The junkyard is akin to a candy store, mounds and mounds of delicious treats and morsels to look at and perhaps inspect closer before deciding on something to sample (and share here). However, like at the candy store, what looks great from far away sometimes isn’t as exciting once you get closer. Kind of like when you choose a red lollipop and assume it’ll be cherry and it ends up being cinnamon. Nothing wrong with cinnamon per se, but not what you were looking for.
So it was the other day when I spied something bright red a few aisles over and ambled over like a moth to a flame, wondering what tasty treat awaited me, surely it’d be something sporting, or maybe just sporty-ish since I was in the GM section after all. But then it became obvious it was an Oldsmobile, not a brand overly associated with either bright red or sporty. Even worse, an Achieva, one of the less durable nameplates in that brand’s long history. Still, I had recently found my old digital SLR the day before and after a quick charge of the battery, figured this might be a worthy subject to test it out on for a few licks.
The Achieva was based on the same platform as the Pontiac GrandAm and Buick Skylark. Built for the 1992 through 1998 model years, it succeeded the Olds Calais which used the same platform and wheelbase. Of its platform-mates, the GrandAm was the most ubiquitous by far as far from what I recall, but then it gets murky, the Skylark had that weird pointy schnoz and never seemed terribly popular, but the Achieva seemed a bit weirdly styled as well.
I think the main problem with all of them was that they seem a little long for their width (or better, their narrowness). However, the front is probably its best facet, I don’t mind that grille treatment with the way that the hood sort of folds down over it like a bucktooth. The lack of gratuitous chrome accentry is alright as well, it certainly fit into the ’90’s idiom.
Was the Olds rocket badge crooked from the factory or was it replaced at some time? We’ll never know. Someone did just screw the plate holder through the plastic bumper with zero regard to how the stylist wanted the name to appear, hopefully that wasn’t done by a dealer.
This is to me its best angle, just dead on from the front. Large lights, clear marker/indicators, black grille, bucktooth color bisecting it with a small badge, decently shaped lower spoiler with air inlets. Nothing ostentatious, just business. Purposeful. Almost (in a whisper) European.
But then there’s the rest that brings you straight back to Ohio or thereabouts. A long side, rear fake fenderskirt-look wheelwells cribbed from the Caprice, the largest rear spoiler (on a FWD car) this side of the Fast and Furious set, etc.
I suppose the rear sort of matches the front with the black panel around the plate area, at least the not overly large taillights don’t preclude the trunklid from having a decent width cutout to open at the bumper.
Here the long body and squared off fender shape pays dividends with a pretty deep and wide trunk although it’s a bit on the shallow side. Easy enough drop your carry-ons into. Carry-ons? What are you implying, you ask?
Yes, this was a rental car in what should be called Avis Red but instead was called Flame Red (I think GM still uses Flame Red today, in fact). While this is a 1997 produced in May of that year, production ended before the new year and supposedly any 1998’s were for rental fleets only, not for the public. In reality, the majority of Achievas overall probably were rentals, at least in the last few years of production.
Like most GM sedans of at least the ’90’s the trunk lid always wants to pop up, it will not stay down without being latched. I’ve resorted to starting to put something heavy on it to get a halfway decent picture with a more or less closed trunk, but I just realized that maybe this was done intentionally for the rental car market? The last few rentals I’ve gotten all were lined up with their trunk lids open as a convenience for the customer and GM did stuff a lot of cars in there over the years.
Part of my initial ambivalence was seeing it was an SL trim level, I assumed that this was mid-grade and there was likely one below and a higher-zoot one above it, both of which tend to be more interesting in different ways. Not so! The SL was the only way the four door was offered as of 1995, it’s kind surprising that GM didn’t just pocket the 50 cents or whatever the pair of SL badges cost them and sell it as just the Achieva. Actually it would make perfect sense, there is zero reason to spend that money in this case. They already had cut the ad budget to pretty much zero, I couldn’t find an ad or commercial from the last few years at all.
There wasn’t even an engine option, while previously offered with a couple of V6’s (Buick 3.3 and Chevy 3.1) as well as multiple power levels of the “Quad4” engine, as of 1995 the only available engine was the new “Twin Cam” 2.4liter transverse four that produced 150hp@5,600rpm and 155lb-ft of torque at 4,400rpm mated to a four speed automatic transmission of course powering the front wheels.
The inside seems to have held up surprisingly well over the last 23 years. The seats had that typical GM mousefur velour and the plastics are pretty, well, plasticky. Two airbags for front passenger safety beats the old half-baked seatbelt solutions in vogue a few years prior.
