As a child of the 1980s, I am very familiar with the GM A-bodies, and Cutlass Cieras in particular. They were everywhere at the time, and there were at least two of them on my block. They were as common on the streets as Camrys and Accords are today. Arguably, the most famous Cutlass Ciera was the tan 1988 Cutlass Ciera that Jerry Lundegaard gave the hit men as partial payment in the classic 1996 film, Fargo. Unlike Jerry Lundegaard, the Ciera was a solid hit.
the south side
The Cutlass Ciera was introduced in the fall of 1981 as a 1982 model. It had some very big shoes to fill. The Cutlass nameplate was Oldsmobile’s most successful in the 1970s, and the Cutlass Supreme in particular was the undisputed best selling model in the lineup. The first downsizing came in 1978, followed by a more aerodynamic restyling in 1981. Building on that success came the Ciera, the first time the Cutlass nameplate was applied to more than one car line.
the north side
The 1982 Cutlass Ciera was a response to the recent Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. As a result of this legislation, vehicle lineups had to be more fuel efficient. You could still build full-size cars like the Delta 88 and Ninety Eight Regency, but it had to be balanced by the addition of smaller, lighter and more efficient vehicles to the lineup. As a result, the Ciera had front wheel drive, unit construction and no V8 option. The standard engine was a 2.5L 4 cylinder, with a 2.8L V6, 3.0L V6, and 4.3L diesel V6 engines standard or optional, depending on the model. It was initially offered as a two-door or four-door sedan in base, LS and top-of-the line Brougham models. For 1983 an ES option was added, with blacked out trim, sporty wheel covers, a console and full instrumentation.
The rear-wheel drive Cutlass Supreme remained in production, so the Cutlass Cruiser station wagon remained on the Supreme platform for 1982 and 1983. Finally, in 1984, the front wheel drive Cruiser was introduced. It was immediately popular with first year production of 41, 816, nearly double that of the 1983 rear-drive version. It certainly didn’t hurt that the Cutlass name still had quite a bit of cachet with buyers. Ultimately, the Cutlass Ciera was a great success, and wound up being the most popular Oldsmobile of the 1980s. The choice of a Cutlass Ciera as the car the hit men drive in Fargo was perfect. If you wanted to blend into the background in Minnesota in the late ’80s, this was the car to drive.
These cars were extremely popular in my part of the country. They were so common as be, for all intents and purposes, invisible. One of our neighbors across the street, an older lady, had a copper colored Brougham sedan, probably an ’84. Our next door neighbor’s daughter, Jeannie, had a cream colored ’84 Cutlass Cruiser with a brown interior and her husband had a full size Custom Cruiser. One of our grade school teachers had a burgundy ’85 Ciera sedan that was a little worse for the wear by the time he was driving it in the early ’90s. My driver’s ed car was a navy blue ’96 Ciera with a blue interior. When I started working part-time at an insurance company during high school and college, the underwriting manager had a gunmetal gray ’91 or ’92 sedan. Those are just the ones I remember. Yes, Northwest Illinois really liked their Oldsmobiles, the Ciera in particular.
However, with success can come complacency. The Ciera was a very comfortable, efficient, state of the art car – in 1982. The problem was, there were no significant updates to the car, save a redesigned roofline for the coupe in mid-1986 and the sedan in 1989. Some slight changes were made to the grille and taillights, usually every couple of years, and a driver’s side airbag was added. Yet despite the lack of changes they kept selling. As the years went by, the most desirable options such as full gauges, super stock wheels and leather upholstery went away. On the plus side, the longer they were made, the better they were built. By the early 1990s these cars and their A body cousins were some of the most trouble free cars available.
But eventually, it was finally time to retire them, and along with its remaining A body cousin, the Buick Century, they were put out to pasture in 1996. The coupe had been discontinued after the 1991 model year, but the sedan and wagon made it all the way to the end. At the time, I recall reading an article where Oldsmobile made 1982 and 1996 model Cieras available to the press to commemorate all the years of production. One wag claimed he couldn’t tell which was which. And so ended fifteen years of production. A ‘new’ Cutlass came out in 1997, but it was clearly a badge-engineered version of the 1997 Chevy Malibu, and it tanked. Oldsmobile never really got a replacement that was a volume seller, and Oldsmobile Division came to the end of the road after a very short run of 2004 models.
What prompted this article? A couple weeks ago, I spotted this Cutlass Cruiser (above) on a side street. I still see sedans all the time, but the wagons are rare enough today that I had to go around the block and get a photo. Today, even in my rust-prone region of the country, these cars are a common sight, a testament to their popularity and durability.
Cutlass Cruiser woodie wagon photos by PN
I was never a fan of the sedan A body. The only A-body coupe that moved me, briefly, was the 1986 redesign of the Cutlass Ciera. But I’ve always thought the A-body wagon was an exceptionally clean and attractive design that epitomized the era. I saw a reasonably well kept Buick example on the road the other day and it made me the kind of wistful that had me looking for a For Sale sign in the windows.
