(first posted 4/11/2014) As one who barely remembers the 1970s, all accounts have it as a never-ending barrage of weird, bizarre, and tacky. It always sounds like the frat party where everyone arrives gung-ho and full of vim and vinegar, consuming mass quantities of beverage both warm and chilled, then disperses quicker than a fart in a hurricane after somebody barfs on the keg.
Which brings us to our earth toned ’72 Oldsmobile Delta 88 Royale Convertible. Twenty-three characters (not counting “convertible”) to describe this buggy does seem rather apropos for this longest, lowest, and widest of Oldsmobile ragtops.
Relax; this is neither a hard core love- nor snark-fest. However, what I am about to submit may likely make your head spin like Wonder Woman. Let me explain myself first.
For what it is, this Delta 88 does make sense in a 1970s macramé, polyester, and lava lamp sort of way. The world was a different place in 1972 and this Oldsmobile is a reflection of its time.
Pretty much since the beginning, Oldsmobile had had a ragtop available for discerning buyers. For the real diehards, fond of when most cars were open topped (like a lot of garments in the ’70s), a convertible graced the lineup to provide that wind in your hair, sunburn on your scalp, and bugs in your teeth thrill. It was that way in 1923…
…and it was still that way in 1948. Though the bodies might have changed, the basic concept was the same–provide something stylish in which the owner can pop the top like the pull-tab on a beer can. What a grand way to be seen by all the unfortunate folks in their boring sedans and wagons.
So it shouldn’t have been a surprise that with the introduction of their even bigger boned B-bodies in 1971, Oldsmobile would still have their traditional convertible. Despite the convertible market having dwindled over time, down to 3,900 for 1972, Oldsmobile was still answering the call of its buyers.
Wearing pretty much the same wheelbases as the previous generation, these B’s were fluffier in most every other regard. It was pre-OPEC fuel crisis and one could purchase their new Oldsmobile with a 7.4 liter (455 cubic inch) engine underneath that hood. Of course a buyer could still get the “economy” 5.7 liter (350 cubic inch) V8 mill that was standard equipment on the Delta 88, and many did, but it just didn’t have the right cachet for a convertible. Neither engine was overly stressed, as this Oldsmobile weighs only 4,200 pounds–for comparison, that is about 110 pounds less than a new Acura RLX hybrid.
These big B’s are certainly divisive machines; searching the rapidly expanding CC archives has revealed both a deadly sin and a jubilant admission of ownership. As for your author, he’s only briefly driven one, a ’74 Delta 88 sedan while in high school many moons ago. Its buttery smoothness quickly illuminated why a 350 paired to a Turbo Hydramatic is such a popular power train combination.
The basic premise of this Oldsmobile is pretty straightforward. It was form over function, plain and simple. There is no reason to compromise when you want to look good and arrive in style. This car said you were doing well and felt little reason to be ashamed of your success.
However, this Oldsmobile was far from being a song of a single note. I submit to you that this humble Oldsmobile is monumentally deceptive; in reality, it was the most versatile Oldsmobile of any size made in 1972. I will now pause for your head to stop spinning–or for your astonishment to subside after reading such a seemingly bizarre statement.
This car fulfills the desire of those who like to cruise around topless. It was fun in the sun and oodles of good times with the sun shining on your noggin. Driving with all the windows down in any steel roofed car can’t even begin to duplicate the experience of riding in a convertible. To recreate the experience in any other Oldsmobile Delta 88 that year would require either a cutting torch or a saws-all.
One of the many things this Oldsmobile does not have in common with more contemporary convertibles, such as a Ford Mustang or Toyota Solara, is that it has a fully functional backseat allowing it to be used by the whole family at once. Have a few progeny? No problem. Place them in the back; at 70 mph, you will never hear any complaints from them. The backseat is big enough that you could even do the same with your in-laws or parents.
These days, so many people think they need a pickup to pull even the smallest utility trailer. With this Oldsmobile, there is simply no need for a pickup when you can go to most any farm and home store to obtain a receiver hitch. By bolting it up to the full frame of this Oldsmobile, you could pull just about anything you need–even with the base 350. Doubtful? I’ve seen it done. Don’t attempt this with any contemporary car (now I remember the reason most people are getting pickups to pull trailers).
This Oldsmobile elevates practicality to an entirely new dimension. So many will disparage this poor car, relegating it to “big old barge” status. As one who has alternated living near both the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers his entire life, I can tell you that is the highest of compliments.
image source: www.aggman.com
River boat barges do a lot of work and are quite efficient in how they go about it. You really cannot overload one, similar to how it would be very tough to overburden the 455 likely found in our barge-colored Delta 88. Environmentalists should love this car as it’s an existing resource with fuel mileage not much worse than most new 3/4 ton pickups. Admit it; you would look a lot more debonair driving this Oldsmobile than an F-250.
This Oldsmobile is 1970s to its core. It is the Kojak of convertibles–suave and dashing, with nothing on top and working diligently to make the world a sunnier place. Who loves you, baby?
Yes, there was a day when these full-sized cars routinely served as tow vehicles.
