Worst Automotive Ideas: GM Makes the Rear Windows Immovable on 1978 Intermediates

[@DonaldHermany]

I’m sure all of the cost saving benefits were a factor, but this was also a bit of dimensional sleight of hand. GM’s downsizing strategy always calmed the new models had equal or greater interior room than the outgoing models. If you look at those rear doors, you will see that the armrest is inset to the door frame rather than being mounted on the surface of the door card. The armrest uses the space that would normally be occupied by the window mechanism. This allowed GM to claim that these models had as much room as the 1977 models.

[@ralphl7643]

True, but the armrest was too far forward to be good for elbows. It was useful to have the part you grab recessed.

[@NillaRilla82]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/h6G8mp6Qp5uNg80si=odiurb67KEKppgkU love this old commercial

[@criznitty]

Along those lines, in order for the window to be functional, it would have to be smaller to be able to roll down into the lower part of the door, or only roll down half way. By not having a roll down window, they were able to look like a full size car with lots of greenhouse, big full pane windows.

[@frankhoward7645]

6:48. I sold these cars when they were new. I remember complaining to the factory rep about the fixed windows and this is the excuse he came up with; thinner doors that provided more room. I took him over to a new Fiat 128 4-door. The rear windows had always rolled down and the door was probably 1/3 the thickness of the GM door.

[@ENDTIMEsVideoLibrary]

Hey!! In the 80s I had a 2 door Fiat 128, appropriately in Lemon Yellow!! Cute little car for the teen that I was, but after 120k miles it began doing everythng it could to fall apart and give up the ghost!!

[@flatheadV8]

@@ENDTIMEsVideoLibrary While large low stressed cars in the US could do big milages, in Europe 100k miles in the 1980's was considered about the design life of many cars. Some exceptions of course, eg Mercedes, Volvo, Peugeot etc

[@frankhoward7645]

@@ENDTIMEsVideoLibrary After I left the car business, I put my money where my mouth was and purchased a 1979 128 4-door. We loved that car and drove it for 9 years until it was totaled by a young driver driving mom and dad's Ford Explorer and not paying attention. These cars needed their timing belts changed at 90,000 miles. Fiat made a special 128 Rally Edition in red or yellow. Had a racing stripe on it. Cost about $3,000. Back then, a timing belt change cost $300. It was difficult (impossible) to convince a buyer that he would have to shell out 10% of what he paid for the car when it was running perfectly fine. Eventually, the belt would snap and as the car had an interference engine, the engine would be toast. I'm willing to bet that's what happened to your car.

[@ENDTIMEsVideoLibrary]

@@frankhoward7645 I just wish I knew you back in the 80s when I had my 128!! Apparently that is exactly what happened.. I paid for a Rebuild that was TERRIBLE and the car didn't last for much longer after that. I did like my 128 very much, but after that nightmare ending I bought an 81Toyota Tercel that was about the same size and far more reliable..

[@frankhoward7645]

@@ENDTIMEsVideoLibrary I sold a Fiat 131 to my father and stressed to him the fact that the belt needed to be changed (can't remember the recommended mileage). Even he let it go until it snapped. I'm a cheapskate. That's what attracted me to selling Fiats. Their slogan was, "A lot of car. Not a lot of money." It was true. The problem was Fiats attracted a lot of cheapskates and cheapskates can't understand paying $300 for a belt change when the car is running just fine. By the way, I live in Minnesota and my wife used it to commute to her restaurant job. She would get out at 1:30 a.m. and it would be -25F outside. While her co-workers would get their jumper cables out, her 128 started every time on it's own. The day it was totaled and we were sitting in it in the middle of the freeway, she broke down in tears because she realized it was going to the junk yard.

[@valengreymoon5623]

Plastic engine components where there used to be metal ones. WORST idea across the board.

[@HAL-dm1eh]

I was thinking of putting that when I scrolled down and read this at the same time. It's a tie between that and skimping on brakes (Ford and Toyota used to be bad about that).

[@NicholasDemichele-m2h]

Your not kidding does not handle heat or cold brittle junk!

[@NickLeeds]

So are people having to pay out of pocket for parts that break?

[@robertkeeney3898]

GM was horrible at that time. They never really came back from that.

[@timhinchcliffe5372]

Common as hell in Japanese cars, especially Toyotas. Americans can't get enough of them. Arguably, plastic intake manifolds don't heat the air coming in as much. This would only be a problem for carburettors that need heat to help atomisation of the fuel. There is a performance mod to put a plastic insulator between the intake and head on some engines.

[@brandonadler1022]

Hatchback look without the hatch is the worst of both worlds

[@GlennC789]

I guess the hatchback look had become trendy. Everybody was making them. GM showing its usual level of wisdom for the day with the look but not the function.

[@MsJamiewoods]

The fake hatchback car shown reminds me of GM's X Body cars 1980-84.

[@jeffhands7097]

A miserable cost cutting tactic of GM was to replace the traditional sewn headliners with the glued-in-place headliners that would invariably delaminate and droop onto the driver’s and passengers’ heads. I simply ripped mine out of my 75 Skylark, leaving me with what looked like press-formed cardboard overhead, and the car was only 6 years old at that point.

[@brentkiely657]

nice ! the dollar store quality look ! LOL

[@TomSnyder-gx5ru]

One of my pet peeves are those damn glue in headliners - the sewn headliners have held up to this day and I've personally NEVER seen one fall! Sometimes "new" isn't always "better!"

[@willc5512]

Ripping it out was better than a chunk of foam in the eye @ 65mph! Went thru that on a 87 FLEETWOOD. Probably their most expensive car at some point in time.

[@matthall8902]

i replaced the drooping headliner in my '87 Plymouth using aftermarket headliner material and 3M spray headliner glue. The only difficult part was getting the original pressed board headliner backer in and out of the car. other than that it was pretty easy and turned out great considering how little it cost for the materials.

[@rustyshackleford1687]

I have so many memories of riding in 70s and 80s cars as a child with drooping headliners. Most of these cars were still fairly new. Real glad that problem is mostly solved.

