|
|
The Oldsmobile was one of the first post-war cars to earn a performance image...and one of the first to lose it. In the early Fifties, the hot cars in southern stock car racing were the Hudson Hornets and the Oldsmobile Rocket 88s. The Hudson disappeared, of course, and the Oldsmobile...well, the Oldsmobile sort of disappeared too, displaced from the attention of the performance-conscious public by such makes as Pontiac, Ford, Dodge, Chevy, Plymouth, Mercury, and even Buick, for heaven's sake. There was a time too, when Oldsmobile was considered General Motors' experimental division -- all the trick stuff was tried out on Oldsmobiles first, then passed on to the other GM divisions. Oldsmobile owners felt special; they got the first crack at new engineering features. For instance, the first of the high-performance V-8s, the Rocket engine, was first introduced by Olds. And it was in a small, light car --making it a prototype GTO, 15 years ahead of its time. And the Hydra-Matic transmission debuted in the Oldsmobile line even earlier. |
This aggressive, pioneering spirit seemed to have been lost in the tasteless days of the mid-Fifties, and for a decade Oldsmobiles were near-invisible non-cars. The 1958s were probably the worst, but matters were hardly improved by the spaceship look of the early Sixties. The bright young engineers were channeled elsewhere, and the styling studios were staffed by gorpy, unwitting creators of Pop Art. The cars suffered a decline of both popularity and quality, and their character was, at best, innocuous. Two years ago, the atmosphere suddenly brightened. Oldsmobile's reputation as an experimental division was brought back powerfully with the introduction of the unorthodox front-wheel-drive Toronado. The performance image was somewhat more difficult to recapture. There is a corporate ban on any form of racing, on power-to-weight ratios of less than 10 lbs./bhp, and, besides, Oldsmobile didn't have any engines hotter than any of the other GM divisions. To get a competitive edge, Oldsmobile needed a gimmick. Olds' engineers decided to take off at a tangent to the rest of the industry by concentrating on handling. The 4-4-2 model, introduced in 1964, was an experiment to test public reaction to a fully roadworthy car. Thus far, the public at large seems no more excited about good handling in a hot intermediate than it did in the compact Corvair, but we think it's maybe the best thing that has happened to Detroit since they started building cars there. The 1966 version of the 4-4-2 won our six-way "Super Car" test hands down, and the '67 is even better. The 4-4-2 is the best-handling car of its type we've ever tested. Instead of the typical horrendous understeer generally found on domestic cars, the 4-4-2 is basically neutral under all conditions, although anyone who want to hand the tail out can easily induce power oversteer, with 440 lbs./ft. of torque driving through a 3.08 rear axle ratio. In the terminology used by Oldsmobile engineers, the 4-4-2 is a "high-gain, high-response" car. This means it reacts to steering input by changing direction rapidly, and that the car is capable of making quick adjustments from one attitude (straight ahead) to another (turning) without any loss of stability. In more familiar language, it's a driver's car. |
Complementing the brakes and handling is an improved three-speed Turbo Hydra-Matic transmission, an option that replaces the former two-speed Jetaway unit. This year, the Hydra-Matic has been built especially for the 4-4-2, with torque converter ratios of 1.9 and 2.5 perfectly mated to the 400 cu. in. engine. It features a shifting arrangement that allows downshifts at any time, providing the resulting rpm do not exceed the 5200-rpm engine limit. Downshifting is automatic, simply by dropping the lever into low range and waiting for the speed to equalize with the engine rpm. Zap, second gear at 88 mph. Pow, first at 53 mph. Maximum gear retardation without worrying about matching rpm with gear ratios; no more double-clutching that manual four-speed, or cursing the inept automatic. The necessity, and much of the desirability, of having a four-speed manual transmission is swept away tby the introduction of the Oldsmobile 4-4-2 Turbo Hydra-Matic. An additional change to the 1967 drive train is the new rear axle, which is now made by Oldsmobile. It uses 31 splines on the axle stubs and an 8.75-in. ring gear to give 32 percent more strength than in 1966. Our test car was not equipped with the limited slip option, but Oldsmobile engineers say it is an improved model with hardened case and re-designed friction plates for more positive lock-up with less heat production. The 350-horsepower, 400 cu. in. engine is unchanged from 1966, with the exception of a new magnetic pulse generator that replaes the breaker points and condenser of the standard ignition. This device allows a wide variety in spark plug gaps and heat ranges, without the usual accompanying power loss. |
