Lord, won’t you buy me an Oldsmobile sang no one ever, certainly not Janis, and not any of the legions of artists since. Yet here we were in the times of the New Wave, with Japan Inc. well in its ascendancy, the thawing in relations with the Soviet Empire making global warming look like a hoax, and perms with shoulder pads all over the place in Los Angeles. Yet what might have been considered a chic little squared-off coupe wearing one of Detroit’s most storied badges barely made a ripple. At least not on the best, er, I mean West Coast of these here United States of America.
I don’t know that I was quite aware that the Olds Firenza even existed. Sure, there were J-bodies all over the place, many of the winners of The Price Is Right’s Showcase Showdown did live in SoCal after all or at least had to drive their “prizes” back home from the Television City Complex in Los Angeles through the local area to whatever place they came on down from.
Cavaliers were like cockroaches (and to be avoided likewise), Skyhawks somehow were attractive to those without the means to acquire a 3-series or Baby Benz or whose corporate lease budgets and edicts only allowed for expenditures from the “Domestic” column, Pontiac’s J/2000/Bird-special-name-of-the-week were for those needing more excitement than a T-1000 and my deep thoughts on the Cimarron will remain unwritten this time, it’s a new year. Did I forget one, I can’t keep track of all the rungs on the ladder, frankly one rung in a ladder looks, feels, and performs much the same as any other when you consider the analogy.
I earned (ha, more like was assigned), my United States resident birthright golden ticket, AKA my driver’s license, the same year this particular car was built. I certainly was enamored of cars that a man with a moderate I.Q. wearing a blindfold might touch the sheetmetal of on a dark and stormy night and think were the same as this in 1985, i.e. the Celica, Scirocco, 200SX, etc. and so forth. I’ll allow those were perhaps somewhat higher priced (to start anyway, yet usually far better equipped), however the Olds badge was at least marketed as somewhat more premium for whatever that’s worth, i.e. not really very much. Yet those are the rules that are played by so it cuts both ways and the more economy-sized and lower priced offerings were definitely smaller than the Olds.
But rectilinear styling is only skin deep, and garbage goes to the bone. Or so the saying goes. There must be a reason my fellow generational peeps are currently bidding up excellent examples of those “competitors” and a myriad of others of the era, yet the J seems to stand for Junk at least as far as those thrusting their money at the online auctions are concerned.
Now, there’s no doubt that the Coupe is the looker of the bunch, after all the J-car was offered in 2-door sedan, 4-door sedan, 4-door wagon, and this coupe form; none of them were ugly, just maybe not particularly inspired. Oh, and the Convertible, but not as an Olds, which is the only version that might give the Coupe a (visual) run for its money; at least if the top is down. Even the Olds’ front isn’t the worst of the litter, the grille-less visage with lots of lights certainly was a predictor of the future for many cars.
Maybe that’s the problem, an Olds being futuristic in any way. While there actually was still a car with a 4-4-2 badge in 1985 coveted by a few people somewhere near the Ohio/Kentucky border, generally an Oldsmobile of the ’80s is the car brand most likely to be sporting doilies (if Tatra87’s neighbors hadn’t stashed them all away by then in their Laurels, Cedrics, and Crestas) if you were to ask most anyone in the teen to very early 30-something demographic. Come to think of it, perhaps mostly thought of as your father’s car, now how’d I think of that?
Still, as I just said, it WAS the 1980s and Oldsmobile was not yet a complete shadow of its former self. Anything with a Cutlass badge either front, center, or after the real name still sold like the proverbial hotcakes, and some genuinely interesting shapes and divisional contortions were still in the pipeline before the rocket brand’s launchpad was dismantled for good. Just not the Firenza. So what’s the problem?
I’ll tell you. Or at least give you one opinion. Here’s the 2.0liter inline-4 engine in this car. This produced a whopping 88 horsepower on average according to the sources I looked at. It was the base engine relative to the optional 1.8liter inline-4 overhead (single) cam engine that produced 84hp. Yeah, four less for $50 more. Uh, alright, every generation does have to learn the “new math” in school and that wonderful 2023-era word “shrinkflation” certainly applies, everything new is old again. Or something like that. There was a 2.8l V-6 available that produced 150hp (according to the brochure only) and presumably more torque. A 4-speed manual was standard with the 2.0l, and a 3-speed automatic was an option.
This car is equipped with said 3-speed automatic and the 2.0, just like I’m speculating most of its ilk for the entire seven year production run did. It’s a slug. Meantime the Japanese were producing gems that purred like sewing machines or bigger fours that had truck-like grunt, Germany had a relative stone axe but it would keep going and overall thrilled more the faster you went, with an unburstable feel. You don’t need a heavy V-6 in a small coupe if you can properly engineer a good four. A five speed manual was offered but only for the 1.8. And the 3-speed auto was $475 back then. All of the competition offered five speed manuals as standard with whatever engines they offered by this time, most every competitor was also on the cusp (the next year in fact) of launching their next generation cars and drivetrains. Don’t even mention the Olds Calais, which was new for ’85, also a smaller-ish coupe, yet with the least sporty formal roofline this side of a Cougar. Seeing that Iron Duke abomination in the showroom didn’t help sell anything but more Toyotas across the street, at least on the coasts where not everyone has a family member in a GM factory willing to give out their employee discount plan credential.
