The latest issue of Collectible Automobile suggests that the “aeroback” styling of the 1978-79 Buick Century hurt its sales (Witzenburg, 2023). However, the article doesn’t compare output with previous years or other General Motors’ mid-sized cars. So let’s do a quick data dive.
The aeroback was bestowed upon the Century and Oldsmobile Cutlass four-door sedan and two-door coupe when the cars were downsized for 1978. Production fell across the board for those body styles compared to notchbacks previously offered.
In contrast, the Chevrolet Malibu and Pontiac LeMans stuck with notchbacks . . . and sales went up. You can see this most starkly in the graph below, which compares output of four-door sedans.
Once the aeroback four-door sedan was ditched in favor of a notchback in 1980, Cutlass production shot up to the point where it surpassed the Malibu — with the Century not far behind.
Buick survived the aerobacks better than Oldsmobile
Production for Buick’s overall mid-sized lineup grew by 2 percent between 1977 and 1979 even though aeroback body styles fell by almost 79 percent. What made up the difference was soaring sales of the Regal, a two-door personal coupe with traditional brougham styling.
The popularity of the Century four-door sedan jumped in 1980, when a notchback was reintroduced. Output went up from under 20,000 units to almost 130,000.
The Cutlass saw a similarly big sales decline for its aerobacks, which fell almost 70 percent from 1977 to 1979. But unlike with Buick, Oldsmobile’s mid-sized personal coupe — the Cutlass Supreme — didn’t fill the void sales-wise. Overall Cutlass production slid by 11 percent.
As with Buick, Oldsmobile’s revived notchback four-door sedan saw a big jump in sales in 1980. Overall mid-sized output continued to fall, but Oldsmobile still outproduced Buick by roughly 485,000 to 363,000 units.
Pontiac and Chevrolet gain sales by keeping notchbacks
The Pontiac LeMans, which stuck with notchbacks, saw the output of its four-door sedans and two-door coupes rise by 37 percent between 1977 and 1979. Might some of those sales have come from people turned off by the Buick and Oldsmobile aerobacks?
Chevrolet’s Malibu used the same notchback greenhouses and door sheetmetal as the LeMans. Output also increased, albeit by only 14 percent between 1977 and 1979.
How much did the aerobacks hurt GM mid-sized sales?
GM’s mid-sized four-door sedans saw output slide by 13 percent between 1977 and 1979. That was far less than two-door coupes, which dropped by 37 percent. Increased wagon production mostly made up for those losses.
The irony of the situation is that even though the aerobacks sold poorly, those body styles didn’t represent a large enough proportion of GM’s total mid-sized output to move the needle all that much. Between 1977 and 1979 mid-sized production fell by 4.6 percent, but most of that was from declining popularity of GM’s personal coupes.
Despite the return of Buick and Oldsmobile’s notchback four-door sedans in 1980, GM saw a 25-percent fall in overall mid-sized production. That was largely driven by a 40-percent drop in personal coupe output.
Did the aerobacks boost personal coupe sales?
While we’re talking about the aerobacks, let’s take a look at whether their unpopularity resulted in higher output for Buick and Oldsmobile’s mid-sized personal coupes in 1978-79.
Also see ‘What’s Collectible Automobile’s beef with the 1978-80 Pontiac Grand Prix?’
That appears to have been most likely with the Regal, whose production soared by 57 percent between 1977 and 1979. The Cutlass Supreme’s output only increased by 8 percent and both the Grand Prix and Monte Carlo fell by roughly a quarter.
A countervailing argument: If the aerobacks pushed some buyers into personal coupes in 1978-79, then wouldn’t that deflate sales of the latter in 1980, when notchback sedans returned? All of GM’s personal coupes saw major output declines, but the Regal and Cutlass Supreme had the smallest — 21 and 40 percent, respectively, versus 45 and 53 percent for the Grand Prix and Monte Carlo.
This adds up to a murky picture of how the aerobacks may have impacted GM. What I think we can reasonably say is that while they were clearly a mistake, they weren’t a very big one.
NOTES:
Production figures are calculated from data by the auto editors of Consumer Guide (1993, 2006), Gunnell (2002), and Flammang and Kowalke (1999).Â
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- Auto editors of Consumer Guide; 1993, 2006. Encyclopedia of American Cars. Publications International, Lincolnwood, IL.
- Flammang, James M. and Ron Kowalke; 1999. Standard Catalog of American Cars, 1976-1999. Third Ed. Krause Publications, Iola, WI.
- Gunnell, John; 2002. Standard Catalog of American Cars, 1946-1975. Revised 4th Ed. Krause Publications, Iola, WI.
- Witzenburg, Gary; 2023. “1978-80 Buick Century and Regal Hits and Misses.” Collectible Automobile. August issue: pp. 60-73.
ADVERTISING & BROCHURES
- oldcarbrochures.org: Buick Century and Regal (1978, 1979, 1980); Chevrolet Malibu (1978); Oldsmobile Cutlass (1978); Pontiac LeMans (1978)
Thanks for looking at this. The second fuel crisis in 1979 is a background factor to be kept in mind in looking at the 1980-81 numbers. Relatedly, the intro of the fwd X bodies as early ’80 models, which sold in huge volumes before quality and engineering issues became apparent. I suspect the bump in Cutlass and Regal notchbacks may map against a parallel decline in B body sales in those years.
That’s useful context. I try to stick fairly closely to the numbers I’ve crunched so didn’t address the X- and B-bodies. Those would be good future data dives.
The Aeroback never looked right even when introduced. And, GM used it for some of the X bodies too. Truly unfortunate was the fix to traditional roof became essentially one roof shape across all the divisions as illustrated in the infamous cover of the business magazine.
As for the points on the A specials (Grand Prix and Monte Carlo) I thought the Grand Prix was well done for its time. Design studio manager for the Monte Carlo once described the problem they were dealing with – designers did not like the 1973’s fat “go for Baroque” design theme and wanted a clean design. But, the marketing folks were coming in saying how that Baroque design moved 1 million units. The result was cleaned up a bunch from the prior version but still had issues.
I have to agree with Jeff Kennedy: The aerobacks just were not right proportionally on the downsized intermediate Buicks and Oldsmobiles, although the X-cars were okay, at least to my eyes. Frankly, G.M. did not really get the styling right on the rear-drive intermediates until the 1981 restyles, in my opinion. I had a co-worker who owned a ’78 Cutlass four-door aeroback, and he really came to dislike the styling. He got rid of the car as soon as it was paid off. I wonder what the resale value was on used aerobacks ?
The fixed rear window on the sedans was unforgivable.