You are right, not much changed on these cars in years. Although, might it be GM’s version of the VW Bug? Have incremental change every year? Nah, it was a cash cow for the General.
That said, these are well built cars. Having recently become the second owner of a ’93 Century, that had all of 41,000 miles on it, it is easy to understand why they were popular with fleets and the geriatric set – comfortable and easy on fuel. I am still seeing scads of these cars, Buick and Oldsmobile, all over Central Missouri.
I drove my Aunt’s back and forth to school one summer, picking up a calculus course in the summer term at college. It had a big 4cyl and I recall it being a pretty rough motor. I also snickered at the “International” badging, figuring that nobody in Sweden or Germany would drive one of these.
In fact I was driving a Ciera when I first saw my TR4 squatting by the road with a For Sale sign on it. In hindsight the Ciera was a tower of reliability and usefullness compared to the TR4..
You must be joking the TR wityh its stone age Fergy tractor/Vanguard powertrain was as reliable as the sun
No joke Bryce, in my 18 year old enthusiasm I bought the world’s worst TR4. Under all the fibreglass and lead and bondo and pop rivets it was breaking in half with rust. It also had mix & match running gear from TR3 through to TR4A. In 19 years it turned a wheel on the road twice, so it wasn’t very useful or reliable.
Surfing recently, I stumbled across this phenomenal website and quickly became a fan. I especially enjoyed this article, as I am a wagon nut. I see a few of this generation wagons around florida, but I have to brag a bit here. I am the proud owner of a 1988 Custom Cruiser with the wood and 48,000 miles. Having grown up surrounded by wagons, I did not realize how few and far between these babies are. Thanks for the great website. I look forward to every post.
I have owned 3 of the B/D body cars (Olds 98, Buick LeSabre and Cadillac Brougham) but never a wagon. I would have really liked the wagon.
I once rode in a Pontiac version of this car. The car was probably an 84 or 85, and I remember how all of the plastic parts in the dash and interior shook and rattled over bumps. Later, I had a friend who owned a Yellow Cutlass wagon with wood paneling and brown interior, probably an 87 or so. That one seemed put together a little better.
There was one day a couple of weeks ago when I saw two of these. I wanted to stop for a picture, but I was late ahd had to be somewhere. So, thanks for easing my regret by this very nice writeup.
I never much cared for these, but even I have to admit that they had become pretty good cars by the end. Being a sucker for station wagons, I tried to plug these to my son when he was looking for his first car, but he has some kind of built-in wagon-hate. Me, I could get enthused about one of the later of these with a 3.8. Wood paneling is mandatory.
I had two, both Celebrity wagons, an ’88 (2.8L V6) and ’90 (3.1 V6). Both well built, up to 30mpg on the highway. At the time, I was living and stationed in NE Ohio; both cars were excellent in the snow; both had excellent utilization. Sold one (the ’90) when purchasing my 2000 Venture; the ’88 we gave away after my wife finished law school. These were GREAT cars.
When we gave away the ’88, although rusty, it still passed Ohio smog (145K) started up instantly in the coldest weather. Replaced water pump at 96K and mass airflow sensor and O2 sensor around 106K. Car regularly made runs through Ohio, NY, Connecticut, Mass, RI, NH, PA, DC, WV, Indiana, and of course, Ontario. Through all four seasons.
My parents owned an ’87 Cutlass Cruiser for a while. I learned to drive on the thing shortly before they got rid of it.
I hated the car because it was embarrassing to be seen in (faux wood siding does no 16 year old any favors) but the 2.8 liter fuel injected V6 had plenty of torque even if it only made 135-ish horsepower. It’d squeal the front tires well on a full throttle takeoff.
Also, including a front bench seat in a car that is as narrow as a FWD GM A-body is some kind of joke.
“They install that Tru-Coat at the factory,there’s nothin’ we can do about it.”
“We’ve got a GMAC plan that’s really super.”
“He was just a little guy, ya know?” – still the best line in that movie and it came from a barfly.
I like the part where witnesses kept telling Chief Gunderson that “oh he was a little guy, kinda funny looking” over and over.
Yes, and when the escort said he was circumcised, Marge asked, “Was he funny looking other than that”? Great writing.
Jerry Lundergaard-Executive Sales Manager.
Good timing on this one! There is surprisingly clean late-model example, a Cutlass Cruiser SL, sitting curbside in front of my house in Geneva, Switzerland. It’s tan with a brown interior that looks like new.
What’s remarkable about that? American cars are and have been almost extinct for over 20 years in these parts of the world, save for Chrysler minivans and a smattering of Jeeps (mainly of the Cherokee and Grand Cherokee sort). Beats me why someone would have bought one of these new in the nineties. Could it be the appeal of the Swiss flag on the front fenders?
I love your comment on the flags. As a kid, I remember when a neighbor bought a 1973 Cutlass Salon – it used what I believe to be the same multiple flag logo. As a midwestern kid in 1973, it made the car seem so . . . international. Little did I realize at the time that nobody outside of the US likely ever even saw one, let alone owned it.
