GM’s Colonnades were possibly the most common cars on U.S. roads in the 1970’s. I was a young kid in the late 70’s and just becoming car conscious, but even I can remember seeing them everywhere. You’d probably not find a large parking lot like this without one. In the 80’s and early 90’s, these were the quintessential decrepit old used car. Cheap, plentiful and reasonably reliable for the low budget auto consumer. Everyone knew they would never be desirable classics like their immediate predecessors. Forty years on, most all of them have succumbed to the rusts of time but for the few survivors which are now garage-kept collector cars despite the naysayers. Not this one!
I don’t remember the last time I saw an honest-to-God curbside (ok, lotside in this case) Colonnade, in the wild and looking like it’s somebody’s regular ride. It’s covered in patina, not wax. It does not look loved, except perhaps in the way that an old saddle or baseball glove is.
The modern vehicles tower over it, but it doesn’t care. When it gets home, it doesn’t look like it will be put in any cushy garage. It’s earned its survivor status the hard way, one hot day and cold night at a time.
The car was parked in front of a dollar store, which may be the last place the owner should be visiting, judging from the interior which could be featured on an episode of Hoarders. The back seat has even more stuff.
I didn’t see the driver, so I am imagining this individual. I speculate the owner is female and in her late 70’s or 80’s. She got the car in 1978, when it was a fairly inexpensive used car. Since her husband died 30 years ago, her frugal tendencies have gotten a bit out of hand. She never gets rid of anything, certainly not her car. They make fancy new ones, but what’s wrong with this one?
I imagine in 1991, the hubcaps were either stolen or a couple fell off. Someone suggested she just get chrome wheels and not worry about the hubcaps. The smallest tires that would fit were more than adequate. Why let those tire salesmen swindle you into buying bigger tires?
Just how old is this car? There are CEO’s of major companies that weren’t even born when this car was built, in industries that didn’t exist. Color TV’s weren’t universal and VCR’s weren’t even available yet. Starbucks had one store, in the whole country, and Subway had 16. No states had laws limiting smoking indoors. A 74 Buick sitting in a parking lot in 2019 is equivalent to a 1929 Buick sitting in a lot in 1974. Somehow that seems like it would have been even more anachronistic. This car stuck out like a piece of broccoli on a meat lover’s pizza to me, but I didn’t see anybody else giving it a second look.
This car has seen trends, technologies and celebrities come and go for decades and it’s still here. Nothing on this car could be described as being in excellent condition, but for 45 years it has held together and still works as somebody’s primary car. How many of the vehicles surrounding it will be able to achieve that?
photographed May 22, 2019, Houston, TX
What a great writeup. Your writing brings to mind the element of dignity exhibited by the authentic life this car has had. Was never going to be a garage queen, that wasn’t the goal. It did what was asked every day and it has survived.
This recalls a song by Brit-band of the 80s/90s called “The Beautiful South”, the “Prettiest Eyes”, in which a lover discusses the lines worn into his (now older) lady’s beautiful face.
Nicely written post. These were susceptible to rust up here in the salty Northeast (along with most other cars as well of that era) but being in Texas may be the reason this one survived; even the horizontal surfaces paint is still viable, so if not a garage queen, maybe a carport denizen?
Your description of time is thought provoking and, for some of us CC readers, quite scary. Those of us who clearly remember working for a living back then wonder how much longer old models like this Buick (and ourselves) can continue to run in a useful manner.
Probably quite a bit longer.
Hopefully.
And it still has its front bumper filler! Even before it was hip to be eco-friendly, GM invented the biodegradable bumper filler.
Note, however, that the back bumper filler is gone.
At the Carlisle car shows, it’s not uncommon to see an otherwise immaculate GM vehicle from this era missing either the front or back bumper fillers (or both).
Pretty much only Reproduction Plastics makes fiberglass replacement bumper fillers for GM cars.
They are not perfect. But more durable.
My 1982 X-Body is missing all of it’s bumper fillers. But it is a southern car, so the heat and humidity doomed the originals long ago.
Last year I saw an original-condition ‘75 Cutlass Supreme, also parked in front of a dollar store. I photographed it and wrote a CC on it, but while I was taking pictures, like you, I speculated on who the driver could be. Must be older, grumpy, messy, etc., I figured.
As I was taking pictures, I barely noticed two young women walking out of the dollar store. They were in their early 20s, dressed in college sweatshirts, and chatting to each other like young women tend to do. It never crossed my mind that they’d be heading towards the Cutlass, but Surprise!
