10 worst gm cars???
- Thread starter Dakota1820
- Start date
- Status
US GM cars in the late 70s and 80s were just pathetic for the most part. The build quality, driving "experience" and reliability was just a joke. Their claim to fame was (like their US competitors), "we're not as bad the other three".
Big sloppy boats or cheap looking, poor handling, soft riding FWD cars. The cars were styled bad, particulary the vertical rear window look, all had the same style to them. That's what they did.
The Honda Accord was so much more refined than the Big 3 cars of the time, it wasn't even close. But Hondas had early issues too: front brakes that didn't last very long with out warping. They rusted easily in salt. So did any US car too. The carbs couldn't be tuned by anyone, but if you didn't touch them in the first place, they worked for years!
What got me about the 82-85 Accord, was how well the car handled and revved. It was fun to drive. The 5-speed manual was so much smoother than GM's cars 10 years later. It was also reliable.
A couple drives in N and X cars and I am amazed people put up with this. When you are competing against US Escorts and Tempos and Omni/Horizon and K-based cars, there wasn't much to worry about. At least the Chevette was RWD, but the rest of the car was not really helping the handling!
Big sloppy boats or cheap looking, poor handling, soft riding FWD cars. The cars were styled bad, particulary the vertical rear window look, all had the same style to them. That's what they did.
The Honda Accord was so much more refined than the Big 3 cars of the time, it wasn't even close. But Hondas had early issues too: front brakes that didn't last very long with out warping. They rusted easily in salt. So did any US car too. The carbs couldn't be tuned by anyone, but if you didn't touch them in the first place, they worked for years!
What got me about the 82-85 Accord, was how well the car handled and revved. It was fun to drive. The 5-speed manual was so much smoother than GM's cars 10 years later. It was also reliable.
A couple drives in N and X cars and I am amazed people put up with this. When you are competing against US Escorts and Tempos and Omni/Horizon and K-based cars, there wasn't much to worry about. At least the Chevette was RWD, but the rest of the car was not really helping the handling!
Remember when GM set the cold idle speed so high you had to ride the brake pedal in D or it would idle at 30MPH?
There was an old Caprice Classic used to get from one end to the other of a plant I worked at in the '90's. The speed limit was 15MPH. I had to ride the brake all the way from one end to the other. That car never, ever, got driven enough to warm up.
There was an old Caprice Classic used to get from one end to the other of a plant I worked at in the '90's. The speed limit was 15MPH. I had to ride the brake all the way from one end to the other. That car never, ever, got driven enough to warm up.
Originally Posted By: addyguy
The thing that really baffles me about these cars is there was no clean cross-over between them...there was a weird period in 1978 When Monza and Sunbird 'wagons' were nothing more than Vega and Astre wagon bodies, with Monza noses and tailights stuck on them, with the 2.5 as an engine.
Monza wagons were basically Vegas with the new for '78 nose, only lasted two model years and were dropped from the line in '80... The alu chevy 140 was the std engine in '75-'77 Monzas, Pontiac's Iron Duke was new for '77, prior the Astre used the aluminum Chev engine as well...
I owned half dozen Monzas that I mostly bought for resale, but had a '80 hatchback with the 3.8 Buick V6 as a driver and '76 & '77 coupes with small block V8s as toys(one was a 4speed)... I'd also owned several other GM intermediates(Malibu, Monte Carlo, Cutlass)including two diesels that I sold before they blew up, which both did... Both of those diesels were almost showroom condition, one a Cutlass wagon I bought for $300(in the mid '80s, they were being avoided like the plague) and drove over four years...
The thing that really baffles me about these cars is there was no clean cross-over between them...there was a weird period in 1978 When Monza and Sunbird 'wagons' were nothing more than Vega and Astre wagon bodies, with Monza noses and tailights stuck on them, with the 2.5 as an engine.
Monza wagons were basically Vegas with the new for '78 nose, only lasted two model years and were dropped from the line in '80... The alu chevy 140 was the std engine in '75-'77 Monzas, Pontiac's Iron Duke was new for '77, prior the Astre used the aluminum Chev engine as well...
I owned half dozen Monzas that I mostly bought for resale, but had a '80 hatchback with the 3.8 Buick V6 as a driver and '76 & '77 coupes with small block V8s as toys(one was a 4speed)... I'd also owned several other GM intermediates(Malibu, Monte Carlo, Cutlass)including two diesels that I sold before they blew up, which both did... Both of those diesels were almost showroom condition, one a Cutlass wagon I bought for $300(in the mid '80s, they were being avoided like the plague) and drove over four years...
