Luxobarges from the 70’s and early 80’s

All I know about these is that they're perfect candidates for heavy modification because they cost next to nothing compared to cars that are actually desirable.


And a pro touring malaise era barge has an appeal to it. Granted it's an appeal like deep fried fair food. You know it's a bad idea, you know it's going to lead to problems later, but it's already in your mouth so the damage is done.

1988RedT2 said:

 only those suffering from senility are singing their praises today.

It may have been said with tongue in cheek, but I take offense at that remark.

i still want a 78 Impala Coupe. LQ4, 4L65, 96 rear end and a decent suspension. 

In reply to Bob the REAL oil guy. :

My sister had one of those. She named it the white ghost. 

I miss my '78 Magnum.  

^That's where my love of them came from. My dad had a 79 Magnum XE. Beige on Beige, T-tops and a 360 and for whatever reason the coolest thing on four wheels to me as a child. When he passed my mom gave it to my brother in law instead of me and he let it sit in a field and it rotted away.

Streetwiseguy said:

1988RedT2 said:

Wow.  No.  I owned a very nice, very original '76 Olds Cutlass.  Olds 350 with a 4-bbl Quadrajet.  Okay off the line, but it topped out around 80 mph.  Twelve mpg.  I would routinely bottom the suspension on little dips in the pavement.  All in all, a decent car for tootling around town, but rather unpleasant in any other duty.

 

That Olds had a lot of stuff wrong with it.  My Moms 77 topped out a wee bit on the high side of 120...Or so, based on the round 85mph speedo.  The task was to try to put the needle to the wrong side of the zero pin.

In high school I had a ‘77 Cutlass Supreme (split bench with column shifter) white with maroon interior. It was a good car always started (and ran good to!) even in our cold winters up here. It had a big back seat. I raced a buddy who had a ‘77 Cutlass Salon. He always got me in the 1/4 mile but I’d get him anything more than than. His was silver with black vinyl interior, factory buckets, console with floor shift and t-tops. I was always secretly jealous of his car. By today’s standards these were big cars and they rode soft. But if equipped properly you could make them somewhat fun on less than straight roadways.

My brother had an early '80s Grand Fury. He drove it to visit my mom, about an hour and a half away. It needed 2 tanks of gas for the round trip.

I think these are picking up in popularity just because they're so unlike anything built today.

That and they're quirky and unconventional but also fairly reliable, easy to find parts for (except trim), and easy to work on.

As for me, make mine an '85 Fifth Avenue in silver with a navy blue interior and a '87 Town Car in white with a red interior - the first cars I remember my grandfathers owning.

Its not from the 70's, but I really wish I still had my 66 Delta 88.  Two door hardtop, bucket seats, console and floor shift, 425, (Ultra High Compression Super Rocket V8 Use Premium Fuel Only was all written on the air cleaner lid) Turbo 400.  The only thing I would probably update would be the brakes, although four 11 by 3 drums actually did a pretty darn good job.  It would redline in top gear- 5500 rpm, which was the high side of 120. 

drdisque said:

I think these are picking up in popularity just because they're so unlike anything built today.

That and they're quirky and unconventional but also fairly reliable, easy to find parts for (except trim), and easy to work on.

As for me, make mine an '85 Fifth Avenue in silver with a navy blue interior and a '87 Town Car in white with a red interior - the first cars I remember my grandfathers owning.

I'd also add that they may be being seen as the next best thing to a '60s muscle car for those who can't afford '60s muscle car prices.

When I got my license, these are what you drove.  I took my driver's test in a 240Z, but my first car was a '68 AMC Ambassador, then a '76 Olds 88.  They were not good cars by any stretch of the imagination.  8 to 12mpg realistically, and not all that fast.  They did soak up the bumps however and were practically indestructible.  Of all the cars I drove during that time period, the two that stood out for being somewhat decent were my grandmother's '72 Dart Swinger with a 340 I think, and a friends '70 Charger.  Mostly cars from that time period just suck however.  We couldn't wait to get something fun.  I look back more fondly today, but mostly they do not conjure up any great memories.  

I have this book close at hand so I can flip through it. And I flip through it often. Pretty much daily. 