I recall a time when these were seen pulling ski- and bass boats; with the top down, it not only made for a pleasant drive to the lake, river or bayou, but having the top down also made it easier for the driver to back the trailer down into water by himself. An acquaintance of mine ruined a new Pontiac convertible that way, when he forgot to put it in park and set the parking brake when he got out of the car and walked to the rear to untie his boat from the trailer!
Interestingly, another popular boat-towing vehicle from this same platform was the “clamshell” wagon. Some owners loved the fact that — when the seats were folded and the clamshell tailgate was retracted — the driver had a great view of the boat’s launch into the water as vehicle was backing up.
People used them to tow all the time, I have a picture of the Haulover Beach Marina in Miami Beach, circa 1969, 99% of the vehicles parked with trailers were cars and station wagons, with one lonely pick-up all by itself, there even was a 66-67 Toronado pulling a boat.
I was young, but I remember people pulling trailers with even small cars. My Dad had a 1977 AMC Pacer Wagon, and we used to pull a small camper with it. Granted, it was a Scotty camper – we borrowed it from my grandfather who used to pull that with his 1949 Kaiser Traveler.
My dad did install the module for electronic brakes, and he did keep the speeds down.
A boat that won’t float. Towing with cars was common back then, they could be ordered with towing packages with stronger springs, bigger cooling and charging systems, trans and ps coolers from the factory. They had rear wheel drive and the weight and torque to easily pull 20ft+ travel trailers, and they were not the lightweight versions we have today. You did not need a truck, and the family could ride in comfort. Emission equipment in the mid 70’s put an end to that, along with the transition to front wheel drive.
So, a Pontiac “Amphicar”, right?
having a 72 Olds 88 like this one with a 455 v8, it was an easy task to tow stuff. Stump pulling power for a car. I used to have 1 of these, but a sedan. could smoke the tires easily if I wanted. Now days (2022) gas prices would not lend driving it much unless you had good money. But boy, could they cruise so smoothly and effortlessly on the highway.
I’ve always found cars made by American car makers in general, from 1972 to 1978 to be the ugliest looking cars offered in the USA.
Whatever. Why soil this article with your disparaging comments then? You want my opinion on ANY british or asian vehicle sold here between 1950 and 1987? I didn’t think so.
Any British or Asian vehicle built between 1950 and 1987? You realise that includes the Jaguar XK120 through 150 and E Type, almost every Aston Martin Bond drove, the Lotus Elan, Bentley Continental, Toyota 2000GT, Datsun 240Z, Mazda RX-7 . . .
(Most of these were available in North America, too).
Whatever…
But 1971 is still ok? Right?
Whew……
It was a decade of horror aesthetically (a judgment from which European and Japanese cars were not exempt). Oldsmobiles tended to be among the least offensive of an ugly lot, although I don’t know what was going on with this car’s headlights. The rest of the car’s exterior is unobjectionable, but the headlights look like the result of a bad photochop.
To these foreign eyes, the full size offerings of the big three up to the big bumpers are some of the best looking cars, and a few after. There was a period where things got a bit iffy, but the 77 GM full size dealt with that. Each decade and country had its horrors. Pontys and Olds for this body not quite as beautiful as Buick and Chev, but as visually appealing to me as anything out of the carrozzerie. Coming up, the Cedric that bested Pininfarina’s efforts…
Definitely agree on the headlights – the protruding partition between them is just odd
And I respectfully share the above sentiment, except I’ll stretch it to start at 1971 and end at about 1985…sorry Carmine.
And yes I lived thru every minute of that decade…
Then again, Jason, the cars of the 70’s reflect a Detroit in turmoil…as was our nation…having undergone an extreme attitude makeover from eternal optimism to wondering if we were going to pollute ourselves into extinction. Then add Vietnam, Watergate, inflation, stagflation…and very specifically to the auto industry…new Federal regs – neccessary as they were – that had Detroit reeling like a drunk. Look at any 1973 vehicle for proof.
Oh, and GM owned 53% of the market…as it looked over its shoulder hoping Congress wouldn’t look too closely lest they get in the mood to invoke the Sherman Anti-Trust Act.
In a way it’s a wonder the cars of this decade didn’t look worse. I’m glad we have some time capsule Curbside Classics to document those years.
Jason – Each to his own I suppose but as an English guy (I hate the term Brit – rhymes with sh*t) I think American cars are great – I actually own a Buick Riviera and she runs like a dream – you dont find many ancient BMW’s running around but the old Yanks go on forever – idiots like Clarkson can spew out their sour graped garbage about American cars but he talks out of his ar*e anyway!
I’ve always found AMC cars to be the best looking of American cars during the 70s. Their inherent quirkiness seemed to match that decade like gangbusters.
There are luxo barges and then there are just barges. And while Cadillac and Buick would be luxo barges, the rest of the GM makes are just simply barges. More mass and less functional purpose.
Sorry, Mr. Shafer, did you say something after ‘Wonder Woman’?
The full size GM range from this period is so good looking, and its great to have another reason to own one. Both my head and my heart thank you.
Don and Robert: Here is more from a different season. Let’s just say these put me behind my self-imposed schedule.
I think I just experienced the WW effect.
“Make the wings flap! Make the wings flap!”
