Pontiac 6000STE
I have absolutely no idea what to make of the Pontiac 6000STE. At its heart, it is simply a Chevrolet Celebrity clone; which itself was an outgrowth of the much-maligned Chevrolet Citation. I have already described the misery inflicted upon my car enthusiast father by the 6000STE's A-body sibling, the Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera. I can't imagine a less promising foundation for a sports sedan than that.
And yet ... and yet, there was a period of time in the early 1980s when the 6000STE was regarded by the leading automotive journalists as the finest sports sedan in America. Like the Cadillac CTS-V today, the 6000STE was considered GM's credible BMW imitator, a world-class sports sedan that melded American attitude with European driving dynamics.
In fact Car and Driver named the 6000STE one of the 10 Best Cars of 1983. The rest of the list was made up of such luminaries as the Porsche 944, Mk. I Volkswagen GTI, Toyota Supra, Honda Accord, Ford Mustang, Mazda RX-7, Mercedes-Benz 380SEL, Chevrolet Caprice (the revolutionary downsized version), and, um, the AMC/Renault Alliance. Hey, nobody's perfect. The point is, C&D thought the 6000STE was one of the best cars in the world; it made a list that included no BMWs, a list from which C&D reluctantly bumped the excellent Porsche 928.
Read what C&D had to say:
"If the downsized General Motors big cars of 1977 were the best American cars since the end of World War II (!), the 1982 General Motors A-bodies are the best since 1977, and the Pontiac 6000STE is the best of all. Exactly opposite the Firebird, the 6000STE is light and lively, features the most up-to-date technology available from GM, and comes wrapped in sheetmetal that can only be described as controversial. ... It is ... the most handsomely trimmed and detailed new product in the current GM portfolio. It is also the least compromised, and the one that does the best job of telegraphing exactly what kind of car it is, and to exactly what kind of driver it is supposed to appeal. This is in every way a Car and Driver kind of car. Fun to drive, economical, distinctive in appearance, comfortable in an active participant's sense of the word, and absolutely contemporary."
Wow. C&D didn't exactly recant upon further reflection; the 6000STE also made the list in 1984 and 1985. C&D wasn't alone in praising the 6000STE, either; it was regarded as a world-class car in a way in which, say, the Celebrity Eurosport was not. Yet it was fundamentally the same A-body underneath as the Celebrity and Cutlass Ciera--two cars known as mediocre at best, disappointments at worst. The 6000STE had the same 2.8-liter, 135-horsepower carbureted V-6, and the same 3-speed automatic transmission as the other A-bodies. I understand that the sports sedan bar was considerably lower in 1983 than it is now; but was it low enough that a Cutlass Ciera clone with a sport-tuned suspension qualified? In later years, the 6000STE would gain fuel injection, an all-wheel-drive system and a larger 3.1-liter V-6, but at its heart, it was still a GM A-body--a pushrod engine in a package for proles.
I have no idea how to resolve this apparent contradiction. For years, I have kept the 6000STE on my beater watch list, both to test it out and because it has major-league sleeper potential. After all, what could be a more unlikely sleeper than a 1980s BMW-caliber Pontiac sports sedan? Now, however, I fear that it's just too late to fairly evaluate the Pontiac. Audis and BMWs of this vintage are enough hard to find in good condition, and I'm guessing finding a mint 6000STE would be nearly impossible.
So, since the 6000STE has left me flummoxed, I'm looking for help. Does anybody out there in Car Lust land have enough experience with the 6000STE to render judgement on whether it's as unexpectedly great as my heart wants it to be, or as mediocre as my mind has concluded it must be?
The first commercial below is chock-full of good-for-you 1980s cheese, but it's mostly notable for the fact that half the commercial passes before anybody speaks. That has the potential to be a brave, dramatic decision had the visuals taken advantage of the silence, but instead we get visual evidence of the 6000STE's ability to cruise in a straight line and clear rain from its windshield. From the cognitive dissonance department, we have the announcer grimly announcing that the 6000STE is "taking on the European performance sedans at their own game," underscored by a visual of the cheesy digital tach lighting up. Right--exactly like a BMW.
The second commercial is mostly notable for the cheesy grin and nod at the 0:20 mark. We don't see nearly enough of that in today's commercials. Pontiac eschewed the grim announcer for the 1986 ad series; the third commercial here shows off the painfully forced dialogue that was so typical of domestic car ads of the time. "John, you clown! Come here, you ... let's go for a ride!"
