The June 1968 issue of Road Test magazine took its rival, Motor Trend, to task for anointing the Pontiac GTO as Car of the Year. Columnist Byron Bloch argued that the award had been a “sham” for “many years” (1968, p. 6).
Bloch started off by critiquing the other three times when Motor Trend gave Pontiac the award. He dismissed the 1959 Pontiac’s “wide-track” as “primarily an advertising gimmick.” Pontiac’s track “was a scant fraction of an inch wider than a lot of its contemporaries, and even a bit narrower than some” (1968, p. 6).
Bloch then pointed out that the 1961 Tempest, which Motor Trend lauded as “unquestionably a prototype of the American car for the Sixties,” would see its shiny technology dumped only three years later, partly due to reliability issues.
In 1965 the entire Pontiac line was given the Car of the Year award. Bloch quoted Motor Trend as saying that all Pontiacs had “the same handling and ride qualities” when its own published data showed otherwise (1968, p. 6).
1968 Pontiac GTO: Not such a safe bet
With all that as background, Bloch questioned why the 1968 GTO was selected the Car of the Year when it it was “essentially identical” to the Oldsmobile Cutlass 442, Buick Skylark GS and Chevrolet Chevelle SS (1968, p. 6).
Did the GTO’s award have anything to do with the February 1968 Motor Trend issue carrying nine pages of advertising by Pontiac and its suppliers — and every ad congratulated the GTO for getting the award?
Bloch went on to criticize Motor Trend’s “fetish about the GTO’s plastic front bumper, which is supposedly a major safety and styling advance.” He argued that it didn’t have all that much shock-absorbing protection. In addition, other aspects of the car’s styling reduced its safety, such as:
- deeply recessed head and taillights that couldn’t be seen from the side,
- impossible-to-see rear fender tips made backing up more difficult and
- side sheetmetal bulges “that can get easily banged up in a parking lot” (1968, p. 6).
One could dismiss Bloch’s negative assessment of the GTO’s styling because it has arguably withstood the test of time aesthetically.
However, the flip side of this argument is that the Pontiac epitomized an era when function took a back seat to form. Not so coincidentally, car buyers increasingly switched to more practical imports . . . even if they didn’t flock to the Rover much praised in Road Test’s June 1968 issue.
I suspect that the main reason why Bloch’s critique was so trenchant was because Road Test did not accept advertising, and so was more insulated from automaker pressure than other car-buff magazines.
NOTES:
This Road Test issue is among the magazines in the Automotive History Preservation Society’s Digital Documents Library.
RE:SOURCES
- Bloch, Byron 1968. “Car of the Year. . .” Road Test. Published June: pp. 6-7.
ADVERTISEMENTS & BROCHURES:
- oldcaradvertising.com: Pontiac (1959, 1961, 1965, 1968)
He raised some good points. However this was the height of the car as status symbol, and still rolling art although a decade beyond the baroque era. I’m curious about the top ad that shows a 1965 GP in France. They should show it negotiating streets designed for donkey carts instead of in front of some chic bistro.
Yeah, some of those Pontiac images are a hoot in terms of the cultural assumptions they present.
There should be no mystery about the Motor Trend Car of the Year awards. They were devised by Bob Petersen (Petersen Publications, owner/creator of Motor Trend) as an advertising generator for the magazine. I know, as told by a MoTrend staffer of a specific case where the Monte Carlo wone the award instead of the Grand Am that actually wone because Chevrolet did a commitment for a larger annual ad buy.
From a judge that was part of the innagural Import Car of the Year comes a story that reinforces the purpose. The first award went to the Citroen SM, a very worthy winner based upon its myriad of innovations. Bob Petersen went nuts over this saying how Citroen never spent ad money and even with this award nothing would change. The criteria for the following year’s award was changed.
Motor Trend wanted 2 things out of the awards for a winner. Big advertising commitment. [Can’t say if it extended to all the Petersen publications or not.] The second was that getting the award would by hyped by the manufacturer to make it appear that this was a major achievement.
Motor Trend was known for questionable ethics because of their ownership. The staff were looking to get somewhere else where they could be respectable.
As I recall, the Citroen was the overall winner for 1972; there was no separate Import Car of the Year until 1976, when the Toyota Corolla Liftback won the award. (However, Wikipedia states that the Porsche 914 was Import Car of the Year in 1970, with a hiatus on the title until 1976.)
Karl Ludvigsen posted a story a while back on his Why Cars Are So Bad website about his role in Motor Trend’s Car of the Year award. I suspect that this is the story but it’s behind a paywall and I’d like to keep my seven-day trial offer in reserve.
Since I brought up paywalls I may as well add that I get the reason for their existence — at some point Indie Auto may need to switch to one if the number of donors doesn’t meaningfully increase — but paywalls can also be problematic for folks on a fixed retirement income.
Adam on the Rare Classic Cars You Tube channel has often pointed out that Pontiacs often had softer suspensions and handled worse than Oldsmobiles. However, most of the 1960’s Pontiacs were beautifully styled cars.
With 20/20 hindsight, we can see that MT’s Car of the Year Award winners were starcrossed, to say the least. Here’s the list from 1969-80.
1969 Plymouth Road Runner
1970 Ford Torino
1971 Chevrolet Vega
1972 Citroën SM
1973 Chevrolet Monte Carlo
1974 Ford Mustang II
1975 Chevrolet Monza
1976 Dodge Aspen / Plymouth Volaré
1977 Chevrolet Caprice
1978 Dodge Omni / Plymouth Horizon
1979 Buick Rivera
1980 Chevrolet Citation