Anyway. Let’s look inside. Alright, kind of vaguely promising at first glance. At least there’s a color, blue. A lot of blue. And some black. Overall it’s actually admirably restrained. Let’s dive deeper, no letting sleeping dogs lie around here.
Bucket seats! Too bad they are as flat as the benches in gym class. Bolsters, man, bolsters! Sporty coupe, remember?
The back seat does look decently roomy, airy and overall easy to see out of, the cushion perhaps a bit low, but three lap belts to counteract your snapped neck and at least pop out rear windows to vent a little of the baking oven effect all the glass must provide.
In case you forget which J(unk)-car you are in, the name is right there on the door panel, the armrest looks to be located in the right spot, manual locks and windows (it is only the S model after all, and an S is part of baSe), but there’s still carpet at the bottom for that luxury feel that an Olds must somehow provide. I mean, to me nothing says luxury like effortless and eager thrusting acceleration, but carpet at the bottom of a door may do the same for others, go ahead, rub that bush if you must!
This here though, what’s with the wheel? To begin, it’s advertised as leather-wrapped, however this one looks to have been attended to by a Jewish Mohel (pronounced “moyle”) soon after its birth on the production line. And not even on just one end, but somehow on top AND bottom, I’m not even sure how it’s supposed to stay on, it’s shocking, that!
And since I’m already there and can’t be shocked further, the center of the steering wheel looks like two spread legs and a decapitated torso giving birth to a squirming bright red rocket launchin’ right atcha! Once you see it, there’s no putting that genie back in the bottle. Yeah, that’s exactly what I want to hold onto and be seeing when I’m trying to slice and dice traffic on the 405 or hang on around the turns of Mulholland. That thing is hideous, I hope someone got fired.
There’s that inspired 3-speed shifter assembly that looks like some sort of mailslot with someone’s cane shoved through it and felt about the same to use. The Bore-O-Matic. At least this car sports the air conditioning option, a Detroit hallmark that was in fact the standard of the world for many years and might still be. It also still sports the dual key setup with different keys for ignition and doors. In some Cadillacs they were even gold (colored, the rich and convincing veneer of Liberace luxury). Olds and the rest of the peasantry brands (remember what I said about the ladder?) else got silver ones whose plating wore off quickly exposing what I assume was dull brass, all featuring the same GM logo.
Someone also stepped up and ordered the upgrade radio, mind you it was a small step only, from AM to AM/FM. No tapes or CDs here. Four presets and were these the ones where if you pushed two buttons (i.e. 1-2 and 3-4) at the same time you’d get another station preset for a total of six? The rear defroster was an option (still?), but I’m sure the cigarette lighter was standard. Uh, maybe I’m not so sure, actually.
We glimpsed this earlier but here’s the full visage of instrumentation. Both gauges. Or “Gages”. Speedometer and Fuel. Yay. And a few lights for the idiots. Where did anyone in Detroit ever get the idea that a driver was completely disinterested in what their machine was doing? Oh, that’s right, they could get that but it’d be a few dollars more. In the meantime let’s remind them with the Dashboard Of Sadness and all of its blank space they could stare at while the speedometer needle inched ever closer to its full monty of 85mph, four full years after the law mandating that was repealed. By 1985, a Scirocco’s would go to 120mph, a Celica’s to 130, all cars that also were introduced in 1982. This stuff matters! Unless, of course, your Coupe has some sort of performance anxiety. It’s okay (insert hand over mouth coy chuckle emoji here)…
Elapsed mileage on the odometer shows 22,520 and there is no tripmeter, BTW. I’d like to think this car is on its second go-round of the odometer but it may not be, this may be it for this one. Maybe that’s why there’s no separate tripmeter, the main one can handle that, nobody wanted to drive this farther than one long trip. I mean, look at it, it’s dusty inside, somewhat rusty outside, but not exactly “worn” in any way.
The dashboard has lots of faux stitching, but that was a thing back then that somehow is starting to be coming back into style somehow (the double use of somehow is intentional). It’s relatively low too, at least the part directly ahead of the passenger, not Honda-low, but decent with a sloped top o’ the dash that isn’t seen today at all anymore. For some reason the passenger gets TWO vents on the side, bonus! That’s in addition to their half of the center duo up there where now a screen would be perched. But come on, screen haters, don’t tell me the base of the windscreen is any lower than where the top of a screen is these days! The top of the instrument cluster with its two miserable gauges is almost lower than that base. Come on, I gotta step out of this, I’ll hold the door for you.