[@70stastic]

I remember trying to roll down the rear windows on my parents '80 Aspen 4dr when they got it and the window stopped about 2" from fully open. I was so disappointed as a little kid because our '76 Dart's rear windows rolled all the way down. A fixed rear window would've really bugged me back then lol

[@WaybackRewind]

Windows that don't roll all the way down was just sloppy engineering. There simply wasn't enough room in the door for it to go down all the way.

[@Lasuvidaboy-jp4xe]

The same couldn’t be said for most Toyota’s, Honda’s and Nissan’s. The rear windows all seemed to roll all the way down or at least most of the way down.

[@WaybackRewind]

@ exactly

[@ragingbull5883]

Same on my 95 Taurus SHO, even my 89. The rear windows only roll down half way, because they would hit the door internally if they could roll down all the way lol. The way the body curved inwards at the top caused that angle of approach to not allow them to go down all the wya.

[@seeingeyegod]

That was always my standard "does this car suck" test when I was a kid accompanying my parents car shopping. Mom! Dad! The rear windows only roll down halfway! This car sux!

[@UNCFIPP]

As a former owner of a 78 malibu wagon, I'd say air conditioning sales went UP because of the rear windows not opening.. It got HOT AS HELL in that wagon with only front door and rear door vent windows to open.

[@scooterp7009]

Yup, we had a beautiful ‘79 Malibu Classic wagon; 2-tone sliver and gray with chrome and a burgundy red interior and NO AC. I loved it and my wife hated it; especially when we took it on a road trip in the summer… 🥵

[@Lasuvidaboy-jp4xe]

And from my experience, the GM air conditioning usually failed after a few years.

[@pdennis93]

I have a story about these. In ~ 1985 while coming home from the pool in my dad's 1982 Buick Regal 4 door, i went to open the passenger wing window and it fell out of the frame and i was holding it by the handle as it dangled outside the car as i yelled for my mom to stop. Iirc they had to take it back to the dealer and have it reattached to the door.

[@timhinchcliffe5372]

Functionality is an optional extra.

[@willc5512]

I swear youve told this story before. Someone else told one about the putty getting soft on the vega rear windows to where u could pop them out on a hot day & put em back in!. Good times. Glad I wasnt born till 83'.😂

[@pdennis93]

@willc5512 I think I have mentioned this happening in one of Adam's videos before. It definitely fits this video. It's one of my earliest childhood memories. I was 6 in the summer of 85.

[@byronn.2885]

Ah yes 80s GM build quality.😂

[@pdennis93]

@@byronn.2885 right? The car couldn't have been more than a few years old. My dad bought it in late 82 or early 83 as a leftover new model to replace a 79 diesel custom cruiser wagon. He totalled it in early 87. I'm guessing the window incident was 85 or possibly 86.

[@patrickbateman9887]

My mom's Regal wagon had these fixed windows. One hot day it overheated and the only way to keep the engine cool was to turn the heater on, meaning we were stuck in the back on a hot day with the windows up to get home.

[@scottymoondogjakubin4766]

All this time i thought it was a safety feature to keep kids from falling out the window !

[@petestaint8312]

That's what I thought too!. 🤔

[@randyfitz8310]

Though really, the lower door narrows too much due to the wheel arch to accommodate the glass!

[@RayEttler]

an unintended perk

[@edu7979]

what kid is dumb enough to jump out the window of a car

[@petestaint8312]

@@edu7979 my thought exactly.

[@pdennis93]

I've always heard that the real reason for the fixed rear window was they wanted to advertise the rear hip room was the same as the 73-77 models. They did this by creating a large indent in the rear door panel for a place to put your arm.

[@douglasb.1203]

You're right. Even in the coupes rear seats, the panels were scooped out for shoulder/hip room.

[@shiftfocus1]

That’s the explanation I recall as well.

[@pdennis93]

@@shiftfocus1 yup. My dad had an 82 Regal 4 door with manual wing windows and I remember the insert in the rear door panels.

[@UNCFIPP]

@@pdennis93 that's exactly why. And if I recall correctly, on older cars, the rear doors were like the suburban rear doors.. No wheel well indent.. The newer cars rear doors all form to the leading edge of the rear wheel arches.. Taking room from the window and motor. Google a 77 and a 78 malibu or any 4door a body. Watch the actual shape of the doors change around the wheel well

[@mattwhaley9917]

We had a 1984 Buick Regal 4-door sedan my parents bought new when I was 8 or 9 years old. I remember asking my dad why the back windows didn't roll down, and him shrugging his shoulders and saying, "Look at these cool power wing windows." I was not impressed.

[@gm12551]

Dad didn’t want a Century lol

[@pdennis93]

@@mattwhaley9917 ours were manual lol. Chrome latches like you'd see in a pickup truck.

[@kennethsouthard6042]

My dad would have had the window lock on all the time and you wouldn't have been able to open those Wing windows either.

[@pdennis93]

@kennethsouthard6042 they were manual. There was no switch. It was a lchrome handle atch like a pickup truck.

[@JimmyLoose]

FINALLY!! You finally got around to making this video. Thank You! What you failed to discus in this video is the absolute nightmare riding in the back seat of one of these cars was as a kid in the early 1980's in the HOT South West of the United States. I suffered in the back of a 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme for years as a kid. I know you mentioned air conditioning, but you couldn't get the rear windows to roll down to get the hot air out on a 110 degree day before you started the AC. Yes, you mentioned the rear vent window, but it didn't help at all. it did NOT turn around enough to direct air inside. I'm sure things were "ok" in Northern states, but this is what happened when car designers live in Michigan. Back then they did not consider what a "hot" day was in the desert southwest. Temps steadily over 105 degrees. Sometimes 110, sometimes 115. That rear seat area with no functioning windows was pure Hell.

[@2Chickaboom2]

You forgot to mention that my Mom chain smoked Pall Malls when driving me and my brothers around. Child abuse! lol.

[@phantom0456]

@4:56 if you look at the rear door shape and the wheelwell arch you can see that there was no way for GM to make those back windows roll down outside of putting another divide into the window and making just the front part roll down, but then the car would’ve looked beyond stupid. That being said, there’s still no excuse for a four door car to have windows that don’t roll down at least partially on the back doors.

