Yes, technically there was a 1979 RWD Skylark, for half the year before the all-new FWD X-Cars arrived in the spring of 1980. But for our purposes, 1978 is close enough. And what is our purpose? To take a look at the Skylark at both ends of its compact RWD incarnation, which bookends the years in the middle when it was a mid-sized car.
Let’s get to that stat; as in the stats. The 1961 – 1963 Special/Skylark had a somewhat long 112″ wheelbase for an early compact, but in that time before the term “intermediate” or “mid-sized” was coined, everything less than a full size car was a compact. These Y-Bodies shared their unibodies with the Corvair, but had longer front ends, where the additional 4″ of wheelbase was. But the basic center section and interior dimensions were essentially the same, and the similarity with Corvair’s close-coupled greenhouse is quite obvious.
If it weren’t for the 5 mile bumpers, these two Skylarks would be quite close in their dimensions. The increase in weight is predictable, especially since the 1961 version had the light aluminum 215 V8.
I added the V6 to the 1961 stats even though it didn’t arrive until 1962, and I see I made a typo on its hp; it should be 135 hp gross. That 198 cu.in. unit is of course the direct predecessor of the 231 inch V6 that was standard on the ’78. The optional V8 was the Chevy 350, in four barrel trim. That must have made the ’78 pretty lively if so equipped.
The 1978 Skylark, and its 1973-1974 predecessor, the Apollo, is of course just a badge-engineered X-Body Chevy Nova, as it had been since the Apollo appeared after the first energy crisis. In 1975, the Skylark name migrated back to the compact car it had started out as.
This Creamsicle Skylark is a regular coupe; a hatchback version was also available, but not very popular as the regular version outsold it 20:1 in 1978.
This one is equipped with bucket seats, console and floor shift. Maybe it has the V8 too?
The 1961 Skylark came standard with bucket seats too, but no console.
The rear seat on these X-Bodies was none too generous. I don’t have all the specs readily at hand, but I’d surmise that the ’61-’63 had a somewhat more commodious back seat.
This one is sporting fake wire wheel covers, one of the better ones of that genre.
I’m afraid I don’t have a whole lot to say about this Skylark. They filled a need for a compact Buick after the first energy crisis, and along with Pontiac and Olds, glomed on to the Nova for the expedient solution. Not very inspiring, which likely explains my lack of enthusiasm, but here it is, another increasingly scarce sight on our roads.
Related reading:
CC 1962 Buick Skylark P.Shoar
These were a nice car especially with the 231 V-6. Still a Chevy Nova underneath from 1968 with updates in 1975. The 1975 updates included the Camaro front suspension and the “squaring off” of the original 1968 to 1974 Nova styling. Love the comparison with the 1962 Skylark. Those 5 MPH bumpers are a lot of the extra 12″ in length from the 1962 to 1978. Still a good looking car and a safe buy in 1978. A lot of changes in cars in those years with downsizing and the switch of many cars to front wheel drive. These were a lot cheaper and easier to fix that the 1980 and later X Cars with FWD cramming a lot of mechanical things into tight spaces. People still loved the older RWD Skylarks, Novas, and A Body Valiant/Darts into the 1980s. Proven technology and cheaper to fix. Looks like a nice ride and maybe a daily driver classic.
It’s less surprising that the trunk coupe outsold the hatchback across all of this X-body generation once you learn just how much extra GM wanted for them. I don’t have numbers in front of me but the coupe was the cheapest body style and the hatchback the priciest, by a couple hundred dollars. The 4-door sedan fell in between.
As I remember, the hinges made the back seat uninhabitable by anyone much over 5′, so you may as well get a sexier Monza. I wonder if a two door wagon would have sold.
Such a price premium and low sales makes you wonder whether GM made any money in offering the hatchback at all.
Looking at that rear seat reminds me of a trick manufacturers use to increase leg room: shorten the bottom seat cushion. It significantly reduces thigh support and is definitely noticable after sitting for any length of time.
One of the cars I first saw it mentioned were the front seats of the ’81-’83 Chrysler Imperial.
That was my immediate reaction to the driver’s seat of an 80’s Jag XJ. Didn’t bother to test drive it. Idiot.
