Almost exactly one month ago, I committed an entire week to treating Chicago like a vacation destination, and my home on the northeast side like an imaginary AirBNB. During each day of staycation, I tried to strike a good balance between actively doing things and relaxing. I had learned from my memories of vacations with my family of origin that while it’s often beneficial to make plans in order to make the most of a trip, it can be detrimental to the intended renewal effects of time off to just keep going nonstop. It was fun to try to see my city from a different perspective and pretend that I had only a limited number of days in which to experience it, and all within a budget.
It ended up being one of the most fun, adventurous, rejuvenating, and still cost-effective vacations I’ve ever taken. Things like riding the $10 water taxi from the museum campus to Navy Pier (which I also explored), and visiting the totally free Museum of Contemporary Photography at Columbia University and Lincoln Park Zoo were just a few of the fun activities that again proved to me that spending a lot of money is not necessary to have a good time in a city like this. This is especially true if one sticks to public transit. I had tried to do something different every day before ending up at one of the local beaches for part of the afternoon. Being unable to do too much in 2020 broadened my perspective about where I actually live, with many spaces having reopened this year. Simply being able to go places again reinforced in me not to take such things for granted.
Friday, October 5, 2012.
One such treasure is a local frozen custard shop called Lickity Split, which is located on a main thoroughfare in my neighborhood. I had ice cream on the brain one evening and had been ready to walk to a Baskin-Robbins about ten minutes from my house. Sometimes, though, I just want something now, and while the walk to the B-R might have burned some pre-emptive calories in advance of whatever I was going to end up eating, my curiosity led me to do a bit of research to discover that frozen custard actually has fewer calories (about 20% less) and grams of fat (over 40% less) than ice cream, according to some numbers I found online from the USDA. Not only this, but frozen custard has substantially more protein and calcium.
I’m not sure why I had incorrectly assumed that custard would have been less healthy than ice cream. When I think of custard, and not being super-familiar with it, I think of a thick, pudding-like substance that seems like it would be packed with more of the things that contribute to a thicker midsection, like a kind of fortified ice cream. It turns out I was wrong (and I’ll be wrong again, many times), so off to Lickity Split I strolled on a Friday evening, with the intent of starting my holiday immediately after powering-down my laptop at the end of the day for what would be an entire week.
The sweets shop itself is a gorgeous, little slice of Americana that looks like it could have existed in any decade from the previous century. All manner of old-school candies are sold in the main part of the store in the event you want to take something home once you’ve finished your cone or sundae. I opted for one scoop of peach-flavored frozen custard in a Joy cake cone, which I ate outside on one of the benches facing Broadway. It was delicious, flavorful, satisfying, and just enough of a serving to where I neither felt like a glutton or like I wanted more. I honestly couldn’t tell the difference between what I had just eaten and a scoop of peach ice cream, and I will be back, for sure.
The downsized 1978 – ’80 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme was one of my very first favorite cars I remember as a kid growing up in Flint, Michigan. By the late ’70s, I was of an age where I couldn’t learn the makes and models of cars any more quickly, and my playing of “count the Chevette” out loud while riding in either one of my family’s two Plymouths was a regular occurrence that surely must have tried the patience of the other occupants. There’s something inside of me that still gets really excited when I see a Cutlass from the same, three-year run as our featured car riding on those beautiful, color-matched Olds Super Stock wheels.
This was the generation of Cutlass that was new when I was first paying close attention to cars. I love the Colonnades, but my love for them came much later and after the 1978 – ’80 models had already entrenched themselves firmly into my heart as the benchmark, as desirable, classy machines that the tasteful people of Flint drove. I don’t read about a lot of love for the ’78s especially compared to that for the super-popular ’76 and ’77 models, which I have never quite understood, as I feel it was the best-looking midsized personal luxury coupe of that new wave from GM, and a very attractive car in its own right.
