This bronze Firebird sitting in a pile of matching leaves caught my eye. It looks like the vintage louvers are catching the leaves too. From the looks of the markings on the tires, it’s been sitting still here a bit longer than it’s supposed to. And since Mike Butts posted a picture of the Hudson dealership the other day, I now know what this blue building used to be.
image courtesy: HudsonJet.net
The Firebird is sitting right about where that Hudson Hornet hardtop coupe sat in 1955. Now it’s “Cozmic Pizza”, a popular venue for live entertainment. If I ever find the time, I’d like to identify all the old former car dealerships in Eugene with before and after shots.
I don’t remember seeing this exact type of louver before, with the little triple windows on the side. Looks like there’s a moisture problem inside, given all the condensation. And the paint is showing some interesting signs of age too. Well, this is hardly a youngster anymore.
More markings on the front tires. If this Firebird didn’t under its own power soon, it was bound to be hauled off.
y’know, as gaudy as the Trans Am was back then, for some reason it still looks a lot better than the low-trim Firebirds. The arse of a late ’70s F-body just looks wrong without the spoiler there.
I agree with you. That car certainly reminds me of the red 1980 Formula that I had for a couple of years. It had the spoiler, which to my eyes really finishes the rear of the body.
The real last Hudson dealer is Miller Motors in Ypsilanti MI. Also the location of the Orphan Car Show every year.
Yes indeed! I live about three miles from there!!!
I’m on my way….
Not a fan of the louvers or the factory color. Poor bird. I’m guessing it had been nailed in the LR quarter early in its life & the repair job is beginning to show. As for F-cars of this genre, this one appears to be in very good condition though and looks to be an ’81 model.
It still wears its correct sail panel decal, front grilles, & wheel well trim. Lack of a rear spoiler and the aftermarket wheels leads me to assume this car was ordered without a wheel option (dog dishes) or the optional base chrome wheelcover. Few have survived in this condition.
I whoever reclaims it doesn’t destroy it even if it is probably got the CCC-saddled 231 or 265 lumps.
Rare to see an unmolested Firebird most I see have been hotrodded to death and nobody imports the low power version and leaves it like that in fact hardly anyone here realizes there was a 6 available never mind anyone would buy one, Good find, I hope junqueboi gets to it first.
Won’t happen, but I appreciate the thought sir!
When I look at this picture, all I see are the curled, dried leaves to be pulled out of that cove at the base of the windshield. Those miserable leaves work their way into the hvac system, and also down into the lower fenders. My driveway is looking like this about now, and I am perpetually doing this same job on a certain Crown Victoria.
Ask me sometime how much I hate concealed windshield wipers.
When I was working at a GM dealership while going to school, one of the big dealership money makers in the fall/winter was a noisy blower motor. Customer would come in and was sure he/she needed a blower motor(which GM over priced) but all they needed was it to be removed and the leaves removed from the hole and it was good as new again. Those jobs called for an hour of flat rate and most of the time took 20-30 mins max(especially if it was in the cowl and not under the dash)
Had that problem with my mom’s 04 Envoy, only it was acorns that would somehow find a way into the squirrel cage and the whole damn thing sounded (and felt) like a C-130 taking off. Spent many evenings taking that motor out of the passenger footwell; almost had to be a chinese acrobat to get to it 🙂
Nice. I wonder what a Hudson ponycar would have been like.
Before/after dealership photos in Eugene would be a super article. Eugene is about the right size for a full set of one dealer per make.
F-bodys never wore rear window louvers very well to begin with, but these louvers really look bad. The goofy side pieces make it look like it has a 70-74 roofline but with a brougham triple opera window assembly(Really, just imagine those pieces painted body color!). I bet the center louver assembly was originally designed for a completely different car and just had those wraparound sections riveted on for Firebird/Camaro use
these were popular around here in Texas back in the day. Those louvers were recycled for other makes. Same dimensions that were on my brother’s ’81 Mercury Capri but with different mounting hardware.
I worked with a guy that had an ’80 model in this color. But, it had a wheezy 6-cylinder under the hood. The color was rather striking when new.
Yesterday I saw a dark blue Firebird Formula or Trans-Am that had those same louvers on the rear window. I suspect they were set up so that they could be used on either the later cars with wrap-around rear window or the earlier ones with the narrower window.
A 70s Firebird has been on my wish list since I was a teenager.I hope someone rescues this one before the shift it notice appears and it’s towed to the crusher
Red tail lights and no air intakes on the hood indicate this is a base or Esprit from 79-81, no? Can anyone pin it down further?
By the way, love this factory color! Loved the chocolate brown on contemporary Camaros too.
It’s an ’81 Esprit. The emblems below the “Firebird” on each front fender call out “Esprit” and the bird on the gas door was ’81 only.
…… a few years went by, and Jim Rockford relocated, got a newer Firebird, all to no avail. The bottom totally dropped out of his private investigator business, and no one knows what happened to him….only his abandoned car remains….. 🙂
Actually the story has it that James Garner took one look at the front styling of the ’79 and decreed it to be so ugly he didn’t want it on the show, so the ’78 model stayed on until the final episode of the truncated 1979-80 season.
Garner was in so much arthritic pain he just walked away mid-season.
I’ve heard that story before and I don’t blame him.
Not that I dislike the 79-81s, quite the contrary really, but those years never looked right in plain jane Firebird form like previous years did. Trans Ams were the primary benefactors to that restyle, every change enhanced the look of the T/A but ended up looking out of place on the base. The taillights are the most obvious example, being that they’re basically the same mold as the T/A’s but without the blackout tint applied. At least they body colored the bezels in years prior!
Plus that front overhang looks a tad long without the chin spoiler/faring breaking things up.