It’s hard to believe the early FWD C bodies had the same wheelbase as the Nova et al. They had very upright seats.
I think the Nova of that era had bad space efficiency, even by 1970’s standards. Much of its architecture was based on the Camaro, and that gives it a long hood, compared to your typical compact of that era. There’s more wheelbase ahead of the cowl compared to something like a Dart or Valiant, for example. It gives the Nova really nice proportions, in my opinion, but it does make for a smaller passenger cabin.
By the time the FWD C-body came out, cars were getting taller, and no doubt the FWD layout helped some with space efficiency. The last time I sat in one of those cars though, the first thing I noticed is that the front seat really didn’t seem to go back that far. It sat up pretty high though, similar to a pickup truck. So that’s one area where it was able to get good legroom measurements. It wasn’t so much how far you sat back from the cowl, but moreso how high you sat off the floor. Another trick they did that became really common with downsizing, was to push the rear seat back further between the wheel openings. That would let them keep a good legroom measurement, and usually didn’t affect shoulder room. However, you’d get more wheel well intrusion, which would make 3-across seating less comfortable. Still, those FWD C-bodies packed a lot of room into those tidy exterior dimensions.
However, you’d get more wheel well intrusion, which would make 3-across seating less comfortable
All but impossible. They did that with the first Seville, too. The 3 inch longer wheelbase wasn’t enough. Yet back then, car guys didn’t obsess over dash to wheel distance.
Just a note on engines. While a Chevy 350 was optional, I think it was only offered in California and high-altitude areas. So I believe the rest of us got, at best, a Chevy 305-2bbl with 145 hp. California engines were often saddled with something called the “California Emissions Package” or something like that, which sapped hp. I think it knocked the 350 down from 170 hp to 155. I’m not sure if they did anything to the high-altitude engines or not.
The 305 was not used in California/high-altitude areas for the ’78 Skylark. At least, going by the EPA website and the ’78 sales brochure. There was a 4-bbl version of the 305, but oddly, it was only used in 49-state versions of the Century, Regal, and Cutlass that year.
I believe when the Apollo came out a few years later you got the Buick 350 or the Chevy straight 6 as Buick had not yet purchased their V6 back from AMC.
Back in the summer of 1978, my Uncle flew in to visit our family for a few days and rented a ’77 or ’78 Skylark coupe with the 231 V6…..One thing I clearly remember is that the transmission constantly hunted between 2nd and 3rd (high) gear when driving at 45 mph or below.
My Uncle remarked that anytime he pressed on the gas beyond light throttle, the trans would downshift.
He resorted to manually selecting 2nd gear for driving unless he was driving at highway speeds.
Decked-out with power windows, wire wheelcovers, and whitewalls, that looks to be a pretty well-equipped old Skylark that someone has done their best to keep in good shape.
Buick sold 114K of these in various styles in 1978
Model 4XB17-Two-Door Hatchback 2,642
Model 4XB27-Two-Door Coupe 42,087
Model 4XB69-Four-Door Sedan 40,951
Model 4XC17-Two-Door Custom Hatchback 1,227
Model 4XC27-Two-Door Custom Coupe 12,740
Model 4XC69-Four-Door Custom Sedan 14,523
Obviously the hatchback wasn’t popular, I’d guess that no one actually ordered one, they just bought what was in dealer stock as a loss leader.
Buick also sold 236,652 Regals in 1978
https://www.teambuick.com/reference/years/78.php
This was never my favorite GM X body in terms of styling (1975-79) but I liked the Buick version better than I liked the others.
I have not thought this through, but wonder if Skylark was the only name GM used on the B/C body, the A body and the X body? If we add the Y body, the answer almost has to be a Yes.
One of the rare instances when the 4 door body was better looking than the 2 door model.
What really spoils the design for me, other than the craggy Buick front end, is that awful thick B-pillar these bodies had. It seems to have been a GM affectation at the time, as our Torana Hatchback also had this treatment – although the Torana was mercifully spared all the bright accenting of this car which visually chops the car in two. IIRC it was to do with cabin ventilation outlet being routed through the pillar – but surely they could have routed them elsewhere and made the pillar smaller.