I remember Wonder Woman. It was an awesome show to watch. Every time she spun around and transformed into Wonder Woman, I’ve wondered “doesn’t she get dizzy from all that spinning?”
That was one of the longest articles to get through that I have seen here. 10 minutes of Linda Carter spinning in her 70s outfits and then running off in the Wonder Woman outfit was strangely hypnotic and impossible to stop watching.
Talk about making one’s head spin, the scene at 2:35 in which Wonder Woman already in costume appears, surrounded by a Fiat 850, a Ford LTD, a Mercury Cougar, and a VW Bus, and then spins and reappears wearing a helmet, was mind-bending on several levels.
The utilitarian value of a classic full size wagon led me to buy one, instead of a more entertaining convertible, but you have me thinking that a convertible would have its own kind of utility. I should add that a full size convertible with the top down is the best Christmas tree carrier ever made. It can be done with an MG Midget as well, but not quite as easily. If Ralphie’s dad in “A Christmas Story” had had a convertible Olds to haul the tree, he may have been less grumpy around Christmas time.
In your second paragraph, you’ve hit upon why I included the link.
By the way, if you get the ME Network, Wonder Woman is on every Saturday at 7 pm Central; I just discovered it two weeks ago.
I dunno if “The Old Man” would have gone for a ragtop, especially in Indiana. Plus the top could get all ripped up from the Bumpasses’ hound dogs.
I always found it interesting to think of what he would’ve had if the movie were contemporary to the time it was made rather than a period piece. Maybe he’d be getting one last winter out of his colonnade Cutlass before moving on to a new A-body Ciera, or maybe he’d be cursing out his Omega before voiceover!Ralphie tells us (from THE FUTURE) that he bought a Camry the next spring and has been driving them ever since…
It’s a well made period piece, sometimes you forget its from 1983.
I had no use for these barges when they were new as I was all about small size, good handling and fuel efficiency. With the advantages in wisdom that 40 more years bring, now I can see the point of these vehicles and I can see the point of owning one. The turd brown that this one is painted wouldn’t be my first choice for color but sometimes one can’t be choosy. Many years ago I had a Plymouth about this shade and I learned to live with it. There is just something about these big, old convertibles that cries out for a leisurely road trip somewhere, or nowhere, as long as one is on the road.
To me the 1972 full-size Oldsmobile somehow managed to look rather sleek, despite its bulk.
The same-year Chevrolet, Pontiac and Buick (also made as a convertibles) did not. Their heavier-looking front ends didn’t have the same grace as that of the Olds.
And THANKS for the reminder that many of today’s much smaller vehicles do not carry correspondingly less weight, translating into poorer fuel economy and performance.
I was a fixture in Oldsmobile showrooms in 1972 as my mother was shopping for a new car. While I remember the Viking Blue Cutlass convertible in the showroom, I don’t recall any of these anywhere on the lot. For those of you who care, the color of this ragtop is Baroque Gold – Mom tried like the dickens to find a Cutlass Supreme in that color, but it was late in the model year and none were available equipped the way she wanted with buckets and a console.
These never had much of an audience – Oldsmobile buyers were such practical people, as a rule. It seems that both Pontiac and Buick catered to slightly flashier people. The Oldsmobile owners of my experience (and they were many) never bought a ragtop.
I have started to soften towards these a little, but ONLY because of that great Oldsmobile V8 coupled to the beefy THM tranny. I think the convertible is the only one of these that I would really want.
I find that, having not experienced the era, it’s hard for me to choose between the styling and character of the Fuselage cars and the all-around competence and excess of the ’71-’76 B/C bodies. As a lover of big Chryslers, I figured you’d have some perspective.
To me, there’s everything to love about a gigantic full-framed convertible with a huge V8, and these cars were pretty thoroughly thought out and well-developed by the standards of the day, compared to their cross-town rivals.
I can’t stress enough the novelty value of a car like this for someone who grew up in the FWD/import era. We didn’t have gigantic convertibles, and we generally didn’t have such large engines. The distinctiveness and character that comes with such a “fat” car is why they’re so popular in Europe today.
My big gripe about these cars was the body. These were very floppy from a structural standpoint, nowhere near as solid as the “Body by Fisher” I had grown so used to through the 1970 big cars. The Mopar C body, being a Unibody, was always much tighter and more solid from a structural point of view. However, the Fuselage cars only offered a convertible in 1969-70 before it was discontinued.
Truthfully, both the fusey Mopar and the 77-76 B body gave a vibe of cheap materials, certainly compared to what was the norm in the mid 60s. The GM cars were certainly better isolated from road noise and seemed less finicky from a carb and ignition standpoint. Also, GM’s assembly quality was miles better in that era. I always preferred the more “mechanical” feel of the Mopar. Maybe it was just youthful rebellion, because absolutely nobody else in my extended family would touch a Chrysler with a fork (with the exception of one great aunt in Minnesota whom we hardly ever visited).
I was born in 1973. I grew up seeing cars like this. My grandparents had a 1971 Buick LeSabre.
Thanks for the color info. JPC, I always find it interesting. This Baroque Gold sure was a popular color on Oldsmobiles that year. In 2014 it’s funny to imagine anyone being disappointed they couldn’t find a car in this color–you’ve got to love the ’70s! My choice would have been the Viking Blue Cutlass Supreme convertible on the showroom floor–that must have been a sweet car.