This is a good a time as any to examine the rolling stock…13″ optional “Rallye”-looking wheels with 175/80 Firestone FR440 tires (surely not original?), making for a sidewall of 140mm height. It’s almost as tall as it is wide. That gets you your supple ride, I suppose, and will work fine for driving across the midwest without steering for hundreds of miles, but not for taking a curve with verve. 13s were still seen on base economy car models in the mid-80s but rarely with an 80-series, a 175/70 or 185/70 was far more common with the majority heading toward 60s on 14s.
As a side note and my automotive PSA for the year (and, okay, since we are between friends here, a bit of a pet peeve), it seems a large number of people believe that sidewall height of a tire is a constant measurement denoted by the number, i.e a given numerical sidewall is just too low. Well, it isn’t necessarily, that number is actually a percentage, the actual sidewall dimension differs based on the tread width number. It’s a percentage of the tread width. So a 285/45 tire would have a sidewall height of 128mm (285mm width multiplied by 0.45), almost exactly the same sidewall as that of a 255/50 tire or a 215/60 or a 185/70. The wheel diameter itself is irrelevant in this calculation and measurement.
What else is there here? Ah, this one has mudflaps to advertise your steed to all who follow and protect the bodywork from spray and grime, however it seems that horse has long since left the barn. The whole point of the flap is to divert water away from the metal behind it, adding flaps after rust appears isn’t putting that genie back in the bottle, not even Ol’ Rusty Jones himself could work his magic here.. But if the mileage is low as suspected, perhaps this is more a poor early repair or a leak from the inside out after sitting and leaking in the back?
The derriere here is fairly non-descript and certainly inoffensive, lose the badging and the rockets on the taillights and it could be several other cars (and not just several other J-cars I mean). It’s not bad but not overly captivating in any way either, not that it really needs to be. The large rear glass though is attractive, as I recall I didn’t think to use the keys that were in the ignition to open it, being far too used to having a handy latch release to the left of the driver’s seat to open it and annoyed that Detroit cheaped out on that too on this semi-higher-end-positioned manufacturer’s coupe. Hence no picture of the inside of the cargo area this time. You can google it if you must, I won’t do it for you, consider it my little instance of quiet quitting.
I’ve actually had this one in the can for some time now, and ran low on gas there for a while. I’m running a little low again (I can only handle so much excitement!), but perusing a VIN label always perks me up. It turns out that this one dates from February 1985 and was built in Leeds, Missouri (just outside of KC, MO), apparently the only plant that built the Firenza versions of the J-body, for a total of 282,460 examples over seven model years before the line and the plant itself for that matter were taken down for good. Look at the bottom right of the VIN label, it says “Pass Car”. Well, it seems most people did in fact pass on the car.
From 1982 until the end of the 1987 model year when the Coupe was killed off a total of 57,282 Coupes (hatchbacks like this one) were built. 1985 only had 7,684 Coupes seeing the light of day with the following two years dropping those numbers in about half and then half again. In ’86 the 2-door sedan (confusingly sometimes also called Coupe) joined the lineup and so for a couple of years there were four variants and for the final 1988 year the O.G. Coupe was dropped leaving just the three others to soldier on.
Some will cavalierly debate whether it’s fair to look at a Firenza as a “sporty” coupe like some of the others I mentioned earlier. In reality, nobody really did, however they could and maybe should have. Could and should have, that is, if Olds was actually able to add a little verve and zip into its cars (they have the freaking rocket logo plastered all over the car and coming at you from the steering wheel, for crying out loud!).
Yes, there was ostensibly a GT coupe with the V6, how many of those have you seen not in a commercial? Exactly. In the end most of the public ignored the Firenza, and likely most weren’t any more aware of it than I was. Seven model years, four body styles, and just over a quarter million sold. Few knew, fewer looked, and even fewer purchased. That spells failure with a capital F. Hey, just like Firenza itself!
Related Reading:
Ed S. caught a 1986 Coupe and translated its brochure from marketing into reality here
Tom K. was a fan of the Firenza and wrote about its last year here
Paul N. came across what he pondered may have been the nicest one left
It is important to remember that the Oldsmobile that General Motors willfully destroyed with the ‘Not your father’s Oldsmobile’ advertising campaign in 1988 had produced the best-selling car in the USA in 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, and 1983. The 1984 and 1985 best-seller was the Chevy Cavalier, suggesting that the Firenza really was a failure in selling less cars over its run than its Chevy clone sold in a year. Somehow the badge-engineering magic that made the Cutlass Supreme worth buying over a Chevy, Pontiac or Ford had been forgotten when the Firenza was conceived.
Oldsmobile was very much a big car brand and not a small car brand. The Omega (both RWD and FWD) was the weakest of the NOVA cars. The Starfire (H-Body) was a total dud. And it only got worse with the Firenza. Meanwhile the 88 and 98 and Cutlass had been the hot sellers for years.
The reality is that Olds really never made the transition to the new FWD era very successfully, especially so with smaller cars. That was their ultimate undoing.