Y'all can hate all you want. But the seventies were the best decade for automobiles. When I get in and drive one it just feels right. That's the way cars should be.

Oh. I had a 1976  Buick 225 4 door.  Big boat of a thing. Loved that car.

Stealthtercel said:

It's interesting how this crowd defines "barge."  To me (possibly just because of the rhyme) a barge has to be large.  The OP started talking about pre-downsizing Regency's.  Now THOSE were barges – although the guy across the street from us who bought a new '71 could wheel it like a kiddy car.  A Cutlass or a Cougar?  They were just mid-sized at the time.

The pre-downsize cars from the 70s were huge.

For perspective, the '77-up Caprice chassis was pretty much the same size as the pre-downsize MIDSIZE chassis.  The fullsize cars were much larger.

Technically my T-bird were not full size cars, they were based on a stretched Torino chassis (the downsized '77-79 T-birds were on the regular wheelbase Torino chassis) but my "light" '72 weighed 4800lb and I don't know what the '76 weighed but it had power seats and the hee-YUUGE safety bumpers so it had to be well over 5000.  4800lb is what my employer's '94 K1500 extended cab truck weighed.

And the first generation emissions controls mostly consisted of "make no compression, make no valve lift or duration" so you saw things like 150hp big-blocks and 90hp small-blocks.  At least they got horrible fuel economy to boot.  Gee, wonder why people started flocking to imports.

In reply to racerdave600 :

Truth. I bought a 1980 Buick Park Ave Diesel. GF had a 69 olds 88 sedan with a 455. They were cheap. I paid $150 for it in 1990.

I just got this 2 months ago:

It's a '71 with a 400. I drove a '77 LTD and a '77 Thunderbird in the late '80s as dailys, and I really don't remember them being this floaty. I put $170 worth of shocks on it a couple weeks ago, and it helped a little, but not enough, and $450 worth of springs just arrived yesterday. I'd really like to get it to the point where it rides like my '96 F-150, and handles better than that, so that it can be an effective tow pig. After I see what the springs do, I'll probably attack the bushings/ball joints next, then the front swaybar, then $750 worth of rear control arms/Panhard.  The rear kit comes with a rear bar, so that'll help too. Also, I intend to put air bags in the new rear springs, to help level it when towing. I hate having my headlights out of adjustment. 

On edit: I also intend to put 17s on it. If you have, or know someone that has 17x8s (or 7.5s, or 7s),  5 on 4.5" (114.3mm), close to zero offset, feel free to let me know. 

I’ve had everything barge-wise from a 72 LTD sedan to an 85 Mercedes 300sd.  I enjoy them all.  Not sure how it can be senility if you’re currently enjoying them.

In reply to Cotton :

I just sent you a message. 

This sort of thing is my bag baby.

For the most part, you just can't go wrong.  Even if you have to rebuild a carb, or replace the entire ignition system, you're looking at a couple hundred bucks.

I still have an '89 Caprice wagon, which is the full size chassis and body that started somewhere between 1977 and 1979 depending on how picky you are with the details. Definitely cheap to own, but some parts are a real challenge to get (like door and window seals, but may be because it's a wagon) and interior quality leaves rather a lot to be desired. It does drive and ride well, and while I have done a lot of work to the suspension and drivetrain, these things just aren't designed for performance or modern tires. The bump steer is atrocious, it has negative ackerman, and the camber curves are all screwed up, but back then it was fine because of the tall, soft, narrow tires. The best you can do on a budget is either stay at stock ride height, or make the suspension so stiff that none of that dynamic stuff matters anymore.

Also, rust. Mine wasn't bad when I got it, but 6 years later even with regular washing, there is rust everywhere. I had grand plans, but I think it's possibly beyond saving now.

Nick Comstock said:

I have this book close at hand so I can flip through it. And I flip through it often. Pretty much daily. 

Right there on the cover is a 1971 Pontiac, just like the one I used to own.  I was involved in a couple minor accidents with it...that big beak of a front bumper could do a lot of damage to the other vehicle.  

In reply to gearheadE30 :

UMI is doing a lot of stuff to correct camber curves and whatnot on G-body cars. Would that apply to yours?

In reply to Nick Comstock :

I have that exact same book.