Believe me, 13 year old me did my very best sales job on Mom to try and get her into that blue convertible. With its white top and white bucket seat interior, we would have been cool people indeed! 🙂 But no sale. I guess the light green Cutlass Supreme 2 door with buckets, console, 350-4bbl, air and power windows was not a bad consolation prize. Its a shame it was gone before I started driving.
While not a ragtop, we had a ’71 Catalina 4-door with the 400 (2-barrel carb). It rode quite nicely, if a bit on the floaty side.
Here in the Middle West, we’re finally starting to see some days above 60*F, and I’ve enjoyed top-down motoring a couple times so far. We made a trip into town with four adults in the convertible (2013) Beetle last summer, and it was pretty miserable for the pair in the back seat.
Final comment, that we had a massive frame and receiver under our ’68 Country Squire LTD wagon (390, 4-barrel carb), and it barely knew the trailer was back there on family camping trips.
I almost bought a triple white ’73 88 convertible a few years ago in Adelaide, but with fuel costs and the little rust bubbles springing up under the side trim I decided to pass.
I still don’t know wether I reget it or not…
Brown cars that are tired around the edges always seem a little extra tired. But, this was a very popular color at the time. Parked on a driveway on a perfect fall day, this car would blend right in.
1972 was a good year for the ’71 – ’76 run of these. They were past the ’71 flo-thru ventilation mess, the big bumpers had not yet arrived, and the engines had not been fully smogged to death. The ’71 year was also odd in that the top trim could only be had in the coupe and convertible, leaving the top 4 door models a bit plain for Oldsmobiles.
My dad’s company fleet car when assigned was for a while a ’72 Royale sedan with the 455 and quite a few options. It always seemed quite swank.
A better looking brown car………….
Here is another example of a ’72 Olds painted Baroque Metallic Gold that I have sitting in my garage.
Twentysomethings today weaned on Civics, Focuses and the like must just stare at a car like this with their mouths agape. Kinda like I did at that age when I saw pictures of old V-16 Packards and Dusenbergs. Yes, American really did once build cars like this. This Olds is a perfect example of a model that all American manufacturers once had in their line up. A huge convertible powered by a big V-8 with two sofa like bench seats that could easily fit 3 across. By 1972 the end was near for beasts like this and in a few years the were gone, never to be seen again.
This Olds actually looks pretty good on the outside with styling that makes it look trimmer and leaner than it is. However, GM interiors around this time took a sudden downturn, with the advent of cheap, hard plastics and vinyl seats that were thinner and cheaper than those previous. Still, this Olds is representative of an extinct breed and would be a nice collectible, especially with the optional 455.
Yes, and it’s especially true when you consider that the qualities which made cars like the Civic so much fun are so much less pronounced. Both the Civic and the 88 have been replaced by high-waisted, heavy FWD sedans in an savory example of convergent evolution.
Granted, the Honda Fit is basically the old Civic wagon with a little extra cleverness around how the back seat’s laid out. Early reports seem positive about the third generation, so they haven’t managed to ruin it yet either.
Perry, I’ve always wondered what building is your avatar, because I like it and want another pic of it to possibly be my wallpaper.
Neither Packard nor Duesenberg ever made a V16. Only Cadillac, Marmon and Peerless ever ventured into V16 territory.
I think that the Olds had the best front and rear styling of the 71-76 GM B bodies, although I prefer the back of the Electra for the C body.
What a great platform, though, a gigantic engine and your choice of a hardtop sedan, wagon or convertible, some of my favorite bodystyles. These would be great cars to restomod or just de-smog, giving more power to help stuff in more sound insulation. A torpedo on four-wheels.
Interesting write-up. I’ll have to wait till I’m at home to watch the video clips though. 🙂
My dad had a frame hitch welded to his ’66 Chrysler sedan. He used it to tow his cabin cruiser, and once or twice towed a house trailer down to Florida. With an auxiliary transmission cooler it got the job done. He only cut the hitch off because he had to drop the gas tank because it had spring a leak.
While this Olds wouldn’t make my list of cars I’d like to own, I would definitely stop and admire it if I saw it at a car show or parked somewhere. I wholeheartedly approve of fullsize convertibles and big block motivation, and I really like the taillights on these.
In 1966 my next door neighbor growing up bought a huge Airstream trailer that was beyond the towing capabilities of his ’63 Ambassador. So, he replaced it with a new ’66 Chrysler Town and Country Wagon with the 440 TNT. Two things I remember distincly about it. The cool luggage rack that went the entire length of the roof and the exhaust note of that 440 from the factory duals as he backed that Airstream up his steep driveway.
If he ordered the T&C specifically for towing the Airstream, I bet he also got the towing package, heavy duty cooling system and 3.23 gears. That would have been a seriously cool wagon. 🙂
Yep, he got the towing package and everything heavy duty. It was fairly loaded, but curiously did not have whitewall tires. I recall him saying the heavy duty tires he wanted (6 ply?) were only available in blackwalls.
He replaced it with a ’72 or ’73 T&C which he said wasn’t nearly as good.
