What US-market car was furthest behind the times?

"sm70- why not Duesenberg?" (sm70-whynotduesenberg) 08/19/2015 at 18:13 • Filed to: None

7

88

I recently spoke to a friend who drives an Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera. In talking about the car, I asked what year it was, assuming it was from the mid/late 80’s. Nope. It was a 1994. Turns out, these miserable little junkyard-magnets were in production until 1996.

To put that in perspective, Oldsmobile had already been producing this futuristic beauty for two years:

Even a ‘96 dodge Intrepid looks downright advanced by comparison.

Other cars in production in 1996 include these

I could go on, but it’s sufficient to say the Cutlass Ciera was, at best, a tad bit dated. What other American-market cars outlived their relevant lifespan.

(Please note that if you say the Grand Wagoneer, I will murder you)

HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 18:17

0

My brother’s second car was a 92 Ciera It seemed great in comparison to his 86 Celebrity. haha.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 18:18

4

A-bodies were almost as cockroach-like in production as in general use.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles 08/19/2015 at 18:18

1

I guess everything is relative.

jkm7680 > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 18:18

4

Grand Wagoneer.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > jkm7680 08/19/2015 at 18:19

0

You were warned.

Highlander-Datsuns are Forever > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 18:21

1

I learned how to drive in a 1983 Cutlas Sierra, just like the one pictured. The A pilller creaked really bad when you went over a bump, we used to joke that it was manufactured on a Friday afternoon. It was actually not a bad car, the engine let go at 90k then it hit a deer and was totaled by the insurance company. Some quirks, the rear brakes had a tendency to lock up, the seats were very plush red velour, I blew out the speakers playing NWA. It had a digital spedo that only went to 85 mph.

jkm7680 > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 18:22

2

thanks for these.

nermal > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 18:26

1

The current model year Nissan trucks are pretty bad from that perspective.

Textured Soy Protein > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 18:27

2

Both the C3 and C4 Corvettes lasted far too long.

The various permutations of Chrysler K car stuck around until 1995.

The Ford Ranger was the same basic platform from 1983-2012.

WesBarton89 - The Way to Santa Fe > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 18:28

1

The final-gen Cavalier. Rattly, unsafe, poor build quality. It wasn’t just a cheap car, it was a cheap car.

AM > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 18:28

0

Not gonna lie, I kind of like how the Cutlass Ciera looks.

not for canada - australian in disguise > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 18:29

1

wiffleballtony > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 18:33

4

2005 Buick LeSabre. Looks like it’s from the early 90s.

wiffleballtony > not for canada - australian in disguise 08/19/2015 at 18:34

1

Not really sure what makes these behind the times.

Birddog > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 18:36

1

Oldsmobile did a wonderful job of hoaring out the Cutlass name.

This Cutlass was available in the same showroom at the same time as the Cierra.

MultiplaOrgasms > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 18:38

0

El Rivinado > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 18:41

1

The 1990-93 Chrysler Imperial, while I have some weird affection for it, it was so long in tooth, it could go spearfishing with it. This was a k-car derived luxury car that had all the Malaise era trappings in an age when that kind of shit wouldn’t cut it anymore.

And this wasn’t just Lexus and the Germans either, here’s what the American luxury cars that were introduced during it’s run looked like.

EmbraceTheRasp > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 18:44

2

If you had asked me BEFORE you showed me a Ciera, I’d have said the Chevy Citation II.

But I’d be equally comfortable in saying the Ford Tempo (which was a wonderful exemplification of the malaise — not mayonnaise, at least mayonnaise has uses.)

Or the Pontiac Sunbird. Which was so bad even Wheel of Fortune couldn’t give them away for 15 years. It’s such a horrible car that Kinja refuses to allow me to post an image. So here is a link: ‘93_Sunbird_Convertible.jpg

Though it pains me, I’d also put the Lebaron convertible up against anything in the sheer “OMG this is a horrible car” category.

not for canada - australian in disguise > wiffleballtony 08/19/2015 at 18:47

1

The Crown Vic and Econoline were built on platforms from the 70s, the Express has been built largely unchanged since the 80s, and the Mirage and the Avenger have interiors that feel like they’re from 1994.

Jedidiah > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 18:49

2

This is a 92

Amoore100 > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 18:54

1

As much as I love them to bits...