I suppose the rise of small cars was the result of austerity, so most buyers didn’t bother springing for mid-ladder brands. I thought the Cutlass Ciera was a big success, and a check of automobile catalog record revealed that Oldsmobile sold 365,481 of them in 1986, once the economy had improved. That was pretty much peak A-car, and many of GM’s problems might be demonstrated by the fact they were still selling them a decade later in what was the most competitive part of the car market at the time. In 1986, a well-equipped Cutlass Ciera SL coupe with leather and a center console would have been a great cocoon of a car for the rush hour commute. In 1996, getting handed a Cutlass Ciera or Buick Century at the rental car desk was a trip back in time to the malaise era.
https://barnfinds.com/nicely-equipped-1986-oldsmobile-cutlass-ciera-sl-coupe/
I suppose the rise of small cars was the result of austerity,
It wasn’t. And what particular “austerity” are you referring to?
The rise of small cars (imports/Rambler, etc.) that started in the ’50s was anything but the result of austerity. Import and Rambler buyers had higher income and higher college levels than buyers of typical big American cars. Import buyers have always had these better economic qualities.
Sure, domestic small cars got a boost right after each energy crisis, but it was fuel economy that drove those purchases.
The Ciera was not a “small” car; it was a mid-sized car, designed to replace the RWD mid size A-Bodies, which is why they were also given that body designation.
I’m talking about when the Ford Escort displaced the Cutlass Supreme as the best-selling car in 1982, and then the Cavalier in 1984 and 1985. Times were pretty tough, and people were buying subcompacts who had previously been driving intermediates. Those same people would return to midsized cars or move up to premium imports and SUVs as the economy improved.
It’s pretty amazing that people bought an Omega with a few extra inches of overhang as an intermediate to the X-car’s compact. The wheelbase stayed the same. The width and height stayed the same. The A-bodies were longer though. I thought these designations were supposed to be based on interior space. Did trunk volume count?
It is better than a Cadavalier.
hahaha, “cadavalier”!
Not that it would have mattered, but certain elements of this thing would have been better on a Pontiac, particularly the front end. The whole turn-signal-between-the-headlights thing is so 1977 Grand Prix and 1980ish Bonneville. Oh wait; Pontiac had to go all ’77 Trans Am on the front of their J-car.
As one who is firmly entrenched in the Midwest (lower part, anyway), and who had nobody in their family at a GM plant although I know people who have family working at the Wentzville GM plant, these were thin on the ground even back in the day.
The one thing I do really remember about these is the shrunken version of the Olds Rallye wheels (or whatever they were called) to hold those tiny tires in place.
Overall a very good, although not lust-worthy by any means, catch.
The turn signal between the headlights was an Oldsmobile thing in ’59 and again on the ’67, ’68 F85/Cutlass/Wagons as well as some 88 models.
I never really noticed, how cheesy these imitation Oldsmobile Super Stock wheels looked at the time. It seemed like blasphemy, GM was offering these simulated versions of their iconic Buick road wheels and Olds Super Stock wheels, in 13″ form. The Buick examples came off better, as it was a simpler design. The samples seen in the 1981 Skylark brochure, was rarely seen on the road. Probably, a positive. As overexposure of these classic wheels, in 13″ form, would have been a bad thing.
A sign of the times, as GM tried to derive as much marketing good will with customers, as they created generic-looking clone cars. Embellishing them, using the best design cues from their iconic legacy products.
FWIW, these aren’t “imitation” or “simulated versions”; they are every bit as real as the ones used on the larger cars. The only real difference is that the offset is different, a necessity of FWD.
You’re right! Too bad, the offset detracted from their looks. Besides, their smaller size.
I last saw a Firenza in the spring of 2015. The reason I remember it so well is because that was just before I began writing for Curbside Classic, and I later thought how I should have photographed it. I’ve never seen that Firenza (or any other) since then.
This is an incredible find – amazing how few of these cars were built, considering the zillions of J cars that rolled off assembly lines in the 1980s. And looking at those interior pictures, I can just sense that unique J-car smell. Maybe it was the plastic, maybe the upholstery, or maybe it was just because most of the examples I rode in were just older, musty cars, but I associate a certain odor with that interior. As well as various squeaks during the lumpy idle.
Oh, and if I owned one of these cars, I’d never be able to look at that steering wheel the same, given your description!
But concluding here in a say-something-nice mindset, I agree that the Firenza’s front end was the best of the J-car lot.
I’ve never seen one of these in the flesh. I’ve maybe seen them peripherally in scenes of mid-80s TV, like Knight Rider. By the time I neared graduation from high school, which, for me, was around the millennium, almost all the J-bodies were already dead and gone. Cavaliers and Sunfires were still being made, but they were rare sights. The Firenza had been discontinued a decade earlier and disappeared fast.
The most vivid memory I have of this car is Sondra Locke driving one in the film “Sudden Impact”. While she is stopped at a traffic light, some street punks leer at her. She motions them to come over, asks if they need a lift, tells them to shove a jack up their rear end, then roars away with that distinctive 2 liter groan.