Turned out the Olds belonged to the uncle of one of the women… he frequently lets her drive it, which she said she enjoys doing. I had a nice chat with the driver and her friend, and it was an amusing realization that the drivers of patinated Colonnades aren’t always grumpy old folks! But the odds are still in your favor, of course.
A great find and writeup. It is sobering to remember that I was 15 years old in 1974 and heavily involved in the car shopping of my mother that year. I am not sure why she did not wind up in a Buick dealership, maybe because Fort Wayne’s sole Buick franchise (Jim Kelly Buick) was still downtown and thus not very convenient.
After trying to find a Cutlass Supreme sedan that summer (“sorry, we are sold out and I just can’t get another. I could show you an 88 . . . ” she decided on a Luxury LeMans that had been a demonstrator.
I was less heavily involved in my stepmom’s new car shopping earlier in 1974 and recall riding along on the test drive of the Monte Carlo. She bought a Cutlass Supreme coupe. Yes, the 1974 Colonnades are deeply etched into my memory banks.
I was surprised at the crudeness of that front facia on this car. I had always found the Buick one of the most attractive versions, but this header panel shows an almost Cuban level of street craftsmanship. Looking at a few online pictures I think there is supposed to be a bright moulding going up the sides and across the top of the grille which disguises the crudity.
I also see from your third-from-end picture that this one has lost its bright trim around those rear quarter windows. That was the strangest trim material I had ever seen, sort of a plastic with some imitation chrome/aluminum/stainless under the surface. It aged badly. Fortunately our sedan did not use that stuff.
That quarter window trim was just basically plastic chrome. The ones on my ’76 have yellowed and have some cracks. They are acceptable for a distance, but I will replace them at some point. The repros are quite over priced though. The ’73 Colonnades had metal trim though.
I believe that this subject car has probably had its header panel replaced or at least incorrectly installed. The poorly aligned sheet metal is amplifying the problem. And of course as others mention, it is missing trim too. I recall in a ’72 Skylark post, people pointed out the poorly/crudely fitting front sheetmetal on that car too.
See the following photo for how a proper fitting front end should look:
At the Carlisle GM show this past weekend, there was a display of Hurst Oldsmobiles. The back bumper filler panel on the Colonnade Hurst cars is very crudely finished. We’re talking AMC Gremlin levels of fit-and-finish.
This was one area were GM was behind both Ford and Chrysler. And GM’s filler panel material was much less durable, too.
Many Colonnade coupes are missing those rear window trim pieces you mention. The remaining ones have taken on a yellowish tint.
For all of the slamming of the Ford intermediates of this era, I’m not convinced that their build quality was inferior to that of the Colonnades. And the Fords had better quality interiors. GM was engaging in its share of corner-cutting during this era, too.
“GM was engaging in its share of corner-cutting during this era, too.”
Yes, I got my fill of trying to fix door panel pull straps that kept coming loose/off on both of the 74 Colonnades in my life. And those awful molded plastic lower door panels that would scuff your knuckles as you rolled down the windows.
My parents’ 1976 Delta 88 Royale had those plastic lower door panels, too, although there was an insert of carpet at the base of the panel.
Good point Geeber, and definitely on par with my experience (and someone who owns a 70’s GM and Ford product). While both Ford and GM were cutting costs in this era, I would agree that GM products did not always have the quality to or better build quality than Ford. GM also seemed to use a lot more plastic, like for the exterior nameplates, and in the interior.
If a admin sees this, one of my earlier posts here was flagged as spam and went straight to trash (and yes I was logged in).
I had the same thought about the grille, it seemed too plain and unfinished. I also concluded that it is missing the chrome around the grille. I’m not sure if they all had the chrome strip continuing across under the headlight. It might not have been on base models. Anyway it is surprising that with the grille chrome missing it isn’t more obvious, like with holes or clips or something.
To my eyes the Buick variant was always the most attractive version.
“In the 80’s and early 90’s, these were the quintessential decrepit old used car.”
For sure. When I was in high school and then college in the 80s, pretty much all the kids drove a 70s era Colonnade of some sort, often bought for a song from the original elderly owner. Lots of fond memories of these. Mine was a 76 Cutlass bought for $400 in 1987 with 110k miles. Got it up to 160k with absolutely no maintenance beyond oil changes, until my neglect killed it…
Being in my late 20s and from New England (both rust AND state inspections), I can only remember these as primer-gray, Bondo-filled “projects” sitting in driveways, occasionally being driven to AutoZone, nu-metal music barely audible over the loud exhaust. They always had either these wheels or some blocky American Racing wheels on them.