[@MaartenvanHeek]

Was thinking that, but most cars have a divided rear window anyway

[@Richard1977]

​@MaartenvanHeek It's also cost cutting and with this choice they saved a lot of money. Plus that a divide also introduces drag which leads to worse fuel economy.

[@TorCow1234]

It's amazing that the rear door window chintz-out remains one of the only things that most people remember about these cars. Quite a misread of what consumers value in a car, as even a spinster granny with no friends is going to grump about the fixed glass in the back seat of her 1982 Malibu. My first car was a highly optioned 1979 Malibu Landau coupe, so I was only plagued by the THM200, the 7.5" 10 bolt, and a short lived R4 A/C compressor. I built a THM350 for it, but looking back now, I'd go for a 200-4R and a shorter final drive, as the stock 2.29 ratio and a 3 speed automatic made for some soggy getaways... you sort of oozed up to 25mph before the car would start pulling with any alacrity. With those bugs worked out, I really liked the car.

[@shiftfocus1]

They might complain later. But did it cost them sales? I doubt it.

[@philricci2012]

My first car was a ‘79 Malibu Landau coupe with a 267 V8 ( not my choice as I bought it used from an older lady) and it had the thm 350 transmission (I checked it to be sure). Other versions had the thm 200 “Chevette” transmission, especially the V6 models.

[@TorCow1234]

​@@shiftfocus1 I'm inclined to agree with you... I know that automotive enthusiasts (the people who banter this stuff about 40 years after the average buyer traded off the car and moved on) make up a rather small portion of the car buying public, but you still have to wonder if the little dent it put in the public perception of GM was worth the few bucks they saved at the time... If you jog the layperson's memory of these cars, I'm willing to bet that that's the first thing they'll remember about it.

[@TorCow1234]

@@philricci2012 Mine was a 305 4bbl. It was 15 years old when I bought it, with about 89k miles and a transmission on its way out. The guy I purchased it from wouldn't let me test drive it, so I figured something was up and lowered my offer accordingly; as soon as it slipped its way through the 2-3 shift when I hopped on the highway to head home, I knew what was up... I managed to nurse it along for another 6 months while saving up for a transmission. My friend's mom had a 305 or 350 powered '79 Caprice coupe that was saddled with the 200 trans as well.

[@philricci2012]

@ My family also had a ‘79 Caprice that definitely had the thm 350 trans and it outlasted the rest of the car. My only experience with the metric 200 trans. was in a 1980 Lemans that had a 229 V6 in it. Both the engine and trans. gave out not long after I bought it. The difference between the V8 Malibu/thm 350 and that Lemans was like night & day. The Lemans felt like a toy compared to the Malibu.

[@wizardmix]

If you asked any kid in the early to even late 1980s to draw a car, they would all essentially draw that box notch back 4-door shape that Cadillac pioneered with the Seville, they'd put wheels on it and an exhaust pipe on the back with smoke coming out of it. That was what we thought of with an average car. So many throw-aways then as there are today.

[@madmike2624]

Adam is on a roll this weekend!!~~ Great content my brother!!!~

[@David-ik8wj]

he puts a lot of effort into these videos. Definitely appreciated by me. I,m not the only one that remembers all those little details he talks about.

[@madmike2624]

@@David-ik8wj 100% my brother!!~~

[@jameshall4385]

I hate space saver spare tire and now a lot of cars don't even come with a spare. I want a full size spare.

[@kc9scott]

I thought it’d be hard to come up with my own “worst”, since the industry has provided so many to choose from. But the complete lack of a spare tire in many modern vehicles is EASILY it!

[@MUUKOW3]

Think about it ,how often do you actually use a spare ? My 88 Cherokee still has the original , spare,My 04 outback still has the original spare never been out My motorhome has the original spare on back and never been off. It is not really that big of a deal.

[@anthonyjackson280]

@@kc9scott Hi from Ontario. 3 years ago we bought a 'pre-owned' 2018 Kia Soul. When I did the walk around inspection prior to accepting it I realised there was no spare wheel, just an (incomplete) Emergency Inflation Kit. I have long commute on country roads and have frequently had to change a tire while driving. I insisted they include a (optional) spare tire kit before I accepted the car. They did with no argument.

[@jameshall4385]

@MUUKOW3 i haven't used my fire extinguisher since I bought it but im not throwing it out. I would rather keep a spare and never use it than not have it and need it.

[@kc9scott]

@@anthonyjackson280 In 2017 I got a flat on my new Ford Fusion on a country road, just 2 or 3 months after buying the car. Used my spare then. TPMS for the win, as I could tell how far I could drive before I’d really need to stop. Earlier this year I picked up a nail with a leak big enough that it’d only hold air for 15 minutes. I have a portable air tank so didn’t need the spare then, but it could easily have been necessary.

[@davem8790]

The 1978 intermediates...so much good yet so much bad rolled into one vehicle. To be fair, they sold well and rode/handled fairly well for the times. They felt like sports cars compared to what buyers were getting out of at the time. It was the initial and long term quality that sent these cars to the crusher (don't forget they were everywhere) and frame rust was again an issue on these in northern climates. If you've ever spent some time under an A/G-body, you'd see that the cost cutting wasn't just the rear windows, it was carried out throughout the WHOLE car. I still love them though.

[@gcfifthgear]

Ironically, I liked the '78 Malibu because it handled and performed better than the previous generation. Trouble is the 200-series Turbo Hydra-Matic was also used in the 1978 Chevy Monza wagon that I owned, and it starting having trouble before it was ever paid for!

[@MUUKOW3]

​@@gcfifthgearThat was easy though,just yeat it for a turbo 350.

[@davestewart2067]

The cheap rear wheel brake clip cylinder design. Why they did that is mind boggling. They already had a backing plate with provisions for a bolt on wheel cylinder. On the shelf. Why reinvent the wheel?!?

[@davem8790]

As modern resto-mods or old school hot rods these are great. As a daily driver when they were fairly new - not so great but comparable to other new cars at the time. Once they got to be about 7-8 years old, the cost cutting really showed up.