When I was in Zurich in 2007 I couldn’t believe my eyes. There were Buick Centuries and Olds Cutlass Cieras from the 80’s and 90’s roaming the streets. I had no idea those were even imported to Europe – figured they only were sold in the US, Canadian and possibly Mexican markets.
A neighbor of ours had the Buick Century version in the late 80’s and referred to it as her “Michigan Mercedes” doubly funny since this was in Scarsdale New York and there were probably more Mercedes 300TD and 300TE wagons in the area than Buicks. Showing the different tastes of the Northeast, the dominant station wagons in our neighborhood were the Volvo 240/740 and the XJ Cherokee at the forefront of the SUV craze.
I have always respected these cars a lot as they say so much about the buying public. People don’t want 400 hp and couldn’t not care less about 0-60 times; they want a comfortable, reliable car that sells at a good price. GM did very well with these cars because they listened to buyers and not auto-mag-rags when they built these cars.
Typically for GM it took some time to get the bugs ironed out but by 1986 or so the cars were very good buys, particularly once fuel injection and reliable overdrive automatics were perfected in these cars. The V-6 motors made reasonable fuel economy and the whole drivetrain functioned seamlessly, which is exactly what the buyers of these cars wanted.
Forgetting this market is what finished GM and caused their bankruptcy. They completely disregarded the family sedan segment for over a decade. By the time they got a reasonably good product to sell in the family sedan market, it was too late. Their Japanese competitors had taken over the market and still hold it today.
I had a 1998 Ciera 3.3 litre sedan for a short while and although it was well used, it was a great car for what it was. Very high quality interior, great engine/transmission combination and good driving dynamics. It didn’t cost the farm to buy or run. In fact, the instrument panel, with gauges for everything, was the best I have ever seen before or since.
These cars are still around and would make an excellent second car or first car for a new driver.
Amazing timing! I spotted (and lost) a Celebrity Eurosport wagon in traffic yesterday.that reminded me yet again that I need to stuff a camera in the truck!
The 80s A bodies were really handsome cars and when compared to Ford and ChryCo’s offerings at around the same time they were standouts. At least until the Taurus debut.
The one thing I love about these is that you can stuff a plethora of different engines into them thanks to GM using the same basic architecture for most of their FWD offerings.
You want a V8? Grab a wrecked Caddy.
A Blown V6? Buick has you covered.
What? A Quad cam V6? Sure, grab a Monte Carlo Z34 or Lumina Z34 with the Getrag 5 speed…
All you need is time, space and a solid chassis.
(Uh boy.. I just re-read that. I need to lay off the coffee!)
GM got the last laugh, with these A bodies being stretched X bodies that were slammed. ‘Worst GM car ever’ ends up lasting near 16 years of production, and called “excellent second car or first car for a new driver”.
I don’t know if I’d say that GM got the last laugh. During the 16 years these cars were in production, Honda and Toyota took over the family sedan segment that had been ruled by GM for decades.
Both of you are correct and it shows how GM has worked forever. The X-Car was horrible and it tool the best part of a decade to make them good cars. This has not changed a bit as the new “import fighter,” the Cruze, has been blessed with less than stellar reliability in its first year. It did well in that first year but I doubt it will continue for long. This will lead to a backlog of unsold cars and rebates and price reductions. Finally, in four or five years, the will have a good car.
By which time the Japanese (and Koreans now) will have moved onto electrics.
In all fairness, I don’t know if the Cruze is the complete disaster that early X-cars were.
The X-cars had terrible reliability, and also had basic design problems that were not related to reliability (thinly padded front seats with a metal bar in the middle; front brakes that locked prematurely, etc.).
The Cruze problems I’ve read about seem more like early production run glitches, and are fairly minor. The car itself is quite competent.
I bought a copy of the latest Consumers Reports car issue. The car has a worse than average rating. There is no way any company should release a new model with this kind of reliability. No way, nada, none. The Big 3 made excuses for this kind of thing for way to long and paid the price for it.
The main reason the US makers lost their market domination was that they continued to introduce new models without bugs being worked out. It is still that way; if I buy new Camry I am pretty assured it will be a good, trouble free car. This is why the Camry is #1 in its segment and the Civic #1 in its. This is huge volume that has been systematically given away for decades.
I worked in the car repair business for years and what I saw drive in my shop was exactly what CR so I don’t buy fanbois going off on them, either.
You do realize that the ratings are compared to the average, right? In other words, your claim that no one should release a new model like that is ridiculous – someone HAS to be worse than average, because that’s how averages work! Or do you want CR to start grading like our colleges, where everything that isn’t awful gets at least a B?
Put another way, because they compare cars to other cars in that model year, something “much worse than average” for 2012 would compare favorably to the very best from just a few years ago.
But everything is better now at GM. Or not. In today’s WSJ, a GM exec is quoted as saying that GM is now benchmarking best-in-class BMW and Hyundai. Quality? Features? Value? No. They are benchmarking profit margin per vehicle!?! Arrrrrggghhhh.
And how long will that last. I can’t believe people buy this overweight, poorly designed junk.
