1971-74 mid-size coupes/sedans - top of line model

[86560SEL]

Another request granted, as someone wanted me to do the mid-size models - this is for the MID-SIZE 1971-74 American sedans (with some 2drs pictured). These cars were the next size down from the other cars.

Keep in mind that the GMs were redesigned and occasionally renamed during this time. 1973 brought some different names (for the Buick) and larger bodies. Also, Ford Torino/Montego was changed in 1972.

FWIW, I know for a fact that the 1972 Luxury LeMans 4dr hardtop is a fairly rare car. I think less 4drs were made than 2drs of that model?

Have you noticed how "spartan" the Mopars are in comparison with the GM and FMC cars?

These were the top trim line models for each of these cars....

1974 Chevrolet Malibu Classic-


and 1972-


1973 Pontiac Luxury LeMans-

and 1972...


1974 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme-

and 1972-


1973 Buick Century Luxus/Regal-




1971 Skylark Custom-



1974 Ford Gran Torino Brougham-

and 1972-

and 1971 Torino Brougham-


1973 Mercury Montego MX Brougham-


1972 Montego Brougham-



1973 Plymouth Satellite Custom-


1972 Satellite Brougham-



1974 Dodge Coronet Custom-

1973-

1972-

[LUVMBDiesels]

For me it was a toss up between the Colonade styling of the Buick and the Fuselage styling of the Dodge...

The Dodge just looked more integrated

[Mike D]

It was an absolutely horrible span of years for the American cars. Between the "gas crisis" and the emissions controls, the cars were JUNK!

I had the '73 Gran Torino and while it was a nice looking car it was a total piece of crap. The gutless 351M400 engine combined with all the plastic pieces made for a car which quite literally fell apart in three years.

These cars were made for the "every other year" trade-in crowd not for someone to actually keep and drive.

Oh man, I had forgotten about those lacey fabrics used in the interior. Rips and tears in the first three months!

[awsrock]

Wow, one said it had a 26.5 gallon tank! Haha.

[Mr.Kenny]

Please don't make me pick any of these cars; I already had to live through that era once....don't make me do it again.

[PaulC]

1974 was a particularly nasty year for American cars. For most, this was the last year before catalytic converters, and engines were badly hobbled by emission control equipment and tuning. Engine stalling and non-starts were the order of the day, and you were a courageous soul if you relied upon a 1974 American car with a cold engine to squirt you through an intersection. 1974 was the year for seat belt/ignition interlocks, a system which greeted you with a bright red dash light and a grating buzzer if you had the temerity to try to start the car without first buckling the seat belt. As a 14 year-old, I was in great demand by my relatives who purchased new 1974 cars, as I had a knack for quickly and permanently disabling the system (Step 1: Look under driver's seat. Step 2: Unplug the harness that ran to the pressure pad under the seat.).

1973 cars had to have rear bumpers that withstood 2.5 mph impacts and front bumpers that could handle 5 mph hits. For 1974 it was 5 mph all around. Carmakers usually addressed this government mandate by grafting shock absorber adorned steel battering rams to the ends of their vehicles, which did wonders for aesthetics and handling dynamics.

If I absolutely had to pick a car from this era, it would be the 1973 Cutlass, as it handled the bumper issue relatively gracefully, and the Oldsmobile engine somehow tolerated emission controls fairly well. The Chryslers had dead power steering and rotten body quality, and the Torino panicked at the mere suggestion of a curve.

[jlomon]

1971 Buick Skylark. I still remember my Grandad's - he bought it new and kept it until 1978, when he traded it on an abysmal piece of garbage (1976 Ford Ltd). It was burgundy with a black vinyl roof and a white interior. 350ci 4bbl V8 engine. I remember thinking it was so cool that the radio buttons spelled "BUICK". Whenever I see one of those, it always reminds me of my Grandad.

[auspumpen]

This thread is a cryin' Shane...painful, really

[Deezl]

Have always wondered what "brougham" was. Guess it wasn't just a Caddie thang.

New poll idea - Who's gonna bring the brougham back?

[H-townbenzoboy]

Give me the Buick Century. If it was good enough for Kojak, it's good enough for me.



Who loves ya, baby?

[Nate Stanley]

All of it is true.
The 1973 GM midsize lineup appeared as if the designers just didn't know what to do next, so this is what appeared. The crisp lines of the previous years turned to bloat.
Most of the trouble in drivability was the emission controls which were stopgap at best. Carburetors had reached the end of their usefulness and it meant taking your life in your hands when driving a cold engine in traffic.

Added to that was the fact that the hard plastic trim disintegrated into powder with exposure to sunlight (not UV stabilized) on all the GM offerings right thru to the early 80's.

Our first car after we got married in '81 was a 1973 Lemans wagon, same platform as the '73 luxury Lemans in the ads shown. 400CID, Turbo 400, factory dual exhausts, extra thick radiator, AC, PS, PB.

For the enitre 9 years we owned it, I recall it requiring a tuneup every 3000 miles to run well, and it never broke 18MPG on a road trip. San Jose to LA required a fuel stop in Santa Barbara. 12 in town was the norm.

On the plus side it was brute when hauling stuff. We had no truck, and one night we hauled 12 sheets of drywall home tied to the roof rack. Another time it carried 27 sacks of ready mix concrete in the back, almost popped a wheelie when coming home.

