G Body top ten list - bad things
- Thread starter LS1GN
- Start date
- Status
LOL... :lol:
Blake... true to a point, but the thread isn't really bashing the cars and I dont think most would dispute their designed longevity vs reality... GM designed them to last to "100k Mile Standard of Average Service Life" vs the 50-75K prior to them... The '78-88 A/G Body's are "Better" in many ways, but GM's cost-cutting handicapped them right out of the box... few earlier cars required extensive bracing to keep from pretzeling for the typical Joe-six pack hotrod with a healthy small block. I will say my 255+k mile '83 Monte was the most reliable car I owned... ugly, but she survived Boston's worst, had no rot, just light surface rust here and there, a few dent, a UV-wasted hue of the typical Light Blue paint, & despite needing a cam and lifters/valve seals/timing chain/gaskets, that 305 was still in great shape. Sure, the car had issues, like any other with mileage, but it was better than anything else I owned from a reliability standpoint... the loaded '03 Blazer 4dr w/ 30K that replaced her in '05 was a POS when compared mile per mile... the CCC E4ME 305/TH350/2:73 Monte got better gas mileage than my injected "X" VIN 4.3/4L60/3:73, it didn't stop as well 4 disc vs front disc Monte, but it held up better all around... Blazer: it developed a LOT of issues after 60k, then the axle cover rotted off at 70k, rear disc brake assemblies disintegrated at 90k, and the rockers started to rot at 95k .. I got rid of it at 98K... all GM Warranty dealer-serviced until 75k and religiously washed after every snow storm... even the old yankee rust treatment didn't save it. That said, I also had to correct UAW-related problems and GM Shortcuts with the Monte. (Gave her up for an X-GF, regretted it ever since)...
These cars were not great when they rolled out, but by the end of production they were pretty damn good overall...even with GM being Cheap, a list of engines that couldn't pull a sick wh*re off a toilet, and the very notable failings of the metric chassis design... These are a lot better than cars of the 50's and 60's and I'll add '71 & '72 because of the GM strikes.. but their earlier predecessors of the '73-77 era were better overall products... most are ugly as sin, but they were designed to be a solid, stable platform, and outside of their "Mother-lovin Beauty"... they were GMs answer to the Ralph Nader safety craze. The saving grace of the '78-88 A/G Body is that they were built in high numbers over a 10 year span, so plenty were able to survive past typical model attrition. I've seen the "true quality" of many cars here in New England... most don't survive long up here. Decades of Circle Track designation, Crazy Drivers, Brutal Winters, Salt and More Salt, and Summer Humidity & Dew Points that rival Florida's worst...many are still out there but the herd has thinned out considerably over the last decade, especially after C4C.... Overall, these have held up well, but their biggest weakness is that crappy frame.
Blake... true to a point, but the thread isn't really bashing the cars and I dont think most would dispute their designed longevity vs reality... GM designed them to last to "100k Mile Standard of Average Service Life" vs the 50-75K prior to them... The '78-88 A/G Body's are "Better" in many ways, but GM's cost-cutting handicapped them right out of the box... few earlier cars required extensive bracing to keep from pretzeling for the typical Joe-six pack hotrod with a healthy small block. I will say my 255+k mile '83 Monte was the most reliable car I owned... ugly, but she survived Boston's worst, had no rot, just light surface rust here and there, a few dent, a UV-wasted hue of the typical Light Blue paint, & despite needing a cam and lifters/valve seals/timing chain/gaskets, that 305 was still in great shape. Sure, the car had issues, like any other with mileage, but it was better than anything else I owned from a reliability standpoint... the loaded '03 Blazer 4dr w/ 30K that replaced her in '05 was a POS when compared mile per mile... the CCC E4ME 305/TH350/2:73 Monte got better gas mileage than my injected "X" VIN 4.3/4L60/3:73, it didn't stop as well 4 disc vs front disc Monte, but it held up better all around... Blazer: it developed a LOT of issues after 60k, then the axle cover rotted off at 70k, rear disc brake assemblies disintegrated at 90k, and the rockers started to rot at 95k .. I got rid of it at 98K... all GM Warranty dealer-serviced until 75k and religiously washed after every snow storm... even the old yankee rust treatment didn't save it. That said, I also had to correct UAW-related problems and GM Shortcuts with the Monte. (Gave her up for an X-GF, regretted it ever since)...