It’s true that like frozen custard, the downsized ’78 Cutlass Supreme coupe represented decreased numbers compared to what most people were used to from one of the United States’ most popular, individual cars: over 400 pounds and 11% lighter at (3,566 lbs. vs. 3,160 lbs.), almost a foot shorter (197.7″ long vs. 209.6″), almost five inches narrower (71.3″ wide vs. 76.2″), less than an inch taller (54.2″ vs. 53.4″), and all on a wheelbase that was about 4″ shorter (108.1″ vs 112″). Despite these reduced exterior dimensions, the EPA-calculated interior volume actually increased, slightly, from 94.9 to 95.5 cubic feet. Trunk space was virtually the same for both editions, at just over sixteen cubic feet.
While the most powerful engine available for ’77 was Olds’ own 403 cubic inch V8 with 185 horsepower, the largest engine available in the ’78 was a 350 V8 with 170 horses. By the time our featured ’79 was new, the most powerful engine available was a 305 V8 with 160 hp. While I’ll concede that most ’77 Cutlasses were probably powered by the 350 and that many ’79s had a 305, I thought I’d use a comparison of the fuel mileage of examples from both model years with the smallest V8 available, the 260. The combined city/highway EPA figure for three-speed automatic-equipped models were 21 mpg for the ’79 and 18 mpg for the ’77. While this was not an earthshattering difference, it was an improvement of almost 17%. The downsized Cutlass’s dietary and fitness program was a success.
The Supreme coupe was the most popular Cutlass for ’79, with almost 278,000 units sold. This represents the highest sales total for any individual Cutlass model for any of its thirty-nine model years between 1961 and 1999. For 1978, the first year of this downsized A-body, the Supreme coupe sold almost 241,000 units, which was only a slight drop from the 243,000 total from the corresponding ’77 model. We know this factory Pastel Green example is not a Supreme Brougham, the next most popular Cutlass that year (with 137,000 sold) as it appears to be missing the oblong “Brougham” emblem on its C-pillar next to the “Cutlass Supreme” script.
This was the generation of Cutlass Supreme that always looked correct to me from the start, versus the Colonnades, which never looked quite as sporty and tight, not to mention many of which had sagging or missing rear bumpers by the mid-’80s. The aero restyle that arrived for ’81 made some of the Cutlass magic disappear for me, with less sculptural bodysides that also eliminated the signature kickup in the rear quarter panels. I now wonder if ice cream might have seemed to rich for me later in life if I had been raised on frozen custard, though I doubt it, as I can barely taste the difference. I can appreciate both, much like I also love a Colonnade Cutlass. The 1978 – ’80 edition, though, will always have a special place in my heart as the serving size that seemed like just the right amount of Cutlass.
Edgewater, Chicago, Illinois.
August 2021.
Brochure photos courtesy of www.oldcarbrochures.com.
These shrank to roughly the size of the big Aussie cars, havent seen many of these smaller models, but I kinda like them. The brochure car looks better without that silly half vinyl top.
This brings up an interesting question… What might be the ratio of Cutlasses of this generation that didn’t have the half vinyl top versus those that did? In my mind’s eye, I’m seeing most of them with it.
I became a car buff a few years before you, so the facelifted Colonade coupes of 1976-77 were the benchmark Cutlasses for me. Those are still my favorite Cutlass for exterior styling, but the ’78s nonetheless impressed me then and now. They captured the essense of the 76-77 coupes in a smaller size (including that signature kickup in the rear quarter panel that was lost in the previous year’s 88/98 downsizing), something that would not be true with any of the cars that tried to replace the RWD Cutlass (Ciera, Calais, W body Supreme). I was very impressed with the entire range of ’78 GM A bodies when they were new, except the weird fastbacks which were short-lived. GM did that “capture the essense of the old cars in a smaller size” thing so well with the downsized ’77 B/C, ’78 A, and ’79 E bodies. Then they botched every attempt at same for the next decade.
There is an error in the brochure shown – ’79 Cutlasses all had black speedometers, not the silver one pictured. Actually, the black ones were phased in mid-’78; apparently there were complaints that the gauge (which was not backlit) was hard to read. Pontiac also used silver gauges in their A bodies for 1978 only. Buick stuck with the silver dials until 1984.
