trinacriabob

Big Hair

Great read. Thanks for the timely delivery! Now, I'm off to have coffee. Happy New Year!

basement

Wow, now we're moving further forward. Of the 73-77 MC, 76 and 77 were better because of the stacked rectangular lamps. Of that next down-size, 85 through 87 got a little better than 78 through 84 and also picked up the still-with-us 4.3 Vortec V6 as its base, which powered this car better than the 3.8s would have (about 30 hp difference).

Boring but relaxing weekend planned. Glad to have a 3 and 1/2 day weekend. Happy New Year everybody!

+1 and +1 Despite the strange "pinched" trunk area Balthazar points out, the '76 and '77 taillight set-up was very attractive, especially in the Grand Le Mans where they were "doubled up" horizontally to take up more space, reaching the license plate indentation. Agreed, I really like mid-70s GM products. The designs became cleaner and more rectangular. For me, the cars of the '50s and early '60s looked too bulbous or overly sculpted. I might be able to go as far back as the first Riviera and first Toronado, both of which were appealing avant-garde cars.

house

gefilte fish

necessity (yikes)

I agree with you on some of these points. So must have many American/Canadian consumers because, in that same year, they couldn't keep Cutlasses on the lots while few Pontiac LeMans cars were sold. I think the front end was fine. I see your point on the rear/trunk. It was very weak. I think that, had this car's rear been more upright, like that of the Cutlass and the Regal of the same year, we would have seen many more of them. What I like is the traditional Pontiac hood sculpting, the side sculpting, the "fast back" roof line, the available Pontiac rally wheels, the really nice cloth buckets with a console in the LJ that couldn't be had in a Cutlass or Regal, and that beautiful 73-77 dash. Throw in the reliability of a small block Olds Rocket V8 and it makes for a nice package. But, you're right about some of the design quirks. Even an amateur car design buff (like me) could take a pencil and work out some decent nips and tucks to have made it a nicer car. I like it because it is unique and when I see one on the road, I really notice it.

bordello

Unfortunately, I don't have that strong of an interest in cars from the era mentioned in the thread. I think '75 and '76 mark the years my interest in GM cars begins, largely because they were a combination of unmistakable GM Detroit iron and updated interiors/dashboards/creature comforts... like this next link shows...yeah, yeah, I know, I know (2nd one from the top, a coupe, with the small Olds V8 referred to in the text) GM stuff I love Didn't mean to hijack...back on track...

Tokyo Rose (fact or fiction, don't know...)

Vietnam

waterfall

I'm going to guess polio. One of the Presidents, or his wife, was afflicted by it in the 1940s...IIRC.

talkative

mint

trendy

+1 !

contact lenses

double

Yes, I am really looking forward to your driving impressions. Also, the C-pillar is quite a C-pillar. Is this thing easy to see out of? Let us know. From looking at the scenery and the look of the houses, that's got to be Northern California.

Good for you! The Carolinas are beautiful.

Exactly. My rule: don't feel comfortable renting a car and driving around, won't go there. In only 2 days in London... Day 1: tried to cross the street in front of Victoria Station, stepped into the roadway after looking the "wrong" way, almost got hit... Day 2: had to get into the airport shuttle, opened the door, ended up staring at the steering wheel... I found the people there incredibly polite, but it was soooo nice to be on a plane heading back to the U.S. Damn, Newark (arrival airport) looked good! Today: Bought my first free lunch, of about 4 that the gift certificate my boss gave me will cover.