By this time, the engine had throttle body fuel injection. It would start on the first attempt as well as better drivability (lack of pinging, stalling, surge, etc) compared to the first and second year models.
Give it some credit.
That steering wheel is problematic.
I know they’re much maligned here on CC, but I always had a soft spot for the J cars, uneven quality-control and low horsepower notwithstanding. A close relative worked for Pontiac so I got a Sunbird wholesale (4 door, manual shift) and I loved it though I would have preferred this body style.
IMO, J cars were trim and stylish—a big improvement over the aggressively bland X platform models, and a lot sportier than the Escort and Horizon/Omni from GMs competitors. In the low-priced, domestic arena they ruled. But like a lot of great models, GM found a way to undercut their potential with feeble engines and indifferent quality. A sad, familiar story.
“…abomination in the showroom didn’t help sell anything but more Toyotas across the street, at least on the coasts…” Five years earlier, that is exactly what happened when my dad went to trade in his Cutlass for a new one. Parts of the interior fell off in his hand. 1980 Supra was in the driveway the next day.
Thank you Dr. Freud (or Dr. Rorschach) for that indelible interpretation of the Olds steering wheel. I always hated it, but now I rather like it. But then I am something of an amateur obstetrician, having delivered one of my children.
A most excellent find (and write-up); I kept my eyes out for one for many years, but gave up about a decade ago. No wonder; they’ve all been hiding in someone’s garage or carport for many decades, because it failed to deliver the kind of joyful driving experience the ads promised?
I left another comment reply further up, but in a nutshell, Oldsmobile was a big car brand, and kept failing with small cars. They were perpetually the weakest of the GM brands with small cars. Why they bothered is a good question; all it did was dilute the brand further.
Olds should have just built the boxy RWD 88/98 forever, like the Toyota Crown Comfort. Taxi, black car and police fleets would have loved them, as well as the old die-hards. They could have advertised it as “This is your grandfather’s Oldsmobile”.
Why they bothered is a good question
Because they were often paired with Cadillac dealers, who didn’t have a small car until ’82, is my guess.
I’d forgotten there was a 2 door sedan first gen. J car at all. It sold quite well as a Cavalier, several times the hatch.
Agreed. Olds also had many stand alone dealers back then. These cars were requests made by dealers to corporate. Buick and Olds wanted something to sell when gas prices spiked, as well as draw in younger buyers to get them to move up their respective “Sloan Ladders”. Turned out to be a swing and a miss.
I don’t understand your answer. Cadillac dealers weren’t clamoring for a truly small car until the second energy crisis, and they quickly got it in ’82.
Having a line of small cars that sell very poorly is not exactly a positive for a dealer (Olds, in this case). You have to stock them (pay interest on them), stock parts, etc. It’s only profitable to sell a line of cars if you have a reasonable volume.
I suspect that Olds dealers wanted a small car to get “small car” and “import” buyers into the showroom, where salesmen were encouraged to upsell them to a more profitable Cutlass or 88 for only a few dollars more per month. A cheesy looking and driving small Olds would only make the upsell easier – unless the buyer was smart enough to realize the same car was available for a few dollars less at the Chevy dealer, or a much better small car was available from Honda, Toyota, Nissan, or even VW.
At least there was Jackie Brenston and his Delta Cats (along with Ike Turner) with a tune that some consider the first rock and roll song.
I never realized these were that rare. My Parent’s neighbors in the 1980’s had either an ‘84 or ‘85 Firenza S ‘coupe’ in light blue very similar to the example seen here. Actually, in my Minnesota hometown suburb, none of the J-bodies at that point in time were uncommon; besides the above mentioned Firenza, an early (82-83?) Skyhawk Limited sedan in tan lived across the street. Catty corner was a white ‘88 Sunbird GT convertible, and we had the gray Cavalier Type 10 two-door, also an ‘85. Another Cavalier, a brown ‘84 convertible, lived up the street about 4 houses. Almost hard to fathom now that 35 years ago the ubiquity of Toyota, Honda, and not “domestic” products just didn’t exist in my Midwest local.
Just, wow. Not only is it rare for being a Firenza (didn’t even the Cimarron outsell the Firenza among the J-cars?), but it’s also a Firenza *hatchback*. This has to be the least popular of its body styles. Makes me sad it lasted this long and is now not long for this world.
I had looked at a black Firenza hatchback as a teenager that was optimistically priced at $4,000 in early-’90s dollars by a used car salesman near my old neighborhood. I wonder what they eventually sold it for. Stylistically, I didn’t have any glaring objections to these.
I drove the sedan version, albeit briefly before the lease ended, as a hand-me-down company car. I imagine that whatever leasing company my employer used offered up a Firenza at Cavalier prices. To me it was a slightly fancy Cavalier, nothing more, nothing less.
The French Canadian commercial would suggest these were sold in Canada, but I don’t recall ever seeing one back in the ’80s.
