W-Body: A Retrospective

[Delta Force79]

Here is a photo history of the W-body....seeing as how the W-body has survived for so long in an ever changing marketplace and has spawned many variants over the years....lets take a look back...

Chevy Lumina:

Chevy Monte Carlo:

Chevy Impala:

Edited July 8, 2006 by Delta Force79

[Delta Force79]

Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme:

Oldsmobile Intrigue:

[Delta Force79]

Buick Regal:

Buick Century:

Buick LaCrosse:

Pontiac Grand Prix:

Edited July 8, 2006 by Delta Force79

[Cremazie]

It's really hard to believe that the transverse leafed luminas rode on the same platform as today's Lacrosse (Allure) and Impala. It's shows what updates can do to a platform. Aside from space limitations the platforms have done well.

[76ChevyTrucker]

The W-body architecture has definitely been around a while and like cremazie said, its amazing what they were able to do with it and refine it to what it is today, although I do agree that it needs to be replaced with a RWD Zeta-based vehicle asap.

[the_yellow_dart]

That GXP looks awesome. I liked my 99 Lumina, and miss it in some ways. Sure was more practical than a Cobalt coupe for hauling people.

[ShadowDog]

One of only one:

A Regal convertible, apparently purchased off of GM's proving grounds.

[Mike The Canadian]

Buick Century:

WOOOO! Lol look at that beast

[trinacriabob]

Buick Regal:

Buick LaCrosse:

Thanks Delta!

Yep, the first one is my sled. That one looks like a '90 or so. Mine is a '92...though not a Gran Sport. It has been the best car I've ever owned.

The second one is what could be my next sled. If they'd only fix that front end.

What's really funny here is the "spread" of the W-body. Ifyou look at Chilton's, it runs the gamut from the Lumina that had a 4 cylinder in it with blackwalls, crank windows and very little in the way of options all the way to a LaCrosse CXS or a Grand Prix GTP with a DOHC V6 and DOD V8, respectively. That's a big spread.

Also, I think the W-body was born in 1988, so it is about to turn 19. Actually, if you buy one of these, you should feel pretty comfortable that you've made a solid automotive purchase.

Edited July 8, 2006 by trinacriabob

[Cory Wolfe]

I miss our old 89 Regal.

[Delta Force79]

One of only one:

A Regal convertible, apparently purchased off of GM's proving grounds.

164188[/snapback]

Wow! pretty cool, I always liked the W-Body Cutlass 'vert and wondered why they didn't make one for another division. I think the Regal looks nice without a roof

And yes, trinacriabob...the W-body came out in 1988 and that Regal is I believe a 1990, although I think I did a search for '1988' Buick Regal's. The W-body has indeed come a long way, but man it's funny how some of GM's best looking products from the last 20 years have shared this one platform.

[trinacriabob]

but man it's funny how some of GM's best looking products from the last 20 years have shared this one platform.

164245[/snapback]

How could I forget. The Intrigue. Best looking W-body vehicle ever. Period.

[ehaase]

The W-body has indeed come a long way, but man it's funny how some of GM's best looking products from the last 20 years have shared this one platform.

164245[/snapback]

But it's sad that the cars from this one platform did not sell as well as their predecessors (FWD A and RWD G bodies). Also, the W body is only slightly smaller than the C/FWD G/H bodies, that I wonder if it would have been more efficient to use one platform instead. I do agree that the second generation W bodies ('95 Lumina, '97 Grand Prix, Regal, and Century, and '98 Intrigue) were very attractive cars. Edited July 8, 2006 by ehaase

[thegriffon]

Hey, what about the Chinese models, the Buick sedans, the Regal and now the LaCrosse?

[PONTIAC06]

I miss my Regal too. It was a 95 custom sedan in white with grey interior and the 3800. It had everything! Power everything, cd player with Concert II sound system,

it came between the 01 sunfire and the 03 grand cherokee

[Delta Force79]

Hey, what about the Chinese models, the Buick sedans, the Regal and now the LaCrosse?

164299[/snapback]

I didn't come across any, if you have any pics of them, feel free to share

[razoredge]

My poor old 3800 91 Regal Limited . Fit like me old bluejeans. Ill always miss that car.

Having owned both, the W was considerably smaller than the C/H body than one would think. 200-300+ lbs lighter as well. Tight under hood, smaller trunk. Rear seat of C/H body has ample room. W body is more of a personal car that also has a rear seat just incase. W body still maintained the quality feel of the larger H/C where as the smaller A's or J's or whatever gave the budget car feel.