I’ve found most ice cream substitutes don’t even come close to satisfying my craving for real ice cream, although some of the more recent low-fat confections come close. I don’t eat ice cream that often, and not much of it when I do, but I usually hold out for the real thing. On the road, I usually go for the Dairy Queen soft-serve, vanilla dipped in chocolate. BR is always good, but the local place Gifford’s will always be the One True Ice Cream for me.
I had to look up Gifford’s since you mentioned it… the flavors on the splash page of their website look amazing.
I’m impressed that you (or anybody) would be able to tell an error in the brochure based on the color of the speedometer, but given what you’ve said about visibility / being hard to read, I can imagine this being written about in some car magazine.
Well Mr. Dennis, you and I have reached that point where we simply cannot agree on this car. I remember when these came out and recall walking through the vast sales lot at Collins Oldsmobile in Fort Wayne the summer a good friend of my mother was looking for a new car. The 350 and 305 may have been offered in 1978-79, but you would be hard pressed to find one because almost every one on the ground was equipped with the 260.
These were decently styled and I have no objection to the general size package – for comparison sake, 108 inches was the wheelbase of the 63-64 Studebaker Daytona hardtop coupes (compared with the 114 inches of the 64 Cutlass and 112 of the 61-63 F-85). But these were CAFE cars built to ace an exam rather than to perform in the real world. Too-small, underpowered engines and lightweight under-spec’d transmissions (with not too favorable gearing) made these the opposite of Cutlasses from their golden era. The later cars with the 307 were far more enjoyable to drive than those slugs with the 260. More power and stouter components might have made these classics, but that was not what these came with.
The Colonnades were never really favorites of mine, but they did one thing really well – they were tough, durable cars that stood up to a beating and provided the kind of comfort and torque Americans were used to. This car tried to take the Cutlass to a size smaller than it had ever been (albeit with more torque than the aluminum 215 offered). The basic package and the styling were fine, but the execution was definitely not. The only reason these sold as well as they did was because most of what Ford or Chrysler was putting out in this class for 1978-79 was not remotely as appealing to most of America. I would liken the 78-79 Cutlass more to lowfat frozen yogurt. The frozen custard of Oldsmobiles was a 77-78 Delta 88 with the 350.
FWIW, my mother’s friend (with a long history of GM ownership) bought a 2 door 78 Granada with the 250 I6.
One of the big reasons I liked American cars more than imports in the late ’70s was that you could special-order them with your choice of a huge range of powertrains, colors, and options. Yes there were some dud engines on offer, but as long as there was a good one you could order it. There was even a 5 speed manual on offer. You could choose suspension upgrades, bench or bucket seats, sunroof or T-roof, cloth or vinyl upholstery, a full set of gauges, different steering wheels, and dozens of other a la carte options. I would never buy an American car off the lot at this time if at all possible.
I love it that we can agree to disagree on a car, JP! (Is this the first instance? I’m thinking it actually isn’t…) The point you bring up about execution is the one niggle I have read about this generation of A-Body special, in that the quality of materials and assembly (fading plastics, fit, etc.) was lacking compared to what had come before
I don’t have any firsthand experience with these 1978 – ’80 Cutlasses, but I can recall seeing many of them in great shape years after their sell-by date, so they must have had some endurance built in.
” I would liken the 78-79 Cutlass more to lowfat frozen yogurt. The frozen custard of Oldsmobiles was a 77-78 Delta 88 with the 350.”
403 Pace Car was the banana split? lol
You have me thinking about the rest of the Oldsmobile line from that time! The Omega might have been low-fat ice milk. The Starfire might have been a push-pop – little and cute. And… well, it has been a looooong workday, and those are the only two metaphors I can think of right now. 🙂
Hello Joseph! Yet another great essay! You never fail to impress me..
I may be a bit older then you, we seem to have the same taste in cars. I too love this generation of Cutlass models. And yes, I even love the aero back ones. I find their design sleek and ahead of its time. Look at all the cars today that have fastback roof lines!
When I was a kid, I couldn’t wait till September rolled around as I would ride my bike (or walk) to all the car dealer ships to get s peak at all the new models. When September of 1977 rolled around, I was so excited to see the new GM A bodies, especially the A Specials because I had seen many previews of them in the car magazines that summer and also I recall seeing them in Time magazine (well I think it was Time) in an article with small pictures of the Cutlass Supreme, Monte Carlo, Regal, and Grand Prix.