The Super Bowl commercial for the Cadillac ATS implied that the BMW 3-Series was the benchmark. Problem is, a new 3-Series just came out, so that means they were benchmarking the E90 (2006-2011) model…
Edit: Actually, further investigation reveals that the E46 (1999-2005) was the benchmark – which was an excellent car, but two generations behind. I don’t even know what to say.
What to say, Marko? Situation normal for GM. If you really want a car as good as a 2005 3 series, go buy a look, low km 3 series and save yourself about $20,000.
Some folks were commenting on the other thread about how BMW and Honda get farther and farther away from the ideal as they bring in new models. It wouldn’t be too bad to benchmark an older BMW for driving feedback, which on the newer ones seems to be evaporating fast. This comment on bmwblog was the clincher:
They then go on to declare the Caddy a loser because it has, get ready, too large cup holders and poorer interiors (subjectively) than the F30 3 series, among other things. If this is what the BMW PR guys come up with, disparaging the Caddy on interior, of all things, I think they are afraid. Very, very afraid. Not horsepower, not `the drive’, not `feel’, but seat leather and cup holders. If GM does not blow this one up, the game will surely change in the next decade.
I’ve an ambivalent attitude towards Cadillac as a brand (too pricey, not enough value for me), but this car is good on paper.
CarCounter, my neighbourhood is awash in BWM cars. There are more 3 Series cars here than GM products and scads of 5 Series. 99.999999999999999 % of the owners here don’t even know what a g force is. It is all about brand for them.
BMW’s biggest market is China, or soon will be. The driving conditions there are hardly conducive to bahn-burning and canyon-carving. This makes you correct: cup holders and seat comfort are more important than g-forces.But you know, BMW knows this and designs its cars accordingly. They pay minor lip service to fanbois and cater to their clientele.
I’m sorry I didn’t make myself more clear. BMWblog complains that the cupholders are a problem (too large) because they’re large enough to hold fountain drinks, which the BMW’s are not. Also, they get tripped on the wrinkled leather surfacing, that is a known trick by leather goods manufacturers to display `authentic’ leather. They call the same leather `pleather’ later, while it is actually the BMW’s finish that is of the pleather (plastic leather) type! So on cup holders and seat leather, Cadillac wins. Most car owners I know that have cup holders crib about their smallness, *especially* German cars, and everyone takes fountain drinks!
Anyway, my point was that if BMWfans are judging a BMW vehicle over a Cadillac based on cup-holder size (which is better on the C), GM have already won half the battle. If they can make the car good and win the other half remains to be seen.
PS: GM has the hottest brand in China: Buick. If it can translate that goodwill into sales for Caddy, well, BMW is in for a very tough fight. Remember GM’s shitty history? It doesn’t exist in China. As an example, in India, the Cruze is considered highly competitive with the Corolla. Priced in the same territory, it is a neck to neck fight every month. And we don’t even have a petrol version of the Cruze.
Given that Cadillac sells 3000 cars per month in China and BMW sells 25,000 cars per month in China, it sounds like Cadillac has a long way to go before competing with BMW in the Chinese car market.
And that’s not even taking the Chinese market’s favorite German luxury brand into account – Audi. 27,000 of those are sold per month in the Middle Kingdom.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/news/2012/02/02/bmw-audi-china-car-sales-continue-to-surge/
http://media.gm.com/content/media/us/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2011/Dec/1206_chinasales
CarCounter, the Buick is a joint venture with the government in Shanghai, the economic centre of China. At least 90% of the Buick cars sold in China chauffeur around business and party types, really one and the same. Buick sales are for kind of a captive market since being driven around is a big status symbol in China.
There are LOADS of 7 series BMWs in China, in fact it is the biggest market for this car, even bigger than Germany.
Fanbois are fanbois and I don’t have a lot of time for them.
As far as BMWs are concerned, I prefer the circa ’88-’91 325i, though I have never driven a BMW. They were just so clean and no-nonsense. I found this convertible in town recently; they are getting scarce.
It’s getting hard to find E30s for a reasonable price that aren’t totally thrashed. Out on the West Coast of the US, a 325iS with a manual gearbox that doesn’t either have 200k miles or tremendous abuse will easily fetch $8,000.
Typical GM.
Also, benchmarking an E46? I own an E46 330i and love it, but an equivalent E90 330i handles much better, has far more comfortable and supportive seats, and is generally a better driver’s car overall. And as mentioned, the E90’s successor model F30 3-series just came out.
Not sure how the Cruze is doing so bad in CR…my ECO has 13K trouble free miles on it in the 6 months I’ve owned it, a friend’s ECO has been trouble free for as long although only 4k miles.
I think consumer reports puts the first year data based on past history of the company, not the actual reliability data from the current models produced…
No, it is based on responses of owners over the first year of the car being on the market.