Alright, so the window and door lock buttons seemed to get plenty of use. But by getting use and looking this used up, it appears that they still worked, so there’s that. That door release handle is horrific though, the Cavalier had a similar looking one, as did the pickups and SUV’s I think as well. Solid, but just a horrible feel and look. Look at any competing Honda of the era for a lesson in how to design something that gets touched every single time you get out of the car.
A driver-centric dashboard (revised for 1996) but gray HVAC knobs that look very Pontiac of the time. Someone took the radio, but left a key that didn’t fit this car (I tried unlocking the wheel). There’s one cupholder behind the automatic shifter with a scrotum-style boot, that center console is too narrow to fit two side by side (cupholders I mean). And do you remember the old days before airbags were invisibly integrated into dashboards?
Almost 186,000 miles! More than I expected from a former rental car that looks in pretty decent shape overall. I suppose the pitting on the bucktooth should have given me a hint. Still, no visible rust outside, and the interior had minimal wear besides those window switches. The gauges (“gages”) look the same as most other GM cars of the period, at least there’s a decent complement of them and no “Dashboard of Sadness” as with a few generations prior. This may be one of the earlier cars to show which side the fuel filler door was on, a boon for any car renter.
The backseat looks pillowy-soft, but a little low to the ground. There was also a 2-door coupe available (through 1997) with the same wheelbase so apparently decently roomy in the back.
I still can’t say I’m overly excited by it, but not really sure what rental I might have picked over it if I saw it on the Avis lot. I might have actually given it a shot, just like that lollipop in the midst of the candy store it certainly stands out and calls attention to itself compared to what’s clustered around it…At least they’d take it back from you after the weekend; once you actually taste the cinnamon on the lollipop it’s all yours.
I wonder if some poor sod’s rental insurance covered the broken back seat. A bit embarrassing to report it.
IMO the 4-door Achieva would’ve looked 100% better if it had the coupe’s (and Pontiac Grand Am sedan’s) fully radiused rear wheelarches instead of the flat-topped ones.
A car so bland and anonymous, even the junkyard where it resides doesn’t know what to call it.
Buck tooth? No sir, that’s a diastema, and I rather like it, like mine 🙂
Haven’t seen one of these in a long time. Always thought they were ungainly looking. Jim put his finger on it: The front is okay; it’s the rear that’s weird and malproportioned. Of course, I didn’t really care for skirting on any ’90s GM jellybean design, and that doesn’t help here either.
The interior looks a lot like the one on my ’95 Firebird, which was a terrible car, but one I sometimes wish I still had.
It’s in great condition for the mileage. Someone really got their money’s worth.
In 2004 I bought a 98 SL for my daughter to use at college. it was equipped exactly like the one pictured, except all white. It had 44K on it, She drove cross country CA to MI 4 times, put on over another 75K over the years.
I think it had the standard 3.3L.
Except for shocks, a radiator re-core, and injectors she put not a penny into it except for regular oil changes, plugs, wires, etc.
It is surprising that it was so reliable considering the neighborhood had plenty of GM N bodies that regularly fell apart over the 7 years this one sat around. There were ignition problems, cracked intake manifolds, and overheating, and that was just the Grand Am owner next door!
Probably would be still going if it wasn’t rear ended in 2012.
I’m quite fond of the Achieva coupe design, I’d go so far to say if it wasn’t a GM N body underneath with that plasticy 90s GM interior whose black fabrics inexplicably turn purple it would be one of my favorite cars of the 90s. I really like the front end, it pulls off that classic Olds look while looking 90s modern, absolutely the best of the N bodies IMO. Not particularly fond of the sedan but it was a pretty successful looking miniaturization of the 98, I think stylists were trying to mimick that, while the coupe mimicked the 88 with its sleeker roofline and open rear wheel openings
I like the styling too. GM did a good job differentiating the N-body platform mates.
The thing that strikes me about this design is the oh-so-prominent shoulder line at the top of the doors, which has the unfortunate effect of making the greenhouse look disproportionately narrower, especially at the rear, which in turn implies the car will be cramped before you even get in. The anti-fuselage?
And that name! Really, GM! I seem to recall Car and Driver saying there should be an Ova-Achieva and an Unda-Acheiva.
This was the nicest looking of this generation of n bodies. The grand am had wonky styling with lines that didn’t really flow and a strange curve at the lower corner of the rear window. The skylark went with bizarre, otherworldly styling which I’m sure thrilled Buick owners who wanted a mini electra in the skylark. This car was available in a high performance?w40? Version with the 180? Hp version of the quad4 which should have been a selling advantage over the accord/camry, but wasn’t. When these debuted, gm had a decent chance to hold on to that segment of the market but they were expensive, treading heavily on regal/cutlass supreme territory, strangely styled, came with door mounted belts and three speed automatics, and seriously missed their targets. The related corsica was cheap and durable, but these weren’t cheap nor compelling.