My buddies Uncle had one of these in the same colour that he bought new. It lasted him something like 25 years as he never drove it in the Toronto snow. He had a work truck that he would use in bad weather. Speaking of trucks, the wheels on the Buick in this story looks like they belong on one.
Warren St., near NJIT, Newark NJ 1983. The brick buildings in the background have not survived, and I have my doubts that this car has either (but it’s possible!)
I was there in 83 too! (BSME 1986). We most likely passed each other walking between classes in the Colton -Campbell Death Star Trench. Only a brave person parked on Warren St. I parked my 77 Grand Prix in the Lunar Lot in front of dorms( converted factory no less!) or in the Slanted Lot across the street. Scary times for night classes.
–Everyone knew they would never be desirable classics like their immediate predecessors.–
Amen to that. While I was a young auto buff, I saw these cars as ghastly fashion rides, unworthy of the brand legacies that preceded them. From 1972 to 1978, with the exception of the new full-sized GM cars in 1977, American cars were nasty. It’s a miracle Detroit had anyone driving one of their cars by 1980.
It was a moment when US designers in nearly all fields of industry, seemed to have a collective spasm of the uglies. The colors, the clothing, the shoes, the hair styling, and the houses were Ron Burgundy and Ron Jeremy “porn-stache” ugly. Thank god for Charlie’s Angels!
My kids watch old TV shows from the 1970s and are repeatedly shocked at how ugly everything was. Young people might have been about 30 pounds lighter, but the fashions they put on those slim figures were completely hideous. I remember living in denim and t-shirts because it was the only clothing available made of a natural fiber and didn’t cause a rash. Leisure suits? Disco music? These were the reasons for all the drug usage, folks.
Sometimes we get together at Curbside to consider which cars from this era we’d want – and I can only think of foreign brands. My first auto show was in 1974 and I collected every brochure available. I have gone through that collection ever since and there are no cars built in America that I would have wanted.
The 1977 full sized GM cars were a godsend. Chrysler produced the Omirizon. Then Ford went back to square one with the Fairmont. Finally, sanity was forced upon car manufacturers to return to cars that could transport passengers without fake wood appliques, velour, padded vinyl, opera anything, or acres of wasted sheet metal.
If you look upon any US car from 1974 and have nice memories – you’ve revealed yourself as a coked-out stoner during 1974.
V, I can’t (and don’t want to) change your opinion, but I lived through that era as well, and I have just the opposite feeling.The era was not all ugly design, even if it does not filter well through modern eyes, but design was different. Different use of color, of fabrics, of materials in general, and it seemed to be a reaction against the granola crunchy late 60s as much as anything. Car design was not an issue, at least to most, the issue was the downsizing and detuning of cars. With emissions controls, greater demands for efficiency, and insurance rates going up for anything having a hint of power, plus the added bonus of horrible build quality, it was inevitable that many of the cars of the times sucked. I would posit that style was still there, just not to your taste.
I do take exception to your statement that “If you look upon any US car from 1974 and have nice memories – you’ve revealed yourself as a coked-out stoner during 1974.” Not true, and disparaging. Those brougham barges sold quite well to a lot of folks of all walks of life. And oddly, you reference disco music, which is an apt identifier of the issues at hand. Disco was popular, but not to all. There are very good scholarly articles noting how disco was generally hated by the Straight White Male group (which is oddly the same group blamed for a lot of current issues) because disco was mainly performed by and associated with minorities (gays, people of color, and women). Filter in popular fashion, which started to reflect these minorities in addition to or instead of the majority, and backlash ensued. We see it happening again today, with the backlash against hip-hop and pop culture fashion.
I can handle your opinion. Why couldn’t you handle mine?
Our opinions are our opinions. They are based on emotions, experiences and knowledge. The fun parts of this blog are the opinions generated. I like emotional responses to these cars. I love the stories these cars generate.
My personal dislike of this auto era, fashion and pop music reflect a subjective opinion. However, I do know that the same models that preceded these Colonnade cars, (and followed them, btw), were better cars, and are more valued today in the market. My opinion is that this era of cars, fashions and music are gross, which is, in itself, a gross exaggeration.
An opinion.
The idea that my personal dislike indicates that I am a racist bigot is repulsive. There are no “scholarly” articles that could make such a claim. Unless I state that my opinion is based upon an unfair discrimination, no one can prove such a preposterous claim. Certainly no “scholar”.
You can disagree, but don’t pretend that “scholars” would agree with your opinion because it isn’t racist or closed minded, as though my opinion is.