My only experience with one of these cars was the 1984 Olds sedan that was passed down to my carpool driver by her father. He was a real Olds fanatic: after that Ciera started mixing its oil and water well short of 70,000 miles, he went and bought another Oldsmobile. At any rate, the ’84 motor apparently got repaired properly, because she didn’t have any more problems with it. The fragile headlight/wiper/dimmer/turn signal switch did self-destruct more than once, the radio would change stations without warning, and I can’t remember what trick she used to get the speedometer needle to indicate properly – fiddling with one or another switch on the dash, I think. The transmission finally went out, and the car became a yard ornament after which the simulated mouse-fur upholstery very likely acquired some of the genuine article.
“However, with success can come complacency. The Ciera was a very comfortable, efficient, state of the art car – in 1982. The problem was, there were no significant updates to the car, save a redesigned roofline for the coupe in mid-1986 and the sedan in 1989.”
This overlaps with comments already made by others, but I don’t think the FWD A-bodies’ initial success was due to their being great cars as much as it was to offering the “package” Joe Average wanted in a midsize family car in the early ’80s, at a time when GM’s competitors simply didn’t. The FWD A-bodies were smaller and more fuel-efficient than American midsize cars had traditionally been, but without being *too* small or underpowered, and in a modern space-efficent package that offered FWD. Contemporary midsize entries from Ford and Chrysler were repurposed compacts and/or warmed-over versions of older RWD designs. Japanese automakers weren’t yet quite hitting the sweet spot of the American midsize market. Cars like the Corona/Camry and Accord were still perceived by many as small cars; while they had undoubedtly siphoned off a fair amount of sales from domestic midsizes, many Americans didn’t yet see them as direct equivalents. Against this backdrop, as long as GM kept the level of design and build quality at least mediocre, the A-bodies were in an advantageous position.
(Chicagoland pointed out a real irony in all this: In 1979-80, GM had a new compact on the market with many of the same advantages, the FWD X-bodies, but things ultimately went downhill fast after it developed a reputation as a lemon. With the FWD A-bodies, GM leveraged the same basic architecture to create a midsize with the same basic advantages. For some reason, it didn’t suffer any stigma through association with the X-bodies, and was a success.)
As the ’80s wore on, however, the A-bodies increasing lost their position. Ford’s Taurus was a great leap forward in the midsize market. As Japanese cars grew larger with each succeeding generation, models like the Camry and Accord were now clearly in direct competition with American midsizes. They brought with them a reputation for superior design and assembly quality, and rode a wave of increasing acceptance of — even preference for — Japanese cars among American consumers. Now the A-bodies were the aging repurposed compact, and the days when consumers would just reflexively go to their local GM dealer to look for a new car were on the wane. On top of all this, the A-bodies also had to contend with family-car buyers moving to minivans and SUVs. The more upscale A-bodies like the Ciera and Century were probably less susceptible to some of these pressures, which explains why they lasted so long; the more downscale Celebrity and 6000 were hit sooner and harder.
When GM finally got a replacement on the market (the W-body sedans), consumers were unimpressed, but that’s a whole ‘nother story….
When the 1990 Honda Accord debuted, Car and Driver pointed out — and I think this is very significant — that it was very, very close to the dimensions of the GM A-bodies, where the previous generations had been smaller. In retrospect, this was probably the point where GM should have said, “Uh oh…”
Accord and Camry grew bigger as their customers gained weight and wanted ‘more room’. A far cry from when same Boomer customers demanded ‘everyone must drive a small car’ during the 70’s Oil Crises.
Accord is essentially today’s “Oldsmobile” with cushy ride and conservative style. And look at how repellant they have become to younger buyers. “Meet the new boss, same as the old…” Honda is rushing to ‘update’ their cars, sounds like Olds in 1997, saying “just wait for what’s coming!”
So, yeah GM has the last laugh.
The market segment that buys cars now is 40-60 years old which explains why the Camry and Accord do so well. I am 47 and I have driven both cars at length and I love them. However, 20 years ago I would have hated these cars. Thus, Honda and Toyota have grown up with their market.
I don’t see how GM has the last laugh as they completely neglected a vital market for over a decade and now are only a bit player in it. The Carmy sells at huge volumes, as does the Accord. The Carmy sells at like three times the rate of the Malibu. This is bread and butter for car makers.
I grew up in a New England Volvo/Saab town. These A-bodies, esp. the wagons, were particularly popular among the nuns and priests (really!!!).
I did have a friend whose parents owned a Pontiac 6000 wagon. The exterior was plain-Jane champagne, but the interior was a rich burgundy leather (vinyl?) with big Pontiac seats (those headrests!) and some kind of space-age dash board.
Then the parents bought Volvos.
And my friend bought a Saab.
I taught of Ciera’s sibling the 6000, just imagine what if Pontiac had offered a 6000 STE wagon as well as the AWD version who was available in 1988-90?
I think the A body really was the American Lada. Both were based on poor to mediocre cars- the Fiat 124 Saloon and the X body. They were both made throughout the ’80s and ’90s, and generally got better as time went on. Although neither was particularly well built, the majority were quite reliable after the niggles were sorted out under warranty.
Both cars defined their nation’s character on four wheels. They were ubiquitous in the provinces. Nobody drove a Lada in ‘new money’ ’90s Moscow, just as nobody drove a Ciera or Century in Manhattan or SF. However, in the square states or Siberia where image mattered less and salaries were lower, these grannymobiles were the cars of choice.