The top image was taken by Flickr user Pepperguy; the second advertising image was found at Wikicars; and the third came from How Stuff Works.
--Chris H.
Cookie the Dog's Owner on May 11, 2009 at 02:42 PM
For a time there in the early 80s, Pontiac was going to be GM's "European"-style division, and all the cars were going to have alphanumeric model names like "T-1000" and "J-2000" and "A-6000." The latter lost its "A" and went on sale as the "6000", and the other two had their letter prefixes lopped off soon afterward. The whole "European division" gag died a quick death within a year or two.
Most 6000s (at least at the start) were the "LE" personal luxury trim level, and at least one of the car magazines started calling it the "Goolie" as a result.
That Car Guy (Chuck) on May 11, 2009 at 05:31 PM
I remember a co-worker getting a new 6000 right as they came out. She immediately replaced the radio and speakers, since she was an audiophile and her husband was a radio station manager.
But the doors had interior gaps that were huge, the car groaned all the time, and then she wrecked it. We'll never know if the T-Bone caused the concurrent maladies or not, but she got rid of it not long after the Big Bang.
Chris Hafner on May 11, 2009 at 05:44 PM
Thanks for reminding me of the original GM radios, TCG. Ugh. Those and the awful left turn signal stalk that also had the windshield wipers and the cruise control - those put me off GM cars for a long, long time.
That Car Guy (Chuck) on May 11, 2009 at 05:50 PM
Chris, those stalks not only sounded like they were going to break off every time you used them, but the white-painted lettering and symbols only lasted a couple of years at best before they rubbed off. They also controlled the high beams >SNAP<.
Like you said, Ugh.
Chris Hafner on May 11, 2009 at 06:07 PM
Cookie the Dog's Owner:
"all the cars were going to have alphanumeric model names like "T-1000" and "J-2000" and "A-6000.""
Interestingly enough, Pontiac was probably just ahead of its time. Cadillac is now exclusively alphanumeric, as is Lincoln and Acura. Lexus and Infiniti launched that way. It's all distressingly efficient and Germanic.
CJinSD on May 11, 2009 at 06:35 PM
The 6000STE was just another false start in the parade of lies that was GM's effort to produce products comparable to the imports. 'This time it is different.' 'Considering how good this car is, I can't wait to see the next one!' The STE faded when the Taurus came out, itself soooo much better than the 6000 without quite halting the growth of Accord and Camry sales. My next door neighbor had a 6000STE. He said it was an amazing engineering achievement, because everything on it broke just after the 50,000 mile warranty lapsed.
Darrencardinal on May 11, 2009 at 09:46 PM
Wow Car and Driver really disgraced themselves by lavishing such praise on this boring, bland, middle of the road turd. No wonder people have abandoned the buff books and read blogs like this one.
I mean really, when you look at the boring lines of this car, do you think the word "controversial" applies?
And I really hated the door handles that GM put on their cars during this era. They looked like a cheap piece of metal they half-ass attached to the car. All the cars seemed to share these cheap door handles, from the cavalier, to the caprice, to many others, all dull.
GM has sowed the seeds of their own demise with cars like this. In a just world they would be allowed to die.
David Colborne on May 11, 2009 at 11:11 PM
Chris, when examining the likes of the 6000STE, remember that the '80s were a stupendously dark time in domestic automotive engineering. We're talking "Install a turbo in a K-Car and call it a sports coupe" bad, and the Dodge Lancer, truth be told, wasn't a bad car by the absolutely frightening standards of the time. So, with that in mind, is it possible that the 6000STE wasn't a bad car for the time? Sure. Is it possible that Car & Driver was engaging in a little domestic cheerleading wrapped in a doughy crust of wishful thinking? You betcha. Is the 6000STE remotely worthwhile by any reasonable, modern standard? Well... it's an A-body, right?
Right.
matt on May 12, 2009 at 03:09 PM
After the twin gas crises, American automotive design was at its nadir. I can honestly say there were no good American designs from @ 1976 - 1983. Only after Reagan came in did they start putting power, performance, and style back into cars.That was also the time when many of the foreign manufacturers came in with much better designs at lower prices in many cases.
Trouble on May 12, 2009 at 03:16 PM
Hmf. Yet another example of the cookie-cutter, badge-engineered, Roger-Smith-era GM cars that sent the company down the crapper. Although, I kind of pity Roger Smith - he'd been lapped so many times that he really thought he was in first place.
