When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
finally decided to venture into this olds swamp of a thread.
Originally Posted by SW17LS
The Aurora was the last ditch effort to save Olds, and it brought buyers into the brand to consider the Aurora who would never have considered an Olds before, like my dad who considered one in 1995. What destroyed olds was the 88s and 98s, killed their brand image to where nobody under 70 would even consider one. There was a reason why the Aurora didnt have any Oldsmobile badging.
i agree with this.
Originally Posted by mmarshall
Well, by your own admission, Olds did not fold until almost a full ten years after the Aurora was introduced. It was a viable, though somewhat weakened, company with the 88 and 98 in production.....but a company with one foot (and eventually both feet) in the grave with the Aurora.
viable but with 1 and then 2 feet in the grave!? huh?? why can't you just admit the OBVIOUS... their cars were crap and old plus the aurora as a hail mary, but even that wasn't enough?
So, I can't agree that it was the Geezermobiles that killed Olds. The Aurora was redesigned into a significantly smaller 2Gen model (and, IMO, better-looking) with a V6 instead of the Northstar V8...that didn't help, either.
ancient 88/98's plus a distinctive but polarizing aurora was like a mild defibrillator for the brand. i'd completely forgotten there was even a sad 2nd gen aurora. found the history on wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldsmobile_Aurora
so it's a false dichotomy about whether it was the old models or the aurora that killed the brand. and it doesn't matter. the brand was just failing and eventually put out of its misery.
Originally Posted by SW17LS
The point is the Aurora was not the cause of Olds' failure, it was an attempt to save it but it was already too far gone. Continuing to make nothing but geezermobiles would have hastened its demise.
exactly right.
For a time in the 90s, the Aurora made it feel like Olds might be salvageable. The reason it had one foot in the grave by the time they designed the Aurora means it wasn't the Aurora that put it there.
too little, too late.
Originally Posted by mmarshall
Like I said earlier, Olds lost a LOT of customers when they ditched the 88/98....most of those customers ended up going to Buick, and some to the Mercury Grand Marquis or Chrysler 300.
it was an apt name "olds" because their buyers were OLD, and dying off. and we see what happened to mercury, and chrysler having the 300 as their only remaining ANCIENT sedan.
Originally Posted by mmarshall
Many of those geezers, though, ended up at Buick (which, at the time, was the main beneficiary of Olds' collapse)...some of them at Mercury or Chrysler. Olds essentially handed most those customers to Buick when the 88/98 were dropped....although there were a few exceptions
sure those 'geezers' would go somewhere, and many, like yourself, who are strongly fond of large american cars, would have gone to the closest "american big iron" (aka crap) brands/models.
Yes, you hit the nail the head....the 1Gen Aurora was the main problem. I agree with you that the 2Gen was actually a better product.
this makes absolutely no sense and is not supported by any data. the 2gen was obviously a cost reduction exercise and using some flavor of other platform to save money.
Originally Posted by SW17LS
The Aurora was not a poor product, it was a very well regarded product that sold pretty well and got Oldsmobile a lot of attention.
yes. i was even somewhat interested. but got an acura instead
finally decided to venture into this olds swamp of a thread.
Come on, bit......with 70,000+ posts, you venture into a LOT of threads LOL.
why can't you just admit the OBVIOUS... their cars were crap and old plus the aurora as a hail mary, but even that wasn't enough?
OK....of the 88 and 98 were such crap as you claim, then explain why the very similar LeSabre and Park Avenue, over at Buick, sold so well, even when the 88 and 98 were still in production? It wasn't a case of apples and oranges, but a case of two different kinds of apples.
so it's a false dichotomy about whether it was the old models or the aurora that killed the brand. and it doesn't matter. the brand was just failing and eventually put out of its misery.
One often-overlooked factor in both Olds and Pontiac's demise, although that wasn't necessarily the case with the Chevy version, was the awkward-looking, unconventional Dust-Buster minivans of the 1990s....the Olds Silhouette and Pontiac Trans Port. A lot of buyers simply couldn't get past the anteater-snout looks,
it was an apt name "olds" because their buyers were OLD, and dying off. and we see what happened to mercury, and chrysler having the 300 as their only remaining ANCIENT sedan.
