Earlier this week, Paul reran a post featuring a long-forgotten staple of the American Middle/Upper-Middle Class driveway. It was great to see that old Olds once again, and to give that “solid citizen” its due, here is Motor Trend’s take on the Dynamic 88 in this March 1966 review.
The subdued praise afforded to the Oldsmobile reminds me of how automotive testers reacted to the Honda Accord in the 2000s: highly competent, family-car comfortable, good value and just a smidge dull—the quintessential “nice” car. But for undemanding transportation needs, the Olds (like later Accords) was hard to beat for delivering what was desired by the target audience. This “Rocket” was for marrying, not for flings.
Though not fully loaded, Motor Trend’s test car was well-equipped with all the basic niceties that upmarket buyers would see as necessary. The middle-of-the-road equipment for a middle-of-the-road car brought the price-tag up to $4,507 ($35,372 adjusted), with the most expensive extra being air conditioning at $421 ($3,304 adjusted). While buyers in many parts of the country might have skipped A/C (though not in the Deep South!), power steering, power brakes, automatic transmission, whitewall tires, tinted glass and AM radio would have likely been found on most all of the Dynamic 88s sold.
| Bodystyle | Jetstar 88 | Dynamic 88 | Delta 88 | Starfire | Nintety-Eight |
| 2-Door Hardtop | 8,575 | 20,768 | 20,587 | 13,019 | 11,488 |
| 4-Door Sedan | 12,734 | 38,742 | 30,140 | – | 10,892 |
| 4-Door Hardtop | 7,938 | 30,784 | 33,326 | – | 23,048 |
| 2-Door Convertible | – | 5,540 | 4,303 | – | 4,568 |
| 4-door “LS” Sedan | – | – | – | – | 38,123 |
| Total 1966 Sales | 29,247 | 95,834 | 88,356 | 13,019 | 88,119 |
The mid-range of the 88 Series proved to be the most popular Full-Sized Oldsmobile for 1966. Solid results for a solid citizen. However, despite the sales success of the not-so-Dynamic 88, the nameplate was retired for ’67. Oldsmobile clearly noted the trend upmarket among buyers of Medium Standard cars (as well as the Caprice, LTD and VIP from the “Low-Priced Three”), and therefore placed more emphasis on the fancier Delta 88s while merging the Jetstar 88 and Dynamic 88 lines to create the new “most-affordable full-sized Olds” Delmont 88 (which would also soon be gone as Deltas came to dominate). Hard to believe it now, but for predicting buyer preferences, there once was a time when GM was ahead of the curve, rather than years behind it.
| Full-Sized Car | 1966 Sales | Full Size Share |
| Chevrolet | 1,499,700 | 31.2% |
| Ford | 1,040,930 | 21.7% |
| Pontiac | 477,993 | 9.9% |
| Plymouth | 330,487 | 6.9% |
| Oldsmobile | 314,575 | 6.5% |
| Buick | 301,160 | 6.3% |
| Chrysler | 262,495 | 5.5% |
| Cadillac | 194,212 | 4.0% |
| Mercury | 172,727 | 3.6% |
| Dodge | 142,600 | 3.0% |
| Lincoln | 54,755 | 1.1% |
| Imperial | 13,742 | 0.3% |
| Total 1966 Full-Sized Segment | 4,805,376 | 100.0% |
And Full-Sized Oldsmobiles were big business, with sales ranking just behind Plymouth in the Full-Sized Category, and ahead of all other Medium-Priced (besides #3 Pontiac) and Luxury brands. Right smack in the middle, for a well-executed middle-of-the-market car.
So let’s give a CC shout out to this obscure series that once represented one of the many solid profit pillars that boosted the mighty General Motors to dazzling heights. “Stable, quiet, predictable” indeed!
Great write up GN!!! So nice to read an article by Motor Trend that’s not nailing a domestic car to the wall and wishing it were European. I miss Oldsmobile!!!
I think you mean Road and Track! Motor Trend (I called it Motor Turd) was always pro-domestic.
I read Road and Track along with the other two in the mid 70’s when i really started getting into cars. i stopped i couple of issues in for the same reasons. But the other two got to a place where i litteraly just bought them for the pictures. Motor Turd…………..lol,thats a good one!