Axiom: No company has ever cost-cut its way to market dominance.
Mikey NTH on May 12, 2009 at 03:31 PM
Cars like the 6000 STE always seemed like stop-gaps, something put together from what was on hand. The problem became that there wasn't anything down the line to make up for it in time.
As an example: The Ford Fairmont. It was an okay sedan, but you just knew that there could be something better. (I never drove the Pontiac, but I did the Fairmont - an old clapped out City-car as stock-basic as they came that had been sent out to Camp Dearborn near the end of its life. It had the six, and in one run, on a summer's day, dry, on two lane twisting asphalt with some hills, it surprised me that it handled as well as it did and accelerated good. I thought that on a normal midwest interstate it would run very, very well.)
Mikey NTH on May 12, 2009 at 03:32 PM
BTW - Camp Dearborn is just down the road from the GM Proving Grounds in Milford, so the terrain of the local roads can be known to the car buff.
JEM on May 12, 2009 at 03:34 PM
We've seen this over and over again. It's taken Detroit until, oh, about 2000 (with the Lincoln LS, then the Cadillac CTS) to figure out that you can't polish a turd.
Its numbers weren't bad for the time, those were the days of the 135HP BMW 528e, and it had pretty good seats and tires for the day, but it was still a pedal-parking-brake slushbox with lots of gray knobs on the dash.
PH on May 12, 2009 at 03:44 PM
Although the interiors of the 6000s were cheap, the cars were otherwise very sturdy. Mine lasted 17 years, until it was stolen. (That's right, believe it or not, someone actually wanted my 17 year old 6000LE.)
993Dave on May 12, 2009 at 03:51 PM
My stepdad bought a Celebrity Eurosport of that vintage instead of the Audi 5000 Turbo I lusted after. It was boxy and had abysmal ergonomics, but it had the cool red pinstripe, plumped up steering wheel and Eagle GT tires on five spoke rims. My first impression on the ride home (other than the fact that we couldn't quite figure out how fast we were going because the horizontal speedometer was hard to read) was that it had appreciably less body roll than most cars I had been in at the time. As the first car I drove regularly, I learned to accept it. It was reasonably roomy and had the basic creature comforts, and had just a little bit more performance than others of its ilk.
For those who cannot wrap their brains around C/D's praise, you have to have lived through those days to appreciate what a vast improvement (oh yes) cars like the 6000STE were. That was not the era of 250hp Accords; 135hp was actually respectable for a family car. They still paled in comparison to some of their foreign competition, but they were far, far superior to their own predecessors.
That said, there are plenty of other cars from that general era that I would be interested in re-aquiring ahead of the Eurosport/STE. Like, just about any of them.
John Pearley Huffman on May 12, 2009 at 03:59 PM
Just a quick correction for Mr. Hafner: Cadillac nomenclature still isn't strictly alphanumeric. Remember, they still make the Escalade. And Lincoln hasn't gone alphanumerically nuts yet either -- they've got the Navigator and the doomed and beloved (sort of) Town Car.
Mikey NTH on May 12, 2009 at 05:13 PM
993Dave: You said the correct thing - for the time they were better. I started driving a 1976 Maverick, and there was the 1976 Gran Torino station wagon. Then grandpa's 1977 Monte Carlo*. The early 1980's cars had problems, but by the end of the 1980's they actually did the job.
*I am still trying to figure out why my 85 year old grandfather bought that Monte Carlo. It had more straight-line acceleration than anything I have driven since - except ex-police cruisers sent out to Camp Dearborn. (Take an old Crown Vic police cruiser with a city plate on the back and a 'third eye spotlight' that can be raised, tell a young guy to drive from Milford to Rosedale to pick up some sewing machines (for tent canvas repair) from a refurbisher, tell him to 'drive like a banshee' on the interstate, and see what happens. Wow, could that Crown Vic move!) And that Monte was very, very fast; grandpa did not stint on the engine. And it was a good-looking car. All washed and polished, it gleamed - like a black and silver dagger.
I miss that Monte Carlo.
MikeD on May 12, 2009 at 05:18 PM
Guess you're all to young to remember the automotive halcyon days of the early 80's!
The Pontiac had AWD, previously only the purview of Audi (thanks Dan Rather/60 Minutes for screwing over Audi).
