Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, the full size Chevrolet had ranked at the top of the charts in the U.S. sales race, typically earning the top spot most years. So they had a tremendous amount on the line when the Caprice/Impala underwent a comprehensive redesign and downsizing for the ’77 model year. It was a big gamble, and central to the new cars’ success would be the reception by the press. Let’s see what they had to say back in the day.
(first posted 10/12/2015) The buff books were itching to get their hands on the new Chevrolet. It was an open secret in Detroit that GM was rethinking their approach to full size cars. FoMoCo was doubling down on their dinosaur strategy, touting the LTD as a “real” full-size car while hedging their bets (unsuccessfully as it turned out) with the LTD II for the buyers looking for a smaller “big” car.
The product sketches looked exciting. The cars promised to be fresh and trim, very in tune with the evolving times. This rendering of the coupe roofline did a reasonably good job of teasing out what would be one of the Caprice/Impala Coupe’s most unique and attractive features. This was going to be big!
Often automotive advertising is brimming with hyperbole. Even today grandiose claims accompany car launches: here’s looking at you, Bold New Camry. But in this case the claims were fully justified. The enthusiast press backed up every word of Chevy’s pitch for its new cars.
Right out of the gate, Motor Trend endorsed the marketing claims for Chevrolet’s new full size cars. The new size and efficiency were praised, and the car was given full credit for being all-new.
Though the Impala had been the top selling full size Chevy since the 1960s, for 1977 the marketing emphasis shifted to the Caprice. These pictures of the Impala Coupe were just about the only ones featured with any prominence. It was a smart strategy for Chevrolet, as the Caprice emphasis subtly moved buyers upmarket. The more profitable, higher-trim level Caprice outsold the Impala for the first time in 1977 (341,382 to 320,279). In fact, the Impala would never again be the top selling Chevy.
Car and Driver could always be counted on to give a blunt assessment of any car it tested. So when C/D’s editors gave the Caprice kudos for being a huge step in the right direction, enthusiast readers knew that the praise was genuine.
All the enthusiast magazines pointed out the available “F41 Sport Suspension” as a key element in giving the new Caprice/Impala such exemplary handling characteristics for a large car. F41 was an outstanding value as well: ticking that option box only added only $36 to the price of the car.
The new Caprice scored well when compared with a Ford LTD Landau, Buick Century Regal and Volvo 240 DL, beating them all in both acceleration and interior quietness, while trailing only the Volvo in fuel economy. The braking distances weren’t that great, though, with the Chevy trailing both Ford and Buick. The Volvo’s stopping distances were surprisingly long, especially for a brand building its reputation as a top safety pick.
Road Test Magazine did not have anywhere near the following of the other buff books like Car and Driver, Motor Trend, or Road & Track. However, the Southern California-based magazine did offer very credible reviews. Initially the publication did not run any ads. In latter years advertising did appear, but not in huge volumes and therefore the publication seemed to be pretty unbiased in the face of big spending car companies. Like the other automotive publications, Road Test was also a big fan of the all-new big Chevrolet.
Interestingly, most cars tested were fitted with the 350 4V Chevrolet V8. The Caprice Road Test reviewed carried the 305 2V. Compared with Car and Driver’s results, the Road Test Caprice was 2 seconds slower 0-60 (11.8 versus 9.8 seconds) but delivered one additional mile per gallon in normal driving (18 versus 17 mpg).
In January 1977, my Pop’s two year cycle on his company car came due, and it was time to replace his 1975 LeSabre Custom. I was ecstatic, as I knew he wanted to get one of the new downsized GM cars. Since he was doing business at the time with a customer who was a large Chevrolet dealer, the Caprice was his pick.
The car looked almost exactly like the ’77 Caprice that Motor Trend tested. It had the same streamlined look of a dark-colored car (Dark Blue-Green Metallic in our case) without the vinyl top over a light tan (Buckskin) interior. Pop’s featured the same sport mirrors and sport wheel covers, while his added bumper guards and body side molding. It was a very handsome car.