The Firenza name was poison here, after a miserable contraption manufactured by Vauxhaul was marketed here in the early ’70s. I believe it sparked the first Canadian class action lawsuit ever, it was so bad. Why GM recycled that name is beyond me.
I agree that Oldsmobiles were supposed to be big cars, and they were very successful in that realm. Back when my Dad worked at the Chev Olds emporium (1976-82), Cutlasses and 88s flew off the lot. I wonder if a major car brand ever fell so far so fast before or since?
This looks like a very light weight car. Does anyone know the GVW? I’m guessing between 2,500 and 2,700 lbs.
Sis had an 84 Sunbird with the SOHC 1.8/automatic. It was no less lethargic in the early 90s than her then-boyfriends 84 Honda Civic Wagovan. It would eventually run away from the Civic if you had enough patience to push them to 80mph.
The Honda was better screwed together, but it wasn’t any more rewarding or entertaining to drive.
The TBI SOHC 1.8 was a reluctant revver, soggy throttle response, and kind of angry tractor sounding at the high end of the tach scale. (her car had all of an 85mph speedo and a gas gauge) Coupled with the 3 speed automatic, you had to keep the revs up to get the car to feel ‘sportish’. It was pretty reliable though, I had to do a starter on it, and a power steering line (which was damn near impossible to find new), wound up putting a used one from the junkyard on it, and she clocked out 160,000 miles of college commuting in it from 94 to 99.
I’d get another one to knock around in, it wasn’t a terrible car, just not as refined as the imports, and was far better place to be in than the contemporary Escort.
The Firenza was most likely a car that the dealers wanted…but didn’t want to really sell.
The first Omega had been pushed into production after Oldsmobile killed the six-cylinder version of the Cutlass for 1973. Dealers wanted a low-price car for advertising purposes. That lured potential customers to the showroom, but once they were there, the sales reps began the hard sell for the Cutlass. (“For just a few dollars a month more…”)
No doubt dealers expected the Firenza to fill that same role, especially after the high gas prices and double-digit interest rates for auto loans (for people with good credit!) of the early 1980s.
If Oldsmobile had equipped this car as a true step-up – better drivetrains as standard, nice interior with an upscale instrument panel, and nicer wheels – it may have found some purpose in life. But dealers undoubtedly wanted something with a low sticker price and high EPA mileage figures for advertising purposes. The result was a car that theoretically offered “something for everyone” while not really appealing to anyone. Especially the Baby Boomers who were more open to buying smaller vehicles.
It is interesting that Oldsmobile couldn’t sell small cars, while Buick, which was also thought of as a Big-Car Marque, did well with the X-body Skylark. If I recall correctly, the Skylark ended up as the second best-selling version of the X-bodies, behind the Chevrolet Citation.
I don’t believe, however, that the Skyhawk, which was Buick’s version of the J-car, sold all that well.
I get the impression this was a vehicle that Oldsmobile simply used to get prospective buyers into the showroom and then try and move them into something larger (and more profitable). I remember reading an article (in a newspaper I believe) regarding the Oldsmobile Alero which Oldsmobile sold from about 1999 to 2004. It quoted a dealer as saying he had to sell four aleros to equal the profit margin from the sale of one 98. I remember that GM introduced the Firenza and the Buick Skyhawk after the Cavalier, Sunbird and Cimmaron had been released. This was badge engineering on steroids, I test drove a Cavalier once, it was a totally mediocre vehicle that could not begin to hold a candle to the contemporary Japanese vehicles.
What got me thinking is the appearance of “Firenza” on the door panels. The only place our current fleet shows the actual model name IN the car would be MX5 and ES350 on the floor mats. That holds true to the Prelude and Accord before I went Mazda.
I didn’t have a J-car, but rolled the A-body Pontiac 6000 – which made absolutely zero pretense toward excitement – followed by a 1987 Grand Am, and the N-body’s interior was a massive upgrade. Not everything was drawn with a T-square. That shifter – yikes!!!
“Four presets and were these the ones where if you pushed two buttons (i.e. 1-2 and 3-4) at the same time you’d get another station preset for a total of six?”
You could also press the 2-3 buttons for a total of seven presets (In this case fourteen- 7 AM and 7 FM).
I’ve owned a couple 80’s era Delco “Electronic Tuning” radios, and always wondered how many customers knew about this option, as there’s no indication on the radio faceplate that the 1-2, 2-3, and 3-4 selections are available.
That car doesn’t look too bad. Not bad enough to be there. A good detail alone would do wonders. For a car like that, get a cheap paint job done, detail the entire car and go over it mechanically and you have a decent little old ride.
Yeah, seems to be an awful lot of the car “intact”.
You did not spend enough time on the name – Firenza? Really? I always wondered if it was a 3 sylable name (Fir-en-za) or 2 syllables (Fire with an unpronounceable “nza” attached). It reminded me of those things that use ” ‘n” as a substitute for “and”, like ham ‘n eggs or fire ‘n ice. Fire n’ Za? What is Za? This was simply the worst model name ever to come out of General Motors.