The first one I saw in person was a brown Cutlass Supreme with a tan vinyl interior and a metal roof. I liked it a lot. But then I saw a white Brougham with a blue landau roof and blue interior and instantly feel in love!
I do like all the A Specials of this generation and feel that the 1981 update too away some of the personality. I did like the front clip of the 81 Cutlass Supremes with the unique grill though.
Thank you so much! I have really warmed to the Aerobacks in recent years. The one in the brochure photo I used looks especially sharp, and to your point, there are so many four-door fastbacks in 2021. I agree with you.
When I had a paper route as an adolescent, there was a family I delivered to that had a 10 y/o (or so) Cutlass Salon Aeroback four-door in white over white. It was immaculately kept, which was made all the more amazing since they had young kids (who are probably in their 30s now). It was the first time I had seen an Aeroback and recognized that they could actually be really attractive cars.
At the time, I was not a fan of the Aerobacks, but I agree that one in a lighter color with color-matched super stock wheels could really look cool. Unfortunately, so many them seemed to be equipped with pie plate wheelcovers, or, even worse, fake wire wheels.
A daily driver for me for many years was a 78 Salon 4 door. 260 and auto. It was remarkable in that city or highway use it always was a consistent 20mpg. Acceleration was decent, but not great, I think the transmission had more to do with that than the smaller engine, and a manual transmission would have been much better. On the highway it would sail along effortlessly at 80 and would go much faster if I pushed it..
The 1978-80 version, although significantly downsized, still came off as a bit baroque and “pudgy” to me. This was greatly rectified with the1981 restyle, with it’s now sharpened creases making the car far more athletic and attractive. Engines were still pretty lame, the only decent one being the 307, that was rarely found on dealer lots.
The 1981 facelift on the GM’s A-Special bodies mirrors the 1980 facelift on the larger B and C bodies. Both facelifts dropped the leading edge of the hood, better integrated the bumpers, smoothed out the sides, and raised the decklid a bit. And as with the 1980 B/C facelift, people seem split about 50/50 as to whether the revised A bodies looked better or worse than the earlier models. I can’t quite decide myself. For the Cutlass Supreme, I like the 78-79’s waterfall grille better than the shovel nose on the facelifted cars, and like the kick-up below the rear quarter window that was an Olds trademark. But the ’81-88 has bumpers that don’t look like afterthoughts, better looking rear quarter windows (that look more like opera windows than the previous design despite being larger), and a rear end treatment that reprises the attractive tail of the ’76-77 Colonade coupes. Both pre- and post-facelift Cutlasses are attractive.
I didn’t realize the larger V8s were such a rarity in these. Both people I knew who had a ’78 or ’79 (one a 4 door aeroback) had them, although I thought it was a Chevy 305 rather than an Olds 307. The Olds 350 was available too, though I think availability may have been restricted to wagons and Hurst models or some such.
Some had 5-speed manual transmission, that was unique.
Nope.
This Cutlass was to the 1976 Cutlass, what the Lincoln Mark VI was to the Mark V. The same baroque mish-mash, but on a smaller plate. Two adult males weighing 200 pounds would make this Cutlass weigh the same as the better Cutlass. Not worth it.
I’m old enough, and grew up in Chicago, the Cutlass capital of the world, so I was surrounded by Oldsmobile all my life. Knowing Oldsmobile in Chicago is like knowing Comiskey Park and the Sox – in the blood. So this Olds aficionado naturally agrees with JP. We’re old and wise.
When these showed up, they were not inspired by anything other than to make a smaller Cutlass. Not a better Cutlass – a smaller one. That is all it accomplished. Worse, like the Mark V, Oldsmobile crammed the 1977 stylings onto a smaller car, which made it look really crappy in comparison to the original. So, I see these vehicles like I do another Chicago icon – the Tootsie Roll – that is, chocolate flavor but not really chocolate.
Now, we can still like a Tootsie Roll, but don’t give me one and tell me it is as good as a Fanny May Mint Meltaway – or I’ll strip you of your CTA card.
NOTHING is as good as a Fanny-May melt away.