More importantly, both were amortized designs, which had huge profit margins. I’d wager that the profits on the A bodies are what bankrolled Roger’n’me Smith’s modernizationmadness. Likewise, Lada exports to Europe during the 80/90s were one of the few sources of income for the USSR and new Russia.
After the collapse of the USSR and the economic realignment (mass poverty) that followed, Ladas got a second wind and the boxy 2104/5/6/7 were still on sale well into the ’90s.
Now that our economy is going the same as the Soviet Union, I think we need a new Ciera- a perfectly good machine that does exactly what is asked of it in the worst of conditions, and can be fixed with bits from autozone.
Brian, that car exists: it is the $21,995 Toyota Camry. It is an upgrade of the last design, which was in turn an upgrade of the last design, which in return was an upgrade of the last design. See the theme here?
What is more, there has to be plenty of profit in the Camry so if sales slow even a smidgen, Toyota can plop tons ‘o cash on the hood to make them move. An even smarter move would be a low mile, used one, which is exactly how most Cieras sold, too, btw.
And that is why the Camry is as ubiquitous now as the A body was in its day.
You’re probably right about the Camry- I’ve been in England for over 10 years, so I guess my thinking is a bit frozen in time. However, the Camry is not an A body or Lada. Its a very good and reliable car, but as with everything today is far too complex for its own good, and when something goes bang, its too hard to fix without a garage or driveway.
What I mean by the Ciera being the Lada, is that its the kind of car that is legendary for its ability to get you to your crappy job and back when you can’t afford an oil change. Its the type of car that got my mates with PHD’s in something useless (and 50K student loans) back and forth to work at Starbucks, and could still take four friends two states over for a punk gig, and manage to make its way back on its own after a few too many PBR’s.
I’d wager a guess that the Centiera was the most common first car/ uni car for people born in the late ’70s or early 80s. I think EVERYONE of my generation has at least one friend who inherited one from his grandmother when she gave up driving. In a few years, I’m sure the Camry will fulfill this role too, although I doubt they’ll be as cheap to maintain.
The Friend With the Ciera, was the one who hated his or her car, yet was always the one I called whenever my Corvair, Fury, Duster, or ’71 Ford was having an attack of heritage and I needed a run to Autozone for a new ballast resistor, solenoid or water pump.
Today’s Lada and A body equivalent IS the CAM/CORD, Brian, for all those Lada/A body reasons you cite. Period. And I’ve had both (A bodies and Camries).
Brian, today’s cars very, very rarely go bang and stop on the road. I can remember cars stopped by the side of the road all the time even twenty years ago. Now it is a are event. That might be different in England, for obvious reasons….
And really, a Ciera is not cheaper to maintain than anything else. GM parts have never been cheap.
FWIW, the feature car today is a 1985 model.
One thing I know about the X and A bodies, they were really good in snow. My mom had a 1985 X-body Skylark, and she always liked to say that she could plow snow with it!
This 1985 example has been losing air from the tires for a while.
In the pre-SUV era, one of the criteria for judging station wagons was liftover height. The lower the cargo floor, the easier it was to get heavy or bulky stuff in there, and the bigger the cargo hold was at a then-typical range of overall vehicle height. FWD wagons like the Cutlass Cruiser absolutely aced that test. The roof of a Cutlass Ciera Cruiser is about level with the top of the bed sides of a modern day F-150, which makes it damned hard to find in a crowded parking lot. Yet my ’93 wagon swallowed up enough IKEA furniture to completely outfit my daughter’s first post-college apartment, including mattress and futon sofa cushions, all with the tailgate closed.
A-bodies are not thought of as particularly refined cars. However, I had the opportunity for a couple months to drive my ’93 back to back with an ’85 Mercedes W123 wagon, because I owned both at once (long story, bad mistake). The Olds was quieter, roomier, and easier to get in and out of than the Benz. The transmission shifted more smoothly. Ride quality was about the same. The Olds easily returned 24-25 MPG on the highway which beat the gasser Benz (grey market) by a long shot, and probably would have been very close to a diesel Benz on cost of fuel per mile given the hefty price premium for diesel over regular these days. If something broke on the Olds, it was probably fixable without taking out a second mortgage — not so for the Stuttgart product. Pffft, no more W123 mystique here!
Agreed, about these wagon’s roominess. I’ve never been a big fan of these, as the early ones put me off a bit; yet there was always slightly seductive about their generic familiarity; like sitting in your doctor’s waiting room. Same upholstery too. But the wagons really were an excellent package, and the later ones (as others have said many times by now) were pretty solid appliances. Just not a lot of soul.
W123s are for the hardcore MB fans. Lot’s of character and amazing material and build quality, but they really don’t make easy living/riding. Unless you’re driving on really rough roads, and then your comparison gets flipped on its head!