Originally Posted By: addyguy
That is what is weird - it IS a 'Monza wagon'....Chev used left-over Vega wagon bodies, gave them the 2.5 Iron duke, and modified the front and rear end, and called them Monza wagons.
Vega's NEVER came with the 2.5 I-4, only Monza's did - this is how you distinguish them!
Call it whatever you want...it was a Vega wagon with Monza badges. They dropped the Vega coupe and hatch in 1977...but wagons were selling, so they kept making them, rebadging themk as Monzas.
That is what is weird - it IS a 'Monza wagon'....Chev used left-over Vega wagon bodies, gave them the 2.5 Iron duke, and modified the front and rear end, and called them Monza wagons.
Vega's NEVER came with the 2.5 I-4, only Monza's did - this is how you distinguish them!
Call it whatever you want...it was a Vega wagon with Monza badges. They dropped the Vega coupe and hatch in 1977...but wagons were selling, so they kept making them, rebadging themk as Monzas.
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
... I did a starter in that one...took maybe half an hour. (Like most, it had no A/C.)
Half hour?
It absolutely had to be a Chevette Scooter with no A/C and no power brakes. And I'm not certain that would be any more accessible. I know for a fact that if it has a power brake booster, you can either remove the steering column or remove the intake and carburetor. Even if you get the bolts out without removing anything else (and with enough extensions and u-joints, you can) but the starter itself won't come out. You'll spend 30 minutes alone trying every angle.
... I did a starter in that one...took maybe half an hour. (Like most, it had no A/C.)
Half hour?
It absolutely had to be a Chevette Scooter with no A/C and no power brakes. And I'm not certain that would be any more accessible. I know for a fact that if it has a power brake booster, you can either remove the steering column or remove the intake and carburetor. Even if you get the bolts out without removing anything else (and with enough extensions and u-joints, you can) but the starter itself won't come out. You'll spend 30 minutes alone trying every angle.
Monza'a and their 'clones' were quite a bit different than the Vega/Astre.
They had a different floorpan, and obviously a completely different body. Also. they came with V-6 and V-8 engines, and were quite a bit sportier than the Vega was.
Yes, they were all H-bodies, but I'm not sure they 'should' have been!
They had a different floorpan, and obviously a completely different body. Also. they came with V-6 and V-8 engines, and were quite a bit sportier than the Vega was.
Yes, they were all H-bodies, but I'm not sure they 'should' have been!
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
It had manual brakes & steering...not sure I have EVER seen a Chevette with power brakes.
Mine had power brakes and A/C. Cars are virtually unsellable in the sunbelt without A/C. It didn't have power steering. (believe me, I took those belts off enough times to know what it had...fan and alternator and fan and A/C belts. No smog pump which I think it was supposed to in 1979 but mine did not nor did it have the A.I.R. plumbing associated with it
) Automatic, Standard cluster, no Rally Pac. AM radio, no FM and one speaker. Cloth insert seats.
Of all the components, the A/C was the only thing that worked well. Everything else was abysmally bad. I cannot even imagine how bad a manual brake model is. The firewall flexed so much that if one was to push the brake with any more force than required with power brakes, the master cylinder would smash into the intake manifold.
I drove my 3-door Chevette back to back with my mom's older, higher mileage carbureted automatic 5-door Rabbit. The Rabbit was superior in every aspect. (except for the wood shavings poking through the vinyl seats of the VW...apparently Germany was short on foam rubber in 1976)
It had manual brakes & steering...not sure I have EVER seen a Chevette with power brakes.
Mine had power brakes and A/C. Cars are virtually unsellable in the sunbelt without A/C. It didn't have power steering. (believe me, I took those belts off enough times to know what it had...fan and alternator and fan and A/C belts. No smog pump which I think it was supposed to in 1979 but mine did not nor did it have the A.I.R. plumbing associated with it
Of all the components, the A/C was the only thing that worked well. Everything else was abysmally bad. I cannot even imagine how bad a manual brake model is. The firewall flexed so much that if one was to push the brake with any more force than required with power brakes, the master cylinder would smash into the intake manifold.
I drove my 3-door Chevette back to back with my mom's older, higher mileage carbureted automatic 5-door Rabbit. The Rabbit was superior in every aspect. (except for the wood shavings poking through the vinyl seats of the VW...apparently Germany was short on foam rubber in 1976)
I didn't realize it had manual brakes until I opened the hood & saw no booster...it was light enough to never miss them. I recall his was a Chevette CS. It had AM/FM, vinyl seats, carpet, idiot-light dash, rear defrost and, of all things, dealer-installed fog lights. Brakes were fine, steering didn't need power assist. He scrapped it with ~200K...the clutch went, and it was too rusty to be worth a new clutch.