These went out of production three years before the V90 was released...

You could argue that they look the same, however...

pjhusa > jkm7680 08/19/2015 at 18:56

1

Came here to say this

Carbon Fiber Sasquatch > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 19:12

1

Made from 1975-1996, the one pictured is a ‘96. While it looks good, I think you’d have a hard time convincing people that you bought it new in 1996

Eric @ opposite-lock.com > Jedidiah 08/19/2015 at 19:23

1

...those sealed beams...

Nauraushaun > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 19:30

1

They wondered how to built the imports, as the Japanese consistently built the future and the US consistently built the past.

Jedidiah > not for canada - australian in disguise 08/19/2015 at 19:33

1

The crown vic has rack and pinion steering, a hydroformed frame, and a watt’s linkage. It also has both front and rear anti-roll bars.

Fords from the 70s aren’t going to have that.

Jedidiah > El Rivinado 08/19/2015 at 19:35

0

That Lincoln Mark has several interesting electronic things, which I think kept up with the times.

It has a self leveling solenoid that lowers the car when you go faster.

not for canada - australian in disguise > Jedidiah 08/19/2015 at 19:35

1

True, but still, the Panther platform was around for quite a long time, and the Vic was a bit of a dinosaur when it was discontinued. It was durable as hell, but it was aging.

mazda616 > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 19:36

2

A-Bodies may have been basic and boring and blah, but they were reliable if well taken care of. In contrast, the first gen Aurora was a money pit from new. GM stuck with some of its tried and true boring and malaise-era formulas as long as it could.

Jedidiah > not for canada - australian in disguise 08/19/2015 at 19:37

0

The B-Body is worse.

Ford at least bothered to improve the Panther platform over time. They still feel somewhat like a modern(ish) car

The same shit will go wrong on a 96 Impala as a 1970 Impala and they feel like a 40 year old car with busted shocks

El Rivinado > Jedidiah 08/19/2015 at 19:42

1

That’s what I meant when I was doing the comparison thing, not only did these cars look more modern, they also had technology that made them more advanced as well. The Northstar was technologically impressive (reliability woes not withstanding) and the Lincoln Mark had it’s interesting suspension.

The Imperial still had K-Car architecture and a landau roof.

Even in it's own market and what it was competing against, it was still like an old man that refused to go back to the home and take his meds.

GeorgeyBoy > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 19:48

0

I have a Cutlass Ciera rotting away at my parents house.

HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles > jkm7680 08/19/2015 at 19:49

0

put.. put them on a 90’s Cutlass Ciera.

norskracer98-ExploringTheOutback > EmbraceTheRasp 08/19/2015 at 19:55

0

lol, my dad had a Sunbird and that thing just ATE oil for a living.

HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 19:57

2

Yeah I remember him being really happy about hw fast it was. The Chevy had an Iron Duke. the Cutlass a 3100 V6. So he went from a maybe 90 horse 4 banger to a 150ish horse V6.

The Cutlass was replaced by a 93 Gran Prix, and that got replaced by a 87 Volvo 240 with a manual trans. after that he never went back to american beige-mobiles.

Eric @ opposite-lock.com > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 20:15

0

The answer to many of the “Most X” car is often the same: GM B-body. Built with only minor changes from 1926 to 1996 (70 years). It was a uniquely-good platform and with some tweaks was better than competitors that were 50+ years younger. The platform would probably still be in use today if it wasn’t for the ease of production of FWD cars, the declines in full-size car sales, and emissions standards continually becoming harder to beat with RWD platforms.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > jkm7680 08/19/2015 at 20:29

1

If you were a villain, you’d be one of these two:

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > AM 08/19/2015 at 20:30

2

I...um...okay.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > wiffleballtony 08/19/2015 at 20:32

1

That’s a 2005? Jesus.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > MultiplaOrgasms 08/19/2015 at 20:32

0

1994 was the last year, correct?

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Jedidiah 08/19/2015 at 20:34

0

...you’re shitting me. That has to be an ‘82.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Carbon Fiber Sasquatch 08/19/2015 at 20:34

0

Yes, yes you would.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > GeorgeyBoy 08/19/2015 at 20:35

0

LeMons

jkm7680 > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 20:35

1

FUCK OFF SWIPER, NO SWIPEY.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Eric @ opposite-lock.com 08/19/2015 at 20:36

1

Wait, woah, hold on. Nineteen twenty six?

jkm7680 > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 20:37

2

Serious entry: Guess what year this one is?