Actually, Paul, when I returned from Korea and needed cheap wheels fast, I looked for a Ciera wagon for exactly these reasons. I could not find one, a testament to how good that are at what they were designed for. I settled for a sedan, which I really liked, gasoline habit aside. It served me well for two years while I got on my feet financially. In that time it had like two oil changes and I did the front brakes. I paid $750 for that car because it had a rough paint job but the interior, an SL, was perfect and it drove like new. I sold it for $700. The brakes and oil cost me $450. My net cost (less insurance and gasoline) was $25 a year.
Said ’88 Celebrity Wagon (my earlier post) made many a trip from Cleveland to the Pittsburgh IKEA store; bunk bed and many other items hauled in cargo area. No problem. A weekend getaway to Niagara one January; overnight lake effect snowstorm dumped 4-6″ of snow. Packed up past center of hubs. No problem for the FWD A wagon. Turned the key once, 2.8 60 degree Chevy V-6 fired up and wagon pulled out smartly through unplowed parking lot like two dray horses were hitched to the front.
I had a HORRIBLE ownership experience with an ’88 Celebrity wagon with that 2.8 liter six. The 2.8 cars are known for intake gasket and coolant leak issues (check), constant electrical glitches (check, check, check, check, check, . . . ), and they have a different transmission than the Olds and Buick versions (failed at 53K miles). I would never buy a Celebrity again but somehow the Cieras and Centuries got all the good parts.
When my dad took me to the Chicago auto show in 1996, I was stunned to see a new Century wagon, complete with simuwood paneling, at the Buick display. Even at 10 years old, I was pretty observant when it came to cars, and I’m pretty sure I knew the still made the A-body Century/Ciera sedans, but I just assumed that the wagon had either been updated. But no, there it was, complete with 1984-style taillights and chrome rear bumper.
My only direct experience with these was our neighbors’ black Celebrity Eurosport wagon. As a stupid kid, I thought it was kind of sharp, but it retrospect I find it rather ironic that their other car was a 240 DL sedan. That Volvo not only outlasted the Celebrity, but also the early Windstar that replaced it.
You are right: I hardly ever see early Windstars on the road anymore, while A-Bodies and 240s are still a regular sight, even here in New England.
I still see lots of Cutlass Cieras and Centuries on the road, 16 or so years after the very last one rolled off the assembly line. “Cockroaches of the road!” (Copyright Geozinger.)
Hey thanks Marko!
I have a feeling someday when Googling my Nom-de-Guerre, that it will come up with Cockroach of the Road as the second entry…
Oh well…
Plenty of them out there. I’ve owned 8 myself in the last decade. 88 Century cost me 275 on eBay, drove for a year, sold for 500. 89 Century cost me 250 on eBay, drove for a year, impounded for expired tags (still ran, cold air even. 87 Celebrity cost me 132 on eBay, drove it from Indiana to Texas with no brakes, fixed brakes, had for 2 years, scrapped for 160. 89 Celebrity cost me 400 locally, had for about a year, traded back to same dealer. 89 Ciera cost me 172 on eBay but had a bad knock, sold for parts for 100. Parents gave me their 95 Century for free at 224K and I drove it for a year took it to 270K and traded it even up for an Aerostar (you know, to live in, down by the RIVER!!!) Second 89 Celebrity cost me 300 and drove for a few months, then blew head gasket and I parted it out (still have interior bits, tail lights, radio, spare tire donut). 90 Ciera cost me 225 at an impound auction, ran ok, trunk was full of tools and 2 handguns, sold all that for about 300, but it had serious issues so scrapped for 160. Latest (9th) A-body acquisition is my dear departed grandmother’s 95 Ciera, cost this spring will be a plane ticket to PA and the drive back once my cousin is done using up the valid tags and inspection time left on it. That and I’ll snag any other $400 or less A-body that I come across, because I know it’ll serve me well. I do believe there is a dying 93 Century in town for 400 and a pitifully kept 94 for 500, and I’m hoping to get both for 700 or so. Currently slumming it in a 98 Silhouette until I can get more A-bodies.
My history with the A body could be it’s own article, and the best part is, I’ve never owned one. I’ve been in a couple dozen of them, and none of them was a rental!
I’m only going to comment on one aspect of the A-body: The repeat owners. I can’t tell you how many people I know or have known who only bought these cars for the majority of the 30 years they’ve been on the road. Just like the poster above me, Alan Moore, many of these folks are serial A-body owners. A couple of my former co-workers are still serial A-body owners, and lament the dwindling supply.
When I was buying my wife’s G6, I noticed an older couple arriving in an ancient 6000. I mentioned this to my salesperson, and he said he’d like to get that car off of them, because he had a waiting list of 20 or more who would buy that car immediately! This was three years ago, after the series had been out of production for 13 years.
Upon release, it was something truly different for GM. My late MIL had one of the first Cutlass Cieras I’d ever been in. At the time, it was a very nice car. It wasn’t until I’d driven a couple of Celebritys that I realized how nice the Ciera actually was. With the V6, the car had plenty of punch for most traffic situations, and gave good fuel economy. If I had not been in my early 20’s when this car was originally released, I would have bought one.