My Grandfather also hauled around his Airstream with a 1973 Newport Custom sedan, towing package, 440 and all. Dad recalls, even with the trailer hooked up, you still had to be careful on the throttle. This car replaced a 1964 Newport, so I’d imagine that has something to do with only positive comparisons in my family.
Great to see this survivor, especially from the one of the really low volume years of the early 1970s. I’ve always thought this car was something of an anomaly, and would have loved to have been a fly-on-the-wall at GM during the planning process for these cars. In the context of a shrinking market, imagine the debates over dropping the higher margin C-body convertibles, while keeping the B-body and adding an E-body, but only for Cadillac. Likely just after the decision to make the B-Body convertible, GM would have decided NOT to proceed with the more popular A-body convertible in anticipation tougher Federal safety regulations. So this car really just squeaked through…
When I was growing up in New Orleans in the 1970s, convertibles were a rare sight in spite of (or perhaps due to) the subtropical climate. The B-body convertibles from 1971 and 1972 were seemingly nonexistent (there were a fair number of A-bodies from those years). I do remember seeing more ’73s and ’74s when they became the only open-top option in most GM showrooms. But the banner year was 1975, where the local powerhouse Olds dealers (Mossy and Royal) must have started hawking the fact that these were the “last of the breed.” It worked, because I knew of 4 in the neighborhoods around my home and school. My favorite of these was the one owned by a middle aged couple around the corner from my house. It was dark blue with a white top and white interior, wire wheel covers, loaded with power windows, locks, etc. They babied the car so it was always in immaculate shape, and they enjoyed it year around with the top up and down. in the mid-1980s I went off to college and my parents moved, so I lost track of the car. I’ve been by the house since, but the couple has moved–I wonder if they’re still enjoying the car (they’d be pretty elderly now). No matter what, I hope that convertible always has a good home as it was a really nice car and a great period piece from the end of an era.
When researching this, Olds must have indeed advertised it as being last of the breed like you say, as the B-body convertible for ’75 had sales in the low 20,000s, quite the increase from the 3900 of this particular one.
Oldsmobile really did push the 1975 Delta 88 convertible. They are surprisingly common at car shows today.
Also remember that, in 1972, the Delta 88 convertible faced in-house competition from the Cutlass convertible. The smaller, sportier Cutlass seemed a better “fit” for the convertible body style.
They played the collectors card.
Whats also interesting to note is that they started with a variety convertibles in every line up in 1971 except for Chevrolet which kept it’s tried and true Impala convertible and Oldsmobile, which just offered the 88. Pontiac and Buick differed, they offered a high end and a lower end, Buick started with a LeSabre and Centurion convertible and Pontiac still offered a Catalina and fancy shmancy Grand Ville convertible.
By 1975 ended up getting rounded down to just a high end one for Chevrolet and Pontiac, which resulted in moving the Impala convertible to the Caprice line up and Pontiac dropping the Catalina convertible and keeping the Grand Ville. Buick did the opposite and dropped the Centurion convertible and kept the LeSabre.
’74 Chevy Ragtops were Caprice only. High school buddy’s Mom had a white ’74 with black vinyl seats. Us dumb high school kids loved top down driving, so here we were . . . . top down, at night – driving into The City (San Francisco) from Marin . . . in December . . . with the top and all the windows down and were all wearing down ski jackets. Heater is on full blast. Good times.
My first car was a 67 Galaxie convertible which I bought on a cold, gray February day. The first thing I did was put the top down and froze all the way to my friend’s house. Then the top wouldn’t go back up until something jostled back into place halfway homw. It took several months before I isolated the loose wire under the hood that caused intermittent top operation.
My first car was my sister’s 66 Impala convertible, bought from her late in my junior year in high school. Many Friday and Saturday nights in the winter of senior year my buddies and I went top-down cruising around South Jersey, heater blasting and winter coats shut up tight.
IINM, most of this changed after 1972. I believe that was the last year for the Impala convertible (replaced for ’73 by a Caprice convertible; the two were never offered at the same time), the Catalina convertible, and at least temporarily, the LeSabre covertible. The LeSabre convertible came back in 1974 after a one-year absence when the Centurion was completely dropped (not just the convertible, the entire model).
I’m curious about the thought process that went into GM’s decision to drop the F-body convertibles after 1969. Presumably they felt that sales of both ponycars and/or convertibles would decline moving forward, leaving no long-term future for such a model. But the F-bodies have to have been among GM’s best-selling convertibles in 1967-69. And the ponycars were the last convertibles to fall at Ford and Chrysler, with each introducing a new ponycar design in 1970-71 that came as a convertible.
I am reminded of the 2002 Spiderman movie where Uncle Ben drives a ’73 Oldsmobile Delta 88. His was a cream coloured 4 door. Not your typical candidate for a carjacking.
Maybe they were going to DONK it?
1973 Delta 88 is a Sam Rami “thing”, its a trademark. one appears in almost every one of his movies. Supposedly the car was purchased by his father, I don’t know if they all are the same car, but a yellow 1973 Delta 88 sedan is always guaranteed to appear in a Sam Rami movie.
