Locate an Auto Repair Shop in Dale, South Carolina

Dale, SC Car Consumer Discussions

Re: [Mr_Shiftright]

by andre1969 on Tue Nov 18 07:59:57 PST 2008

I just spec'ed out a 1982 Cimarron, for kicks. Now it has a $12,181 base price. Air conditioning, power steering, an AM/FM stereo, leather wrapped steering wheel, and twin power mirrors were standard. However, by the time I added in all the power stuff, cruise control, an automatic transmission, tape player, tilt wheel, and a sunroof, I come out with $14,103! I wonder what a comparable BMW 3-series would have cost back in 1982? Now, no self-respecting 3-series should have an automatic, so to take the automatic out of the Cimarron and make it comparable, it's at $13,733. I doubt if a 3-series was much more expensive. I guess a Benz C-class would've been up in the stratosphere, though. Cadillac did a much better job of turning a sow's ear into a silk purse, IMO, with the 1975 Cadillac Seville. While it was based on the Chevy Nova, they did a good job at hiding that fact. Plus, at least it had a bit of exclusivity with the standard fuel-injected Olds 350 V-8, something you couldn't get in any other X-car. It was also longer, had a roomier back seat, and was about 700-800 lb heavier than a Nova, so it was much more substantial. I'll have to admit though, that when I've sat in these first-gen Sevilles, I was a bit disappointed. I thought they'd be roomier and more comfy, but I guess being based on the Nova, they could only do so much with the seating position. I think all the extra room actually went into the back seat. I'd probably be happier with a '75 Dodge Dart Special Edition, although looks-wise, they're kinda dumpy compared to a Seville.

Re: [dpalka]

by andre1969 on Tue Nov 18 07:34:43 PST 2008

The Cimarron seemed like a good idea at the time. It was designed in an era where gas was expensive and relatively rare, and the EPA was breathing down GM's neck to get more fuel efficient cars out there. Plus, small upscale cars like BMW and Mercedes Benz were skyrocketing in popularity. Unfortunately, the end result was essentially a $12,000 Cavalier. Eventually they started putting Chevy V-6es in them, which made them better performers, but it was still just a gussied up Cavalier. Quality-wise, I wouldn't call them the worst car of all time. After all, it was 1982 and a lot of cars were horrible. Both foreign and domestic, truth be told, so it wasn't just the Big Three, although they certainly did take "horrible" to new heights in that era! But I think it was just a symbol of how far Cadillac had fallen. Cadillac had started slipping in 1971, and I'd say 1982 was when they hit rock-bottom. The Cimarron was crap. Anything with the 4.1 V-8 or Olds Diesel was crap, and those two engines covered just about everything else. About the only saving grace was if you bought the factory limo. It still used a Cadillac 368 V-8, and I think it was still using the beefy old THM400 transmission. It's only flaw was the V-8-6-4 cylinder de-activation, but supposedly it wasn't hard to just disconnect that. Overall, 1982 was just a horrible year for Cadillac's reputation (although at the time, they sold well in spite of the recession), and I think the Cimarron was just the "crowning glory" of that. :sick:

Re: Hallelujah! [boomchek]

by andre1969 on Tue Nov 18 07:20:30 PST 2008

thanks. As soon as I get my convertible out of the shop, the DeSoto's going in next, in an attempt to make it road-worthy again. It mainly just needs brake work, a carb rebuild, and some maintenance (belts, hoses, tuneup, coolant flush, tranny flush, etc) but I'm sure the mechanic will find other issues as he gets into it. Oh, and seatbelts. I'm going to have seatbelts put in. I was 20 when I bought this car, and back then, seatbelts didn't seem like that big of a deal. But I'm much more aware of my mortality these days, and don't feel nearly as indestructible as I did when I was 20. :P