[@LEGOminiac]

This is interesting as it’s the first time I’ve ever heard it explained as a weight or cost-saving measure. I thought it was initially explained as a way to achieve the same interior volume as the previous (1977) generation by having the rear door armrests inset into the door panels, achieving identical rear seat shoulder/hip room. Doing this would not leave space for the window regulators and mechanicals to allow for the rear door windows to open. The vent window was always a part of the design - whether in the door (Chevy/Pontiac 4-doors and all division wagons) or in the rear most glass of the aero back Olds and Buick sedans initially.

[@severinjohn]

I was about to post a similar comment. The increase in rear seat hip and elbow room was the reason GM did this. Not to save weight and not to cut costs. If cost cutting was the goal, I would think we'd be seeing fixed rear glass everywhere in 2024 since manufacturers are going to extremes now to cut costs.

[@pdennis93]

They were only on the door in the wagons in 78-79. The sedans all had the vent windows behind the door in the early years.

[@LEGOminiac]

@@pdennis93 ahh right. The Chevy and Pontiac sedans for 78-80 had a slight rake to the rear glass and the vent window was just behind the door 👍🏻 Then they switched the formal roof and rear door mounted vent windows in 1981. I would suspect that was where the real cost savings was since all 4 models used the same roof/rear doors from 81-83

[@jetsons101]

They probably had to fix the glass in place because the rear wheel well really cut into the rear door so there was no room for the glass to move down into the door.

[@willc5512]

Yup cuz it was "hip to be square"! That square door shape had everything to do with that.

[@gregorymalchuk272]

But isn't that why the rear part of the window is a separate little triangle in it's own frame?

[@kennethsouthard6042]

This gave them the real big weight and cost savings which kept all the cars on a common wheelbase.

[@jetsons101]

@@gregorymalchuk272 The door looks to small even for that to work.

[@Project_Low_Expectations]

@@jetsons101it would have gone down at least half way

[@timmcooper294]

This reminds me of my parents shopping for a new car in 1981. I was a car crazy kid , and I was horrified when my parents went to the Dodge dealer to look at the new K cars. I noticed the painted cardboard headliners and the rear windows that didn't open.... I was rather insistent that they keep looking at other cars, and they ended up buying a new AMC Eagle wagon. That was a cool car and ended my complaints. It also was quite trouble free and still ran great at 160,000 miles when they sold it.

[@RareClassicCars]

Probably the best choice in 1981. I, too, would’ve likely bought an Eagle.

[@phillipcramer7936]

In 1983 the municipality I worked for issued me a stripper Malibu station wagon. Even though it didn't have A/C, GM didn't provide cowl vents, and there were only two measly fresh air outlets in the center of the dashboard, and vent windows in the doors has been abandoned in the late '60s. The interior of this pos car was like an oven. Also, the Ackermann geometry seemed off as the tires scrubbed during hard turns. Its V6 engine was anemic at best. It's obvious why Chevrolet was the lowest bidder.

[@pcno2832]

My parent's '75 Malibu had 2 dash vents and 2 huge scoops in the footwells, all flow-through. They were great when the car was moving, almost as good as vent windows. But their Chevette and Citation both had fan-forced ventilation that only trickled and heaters that trickled as well (I put a shutoff valve on one). I think the downsizing left little room for decent sized ducts, so AC became a necessity.

[@monomille1]

Given the shape of the rear door there was no way the window was going to be able to go down more than a couple inches. The wheelbase really drove the decision for the 4 door. The weight and cost savings were just side benefits.

[@irieman442]

This is truly the real reason for the fixed rear window. There was no way to fit a regulator in that small rear door, and if you could the window would only go down3 or 4 inches anyway.

[@sharkinstx]

My mom’s last car (she bought it new) was a ‘78 Malibu Classic 4-door, 305 2-barrel with the horrible THM200, a/c, and dealer-installed AM radio. Two-tone paint (Light Blue metallic and Bright Blue metallic). Built at the Arlington, Texas assembly plant. It had the fixed rear door windows with swing-out rear quarter windows. If you bought power windows, the swing-out rear quarter windows were power operated. The fixed rear glass allowed for the pocket in the door trim panel, improving elbow room. I read at the time that GM was prepared to tool up to produce doors with movable glass, in case buyers protested and refused to buy the cars with fixed glass. The fixed glass was the least of the problems with my mom’s car. The worst was the THM200 (Federal class action lawsuit), which was eventually replaced by a rebuilt THM350. Also numerous recalls, from problems with leaking a/c condensers, to rear axle shafts that could slide out (button on inboard end snaps off), to defective springs. Plus the poor quality enamel paint (GM switched from lacquer paint to enamel, when the A-Body plants were retooled for the ‘78 models). She drove the car just 72,000 miles in 35 years, and we sold it for $1,000 after she passed away in 2012.

[@SurnaturalM]

Yeah I had a 1978 malibu classic as well around 2004, mine was a 2 door model, burgundy and grey. it has only 40k km, I got the good idea to swap the engine from the 305 to à 350 from a 9c1 1990 caprice. Without changing the transmission, it lasted a week. It was awful. I then put a th350 in it, I drove it until 2015 when I sold it. It was still like new.

[@gordocarbo]

Yep those trans were an issue. Lots of late 70s and esp early 80s cars that had soft cams .Shop I worked at as a teen late 80s replaced these constantly for the dealer up the street. Easy $. You could still work on stuff without much headache

[@sharkinstx]

Yeah, the trans started giving problems (harsh 1-2 shifts) within a year, with just a few thousand miles (she rode the bus to work). After a few years, an internal case support broke, and the 2-3 shift went away. After that, a local independent transmission shop replaced it with a rebuilt Turbo 350. Problem solved.

[@robertd9850]

Car is in the lake and sinking fast. Just roll down the window and . . . doh!

[@michaelstrafello7346]

I worked for a Chevrolet dealership in 1978 and a local cab company ordered 6 4dr malibus and canceled the order when they found out the rear windows were inoperable

[@jkmarshall3553]

Did they instead flip those orders to Plymouth for 6 Fury 4dr models?

[@dieseltu1035]

Dodge diplomats we're taxis ​@@jkmarshall3553

[@dyer2cycle]

1978...they should have ordered 4 door Novas instead....

[@steveam29]

Saving the weight on rolling down the rear windows improved the fuel efficiency by exactly 0000000000000000000001% 😅

[@eddiestanley135]

👍 Yeah, those heavy window regulators and motors were real fuel economy destroyers!!?😃😮

[@glennso47]

If even that much.