I don't really look back with fondness with those cars. It was a dark time for auto design and things didn't get better until fuel injection got perfected and designers finally understood that weight and size did not necessarily make a better car.

It was amazing how fast the wrecking yards filled up with them, and now they are almost nonexistant on the roads. Good Riddance!

[86560SEL]

Did you buy that Gran Torino new?

Funny thing about that interior - yeah, alot of the luxury models of these cars had what was called a brocade cloth interior. My old 72' Electra had it, but mine was still like brand new, but it was a garaged car. I notice a few comments about the interiors of these cars of people that had them and them falling apart, but it looks like everyone saying that is from the southwestern USA. I know that out there, the very hot and dry weather really took a much harder toll on interiors that say other parts of the country. I also currently have a 1972 Chevrolet Caprice station wagon with a like brand new interior (the dashes were bad for cracking on these, but this car was also mostly garaged) and I have a 1973 Pontiac, also still has a nice interior, but it was garaged for years too.

I am not sure about these mid-size cars, but the bigger ones of the early 70s were pretty good cars. I have owned several over the years and never had a major issue with them. The 1973 Pontiac Grand Ville I have was bought brand new by my grandmother in 1972 (I inherited it in 2004) and other than brakes, she never had a problem with the car. Since 2004, the only problem I had is that the alternator started making a noise after I washed the engine. That 455 4-bbl engine just keeps on going, but at about 10 mpg. Also the turbo 400 transmissions are almost indestructible. Out of the 10 early 70s GM cars I have owned with one, I have never had a problem. They shift silky smooth. Also, I have never had a early 70s FS GM car with a leak whatsoever. I have absolutely no drips of fluid under my current cars of that era. Same cannot be said for 90s GM cars.

Originally Posted by Mike D

It was an absolutely horrible span of years for the American cars. Between the "gas crisis" and the emissions controls, the cars were JUNK!

I had the '73 Gran Torino and while it was a nice looking car it was a total piece of crap. The gutless 351M400 engine combined with all the plastic pieces made for a car which quite literally fell apart in three years.

These cars were made for the "every other year" trade-in crowd not for someone to actually keep and drive.

Oh man, I had forgotten about those lacey fabrics used in the interior. Rips and tears in the first three months!

[86560SEL]

Originally Posted by Deezl

Have always wondered what "brougham" was. Guess it wasn't just a Caddie thang.

New poll idea - Who's gonna bring the brougham back?

Yeah, "Brougham" was a name used on several different American cars. It was basically a trim-level option that added alot of little luxury features or upgraded interior. Some I can think of are: Catalina Brougham, LTD Brougham, Satellite Brougham, Gran Torino Brougham, Marquis Brougham, etc. Cadillac used it, but it was an actual model, rather than trim option.

[86560SEL]

Oh yeah - I had a 1972 Buick Electra which was not as bad with this feature, but before the 74' issue. My 72' - the seatbelt light would not go off until the seatbelt was fastened.... and if it detected "weight" on the passenger side seat, the light would come on until someone fastened the belt. I simply fastened it and tucked it under the seat, because I normally took my grandpa in this car and he never fastened it. I also have a 1972 Chevrolet, but it was manufactured in December of 1971 and does not even have a fasten seat belt light. "Fasten seat belt" warning lights/buzzers were not mandatory in cars (at least American cars) until January 1, 1972.

My grandmother had a 1974 Olds Toronado, but she did not have the seatbelt issue. Her car had the rare "airbags" (then called, air cushion restraints) option and those cars did not have front seatbelts. Strange huh?

Originally Posted by PaulC

1974 was a particularly nasty year for American cars. For most, this was the last year before catalytic converters, and engines were badly hobbled by emission control equipment and tuning. Engine stalling and non-starts were the order of the day, and you were a courageous soul if you relied upon a 1974 American car with a cold engine to squirt you through an intersection. 1974 was the year for seat belt/ignition interlocks, a system which greeted you with a bright red dash light and a grating buzzer if you had the temerity to try to start the car without first buckling the seat belt. As a 14 year-old, I was in great demand by my relatives who purchased new 1974 cars, as I had a knack for quickly and permanently disabling the system (Step 1: Look under driver's seat. Step 2: Unplug the harness that ran to the pressure pad under the seat.).

1973 cars had to have rear bumpers that withstood 2.5 mph impacts and front bumpers that could handle 5 mph hits. For 1974 it was 5 mph all around. Carmakers usually addressed this government mandate by grafting shock absorber adorned steel battering rams to the ends of their vehicles, which did wonders for aesthetics and handling dynamics.

If I absolutely had to pick a car from this era, it would be the 1973 Cutlass, as it handled the bumper issue relatively gracefully, and the Oldsmobile engine somehow tolerated emission controls fairly well. The Chryslers had dead power steering and rotten body quality, and the Torino panicked at the mere suggestion of a curve.

[86560SEL]

Originally Posted by Mr.Kenny

Please don't make me pick any of these cars; I already had to live through that era once....don't make me do it again.

Yeah, I agree... this was about the time the mid-size cars started getting junky. Most of the bigger (full-size) cars of the early 70s held off until about the mid 70s before they started going down hill. The early 70s big cars were basically carry-overs from 1971 and did not change until 1977 for GM and 1979 for Ford, but started getting poorer mechanically.

I have never owned a mid-size 70s car, but have had alot of the big ones and never have had a major problem with them... other than using alot of gas.