Actually, the ’79-’81 Formulas, T/As, and Yellowbirds had different taillight assemblies — these carried four taillights per-side instead of three and the lenses were smoked as you mentioned.
In addition, the 1980 Yellowbird had its taillight ribs accented in yellow.
Interesting, I had always assumed the difference was only color. I haven’t seen enough regular Firebirds to notice the lack of extra bulbs to notice I guess
I found a Yellowbird at a local pick n pull a few years ago, but it was repainted black with Trans Am decals. The yellow taillights were the giveaway, as was the pinstriping under the badly chipping black paint. 🙁
I like the color but not the louvers. Only car of mine I ever put louvers on was my 240Z, and even then it was mostly because my Datsun dealer’s Parts Dept was letting a used set go for $25 when they were normally something like $120. Looked pretty good, but hardly essential, and given the chance I probably wouldn’t do it again because… well, because I’m not 20 anymore for one reason. But at least my Z-car fastback glass was flat, not wraparound like on F-bodies. Covering a curvature like that is something louvers just can’t seem to do very convincingly, and this coppery ‘Bird found in Eugene is an especially awkward attempt.
The situation gets even worse with the third-gen F-bodies, as the wraparound rear window grew larger and more elaborate in ’82. There are louvers made for them both in three flat pieces, like the featured second-gen’s; and also in one-piece curved versions (attached). Considering that big fancy lift-up backlight — supposedly the largest piece of automotive glass ever produced — is one of the third-gen’s better features, it seems a shame to hide it with the auto world’s answer to Venetian Blinds. There are a lot of things I’d like to add to my ’89 Camaro, but louvers are not on the list.
Body coloring them rarely helps, IMO. Louvers are already one of those mods done for the sake of doing mods and painting them only adds to that. Plus if people wanted the glass area to look body color, there’d be widespread use of body color tint by now!
Very 70s, louvers are a must have for playboys(real& imagined) along with a Mexicam moustache & safari suit.I went out with someone who had a Ford Capri with louvers and fake fur seat covers.The interior smelled of Brut aftershave
Louvers may not look great on this car or that Camaro, but I liked them on my 80’s Mustangs. They added some style to the hatch as well as privacy and shade. They were a bit of a PITA, I took mine off in the winter and always carried a screwdriver to open them up for cleaning. They were a bit noisy too but those were not exactly solid cars to begin with.
Looking back, maybe they weren’t all that great looking, but they were popular at the time (early 90’s). Of course those were the days of headlight covers, lighted pickup visors, neon tailgate nets, car bras, and more.
Mustangs seem to have more of a history with louvers, although I don’t know what that history is exactly. Weren’t they a factory or dealer option at one time?
There were also two main kinds. The aluminum ones like the Firebird above and the Mustang below which were good quality, and the plastic ones which faded and deformed.
I’m with you, I prefer no louvers if given the choice, but I agree Mustangs historically seem to wear them well. 69-73 fastbacks look good with them(hey, what’s another obstruction to visibility?), and Mustang II hatches and 79-86 Foxbodies looked pretty good with them as well. In fact actually the Fox louvers do a pretty good job complimenting the side window louvers.
I believe Louvers were a factory option, at least on the dealer level from 1969 to 1984 or so. I know the 69-70 and early Fox louvers were factory for sure. That probably influences my opinion of them, as I usually have a much harder time stomaching aftermarket accessories than factory ones.
Never liked the ’79 restyle of the Firebird. The front clip is just plain ugly.
Ditto. Much prefer ’77-’78 “Smokey & the Bandit” style. Second to the ’70-’72s…
I’ve read from several sources that Pontiac wanted a front end that recalled the Corvette. If that’s true, my response is- Major fail!
That is the ugliest set of louvers I’ve ever seen. It looks like the rear window is wearing a girdle.
Nice Firebird otherwise. Am I the only one who thinks this would look good with whitewalls and the standard full wheel covers? Blackwalls and the Pontiac dog-dish hubcaps would give it a nice, purposeful look too.
I remember the Brodsky’s name on a lot of Jeeps. By the late ’50s the AMC dealer had moved to west 7th, next to the current BMW dealer. I can certainly point out a few of the old dealership buildings to you, you’d be surprised what they are now.
I guess I’m the exception to the rule, I’ve always been crazy about the 1979 refresh of the Firebird. Make mine a Formula, but at this point in time, I’d take any of them.
I have to agree with others, not having the ducktail spoiler on the back of the car does change the look. But I’d still be OK with one. I’d prefer the factory steel rally wheels on it over the aftermarket aluminum ones.
It’s not my favorite Firebird, but I still like it. I never knew that nose was controversial until I started visiting CC.
The spoiler on the other hand I always thought was essential. Today though I kind of like this clean look. Perhaps from watching too many Rockford reruns.
My Dad was always very dismissive of the 79 so I guess I’m used to the controversy. He had a 78 T/A and pretty much felt that was the epitome of the second gen styling, which do I agree with to some extent, but boy would he poke fun if I mentioned I liked the 79s too.
If there’s any reason to loath 79-81s it’s Smokey and the Bandit II. The 77 stared in a much higher quality and exciting movie.
I really like seeing a base model without the louvers, decals etc. There are just Too.Many.Trans Ams out there (hate to say that about any classic car, but honestly, if you look up Pontiac between say, 1970 and 1990, on any for-sale site, you’ll get about 40 Trans Ams for every 2 Grand Prixs and 3 anything elses). This is a great color, and the missing spoiler shows the sleek fastback design much better, IMO. I don’t care much for the grille-less front end of these 1979-81s, but I do like the full-width taillamps.
The building has been abused waay more than that Firebird…