I used to think about that because I looked at that nameplate every day in my first real job when I would park next to or walk past the Firenza one of the secretaries owned. It never once occured to me to look at one when I went looking for a new car in 1985, and I even drove a Cavalier!
Also, what was with those gunsight graphics on the gauges?
“Firenza” sounds close enough to “Firenza”, which is Florence in actual Italy. However, I see nothing Italian-esque with any of the Oldsmobiles called Firenza. Okay – the RWD H-Body had a Ferrari-esque roofline, but that’s stretching it.
I remember learning in European History class that “Firenza” is the Italian name for Florence (phonetically, at least), and I was absolutely amazed. Until that time, I’d assumed that Oldsmobile made it up.
Since GM had used the Firenza name on a deplorable Vauxhall imported to Canada (mentioned by Geoff above), and also a short-lived Starfire variant in the late 1970s, I guess the Olds folks just picked a name out of their existing inventory.
Just be thankful that GM didn’t run ads featuring stereotypically Italian designers fine-tuning the Firenza’s design in a studio with Florence’s cityscape in the background…
Right! And I remember reading about the Vauxhall Firenza. I feel like I could use a CC refresher, so I’ll probably be looking that up.
I had meant “Firenze” above, but auto-correct had done its thing and I couldn’t fix it, even on the back end.
I don’t recall seeing any Firenza hatchbacks back when these were new and am not surprised to learn that Firenzas of any kind were relative rarities. Of course, they had none of the appeal of larger Oldsmobiles and were perhaps seen by most target customers as a poorly conceived substitute for the larger, more expensive offerings for which Olds was best known. In my circle, a purchase of a Firenza would have been met with polite skepticism if not outright derision, something along the lines of “the Cadillac of J-cars” (oh wait, there was the Cimarron) whereas a Cavalier would have been acknowledged as an economical, if uninspired choice.
I wonder if Francesca Fiore drove a Firenza.
Brother /sister in law had the “station wagon” , version. I believe it was an “85”. Could a been an “86”.
Inside was just about this color. Outside, ice blue/faux wood.
It drove rather nicely as I recall. Was only in it two times.
Other brother/sister in law had the “Pontiac 6000” @ the same time frame.
It was an “85”. It really moved! Drove it a few times.(no faux wood)
Tranny on the “Pontiac” gave out around “1987-8”.
Mr Klein, you have – quite unlike GM – tried hard on this one, and the steering-wheel ribaldry alone alone gets full marks here. We are most amused.
(Btw, if doing, say, a three-point turn, it turns from exposed rocket lady to a headless legless man with his thick arms flung out as if to say “Why me?”, and indeed, given your suggestion of what the mohel had done, he’d have a point. Alternatively, it could be an in-car amusement as a headless and legless couple argue back and forth between locks, but by that stage the handling might have been overwhelmed, but I am digressing).
All I can say is thank god it wasn’t a manual: I’m not confident your response to the little knob would be publishable.
A 2/10 car gets a 10/10 review, and that itself merits a Curbie!
My first car was a J body, a first-year Pontiac J2000. Yes, the standard tire size was 175/80R13; I had the optional wider 195/70R13 tires. The former size is rare now; the latter rare even way back then and unobtainium now.
This car was utterly unnecessary; the result of Olds dealers whining about having a small car to sell. The car itself was closest to the Buick Skyhawk since those two shared a unique Datsun-ish dashboard not used on other J bodies (Olds used black trim; Buick color-keyed). The Chevy, Pontiac, and Cadillac versions shared a second dash design with some minor divisional tweaking, although all three of those brand mucked with the dash several times. Seats were all similar with diffferent stitching, padding, and upholstery; likewise the door panels (high-end Firenzas got unique Toronado-style door panels, but they’re rare). V6 Firenzas are second in rarity only to Cavalier V6 wagons. Only the Cimarron routinely got the V6 and it was made standard the last couple of years.
The rear seat was fairly tight in hatchbacks due to a lower roof and seat cushion. Notchback coupes had a higher seat cushion which made legroom feel roomier, but headroom was tight. Wagons combined the low cushion with a high room – mundo headroom. The foor-door sedans had the best rear seats with a high cushion and high roof, decent leg and headroom.
American cars of this era, especially GM, seemed to go out of their way to remind buyers of all the a la carte options they turned down, with dial-less clock faces, empty gauges, blank panels, cheap-looking radios, and such to rub it all in.
First off, I about fell out of my chair laughing at the mohel comment. Hilarious.
As for the state of GM, they’ve always had incredibly talented engineers and designers. I’ve no doubt that, if the balance sheet had looked right, they’d have been able to make cars that *at least* were competitive with the foreign stuff on paper (whether they’d have been able to wrangle their UAW- and Unifor-controlled factories into actually assembling things correctly is another story).