Even in the 1880’s “western” The Quick and the Dead, where the car was used as a covered wagon in the background.
http://www.deadites.net/features/the-classic-delta-88/
LOVE for obvious reasons. My dislike of brown has little bearing on this beauty. I’ve heard from many people that the best spot in one of these is the back seat. Ironically I’ve never ridden in that spot….but it’s hard to do when I’m always the one driving.
When we take the convertible somewhere as a family, I get my wife to drive whenever possible, and relocate one of the kids to the front passenger seat, so I can lounge in the back. The kid that rides shotgun is usually agreeable too, as they never get to ride shotgun in the mommy-bus (Honda CR-V) and they don’t like the wind, as Paul describes in his comment below.
Jason, you forgot one aspect of the 70s that made these convertibles problematic: long hair. In fact, I’m going to go out on a limb and say that it was the real reason convertibles died. They were highly incompatible with the long tresses that were so fashionable at the time.
It was bad enough in the front seat: my best friend at this time (1970-1972) had a ’63 Falcon ragtop, and he and I both had seriously long hair, and not only was there a serious visibility problem with our hair getting in our eyes, but the hair was in total tangles after a longish drive. And no, we weren’t about to do something like wear a cap or such; not cool.
You make reference to the kiddies in the back seat at 70 mph on the freeway. Perhaps the single worst ride I ever had hitchiking was across the state of Illinois in the back seat of a big ’66 Fury ragtop, along with my female hitching companion, who happened to resemble WW in a number of key ways, and makes the memories even more vivid. She had really long, dark hair, and siting in the back seat at 70 was a torture chamber. Have any of you ever done that? The backdraft is absurd: one’s hair is being torn about in all directions, at great velocity. It was literally impossible to sit back there, so we had to share the back bench laying down, which was no picnic either. And the noise…
The back seats of these big convertibles were utterly unusable above about 30-35 mph. And the hair situation in the front was decidedly problematic as well. That ride probably explains why I’ve never owned a ragtop, or felt a powerful urge for one, despite my much shorter hair.
I identify. A number of years ago I got the back seat of a Volvo C70 convertible with the top down on I-465. I could certainly see the two people in the front seats, but could not hear a single thing they were saying. Fortunately, my short hair did not add to the bad experience. At least my glasses kept the 70 mph winds out of my eyes. But it was a loud, unpleasant ride.
Yes, the wind in the back seat of a convertible can get annoying, and chilly depending on the weather. Our kids often don’t appreciate riding back there. I wouldn’t want to go on a really long highway road trip riding in the back.
Even as a driver, I enjoy taking our convertible on roads where the speed limit is 50mph or less. Convertibles are made to take in the scenery, and there’s not much of that on the freeway.
Have you ever posted any pics from your Marsha Brady hair era?
1973 passport photo (yes, the Passport Office in Iowa City accepted it, reluctantly). It was shot up in a tree that I and the “photographer” had climbed. For the express purpose of shooting a passport photo. Does that help explain my life in 1973?
Yes, and also how cool 1973 must’ve been.
Depends…not in some ways.
When I left home in 1971 as an eighteen year old, I was essentially homeless. I slept on dirt floor basements and such. It probably explains why I own 12 houses now…
And scrounging for food was a real problem, given my voracious metabolism. There weren’t all the free food banks and such back then as there are now. Homeless people at least don’t go hungry, generally. In Eugene there’s even a free sit-down “restaurant” that feeds all comers every day at noon. How I would have liked that back then. I won’t tell you what I resorted to to get food sometimes.
Same for clothes; there’s places now that hand out lots of free clothes. I got arrested for lifting one pair of cotton socks from a department store, and spent a night in jail for it, and had to have some money sent by my brother to get me out to pay the fine. For a pair of socks…. No, I shouldn’t have done it, but it seemed like the only choice at the time.
That period didn’t last very long for me, fortunately, as I got jobs and such after a while, but that wasn’t always so easy, given the economy at the time.
One more detail: Food stamps? You had to prove that you had access to a kitchen with a genuine range, otherwise they wouldn’t give them to you. Like I can’t eat raw salads? Or cook my eggs at the basement kitchen of one of the many religious student centers in town? Or on a hot plate? No!!! You must have a kitchen, and prove it with a letter from your landlord. Meaning no food stamps for homeless persons. Catch 22.
Well, it did encourage my work ethic; no freeloading in Iowa, unlike CA which was famous for its lavish welfare benefits back then.
A bit of cash always made things a bit cooler. 🙂
Summer Breeze, makes me feel fine, blowing through the jasmine in my mind.
Quick solution in my tressed era. Ponytail.
Nice picture. 🙂
I kept the look (but not the lifestyle) 2018. Age 62.
A good add to the list of what killed the convertible. Catch an episode of Perry Mason in the ’60’s and the women have shorter hair covered with a scarf whenever a convertible is involved.
No matter how much of a free spirit a person was in the early ’70s, the occasional ride in dad’s air-conditioned Electra or whatever had to reinforce how brutal an open air ride can be at high speeds.
That’s a good point about long hair. If my hair gets any longer than what is seen in the “About” section, it gets pruned.
I did ride in the back of a VW convertible once long ago. It was like a non-stop wall of wind and it seemed like we were going at mach speed.