That’s a 1996 model.

GeorgeyBoy > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 20:38

1

I could never.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > jkm7680 08/19/2015 at 20:38

0

That’s worse than the ‘92 Cadillac.

What I’m gathering from most of this is that nobody hangs on to old cars quite like GM.

GeorgeyBoy > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 20:39

1

They’re so badass.

someassemblyrequired > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 08/19/2015 at 20:39

1

They were better built and much cheaper than the w bodies that replaced them. I seem to recall that in their later years they advertised something like 95% of Cieras built since 1982 were still on the road. Having owned 3 A bodies, I believe it.

GeorgeyBoy > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 20:39

1

GeorgeyBoy > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 20:40

1

Ok. Last one.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > GeorgeyBoy 08/19/2015 at 20:41

0

IT HAS SPRINGS AND A BRAKE PEDAL!!!!! THE EXTRAVAGANCE!!!!

jkm7680 > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 20:41

1

GM sure does like their old cars.

Ford likes their old technology, so I guess GM can have their entire old cars.

MultiplaOrgasms > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 20:42

2

*1936

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > MultiplaOrgasms 08/19/2015 at 20:43

0

That’s not much better.

MultiplaOrgasms > Amoore100 08/19/2015 at 20:47

1

The V90 itself being a mildly updated 1982 760 Wagon.

wiffleballtony > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 20:47

0

Yes it is, frightening huh?

Amoore100 > MultiplaOrgasms 08/19/2015 at 20:49

0

Details, details...although it’s true that the first “modern” Volvo wasn’t until the 850 came...

MultiplaOrgasms > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 20:54

1

Its not like GM didn’t do some serious revisions over the years to keep the damn thing vaguely up to date. That’d be like saying the V-body GTO’s chassis is identical to the 1966 Opel Rekord 1500.

Eric @ opposite-lock.com > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 20:57

0

I was sure it was that old. I stand corrected. It was 1936. Still, we’re talking only 5 years after they stopped building the model A.

Eric @ opposite-lock.com > MultiplaOrgasms 08/19/2015 at 21:01

0

They actually did surprisingly little to it in that time. It lived so long both because it was incredibly modern when it was first built and also because it was so incredibly simple. You just really couldn’t improve on it much... I think the first revisions that I’d call major to anything outside the body were in the 70s, then the last B-bodies from the 80s-90s were stiffened. The car had a solid rear axle the entire time.

In spite of the age, it had better handling than cars built on the Panther platform that Ford started building in the late 70s, which is kind of mind-blowing.

MultiplaOrgasms > Amoore100 08/19/2015 at 21:01

2

I’d argue that the 400-series was the first “modern” Volvo, as it had all of the 850s features some five years prior. It even had electrical issues. If that isn’t modern as fuck I don’t know either.

Amoore100 > MultiplaOrgasms 08/19/2015 at 21:14

0

Eh, we had 740s with electrical issues since the Indian made wiring harness apparently kept disintegrating...by then both had well over 300K miles, however, so it wasn’t worth replacing anymore since they were a bit beat by then...so not really modern Volvo issues...also, I don’t really count the 400 Series since they’re a bit too DAF-like and rubbish IMO...

Eric @ opposite-lock.com > El Rivinado 08/19/2015 at 21:16

0

I remember when Chrysler broke out of that funk they were left in after Lee saved them. The follow up to this car, the LHS, was thoroughly modern by K platform standards. Like night-and-day better. They probably wouldn’t exist today if they didn’t develop the LH platform.

These never sold well, either, due to how mediocre and archaic they were.

AM > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 21:21

0

I said I like how it looks, the cars still a pile of shit.

Eric @ opposite-lock.com > wiffleballtony 08/19/2015 at 21:21

0

In their defense, the 1992-1999 LeSabre was probably the best car they ever built with a Buick badge, so making it look more like that era was probably a smart move. Possibly one of the best GM ever made, for that matter. These cars are like cockroaches.

