File this in the “You Don’t See These Anymore” folder; a stock-looking 1967 Oldsmobile Cutlass Coupe, a survivor, worn and slightly abused, but otherwise pretty much as they used to be found. And this one, being a 2-door coupe, a very rare sight. How come this one hasn’t been over-restored or hot-rodded? And how long before such a fate happens? After all, this one doesn’t look like it’s a parts car but a perfectly rescueable one. In a time when just about every single 1960s 2-door coupe has been fixed-up, modified, or taken to spend most of its life in a secluded garage, this Supreme is still living a street life.
So let’s enjoy it, as it sits out in the open, in 2026.
Granted, it doesn’t look factory-fresh, and those hubcaps are circa 1970s. But what did you expect, after six decades? And the flaking paint on this one’s hood makes me think it originally came in a shade of Gold or Champagne that Olds’ offered in 1967. Yet, it’s quite fun to see a mostly unrestored Cutlass from the very early days of the Supreme story, still on the roads as if playing “daily driver”.
Naturally, the Cutlass Supreme story has been told at CC before (links below). As those entries told, the Supreme package was following cues that the era-defining Ford LTD had put into practice, but bringing those into the realm of the intermediates. As such, the Supreme first appeared in 1965 as the top trim line of the Cutlass range, itself the top line of the F-85 range when it showed up in 1961. Today’s find, with its telling CS C-pillar badges, is officially a Cutlass Supreme Holiday Coupe. The Holiday, being Oldsmobile’s term for hardtops, and makes for a bit of a mouthful when mentioned altogether. Admittedly, the increasingly 1950s-sounding term was coming near its end and would be phased out in 1971.
Meanwhile, the Cutlass and Supreme lines were just starting their era, which was to be a dominant one in the 1970s and early 1980s. As the 1967 brochure said, the Supreme had a simple purpose in life: “To let you live big and spend small simultaneously”. In what were to be the waning days of the Muscle Car era, that “live big and spend small” mantra would prove to be incredibly alluring to the 1970s buying public, Supreme style.
For 1967, the Supreme formula was pretty much in place, though still waiting to gain more converts. Not that there was much wrong with the model by that date, as it carried the touches that would define its future; a luxuriously appointed interior, above average assembly, a standard 330CID Jetfire Rocket V-8, and a newly available (and quite relevant) Special Turnpike Cruise Package, with a 400CID Rocket V-8 and 2.41-to-1 axle ratio for economy expressway cruising. All details that are better covered in previous CC entries.
Still, Pontiac was the hot thing in that decade, and Olds wasn’t quite there yet, though it was a steady, trusty, and known quantity. A steady performer in GM’s sales charts.
As many agree, GM’s styling was in one of its best eras in the 1960s. That said, it took Oldsmobile longer to develop a “division look” in the way GM’s other children had enjoyed under Bill Mitchell’s styling team. Cadillacs were unmistakable, Pontiac had gained its known face and hips, Buick had Sweep Spears and Ventiports, and Chevrolet’s had a “Chevy face” of sorts and “Junior Cadillac” cues.
Meanwhile, Olds, though not a poor looker in those years, only had changing cues to jets and rockets somewhere in their bodies as their “look”. It took the division until the late 1960s to gain its formal Olds-Face with jet-inspired grille nostrils, plus its cursive baroque badges.
Still, 1967 was a more distinctive effort than earlier Oldsmobiles of that decade, mostly influenced by the 1966 Toronado’s chiseled blade flanks. That, along with GM’s 1960s hips and the rocket-like tailights make for a nice variation of the company’s styling themes from those days. And well, that CS badge heralded a cursive language that sort of stuck way toooo looong into the 1980s. But who would have known in 1966, when it first appeared, that a tradition had been established?
Also, I’m not used to the idea of a Supreme with no vinyl top, but as the brochure shows, it was optional. That full-Brougham look was still in its early stages then and not shown in every single possible advert.
In 1960s mythology, I guess the fact that Oldsmobile was not yet the hottest of things has played in favor of today’s find. Perhaps the reason it has survived relatively untouched?
Still, it’s got the sharp styling that GM products of the time were known for, and nowadays it’s a more distinctive choice than a Chevelle or a Pontiac A-body intermediate from the same age. And providing much the same road attributes, or perhaps even more so. As Aaron S. mentioned on a properly set up Turnpike Cruiser 1967 convertible, the Cutlass was “an outstanding all-around car and perhaps the best road trip vehicle among late ’60s domestic models.”