” I remember living in denim and t-shirts because it was the only clothing available made of a natural fiber and didn’t cause a rash. Leisure suits? Disco music? These were the reasons for all the drug usage, folks.
Dumbest comment I’ve seen in ages. Yeah, polyester causes rashes. Yeah, disco music = addict. I’m going to avoid treading further here being rude, yet I suggest bake an apple pie, grill hotdogs, and play rock n’ roll. They need to be in your rotation soon, lest “us” people get you hooked on drugs and mixed fabrics LOL.
LOL!
Hot dogs, apple pie and rock n’ roll are always the perfect prescription!
Bring the PBR!
I hated almost all new cars from the Colonade era, but I really despised the Colonade cars themselves the most. To this day, I don’t understand what GM was thinking when they went from great looking cars across the board in 1972 to these horrible things. They sold pretty well, my mom and sister’s cars were ’73 Cutlasses, and boy, did I hate the looks of them. I had mom’s old car, a ’72 Cutlass and was was happy not to be driving a new one.
I didn’t read anything racial in the original comment. I took it as hyperbole. Surprising that the disco passions are still strong all these years later!
Having been too young to really experience the disco era, I haven’t heard the theory that anti-disco=anti-minority. From my little exposure to it, I associate disco with John Travolta and the BeeGees! Shows what I know! Happily, I think music has tended to cross racial lines more than most anything else. Kind of a diplomatic envoy between cultures.
These cars were not designed to have chromed park benches and cow catchers attached to their grilles and tail lights. I would have like to have seen what they could have looked like if the Feds didn’t ruin these cars’ appearances.
The 1972 Torino went from looking passable to looking ghastly the next year thanks to those monstrosities.
I agree, though I put a lot of the blame on Ford. All their federal bumpers looked terrible. GM had mixed results, some of their’s were not bad. But Chyrsler did the best, I think. Many of their post-73 bumpers looked fine.
That’s not actually what happened, though it’s an oft-repeated bit of “common knowledge”. What the feds did was issue a bumper performance standard. It contained absolutely no requirements or prohibitions related to the bumpers’ appearance. Automakers chose to install ugly bumpers in many cases, arguably as part of a broader effort to turn public opinion against vehicle regulation in general. That’s entirely on the automakers, not on the government for requiring that car bumpers be functional, not just fashion accessories.
Want proof? Go look at a Pontiac from that same era, with the Endura bumpers.
Yes! Very much this. The point they tried to make clearly ended up “unproven”.
But could Pontiac and all the other GM divisions put Endura bumpers on all their cars in 1973, 74 and 75?
If they’d wanted to, yes! They simply chose not to.
Did they have the production capacity for it in 1974?
Chicken, meet egg. Egg, chicken. You two have a lot to talk over!
I enjoyed your write-up. Nice to see an old car still doing it’s thing.
I think the wheels are from a Chevy LUV but painted. They seem to work on it.
The undersized tires kind of compliment the curves of the body.
I grew up in the 70s when most cars had these bulky bumpers, and Im not annoyed by them as much as some people. That’s just how things looked. It did make it easy to push another car without damage if you needed to.
I didn’t like the Colonades as a kid because I saw the impracticality of the body, but later I
liked them for the same reason. Not everything has to be trim and logical.
This is a happy car, with a happy face, and I like it.
Not many of these on the road. I caught this one on the way to work this morning. The badge on the side of the roof says “Luxus.” I could only get one pic in traffic. The Regal appeared complete but ran rough.
Wow, another one! CC effect
Great post. I enjoy playing the “what would a 50 year old Chevy look like in 1969” game too. Yesterday a 1964 Dodge Dart was pulling out of a parking spot in front of where I live – being a smaller car I don’t think it caught a lot of people’s attention. Chrysler introduced the general shape of cars (sans the tail fins) back in 1957, which is still sort of with us, although the higher, boxy shape that cars had in the 1920s will likely be what cars in the next 20 years will look like, although obviously more aerodynamic. Another car that caught my attention was a matte grey Honda Civic Type R with dual spoilers- glad to see there are some low to ground cars still being made.
There are reasons the 1970s became the hedonistic decade – Watergate, Vietnam, OPEC Oil Embargo, and stagflation, people became disillusioned and just wanted to party often arriving in 2 door personal luxury. I read once that no one thought a ‘65 Mustang convertible would be collectible due to over a 100 thousand being produced, so maybe there is some hope for a GM colonnade, but since it’s been over 40 years it seem unlikely.