[@questioner1596]

Like he said, it's the domino effect. Each piece isn't that heavy, but saving weight in the door allows lighter duty engine, suspension, etc. I like having roll down windows, but every compromise has benefits and drawbacks. My 2 doors had fixed rear windows despite having a back seat.

[@jayt620]

stop start technology probably improved fuel efficiency by .000000091%

[@Guns_N_Gears]

You forgot a decimal

[@keelay1977]

I remember riding in the back seat (and cargo area) of my aunt & uncle’s silver 1978 Malibu wagon with red vinyl seats and no A/C. Those rear vent windows did nothing and the two outer dash vents being blanked off didn’t help, either! It was also strange that the ‘78 GM intermediate wagons had one year only taillights with the backup lights on the outboard sides of the lenses. The ‘79 and later wagons moved the backup lights to the inboard sides of the lenses for some reason. Appearance, I guess? Thanks for the video!

[@ENDTIMEsVideoLibrary]

If I would have been old enough to buy a car back then, that Fixed rear window would have been a Deal Breaker for sure!! GM may have saved a lot of money on that one but I have the suspicion that they probably made up some of the difference in a loss of sales..

[@leonardpoindexter5289]

I guffawed when you said manufacturers had to cut weight in vehicles considering how now they regularly produce 2 ton and heavier ones.

[@rustyshackleford1687]

It's interesting how advancements in engine development have allowed us to jam all the weight back in but still get decent fuel mileage. However, I don't trust the high-strung, low-displacement turbos and CVTs that we use to achieve this outside of the warranty period.

[@mrpuppified9137]

These are classed as trucks, in many cases, so car mpg averages were not impacted.

[@rovervitesse1985]

I love that green olds! Looks so nice with these wheels

[@JimFlanagan4206]

I remember getting the back seat of my cousin's mid 80s Chevy Malibu. I was looking for the window crank when he told me they didn't roll down. I couldn't believe it and thought it was the worst design ever.

[@justflooreit4me1]

I guess I've been watching this channel too long because this is basically a refreshed video that is already been out there on this subject

[@corgiowner436]

Given the shape of the rear door and the size of the glass it’s only gonna roll down a few inches anyway.

[@Pisti846]

I have always read that the reason for the non-roll down rear windows was to preserve rear-seat hip room in a much narrower body by recessing the armrests, which meant no roll-down window hardware would fit. GM would have been much better off by making these cars either unibody or unibody with front sub-frame to save weight and making the cars wide enough to get the 55 inches of rear hip-room needed for three across seating. They then could have put in roll-down windows and probably sold even more. The full-frame added weight that was wasted. Considering GM's experience with unibody as well as Chrysler's from 1960 on and AMCs from the 1949 Nashs on there would have been no lack of engineering knowhow out there. The A-body Buicks and Oldsmobiles were not fake hatchbacks, they were fastbacks.

[@BrianLarson1326]

The last thing I need to do in my life is dwell on other peoples mistakes, but yes, as stated below, the rear window debacle was one of the main reasons I disliked several decisions made by automotive manufacturers. Thanks for the video, and for showing one of the vehicles I actually liked, but could never afford to buy, as well as the main reasons I I probably would have bought something else, lol.

[@pcno2832]

Chrysler deserves honorable mention here. They used the same arrangement on the early K-cars, but after a couple of years, the rear vent panes no longer opened and the main glass rolled down. Of course, some Chrysler cars (Lancer, Lebaron GTS, etc. ) during those years were known for those awful flexible nylon racks that used to split in two when you were trying to open a window, though I don't know if the Aries and Reliant had them as well.

[@Lurch4you]

Chrysler would add rear roll down windows to the K-cars during the 1982 model year. My sister had a 1981 Dodge Aries 4dr that had no roll down rear windows, but flipper rear windows. Just like the GM 1978-87 4dr A/G bodies.

[@20CentMotors]

"Weight is the enemy." - Raymond Loewy, from his book, "Never Leave Well Enough Alone"

[@kanaric]

Cars today could learn from that. 400hp but in a 4000lb car. Not exactly fun to drive and there is a reason why Americans are considered by be god awful in professional racing, the cars here SUCK.

[@turbofanlover]

Wow. First I've ever heard of this kind of thing being done. There is no way that I would ever consider buying a car with this lack of a basic feature.

[@johnplovanich9564]

Another informative, educational video.This is 1 of my FAVORITE channels. I learn something new with every video Couldn't put the rear windows down,but you could rotate the vent window.Great video and as always cheers from Eulethra.

[@stuartaaron613]

The worst theing they did in 1978 waas the stupid sloped rear window on the Olds and Buick models. Tried to make them look like hatchbacks.

[@gm12551]

That silver gage cluster was stupid too

[@brendancarlson1678]

The Cadillac that looks like it barely got away from a steamroller.

[@jefferysmith3930]

My grandfather was pretty cheezed about the fixed rear windows in the new Lemans Safari wagon he bought for my grandmother to drive. In FL the a/c was always on anyway. As kids we never noticed the difference

[@eyerollthereforeiam1709]

Many times, especially with GM, they've done things that had me wondering "WHAT were they thinking??" Adam, this is one of several times when you explain what they were thinking. In spite of what I've thought all these years, some of these things actually make sense.. Even if I still don't like them. But at least I can see where they came from.

[@JK-dp3lp]

Can't roll the windows down, and the deck lid isn't large enough to put a suitcase in, great ideas! I will say I really like the 2 tone green and those color matched wheels.

[@penguin44ca]

You know what I love about this? No actual effort was put into the making of this video. I personally think a slide show about moving objects was the way to!

[@Srvease1631]

Mid 70s GM 2-door models, such as cutlass, front seats revolved so passengers can get to back seat. I always missed the ac vent below the steering wheel - crotch-cooler.

[@briannichols4807]

My paternal grandparents bought a new ' 81 Buick Century 4Dr. just like the one in the picture between 3:25 - 3:30 , except there's had a tan vinyl top , as well as my maternal grandmother had a ' 78 Buick Century station wagon , which was the last car she owned . The rear windows not coming down is one main thing I remember about both of those cars .