Very interesting to read this review, and I agree with your analogy that this was the Honda Accord of the 1960s. Though I was born in the early ’70s and am only speaking in hindsight, to me Oldsmobiles of this era were, like you said, the quintessential cars of the times. And desirable too — even when most 1960s cars were beaters by the 1980s, it seemed that Olds sedans still held quite a bit of allure.
I recently saw this rather beat-up Delta 88. It was parked at an auto parts store’s parking lot (probably not a coincidence). This light green was by far my favorite color for these — seems to match the aura and the era very well.
What a great shot! And that green was such a memorable and popular color from the time period. This car would have been quite a fine suburban ride back in its day.
Any road test from “Motor Trend” magazine should be taken “with a grain of salt”.
Impartial, factual and fair they were not; especially in this time period.
Actually, for this time period, I think MT was pretty fair. They weren’t harsh (that never seemed to be in MT’s DNA), so you weren’t getting a critical assessment. But I think that they accurately pegged this car’s benefits and appeal (to its audience).
When I went to locate this article after seeing Paul’s post, I was flipping through the 1966 issues and they had a number of these types of short tests on “boring” cars. I will post some more so CCers can see the range, but I think they did a fair job of giving an overview (a sunny one, always, that’s true), but they did focus on differences and benefits of particular models, which is a helpful sorting function.
Now, I totally agree that there were other periods in MT’s history when they were crazily biased–I just don’t think this time period was anywhere near the worst offender.
OK, perhaps not the worst offender. But… perhaps still excessively Polyanna cheerful and vague; with a happy ending for every article?
It’s the Disney of car magazines 😉
Motor Friend? 🙂
The “Charlie McCarthy of Detroit”* is a phrase I remember reading many times.
*puppet for those who may not remember or know Edgar Bergen’s work
It’s not the harshness that bothers me about Motor Trend (or Car and Driver) it’s that in the 1980’s on up they were kissing so much foreign car butt and constantly and consistently putting domestic cars down. i like and own and have owned many imported cars. there are times when driving a BMW gets tiresome and i want to drive something smoother like a Caddy. but these magazines ooozed of getting paid by imports. Not all domestic cars were crap when they came out at any given year. not everyone wants a car that can stick to an s curve at 100 mph. and thats what pissed me off about them. It got to where when there was a comparison of any imports and domestics…..i knew the outcome(i felt psychic at this point…LOL!!!) it was really frustrating to see an article about a car that you like and have it completely trashed because it was’nt imported.
That car probably was completely trashed because it was bad, not because it was domestic. Aside from traveling in a straight line on slightly rough pavement, US cars were worse on a scale from “slightly worse” to “complete and obvious crap.” The only other selling point for US cars was size/price value for someone who needed a big car.
But why shouldn’t an expensive car be every bit as good as it can be?
Why should there have been massive black holes the manufacturer didn’t address? Why should anyone have had to accept poor brakes and handling just because a car was American (I’m talking in-period here)? Conversely, why should anyone have had to accept unyielding seats and a firm ride just because a car was German? And nobody wanted to accept unreliability just because a car was British.
Couldn’t the US manufacturers make a car that was the best of all worlds? I always thought the ideal would have been something like a roomier, reliable Jaguar.
Actually, American makers couldn’t, without busting the price. An American car as complex as a Jaguar probably would have been a comparable price and sold in comparable volumes. If an American company doesn’t want to go into business on those terms, then they don’t have a comparable product.
Car and Driver once did a M/T parody called Motor-Rooter with the subtitle “We Test 374 Cars and We Like Them All!”.
There was a point around the mid-1970s where it seemed as though the magazine never picked a winner in a comparison test. The tests results became the equivalent of giving everyone a gold star for simply showing up.
I remember reading the magazine’s review of the 1979 AMC Spirit, and being shocked when the writer basically raked it over the coals. Not because I believed that the Spirit was really a great car, but because I wasn’t used to reading that kind of criticism in Motor Trend.