Playing the 29 in 74/74 in 19 game, a 29 Buick would have looked SO old in the 70’s. Today, arguably the old car is sleeker than the new cars around it. They are more aerodynamic, but many newer cars have adopted a taller, ungainly shape, like the Nissan in front of the Buick. I agree cars seem to be reverting to the tall, two-box proportions that the early sedans had.
I appreciate your optimism. People really loved the original Mustang when new and it never really went away, especially as Ford began straying from the formula with bloat and then the awkward looking Mustang II. At 20 years old, the early Stangs were considered classics. Colonnade collectors are still kind of a cult in the old car world. Volume is only one part of collectibility, with desirability being the more important factor. 70’s American cars will never be as desirable or valuable as the 60’s ones, regardless of volumes (excepting some early 70’s muscle cars, of course).
People were already seeking out and restoring 1965 and 1966 Mustangs by 1981. I remember Time magazine featuring an article about this.
If people aren’t restoring Colonnades in large numbers by now, it’s not going to happen.
Excellent find and article Jon. Thank you. When I was a young teenager, Colonnades were ubiquitous. Perhaps the most common domestic cars on the road in Eastern Canada in the late 70s. And I have to admit, I was tired of them at the time. Especially, as their design became obsolete so quickly, due to cars like the downsized 1978 A Bodies and the Fairmont/Zephyr. With their tendency to rust fairly easily, they too often came across as beater gas hogs. I’ve always appreciated practical design in cars, and felt the Colonnades sacrificed too much to flamboyant styling. Then and now.
I knew I was automatically going to like this post, given the subject matter (Colonnade; the ’70s; a car from a make formerly HQ’d in my hometown), and usual great writing and pictures.
One thing I suddenly remembered when looking at one of Jon’s rear three-quarter shots of this car was how the sloping flag-shape of the rear quarter windows was echoed in the body sculpting of the front fenders/doors.
Enjoyable read!
Thanks! This is certainly a bold design, and pretty well integrated. Thinking about the 29 Buick, I realized that perhaps the front fender design was trying to be suggestive of a 20’s/30’s style. I had never thought of that before. As VanillaDude pointed out, the bumpers are the only thing limiting an otherwise very sleek design.
Check out this 1941 Chevy coupe…
https://www.google.com/search?q=1941+chevrolet+coupe&client=ms-android-verizon&prmd=sivn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiAr7-L8IrjAhVHr1QKHZ61BakQ_AUoAnoECAwQAg&biw=412&bih=751&dpr=2.63#imgrc=NaZGrvBvTW_PCM
And you can see from where the Colonnade designers got their marching orders. Trying to bring back a neoclassical spin on the prewar iron, it sort of worked, but seemed like an answer to a question nobody was asking.
I love a good Colonnade! They really were everywhere throughout the ’70s and ’80s.
I have vivid memories of them by the late 1980s and early ’90s running around in misfiring, long out of tune engines belching blue smoke out the tailpipe, rusty doors and roofs and probably a 2X4 for a rear bumper.
But the ones that were kept up with were (and are) gorgeous cars, and today, the low mileage, nicely optioned ones command high price tags.
I would love to see that Buick cleaned up with a nice set of Buick Rallye wheels on RWL tires; hopefully its next owner agrees.
FWIW, my ’77 GP is still in heavy DD rotation and it still has its bumper fillers!
But the ones that were kept up with were (and are) gorgeous cars, and today, the low mileage, nicely optioned ones command high price tags.
Stay tuned for my next article.
Love your GP!
Hi Lt. Dan.
I agree about the rallye wheels. And it should have Radial T/As because everything should have Radial T/As.
BTW, how’s the ’83 GP running?
Its still doing battle on the roads with modern incompetent drivers in Camcords and cute utes
Got my driver’s license in ’74…did my HS driver’s ed instruction with cars like this (donated by the local dealer). What I remember was how difficult it was to see out the back of them when trying to parallel park (guess we’re back to that now with many cars).
I remember someone commenting around the time these came out (don’t know why it reminds me of this car) that they couldn’t believe it was going to cost more than $20 to fill up their tank (I think these cars had 23 gallon tanks).
My Father had owned mid-sized GM, but that was in the mid-60’s when he owned an Olds F85. By this time he had moved over to large Fords (we had a country sedan)…plus he still owned his ’68 Renault R10.
I’m trying to find the where abouts of my family’s 1974 350 v8 Buick Century 2door. Any info would be greatly appreciated. Last know place was Hood county tx. Feel free to contact me on FB in the link below or findmybuick@yahoo.com
https://www.facebook.com/100094059154486/posts/102233236255315/?mibextid=rS40aB7S9Ucbxw6v