Inside, Pop’s Caprice had an option that was new to our family, and extremely useful: the divided front seat. My father was 5’10” while my mother is 5’3” with heels, so the two of them sharing a bench seat, especially when she was driving, made for an uncomfortable ride. With the split seat the problem was solved! My parents never got another car with the traditional bench seat after the epiphany in the Chevy.
His interior was vinyl rather than the cloth shown above, but the color was the same. The car was abundantly equipped with options as well, including power windows, locks, and driver’s seat, AM/FM stereo, A/C, cruise, tilt wheel and remote trunk release. I don’t know if it had the F41 suspension, but no matter, my parents loved the way it drove. It was also significantly easier to park, and the Caprice’s rear-end didn’t jut out of our carport the way the LeSabre’s had.
As for me, I adored the car and spent hours washing it, sitting in it, poring over every detail. When we got it, all my buddies rushed over to see it. Pop would let me take the keys and fire it up in the driveway. My friends and I spent a lot of time listening to the purr of that Chevy small block while we discussed all the merits of the car and played with all the buttons.
Any family sedan that can get a group of 5th grade boys that excited has to be a home run. It’s hard to imagine similar enthusiasm today if a boy’s father were to bring home a Bold New Camry, which in my mind is the spiritual successor to the Caprice/Impala as the quintessential American sedan. Without a doubt, Chevrolet did in fact start a whole new ballgame. By all accounts, they hit it out of the park with the 1977 Caprice.
Then they took this perfect platform and gave us the whale size Caprice.
Great article. And kudos for even including Road Test Magazine. Unfortunate they devolved into such a parody in the end.
With contributions by “Maxwell Chalmers” ? Writers had to use a pseudonym when publishing their articles by the 80s. Poor Walt Woron. His attempts at reviving it were all for naught.
77 Caprice and Impala: One of GM’s most focused and successful attempts, I think.
Shouldn’t “Maxwell Chalmers” confine his contributions to MOPAR reveiws?
Ha! Hope he kept his day job.
Maxwell Chalmers was a psuedonym used by Len Frank, one of the more prolific auto writers of the ’70s and ’80s.
Thank you for this enjoyable read GN. Given the great initial sales and excellent press reception of the Granada/Monarch, the Seville, and the Aspen/Volare, it seemed the US was more than ready for luxury in a smaller package. Particularly if interior room and luggage space wasn’t heavily compromised from the 1976 models. The engineering was still very conventional. If it was a marketing and product investment risk, it was one GM had to make. Especially with such great potential rewards. Looking back, the real challenge for GM was the necessity of getting the X cars right.
In early 1977, Consumer Reports compared the new Caprice with a 305 to a the ‘mid-size’ offerings–a Cutlass with the 260-V8, Monaco, and LTD II.
Under “Disadvantages” for the Caprice, the magazine said “None important enough to mention”. They said it was the best car they had ever tested.
The new GM cars were excellent, and I’d say the Chevies with the 305/350 were the best of the lot.
Under “Disadvantages” for the Caprice, the magazine said “None important enough to mention”.
I remember that too! It was awesome.
And within the year prior to that, CR listed only one disadvantage to the Dodge Aspen (or it may have been the Plymouth Volaré): “Shallow trunk.”
Unfortunately, they only lived with it for a few months…
Great read. Thanks! This is my buddy’s ’83 Caprice Classic, that he picked up for $300 because it has rusty freeze plugs. Other than that and a dead passenger window motor, there’s nothing wrong with that car.
I haven’t seen an Eddie Bauer F Series in a long time, forgot they even existed. I always saw green on tan/gold colour scheme.
I was looking at American cars around that time and I stumbled upon that one. I was tempted but I ended up buying an older Impala with a 6 cylinder around that body style. Freeze plugs are a breeze if there’s nothing in their way.
I owned four of these, a 1978 coupe, and 78,82 and 84 sedans, great cars to drive. Still thinking about getting another onesome day, but with gasprices and roadtax these days, they are really expensive to own and drive overhere. 🙁
( weird enough we shipped one back to a guy in Arizona two years back, together with a Porsche 928 he also bought. Must be some sort of following for them in the USA I guess. Or maybe he just really, really liked it. Like me. And it did fit in nicely to fill up a 40 feet container)
I remember when these were new. The “smallness” and “squareness” were a shocking difference compared to the big cars we were used to. I didn’t like them then but sure would like a Caprice coupe today. With velour!