Car and Driver, on the other hand…
This really was the Accord or Camry of 1966, at least in my little part of the upper midwest. As I think about it, I don’t ever recall anyone complaining about an Olds of this vintage being troublesome. Although I still consider this the least attractive big car coming from GM in 1966, it may have been one of the most satisfying to own and drive.
This was really close to the end of an era when GM was really GM. If you went to compare a Chevy Pontiac Olds and Buick, you really had some work to do. Different engines, brakes, suspension tune, and a body/interior not even remotely styled like the others. Add the fact that each was built in its own assembly plant(s) and you could get markedly different build quality between them too. Oldsmobile really was firing on all cylinders by 1966.
” Add the fact that each was built in its own assembly plant(s) and you could get markedly different build quality between them too.” Really? maybe in Michigan, but certainly not in California. South Gate assembled everything from Chevy to Cadillac. By 1965 there was very little difference except for engines and styling.
Or, could say it was the CR-V or RAV-4 of the time. Since they outsell their mid size car stable mates.
Analogies are often flawed, but in fact these full size cars were like the Accord and Camry a few years ago. Then the intermediates blossomed, and the Cutlass became the RAV4 equivalent.
Wouldn’t the Impala have been the camcord of this era?
Agree, Bruce!
A Chevy Impala or a Ford Galaxie (mid range but not top of the line) might be a better choice than a more upscale Oldsmobile?
Yeah…this is more the Toyota Avalon of 1966.
Agree from a product positioning standpoint, but the popularity/market share and volume of sales was hugely different (32,583 Avalons for 2017 versus 213,437 Olds 88s for 1966).
Except Toyota sold, what, 40K Avalons last year? Oldsmobile sold 300K of its standard size cars in 1966, over 200K if you want to subtract the 98. Given the much larger size of the market 50 years hence (I see US vehicle sales numbers of 9 million in 1966, 17 million in 2017), wouldn’t something have to sell close to 400K units a year to simulate the impact of the big Oldsmobile then?
We’ve discussed how fragmented the market is nowadays, when referring to styles and body types, but how many makes are vying for a share of the US market now, compared to 1966? And does anyone sell 400K of anything any more?
The problem with these comparisons is that the two cars don’t serve the same market, then and now. The Dynamic 88 was very common as a family car; who with several kids buys a sedan as primary family hauler? The best comparison is with a Honda Pilot, or a Highlander, or something like that.
Come to think of it, the best modern parallel for this Olds might be the GMC Acadia: ubiquitous slightly upmarket family hauler, a smidgen nicer and pricier than related Chevrolets.
It’s an interesting question. I guess I think of the Camry as the Impala equivalent. It’s harder to pick an appropriate “upmarket” companion for the Olds. I picked the Accord for the modern Olds “equivalency” simply because it has been well regarded and is slightly “premium” (at least as compared to lower-priced domestic brand alternatives). But what is interesting is that the whole volume selling upper-middle “Medium Standard” brand-set has mostly vanished.
As someone whose parents went from a 1965 Chevrolet Bel Air wagon to a 1967 Oldsmobile Delmont 88 Holiday sedan and stuck with Oldsmobile until almost the bitter end, I agree with GN.
Chevrolets were viewed as “blue collar,” while Oldsmobiles – particularly the 88s, and then the Cutlass Supremes – were more “middle class white collar.”
A Ninety-Eight was for the Oldsmobile faithful who wanted something extra, but either couldn’t afford a Cadillac, or viewed them as pretentious.
(My father, born and raised in a small Pennsylvania town with a heavy Pennsylvania Dutch influence, always said that Cadillacs were for people who wanted to “show off,” and refused to even consider one, even though he probably could have swung a DeVille by the early 1990s.)
Where would the 1960’s Buick models fit into this marketing plan?
Maybe – a Cadillac if you wanted to flaunt your disposable wealth, a Buick if you didn’t consider your wealth disposable.
OldPete: My observant Grandfather commented that politicians, neveau riche & mafia gangsters drove a Cadillac; “old money” and people with quiet, conservative good taste drove a Buick.
Buicks were for conservative wealthy people who didn’t want to flaunt their money. They were also bought by successful professionals who didn’t want clients thinking that they were being overcharged to pay for the Cadillac in the drive way.