I’ve been pondering what will replace my Cockroach of the Road© when it finally dies. I’m thinking wagon, if at all possible. I ran across a 1994 Ciera Cruiser about a year ago on CL. They only wanted $2K for it, but the pix were a little blurry and I didn’t quite trust the info in the ad. By the time I called on it, it was long gone. I still suspect one of my former co-workers may have purchased it.
I haven’t seen one since. I may just hold out for a Malibu Maxx instead…
Hold out for the Malibu Maxx. My wife ended up keeping hers. Bought it for $3500, 05 model.
That generation is pretty much the equivalent of the A-Bodies. Great space utilization. Durable parts (for a GM car). Plus the interior is cheap and simple… just like…
I had a ’93 Buick Century sedan with a 3.3 and 4 speed auto as a daily driver in high school. It even had an air bag! What I remember most about the car was how it just kinda floated down the road. It was probably the smoothest riding smallish car I have even driven. It would squeal like a pig when you went around corners at any sort of speed, but that was due to the small 185/70/14 tires. This car was meant to get you around in comfort, which it did with aplomb. I do remember that the 3.3 had a suprising ammount of grunt and it was pretty quick for what it was. I let go of the car at 150K due to the trans lunching 2nd gear, probabaly because the fluid had never been changed. I kind of miss the car though. I might pick one up for a winter car to save the 2012 Mustang from the salt gods.
Last Friday while I drove my truck down to Tacoma to trade it in, I spotted a beige Celebrity, of the 1982 or so vintage wagon cruising along in rush hour traffic on I-5 and I live where rust isn’t an issue, and yet, I don’t see these too often anymore.
I was 16 at the time these came out and my dad worked at a GM dealership. As the author says, these may have turned into very reliable cars in their latter years, but the initial examples converted many people I knew at the time into Japanese car buyers for life. The first model years churned out putrid, Problem-plagued unreliable junk and I curse the day GM went FWD (1960’s Toronado and Eldorado excepted).
Tom, I would have to disagree with your statement, “By the early 1990s these cars and their A body cousins were some of the most trouble free cars available”… Quite the opposite: with the 4 cylinder motors, the aluminum head was fragile, and could be easily cracked if the motor overheated. The manifolds constantly broke at their attachment points. The trim fell off and the paint started peeling during the first couple of years of ownership. As one of the other posters noted, it was the “American Yugo”… But the worst part was GM’s total refusal to honor the warranty or listen to complaints of owners– which led many of us to swear off GM vehicles for eternity.
My parents bought me a 1984 Buick Century Limited 2-dr. when I was 18 going to college. This was in 1986 so the car was only two years old with 26,000 miles on the clock. I guess I was a spoiled brat, as I remember saying I really wanted a Cutlass Supreme or Buick Regal. But I got the Century and ended up loving that car. Who wouldn’t, right? 19 years old driving a nearly new car that looked and drove beautifully! My friends all loved riding in it because it was the newest car and not a parent’s car. It was mine! The color combination was sweet – It was black with a black vinyl top and deep red velour pillow seats. It was special ordered by a middle-aged woman that always drove smaller cars and eventually traded it because it was simply too big for her to handle. My brother in law worked at a Honda dealer and she went there to possibly trade it in on a new Prelude. He told my parents about it and we went to her house to see it and bought it. I remember thinking how weird it was that it had blackwall tires with wire wheel hubcaps. She ordered it like that. The coupes were always rare and I remember people commenting on how they never saw 2-door versions of that car. I wish I had it today! I can still remember the options she ordered it with – it had A/C, power windows, locks, tilt, no cruise, delay wipers, power trunk, manual reclining driver and passenger seats but no 6-way power, reading lights front and rear, gauges, basic AM/FM stereo (that I eventuallly upgraded easily to the factory EQ model), power antenna and UH-OH – the dreaded 3.0 litre V-6. We had to have that beast of an engine rebuilt at 56,000 miles and again at 75,000 miles. By this time I was graduating college and the second rebuiild was a scary thought seeing the engine blew twice. After graduation, I ended up trading it for a new Escort GT. The day I drove the Century to the dealer to pick up the new car the water pump went! I loved that car, and will never forget it. So much so that in 1995 I had the chance to buy a 1987 white 4-dr Limited, blue velour interior with the 3.8 engine from a neighbor of mine. It had only 72,000 miles on the clock and was mint. That car was so fast – I can still remeber how nice it was to drive. Unfortunately, it came to an end when I was stopped at a red light in the middle of winter and a Ford F-150 plowed into the back of me. Totalled. I have to say those A-body cars were roomy, great handling, and efficient. I know why they were so wildly popular. Because even with their share of problems, I loved the ones I owned too!!
I had a 4 door Century, with the tiny square headlamps…I’m thinking it was an 88? Blew the transmission at 75,000 and was pleased that the 3 speed is a lot cheaper to rebuild than the 4 speed. My then-father-in-law had a newer Ciera with a truly odd equipment package on it…manual windows, power locks, cruise but no tilt, no rear defrost, AM/FM with no cassette, power recliners but no other power seat functions, wire wheel covers…GM would build just about any oddball combination.