The 1985 Cutlass Supreme coupe that I posted last weekend got lots of love. Oodles and oodles of it, as it became our highest viewed post of the week. So how much love are you going to muster for its stablemate, this 1985 Cutlass Ciera four door sedan? It shares the vaunted Cutlass name, but other than that, not so much. But surely that’s not an obstacle standing in the way of your supreme affection?
Actually, they did share two of their engines; the 231 CID/3.8L V6 and the much-lamented 262 CID/4.3 L diesel V6. Now that would be a find.
They most certainly didn’t share much else, except undoubtedly a number of interior bits and pieces perhaps, like switch gear and such. Maybe there was more; someone will know. But obviously the Ciera was FWD, sitting on a direct development of the X-Body platform with 104.9″ of wheelbase.
The result was a quite roomy vehicle, thanks to the most space-efficient design GM had ever made to date, and comparable in that regard to the state of the art in Europe too. No wonder these became so popular, especially with the rental fleets.
The rear seat accommodations were quite decent too, but the leg room looks a bit exaggerated thanks to GM’s commonly-used sleight of hand method of a rather short lower cushion. But no one was likely to complain, considering how cramped the back seat of the significantly larger GM RWD X-Body compacts like the Nova had been.
This is one of the earlier sealed beam headlight versions. They’re getting a wee bit scarce these days.
So come on; let’s not let our PLC/RWD bias show too much. Bring on the love; you know you have it, somewhere.
I LOVE these cars. Not so much for any true merit of the car itself, but for the memories made in one very similar to it.
An 87 sealed beam base model in silver with a dark blue interior.
It belonged to my best friends mother. We drove the car for 3 years Lots of road trips.
Brings back good memories thanks Paul
As a “grocery getter” and with just out for a longish drive, I do enjoy my 1988 Ciera SL coupe. I believe the 44K are the original miles.
Here a shot of my 1988 engine compartment:
and then the interior:
The round gauge analog instrument panel in these looked excellent in these!
This was a Cutlass for the other side of the brain. This was the one you bought because it was an intelligent decision. It was efficient, it was well built, it was modern. And it was an Oldsmobile. Nobody bought these because they were beautiful or because of falling in love with it.
My stepmom went from a 74 Cutlass Supreme coupe (with white interior, no less) to an early 4 cyl Ciera sedan (gray in and out). The Ciera was a modern car but it wasn’t the same thing as the old Supreme. At all.
“It was modern”. For the first three years. Not so much the subsequent what seems like forever of its run 🙂
Just scrapped my ’95 Cutlass Ciera due to rust, and was very unhappy about it.
Easy to maintain, a competent highway driver for long commuting and seating that was a genuine pleasure to relax in after a long workday. I would take that featured car without a second thought.
I always liked these. I didn’t like them in the same way as the rear-drive originals, but they were still one of the better products GM built in the ‘80’s and they had a long life. It’s not unusual to see the later ones still on the road today, even here in Ontario. My in-laws had an ‘85 in a tan colour with the 4.3 Diesel. They bought it new and kept it well into the ‘90’s when the engine died, and then it sat at the back of their property for several years until it was finally scrapped. It was kind of sad to see it sitting there, but there wasn’t much they could do with it by then.
These, and the Chev Celebrity were attractive cars. These would have been maybe $16-18K when new, in Canada, I am guessing.
In my own case, I stopped in at Chrysler that year and got one of their products for somewhat less than that, as our family car. It was a switch back from the General for me and I remain pleased at having made that decision. Nothing at all wrong with this Olds however. It’s just that it was a comedown from the Oldsmobiles of the previous decade, the 88s, and the Colonnade Cutlasses.
Dad bought one in 1983, and we loved it. The car had the mid range LS trim, with relatively few options, air conditioning , rear window defogger, cassette stereo and a console shifter. It was a perfect car, arriving with zero flaws and was completely reliable for the 5 years we owned it. The quality of materials and assembly was vastly better than the 70s cars we had. It took space efficiency, fuel economy and handling to unprecedented levels for us, at least by 1983 standards.