[@arnesahlen2704]

First-ever mention I've heard of the virtuous circle - and true to form, you define it clearly and efficiently. Yet another BRAVO🎉 👏 to you!

[@nlpnt]

Early Chrysler K-Cars, '81 Dodge Aries and Plymouth Reliant, were similar but they gained roll-down rear windows for '82 since the Chrysler LeBaron was added that year with a puffy landau roof that covered the vent-window area of the back doors. Supposedly some very early '82 Aries/Reliants had the early setup to use up parts on hand (and all the ones pictured in MY82 brochures and ads do) but I've never seen that irl.

[@andyk6796]

I remember the early K-cars having rear windows that didn't roll down too. Fortunately they realized that was dumb and changed it.

[@jonclassical2024]

I think the two-tone green paint scheme on that Olds is beautiful...I had a 1984 Chevy Caprice wagon what had a similar two-tone green with no fake wood side panels.... except for the overheating/ fan issues, it was a great automobile!

[@davidlehner6094]

Adam, I can think of several but one of the worst cost saving measures has to be American Motors use of vacuum operated windshield wipers even on their higher-end models all the way trough at least 1967! My dad had a 1965 Ford Custom (not Custom 500!), Ford’s lowest line full-size car, that had 2-speed electric windshield wipers standard. The only other options on that car were the 289 2V, power steering, and AM radio. But, it was actually pretty nice. Comfortable and QUIET!

[@ChrisBrown-pz2gu]

AMC had vacuum wipers until 1972!!!

[@davidlehner6094]

Yeah….I’m not surprised!

[@СуперЛогин]

Dude did I tell you like a maniac?))) The cars reviewed are smooth any way

[@chriscazares5161]

My mom had a 1983 Buick Regal Unlimited 4 door like the one featured on Motorweek. She absolutely loved that car! But, yes it was annoying not to be able to have the back windows down.

[@johnkem2630]

The fixed rear door windows were cited at the time for child safety. Additionally, the rear vent windows allowed for flow through ventilation.

[@MsJamiewoods]

My parents bought a 1977 Chevy Impala. It was now the primary car in our family and the 1968 Chevy Bel Air was the "second car." Several months after my dad drove it home, we took a two week road trip vacation to Florida for Christmas. It was a great car for two adults, one 14-year-old daughter and an 11-year-old daughter. Two years later I used the '77 to take my driver's license road test -- I passed on the first try.

[@charlesbland1073]

I had a blue 1982 4dr. Cutlass that had the rear door vent window that opened by hand.

[@mikeschellinger.thatsme]

I bought a 79 olds cutlass wagon in late fall years ago. It had crank windows and I was the only one who drove it. It never occurred to me that rear windows wouldn’t roll down until the first warm day in spring. Being a wagon, it turned it quite the greenhouse. The vinyl seats didn’t help either. Not only did the rear door windows not roll down, but the window at the back tailgate (being a clamshell design) didn’t retract either. There were times I’d open the tailgate and all four doors trying to let the heat out in summer before leaving, and of course always looking for a shaded parking spot.

[@Cadillac61]

These intermediate GM cars are among the best looking cars GM has produced. I know I’m in the minority, but I like the slant back Buicks and Olds. They stand out. Now good luck finding one. The 4 doors are the nicest to me. Overall my favorite of the GM intermediate cars are the 1978 Monte Carlo and Malibu with the Grand Prix being a close 2nd. Another great video Adam!

[@bmac1205]

Love the wheels on the two tone green Olds.

[@CurtisClinton77]

these were ahead of their time. Audi does the same thing today, and calls it "Sportback". BMW does the same thing and calls it "Gran Coupe", and everyone just loves it.

[@trudygreer2491]

Don't forget the Pinto sedan!

[@DMETS519]

Well you can tell at least on the green Cutlass shown that even if you could roll down the rear window it would only fit into the door below about 4 or 5 inches lower anyway.

[@Normanx964]

GM management should have been arrested for this.

[@EngOne]

*In the "minds" of dingbat sales execs at GM, they "thought" this would force customers to buy the at-that-time expensive, profit laden air conditionning option. Somehow, they were unable to figure out it would only drive sales of competitors's models. ROFL...*

[@timothyweers8054]

With the 4-door sedan cars we had, one thing I absolutely hated was that the rear passenger windows never went completely down. Some cars didn't even go half down. I had a 1991 Oldsmobile 98 Regency Elite and with the windows going about 2/3 of the way down, when on the highway, would rumble throughout the car as I drove.

[@HemiChrysler]

it's the same cost cutting on the 1981 Dodge Aries, the first year, and likely the Plymouth Reliant too. my 1981 Aries K-wagon has fixed rear windows.

[@chriswilkerson1493]

Was going to make this same comment. All 1981 K-cars had fixed rear windows, but Chrysler apparently thought this was a mistake and went to roll down windows after just 1 model year

[@nlpnt]

@@chriswilkerson1493 I made another comment on this above, they had the window hardware planned for the LeBaron sedan with its' standard landau top that carried onto the doors and went ahead and put it in the regular Aries/Reliant too.

[@chriswilkerson1493]

@@nlpnt I didn’t realize that, that’s actually a very good solution on their part. Good to see you on here, you always have very informative comments on Curbside Classic.

[@tim_g3478]

In addition to eliminating the rear window mechanism, they changed to aluminum wiring! I had a ‘78 Century 4-dr that had all sorts of wiring issues. Once you found the culprit, you had a challenge jumping in a section of copper to fix it!

[@douglasb.1203]

Mom's 78 Grand Prix LJ had archs of electricity whenever the power window switch was pushed or pulled. Very disconcerting.