Study a ltitle history. Mercury was canned, not because of the age of its buyers, but because their products were considered too close to their downmarket Ford cousins, and, therefore, losing out to Ford sales. It was costing Ford more to maintain the division than the division was producing in revenue.
the 2gen was obviously a cost reduction exercise and using some flavor of other platform to save money.
Cost-cutting or not, it was, in several ways, a better product.
yes. i was even somewhat interested. but got an acura instead
....and Acuras, back then, were superb products, despite the dissing they often get in this forum.
This was about the same time as the Achieva (sp?) as I recall. They had a coupe trim that was called the SCX or something like that, with the “quad 4” engine and a manual transmission. My dad and I took one out for a test drive. I remember it being pretty fun but ridiculously noisy, which took it out of consideration for my folks. I think the Achieva was a replacement for the Cutlass Ciera.
Later on there was an Alero, which I was actually fairly impressed with. I think it replaced the Cutlass Supreme. It was another “too little, too late” car for Oldsmobile.
My best friend in high school’s grandparents traded in a ‘91 Camry for an Olds 88. This would have been in the ballpark of 1995. At the time, Oldsmobile offered a 30 day return policy if you were unhappy with your car. His grandparents did indeed return it after a couple weeks. I can’t remember what they ended up with, but I think it was a ‘96 Camry, if memory serves.
This was about the same time as the Achieva (sp?) as I recall. They had a coupe trim that was called the SCX or something like that, with the “quad 4” engine and a manual transmission. My dad and I took one out for a test drive. I remember it being pretty fun but ridiculously noisy, which took it out of consideration for my folks.
Good point about the Quad-4. Like some earlier large-displacement GM fours (particularly the Iron Duke four), it had torque but was quite unrefined.
I think the Achieva was a replacement for the Cutlass Ciera
More or less.
At the time, Oldsmobile offered a 30 day return policy if you were unhappy with your car.
They got that from Saturn....along with Saturn's No-Dicker-MSRP price policy.
The #1 car that caused the demise of Oldsmobile according to that list is the Gen II Aurora, the Gen 1 Aurora is not on the list in fact its praised in the article as being exactly what we all said it was and you said it wasn't.
These quotes are especially germain, as they are the exact points we made that you told us were wrong:
The first generation Aurora was a step in the right direction for Oldsmobile, with unique and sleek styling, a proper V8 under the hood (albeit the problematic Northstar), and several racing victories.
When the second generation Aurora was released, the sleek looks were ditched in favor of strange bloated styling, ruining any potential the car had left in it.
Also on the list? The Olds 88 and 98 you insisted were what would save Oldsmobile and that replacing them with the Aurora was a mistake.
Thanks for finding this, makes our point about the Aurora and the 98 and 88 Beautifully.
So completely forgettable, and you’re really young lol
my oldsmobile history is also generally pretty limited but after seeing the posts here i was inspired to look into a few of those models, and what they did to the 98 especially is a disgrace! before 1985 it was actually a pretty cool looking serious car you could be proud to own
then starting with the 11th gen it became FWD and the V8 was ditched for a V6, and you can't do both of those and expect people not to notice... it also just started looking like another generic bland appliance
my oldsmobile history is also generally pretty limited but after seeing the posts here i was inspired to look into a few of those models, and what they did to the 98 especially is a disgrace! before 1985 it was actually a pretty cool looking serious car you could be proud to own
then starting with the 11th gen it became FWD and the V8 was ditched for a V6, and you can't do both of those and expect people not to notice... it also just started looking like another generic bland appliance
Many of those here will probably not be old enough to remember, but the 98 was arguably at its best from 1967-1970, when it was reliable by 1960s standards, well-built, had excellent fit/finish, rode like whipped cream, and was a true pleasure to drive. Starting in 1971, though, material-quality dropped, fit/finish cheapened, and emission controls started to rob the power and drivability.
When I was little my dad had a Cutlass Calais which I loved. There is a picture of me maybe 3 or 4 years old hugging the steering wheel
of it. So I have always had a soft spot for Oldsmobiles.
But yeah they were serious cars before they were ruined in the late 80s and 90s
08-27-23, 08:48 AM