In a fit of nostalgia, I looked at a very well preserved example a couple of years ago and was distinctly underwhelmed. GM had advanced the Ciera virtues to a mucb higher level in later models and platforms, yet the car didn’t have any vintage appeal for me, it just seemed mediocre. Still, for 1983 standards it was very well done.
My next-door neighbor still daily drives one, but it’s a later model with flush headlights.
The engine sounds like he’s shaking a beer can full of washers, but the darn thing starts and runs every day.
There are still a handful of these, and Buick counterparts, doing daily driver duty in my town. The same can’t be said of any other domestic passenger car of the same age; they even seem to have outlived the Fox Mustangs. That longevity is deserving of quite a bit of love.
They ran, were plush enough, and did their job well for a long time. The bugs got worked out and then it just became a money machine for GM, providing owners with a fairly worry free machine that was pretty cheap to fix when needed and fit the family well.
Left on the vine way too long for any “true enthusiast” and long criticized by those that likely wouldn’t have bought one anyway, but for others (i.e. the vast majority that actually buy cars) that just want a decent value and pretty reliable car to navigate the vaunted McDonalds DriveThru Handling Course, these fit the bill perfectly.
The early cars with the sealed beams look better to me now than the later ones with the flush lights. It’s a good looking front end although it could stand to lose a few of the crests on display.
We had a Ciera and a Century, both of which reached very high mileage with almost no problems. They were a good, practical, relatively uncomplicated design, and the 3.3 engine seemed indestructible (as was the 3 speed automatic transmission.) The New England road salt and rust environment killed ours, or I would still be driving them today. I only wish there was a current equivalent vehicle that was affordable.
Love? Eh…perhaps mild affinity since a 91 Cutlass Cierra sedan was my first car. I admire the velour, I admire the lazy torque of the 3.3, and I respect their durability. A workhorse, and probably a very affordable one by the end of their run, which served people well.
But these were easily eclipsed by about 1986/87 when the new Accord and Camry generations landed, and pitiably outdated when the 1990 Accord and 1992 Camry launched. It handled like a boat despite the tidy size, the interior was 1975, and IIRC the strict 3-box design made the rear cabin a bit cramped compared to the 92 Camry with an inch shorter wheelbase. I kind of want my 91 back, if just for a day, to refresh those old driving impressions.
My mother-in-law had a 1986 Ciera with every possible option, except the six. The weak 4 cylinder was pathetic and sounded like a piece of farm equipment. I had the similar 1984 Pontiac 6000 LE. Both were mediocre at best. It was during this era that Camcords started pulling away and I can now see why.
I had a well used 1989 Ciera, a loaded one. It was a great car and it never failed me. I did the front brakes on the side of the road and that’s it.
Auto journalists ranted about how outdated they were but customers loved them. They were roomy, well built, handled well and were Japanese reliable.
The 3.3 V-6 had 160 HP, good for the time. Great low end torque made around town driving fun and the 4 speed automatic is classically good GM.
Technically speaking wouldn’t it be the still in production Cutlass Supreme 4-door sedan still based on the A/G body would be the direct stablemate to the coupe?
The Ciera design looked archaic and dorky in the 90s as they were still being produced, but in the context of 1985, pre-taurus revolution, the design is pretty solid, and an improvement over the A/G sedan in many respects. The black corners of the headlight bezels always bothered me on the sealed beam models, it seems like that’s where the turn signals *should* be, but they look better to me than the aero facelift models, and the original boxier roofline and taillight treatment suits it better than the smoothed over refresh.
The real rarity with these is finding one today that isn’t wearing ugly black steelies. Some of these had the old style oldsmobile road wheels, which are utter unicorns now
I didn’t say “direct”, did I? And technically it clearly was a stablemate, given that it shared the Cutlass name, eh? Feeling a bit pedantic this morning? 🙂
If we decided to have a contest as to which Cutlass sedan was the closest to the G Coupes, then yes, the Supreme 4-door sedan wins.
