Jump to content
NINETY EIGHT REGENCY

Design Notes: 1st Generation GM C-Body

Recommended Posts

Hi 98!

Although these C-bodies were mocked by Lincoln in that devastating commercial, you can't blame GM too hard for trying to make them more efficient than their predecessors as these were conceived during the energy crisis, and it was fortunate that GM could continue the B and D-bodies longer. The shrunken E-bodies did not fare as well because they had no style (aside from the Toro), which was not befitting a personal luxury coupe.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't realize these were finalized so far in advance of their eventual on-sale date. Which means they had a bit of time to backtrack... and didn't.

Although the worst in a spate of GM downsizing disasters was, in hindsight, I believe, the '86 E-bodies. For the C-bodies' part re: bobo, by extension, the fact the B and D cars remained on the market for a while longer just made the Cs even more pathetic, by comparison.

Darkness descended.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi 98!

Although these C-bodies were mocked by Lincoln in that devastating commercial, you can't blame GM too hard for trying to make them more efficient than their predecessors as these were conceived during the energy crisis, and it was fortunate that GM could continue the B and D-bodies longer. The shrunken E-bodies did not fare as well because they had no style (aside from the Toro), which was not befitting a personal luxury coupe.

Hello Bobo.

I am glad you and others are enjoying the website. It does offer insight into what GM was thinking and doing, Yeah, GM made a lot of mistakes a long the way. Some of them could have been avoided. I am glad this is sparking conversation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However I think the C-body designation predates these miniature FWD models by many decades.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However I think the C-body designation predates these miniature FWD models by many decades.

True..the real C-bodies were around from the '30s onward...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those front-drive C bodies are why GM wisely went for the 2nd generation dating for the 1990s. My 99 Park Avenue is a second-gen FWD C-body apparently. The first-gen looked way too small and much too commonplace. That first-gen C body is one reason why it seems everybody hated Roger Smith when he ran GM in those days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to have one of those Olds 98 Touring models (circa 1988-'89?) Very spacious inside and good performance from the 3.8L V6...something to be said for low curb weight...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of you may mock these C-Bodies, but GM did manage to sell the hell out of them and many more than should be are still in service today. Think, when was the last time you saw a Chrysler or Ford product in this class and vintage? I see this era of FWD 88s, 98s, LeSabers, Electras, and Devilles on the road daily yet almost nothing from Ford or Chrysler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is true. The first year, from what I heard, they were troublesome, but they got their act together thereafter, and these cars could run up to and over 300k miles with preventative maintenance.

My own personal reason for mocking them is because of the severely cut down size and relative lack of distinguishing features v. their immediate forebearers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spent a few minutes going through my Olds brochures from the 1980s. The doggone 98s were reported to have a curb weight of 3300-lbs. The FWD 88s weighed 3100-lbs! Great power to weight ratio.

My mother in law used to have an '86 LeSabre with the 3.8L V6 and that thing could cook. Also got great fuel ecomomy (think it had something like a 2.0:1 overall final drive ratio when in overdrive so the engine was barely idling at highway speeds).

Edited by NeonLX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah...even the Cruze weighs more than the 88/LeSabre of the late 1980s...

I liked the combo of a torquey engine like the 3.8L yanking around a lightweight car. Don't have to work the engine very hard to bring on the acceleration. My old Gremlin X with the 258 six was another great example. You could upshift at 1800 RPM and still get up to cruising speed really quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We  Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×