Both C/D and R/T tested models seemed to have the famous F-41 sport suspension.
My ’79 Caprice doesn’t. As a consequence, I feel she’s still under contemporary european standards.
Before the Caprice, I had a ’75 Opel Rekord which seemed to had much better handling and braking capabilities. I never felt unsafe at the wheel of the Rekord while I did (and still do) when I’m driving the Caprice, especially on wet grassy roads after a little rain.
Moreover, I’d like to know how C/D managed to do 17 MPG in urban driving with the 350 ! With the same engine, I’m doing 11-12 MPG in the city and 15-18 on the highway.
On the other hand, I reckon this is the best highway car I’ve ever had (on dry roads…). It’s like cruising on a soft and cushy flying carpet… At 90 MPH ! Love it in the city too because she’s always in the right range of torque, thanks to the 350 and the TH-350, no matter what the traffic conditions are. I can actually zip through parisian traffic in spite of her huge size.
Love the opposite lock the Road Test guys got on the Caprice! GM’s downsized models in ’77 put an end to that depressing era where cars were getting slower, fatter and uglier every year. Then in ’78 we had the Fiesta, Fairmont and 911 SC and then in ’79 the Mustang. Good times.
The ’76 Caprice was available with a 454-4 rated at 225 HP. I suspect that more than made up for the weight difference between the two generations, and then engines continued to get less powerful. The 350 ci gasoline V8 was dropped for 1980, and it was years before offerings actually improved. Two different 115 hp V8 options replaced it.
The 350 4BBL was dropped for 1980. The 120 Hp 267 was offered as an option and the top gas fired mill was a 155 HP 305 4BBL V8 which wasn’t much slower than the previous 350 setup due to a weight loss and the better gearing of the 200 transmissions. The 305 4BBL continued as the top engine and most commonly ordered motor right up until 1988 when it was supplanted by the TBI version of this engine with 170 horses. The only 115 Hp engines listed were the 1981 and 82 267 V8’s which were dropped for 1983. These were the intermediate power choices between the 229 V6 and the 305.
The other 115 hp V8 was the Olds 350 diesel. I drove many, many of this family of cars, and the two quickest by far were an early 350-4 Impala and an early 403 Oldsmobile 98. The 305s were walked over by all sorts of 4 cylinder imports on the street. The early ones with larger V8s were still not exactly fast, merely not underpowered.
When these came out, based mostly on their excellent reviews in car magazines, a co-worker who had only ever owned small foeign sedans bought one of these. His was one of those orange (?) metallic 2 tone 4 door sedans like the one that was featured in several magazine ads. Of course, it had the F41 suspension and split bench. He thought it was one of the best cars he ever owned.
A great car. My grandmother had a 1977 Chevy Impala 4 door sedan. She had it for six years before retiring from driving. I loved riding in the car and was disappointed when she sold it to her son, my uncle. It didn’t have anything fancy, like cd player, or fuel injection. But it was reliable, and it got good mileage.
Great write-up, GN! I hate to be negative about a car that seems to be so well-liked by everyone here at CC, but our ’77 Caprice Estate Wagon was not the best-built car in the world by any stretch of the imagination. Ordered brand new from the factory (which I believe for the wagons was in Canada) the build quality of that car was very poor to say the least. Yes, my father always said it handled well and the 350 V-8 had great acceleration, but that car was built as if they had all but five minutes to get it put together. Moldings and emblems literally fell off it all the time. The power window switches on the driver’s side both failed. The Sport wheel covers didn’t like staying on the car and we lost them several times. The digital clock was crooked in the dash from the day we took the car home and it stopped working after a couple of years. Same for the lighted passenger vanity mirror – it was crooked in the visor and only one side would stay lit properly when you opened it. After four years, there was so much rust forming under the long cargo area rear windows it was ridiculous – luckily the car was brown so it didn’t show too badly. On the positive side, the drivetrain was bulletproof. It never gave Dad an ounce of trouble in the nearly 90k miles that we had it. GM did a great job of downsizing their full-size vehicles. They looked great, were roomy and a definite improvement over their predecessors. I just wish we had a ’78 or ’79 that maybe would have been made with a little better quality.