[@aloysiusbelisarius9992]

I remember riding in the back of one of those Cutlasses, which my mother had for a while when she worked for Deer Creek Estates and Country Club in the early-'80s. I also remember the frustrating surprise that the only movable piece of glass back there was the swivel rectangle, that there was no switch or coffee-crank for the bigger window...which, BTW, on all cars by that time that still had movable rear windows (save maybe for Caddies, but I'm still not quite sure of that), only allowed the windows to go *half-way* down. That was also something else I did not care for at all. There is another case of cost-cutting shenanigans that really grinds my gears ever since I learned about it, but this was in the 1960s. From '63 to '65, Lincoln's offerings had possibly one of the largest lists of standard equipment of any car, to include power operation of the triangle windows, 6-way seat adjusters, and power locks (the last of which many would argue needed to be standard just because of the clap-door configuration). Starting in '66, those three features were deleted from the standard-issue list and relegated to the extra-cost optional list. Ford's argument was that it would reduce the base price of their cars and bring in more sales. But Lincoln was a luxury marque, and those little creature-comforts were best kept where they were. Truth be told, the advertised drop in price to $5,500-ish only applied for a stripped Coupé; sedans and 'verts that were fitted with what used to be standard equipment saw their prices remain about the same as they were in '65. I still grill Ford for that cheap move, but especially the power-lock deletion. Maybe power locks could be made optional extras for the 2-door versions which also debuted that year, but there were also many *4-door* versions that were devoid of any central-locking system, further giving credence to the overly-clichéd phrase "suicide doors"! The only good thing about that is that it makes it fairly easy to install an electric power-lock system into one of these cars. But still, Ford deserves the Will-Smith Treatment for trying to drop their luxury marque a couple of rungs of the class ladder (again, they did it once before in the '50s) to the level of an Oldsmobile 98 or a Buick Electra-225.

[@tonyflorio3269]

Weird that Buick and Olds didn't make these actual hatchbacks, like the FWD X-bodies. That would have given them a significant practical advantage for their less conventional looks.

[@packard5682]

They were actually going to make them operating hatchbacks but the cost and added weight killed that idea. Hatchbacks and wagons are more expensive to build because of that open area and getting it to stay "square" or correctly lined up during the building process. There was also the not answered question as to why they made the Buick and Oldsmobile's with the slant back design and not the Chevrolet and Pontiac. There were some surveys done that showed people would accept a hatchback or slanted roof design on a less expensive car like the Chevrolet but not on what was supposed to be an upper market level vehicle like the Buick. Go figure.

[@TorCow1234]

I don't have a specific example of cost savings measure that comes to mind... I always miss convenience and compartment lighting, which is a common thing that's eliminated during decontenting sessions. I do much of my driving and working at night, so it's nice to be able to see inside your trunk or glove compartment without having to grab a flashlight, and have well designed map/reading lights. If we go back to a time before my time, Studebaker replaced the full instrumentation in their non-Hawk vehicles with oil pressure and charging system idiot lights for 1956-62 in cars and 1957-up in trucks, but actually went back to full gauges in all of their cars from 1963-66. My 1962 Lark will be getting gauges out of a 1963 when I get it back on the road.

It's always cool to think about my career as a process engineer at Libbey-Owens-Ford Glass in Lathrop, CA mid 90s. I worked the lamination and packaging line where we would supply glass to NUMMI in Fremont, CA! Good Times!

[@stephen3164]

My ‘79 Bonneville sedan with rally wheels, sport mirrors, and side skirts also eventually had rear windows that no longer rolled down. (Power windows quit working.). The AC had also quit working. The velour interior was working overtime in the Summer, especially for rear seat passengers trapped in the hot interior with no windows. But never fear, bc rear ventilation issues “fixed themselves” when all the metal behind the huge chrome panels rusted away. The bottom 4” of each rear door were literally just gone one day, and fresh air could once again enter the rear seats through the doors. Rain too.

[@P.Galore]

Looking at that Blue freighter reminds me: " The car with the lowest book value has right-of-way."

[@jeffreyweinzierl1509]

Back in the day, I heard the fixed windows were a safety feature. A kid won't fall out of a window that doesn't open. I think that was purely speculation to be honest and I didn't believe it. But if you look at the size of the glass compared to the size of that rear door, especially how its designed to blend into the wheel opening, there wouldn't be much room for that window to go down. I kinda think they figured "the juice isn't worth the squeeze" and cheaped out on the the door. Form over function.

[@byronh60]

I remember too, the commercial advertisements showed the benefit of those crazy rear vent windows as providing excellent ventilation without messing up rear seat passengers hair or things blowing around like maps and such. GM was very proud of it. Everyone I knew thought it was weird and hated it. I know Adam hates those slant-back Cutlass’ and Regal’s, but to see them now, especially nice examples, look really nice to me and don’t look like everything else on the road.

[@joeseeking3572]

The fastback versions sold terribly, but Old (and to a lesser extent Buick) did really well with the restyle notchback. Especially in Supreme Brougham and Regal Limited trim you could easily pretend you had a 1 year old Seville.

[@tommywatterson5276]

I remember this. I thought fixed windows in rear doors was a horrible idea for safety concerns. I also thought the Olds and Buick midsize sloped roof " hatchback " models were ugly. If they had been actual hatchbacks, at least I could see some functionality. I would much more understand this design in the Chevy and Pontiac lines as a hatchback, not in the Olds & Buick brands.

[@loveisall5520]

I had one of these in Cutlass Supreme as a company car, all black 4-door sedan with a trunk. I thought it was weird at first, but here in TX I never rolled the windows down anyway due to the heat. Never missed it. I remember the wagons had those little power vent windows back near the tailgate on both sides. Maybe people up north needed them to roll down, but I sure didn't. Loved the car; for me it was reliable and very comfortable, had all the options I wanted. I don't remember the engine except it wasn't diesel!

[@ltcmoose2001]

I had a 79 Cutlass Salon. I shipped it to Germany and ran it on the Autobahn. I drove it to work every day with no speed limit. It was a little 260 V8. I never knew the top speed because the speedometer would only go up to 85. As the speedometer needle disappeared from sight my wife would ask me how fast are we going. I would respond that we were doing "F" as the needle disappeared behind the fuel gauge. Kept the car for 12 years, rebuild the transmission and still ran great with 250k miles. Best car I ever owned.

[@73_f100]

3:01 talk about rough build quality. You can see the weird gaps and forms even on my phone screen.