Though the ’76-’77 Cutlass Supreme comes close.
So… would the W-Body Cutlasses be the US Cellular or Guaranteed Rate of Olds? 😉
I’m closer to Joseph’s age, so by the time I was around these were THE Cutlasses… the Colonnade ones were huge, rusted out old-timers in comparison. In hindsight I could see how these look a little toy-like if your original frame of reference was the previous generation.
I will say that the ’81 restyle on these (and their GM mates) did make each of the cars look more substantial and “expensive.” Crisper lines, less baroque-looking, finer detailing on things like grilles and taillight clusters.
Oh, man! Now I feel like I need to find some Fannie Mae Mint Meltaways! Thank you for making me laugh. I always appreciate your perspectives on Chicago, as I am a transplant, even if a long-time one.
Great piece and love your always creative use of analogy. I too really love these cars, I always felt these Cutlass Supremes to be the best by far of all the downsized GM A-bodies. I even liked the Aerobacks as they looked rather European to me at the time. Boy are those rare now.
While I always liked them, it turned to love in 1985 when I bought a ’56 Super 88 convertible (Rose Mist & white) from a fellow Olds collector who lived in DC (I founded the OCA Blue & Gray chapter that year). Everett also had a gorgeous ’79 Supreme just like this one, except in pale non-metallic blue, that was in absolutely new condition… truly ice-cream perfection. Had the 305 V8 I believe. My wife liked it so much that she said she wanted one, but regrettably I didn’t follow though when superb examples were still somewhat common. Wouldn’t mind one now but with a ’69 Cutlass Holiday Sedan in the garage with her ‘stang vert there’s no room. Also I wonder how the 305 was that year, sI know those had some cam problems, but not sure what years that was an issue.
Thank you so much. I think a lot of this generation of Cutlass were kept really nice (relative to other cars) for a really long time. I recall having read about how they kept their value for a few-years stretch of time (when inflation was out of control in the early ’80s). I could completely understand how your wife would have wanted one after seeing one in great shape, because I still feel that way when I see one at a car show. I’m sitting on a small virtual “stack” of photos of this generation of Cutlass that I haven’t written up only because I didn’t have anything unique to say about any of them. 🙂
As this is a “my year Cutlass is better than yours” fest, I am going back to the ‘73s. When the colonnades rolled out across the GM line for ‘73, the Cutlass Supreme was the class car of the bunch. The twin grills and the big bumpers attractively shaped to show them off, moving through the small formal quarter windows, and back to the well-done taillight and rear bumper combo, the ‘73 CS really set off the Olds as the car to own. IMO it set off the commanding run of the Cutlass as the car of choice in the mid-to-late ‘70s. It did so by being a solid car mechanically, and well ahead visually, from so many other ‘73s that were much more visually hobbled by the new bumper mandates.
From ‘74 on, the Cutlass progressively worked itself toward the big, broad, straight front and rear bumper idiom that so many cars carried from the ‘73s. But the ‘73 Cutlass Supreme sits in a GM colonnade class of one.
I also really love the ’73 Cutlass – in any form. I love the base “S” models with the triangular rear-quarter windows, the Supremes with the V’d rear window and front fender louvers, the smaller bumpers. I love the round-taillight ’73 Chevelle, but it’s a toss-up between it and the Cutlass for me in terms of which ’73 GM Colonnade coupe is my favorite.
Here’s my current version of a green Cutlass currently in the garage:
Joseph’s pick is a worthy successor imo,
As usual, another great essay Joseph.
I too prefer the styling of pretty much all of the downsized A-bodies to their Colonnade predecessors. The Grand Prix, especially.
These Cutlasses just seemed right, size-wise, and I’m with you on the wheels. As to JPC’s comments about the engine choices, I’ve got to agree with him though. I was never a fan of that small V8 after driving an ’81 Camaro with the 267 or whatever it was, however the 305 in the ’77 Concours that my Mom had wasn’t too too bad.