These cars were not great when they rolled out, but by the end of production they were pretty damn good overall...even with GM being Cheap, a list of engines that couldn't pull a sick wh*re off a toilet, and the very notable failings of the metric chassis design... These are a lot better than cars of the 50's and 60's and I'll add '71 & '72 because of the GM strikes.. but their earlier predecessors of the '73-77 era were better overall products... most are ugly as sin, but they were designed to be a solid, stable platform, and outside of their "Mother-lovin Beauty"... they were GMs answer to the Ralph Nader safety craze. The saving grace of the '78-88 A/G Body is that they were built in high numbers over a 10 year span, so plenty were able to survive past typical model attrition. I've seen the "true quality" of many cars here in New England... most don't survive long up here. Decades of Circle Track designation, Crazy Drivers, Brutal Winters, Salt and More Salt, and Summer Humidity & Dew Points that rival Florida's worst...many are still out there but the herd has thinned out considerably over the last decade, especially after C4C.... Overall, these have held up well, but their biggest weakness is that crappy frame.
1. Horrible weld quality
2. Ugliest dashboard ever.
3. The rear lower control arm frame bolts. :evil:
4. Rust
5. The stupid axle flanges
6. The fat lip on the inner fenders
7. Metric and standard nuts bolts
8. They are popular donks...
9. 4 turns lock to lock
10. Eats up all my money
2. Ugliest dashboard ever.
3. The rear lower control arm frame bolts. :evil:
4. Rust
5. The stupid axle flanges
6. The fat lip on the inner fenders
7. Metric and standard nuts bolts
8. They are popular donks...
9. 4 turns lock to lock
10. Eats up all my money
Actually, I'm with Blake. They really are pretty good cars for their era. Compare them to a Volare, K-car, Granada, Fairmont, etc. The G aged pretty well. Obviously they aren't/weren't perfect. But I'd take a 35 year old Cutlass over a 10 year old Kia.
DRIVEN said:
My Dad had a 1984 Toyota pickup he bought new then, and kept it to 1990. I can't even remember it without huge rust holes. That is why his next pickup was a Ford. My Regal being over 20 year olds barely has any rust except at the right #2 mount. Which leads me to:
12. HVAC housing draining rain water right on the right number 2 mount and rusting that part of the frame out. Probably just about every G body will need a repair washer welded in there.
13, Crappy factory rubber body mounts promote frame rust, go with poly when replacing.
To be fair, every car model is going to have some cons. I have yet to see a perfect car.
Compared to those shitboxes, my God, I wasn't event thinking of them... the only car worse than them was the Yugo.
My Mom made the mistake of stepping into the local Ford/Mercury/Lincoln Dealership in the early 80's, she left with a brand new Ford Fairmont... Nice Bronze/Copper painted 2 door, all the character and sex appeal of a saltine cracker... THAT was a POS and a half.. developed electric issues right off the lot.. was in the dealership quite a bit. Then one day something behind the dash decided to light off... yeah, nothing like watching my Mom's dash smoke like hell and then burst into flames.. the fire was knocked out before the car completely burned down... Mass Lemon Laws are great.. she was refunded her money 100%, (just as the era of super lawsuits was taking off)... I'm sure they were happy she took it. She made up for her mistake, bought a used Malibu Landau 2 door with a 305... lot of good memories in that car.
Good point we had two of those awful Fox bodies. Why in the hell did Dad buy them? The Fairmont had new paint but mice ate the electrical. We drove back roads to an air show, I thought the dash was coming through the windshield, it was that rough. Plus carb issues and continuing electric gremlins. The Zepher's motor seized up a week after we had it, just junk. We had a great 75 Olds Cutlass 4dr before those POS known as the "Beast" that only really gave trans issues. Great car all around, so much for the great TH350. I picked up decent 76 2 door for $50, parked because the TH350 was heading south. Both had the very reliable 350 Rocket, good power considering 7.8 to 1 and tiny cam. Our 81 Delta 88 was still our best car, too bad that suspension and frame didn't stay on the G body. The G body doesn't look near as bad remembering that awful junk. Don't get me started on K cars, we had 5 in our shop at one time, just awful in every way other then Ok gas mileage. Our 82 Diplomat interceptor was a cool car and decently made.
Ford Tempos back in the 80s were decent cars, my mother had one for over ten years with zero problems. But my late Grandpa's Regal has long outlasted the Tempo.
14. Front suspension is bad by even 1950s standards.
15. Many G bodies lack the rear seat brace even though they all need it.
16. All Regals and GNs, except the GNX, lack 4 to 6 lower body mount bushings and the number 5 bushings from the factory.
15. Many G bodies lack the rear seat brace even though they all need it.
16. All Regals and GNs, except the GNX, lack 4 to 6 lower body mount bushings and the number 5 bushings from the factory.
- Status
Similar threads