Eric @ opposite-lock.com > Textured Soy Protein 08/19/2015 at 21:33

0

Didn’t the Ranger have the same sheet metal for 20 years? From 1992-2012? It was a living fossil for much of the time it was in production... Even that was just a facelift of a design that had been in production for 10 years.

Fascinating: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Rang…

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > AM 08/19/2015 at 21:46

1

Fair enough.

wiffleballtony > Eric @ opposite-lock.com 08/19/2015 at 21:59

0

What about the Grand National?

Eric @ opposite-lock.com > wiffleballtony 08/19/2015 at 22:14

0

It wasn’t the best. It was fast, but that was about it. The rest of the car was a malaise-era Buick Regal.

They built a lot of LeSabres and they were all pretty good by the standards of their era.

WilliamsSW > Highlander-Datsuns are Forever 08/19/2015 at 22:28

1

Hey - the first speedo I ever truly buried was in an 83 Ciera (non digital obviously). But even in the 80’s, that was a crap can. I think the Century made it a year or two past the Ciera even?

The last gen Chrysler 200 is a candidate - wasn't around that long, but was dated when it was introduced.

boxrocket > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 23:22

1

Working backwards:

Cadillac DTS.

Cobalt/HHR.

(gm anything from about 2014 back to about 1972, especially before 1998). Cavalier/Sunfire, Lumina/Corsica, Roadmaster/Caprice/Fleetwood, so much more.

Jeep Wrangler before the update that gave it the Pentastar 3.6 V6. Arguably still true.

Toyota FJ Cruiser.

Hummer H3. Also non-Alpha H1s.

Chrysler K-Cars.

Chevy Vega.

Chevy Corvair - which could have maaaaybe worked if introduced a decade earlier.

Ford Model T the final decade of its production.

Jedidiah > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/19/2015 at 23:23

0

Nope. It’s a 92 Brougham. Here’s a brochure excerpt for a 91, which is identical I think

boxrocket > HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles 08/19/2015 at 23:31

1

I do like a story with a happy ending.

Especially when it involves a Volvo.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Jedidiah 08/19/2015 at 23:33

0

Oh god the horror

Jedidiah > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/20/2015 at 00:00

0

It’s not really that bad,

They drive just like the 70s/80s ones but with an even slower Chevrolet motor

AM > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/20/2015 at 00:00

1

My nomination is the Buick Rendevous.

They were still making this POS in 2007. It looks likes its right out of the 90s even though it came out in 2001.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Jedidiah 08/20/2015 at 00:06

0

I’ve driven a 70s Cadillac. The ride was good. Everything else was beyond horrendous.

Jedidiah > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/20/2015 at 00:09

0

You got to go pre-75. They changed the process of making the vinyl and plastics sometime around there and it really made the dashboards and seats terrible.

They fixed it sometime later

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Jedidiah 08/20/2015 at 00:13

0

My point still stands: A 1992 luxury car should be a lot more than a questionably made early-80s Cadillac.

Jedidiah > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/20/2015 at 00:17

0

But we don’t live in 92.

If you can get one of these used for pennies, then it might not be a bad car for the money.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Jedidiah 08/20/2015 at 00:23

0

For someone, maybe not. But I for one want nothing to do with it. I just don’t like them, Sam-I-am.

pip bip - choose Corrour > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 08/20/2015 at 06:17

1

Grand Wagoneer.

8)

jk!

MultiplaOrgasms > Amoore100 08/20/2015 at 07:49

1

Too DAF-like because all DAFs were transverse FWD with Turbos and manual transmission, oh wait they weren’t.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > someassemblyrequired 08/20/2015 at 08:55

0

We’ve had several in the family, of the Buick variety. My older sister still has one, in that metallic light blue so impossibly many were made in.

Amoore100 > MultiplaOrgasms 08/20/2015 at 10:09

0

In that case I stand corrected. We never got them here so I wasn’t entirely sure what the situation behind them was...

MultiplaOrgasms > Amoore100 08/20/2015 at 10:24

1

There are a few commonalities with the 300-series, which was the last car to be directly developed by DAF, mainly the Renault derived engines since Volvo didn’t have any engines suitable for transverse application at the time and a CVT transmission on SOME models. FYI said CVT was not of the Variomatic rubber belt type as it was the case on all previous DAF models and the Volvo 340/360, but used a steel belt system which was first seen on the Ford Fiesta and Fiat Uno.