As to Frozen Custard vs. Ice Cream, while I haven’t made ice cream in like almost 2 decades now, I seem to remember the ice cream bases not being all that different from one another. The key difference when creating an ice cream base was that when you did it as a custard, you needed to temper egg yolks and sugar very carefully on the stove, whereas regular ice cream didn’t need this extra step. While frozen custard tastes richer than ice cream, they really are kind of the same thing.
Now what I’d like to know is where Gelato falls into this conversation. ;o)
Thanks, RS Rick – and much respect to you for making your own ice cream! I’ve read about it, and I think I may have had friends over the years that made their own, and I’ve always been fascinated by the other ingredients that go into it. I had no idea salt was needed, for example!
Back when I had first drafted this essay maybe three weeks ago (yes, I write them that far in advance), it was more fresh in my mind the differences between custard and ice cream in terms of their content, but I do remember reading about eggs (yolks) being a main difference.
And the downsized ’78 – ’80 Grand Prix is stunning to me, all of a sudden. In the right color combo and with those styled steel Pontiac wheels with red center caps, I would totally rock and roll with one of those.
An odd bit of trivia… the ’79 Cutlass was one of the “very few to none” cars ever built that could be ordered with a 3-, 4-, or 5-speed manual transmission – dependent on engine choice, of course. I don’t believe that even the rest of the A-body lineup offered that choice.
My dad bought a ’78 Century aeroback with the 305 4 bbl, the largest engine available, and decently quick for the era. It felt very fast partly because the speedometer was 5 mph slow. If he’d known the Cutlass offered a 350, he might have bought one. I don’t remember those being an option. Wiki says only on the 4-4-2.
A bare-roofed Regal was the best looking of the ’78 A bodies in both our opinions, but he wrongly thought he needed a 4 door. The Cutlass was pudgy to me, despite being so similar in overall shape. The ’80+ were better.
Great as always, Joseph. I haven’t been to Patio Beef (or Edgewater) since COVID… but that custard shop looks worth the trip from UV.
Thanks, Chris. I haven’t been to Patio Beef in probably a decade, but I’m thinking maybe I’m due to walk over there in the near future. I loved their chicken. I’m still iffy about eating in restaurants (though I have a couple of times), but I’d have to feel it out. 🙂
I’m only just a few years younger than you are, based on that you were a budding car nut when this car was out. I have similar feelings about the later G-body Cutlass Supreme (81-88). I had a fondness for the Monte Carlo SS during the 80s (and my budding car nut years) because I saw it every Sunday watching NASCAR and they were featured a lot in the magazines my dad read (Popular Hot Rodding, Hot Rod). I just loved that aero nose and the blacked out trim.
But one summer I spent in North Carolina with my grandparents. One afternoon I was sitting on the front porch swing with my grandmother. We were just enjoying the warm afternoon, me listening to her stories about older family members i hadn’t met. I heard it before I saw it. A deep rumble of an exhaust coming from around the bend. I looked towards the road and watched it as it rounded the curve and went past the house. My car spotting game was on point, and had been since I started kindergarten. I knew by the quad headlights, the weirdly angled grille, and the thin taillights that it was a G-body Cutlass Supreme. It was white with a vinyl top over the back half of the roof, and T-tops that were off, allowing the owners mullet (it was the 80s in North Carolina) to be windblown. It sported the color-matched Super Stock wheels. It was clearly not running the stock exhaust, as it was much louder and sounded way cooler. It was around this time i was able to at least know what cars were running V8s by the sound of them.
A couple of days later, I saw it again around the same time. I figured he must be on his way home from work. And that became my little ritual all summer long, waiting and spotting that Cutlass to come by and bring a smile to my face. From then on, that became my favorite G-body and also got me more interested in Oldsmobiles overall.
It looked just like this one, except for the wheels not being color matched.
I loved reading this – thank you. I also really enjoy trying to understand an early association with a cool car and approximately the time when it all started. I was never big into NASCAR, but I do remember seeing bits of it on TV when it would be on in the background. I came to associate this same-generation of Buick Regal not with the Grand National, but with Richard Petty – and only because we had a Matchbox car of the “Petty Stocker”, IIRC.