I had a 1977 Buick Limited (October 1976 Build date.) that came from the Linden, New Jersey plant. Being an entirely new design, I was impressed with how well it was built (esp for a mid ’70s anything) Perhaps the took more care on the “C”s? I can’t imagine that Canadian labor being that different than NJ labor.
Not blaming the Canadians, just GM – it was a very poorly made car in many ways. I know others that had ’77 Buicks, Oldsmobiles and even Pontiacs – they were built much better than our Caprice.
Maybe the difference was local management. Deming believed it is responsible for most QC issues. Variation between factories might explain the wide range of quality stories one hears.
British Leyland had notoriously bad QC & labor relations, yet one exception (relatively speaking) was Abingdon-on-Thames, the archaic MG factory. I bet the reason was management not being in Bertie Wooster mode. Of course that was the one BL shuttered in 1980.
So true Neil. I think it was a shame that our Caprice was so poorly made, as I know my father enjoyed the way it drove and handled. I remember closing the back tailgate and one of the silver moldings fell off and hit the ground. Hubcaps literally flew off that car on several occasions (I still have one in my parent’s garage as a remembrance of that car) We have relatives that had a ’77 Buick Estate wagon and their car was built so much better than our Caprice was. Theirs didn’t ever rust like ours did. And I think you are right that certain factories are managed differently – hence the big differences in quality control.
Tom C – really appreciate your comments. The truth is there was a hit-or-miss aspect to the quality of US cars during these years. We’ve discussed it at length here in regard to Chrysler (my aunt’s early Cordoba was a fantastic car but when my cousin bought one the following year, it was one of the worst lemons of all time). Perhaps GM was not that much different from Chrysler in this regard.
One thing you didn’t mention that I remember from my friend’s ’79 Impala Wagon was that the interior door panels and dashboard both developed a strange rash from sun exposure. The smooth parts flaked off and left a hideous surface exposed. Also, all of the lights used to turn themselves off while we were driving. Disconcerting.
That’s a great counterpoint to all the positive comments. While the ’77 full-size Chevy was superb in its time, in the quality department, it’s just another downward step to GM losing market share. A GM Greatest Hit, to be sure, but was it the last?
Like others mentioned American cars from this era were very hit or miss when it came to quality control. I remember my dad always saying talking about not buying a car made on Monday or Friday. As for the Canadian build quality, Oshawa always had a reputation of being on of GM’s best plants for quality control. I know that our Oshawa built GM cars have always been very good. And in my experience my Oshawa built b-bodies seems to be screwed together better than the Arlington built one I owned. That said, I am sure even a good plant has bad cars every now and then, especially in this era.
That said, GM’s Ste Therese plant in Quebec had a reputation as being one of the worst plants for build quality. This is why the low demand F-car ended up there for it’s 4th gen models and probably why it was eventually closed down.
It seems typical of American companies of the 1970s. They’ve become so concerned with saving money that they’ve forgotten about how to produce good quality products. I hope I’m wrong.
A friend bought one in the mid 80s. It was a high-mile 77 Impala coupe that had been a former rental car. I had developed a deep hatred of the 1971-76 GM B body cars, and was surprised at how much I liked driving his. It gave excellent service, and was a pleasant, comfortable car.
It always seemed funny to me how Chevy seemed to slowly lose the retail market to Ford in the 80s. As close as they are dimensionally, this car and the Gen1 Panther were so different in personality.
I think GM lost or surrendered the barge market to Ford. They replaced good engines with bad ones, & then got fixated on the absurdity of luxury-car FWD, while Ford wisely stayed away. You’d think Europe might’ve given them a clue here.