A little 🙂 Actually I think it would be interesting to see what would get more love, the Supreme sedans were very forgettable, I wasn’t 100% they were still being made in 85, and despite their traditional underpinnings didn’t seem to have the longevity of these Cieras.
Nowadays I see everyone going out of their way to have the plain black steel wheels. Removing decent hubcaps for whatever reason. Actually swapping out nice alloy rims for them. Its like paying extra for clothes that look worse but in a very particular way. And its even a thing to ADD fake patina to a car. WTF? I used to think that was what people with a lot of money did because they were bored with having nice things all the time, and wanted to pretend to be “authentic” or to see how the Proletariat lived. Is that what being a hipster is?
Or do they genuinely like straw hats and unusual facial hair? And tattoos. So many tats. So many people trying so hard not to look pretentious. I don’t get it. I guess I was always a cranky old man before I became one. 😉
Dad had one just like above, but maroon over maroon. One day, Mom noticed the car was missing from the driveway when she went for the paper early one morning.
Several days later, the police called with the location of the car sans the 4 cylinder engine. To this day, my entire family is puzzled as to who would want an Iron Duke???
The Tech4/Iron Duke had many uses.
Boat anchor.
Holding down a corner of a tarp for painting.
Scrap value.
Ballast weight in the trunk for snow traction.
Go-kart/lawnmower/sump pump motor.
…but wait there’s more!
.
Plop them into the ocean to encourage coral reef formation.
.
Pile them up as a breakwall near beaches.
.
Drop them onto Morris Marinas if you run out of pianos.
.
Stack them end to end straight up to reach heaven.
(Keep Google Translate handy however)
.
Make a very heavy Jenga tower for parties.
(Have forklifts and ambulances on hand)
.
Strong pencil sharpener motor.
.
Strong fish tank pump motor.
.
Adequate turkey cutting knife motor.
.
Something to fling at the castle with your catapult.
(When you run out of whatever you normally use. I don’t know everything. Work with me here, people)
.
You guys are forgetting one. The Iron Duke was in high demand as a desirable, refined replacement for Vega 2300 engines.
Let me get one thing out of the way; the RWD Cutlass Supreme offered much better driving dynamics than the FWD Ciera did, unless you are in the North and it snows. The G Body gets very skittish in the rain so I can only imagine what it would be like in snow.
That being said, a 1986 Brougham model was the last car Hillary Clinton privately owned. Undoubtedly there were some political calculations involved about cannot get anything too flashy and has to be American, but this was a top choice for yuppie families back then. Good enough for the Governor’s wife!
When these cars debuted in 1983, GM had four years to correct the ill handling and quality problems of the X cars and had mostly done so. By 85/86, the morning sickness problems of the power steering racks had been corrected, and the engines received fuel injection before Honda put fuel injection in its cars. Quality had significantly improved and the engines improved a lot over time and got more power and more durability. They were considerably plushier than anyone had expected the cars of the ’80’s to be. Everyone expected us to be driving sub-Chevette size cars in 1979.
They sold well, and the Oldsmobile and Chevrolet versions regularly appeared in top ten seller lists, even after the Taurus debuted. The Pontiac STE version made it onto buff books 10 best lists and was lauded as offering European performance, handling, and equipment levels at American prices with American size and reliability/durability.
This was the last market dominant sedan marketed by GM after decades of market dominance. The C/H bodies were successful, but they didn’t bring in new customers. The N bodies, particularly the Grand Am, were successful, but they only slowed the market share bleeding. Apres moi, le deluge, says this car.
Let’s set our wayback machine to 1985. Let’s also forget the long journey’s into night of this car, when every other car at the airport rental lot was this, a Corsica, or a Tempo. Back then, families looking for a midsize sedan could buy an Accord, Camry, Stanza, Maxima, K Car, or the RWD LTD/Marquis.