BTW, Porsche 944/928 series were pieces of shit! They should've just kept building the 914 3.0!
BTW 2, there was no car built in the 80's, by an American company,that could possibly be considered as worth owning.
Hey, much like today?
Neshobanakni on May 12, 2009 at 05:52 PM
Had the Olds version of it. On a very cold morning, I passed another car. Flicked that turn signal, and it snapped right off. American cars sucked for for soooo long. They'll never convince most of us to give them another chance. They don't deserve it, 'cause of the crap they foisted off on us when we were young.
rrsafety on May 12, 2009 at 06:18 PM
I remember when they were filming that third commercial on campus at Princeton. We all found it bizarre because they hardly ever let anyone film there, least of all car commercials.
Joe Momma on May 12, 2009 at 06:34 PM
Wasn't this car parodied in a movie back then (sorry; can't remember the title) as 6000 SUX?
joe on May 12, 2009 at 07:41 PM
BTW 2, there was no car built in the 80's, by an American company,that could possibly be considered as worth owning.
1985 Mustang GT; 302 V-8 with roller cam and stainless steel factory headers; last of the factory Holley four barrel cars; Borg-Warner five speed with nice factory shifter; the car produced 210 hp and delivered 22 mpg at a constant 80 mph. I once covered 25 miles in that car in 15 minutes; my wife was going to be late for a college exam unless I drove her to class. She studied in the passenger's seat on the way to school, without knowing that her husband was exceeding the speed limit by 45 mph. That car was smooth and steady at 100; it gave excellent service at low cost; and it was a blast to drive. There was no car built in the 80's, by an American company, that could possibly be considered as worth owning? Poppycock!
Kev on May 12, 2009 at 07:52 PM
Yeah, that movie was RoboCop, the original movie.
I love how they focused on the LED instrumentation. In my opinion, one of the best features from the early '80's cars. Have no idea why they stopped using them; they just look so much more technologically advanced.
But the cars sucked. Still, I have to laugh when I hear people talk about how 80's engineering was so depraved and so compromised (especially American makes). While I totally agree, I look at today's vehicles and I can easily see what is so f-ed up about American cars and their tastes. Look at what 80% of Americans are driving nowadays: 6000lb SUV's and trucks that make 15MPG at best. Huge, bloated, obese, overbearing hulks of steel that are almost as obese as their owners. There's no reason why one person should need a gigantic behemoth cage of almost 3 tons of steel surrounding them on their daily commute. Yet it has become the norm here in the good ol' USA. Whether the tastes were shaped by the industry or the industry just went after the taste is irrelevant. Hell, even Honda and Toyota, once known for their efficient yet roomy and super reliable vehicles, have sold out to the American way of life. Gone are the cool small cars (Toyota MR2, Celica, Supra)(Honda CRX, Del Sol, Prelude) and now Honda has Ridgelines and Pilots while Toyota is hawking Highlanders and Tundras. Gigantic, hulking vehicles that look hideous, handle like crap, suck gas like OPEC is subsidizing them, destroy our roads faster, and make their incognito and pathetically insecure drivers look like Blumpkins. Yes, you look like a big fat Blumpkin behind the wheel of your gigantic SUV/truck. I said it. Wonder why America is going down the toilet? That's why. Nobody has the balls to engineer, manufacture, or buy reasonably sized, cool, and practical quality automobiles anymore.
So don't laugh at the 80's too hard. At least the SUV/truck craze hadn't begun yet, so at least people hadn't completely lost touch with reality, like is the case right now in these dark, dark times.
Paul Blossom on May 12, 2009 at 09:11 PM
I owned a 1983 6000STE. Worked at GM at the time. The two previous cars I owned were a 1987 BMW 320I and a 1980 Audi 5000s. I liked the Poniac. It was tight and handled tolerably well. Had more power than the Audi, but the chassis wasn't as good. The interesting thing about the 6000STE was that there were basically no options, as compared to every other GM car. This meant that the vision/gestalt of the car could be delivered with every vehicle, not just those with certain options. It also meant that it had a more intersting exhaust tone than other GM cars. In fact, the plant manager at Pittsburgh swapped out the exhaust on his company car - 6000STE because he didn't want the high end Pontiac to embarrass GM because of that exhaust tone.
Chazz on May 12, 2009 at 09:59 PM
Tried to buy one of these for two years back then at my local dealer here in Southern California (Costa Mesa), but for some reason, the factory couldn't deliver.