Either way, it was clear that, by the time this car came to fruition, GM’s obligations were such that it just plain *cost* the company more money than its competitors to produce a worse car. That, or it tried to maintain its customary profit margins for the shareholders for too long. To that last point, one wonders what would have happened if GM had been willing to forsake some profits in exchange for better products and dividends paid down the road in the form of customer goodwill.
Oh, wait, they tried that…the Saturn project. And it lost $3,000 per car and ultimately $5B over 25 years, in the process.
And there was also the initial GM10 (W-body) program, which cost $7B. Somehow, GM was convinced it could capture 21% of the total passenger car market with that one “senior-intermediate” platform.
I suppose, really, GM was doomed just as soon as competitors–including FoMoCo and Chrysler, much of the time–figured out how to build and market better cars in North America.
As a stockholder for 40 years to the bitter end, I wonder if the unions wouldn’t have been as rapacious if they’d been given some profit-sharing, but they would probably have demanded all of it eventually. It would be interesting to know how many employees held stock. I’ve not bought any more since the day after the ’87 crash.
I’ve no doubt that, if the balance sheet had looked right, they’d have been able to make cars that *at least* were competitive with the foreign stuff on paper
I’ve no doubt of the exact opposite of that, and the record rather supports it: Vega, Cadillac V8/6/4, Olds diesel, Cadillac 4.1 V8, FWD X-Cars, J-Cars, ’86 E-Cars, ….shoot; I might as well just copy and paste the list of GM Deadly Sins, and there’s still a few more to go.:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/on-the-purpose-and-nature-of-gms-deadly-sins/
It wasn’t the lack of adequate funds and budgets that resulted in these DS; it was poor management, from the very top down to the bottom. GM had cancer, and it steadily metastasized throughout the whole organization.
The J-cars were benchmarked against the Accord. So how and why did they end up with the pathetic 1.8/2.0 pushrod four? Did they drain all the oil out of the silky-smooth Accord engine in order to benchmark it against it?
I could go on. Oh, and the Saturn escapade cost more like $10 B, when everything was accounted for.
FWIW, the issue on the assembly line weren’t the major issues; they were just the icing on the poisoned cake. The problem was what they were being asked to assemble, most of all.
Growing up on Toronto, Canada in the 1980’s J cars were everywhere – Cavaliers the most popular followed by Sunbirds. A family friend had a 1985 Pontiac Sunbird hatchback with paint on performance – two tone black & silver with rear louvers on the hatchback and a sunroof with the word Formula on the side. Teenager me thought it was kind of cool as it had the Firebird style front end. An older couple that lived on our street traded in one of the large GM rear wheel drives – Old 98/88 on a Cadillac Cimmaron. I remember thinking this is just a glitzed up Cavalier with a Cadillac Price – I do not remember the trim line, but it was dark maroon with gold badging on it. You saw many elderly women driving Buick Skyhawks, but I do not remember ever seeing a Firenza on the road, only the odd one on the dealers lots.
So many hateful comments .
Of course, I never got to drive one and I know the Iron Duke was underpowered and hated by all so…..
That being said this doesn’t look like a penalty box to me .
It also looks like it might well be the original 22,000 mostly garage kept miles by a middle aged driver who bought it new and didn’t need to drive it much nor replace it as long as it ran .
This is one more of those lumps I used to buy for under $200 in good shape because NOBODY wanted them .
-Nate
I had the 6 cylinder option with a 4 speed in the same dark blue. It was a fun car to drive, pretty peppy. A job change forced me to trade it in on a pickup after 1-1/2 years. From what I understand, they did not hold up well.
So where is this GM delight located. Might want to go check it out for myself.
“Here’s the 2.0liter inline-4 engine in this car. This produced a whopping 88 horsepower on average according to the sources I looked at. It was the base engine relative to the optional 1.8liter inline-4 overhead (single) cam engine that produced 84hp. Yeah, four less for $50 more.”
I checked if the 2.0 got better MPG, since that could have been a big selling point in the 80s.
Yes, it did. A whopping 28 MPG instead of 27.
This car screams “I was a rental car at birth!”
In 1986 my wife and I were married about a year and half, and her 1983 Mustang with the wonderful Essex V6 began overheating. This on a car with less than 20k on the odometer! So we took it to the local Ford store, and they validated the overheating. They also said the heat had damaged the transmission to the point where it would need to be replaced. Ford said that even though it was out of warranty, they would kick in $750 towards the transmission. But the service department had no idea where to begin to figure out the original issue.
I was ready to get rid of it, and she was frustrated. Then, to make the whole thing worse, her dad got involved!!
She wanted to go look at a Monte Carlo type car, but he convinced her without me knowing it that a new 86 Mustang was the best idea! Before I knew what was happening, we had leased a 4 cylinder automatic Mustang LX coupe…. Because why have quality, or something nicer. Besides, the 88hp was a screamer!!
Maybe we should have looked at the Oldsmobile, V6 for sure!!