[@dakotafarm1]

I had a 1979 Pontiac LeMans. I liked that car a lot, but the immovable rear windows was ridiculous. There were some small vent windows behind them you could push open, but that didn't make any rear seat passengers feel refreshed. I read at the time that GM did this to reduce weight to improve fuel economy, which was preposterous as even one small child passenger or a bag of groceries would outweigh the window cranks. I liked my '79 LeMans a lot though, it got great gas mileage with the 231 V-6, and accelleration felt as good as a V-8. Wish I still had it.

[@bobwilson758]

You got the good Buick V-6 ! Great engine --->

[@robgrear1142]

Another example of the downfall of GM in the 1970’s.

[@damianbowyer2018]

Wow, this is startling info on these GM Intermediates, Adam....What happens if U have an accident and the doors won't open....U can't open the rear windows to get out, especially if the car goes into water and U need to get out quickly....How this passed Safety Standards is incredible, Adam....😯👐👎

[@davida1hiwaaynet]

This is really interesting! I have 7 older GM cars and have often considered sealing the windows shut since it is so much easier to keep the air conditioning working versus keeping all the window regulators functional LOL! That might cut down on wind noise, too. But I am not a typical person so my opinion surely differs.

[@Nick_B_Bad]

The Cutlass Salon will always have a special place in my car heart. ❤😂

[@MrBrianbusch]

I'm a floor and window Vent person, never really care for AC plus I prefer to be able to hear the sounds of traffic around me.

[@markwatson3135]

It also does not look like the rear window would go down much anyway with the wheel arch in the door

[@Michael-iw4ru]

Who knows? It could be that 'shrinking' affected the door shape dramatically so they decided it's not worth it to make all the mechanics to lower the window for a couple of inches and tried to turn the disadvantage into the 'innovation',

[@buckykattnj]

Some of the G-bod sedans almost survived until nearly the end. IIRC, the Malibu sedan ended in 1983 with the nameplate (at least temporarily)... the Buick sedan ended in 1984. Pontiac had the sedan/wagon only Bonnevilles until 1986... but the Olds Cutlass Supreme sedan lasted until 1987! A friend had one that wanted me to fix it in ~1994... I wasn't able to fix it, but I was astonished to see a car I thought had been discontinued 4~5 years previous.

[@dyer2cycle]

the El Camino lasted until 1987 also...basically a Malibu wagon with the rear roof cut down....

[@buckykattnj]

@@dyer2cycle It's not a sedan... I was only bringing up the sedans. All the coupes and pickups survived into 1987... The Cutlass Supreme coupe and Monte Carlo fielded brief 1988 model years, but were built in 1987. The last of the G-bods were all built at Pontiac Assembly... along with the Fiero. GM was in a big hurry to shutdown the plant, so these cars were the last made there... the G-bods ended Dec 11, 1987 and Fiero August 16, 1988.

[@landiahillfarm6590]

I love the opening shot of the Impala, showing in the background what we COULD have gotten and in the fore the blocky POS we ended up with. Way to go GM.

[@marvintaylor5332]

Adam , you just bought me back to pass. . . I forgot about that era of gm cars not having rear roll down windows! I was never a fan of that particular body style that you are showing. Personally, I thought it was hideous, and I still think so ! Those cars were literally heat boxes in the rear seats if the ac was not on in the summer months! Furthermore, I think it's one of the ugliest car designs of that era, and no rear roll down windows didn't make the situation any better! Just another reason to dislike the ridiculous car ever more !!!!!

[@kickinvideo333]

My dad traded in our '75 Chevy Malibu four-door sedan with A/C for a Dealer Demo '78 Chevy Malibu four-door sedan. Needless to say, us kids noticed the difference. I'll never forget the day my dad hit a typical Northeast Ohio pothole, ejecting the hubcap into a black hole and bending the rim. He quickly traded it for a loaded '79 Bonneville Brougham, which was, for us kids, like Heaven after Hades.

[@Troy_nov1965]

My 72 Mercury comet had rear windows that did not roll down but popped out like a vent window

[@anthonybrennan1075]

You can see that the shape of the door would have restricted lowering the window to more than a few inches anyway. Without the inclusion of a small fixed piece at the rear of the window aperture, the main glass would very quickly impact the door frame adjacent to the wheel arch. A stellar example of form over function.

[@daiichidoku]

dad had a '78 century coupe. 305 car. no a/c. as a young lad in the back in summer i hated every moment. years later a grey goo started to seep from under the panels. window sealant im sure

[@Lousybarber]

I had a new ‘78 Olds Cutlass coupe. During the first summer I had the same thing happen. A sticky grey substance ran down the inside of the B pillars. One of many issues I encountered with that car.

[@serpentorzool5433]

I see the logic in removing some components like that. Most people don't roll all 4 windows down, especially before power windows. I grew up in this era and never knew that this was a "thing". My mom drove 1978 corolla hatchback that was school bus yellow.

[@jkusrbetter9519]

When I look at an awful looking Cutlass with the goofy rear window I can see why Oldsmobile is out of business.

[@warderjack]

Ditching the 3800 for the unreliable 3.6

[@kirkcather3670]

I had the '81 Olds Cutlass Salon. Living in the South, I never had a problem with the real windows being fixed.

[@kennethsouthard6042]

In our family this would have been a big plus. For whatever reason, my parents hated it when the kids rolled down the rear windows. They really liked it in '73 when we bought a Lincoln Continental with power windows to where they were able to lock us out. And those windows were never and I mean never unlocked. The only downside is that it locked out the front passenger window as well which made my mom feel that she was also captive to this feature when she was the passenger.

[@OLDS98]

Thank you Adam. I know the 1982-1986 Pontiac Bonneville had that rear vent window design as well as well as Chevrolet Malibu and Le Mans. I used to wonder as a child why the windows did not come down. People did not like that roof design before the change on Oldsmobile and Buick. I was told that was designed that way because of European car design. I was also told they did not have room in the rear door panel or design to put window gear and motors. I do not know how true it is. The 1977 and 1978 downsizing what not downsizing to me, but right sizing. Those cars were still large and had interior room and trunk space. The 1985-1987 downsizing was too much and went too far and it cost GM money and time and market share. I often wonder if those cars had been wider and longer would it have worked. There is still the issue of the styling. The other things that were cheap : The plastics that become brittle over time is an issue in the interior and under the hood. The mouse fur headliners on GM cars.