Being a Cohort find, and having no direct info from its current owner, we can only speculate what the car’s actual package is: a “plain” Supreme? A Turnpike Cruiser wonder? No way to know. And no way to know if a future owner will update it whole, drivetrain included. But for today, we can enjoy it in its street-like worn condition.
Related CC reading:
CCCCC Part 3: 1967 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme – America’s Love Supreme Starts Here
1967 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme With L66 Turnpike Cruising Option: The Ultimate Road Trip Olds
Curbside Classic: 1967 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme – Falling Prey To American Luxury
The 20 MPG 400 Cubic Inch Olds Cutlass Turnpike Cruiser
Am I the only one who finds the 66-67 Cutlass less attractive than the 64-65? With every other GM Division that offered it, I find the later version of that A body better looking than the original (especially the Chevy). But not the Olds. I think Oldsmobile was trying hard to make that full rear wheel opening work for them and had not yet found the right styling. The wheels look too small, for one thing. I think these may look their best as a Vista Cruiser, or maybe even a 4 door hardtop.
I think those wheel covers are original, and were the base level discs. I think the brochure is showing the optional wheel covers that I don’t recall seeing that much when these were relatively common (as they were in my area).
One of these would still make a decent daily driver, IMHO. The 330 was a nice engine with plenty of go.
To my eye the Cutlass body for 66/67 looked significantly larger that it did in 1965. Also, is it me, or do the 66/67 Cutlasses look wider and longer than any other A-body intermediates from the other GM divisions. While a 67 Skylark looks like an evolution of a 65, a 67 Cutlass looks more massive like a full-size Olds rather than an update of the mid-size body.
The same thought occurred to me as I was reading. I wonder how the overall lengths of the Cutlass models compare to their other-marque siblings.
And for the most part, I much prefer the straighter lines of all the ’64-65 A-Bodies.
I’m with you, I like the 68-72 Cutlass the most of the A bodies in those years, but these 66-67s just look heavy and blocky almost like they’re full sized, absolutely not my cup of tea, and forget Chevy as a comparison, the 66-67 Pontiac Tempest/Lemans/GTO might be my favorite A body design period, it’s amazing how two cars sharing the same basic structure and roof can look so drastically different
. I’m not one who gets bothered by overhangs on cars from this period but they stand out me on this.
Indeed, for the styling of the 1966-67 GM intermediates, the Cutlass is dragging up the rear, behind even the Buick Skylark.
Of course, that situation would be reversed for the following generation with the Buick getting that exaggerated side-sweep and odd concave rear bumper that always looked like someone had backed into a pole.
Nice car, meh color and tiny wheels?
Are those the original wheels or am I just so used to seeing 1960’s cars with upsized rims?
White stripe tires were almost mandatory (if technically an extra cost option) and those would visually shrink the sidewall, expand the rim and add more reflectivity to the whole.
On a foggy day I don’t think you would even see the wheels on this vehicle. A teetering, unsafe looking rolling advert for aftermarket hoops!
My tiny VW Karmann Ghia has bigger wheels than this monster!
One big reason for the demise of these is the way the front and esp rear window frames rotted out. Effective repair required removal of the glass, which was glued-in. I once bought a Vista Cruiser, just to get me thru the winter. It did a good job of that, but the Vista Dome leaked. There was water on the rear floor the entire winter. I’d start the day by scraping the frost off of the inside of the windshield.
I always felt the Old’s designers envisioned much larger wheels or at least wheels pushed out toward the fenders more.
They always look under-tired in stock form. Makes the rear track (especially) look way too narrow in relation to the body.
The guy, where I store the Ambassador, tends to pick up cars from who knows where and then sells them for a little profit. About 18 months ago he had an 64 Cutlass for sale just as original as this 67. Similar color and all the wrinkles one would expect on a 75 year old man. Dummy me I never took a picture. I will say those rear fender wells look like caves. Need more meat.
This Olds looks like a railroad inspection car that would ride the rails. The look is just not there.
Friend in my neighborhood got an Oldsmobile like this for his first vehicle back in the mid 70s. I think it was a parent hand me down. He was so glad when he could afford to buy a new Camaro (late 70s) and ditch the Olds.
Wonder what was under the hood.
Nice to see an unusual survivor like this .
Being a Hard Top Coupe ices the cake .
-Nate