Toranas used an Opel/Vauxhall body the 2 door Commodore/Senator/Monza has the same massive B pillar GMH didnt change it just added their styling to front and rear panels installed a local powertrain and claimed it was an all Aussie car.
It would have been more intersting to have a 3-way comparison: the ’61-’62 Skylark against the ’78 Skylark and compare them to the downsized 1978 Regal!
I highly doubt a 150hp 350 Chev in 1978 would be livelier than the 4 barrel 215 Buick V8 was in 1962. The owner of the boat shop I worked for bought 2 ’87 Chev shop trucks. 305V8, truck 4spd, 3/4 ton, 2wd. Brand new. These trucks couldn’t pull the skin off a rotten banana. He paid 22K for both of them.
I like it quite a nice looking coupe, Id have one here actually plenty of Buick running gear in dead Holdens laying around if it goes wrong, but very few Skylarks of any model here from what Ive seen.
A 4 door model, if available with the strong Buick 350 4-BBL V8 engine, with the thick sound deadening and luxurious interiors Buicks of this era were know for, could had been quite the “Bargain Basement Cadillac Seville” model.
I’d still prefer the ’62 Skylark coupe, with the aluminum V8 engine and a heavy duty radiator & cooling fan, to the newer model.
I suppose back in the early 1970s, American car companies felt comfortable enough to believe that their brand names could sell any product. They don’t think that way anymore, but the wise guys from this era were a complete different breed of leader, I am assuming.
That said, the idea that the guys at Buick and Oldsmobile couldn’t see the long-term damage to their brand by taking a Nova and slapping their badges on it, could be a reason the Apollo and Omega happened.
These cars were either a Chevrolet or a Pontiac – two brands that offer basic transportation in vanilla or peppermint flavors. As a Nova or as a Ventura, these cars meet expectations and fit their brands. These cars were durable, useful, functional, and cheap. That is what they offered.
That isn’t a Buick or an Oldsmobile, however. It is just a bad thing to give a Nova to Buick or Oldsmobile without making them a Buick or an Oldsmobile. GM did not make these cars fit their brands. Neither offered a different look, interior, power or feel than the Nova and the Ventura. It was obvious that the Apollo and the Omega were not the kind of cars that should be sold under the Buick or Oldsmobile names.
Buick and Oldsmobile did not come out ahead selling a Nova. Instead their brand portfolio was cheapened. It was an honest insult for a Buick or Oldsmobile owner to see these cars on the road. No self-respecting Electra or 98 driver would have ever considered either car. No one really wanted a badge engineered Nova.
Consider the dealers – they sold to white collar professionals. They didn’t want a Nova – they wanted a smaller car they could sell to young white collar professionals. Buick and Oldsmobile dealers wanted a sportier, smaller and more youthful Buick or Oldsmobile, not a Nova.
Within a decade, these badge engineered cars tore down their parent brands, not build them up. The Apollo/Skylark and Omega Nova cars turned away young white collar professionals. No one was fooled.
That said, the idea that the guys at Buick and Oldsmobile couldn’t see the long-term damage to their brand by taking a Nova and slapping their badges on it, could be a reason the Apollo and Omega happened.
It’s the same old GM story: short-term gains by sacrificing long-term solvency. The folks who dreamed up poorly disguised Buick and Olds versions of the Nova calculated that they’d be long retired before the real damage to the reputations of GM’s upscale divisions began killing the brands off in earnest. It was a steady decline that surprised absolutely no one.
While I respect your well thought out opinion and agree to a certain level, I have to say a good friend bought a new ‘78 Skylark coupe completely loaded out and you could distinctly tell it was a much more luxurious interior and ride than a Nova. Just looked and felt more upscale. But yes, it was easy to see visually it was based on the Nova – perhaps a more distinctive use of sheet metal would have helped.
I always felt bad for the Olds version….while in the ‘60s Olds could still lean on its ‘innovation’ reputation, the Omega really stood for nothing despite the Cutlass being the #1 selling car in the country.