My father was probably typical of many traditionalist customers; after his ’80 DeVille, he went for the inferior Town Car. When he sold that later, his neighbor was the buyer, and Dad got another TC.
In my opinion the big Chevy was the ONLY downsized GM car from that era that did not look awkwardly-truncated and dis-proportioned from the get-go…and still handsome today.
It IS hilarious to think however that a 212″ overall length was a DOWNSIZE!
I agree. I find the 1977-84 Caprice/Caprice Classic/Impala to be the best looking GM cars out there. Probably until the 1991-96 Caprice/Caprice Classic/Impala SS.
As I recall, the dealers were worried about customer acceptance of a full-size Chevy where you could reach the opposite back window crank from the driver’s seat! Not sure why that’s a bad thing, but a lot of people were still in the bigger-is-always-better mindset. I guess they all bought LTDs and Towncars in ’77.
I can’t think of any all-new GM cars in the last 40 years that hit it right out of the ballpark like the 1977 Chevy Impala/Caprice did. It was damn near perfect.
My parents had a blue 1977 wagon with a 305 engine. I drove it several times and was quite impressed with its handling.
I’m not a huge fan of the late 70’s vehicles but I really thought GM scored a homerun with the 1977-79 downsized cars and thought they were a major improvement over the mid 1970’s biggies, for some reason a Chevy Caprice 2 door of that era seems to look sportier every time I see it, especially on those with the sport mirrors, GM really seemed to have the ball rolling in the late 70’s with the full sized cars and the midsized cars, the 350 4bbl V8 on the Chevy’s seem to have really good performance for it being a Malaise era engine.
If these were still being made when I was finally able to buy my own car, I would have done so. Unfortunately, the Whale debuted a year or two before that and I lost interest. GM lost the plot just as they reached the apex, didn’t they? From Caprice to Citation in 3 years.
I learned to drive in a ’77 Impala wagon. It was probably the best automotive decision my parents ever made, (with the possible exception of their earlier Volvo PV44). (Prior cars had been a Renault Dauphine (Mom rolled it, love the swing axles), Saab 96 wagon (smoky 2 stroke hated wet weather, and tranny fell out in <5 years), and 72 Vega (need I say more?).
But theImpals was a great highway car. Besides our frequent trips up I95 from Philly to Providence, it took us on the great American road trip in summer '78 – 7,000 miles around the US in a month.
It wasn't totally perfect though: after the road trip it needed helper springs even though it was under 2 years old; and the AC compressor seized on the Cross Bronx Expressway, back when you frequently saw stripped cars on cinder blocks on that stretch of road….
I’ve owned 2 C bodies from the ’77-’90 era–still own one–and the reviews are right on. I think the ride did suffer a bit (from the Mr. America, not Mr. Enthusiast, viewpoint) due to the shorter wheelbase since my ’75 feels more isolated, but the handling on the downsized cars is pretty impressive even without the F41.
These were just what the market, which in 1977 still wanted a full size car but needed 5-6 more mpg, needed. My only regret is that all too soon, people turned away from full-sizers and never fully turned back, though the blip in the mid 80s doubtless extended their lifespan another 10 years.
These also represent a transition in my mind from the old style of car, where it was all about styling and displacement, to the new era of utility. Compared to today’s homogeneity, these cars retained some individual characteristics across the GM marques but did look more like each other than ever before. And of course, the early ones were the last gasp of unique divisional engines with their own respective feels, layouts, and sounds. These, especially the ’77-’80, represent to me both the last of the old and the first of the modern, all at once.
That goes for the driving experience, too. I would say it is a shorter step from this Caprice or my ’77 Electra to my mother’s Prius than this to my ’75 98.
I’m at work but saw this and I’ll read it completely later as this is what I’m driving now, I’ve had 3 of the 4door models and I got a 1980 2 door caprice now. Love it.
The CC effect again, saw one of these ’77 Caprices on the way home just before tuning in here. My first sighting in a while. Amazing what high sales, a partial elderly ownership base and a good solid car will do for keeping a few on the road almost 40 years later. This car was in okay condition.