Northern Kentucky mob guys studiously avoided Cadillacs for fear of being too flashy. Newport KY was a hotspot of mob activity and they bought LOTS of Olds 98s so they could fly under the radar. My dad’s uncle owned the local Olds store…Simon & Fischer Oldsmobile in Newport.
Not sure I agree that Chevy was “blue collar”. I knew tons of folks who were anything but who had a new Chevy every 3-4 years. I think Camry is the modern reincarnation of the Chevy, especially Impala. It is sort of the default choice for people not very interested in cars who just want to make a low risk purchase and get something OK, fairly nice, respectable, and generally worry free. Also, it seems to me that Toyota has figured this out and keeps Camry pretty much the same over the years – no radical growth in size or horsepower, no radical styling, up to date safety stuff – and they sell like clockwork.
Chevrolet was blue collar. They sold so many cars that a number of wealthier folks owned them, but the average skewed less educated and wealthy. The notable comparison is to the Pontiac Catalina. They were comparably priced when equally equipped. Catalina buyers were younger, better educated, and wealthier.
I’d have gone with the Impala – Camcord comparison, except there were exciting Impalas you could buy if you wished. But that’s zeroing in on a detail.
Back then, Impalas and Galaxies gave away nothing to their more prestigious brethren. They ran in a lane that offered style and value back when style, at least, mattered more than today.
By the way, as a ten year old I wasn’t exactly in GM’s marketing crosshairs back then, but I was unaware of all the model variations; to me the full-size Olds were 88’s and 98’s, nothing more. Until the Delmont came out and was briefly picked up by the California Highway Patrol, which in my lifetime had pretty much been (and then reverted to) a Mopar franchise. I still remember seeing the Delmont badge on a CHP Olds and wondering what the heck that was.
Yeah, I’m a serial Olds owner, from a family of Olds owners, and I never got the knack of all the different 88s. Off the top of my head, I can think of Super, Delta, Delmont, Jetstar, and Dynamic, and I have no idea how they relate to each other. And I’m really good (or obsessive) about remembering the model hierarchy of 50s and 60s US cars.
“I can think of Super, Delta, Delmont, Jetstar, and Dynamic, and I have no idea how they relate to each other.”
What a great point. Is there one other car from that era that was 1) so consistent with a name for over 50 years as Oldsmobile with the 88 and yet 2) one other car from that era whose “modifier” for the 88 made less sense or was less memorable than the bunch of them you mentioned?
I can almost feel pity for the car salesman, having to learn all these models, sub-models, and sub-sub-models, only to have the manufacturer reshuffle the deck every year. Oh, and options and availability……
The Delmont 88 reminded me of the canned goods aisle at the supermarket. There was Heinz 57 and DelMonte 88. 🙂
Delmont just sounded dorky to me back then. Still, I like names better than unintelligible letter combinations, LT, LS, DX, LX, EX, DTS, MKsomething, etc,
The Accord always won the comparisons, the Olds, while slightly premium, did not.
>>and ahead of all other Medium-Priced and Luxury brands.
That would be Pontiac, w/ @ 50% greater sales. Better looking, better drive train, better value. The hot brand of the 1960’s.
Good catch on Pontiac–I meant all besides Pontiac and will amend the text.
Just like JFK’s ’63 open-air Lincoln, I’ll never unsee Ted’s ’67 Delmont 88.
I’ve wondered ever since …… a 4-dr sedan of a low-level model? Not even a Delta 88?
Must have wanted to be invisible, that awful night.
Took me a minute to catch the reference. I want to see that movie. I’ve thought before that I would have expected him to drive something more upscale, or at least current model year.
It was actually his mother Rose’s car. It was registered to her.
Ma, …. I wrecked your car…..sorry!
Was doing some research on the Delta 88 and this popped up near the top of the search. Reason? Driving home from dropping off scrap metal and only 1 1/2 blocks from my house was a white 4dr. sedan with a for sale sign in a driveway. Went on to the hardware store and then drove back, past my turn, to get another look. It is raining so I can’t look at it today