The only complaint we might register is a small one (and we've said it before): the rear axle bottoms too easily with a 4- or 5-passenger load. Without stiffer rear springs, which would increase the rear roll couple to the detriment of cornering adhesion, it's a 2-passenger car. The 4-4-2's interior is pleasant, but not outstanding -- mainly because it's a compromise between standard F-85 pieces and someone's idea of what a GT car's dashboard should look like. It contains all the right instruments (if you specify the Rally Pack option), but they are condensed into one illegible dial flanking the speedometer on the left. In the center of this dial is the smallest tachometer we've seen on any car, with oil pressure, water temperature and ammeter gauges spread around at 120-degree intervals. It looks more like a chrome-spangled battlefield than a serious attempt to convey information, and is totally out of keeping with the quality of the engineering features on the rest of the car. The driver's postion is also compromised -- you sit too close to the steering wheel (not available with the telescoping option offered on larger GM cars). The only aspects of the interior that save the 4-4-2 from mediocrity are the comfortable bucket seats, the well-located small controls, and good vision in all directions except the rear quarters, which are blocked by the currently stylish wide roof supports. Despite these minor criticisms of the interior, the 4-4-2 is the best balance of performance and practicality we have seen. It handles well, stops fast, and rides comfortably on almost any road surface. If these are the things America really wants and needs in its passenger cars, then the 4-4-2 experiment will be a success. Spread the word. |
Specifications | |||
Oldsmobile
4-4-2 Manufacturer:
Oldsmobile Division, General Motors Coporation, Lansing MI ENGINE DRIVE TRAIN
DIMENSIONS AND CAPACITIES SUSPENSION STEERING BRAKES WHEELS
AND TIRES
|
CHECK LIST
ENGINE |
- |
Excellent |
||||||||||||||||||||||
DRIVETRAIN Shift linkage Shift smoothness (auto.) Drive train noise |
- |
Good Good Very Good |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
STEERING Effort Response Road feel Kickback |
|
Excellent Very Good Poor Very Good |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
SUSPENSION Ride comfort Roll Resistance Pitch control Harshness control |
- |
Very Good Very Good Good Very Good |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
HANDLING Directional control Predictabliity Evasive maneuverability Resistance to sidewinds |
- |
Very Good Excellent Very Good Very Good |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
BRAKES Pedal pressure Response Fade resistance Directional stability |
- |
Excellent Excellent Very Good Excellent |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
CONTROLS Wheel position Pedal Postion Gearshift postition Relationship Small controls |
- |
Good Very Good Good Fair Very Good |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
INTERIOR Ease of entry/exit Noise level (cruising) Front seating comfort Front leg room Front head room Front hip/shoulder room Rear seating comfort Rear leg room Rear head room Rear hip/shoulder room Instrument comprehensiveness Instrument legibility |
- |
Very Good Good Good Very Good Very Good Excellent Fair Poor Fair Good Very Good Fair |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
VISION Forward Front quarter Side Rear quarter Rear |
- |
Good Good Very Good Poor Good |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
WEATHER PROTECTION Heater/defroster Ventilation Weather sealing |
- |
Excellent Good Excellent |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
CONSTRUCTION QUALITY Sheet metal Paint Chrome Upholstery Padding Hardware |
- |
Very Good Very Good Excellent Very Good Very Good Excellent |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
GENERAL Headlight illumination Parking and signal lights Wiper effectiveness Service accessibility Trunk space Interior storage space Bumper protection |
- |
Very Good Good Excellent Good Very Good Good Good |
|
PERFORMANCE Zero to 30 mph: 3.0 sec Zero to 40 mph: 4.2 sec Zero to 50 mph: 5.7 sec Zero to 60 mph: 7.8 sec Zero to 70 mph: 9.8 sec Zero to 80 mph: 12.4 sec Zero to 90 mph: 15.6 sec Zero to 100 mph: 19.4 sec Standing 1/4 mile: 15.8 sec @ 91 mph 80 - 0 mph: 272 ft (.78G) Fuel mileage: 11-17 mpg on premium fuel Cruising range: 220-340 mi |
|
||
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
A slightly abbreviated version of this road test also appeared in the 1967 Car & Driver Yearbook |
|
Want to link to this site? Please
use this banner. The correct URL for this website is http://www.OLDSmobility.com/) |