One of the men in father’s Jaycee Chapter had a 1967 Plymouth Satellite convertible. I remember riding in it with my mother around 1970 or so, in the back seat, to a Jaycee event. I loved it. I was about seven years old, and we took the interstate most of the way.
Years later I mentioned to my mother that I would love to have a convertible. Her response – “They’re awful. Don’t you remember riding in ***’s convertible to that event in Carlisle? The wind blew us all around. That cured me of ever wanting a convertible.”
Good point, Paul as long hair would whip your face, sting your eyes, and beat your cheeks to death. Of course, in most of the old promo pix, the girls are wearing head scarves, or bonnets of some kind and most guys had hats on which wouldn’t blow off because the windshield header was high enough.
Long hair is no longer fashionable? If you got it, flaunt it.
I had a fraternal twin to that car for a time back in the early Eighties, a ’72 Buick Centurion Convertible, in that exact shade of dirt with same color interior. Loved driving it but it need floors and at that time it was just an old rusty car so it got junked.
I always thought the 71-76 b bodies made so much more sense in convertible or wagon form. The coupes were not as handsome as the colonnade brethren, and the B-body sedans didn’t seem so much roomier than the colonnades . The wagon could carry more things than the colonnade wagons, and didn’t have that dreaded rear facing third seat. The b-bodies had their own space since there was no A-body convertible, the styling and proportions fit well, you can carry 5 of friends or family, and these cars have presence. If I could I would snag a convertible but I don’t have the space..yet.
As I have written before, my mom’s car in the early to late seventies was a clamshell Buick Estate Wagon. It was originally a dealer demo and had all of the optional equipment including everything needed to tow a mammoth trailer. No, we never towed anything with it!
Great article, though I will disagree with one point.
Clearly the Kojack of Convertibles would be a 1971-1973 Buick Centurion convertible, 455 and AccuDrive Baby!
Okay, I’ll admit, Kojak was a stretch. However, the color is fairly close within the rainbow of GM palettes of the times.
These very large American cars did offer a child of the 70s solace during a time when traveling any other way, especially by plane or cruise ship, seemed fraught with disaster. Tall office buildings weren’t particularly safe either and the beaches were loaded with sharks. Nothing was going to hurt you in a Delta 88 Royale.
Haha…I see what you did there.
George Kennedy would agree.
Get me Joe Patroni!
Oh George was well versed in the dangers of 70s travel and need for stepped up safety. Rule #1, for a brief period anyway, was to avoid ocean travel with Shelley Winters at all costs.
Rule #2 was that if you were a young, beautiful female who looked great in hot pants and spiked heels, you would survive virtually anything – even a capsized ocean liner.
Rule #3 was that adorable, plucky children never die in disasters, whether the disaster in question is an earthquake, an overturned ocean liner or a burning skyscraper.
Middle-age, matronly women, however, would be better off just staying home.
Rule 4 – the curmudgeonly fat guy is always a goner.
Rule #5 was that the best chance at love for the romantically challenged – especially nerdy men – was during a disaster.
Because, as we all know, the best time to hit on a woman is when a building is burning down around you or you are trapped on a sinking ocean liner.
Rule #6-Nuns always stand a good chance of surviving.
Rule #7-Everthing is instantly ok when Charleston Heston arrives on the scene.
A great reminder of the rules for safe (and fun) travel in the 70s, thanks guys.
Above all never forget that large American cars were extremely safe and could float. They were your best travel option at the time.
Rule #8. Even Paul Newman and Steve McQueen will get involved if the money is right.
Rule #9. For added effect, shake the camera.
Hey, I’ve fit 3 adults in the back of my Solara before, one had to sit on the “hump” without a seatbelt of course…
Does this one have a bench seat up front? If so, you could bring along 5 of your friends when you go cruising!
My childhood town, village of Angola, New York, had 2 or 3 (the entire fleet) 1972 Delta 88 sedans as cop cars. Of course the town manager owned Catalano Chevy/Olds, the local dealership. They may of been 1971 models.
Love the Olds but that color is hideous. We had a 74 Caprice that color or very close when I was growing up. Not sure what people were smoking in the 70s that made them buy so many poop-brown cars.
I’m also the proud owner of one of these 🙂 . I have a full article coming sometime in the future.
Yours is a much better color.
Thank you for speaking up. When I was uploading the pictures for this, I saw yours had been uploaded about the same time. I looked all over for something scheduled about it, but didn’t see it. So, having seen most of your pictures already, your Olds looks great and looks to be in much better shape than the one above.
I see cornering lamps! I like it.
Interesting comments and opinions. It was interesting to read people’s experiences and memories as well. I thought I would share the 1971 Oldsmobile Eighty Eight commercials:
Hey, Doc from The Love Boat saved on a year-end Olds!
They WERE big. They played big. They could carry stuff and people and pull a trailer and still put down the top. No need to compromise. The motors worked all the time. If the sun don’t shine the climate control worked all the time too. Parts all available at your close by NAPA. 70’s cars get a lot of crap. They sure served back in the day though.
Brian, somehow I think your memory has become a bit, say clouded when it comes to the mechanical reliability of 70s cars!