I have a 1976 Buick Skylark but I Put a 327 & 700 R 4 Tran in it the motor has been bored out kind of like a street race car I’m still working on it though but I like the car I really do I had it for about 10 years or more I found out some things on there I do side windows in the back I did have a ragtop on it but I took it off and that’s when I found out about the windows but it’s so much like an over though anyway I just figured I’d drop the fuel lines here sitting here reading all this stuff that y’all had put on here about Skylark pretty cool have a nice day.
There’s one of these that lives not far from me in yellow with a white top .
It was for sale for several years, no takers, recently it’s been parked outside a garage on the boulevard that works on mostly older vehicles so hopefully it’s going to last a while longer…
-Nate
Well, didn’t actually drive the Buick, but an Oldsmobile Omega was probably the most common GM car we had in our fleet at Hertz when I worked there 1977 and 1978. Believe there were more MOPARs than GM based on what I drove (or maybe that’s what people rented?) of course back then most of the cars were Ford (a couple Mercurys , but no Lincolns), even an AMC Pacer or two (don’t remember any Hornets nor Concords), the imports were limited to a Toyota Corolla liftback (more than 1) and Datsun 510 (the late 70’s version, rather than the original).
These were an OK car, not very roomy. We had a couple of wagons (including a Cougar wagon) that we used for one-way transport of a group of us if we had quite a few pickups (I was a transporter for one-way rentals). Our location was the South Burlington (Vt.) airport, and even though distances weren’t great, they often were convoluted, where we had to stop at several locations which weren’t on the way to each other to pick up a car. Not many interstates, so lots of secondary roads which slowed things down. The driver of the big car (wagon) was guaranteed to have the longest (or tie for longest) trip, the problem was that they could call us for a pickup at 5PM after we were up all day doing something else for such a trip, and you could be gone 12 hours after that, not very safe for non-drowsy driving. We were paid a standard rate based on the trip, which (for me) worked out to less than minimum wage, unless you were a speeder (I wasn’t). However many speeders ran into deer, saw several cars totalled that way (you would think they might try to discourage speeding, but we were mostly young, so probably was thought to be a lost cause…cars were insured, but still, it was a waste (and a tragedy for the deer).
Anyhow, I think most of ours were pretty stripped, though they did have A/C (don’t remember if the imports did, I think so), but with AM radio, and the 6. We had V8s in the Thunderbird of course and LTDII (think the 302), but most of the fleet was base engine. The Granada was a 6, not sure but I think the Fairmont was the 4. Gas shortages were hardly a memory back then so I think they tried to stay with the smallest engine (plus the car cost less). I don’t remember any FWD cars back then (mostly domestics which were still RWD if not 4WD) and even the few imports we had were still RWD back in the 70’s (no Fiat/VW/Subarus…too bad since we were in the snow country, but I don’t think they were thought of as being reliable enough for fleet rental back then.
Not sure what the base car (least expensive rental) was since we only drove them, didn’t rent them, but I’d guess these were they, plus their commonality. The other GM we had were things like a Pontiac Grand Prix (probably similar rental rate to the Thunderbird?) but only one B body Impala that I remember (and it had been stolen). Don’t think we had any Pintos nor Mavericks (in 1977) which I would think would be the base rental rate had they had any. We did have Fairmonts in 1978, which coincided with fewer Granadas being driven in 1978. Lots of Dodge Aspens (1970’s) and Diplomats, including the 2 door. Even drove a (1978) Magnum, which I really liked, despite its color (green, which normally I like, but I don’t think it suited the Magnum)…it was probably same class as Thunderbird.
That’s the time period where I had by far my most varied diet of different cars..must have gotten something out of my system as I’ve only owned 4 cars in 47 years of driving; once I find something I like I’m very loyal; can understand people who want to have a drastically different type of car every couple of years, but that’s not me. My Father and brother-in-law have both owned way more cars that I will probably ever, even if I change my ways now and get a different car every couple of years.
Absolutely BEAUTIFUL!!!! This was my first car in High School as a gift for Christmas. I so loved my car and took very good care of my car until things in my life happenedandi was no longer primary owner and my beautiful car wasn’t cared for the way I did. My car was sold by other person and I was so heart broken. I have always wanted to find my car. I just how my car was loved as much as I loved it.