Phoenix8990

I don't see a lot either out there and am not clear as to why those 2 variations existed? It seems to me the Cutlass S, the Supreme, the 442, pretty much had it covered. How is an F85 different from a base Cutlass? Did they sell many?
thanks,
SteveW.

Koda

The car, in 61-63, was the F-85 and the Cutlass was the upper trim model. After the model change in 64, there was still F-85 and Cutlass. 442 was a package, not a model. Cutlass Supreme showed up in 66 as a trim package. F-85 was the model.

This changed in 68 with the next model change. 442 was a model now, Cutlass and Cutlass Supreme were trims on the F-85 model.
In 70, Cutlass Supreme was the formal notchback car. Somewhere around this time the Cutlass S showed up. 442 was still a model, F-85 was still the base model.
In 72, 442 became a package again, then things changed again in 73.

This is the evolution of a car line. Typically, you start a vehicle with 1 setup in case it flops. Add a higher one, then a sporty one, then a premium one, and so on. You're just trying to hit market segments, and the cars are not hard to build more of one and less of another, you just change your parts mix to the assembly lines. The short answer is "base Cutlass is 1 trim level above a F-85 of the top grade (sometimes there were F-85 Deluxes, and there were even F-85 442s).

I don't think many 61-63 F-85 model, all trims, sold. They got immensely more popular as an intermediate car. The F-85 name was phased out in 72. SX was putting a 455 in a Supreme body as a classy sporty car. Different idea, same parts, mix and match, make money.

jaunty75

Pretty much what Koda said. You have to know the history. Olds didn't invent a model line-up with F-85, Cutlass, Cutlass Supreme, Cutlass S, 442 all in one model year. These evolved over time depending on demand and the market segment Olds was trying to sell to.

The F-85 was introduced in 1961, and there was no Cutlass. That didn't come along until about half-way through the model year, and it was simply an F-85 with bucket seats. Starting in 1962, the Cutlass became an upper level trim line on the F-85. Later, the Cutlass became its own model. Olds kept the F-85 through the years so as to offer something to every market segment.

How is an F-85 different from a base Cutlass? Depends on the year. The differences were usually in the area of available engines, available body styles, and level of trim. Put a Cutlass next to an F-85 of the same model year, and you'd probably notice right away the differences. The F-85 was looked more plain. No trim around the wheel wells,for instance.

Another differentiation is that not all body styles were offered in all model lines. If you wanted a convertible, you needed to buy a Cutlass as the F-85 lines did not have it. F-85's tended to be less sporty, featuring four-door sedan and 2-door post cars. You want a hardtop, you had to buy a Cutlass.

Phoenix8990

Thanks for both answers,.

Steve

joe_padavano

I'm afraid I don't understand why people seem to be mystified by the fact that car makers offer different trim levels at different price points. This question comes up a lot. For example, Honda offers Civics in DX, LX, EX, and Si trim levels, each with different standard equipment. This is just an attempt to entice as many buyers as possible.

I guess what people not alive in the 1960s fail to grasp is that then you could pick and choose individual options to completely customize your car. Today automakers have tried to consolidate options into "packages" to reduce manufacturing costs.

To clarify what's been posted in this thread, when the F85 line was released in 1961, there were THREE trim levels, F85, F85 Deluxe, and Cutlass. This was joined by a fourth performance level in 1962, the Jetfire. By the way, this extended to the full size cars as well, with Eighty Eight, Super 88, Dynamic 88, and Starfire. Over the years, model names changed but the basic structure of three trim levels plus a performance version was pretty much the norm. And don't confuse the SX engine package with the Cutlass Supreme model line.

Today, rather than releasing different trim level models on the same platform, automakers apparently need to offer a completely different SUV to fill those market niches (though admittedly the underpinnings are all pretty much the same). Does BMW REALLY need SEVEN different SUVs to cover the market? And this is seven different models, not trim levels. And by the way, that doesn't count the TEN different car and crossover lines they offer. Seriously?

69CSHC

Why an F85

Most people like more comfort and ease of use options... I don't but I'm definitely in the minority.


Keep in mind the king of 442s are F85s...

1966 F85 W30s are arguably the quickest Oldsmobile's ever produced...

Base to base very similar but people buying Cutlasses were likely looking for a better optioned vehicle. Therefore F85s will by default generally be lighter lesser optioned vehicles.

They definitely produced many. Peak production year was 1966,

159,085 F85 // 83,115 Cutlass // 21,997 Cutlass 4-4-2 http://www.carnut.com/specs/gen/olds60.html

The reason they are rare despite production numbers like in 1966 is desirability. The closer you are to a 442 in pecking order the more likely the car still exists. A 6 cylinder ultra base model version starts getting long in the tooth the more likely you are to replace the vehicle....

Koda

I would love to see a non-AC all stock 68 Hurst / Olds and a 66 all stock 442 W-30 drag race.

The 390 HP 455 apparently pushed the 68 body through the quarter at 13.9, but the 360 HP 400 pushed the 66 body through it at 13.8 from what I read (not official numbers, just reprinted a few times so who knows)

69CSHC

So would I, It would be a tremendous matchup.

On paper, simulation is right there with you.

1966 W30 13.8
1968 H/O 14.0

Automobile Catalog puts them both at 99 MPH while the W30 has almost every single advantage.

W30 4 speed stick 4.33 rear, curb weight 3310 LBS
H/O 3 speed auto 3.91 rear, curb weight 3810 LBS

The W30 is a beast and the H/O is on another level. Imagine giving the W30 that 500 LB penalty.

The 69 H/O is just as much of a monster, Car Life's 69 H/O ran a 14.1 @ 100.1 MPH test weight 4205 LBS
Peter Klutt of LMC also tested a stock 69 H/O and ran a 13.828 @ 100.59 MPH

Golden Pig

Judy Bureski Racing A Stock turned 11.2s all day long with stock W30 block intake and heads and full weight car in 1970. The 66 W30s were barely 12 second cars even at the lighter bodyweight. Fast but not Judy fast. Also The 66 F85W30 raced class C.

However. The 66 F-85 W-30 was the birth of the future king of the ring W30 455. If not for the Pontiacs they would have been right there with the Camero at top of C Stock.



1966 F85 W30s are arguably the quickest Oldsmobile's ever produced...

OLDSter Ralph

If you had both cars as delivered or near to it, and allow minor tuning, the 68 H/O would beat the '66 W-30. All these magazine tests were done on different drag strips at different altitudes on different days and with different drivers. Consider the tire sizes for just one thing.
Both cars were hurting for traction. The '68 H/O (TH400) would recover from wheelspin faster than the "66 with 4.33's.

Koda

For this hypothetical drag race, we are going to consider perfect manual shifting on the 66.

So, stock tires, and we did a righteous burnout right before the race?

69CSHC

Good point.

Definitely. I just wish Peter Klutt had a 66 W30 on hand when he conducted the musclecar shootout. Enjoy this vid guys, he put together a great show years ago for the speed channel. In my opinion he tested the cars out just right. Quickest 42 minutes of viewing I've probably ever experienced.



P.S. I believe the show originally aired the summer of 2004.

Run to Rund

The original owner told me that #24 1966 W30 ran 13.30s bone stock. In C/S, 12.30s and 12.40s were common for them. The Rund car best e.t. was 12.15 and 115 mph. Remember that stock times were on miserable red line tires, and stock class ran on 7" wide slicks of primitive design and rubber compound. Technology quickly improved over the next few years so it is hard to get fair, direct comparisons to later cars' times.