To me, the Skylark looked like American interpretation of Citroen styling. It looks almost like GM hired one of the designers who worked on the Ami6.
The Australian Holden Commodores through the early mid 90’s share some similar design elements. Especially the VP model, that’d be the 1992 model I guess for our North American readers. In fact that 1992 Commodore and the following model from 1994 (VR) would make for an interesting design comparison with various North American GM models, and some Ford products too.
Newt,
Exactly what I thought when I first saw the rear view.
OK, I admit it — I liked the Achieva. Well, I liked them more in the earlier years when one could be had with a (semi) interesting engine and even a manual transmission. If I had been in the market for a new car in the early/mid 1990s, I would have considered one. Then again, maybe the test-drive would have turned me off of it.
From a styling perspective, I liked the big-car styling cues, but in a smaller package, and I saw it as a big improvement over the Calais (granted, that wasn’t too hard to do). And these were a decently good value, too. Certainly not the most memorable car in the world, but not the worst, either.
My wife and I had a 1993 SC (Sports Coupe) and it was much better looking than the four-door sedan version like this. Not a bad little car although the Quad4 was a tad noisy and it did eat a head gasket (covered under warranty). She really liked it and that’s all that mattered.
I like it. I like it better when it’s 2 sizes bigger and called the 98, but still…
Not quite the CC effect, but I saw a final 500 Alero this afternoon.
I had a 95 Achieva coupe with the quad4 for a year and a half back in the mid 2000s. It was the worst car Ive ever had. Besides terrible reliability, horribly cheap interior the ride was so crashy due to it being a “sport” suspension it was a horrible to drive. The 4t60e was programmes to upshift as fast as possible and it would be bucking at 45mph because the quad4 didnt have enough torque for 4th gear at that speed. I was happy when the tranny finally shit the bed and i junked it. Replaced it with a 3800 powered buick regal with the same 4t60e tranny that gave me years of reliable motoring. Gm cars from the 70s to they went bankrupt were worse the smaller they were, with the w body beign good and n and j being garbage.
Is this the most written anywhere about an Achieva since maybe 2002? My compliments for finding so much of interest in this car.
“… automatic shifter with a scrotum-style boot…”
Great. Now I’ll never get that image out of my head. 😆
Came here to say the same, LOL!! During this period of time, I searched desperately, devouring all of the top automotive magazines, looking for something, ANYTHING to like about car models during that current state of automobilia! 🙂
Typical GM cockroach with a lot of them still plugging along across the Midwest, although the Quad 4s iirc have a pricey to replace water pump, the 3.1L V6 would be the one to have for maximum neglect-resistance (though they can have their own maladies with lower intake gaskets and rocker arms)
In retrospect, these cars encapsulated Oldsmobile’s predicament as the 1980s gave way to the 1990s. Oldsmobile wanted to carve out a new image, but the cars simply weren’t well-executed enough to support the move towards a “new generation of Oldsmobile.” Whether due to indecisiveness, or being forced to work with standard GM hardware, they still had the smell of “your Father’s Oldsmobile.” But our fathers weren’t interested in these, either…
The Achieva coupe was good-looking – one of the most handsome GM designs of this era, in my view. With a more refined Quad 4, and more money spent on interior materials, it could have appealed to younger buyers.
But even in this market segment, the buyers were moving towards four-door sedans.
The sedan, which was a Mini-me version of the Ninety-Eight, wasn’t going to appeal to younger folks. Once the car failed to catch on with customers, GM threw in the towel and relegated it to fleet duty. So we were supposed to wait for the new Alero, which would be the next big thing, and attract those younger import buyers, and thus really turn the division around…
I love the Achieva. It has always been my favorite of that generation N-bodies. 2-door, SC, 5-speed manual is how I would take mine.
The biggest problem with these cars and lots of others of the 90s was the interiors.God how drabbinawful they were!Cheap is a compliment!Im a huge Cadillac fan and I love the new design of the rwd Fleetwoods from 1993-1996 gorgeous.Until you get in and then you go ugh.Plain looking with a beautiful exterior design,why did they cheapen it?I might consider one if I can find the right overall color/wheel combo.These Achevas and Skylark interiors are of the times-cheap junk.I will bet any amount that if you sat in this Acheva or Skylark (Grand am was better)that you would get springs up your scrotum.No pun intended.Thanks for a great story,and everyone else’s -Robert Levins.