Speaking of B bodies, I saw another classic B body on my commute – a “Palm Beach” Buick LeSabre from this same era. It was on huge wheels, but otherwise unmolested and quite nice. I would not have recognized the Palm Beach trim if not for the continuing education of CC.
I guess you can’t keep a good B body down.
One of the best cars the General ever produced. The styling is movie-star perfect: sheer and angular, subtle and aggressive all at once, never reverting to cliché. Good build quality, solid powertrains, F41 fun. A million options. And that intangible something only these B bodies exude.
The brocade and bloat was just a memory now and relegated to the final LTDs and Furies. Long before retro was cool.
Nothing is quite so wonderful as the General firing on all cylinders.
I’m never going to be able to de-associate this car from the DC sniper.
That’s sad, But I guess some will always associate early ’60s Lincolns with the Kennedy tragedy too!
Thanks for compiling these, GN. I will have a read of the articles later, but it does echo the 1978-79 downsizing that GM and Ford did in Australia even though they took two quite different approaches.
GM dropped their local Holden sedan (Belmont/Kingswood trim levels) for the Opel-based Commodore that was 5.4″ (137 mm) shorter, 6.7″ (170 mm) narrower, and about 270 lb (122 kg) lighter, but carried over the engines basically unchanged.
The 1979 Ford XD model was also 5″ (129 mm) shorter but only 1.6″ (40 mm) narrower, however Ford went on a huge weight-saving drive to equal the Commodore’s weight saving once the new alloy head on the 200/250 ci 6-cylinder arrived.
One observation though is the split bench as photographed, set up for a much shorter driver than passenger, makes a mockery of the 6-seat capacity. Out of the various alternative arrangements I prefer the setup that has the centre seat attached to or moving with the passenger seat.
The split bench did actually work, the passenger seat was wider than the driver’s. Dad had one Caprice with that seat.
How do you go from hitting one out of the park with these, to bungling the X-car, in just a few short years?
We had several Impalas of this vintage in our government motor pool back then. 350 4 bbls with F41. What an improvement over the LTD II’s with the 351, which were actually bigger and heavier. The hard, plasticky interiors weren’t much, but these were fairly base models and the Caprices were more upscale. The driving experience was great. Firm without being harsh and very manageable. Reliable too. Most went trouble free to 100,000 miles before being surplused.
Great article on great full sized car. I wish they still made them today. The first one I owned was a ’77 that we inherited from my SIL when she bought a used ’85 Ford Crown Vic(my son eventually inherited this one). I had tested it for her 6 years earlier as I was the family car guy. I was impressed with it at that time but was buying and driving 60’s thru early 70’s Mopars at the time. When we got the ’77 Caprice and drove it awhile I bought and drove Caprices for the next 10-12 years. I also drove extensively my in-laws Pontiac and Oldsmobile station wagon versions of this car, using them to deliver grandfather clocks for them in my spare time. They owned a retail and repair clock business. My FIL said the station wagons had enough room to carry the grandfather clocks, did not beat the clocks delicate movements like a van would and also served duty a family car.
The ’77 had a 350 4V with a 350 THM. It got fairly good gas mileage for the time and handled well for a full size car(better than any stock GM car I had driven starting with a 1947 Chevrolet Stylemaster). The next was an ’82-83 that had a 305 and automatic 4pd overdrive. This one was more highly optioned than the ’77, having power windows power door locks and generally higher trim level. It got fantastically good gas mileage esp on the road, as near as I can figure 25-26 mpg. It didn’t have the pep of the 350 but I didn’t feel like it was under powered. The last one was an ’86 which did not last long because for some reason my wife did not like it even she purchased it on her own. I thought she had done a very good job on buying the car and I was proud of the fact that she had done so. We sold it to a kid who wanted to do the air bag or hydraulic suspension on it.
As stated I still wish they madew these today as in my opinion GM hit a home run on this body. The looks, handling, economy and overall utility of them cannot be beat. There used to be a company that would rebuild/refurbish these to as new condition. It was a bit expensive in my opinion but you ended up with a new older car.