[trinacriabob]

My poor old 3800 91 Regal Limited  . Fit like me old bluejeans. Ill always miss that car.

164344[/snapback]

Anybody that's had one of these loves these cars.

And, very true, it is the smallest platform you can get that gives a big car ride. I was thinking...the reason this platform has had such a long history, beyond the obvious reliability, is probably because it is so many things to so many people.

[Ravenfreak13]

I guess that my dad had the oldest regal of all 88 Regal...What a solid car...very advanced fro its day...and my aunts 93 Lumina...what memories

[XP715]

My first car was a W-body; a 1990 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme sedan. That little 3.1 never gave me an ounce of trouble ever! Loved it so much that when I stacked it up the first time I was dumb enough to put a junkyard nose on it and have the thing repainted. Three weeks after it was done some asshole kid on a blunt ride during his lunch break cuts me off and the thing gets totalled again.

Rest in peace, little buddy

[knightfan26917]

One of only one:

A Regal convertible, apparently purchased off of GM's proving grounds.

*raises eyebrows*

Hmmm...my dad used to work for Unocal 76 ... very interesting .

And, aye...what a history.......

Cort, "Mr MC" / "Mr Road Trip", 32swm/pig valve/pacemaker

MC:family.IL.guide.future = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort/

Models.HO = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort/trainroom.html

"You've made a fool of everyone" ... Jet ... 'Look What You've Done'

[bobo]

I put a lot of miles on 1990 Luminas at work. They were surprisingly good drivers, particularly on the highway. But the interiors were horrible. My favorite W-bodies were the Cutlass Supreme sedan, the Intrigue, and the last generation Grand Prix.

[trinacriabob]

I put a lot of miles on 1990 Luminas at work.  They were surprisingly good drivers, particularly on the highway. 

164430[/snapback]

Which powerplant? 3.1 V6 or L4?

[Delta Force79]

My grandmother has a '91 Lumina...gold with beige interior....3.1 V6....the interior is horrible though, the dash pad is all warped and lifting up at the defroster vent and under the gauge cluster....also the power windows aren't working in the two front doors for the driver's controls and I don't think it has rear defrost...but it has power windows and locks

[bobo]

Which powerplant?  3.1 V6 or L4?

164439[/snapback]

They ran on E85, and I think they were 3.1 liter V-6's. The model year may have been 1992. We ran them on ethanol at first, but then we were told not to use it anymore because it was causing mechanical problems.

[Sixty8panther]

I respect these cars for being GM and by extension for providing

good reliable transportation in many cases, that having been said

the W bodys were NEVER, are not now & will NEVER BE adequate

replacements for the RWD G-bodys, nevermind B-bodys!

The W body represents a lot of what has gone wrong with GM in

the past two decades. Sorry to be a wet blanket but that's my

honest opinion.

[ehaase]

The W body represents a lot of what has gone wrong with GM in

the past two decades. Sorry to be a wet blanket but that's my

honest opinion.

164456[/snapback]

I agree with you, even though I am a big fan of the '97-'98 redesigns and the current Impala SS and Monte Carlo SS.

The original W bodies failed against the Taurus, and GM held onto them too long before redesigning them. My understanding is that the '97-'98 redesigns were to have debuted around '93 or '94, but were cut because of GM's financial crisis in 1992. Even the redesigned W bodies stayed around too long.

The failure of the 1988 Cutlass Supreme is one big reason why Oldsmobile is no longer around.

I believe that the original W body program cost GM $5 billion, and I think it took a long time for GM to make money on the program.

[daves87rs]

I agree with you, even though I am a big fan of the '97-'98 redesigns and the current Impala SS and Monte Carlo SS. 

The original W bodies failed against the Taurus, and GM held onto them too long before redesigning them.  My understanding is that the '97-'98 redesigns were to have debuted around '93 or '94, but were cut because of GM's financial crisis in 1992.  Even the redesigned W bodies stayed around too long.

The failure of the 1988 Cutlass Supreme is one big reason why Oldsmobile is no longer around.

I believe that the original W body program cost GM $5 billion, and I think it took a long time for GM to make money on the program.

164483[/snapback]

That sounds about right..

[trinacriabob]

Sorry to be a wet blanket

164456[/snapback]

Blasphemous Pantho!

[ShadowDog]

I appreciated my '95 Monte Carlo a great deal, even more, now that it's in car heaven. While the fit-n-finish of the interior wasn't much for praise, the materials were quite pleasant. The back seat region was spacious and plush, seemingly less-than for the latter in the current models.

In terms of them being adequate replacements for the B & G Bodies, I don't miss what I never appreciated. The W-Bodies were lightyears ahead in improvements. If GM had lagged at the auto industry transition to FWD, which was largely consumer-driven, they'd have been the laughing stock of the automotive world.

One thing worth noting is that the W-Body found a home in virtually every car division within GM with zero badge-engineering involved. Every W-Body make was unique in its executed design and style. GM really needs to get back into that mode of thinking...or at least continue to develop the cashflow to make that expense a reality again.

Rest in pieces my dear Monte Carlo, rest in pieces.

[The O.C.]

WOOOO! Lol look at that beast  

164200[/snapback]

While not the most exciting, probably one of the cleanest and nicest-looking W-body exteriors ever built.

edit: The Century photo, that is.....

Edited July 9, 2006 by The O.C.

[Croc]

While not the most exciting, probably one of the cleanest and nicest-looking W-body exteriors ever built.

edit:  The Century photo, that is.....

164530[/snapback]

No, 1998 Intrigue.

[Flybrian]

No, 1998 Intrigue.

164535[/snapback]

Um...that's his opinion?

For its price (just under $20k), the Century was likely the best-looking midsize car for the vast majority of its run. Certainly looked more expensive than it was.

Nothing beats the Regal GS, though. Supercharged, black-out grille (early years), Monsoon stereo, and hot sleeper looks. What a beauty. And clocking in at $25-28k, an incredible value.

[Croc]

Um...that's his opinion?

164541[/snapback]

Um...that's my giving him $h!?

I'm gonna start calling you NetNanny...

[Delta Force79]

I respect these cars for being GM and by extension for providing

good reliable transportation in many cases, that having been said

the W bodys were NEVER, are not now & will NEVER BE adequate

replacements for the RWD G-bodys, nevermind B-bodys!

The W body represents a lot of what has gone wrong with GM in

the past two decades. Sorry to be a wet blanket but that's my

honest opinion.

164456[/snapback]

I agree with your sentiments Sixty, I myself own a B-body, and have owned more than one....well actually a C-body Ninety Eight...but the fact is, for their time...W-bodies were pretty advanced...offering decent interior room...and for lack of division specific engines, they all at least looked different, and had different interiors. W-bodies have made up the majority of GM NA's car sales for nearly two decades....these facts cannot be overlooked, and hence why I started this thread. Hell I don't even own a W-body....and although my Riviera is a G-body, I know it's really not ( lack of RWD) but I love it just the same....

[Flybrian]

nevermind B-bodys!

164456[/snapback]

That's what the FWD G-bodies are for!

[Delta Force79]

That's what the FWD G-bodies are for!

164564[/snapback]

How dare you mister!...now you're asking for trouble...

I can't really say anything, I own one of each

[Justin Bimmer]

The GM-10 was debuted with only 2dr models because GM didn't have enough money to launch the 4dr version at the same time.... and THATS what really killed the GM-10 "W" Body from the start. People wanted 4dr cars not Coupes. Thats what killed the cutlass and the lumina.

Thanks Roger Smith......

[Olds Guy]

As a former owner of a first gen W-car (2 in fact), I must have been the minority, since I bought two coupes, and have only had sedans for my last three cars because Olds & Pontiac stopped selling W coupes. I think the first gen sedans were not good looking at all. The Lumina may have been the least offensive.

I also think this would have sold well, given the opoprtunity.

Edited July 10, 2006 by Olds Guy

[Guest YellowJacket894]

In terms of them being adequate replacements for the B & G Bodies, I don't miss what I never appreciated. The W-Bodies were lightyears ahead in improvements. If GM had lagged at the auto industry transition to FWD, which was largely consumer-driven, they'd have been the laughing stock of the automotive world.

Well, the American Automakers (and not psudeo-Patriotic Toyota, et. al.) are switching back to rear-drive for large cars with V-8s. Looks like the W-Body loses here. Front-drive cars are pretty much just on speaking terms with V-8 engines.

I respect these cars for being GM and by extension for providing good reliable transportation in many cases. That having been said the W-Bodys were NEVER, are not now, and will NEVER BE adequate

replacements for the RWD G-bodys, nevermind B-Bodys!