Re: Anybody want a Mark V? [tjc78]

by andre1969 on Tue Nov 18 07:12:49 PST 2008

Am I correct that the Thunderbird also had a DJE edition as well? Yeah, I think the '78 T-bird offered a DJE edition, and then it was re-issued for 1979 as the "Heritage". One of my mother's cousins had a '79 Heritage...it was a deep burgundy with a landau top that covered the big side windows in back, leaving just the little opera windows in the "basket handle". The carpeting in the trunk was more upscale than what's in most cars today, and the carpeting in the interior was twice as nice as that! I wanted to buy it when she decided to sell it, but I was a little tight on cash at the time, and I wouldn't have had a place to store it. And it was so nice that it deserved to be garaged! I think she would've let me have it for $3000-3500. I like that icy blue that they offered on the '78 Mark V, but didn't care for that champagne color they had. What colors did they offer for 1979? I've seen that deep midnight blue, which seems really common, but I'm guessing there were a few other choices? Was the midnight blue a metallic? My '79 New Yorker is a midnight blue they called "Nightwatch", but it's a non-metallic. Probably the main reason that it's still fairly shiny after 30 years! Although when it comes to washing it, it's just as bad as black...looks dirty about 15 minutes after it dries. :mad:

Re: Anybody want a Mark V? [Mr_Shiftright]

by andre1969 on Tue Nov 18 07:06:33 PST 2008

My friend did look into getting another engine put in, but I forget now how much the mechanic told him it would be. It didn't seem too outrageous. Unfortunately, there's the fact that the car has all those other issues, so it just seemed like throwing more money into a pit. I was really surprised at how quickly this car deteriorated. I remember when he bought it, and drove it to Maryland from New Mexico. At the time it seemed really nice, although the paint was starting to crack here and there if you really looked closely. I think he's had it about 5 years now. It's sat outside all that time, but he'd usually keep it under a cover...one of those "breathable" types. Still, it just seemed like the paint and interior went to hell alarmingly fast. I wonder if the climate change could do that...with the car spending most of its life out in a warm, dry climate and suddenly getting subjected to Maryland's wider variety of weather?

Re: the original kojak's car [stephen987]

by andre1969 on Tue Nov 18 06:59:13 PST 2008

For the '70s survivors out there (like me), here's a '75 Century Colonnade Coupe. (note the Century script on the lower front fender). The Regal from that year had a more formal roofline. Yeah, the quickest way to tell the Century/Regal apart, other than looking at the badging, is the roofline on the coupes. The Regal used a more formal roofline, which it shared with the Cutlass Supreme, Grand Prix, and Monte Carlo. The opera windows had a forward slant to them, but had more pronounced corners. And the rear window, IIRC, was sort of vee'd toward the center of the car. The Chevelle/Malibu, LeMans, Century, and cheaper Cutlasses used a more fastback roof. I think what might lead to some confusion though, is that there were several quarter window treatments available. Standard was a large, triangular window that made for a slim C-pillar. It was popular in 1973, but became less so in the later years. Pontiac didn't offer it at all in '76-77. One option was a louvered quarter window, which was common in cars like the Pontiac Grand Am, Laguna S-3, and LeMans Sport Coupe. I can't remember seeing any Cutlasses or Centurys with it, though. The other option was the small opera window, which is what the Century you posted is sporting. That, plus the landau padding, give the roof a more formal look, that at a quick glance might look like the roofline of a Regal, Grand Prix, etc. But to see them side by side, the difference would be much more noticeable. But then, just to be annoying, in 1976 the Century coupe started using the more formal roofline. There was a Century Special that still used the more fastback roof, though. Also, to add to the confusion, when the cars went to rectangular lights for 1976, the treatment was different on coupes versus sedans. Sedans, both Century and Regal, used the stacked quad headlights, with the turn signals mounted inboard of the lights, while the coupes used more conventional side-by-side lights, with the turn signals underneath them. BTW, I like that '75 Century coupe you posed, Stephen. That color looks close to my '76 Grand LeMans, although my vinyl roof is burgundy as well. I wonder how white would look on it, if I ever needed to replace it?