Had the Cougar in the comparison had the 351-CJ that was still available (1974 was last year at 255 net hp) instead of its 460, its performance time would have been much better. Also, if you watch the braking on the Cougar, it was much more stable and didn't seem to veer or have the rear come around like the Cutlass. Suspension was won by Cutlass hands-down.
The Salon version was intended to emulate the look and feel of foreign sporty luxury machines. The Supreme was pure luxury focused, with a bit of sportiness.
My uncle had a ‘77 Cutlass Supreme Brougham. It had a weak 4.1 V8 and wallowed like a yacht but boy was that car comfortable. Double plush seats and a/c that blew as cold as a meat locker. And it was quiet.
Bad brakes and underpowered? Where do I sign up!? Really, unless you lived through it, it's hard to fathom just how badly the EPA regulations gutted the American auto industry.
On hard braking the car turned sideways and had severe brake fade... yet he said the Olds Cutlass had better braking than the Mercury Cougar? How much worse could the Cougar's brakes be!?
2 місяці тому+1
It was a 2.73 rear end! At least put a 3.23 or 3.55 and you have a normal car. Gas was "FREE" back then.
Terrible mileage. Very bad handling. Hard to start on cold mornings. Problems with brakes. I'd sure like to have it back. Beautiful car with white leather interior and black carpets. very nice all white exterior. I loved my 74 money pit.
I definitely thought GM built better personal luxury cars than Ford by the mid 70's, I've always liked the mid 70's personal luxury cars GM built, I just wish they had the same powertrains and compression ratios as the 1960's/early 70's cars did.
To bad they never tested a 1973 or ‘74 Chevy Monte Carlo. It was different than other B body GM cars with the engine set further back and a front suspension designed after the Mercedes of the time. My ‘75 Monte Carlo had a 359 2bbl with a 3:08 rear end.
16.4 sounds close to me. never owned a real screamer but thought my 74 olds was fairly quick. exactly the color of this test car. Terrible gas mileage. 12.5 mpg on a trip.
It would despite it being a low compression smog engine, I believe 1972 and earlier models would've been more powerful and fast due to them being pre-Emissions era engines.
@@cellpat7392 In 1985 I owned a black on black 1974 Cutlass supreme with the original 455 c.i.d.motor backed with the factory posi rear end. Whata friggin monster. Unbelievably fast with tons of torque. Got in alot of trouble with that beast. Lake county Illinois speeding ticket of 154 mph in a 55 mph zone. No lie. It was worth it too.
@@cellpat7392 455 was def a factory option in the 1974 Olds lineup; at least in the A-B-C bodies, drove that year Cutlass, 455 and all, in a four door pillared hardtop. That year Hurst Olds Pace Car could've been had with a 'W30' 455 HP engine, it even had a dual snorkle air cleaner
My 74 Cutlass would do 16.40s in the 1/4 at 88 mph with a 350
What was the rear gear ratio?
Had the Cougar in the comparison had the 351-CJ that was still available (1974 was last year at 255 net hp) instead of its 460, its performance time would have been much better. Also, if you watch the braking on the Cougar, it was much more stable and didn't seem to veer or have the rear come around like the Cutlass. Suspension was won by Cutlass hands-down.
I've always thought the Supreme was the top line Olds Cutlass, not the Salon
You are correct
The Salon was more on a par with the Pontiac Grand Am.
Salon was top of the line with every option available!
Yes. I owned the Supreme
The Salon version was intended to emulate the look and feel of foreign sporty luxury machines. The Supreme was pure luxury focused, with a bit of sportiness.
My uncle had a ‘77 Cutlass Supreme Brougham. It had a weak 4.1 V8 and wallowed like a yacht but boy was that car comfortable. Double plush seats and a/c that blew as cold as a meat locker. And it was quiet.
Bad brakes and underpowered?
Where do I sign up!?
Really, unless you lived through it, it's
hard to fathom just how badly the EPA
regulations gutted the American auto
industry.
On hard braking the car turned sideways and had severe brake fade... yet he said the Olds Cutlass had better braking than the Mercury Cougar? How much worse could the Cougar's brakes be!?
It was a 2.73 rear end! At least put a 3.23 or 3.55 and you have a normal car. Gas was "FREE" back then.
Terrible mileage. Very bad handling. Hard to start on cold mornings. Problems with brakes. I'd sure like to have it back. Beautiful car with white leather interior and black carpets. very nice all white exterior. I loved my 74 money pit.
Loved my 74 cutlass salon sedan. It was a boat but enjoyed driving it more than any modern car
Hey! That’s “Big Bud” Lindemann. Any male from GR raised in the ‘50s or ‘60s will recognize that set of pipes. I learned to drive in a ‘74 Gutless.
I agree, i had a 74 cutlass, loved the ride.
WMACHINES 455 same!
Had a 73 supreme with those wire wheel covers
... of course they were soon stolen. Loved that car.
Too bad they were taken. I depise thiefs
I definitely thought GM built better personal luxury cars than Ford by the mid 70's, I've always liked the mid 70's personal luxury cars GM built, I just wish they had the same powertrains and compression ratios as the 1960's/early 70's cars did.
To bad they never tested a 1973 or ‘74 Chevy Monte Carlo. It was different than other B body GM cars with the engine set further back and a front suspension designed after the Mercedes of the time. My ‘75 Monte Carlo had a 359 2bbl with a 3:08 rear end.
I had the 74 and it did handle great!!! I always wanted the 73 hurst 😂😂😂
have a74 cutlass supreme 15.91best it ran in the quarter have to know how to tune them
My Schwinn Varsity would beat this sled in the quarter!
love the music playing towards the beginning of the video, it reminds me of the jazzy/progressive rock tunes that was popular during this time period.
My dad had a brown 1974 cutlass. I liked the interior but apparently it's about the ugliest year ever for a cutlass.
16.4 sounds close to me. never owned a real screamer but thought my 74 olds was fairly quick. exactly the color of this test car. Terrible gas mileage. 12.5 mpg on a trip.
I wish they would've tested this car with the 455 V8, I'm sure acceleration times would've been a lot stronger despite it being a smogger car.
It was although it wasn't commonly ordered, most came with the 350 V8.
It would despite it being a low compression smog engine, I believe 1972 and earlier models would've been more powerful and fast due to them being pre-Emissions era engines.
@@cellpat7392 In 1985 I owned a black on black 1974 Cutlass supreme with the original 455 c.i.d.motor backed with the factory posi rear end. Whata friggin monster. Unbelievably fast with tons of torque. Got in alot of trouble with that beast. Lake county Illinois speeding ticket of 154 mph in a 55 mph zone. No lie. It was worth it too.
@@cellpat7392 455 was def a factory option in the 1974 Olds lineup; at least in the A-B-C bodies, drove that year Cutlass, 455 and all, in a four door pillared hardtop.
That year Hurst Olds Pace Car could've been had with a 'W30' 455 HP engine, it even had a dual snorkle air cleaner
And that's the standard engine in the bloated, overweight Delta 88, can you imagine what it's performance is like?!
I love how he had the balls to bash the EPA in these tests! I wouldn’t doubt that’s the reason the show was cancelled
19 seconds in the quarter mile speed of 78mph is in the fair/average range which is surprising because the speeds to 60mph were sluggish.
I think the number he said for 0-60 is wrong, 15.6 seconds. There were plenty of errors.
@@stepheng3667 For me to get to the quarter mile in 19 sec at 78mph the car should've done the 0-60 mph times in around 12 seconds.