Smog pump was probably Kalifornia-only...I don't recall his having one, either.
Smog pump was probably Kalifornia-only...I don't recall his having one, either.
Originally Posted By: spackard
Remember when GM set the cold idle speed so high you had to ride the brake pedal in D or it would idle at 30MPH?
There was an old Caprice Classic used to get from one end to the other of a plant I worked at in the '90's. The speed limit was 15MPH. I had to ride the brake all the way from one end to the other. That car never, ever, got driven enough to warm up.
I had a 1985 Buick Skyhawk that did this!
Remember when GM set the cold idle speed so high you had to ride the brake pedal in D or it would idle at 30MPH?
There was an old Caprice Classic used to get from one end to the other of a plant I worked at in the '90's. The speed limit was 15MPH. I had to ride the brake all the way from one end to the other. That car never, ever, got driven enough to warm up.
I had a 1985 Buick Skyhawk that did this!
Originally Posted By: addyguy
Monza'a and their 'clones' were quite a bit different than the Vega/Astre.
They had a different floorpan, and obviously a completely different body. Also. they came with V-6 and V-8 engines, and were quite a bit sportier than the Vega was.
Yes, they were all H-bodies, but I'm not sure they 'should' have been!
I bought a 1980 Monza Coupe after Graduating High School. It had the 2.5l Iron Duke motor coupled to a Saginaw 4speed trans. You can laugh all you want, but that thing moved! I would almost have to say it was fast! (for what it was) When I would go through the gears, You could even feel the two barrel carb kick in!
Monza'a and their 'clones' were quite a bit different than the Vega/Astre.
They had a different floorpan, and obviously a completely different body. Also. they came with V-6 and V-8 engines, and were quite a bit sportier than the Vega was.
Yes, they were all H-bodies, but I'm not sure they 'should' have been!
I bought a 1980 Monza Coupe after Graduating High School. It had the 2.5l Iron Duke motor coupled to a Saginaw 4speed trans. You can laugh all you want, but that thing moved! I would almost have to say it was fast! (for what it was) When I would go through the gears, You could even feel the two barrel carb kick in!
The 95 Caprice that I sold with the 4.3L V8. POS would be an understatement.
Originally Posted By: addyguy
Years ago, had a neighbour whose work car was a 1980 Pontiac Sunbird with that exact same combo.
It never ran well, kept stalling out on him...it was funny to watch him trying to get going in it!
I remember you telling that story!! That was funny. Mine was only two years old when I bought it. Maybe thats why it ran so good? I only had that car a short time, it was just too friggin small.
Years ago, had a neighbour whose work car was a 1980 Pontiac Sunbird with that exact same combo.
It never ran well, kept stalling out on him...it was funny to watch him trying to get going in it!
I remember you telling that story!! That was funny. Mine was only two years old when I bought it. Maybe thats why it ran so good? I only had that car a short time, it was just too friggin small.
I also agree with those that said Saturn should not be on this list. My Saturn is 12 years old now and with no signs of paint fading or the plastic panels cracking. Not sure where the article's authors got that from. Saturns seem to maintain their looks better than most cars their age, and actually most of the paint problems I've seen on them occur on the painted metallic surfaces (hood, roof, trunk) rather than on the plastic surfaces.
The engines, granted, weren't the best and do not stack up quality-wise against Honda or Toyota. They tend to burn oil and the later ones often had intake manifold gasket failures at around 80,000 miles or so. But they'll run for a very long time and many miles if you keep them topped up with oil and change the oil regularly.
Nonetheless, I'm happy with mine, arugably the best all-around small car GM has ever made in its history up to 2002.
The engines, granted, weren't the best and do not stack up quality-wise against Honda or Toyota. They tend to burn oil and the later ones often had intake manifold gasket failures at around 80,000 miles or so. But they'll run for a very long time and many miles if you keep them topped up with oil and change the oil regularly.
Nonetheless, I'm happy with mine, arugably the best all-around small car GM has ever made in its history up to 2002.
An additional note on Saturns: the S-series is one of the most fuel efficient small cars of its era. I have attained 40 mpg per fillup on many occasions in my car, and it is the most fuel efficient vehicle I have ever owned, and that's having owned two Honda Civics prior to it (although they were carbureted and not fuel injected).
Massive on opinion and short on facts would sum up this list nicely. Every mfgr makes lemons, every single one.
- Status
Similar threads