Those things were awesome. Dad had 2, one locally assembled with a V6 and an US one with a 305. The local was more luxurious, had a bigger radiator and that Comfortron A/C thing, but the American suspension calibration was smoother and the 305 was inmortal.
The early coupes with the curved back window looked gorgeous.
The only car I can think is as awesome as this is the local WM/WN Caprice.
The 77-79 cars looked, and were, a lot better, IMO.
The 1980 “improvements” consisted of slightly lowering the hood and raising the the trunk to improve aerodynamics and mpg, and squaring off the rear windows for the “formal look”. So even though the cars did not become eyesores, they were considerably less attractive.
The interiors also looked cheaper. The Chevy dashboard was especially cheapened. On the Buicks, the door pads got fake wood that looked really cheap and fake!
I think the availability of 350 cid engines was curtailed or eliminated. In their place, around 1980 or 81, Chevy introduced an 265 or 267 cid version of it’s 305, with a lot less hp, and probably less real-world mpg. Buick came up with a 252 Cid variant of the 231, again using more fuel for imperceptible power gains, and put it an…Electra, previously a 350 V8 only car.
Also,this is anecdotal, but 1980 seems to mark the beginning of crappiness in GM’s cars. The certainly looked cheaper and uglier In the early 80s, my dad was giving his co-workers rides to/from dealers…they drove ‘nice’ cars, but they spent a lot of time in the shop: an 80 or 81 Electra 2-door, an 81 Cutlass. Before that, he’d only get a non-GM car if it was a much better bargain. After that, his next new car was….a Ford
The only positive thing was the intro of the 4-speed automatic. Consumer Reports tested one with a 305 V8 and it got 30 mpg highway–pretty impressive for a big car.
1980 was one of those years when quality control seemed to take a hit with this line. But in 1981/82 onward it came back and these remained one of the better built cars of the 80’s and the 305 4BL/200 R-4 transmission became a very well oiled unit.
With the right options and paint colour this generation of full-size Chevrolet still looks good even today. When they came out in 1977 as a 23 year old I was quite impressed at how well GM pulled off the downsizing. I imagine it these models really shook up some people at Ford and Chrysler that year.
We bought a 1977 Impala in 1982 with only 20K miles on it from a retired person on my paper route (who replaced it with a 1981 model IIRC). It came with the 305 engine and the infamous “metric” THM200 transmission.
We had the transmission rebuilt at 40K miles.
At 85K miles, the improperly-hardened cam lobes had already worn down, and we lived with it for awhile. I’m pretty sure this cam issue (combined with using a Chevette transmission) is the reason why our neighbor ditched the car, as I believe that these two points were known problems with the car by 1982.
At around 100K miles the transmission was failing yet again; I yanked the engine/trans, replaced the cam, lifters & timing chain, and also rebuilt or replaced every single thing bolted onto the engine down to the core plugs and rear main seal (only thing I didn’t do was to remove the heads), and installed a freshly-rebuilt T350 transmission (had to shorten the driveshaft about 6″). This gave the car a new lease on life and it ran for another 100K+ miles after this.
Good points: the stock battery lasted 11 years until one of the terminals broke off internal to the battery, and the stock A/C system was still working 20 years later. We had the car in our family from 1980 to 2005.
The soft cam was a known issue on those 305 motors right up until the early 80’s I believe. We used to put in a performance cam like the one used in the SS Monte Carlo’s from 1983 onward along with a steel gear and new timing chain and this indeed would give this engine a new lease on life and considerably more power than stock. The 200 Metric trans was for sure under-sized for anything other than a low calorie V6 but were as easy as replacing a clutch to rebuild. We used to put an auxiliary bolt in radiator cooler after rebuilding these and that kept them humming along much longer than keeping it stock.
Fun memories of how you got excited about the cars. It sounds like we are pretty close to the same age. I followed these closely, and thought they were great. My parents were ready to trade their huge 1970 Chrysler in on something new in summer 1978, which was between 5th and 6th grades for me. I tried my best to influence them, and I think it rubbed off a little, because thankfully they didn’t get a Ford LTD II they considered (I hated it, and even at that age it was so obvious how much more advanced the GM full-size cars were.) We ended up with a fairly low-optioned 1978 Caprice sedan in Carmine metallic with a Carmine cloth interior. Not the LeSabre, Electra, 88 or 98 I hoped they’d get, but not bad!