I’d have liked to have seen one of these in a two headlight configuration, I think that might have been a better look than the 4 on this car.
As mentioned above, Telly Savalas certainly drove a Buick in Kojak. I seem to recall Richard Nixon was an Oldsmobile man perhaps. No slight intended on either Milhaus or Olds.
If any of these cars survived the rust belt winters, they would have been doing well. I would still counter that the Cutlass was more versatile than the 88 though. Less expensive, but with the same engine and performance capabilities, albeit with a bit less interior capacity. Had market tastes and needs not changed, Olds could still be pumping these cars out by the thousands today.
My parents ‘73 Ford LTD was about the same shade of brown as the CC Olds. We had two snowmobiles that got towed by the LTD or my Dad’s company car at the time, a ‘71 Country Squire. Snowmobiles were so popular in the 1970’s, but what an expense as they were stored somewhere else 6-7 months out of the year.
If you look at automotive brochures, convertibles really lost the glamour puss status they had in from the 1930’s – 1960’s by the dawn of the 1970’s. Sometimes it’s hard to tell if a manufacturer offered an open top model (unless it was in it’s last year).
As a kid growing up in the 1970’s I can think of only two convertibles that I rode in; my only Uncle who didn’t have kids (back then) had a Fiat (I think it was a 124) and a neighbor had a Sunbeam Tiger. There was a brown ‘72 Pontiac Granville Convertible, a light green ‘68 Impala in the neighborhood, but I didn’t get to ride in those.
1972 is my favorite year of the Chevrolet, Oldsmobile and Buick B-body cars built from 1971-76, despite the low compression V8 engine’s they’ve still offered good performance and it was the last year of the smaller bumpers.
My 2 best friends in high school and I had always talked about taking a road trip in a 1970’s convertible. High School turned to college, college turned to grad school, grad school turned to jobs. I finally made an executive decision and bought a 1972 Delta 88 Royale convertible from a recently married guy that had moved from Salt Lake City to L.A. and needed a more practical car. Sky Blue with a white top and white vinyl interior, I bought it for $1200 (in 1989) and put another $1000 into it for exhaust, tires, and a bit of upholstery work. I named her Blanche, after Blanche DuBois in A Streetcar Named Desire, because although also a fading beauty, she too still showed some of her original youthful charm and elegance. One of my friends had just finished grad school and had just gotten a job in Seattle, the other had also just finished grad school and had a week before starting his Job in San Diego. ROAD TRIP TO SEATTLE!!!
So here’s the thing: I had forgotten just how floaty and vague the suspension of this era of GM cars was. I also did not consider that driving past Mount Shasta at 75 mph with the top down would produce a wind chill factor of about 40 degrees in the middle of summer. We all got the worst summer cold. And, not having owned a convertible of this vintage before, I could not have foreseen that at 75 mph the separation between the the windshield and the convertible top header would be just enough to force the bodies of half dead yet fully pissed off Oregon honeybees into the car.
Once I returned, I sold the car for $2200 to a newly arrived New Yorker college student who always wanted a convertible. We both couldn’t have been happier.
One of the oddest, UGGLIEST headlight applications of any car ever. Ugly then, ugly now.
Big luxury convertibles were the glamour cars of the 1940s through 1970s. They were always showcased in movies so that the movie star behind the wheel was clearly visible. Yes these cars were adaptable to all kinds of uses. Held plenty of passengers. Older readers remember that before seatbelts were required, or even considered necessary, cars were often filled with as many bodies as could be crammed in. Besides a big trunk, the backseat could be filled with luggage and whatnot. Put the top down and tall bulky cargo could be accommodated. Pulling trailers, of course. Watch Lucy’s movie “The long Trailer!”
I had a ’64 Cadillac convertible and it was roomy and a great way to cruise the backroads with four or five passengers. Back seat passengers don’t have it quite so good, but putting the side windows up cuts out a lot of buffeting. Long hair was definitely a problem so that women wore scarves or other head coverings when driving or riding with the top down. Hippies could wear a ponytail. Yesterday I took my ’96 Mustang convertible out for a fairly long drive and enjoyed the early Bay Area Autumn weather. The little backseat makes the car flexible for occasional passenger use. That’s why I prefer a small four seat convertible over a smaller two seater. Long hair, guys? That’s what the “man bun” is for, right?
It was 1988, I had just gotten my license and my friend’s dad was nice enough to offer his ’76 Delta 88 for me and his son to go for a drive. He thought I was a responsible young man. He thought wrong. I thought it was just a blah old car, but I was happy to drive anything. It was a brown coupe with a 350 “Rocket” engine. I was surprised by the pep and the comfort, and the ease of exceeding 100 mph on Cline Avenue, a local highway where everyone went to see how fast they could go. A friend who had a ’77 Cordoba with a 400 raced us and lost badly after 100 mph. He was so annoyed by this that he later had dual exhausts installed with glass packs. (Really opened it up) But I will always remember that big brown Olds and the fun night of cruising. Looking back, it was really in perfect shape. I didn’t appreciate it then, but I sure would love to have that car now. And it’s owner is long passed on, but I miss talking to him too.
Is this car for sale still I’m interested in purchasing this car.