983.
The Regal is also unusual, since its sort of is in the Skylarks niche. but the Lacrosse is what replaced the W-body Regal/LaCrosse, which connects its lineage back to the Colonnade.
I enjoyed your response, but I have to say this.. The definition of what is midsized and full sized has changed. I do not agree that what they consider full size today is full sized. I hear what you are saying, but they consider Regal and Malibu 2014 to be midsized and Impala full sized. I personally think Impala is not true full sized. There are no true full sized cars right now either. Cadillac XTS is more midsized that it is a large car.
Cars have become smaller and globalized.
They would say to you that the Buick Verano is what is in Skylarks segment today. They classify LaCrosse as full sized. I am sorry, but they do. I do not agree with that either especially considering the size of the trunk among other things.
I did by accident leave off:
1973 Pontiac Grand Am:
1977 Pontiac Can Am:
1977 Oldsmobile Cutlass 442:
I agree with what you are saying somewhat but I do believe that cars are getting bigger. Take the Honda Civic and Toyota Corolla for example, the current generation is around the same size as the the camry and Accord of 15 years ago and now have gotten so big that Toyota and Honda came out with smaller cars(Yaris and Fit) respectively
There are some true fullsize cars left. Take the 2014 Taurus. Since the Taurus name was reactivated and attached to a slightly revised Five Hundred back in 2008, it has been considered a full size car and actually is more roomy in the back seat then the Crown Vic/Grand Marquis due a lack of a trans hump because it is FWD. The trunk space in the 2008-2014 Tauruses, rival that of SUV cargo space.
Yikes! 21 embedded videos, no wonder my laptop keeps freezing up when I click this post!
Yes, please, not so many videos embedded in one comment.One only per comment; this overkill.
Thanks.
It’s funny, I thought the 1970s Cutlass looked great, but I only rode in a colonnade a couple of times, so I never really experienced the bloated underwhelming performance. My parents and friends parents Had moved on to bigger cars.
I only remember ever seeing two of these when I was a kid, there was a crappy white rusts out Laguna that tried to race me one time, I had no idea what it was.
And there was a Can Am that used to park by the local movie theater. I had no idea they were rare, it just was a crappy old Pontiac to me. It wasnt a good looking car IMO.
I have come to appreciate these mid 70’s American Iron, including the Colonnade cars. We still have a Colonnade in the family, it was my father’s daily driver and now is my brother’s car. It has been one of the most dependable cars in my immediate family. To this day it hasn’t had a even a valve cover off, and in the last 7 years has needed no mechanical repairs (mind you it doesn’t see a ton of miles anymore). We have owned a lot of mid 1970’s Detroit iron, and although they get a bad rap, I can’t say we’ve ever had a bad one. They are cheap and easy to fix, and if you are a decent tune-up person, they run very well with minimal maintenance. And while they had poor build quality, the ones we have owned had proven very durable (other than rust resistance).
I had a 1972 Chevelle 2-door when I was younger, with a 250 and a PG. I always had the idea to “hot rod” the quintessential Chevelle and looked down at the mid 1970’s GM A-bodies. Years later, after being inundated with 1964-72 A-bodies it’s quite refreshing to see a nice original Colonnade like this Pontiac, factory flaws included. And after having a lot of experience behind the wheel of each generation, the improvements to the chassis and brakes of the 1973-77 generation sure make them easier to live with.
Interesting car and article, but I have to disagree with some of the premises of the author. I think the styling of the LeMans was actually pretty pleasing and integrated. The side pontoons echo the very pronounced prow of the hood, and even the rear quarter window shape works well with that theme. I like the roofline and the full rear quarter windows on the 73-75. GM did not try very hard on the bumpers, that is true.
I also disagree that the A body cars were not differentiated between brands. You could maybe make that argument, except in hindsight looking back to the 70’s, you have to look over the 80’s and 90’s, which were the era of totally interchangeable designs. At least the Colonades shared no body panels (except maybe roofs) and each car had it’s own distinct styling cues. They had very expressive styling compared to the next few generations of GM cars. They also were the last new platform GM introduced that were made without major consideration of fuel economy. The lack of convertible, hardtop (they could plan for unrealized rollover standards but not bumper standards?) and serious muscle car versions insures that they will forever be less desirable as collector cars than their intermediate predecessors, but they really were unique looking cars that just a few years later people could say “they don’t make cars like that anymore.” For better or worse.
