The Diecast Zone · Model Car Club Since 1997

Diecast Collector Forums

Eight forums, every scale, and thirty years of shop talk — new arrivals, restorations, reviews, and the finds you won’t see posted anywhere else, with the full archive back to 2002 restored and searchable. Free to Register.

8Forums
195,000+Topics
1,276,000+Posts
10,000+Members
1997Research From

Added to my Oldsmob...
 
Notifications
Clear all

[Closed] Added to my Oldsmobiles, a 1960 Olds 98 in Garnet Mist Poly from Western Models.

14 Posts
9 Users
0 Reactions
5 Views
Curtis Parisi
(@parisi50)
Noble Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 333
Topic starter  

Added to my Oldsmobiles, a 1960 Olds 98 in Garnet Mist Poly from Western Models.

Also a representation of three decades of Oldsmobile. Awful that GM in their infinite wisdom let this brand go down the toilet...

photo no longer available

photo no longer available

photo no longer available

<img
src="https://www.diecast.org/assets/images/forums/2020/06/24/IMG_4023.jpg" />

photo no longer available



   
(@mike-detorrice)
New Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Great line up of Oldsmobiles, including that sleek '60. Wish Olds were still around.



   
Harv Goranson
(@mg-harv)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 30 years ago
Posts: 13699
 

Car brands that sell well stay in production. Survival of the fittest.

If more folks had bought Oldsmobiles, I bet they'd still be around. Pontiac, Mercury, and Plymouth too. But the big three still own the names (I assume) so they could pop up again someday.



   
Curtis Parisi
(@parisi50)
Noble Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 333
Topic starter  

It all boils down to GM or Ford or Chrysler making the style, performance and creature comforts that people want in those brands. People would then buy them and those brands would still be with us.



   
(@rick-thompson)
Trusted Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 30
 

Was it purely a matter of sales, or did corporate restructuring and allocation of resources play a part? I can't believe that it was strictly a matter of sales figures that caused the demise of those three brands.



   
(@thingluvr)
Trusted Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 25
 

Starting in 1949, Olds had an exciting new V8.

The styling was also distinct from each of the 5 divisions. It started with the regulations: lower engine emissions and safety features. (And I'm not saying these were unnecessary.) Lots of investment in "keep up with regulations" meant lower investment in 5 distinct brands. Plus, each brand became several different sizes of car. In this case, the companies had control over how to handle the expansion of models, and it may have been a mistake to allow each brand to try to be everything to everybody. After a while, engines were mostly shared, along with new technologies, and an Oldsmobile was a Pontiac was a Chevrolet, etc.



   
Harv Goranson
(@mg-harv)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 30 years ago
Posts: 13699
 

A good point. With the proliferation of sub-brands, the old pecking order at GM disappeared. Chevrolet at the bottom, then Pontiac, Olds, Buick, on up to Cadillac.



   
(@Raymond Paszkiewicz)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

Richard Nosker makes some very good points...,

When Pontiac starts making products like the Aztec, and makes generic engines, used in all of GM's brands, it all becomes redundant. Or you could not tell the difference between a Buick LeSabre and Electra, it becomes redundant. Remember, just a few years ago, the Cutlass was a best selling nameplate. When Chevrolet had a variety of great products and you were on top of the world, if you were a Chevy dealer. Mercury became just a Ford, with a different nameplate, and Plymouth had no product to offer. It all came tumbling down. All we have left is nostalgia.



   
(@ken-smith)
New Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Strange part was that Olds killed off the Cutlass when it was their top selling car! Never could figure that one out. Had a Cutlass at the time and it was a great car.



   
(@Robert Jacobs)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

Two words: Roger Smith

If ever one man could be held responsible for the ultimate bankruptcy of GM (unthinkable!) it was him. Under his leadership, each division was reduced to a desk in the corporate office, and each model was a standardized, homogenized, cross pollinated version of a few basic body sizes.



   
(@100ford2003)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 12909
 

Agreed ! Shameful imo.



   
Harv Goranson
(@mg-harv)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 30 years ago
Posts: 13699
 

I asked a friend of mine who worked for Ford once about the badge engineering...

...between Ford and Mercury. He said it allowed different styling exercises to be experimented with on each brand. But I don't recall any Mercurys outselling Fords in recent decades based on styling.



   
(@marmon16)
Estimable Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 62
 

Your father's oldsmobile

I remember Olds at the auto shows of the 70s and 80s displaying a big banner "Not Your Father's Oldsmobile." Too bad that was a terrific car. Remember too their misadventures with the Aurora. By most reports, a terrific car. Olds powers did not want Olds name on the car. Good read on all this is the book by John Rock who was their last division head.



   
(@Don Anderson)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

I sold Oldsmobiles in the mid seventies and left to work for the state dealers association. And the first Olds dealer I called upon had just gotten shipped his Delta 88s with Chevrolet engines. He wasn't happy. And so Cadillac got the Olds engine in the Seville. Cute, huh? Now this was a downstate dealer who sold a couple of lines and knew how these motors were behaving too. Of course a lot has happened since then. My personal opinion was that Oldsmobile lost its zoom. And it was before that.



   
Share: