Full-Size Revival?

[carman21]

Some of you may remember the traditional Full-size Cars of the 1960s & 1970s.They had big V-8s, RWD, and were well over 200 inches long, usually 210 or higher. Their flaws were their size and their poor gas mileage. The Oil Crisis of the 1970s,the influx of imports like Toyota, Datsun, and Honda, and gov. regulations slammed the brakes on a once thriving segment. Of these cars only the Crown Victoria, Grand Marquis, and the Town Car are lone remains of a segment that once dominated autosales for 25 years or more. From 1955 to 1980, 2/3 of all cars sold were considered full-size. During the early 1980s volume collapsed altogether and the top selling cars were all compacts with four cylinder engines. These compacts only got about 20mpg city and 30 mpg hwy, a typical V-6 mileage today. Today the top selling cars are midsizers with V-6s. With predictions of the LS2 V-8 getting over 30 mpg hwy with 400hp with DOD. This means V-8s will soon be entering the sweet spot of 20-30mpg. The V-6 entered this spot about 15 years ago and the V-6 became a top selling engine in cars. If V-8 are soon entering that sweet spot in the next 5 years then by 2026 my the best selling cars will likely be full-sizers.

I know the Avalon, Impala, and 300 are considered full-size today. Well, with cars steadily growing in size and people are transitioning back to cars from full-size SUVs. I think that much larger full-size cars with V-8s are likely to appear in the next 10 years. These cars will have lots of room under the hood, in the cabin and in the trunk. These cars will be very different from the full-sizers of old. They will be unibody, a hybrid V-8 that will have DOD(Displacement on Demand) be Camless with overhead actuators,run off ethanol instead of unleaded gasoline, and be mounted to a CVT that drives a super-handling AWD system. Yeah! Progress!

Edited January 10, 2006 by carman21

[balthazar]

Their flaws were their size...

Uhh no, that was not a flaw.

[Variance]

I've had an attraction lately to the old GM land yachts.

The old Impala SS...

The Roadmaster...

The Fleetwood...

They just have a big, powerful, imposing look that most large cars today don't have. These days, if the average family wants a land behemoth to drive, they turn to big SUVs. I'm not entirely sure a large sedan revival would occur yet. Full-size sedans are equated by most to be "old people's cars". Ironically, I see more elderly people in compact cars than big sedans. In fact, my own grandmother drives a Corolla.

[razoredge]

Variance "old GM land yachts" ?

Those are the "new" ones, or the "last" ones :AH-HA_wink:

This is a semi "old" land yacht

I believe we could get a model here and a model there if they do continue V8 improvement. The last of the H & C bodys were large just in FWD formate but really today the Suv and Crossover seem to have the room and utility everyone wants, I believe they along with ........minivans replaced the large passenger car & wagon in the market place. I have a feeling Buick may have a car of this sort in the future perhaps shared with a Caddy or large Pontiac.

Corn burners sure is something Im interested in but its probably not feasible volumn wise.....how about methane they could bottle "$h!loads" of it from the local landfills

[Sixty8panther]

Now that my letters and drawings to GM regarding the importance fo a (1st gen) retro 5th gen Camaro have been made into reality when my prayers were answered today I think the next step is to bring back the V8, RWD full sizeres.

A fullsize sedan/coupe for BUick Caddy & Chevy... they could call them uh, Ummmm.... I donno B-body has a nice ring.

Monte Carlo / Caprice Classic

Invicta / Electra

Coupe Deville / Fleetwood Brougham

just an idea. You'll be receiving my letters Mr. Lutz.

(spell check will be used )

Edited January 10, 2006 by Sixty8panther

[Cory Wolfe]

Well, Sixty8... since you're the one who seems to get what he wants... get a me a Fiero, a modern 240SX competitor, and a modern (last gen) Lexus IS type car produced under the Pontiac brand, why don't you? And how about a Grand Am on the Camaro's platform, a new GTO, a modern evolution of a (4th gen) Firebird, and a new Grand Prix too? Screw full sizers... when I can have all those, right Sixty8?

[AM6_Cutlass]

The Impala is actually a mid-sized car, it is just large by todays standards. I'm with you though. I want a B-bod replacement with a 400hp DOD V8, six-speed or CVT, seating for six, a real trunk, RWD and 20 mpg to boot. I would also like it in coupe, convertable, four door pillarless hardtop and wagon models. C'mon GM, bring back real full sizers!

I second that, except I want mine to get 30mpg. With DOD and six-speed or CVT, I don't think that's too far fetched. 80s B-Bodys could achieve mid 20s

[regfootball]

full size cars don't need to be so massive. my 500 has more useful room than just about all great 70's/80's big RWD boats, but is packaged much much better. And yet, i still think it could stand to have more room and space yet (town car?).

hopefully they will continue to whittle away at the engine bay for space to return back to the passengers.

[carman21]

full size cars don't need to be so massive.  my 500 has more useful room than just about all great 70's/80's big RWD boats, but is packaged much much better.  And yet, i still think it could stand to have more room and space yet (town car?).

hopefully they will continue to whittle away at the engine bay for space to return back to the passengers.

I agree we don't need a car thats 234 inches long like the 1970s Olds 98. GM and others just need to be space efficient like the Ford 500. I think a great size would be around 210-215 inches. pass vol around 120cu ft and a trunk of 24 cu ft. I understand that traditional full-sizers were large and that was an attraction but, there really isn't a need for all that excess weight when you could have great handling instead.

As for ethanol, Brazil has widespread use of ethanol and it took only 5 years to jump from just over 1 % to 90%. I think the US can do the same and ethanol burns more efficiently so we would see a 50% jump in fuel economy just by switching from gas to ethanol according to figures from Chevy in Brazil. Impressive yes but, the key to rebuilding the past is thinking towards the future.

In the golden era of the US auto industry did Americans look to the 1920s and 1930s for auto inspiration they looked to an optimistic future. This is what made American cars great back then and it will make them great again. GM Fans, If we are what we say we are, we will look to GM's glorious future rather than a long lost past. GM needs to gain back its mojo. We don't want a GM with a midlife crisis trying to relive the glory days, rather GM should think of itself as the child of the GM of the 1960s. GM,Jr is a rich kid that has been spoiled and needs to get his spending under control and his life into focus much like GM, SR. in the 1950s. GM,Jr. will get his life into focus soon and find his place in the market. Like his father he will crush the competition into submission and become the world's best and largest automaker in every market on Earth and be the most dominant player in the US market and will leverage his size to outsell both imports and domestics combined. If you think I'm nuts well look at GM of 1953 and compare it with GM of 1968. Niow look at GM 2005 and fill in the blanks for GM 2020.

[balthazar]

I understand that traditional full-sizers were large and that was an attraction but, there really isn't a need for all that excess weight when you could have great handling instead.

First off, you are contradicting yourself: in your opening post you call their size a "flaw" yet above you call it an "attraction". Secondly, modern cars weigh FAR MORE per square inch of 'footprint' than anything from the '60s, and that's after making nearly a third of the vehicle out of cheap plastic.

Too bad that as cars have gotten smaller (appealing to some), they have also gotten horrifically heavy.

A lot of '60s cars were very well balanced, too, as opposed to later cars than grew increasingly nose-heavy partially because they had relatively no rear overhang.

In the golden era of the US auto industry did Americans look to the 1920s and 1930s for auto inspiration they looked to an optimistic future. This is what made American cars great back then...

Actually, most successful manufacturers regularly look at past example for all sorts of inspiration. Stylistically however, not often... and the reason is that there was real measurable advancement & stylistic progress throughout the first 75 or 80 years of the auto industry. But cars have changed very very little in silhouette since the '80s... the stylistic progress has slowed dramatically.

For a good example, look at the Corvette style jumps: '55/56, '62/63, '67/68, '82/84... then look at the restyles since. Look at '04/05 (do I have that break right?)- very little stylistic progress because there's very little left in the barrel. Minimal overhangs, super low profile, way-laid-back windshield, aerodynamically-observant... these things dictate the bulk of the design. It can't get dramatically lower or shorter, narrower won't accomplish anything, it's locked into a tapered nose with flush/hidden headlights and quad taillamps. Where to go????

We don't want a GM with a midlife crisis trying to relive the glory days...

So is the current horsepower war also an attempt to relive the glory days? 'Good stuff' will always be popular, whether it's power & speed or good design. Being inpirated from the past in no way demeans the present, it merely recognizes quality and appeal.

Gotta learn: "New!" does not guarantee "better".

...look at GM of 1953 and compare it with GM of 1968. Niow look at GM 2005 and fill in the blanks for GM 2020.

You have way oversimplified the issue here. Thousands of contributing factors... and I will point to merely one: division engineering departments.

[Chicagoland]

Buyers do want roomy cars, with the growth of mid sizers into "large" cars, according to EPA ranks. {BTW, Impala is classed as large by EPA too}

But, old car fans, don't expect big BOF cars to make a comeback. Zeta, the most likely platform for developing a new large GM car, is unibody.

[Imaj]

As much I love my BOF Classic Caprice.. BOF are something of the past unibodies are better safety and performance wise

[balthazar]

Ahhh, now a UB contributes to "performance", too eh? The myth grows wild.....

[razoredge]

Good points by all,

Monoque does contribute to rigidity but not unibody in itself.

We cant go back to such huge cars. They would weigh 6000 lb with all todays "must have" gimmickry.

On the other hand the width of the older cars can not be matched unless we go that wide again, back seat leg room can not be matched either. Trunks are better but thats with the FWD platform, same as some aspects of rear seat room. Not sure how the rear drivers are doing, that big ol spare tire in the middle of the trunk was never very handy.

That Ford is a big car, I looked at them, they are large, I parked the LSS beside one, they are large, Ford may have done good with this car Im not sure time will tell.

Once again....lots of room in the old H body BOP cars ;-)

Edited January 12, 2006 by razoredge

[97regalGS]

who give's a hoot whether it's bof or ub.

if the car is the size you want, driving the wheels you want, looks good on the inside and outside and performs the way you want does the underlying components really matter all that much?

[regfootball]

Spoken like someone who has never worked on a car in his life.

Just kidding. I can see your point, but smaller engine bays mean it is harder to do work under the hood, and the harder it is to do work under the hood, the higher flat ratye hours are when something breaks, meaning it it more expensive for the consumer to pay for to fix. Again, I see you point, but there must be some happy medium between enough space to work and interior room.

looking under the hood of a typical 70's GM car as well as cars like my father in law's 98 Olds 88, you can still see plenty of tarmac around all sides of the 90 degree spacehog engine. FAR TOO MUCH wasted length under there. example, why should the radiator have 6 inches of clear air in back of it of which some of could be returned to the passenger compartment? Sit in the front seat of an 88, and its cramped, the dash is low and way too far back into the wheelbase of the car. as a result, there's no front leg room and no rear leg room.

Look at a mid 80's caprice. ENORMOUSLY long hood and trunk. what's left in the middle for leg room?

A good recipe for a full sizer would be about 116 to 118 inch wheelbase and an overall length in the mid 200's. there should be a minimal front overhang over the front and a longer rear overhang is ok if it benefits the trunk. I like a low cowl and dropaway hood (like my 99 taurus or like an early dodge stratus) for open airy cabin and visibility. high enough roof for higher more natural seating position and more headroom. fairly low side windows. a dashboard that is less upright and claustrophobic. stretch the roof back far, again for cabin spaciousness. long/wide doors that have almost 90 degree hinges.

then, if the car is kept around 3500-3600 pounds in FWD form (FWD is most space efficient) it should get great mpg, handle well for a big car, go like stink and have an assload of room.

Dodge regressed moving away from the last Intrepid blueprint. the intrepid had a bunch of room, but it did suffer for seating that was too low and a roof that was far too low.

Edited January 13, 2006 by regfootball

[razoredge]

looking under the hood of a typical 70's GM car as well as cars like my father in law's 98 Olds 88, you can still see plenty of tarmac around all sides of the 90 degree spacehog engine.  FAR TOO MUCH wasted length under there.  example, why should the radiator have 6 inches of clear air in back of it of which some of could be returned to the passenger compartment?  Sit in the front seat of an 88, and its cramped, the dash is low and way too far back into the wheelbase of the car.  as a result, there's no front leg room and no rear leg room.

Reg you need to lay off that stuff, its clouding your thinkin. there is no lack of passenger room in H/C body, sorry. Also the 90* B U I C K V6 was and still is GM's most compact V power unit. The Denali peaked 60* and even taller Everest DOHC 60* however do present packageing/servicability problems.

6" clear air between fan motors and manifold ? really ?

Maybe if raising the hood 4" to shorten it 4" is the answer we should all just switch over to minvans because thats what these new tall cars are beginning to look like.

[balthazar]

>>"...116 to 118 inch wheelbase and an overall length in the mid 200's."<<

'mid 200s' would be about 250", no?

I like my car's stats: wheelbase: 123", overall: 217". Loads of room and no dreaded center console! I had a car for a few years, about the size you advocate (whl: 113, ovr: 201)- much smaller interior- small trunk, no like.

>>"you can still see plenty of tarmac around all sides of the 90 degree spacehog engine"<<

Now, Reg- if you want to talk about "spacehog" engines, you simply CANNOT overlook your beloved OHC jobs!

Really really tight engine comparments are for those interested in paying $75-100/hr service department rates. Those of us who know the business end of a ratchet wrench like to be able to get a hand & partial forearm down to -God forbid!- change a radiator hose or something. nissan stuffed their oil filter between the engine & firewall on the older sentra 4-banger: you have to jack the car up high & get completely under it to change the frickin' oil. Yeah- that's really worth another half-inch of leg room.

Come to think if it, if the filter was in a decent location to begin with, they actually MAY have been able to get another half inch of leg room!

[capriceman]

I think my Name can answer my opion on these cars!!!!!

I hope they come back!!!!!

[Sixty8panther]

who give's a hoot whether it's bof or ub.

We've had threads spanning 10 or 12 pages where we argue this point back and forth and things get nasty.

For those of us who appreciate a nice boulevard cruiser wiht a live rear axle, C-chnnel &/or boxed frame and four-link coil suspension it is a very important thing to see these cars come back. It's not a gray area... either you GET it or you dont.

[Sixty8panther]

Well, Sixty8... since you're the one who seems to get what he wants... get a me a Fiero, a modern 240SX competitor, and a modern (last gen) Lexus IS type car produced under the Pontiac brand, why don't you? And how about a Grand Am on the Camaro's platform, a new GTO, a modern evolution of a (4th gen) Firebird, and a new Grand Prix too? Screw full sizers... when I can have all those, right Sixty8?

Fiero I'm all for it... and a rear engined Corvair based loosely on the Kappa architecture

a modern 240SX competitor yes... & a modern 240Z too!

(not a V6 overweight origami mobile like the 350Z but a inline-6 lightweight)

modern (last gen) Lexus IS type (Pontiac) Call is Grand Am

Grand Am on the Camaro's platform (see above)

a new GTO oh it's going to happen... don't worry

a modern evolution of a (4th gen) Firebird so you want the GTO, Grand Am 4dr, Fierebird, Fiero and a lightweight coupe to go along wiht your Solstice? Let's be somewhat realistic.

new Grand Prix too I hope it does not have tumors in it's tail lights.

Screw full sizers... you were just chock full of good ideas untill you had to be a selfish prick!

[regfootball]

>>"...116 to 118 inch wheelbase and an overall length in the mid 200's."<<

'mid 200s' would be about 250", no?

I like my car's stats: wheelbase: 123", overall: 217". Loads of room and no dreaded center console! I had a car for a few years, about the size you advocate (whl: 113, ovr: 201)- much smaller interior- small trunk, no like.

>>"you can still see plenty of tarmac around all sides of the 90 degree spacehog engine"<<

Now, Reg- if you want to talk about "spacehog" engines, you simply  CANNOT overlook your beloved OHC jobs!

Really really tight engine comparments are for those interested in paying $75-100/hr service department rates. Those of us who know the business end of a ratchet wrench like to be able to get a hand & partial forearm down to -God forbid!- change a radiator hose or something. nissan stuffed their oil filter between the engine & firewall on the older sentra 4-banger: you have to jack the car up high & get completely under it to change the frickin' oil. Yeah- that's really worth another half-inch of leg room.

Come to think if it, if the filter was in a decent location to begin with, they actually MAY have been able to get another half inch of leg room!

a v8 ohc fit beautifully under the hood in my taurus.

[balthazar]

Sure, and you worked on it all the time, right? Hell, I had a hell of a time just changing spark plugs on my '73 Charger Rallye 440 Magnum because of the big upswept manifolds- had to do it from below the car... and a '73 is a big car.

You must've at least looked underhood of a recent mid-size transverse V-6 car, right? Yikes.

Obviously there's a 'middle range' between the engine comparment of a '65 Impala with a 327 and just about any recent car you care to mention. Unfortunately, no one is building that today. I know most car owners today know more about woofers & tweeters than what/ where their spark plugs are/may be, but I don't want to play if all I have to do is pay. Ya get me?

[regfootball]

Sure, and you worked on it all the time, right? Hell, I had a hell of a time just changing spark plugs on my '73 Charger Rallye 440 Magnum because of the big upswept manifolds- had to do it from below the car... and a '73 is a big car.

You must've at least looked underhood of a recent mid-size transverse V-6 car, right? Yikes.

Obviously there's a 'middle range' between the engine comparment of a '65 Impala with a 327 and just about any recent car you care to mention. Unfortunately, no one is building that today. I know most car owners today know more about woofers & tweeters than what/ where their spark plugs are/may be, but I don't want to play if all I have to do is pay. Ya get me?

i had noneed to work on it. first of all, 99% of america has no pole barn with a hoist.

2nd of all, i don't have tools. i don't waste the money on tools to do something that i can pay someone to do.

3rdly, i never had to have anything done other than routine maintenance.

its of more benefit to the user (the BUYER) to give them the space in the cab, than to waste space under the hood for someone who may or may not ever see your car.

[balthazar]

How did I know?

Why put money into another's pocket's at $75/hr when you can do it yourself for free? I saved myself over $1000 last fall doing a brake job on my truck by myself. Nope: no hoist, either (tho I do have a pole barn).

If a person has the money to fund the loan department, the service department and the state tax coffers by buying a new car every time the warranty dries up and eating the 60% depreciation- I guess that's their prerogative. But that's FAR more wasteful than a clear 6" around an engine underhood, wouldn't you agree?

[regfootball]

How did I know?

Why put money into another's pocket's at $75/hr when you can do it yourself for free? I saved myself over $1000 last fall doing a brake job on my truck by myself. Nope: no hoist, either (tho I do have a pole barn).

If a person has the money to fund the loan department, the service department and the state tax coffers by buying a new car every time the warranty dries up and eating the 60% depreciation- I guess that's their prerogative. But that's FAR more wasteful than a clear 6" around an engine underhood, wouldn't you agree?

i simply have no need to blow $$$ on tools and such since i drive newer cars that i get more miles out of without fixing.

i have no desire to waste my spare time fixing a car. i'd rather be doing something with my girl and my wife. i have no desire to hunt for parts, shop supplies, workable tools and keeping them organized, and my garage is not heated. the lighting is totally inadequate and trouble lights suck. i don't have enough room in my garage to work on anything. i have no desire to clutter it up with more tools than just some basic tools to upkeep my house. tools and tool cabinets cost money. and i don't enjoy taking apart cars. I watched my dad (who was a diesel mechanic for 20 years by the way) overhaul and work on all the family cars over the years. i helped him sometimes. engine work, brake jobs, body work (that really sucks) taking cars into the tranny shop....and the list goes on and on.

my car expenses are much more predictable and easier to budget for by getting a newer rig mostly in warranty and getting the best most trouble free miles out of the car. One time a bought a 7 year old car and it turned into a bit of a money pit. instead of the 2 or 300 a month for a trouble free ride, it was just pumping money into the system of mechanics. Would i have benefit by doing any of the work myself? Some, sure. not enough to offset the time and hassle and money it would have taken me to acquire all the tools and parts and not to mention that my townhome association didn't allow folks to be mechanics out of their own small 18x18 garage. you forget, almost no one has a pole barn with extra space to do that stuff.

What's a nice air wrench and compressor cost?

that would make a few car payments.

need any special tools for that brake job?

and then when you're talking trannies and clutches and stuff, and front end work, you're likely not gonna do that work yourself anyways.

basic maintenance work like rad flushes and tranny flushes are cheap and infrequent. nobody puts their own tires on. and VIOC will change my oil, on my whim, in about 15 minutes, and i can get that done on my way into work on any given day. i don't have to plan part of a saturday for it.

had a wheel bearing replaced on my aztek a few weeks ago under warranty. had i needed to do that myself it would have consumed too much of my time. i was in and out of the dealer in about 60 minutes.

like i said, like 99% of the folks out there, i prefer to get my work done, and that's why its of more benefit to me the owner or user of the car to return the space to the cab where its much more useful than the once a year someone might have to get to something under my hood.

I've had a pretty good track record with my cars overall. Most of them that i bought which were new or newer I've done mostly just oil changes, tire rotations, flushes etc. too. Some of my cars I have not had to spend more than a few dollars to have others do work over the time I've owned the car. The only money I put into my 95 tbird for repairs in 71, 000 owned miles was a battery. no brakes, tires (other than snows) or tuneups or anything. I had something taken care of under warranty (windshield leak) that i wasn't gonna do myself. i owned my tbird over 4 years and aside from oil changes i paid 80 bucks for a battery. And that's right under the hood.

Edited January 16, 2006 by regfootball

[carman21]

I kind of did say that size was a problem for some but it was also an attraction. Today big SUVs are a turnoff to some and others love them. Please don't be so serious its just a fun debate. Anyway. Poor handling in large vehicles is a result of their relatively greater size. For instance, a BMW 7 series would never be expected to outhandle a 3-series on curves. For comfort, the 7 takes the crown because greater size usually equals greater ride comfort. This may exlain the popularity of midsize cars. Midsizers are more comfortable than compacts yet more agile than full-sizers.

Perhaps we have thought out cars. Instead of size or length being a class standard. Perhaps weight is more accurate determination of a car's class. In my system there are 5 classes Half-size cars(ultra-compacts), compact cars(compacts and subcompacts), midsize cars, large cars, and full-size cars. Half-size cars are between 2000-2500lbs. Compacts are from 2500-3000lbs. Midsize cars are between 3000-3500lbs. Large cars are from between 3500-4000lbs. Full-size cars are over 4000lbs.

Examples of half-size cars are:Chevy Aveo, Hyundai Accent, & Toyota Yaris

Examples of compact cars are:Chevy Cobalt, Ford Focus, & Toyota Corolla

Examples of mid-size cars are:Chevy Malibu, Ford Fusion, & Toyota Camry

Examples of large cars are:Chevy Impala, Ford 500, & Toyota Avalon

Examples of full-size cars are:Ford Crown Victoria & Mercury Grand Marquis

(Obviously not much thought was put into the Full-size segment in a while)

This theory can be applied for about the last 50 years of automobile classification. prior to the 1950s weights in cars leaned towards the heavier side despite class or application,due to heavy use of steel,so those cars can't easily be classified.

[balthazar]

Tools really aren't all that expensive- and in even competant hands pay for themselves many times over (unless they're made in China!). I needed a 1.5" 3/4-socket & extension bar for the lug nuts on my '40; new they'd cost about $50 from Sears. Swap meet vintagte examples: $8. Even if I have $1500 in tools, they saved me $1000 in that brake job alone (only specialty parts: tubing bender: $4, flare kit: $50). I bought my 30-gal 5-HP compressor about 4 years ago for $269. I don't replicate hand tools with air tools, so I don't have a air ratchet, but my air-powered angle grinder cost me $39 about 10 years ago- still runs fine.

I was brought up both to be thrifty and 'hands-on', and the two dovetail perfectly. My hobby is working on vintage iron and my time spent doing so is well earned & richly rewarded, IMO. I absolutely HATE being at the mercy of the stealership with a new car, being told something is broken yet never seeing the proof and forking over many car payments (whoops- haven't had any of those for over 6 years!) to have it repaired. I was this close to putting a new water pump on my I-6 when I realized there was this special wrench that was needed to pull the fan nut. I was NOT happy about that (local garage did it for $200). Perhaps I have been unduely fortunate, only non-maintenance task I did to my Ford below 110K was a steering box at 44K.

Everyone is free to spend as much or as little as they wish on their cars (provided legal regulations/requirements are met). And I understand about living in a townhouse and having a family... still I pulled our apartment door knob to run an extension cord out thru the hole to the parking lot where I did all sorts of nighttime & weekend restification work on my old Charger Rallye 440 years back. And I must know 40 guys who also do all sorts of work on their vehicles too; welding, sheetmetal replacement, powertrain swaps, painting, etc, etc.... tho I won't argue your "99%" estimate all the same.