The 1978 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme Coupe measuring in at 197.7″ was identical in size with the 1977 Chevrolet Nova Concours Coupe’ also at 197.7″. The fully equipped Nova Concours weighs in at least 3400 pounds with a 250 cu in I6 while the Cutlass Supreme Coupe’ at 3160 pounds with a 231 cu. in V6 weighs at least 240 pounds lighter than the Nova Concours or Oldsmobile Omega Coupes’ The Cutlass Supreme though had a little more interior room and trunk space capacity than the Nova Concours though. In terms of hip room the Nova had a bit more than the Cutlass Supreme since the Nova was a bit wider than the Cutlass but only by the slimmest of margin. Nova, 72.2″ wide vs. Cutlass at 71.5″ wide which was only a hair length or fingernail length in difference. Headroom for both cars, just about the same.
Thank you for this! It really drives home just how substantial the downsizing of the GM midsized cars was, especially relative to the (large) compact X-Bodies, like the Nova.
The blue one in the brochure/ad looks so beautiful! The proportions on these are just perfect. The Cutlass Cruiser of this generation is also one of the nicest proportioned wagons GM has ever built IMHO.
This generation of Cutlasses came out just before I turned 16. As noted above, the Chicago suburb where I grew up was chock full of all generations of Cutlasses (and Regals, Centuries, Grans Prix, LeManses, Monte Carlos and Malibus), so it often seemed like every third car on the road was one of these. They were sensible in size, handling, ride, and overall character and seemed to hit the sweet spot of the market at a time when Ford and Chrysler had nothing comparable to offer. Joe makes a great case for the 1978-80 being the best version, but I generally prefer the ’81-88 G-body coupes, if only because my first car was a 1984 Regal.
My dentist has this same model (or maybe a Brougham, the oblong emblem does seem to be present on the left C-pillar, but not the right). He bought it new but now keeps it at the office sans license plates, so it may not run any more. He also has a 1983 Nissan pickup.
My guess is that he can’t quite part with them, but his wife doesn’t want them cluttering up the driveway at home.
Time does vinyl roofs no favor!
Back when I lived in East Ravenswood, my landlord had one of these in maroon. Yes, a 2door. Got to ride in it a couple of times. I was sometimes the super in his building by default. Nobody wanted the job and I had a pretty good one in an office in the Loop. Don’t remember “Lickity Split” although I still recall a parlor known as “Humphrey Yogurt.” Usually only wandered as far north as Andersonville. By the time I got that far, I’d be thinking about getting home. Would always leave my Manta Rallye at home if I was having a beer and walk for the exercise and adventure even though I had a CTA monthly pass. Used the pass to go to work and sometimes the Manta would park for a week or so.
Being on a condo board seems like a pretty thankless job, so I get what you’re saying. I have a lot of respect for those board members and maintenance staff that keep things humming.
If I recall correctly, Lickity Split is maybe 9 or 10 years old, and they now have two locations – the other one being in in Rogers Park.
I joke with people that my CTA card is my “car keys”. Your Manta must have been one of only a handful of running examples (if not the only one) in this city!
The Manta was a Rallye, native to Chicago and never garaged. I bought it cheap in 1979 knowing that it would be parked on the street. Radiator got stolen once. Had a major adventure finding one at a southside junkyard. My CTA pass came in handy that day bringing the radiator home. Bus route to work started a couple blocks away, always got a seat on the route via LSD. Coming home, I walked from Michigan Ave. to the west near Chicago Theater and always got a seat. Drove to work once and parked in a construction site where the new Hyatt was being built. My apartment was a rental and I think my rent was $230 a month in 1979. Lots of good, inexpensive, ethnic places to eat near me. Mexican, Korean, Greek, Japanese. Hardly ever cooked when I was single.
My first new car was a ‘79 Olds Cutlass Calais. It was white with a light blue padded landau roof and light blue velour buckets. It was fully loaded except for a sunroof, 8 track or CB radio. I had the Olds 307 4BBL V8 and the 3 speed automatic transmission. Back in the days when you picked your individual options. I ordered it new in the summer of 1978 and it was delivered in mid September. I believe I paid $6,400 for it and remember my car payment being $212 a month for 36 months and my rent was $225 a month. My favorite car and I wish I still owned it. I also wish I was still paying $225 a month for rent…