The Accord, Camry, and Stanza were too small. The Maxima was small and considerably more expensive although it came with all the button tufting and electric gadgets and electronic instrument cluster that thrilled technoyouths in the ’80’s. The K car was smaller, dowdier, and not as plush inside. The K didn’t offer a V6 and didn’t offer a lot of power options. The LTD/Marquis suffered from chintzy Fairmont underpinnings and people didn’t want RWD in 1985.
Despite the current owner’s . . . ownership . . . look at that interior! A good cleaning and it would come right back to life. It’s an ATTRACTIVE, luxurious, plushy gray, unlike the hard scratchy cloth used in 2020. The silver exterior, if polished and cleaned, would brighten right up and sparkle nicely. The missing tag on the front fender should read Fuel Injection which indicates this is an Iron Duke powered car.
Whoever bought this car new in 1985 was probably trading in a 1977/1978 Colonnade or Aeroback sedan, or a Volare/Aspen and would have been blown away by the fuel efficiency, handling, room, comfort from the cloth seats, air conditioning, and power accessories.
I’m not done! I’m not done! In Mexico, these had a startlingly handsome variant called the Chevrolet Cutlass Eurosport, which had alloy wheels, fancy silver ground effects panels, (usually with a black or navy blue body, in either two or four door) and a five speed transmission and fancy bucket seats and console and trip computer.
My Dad bought himself a new 1983 Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera Brougham, in medium blue with velour interior. It was loaded, but no opera lamps or vinyl roof. It was the fanciest, plushest car our family ever had until then. It drove just lovely. It had decent pick-up, so I thought. We had it for many years. Here’s a pic from a Canadian brochure.
I had an ’87 Celebrity Eurosport, and a ’95 Ciera.
Both sedans. I’ve ridden in several other variants over their early years like an ’86-ish base 6000 and an ’82-ish Cutlass Ciera.
All had one thing in common in my opinion. They felt cheap. Just kind of generic, from the way they rode to the handling to the door handles to the interior switches. Not bad, just a feeling of comfortable seats attached to, well, not much.
Understeery, merely adequate braking and ride.
They had their good points. They were reliable, cheap to run and fix, and had good heat/AC. Visibility was excellent, as was snow traction.
The 3.1L in the ’95 was a strong runner. The Tech 4 in the ’87 was much better insulated from noise and vibration better than it was in, for example, the S10. But it was still a dog. Most of the other examples had the 2.8L and it was mostly adequate.
They had a lot of useful room inside and they were just the right size outside.
But they will never get the love from me that my ’79 Grand Prix or ’84 Regal got. Those felt much more solid, handled so much more naturally, and were quieter as well. They felt like they had better quality, though it may have just been the feeling rather than reality. They were also easier to work on myself, with lots of room under the hood and simple RWD layout. Carbs, mechanical fuel pumps and all that made them easy to learn for me, as I am only of average mechanical talent.
Granted, they were not great in snow, not helped by the higher pressure Hoosier GTs I had on both. Skinny, mushy tires cut through the snow better and thats what all the FWD variants had.
The Gs felt special. They had some swag and game. The FWDs felt like appliances for people who don’t care about cars very much.
Your mileage may vary.
Surprised that no one has mentioned “Fargo” yet.
The couple that were bitching about the “clear coat” that Executive Sales Manager Jerry Lundegaard ( “You Betchaa”) added to the Cutlass Ciera at the last minute so remind me of my parents!!
Every time I see a Ciera, I have to laugh!!
You meant “tru-coat,” dontchaa!
Aw, Geez, you got me, Norm!!
As for the cash that was buried along the side of the road, you betchaa Paul Bunyan found it!!!
My mom had one of these, same year if I recall. It was a baby blue Brougham and the garage mate to my dad’s (and later mine) 83 Delta 88 Royale Brougham 2 door. We were definitely a GM family.
My memory of the car is that it was mostly a decent car except for a persistent problem of sending either gas or exhaust fumes into the cabin through the air conditioning. The dealership had a hell of a time trying to fix it, mostly failing at doing so, and even when it seemed fixed, it would recur a few months later. Mom traded it in on a Nissan Altima in about 95 with somewhere around 150k miles, and by that time it was running kind of rough.