Amen to that. A B-Body can go for well over 300,000 miles. That, my friends, is the simplicity of rear-drive at work for you.

[knightfan26917]

I respect these cars for being GM and by extension for providing

good reliable transportation in many cases, that having been said

the W bodys were NEVER, are not now & will NEVER BE adequate

replacements for the RWD G-bodys, nevermind B-bodys!

Agreed, imho.

I actually owned a 3rd generation Lumina, 6th generation MC, for about 4 years. Purchased it brand new & used it as a daily driver, but quickly wanted it gone the minute I drove my friend's 1987 MC LS while he was here visiting from PA in late 2001.....

Cort, "Mr MC" / "Mr Road Trip", 32swm/pig valve/pacemaker

MC:family.IL.guide.future = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort/

What's it like to buy your favorite car brand new? Wish I knew...

"You've made a fool of everyone" ... Jet ... 'Look What You've Done'

[The O.C.]

Um...that's my giving him $h!?

I'm gonna start calling you NetNanny...

164543[/snapback]

I'd say the Intrigue was probably the most satisfying W-car to drive and had the best interior.....but I'd say the Century wins the exterior looks debate.....

....in MY opinion.....

[The O.C.]

The W-body pretty well sums up most GM vehicles nowadays. Solid enough to jump a river and reliable enough to pile on endless miles, but supposedly lacking "refinement" and therefore deemed utter $h! by the automotive illiterate.

164744[/snapback]

The W-body suffers from poor packaging.....say rear seat room versus exterior size as one example. The architecture also lends itself to long front-and-rear overhangs relative to the length of the wheelbase.

The long overhangs also tend to add to the nose-heavy feel of these front-drivers.

However, GM has been able to strengthen the chassis to the point to where there are very few squeaks or rattles.

[Sixty8panther]

...and for lack of division specific engines, they all at least looked different, and had different interiors.  W-bodies have made up the majority of GM NA's car sales for nearly two decades....these facts cannot be overlooked, and hence why I started this thread.

164561[/snapback]

Oh I know where you're coming from. The thread was a good idea.

I just get a little antsy when people start waxing poetic about the

merits of mid size FWD family cars...

[Delta Force79]

this is just merely the first of my upcoming retrospectives....the reason I began with the W-body is because it has survived this long....as I said I don't own one, and never have owned one....but I have over the years found myself wanting more than just one example of a W-body so I am a fan, despite my preference for RWD and a V8.

[Drew Dowdell]

The W-body suffers from poor packaging.....say rear seat room versus exterior size as one example.  The architecture also lends itself to long front-and-rear overhangs relative to the length of the wheelbase.

The long overhangs also tend to add to the nose-heavy feel of these front-drivers. 

However, GM has been able to strengthen the chassis to the point to where there are very few squeaks or rattles.

164985[/snapback]

Oddly, the Cutllass coupe and convertible weren't as bad in the rear as the rest of them. I know the GP had very poor headroom. And the legroom in the Lumina wasn't great.

But the back seat of my 2+2 Cutlass convertible was one of the most comfortable rides I've owned.

and in the summertime, you had all the headroom in the world.

Add to that, the DOHC 3.4 was a great performer..... smoother than the 3.1 or 3.8s and could easily break the front tires loose in second gear. My convertible only did about 27mph highway, but it was by far the heaviest of the W-bodies at the time. The 3.4 DOHC coupes did better I hear.

Edited July 11, 2006 by Oldsmoboi

[trinacriabob]

The W-body pretty well sums up most GM vehicles nowadays. Solid enough to jump a river and reliable enough to pile on endless miles, but supposedly lacking "refinement" and therefore deemed utter $h! by the automotive illiterate.

164744[/snapback]

I like the way WMJ thinks. Right on....as I keep on driving my very high mileage 3800 Regal, completely flustered as to what I should replace it with. Another "coarse" W-body...yeah, that's the ticket!

[razoredge]

Yea if GM had only kept building those A/G and B/C body, big block, body on frame monsters for 2 more decades just think where they would be today................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

[Sixty8panther]

Razor:

We wouldn't be building V8 Camrys & slapping on Impala SS emblems.

[Guest YellowJacket894]

Razor:

We wouldn't be building V8 Camrys & slapping on Impala SS emblems.

165797[/snapback]

Amen to that.

(What happened to our Rear-Drive emoticon? I feel that someone is trying to double cross us...)

Edited July 12, 2006 by YellowJacket894