I happen to have owned a 76 LeMans, which I bought in 1994 as a daily driver. It was in pretty good shape for it’s age, 75k, white coupe, red interior, no vinyl top (the only thing I don’t like about this CC car), Rally II wheels, 260 V8. I would have liked a 68-72, but I couldn’t afford one and I still wanted something older and unique. It was a good car, but slow of course. The engine really didn’t have the oomph to drive the car AND run the A/C, which was unfortunate in Phoenix. Didn’t matter much, though, cause the AC crapped out anyway and I couldn’t afford to fix it. Fortunately the only non original thing on the car was the vinyl upholstery had been replaced with nice looking velour, which made the prospect of driving with no A/C much more bearable. The one thing that bugged me on that car was that the steering wheel was not centered perfectly on the center of the driver’s seat. It was offset a little to the left. I sold it after 3 years and never had any other significant problems besides the A/C.
This auction car is in amazing condition. I love the original tires! Looks like the same car that was in the Auburn auction Paul posted a couple months ago. Did you note how much this car sold for this time? It sold for $18700 in that auction.
I always preferred the ’70-’72 A bodies, but I did like some of the Colonades. Certain models with the right options did perform well, particularly compared to the competition. The Can-Am and 442 come to mind. The Olds Cutlass with the removable body commercial in the earlier post brings back some memories, the actual car ended up in my high school auto shop. GM was quite generous to high schools back in the day.
I really like the 1973-77 A bodies,
The Grand-Am really looks great!
https://www.flickr.com/photos/33723086@N02/4275893964
I even like the 4 doors! This ’77 LeMans I spotted on the street reminds me Kojack’s Buicks!
https://www.flickr.com/photos/33723086@N02/7947895746
My very first ride was in a Colonnade coupe, my father’s then brand new 1977 Pontiac Grand-Prix! Pictured in my mother’s arms in January of 1977.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/33723086@N02/6166000259
In fact, I was riding in another colonnade coupe, when I wasn’t even born! My then 22 years old mother didn’t like the cold (in winter) white vinyl buckets in the 1976 Century Custom so they got a Grand-Prix with a cloth bench seat to replace it!
https://www.flickr.com/photos/50488533@N00/2683522017
This one is probably my favorite, a 1973 Century Gran Sport Stage1 with a 4 speed stick.
I have also seen, well hidden in a garage, an almost identical, low mileage 4 speed non-stage1 1973 Century Gran Sport a few years ago.
We cannot truly blame GM for those designs, During that time it was widely thought the Federal Government was going to pass new standards regarding roof rigidness. GM took the lead and tried to anticipate this change with what they thought was safe. In the end the Feds decided not to bother with this rule change.(perhaps due to the bruising they got with the seatbelt interlock fiasco(it was said more folks were angry about having to buckle the seatbelts in their 1974 cars before they would start then they were about Watergate)
But by the time the threat of this rule disappeared, GM was committed to producing them for a few years till the designs and tooling to produce the cars was recouped.
GM however did keep the production a convertible going longer then everybody else in the USA so that counts as something.
And you know what, in a 2 door Colonnade, the door and glass are so big that driving with the windows down is practically like a hardtop for the most part.
GM was still very interesting in the 70’s, probably still carried the widest variety of bodystyles available in any manufacturers line up, the last convertibles of 1975-1976, massive 8/9 passenger limousines and wagons, huge FWD personal luxury coupes, ponycars, motorhomes….
Some colonnade coupes had T-Tops too, while not the most practical feature, it’s still a nice period feature that wasn’t available on previous hardtop coupes.
I was never impressed by their looks which seemed to me – even in the boring Israeli automotive scene of the 70s – uncohessive and frumpy. They appeared to be too wide for their chassis and the bumpers really killed whatever was left. I remember them losing their luster relatively quickly only to be metlater in shady parts of Tel Aviv, having passed from their first and second owners into the hands of pimps and small time criminals. GM somehow managed to divorce itself from all of its stylistic assets during this time. Of corse, in comparison with the non-events that the later intermediates represent, they were at least distinctive…
There you go, still unloved in Israel…