I’m a Ford guy and truly marvel at how good the 1977 Chevrolet full-sized cars were. This is likely the only product the company has done absolutely spot on right in the last 40 years. This had styling and room and was quite innovative in its day.
I thought it might be worth to mention the Bel Air still offered in Canada until 1981. CC posted an article about a surviving Canadian Bel Air.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-american/curbside-classic-1977-chevrolet-bel-air-coupe-a-once-storied-names-last-stand-in-canada/
And these Bel Air photos from the Canadian brochure might be Impala photos who had been air brushed.
http://oldcarbrochures.org/Canada/GM-Canada/Chevrolet/1977-Chevrolet-Full-Size-Brochure/slides/1977_Chevrolet_Full_Size_Cdn-16-17.html
I had one of those 1981 Bel Air cars, but only for a couple of years 1983-86. I found it unreliable, sometimes failing to start for the return trip home from the mall. I had to get it repainted when it was four years old due to the finish becoming duller than the ten year old car that I sold previous to this. It was kinda thirsty too.
I did like the styling, and the finish on mine was OK.
This car was a home run, however it hit something bigger than it – the US economy. Thankfully, these cars had a two year run until the economy began sinking. GM also had zero competition. Anyone who wanted something other than a floating LTD or New Yorker, bought GM’s cars. Few were unhappy. So it was one wild success for at least three years until Americans started feeling the pinch of the 1979-1982 recession.
Ford said they wouldn’t do anything, while doing everything to produce a new Panther just in time for the economic crash. The Panther was a half-baked response and was left half-baked while the economy continued to tank until 1983. Honestly, a lot of people didn’t see the 1980’s economic rebound coming until it arrived.
What this meant is that GM didn’t update this perfect car for far too long, while Ford was only half-heartedly involved in what was then called the LTD/Crown Victoria. Chrysler didn’t look like it had a future, let along any competition for either Ford or GM. When Ford started sinking updates into the CV, GM was onto a larger version, (Caprice, 98, Roadmaster).
The history of this car shows that you can do everything right, but it takes a sustainable economy to keep the success going. This car got GM to 60% in the US market. Then X-car, J-car, C-car, and the 1980s melt down occurred for GM.
These cars were GM at their best. They will never have it this good again.
Good looking car, really liked the 2 door, especially with that wrap around rear window. Friend of mine had one, great car. The only problem it had was the miserable alternator belt. Lousy little skinny 3/8″ belt. Had to adjust it about every 3 months and a new belt once a year. The bean counters were saving probably 15 cents there. It was super easy to adjust with the alternator on top, big screw driver and a 1/2 x 9/16 combo wrench and you were in business.
My Dad had a couple of these, an early 80s, which he really liked and drove to ~200K. And a late 80s that was it’s replacement that he didn’t like at all. Not living nearly I’m not sure I ever drove either one, but it was curious how similar they looked and how different he regarded them.
To me, an aircooled VW guy who evolved to a older BMW guy, they were still a bloated domestic car. Shrug.
It occurred to me last night that this is the car that deflated the vinyl roof era. I can only remember a few coupes having the front half vinyl and none with full vinyl or cabriolet style. The sedan looked great without it, and the relatively thin C pillar made it seem silly to spend the extra money.
Man this brings back memories. Had a 77 caprice 2 door. Put 300,000 on that baby and it had 125,000 when I got it. After I sold it a guy made a crash up derby car out of it and won three years in a row. I got my 700$ out of her.
Whoever ‘rendered’ the blue Chevy Caprice for the front of that 1977 Consumer Guide issue:
https://i0.wp.com/www.curbsideclassic.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/77CapriceCGCarPreviewCover.jpeg
Took some major artistic license! It has more tumblehome in that drawing than the 1976 and early Chevys it replaced.