(first posted 5/18/2017) When I first saw this Olds 98 coupe at the Cohort, shot by William Rubano, its understated and rather formal elegance is what caught my eye. But when I checked out the ’64 Olds brochure, I was in for a surprise: this is not the plain old 98 Holiday Coupe; this is the 98 Custom Sports Coupe. That means leather and fabric trimmed bucket seats, console, floor shifter, and a full complement of standard power conveniences along with the 345 hp Starfire V8 under the hood.
What makes the existence of “the last word in sporty elegance” surprising, is that Olds already had that basevery firmly covered with its legendary Starfire coupe and convertible, which ushered in the whole big-sporty-bucket seat-console era, at least at GM. And then there was its slightly lower-trim Jetfire 1 sibling. And the slightly more prosaic Dynamic 88 and Jetstar 88 hardtop coupes. Olds was trying awfully hard to cultivate the “sporty elegance” image. A bit too hard?
Here’s the three 98 two-door models. I’d forgotten totally about the Custom Sports Coupe, but then it was only offered in 1963 and 1964. Having pioneered the big bucket seat-mobile (at least at GM) with their 1961 Starfire, Olds was obviously spreading the fire around, and very generously at that. And it worked, since apparently the Custom Sports Coupe outsold the regular Holiday Coupe by a healthy margin. But by 1965, it was gone, a victim of Brougham fever. Plush was in; “sporty elegance’ was out.
The Starfire sat on a somewhat shorter 123″ wb than the 98’s 126″, and had a distinctive hardtop roof design (along with the Jetstar 1).
Here’s the Jetstar 1, which was a bit confusing to me as a kid back then. Couldn’t they just have made some of the Starfire’s standard power accessories optional rather than de-content it and give it a new name? Yet it had the the same “Starfire” 394 cu.in. V8 making 345 hp.
And for the really undynamic set, there were both the Dynamic 88 and Jetstar 88 coupes, which obviously shared their roofs with a host of other lesser GM B Bodies.
The 98 had to share its roofline with the Buick Electra 225 coupe, but otherwise its was also unique in the Olds lineup. So Olds fielded three distinct different full-size hardtop coupe bodies in 1963 and 1964. The GM Golden Days, when the more was merrier, especially its glamorous hardtops.
The only reason I can tell this is a Custom Sports Coupe is from the bucket seats visible in this shot, although “bucket” is hardly applicable.
These are genuine bucket seats, not the big, flat, wide thrones in the 98 Custom Sports Coupe. Do I also have to define “sports”? Let’s just say its application to this 98 is a giant stretch, in more ways than one.
Enough already. I was attracted to it because of its slab-sided handsome lines. And having been in thrall of the Starfire, Grand Prix and other big GM bucket seat cars of the times as a kid, I should have no reason to question why Olds decided to offer the same treatment in its 98. Maybe it’s just because I wasn’t aware of its existence at the time, and feel slightly cheated. I’d have loved to sit in one at the dealer’s showroom. Either way, it was a short-lived phenomena. The 98 just didn’t pull off the “sporty” them very convincingly.
Wow, a gorgeous car. I find the 63-64 Oldsmobiles to be their styling high point after WWII, and as attractive as anything ever made by GM. I realize that these hew to my conservative tastes that that others may prefer more daring designs.
Perhaps I am colored by 8 years of my young life spent in this car’s little brother. As I look at both, I am struck by how good of a job Olds did of keeping a family resemblance from top to bottom. This is especially true when the Cutlass was equipped with these optional wheelcovers as ours was.
I had not been aware that the 98 came as a “sport coupe” with bucket seats, but then they were certainly a fad then. I would be all over this car.
I have to disagree about these cars. I’ve always thought that the 1964 full-size Oldsmobiles were simply big and bland, particularly next to the Buicks and Pontiacs of that year. (It was an off-year for the full-size Chevrolet, too.)
I liked the 1961 and 1962 models, as well as the 1963 Starfire and Ninety-Eight. With the 1965 models, Olds was again finding its way. In a book about Oldsmobile’s postwar years, an Oldsmobile insider calls the 1964 full-size cars “overgrown Ramblers,” and I have to agree, except that I think that the 1963-64 Ramblers are a more cohesive and distinctive design.
It is interesting how each of us interpret the Buick / Olds sister cars. I’ve always found the ’64 Buick Electra to be possibly the stiffest and most formal design ever marketed by any brand. I love the ’64 Electra, but even with my conservative tastes, I find it almost intimidating it in its formality…..
I agree. As attractive as the Buick is, it is a very heavy, weighty design. I find the Olds 98 to be light and crisp in contrast. I think that 1963-64 may be one of the few design cycles where I like the big Olds better than the big Buick.
This discussion shows how GM continued to dominate the market in the 1960s even as the Sloan brand ladder collapsed. Thanks to deft styling and different engines, it offered two cars that appealed to different customers, even while they supposedly competed with each other on paper.
I’m sure that the discussion in 1964 was, “Do we choose the Ninety-Eight or the Buick Electra?”
Not, “Do we choose the Ninety-Eight or the Chrysler New Yorker?”
Much to the frustration of Chrysler.
@ Geeber, and therein lies the answer to the many modern minds that question on CC why GM duplicated so many cars with minor variations on a theme. In ’64 you could pick and choose among options ranging from the Bonneville Brougham to the Series 62 Cadillac, and everything in between, and probably find the American luxury car you just had to have. And each of those cars individually easily outsold Ford’s Mercury Park Lane and Chrysler’s New Yorker.
GM was crazy, like the proverbial fox.
Geeber, I think you are absolutely right about the different GM divisional offerings working to keep buyers in the GM fold even as the Sloan Ladder collapsed. I know my parents toggled between Buick and Oldsmobile, thinking both were good cars with good engines and generally making their choice based on styling and interior trim, which were distinct enough (until the 1980s) even with the shared bodies. For many “big car” buyers over the span of many years, there’s was no strong reason to look outside of GM, as you had plenty of good choices “in the family.”
A retired AMC official wrote about a book in the early 2000s about his experiences in the auto industry. He started out at the dealer level, and one of his first jobs was working at a Pontiac dealer in the mid-1950s.
He said that he quickly discovered that his main competitors were dealers who sold cars made by the other GM divisions, as people who bought GM cars tended to stay in the GM family.
Interestingly, the ’63 and ’64 Cadillac 62/63 DeVilles seem much sportier and less boxy. The fins help, and the ’64 2 door hardtops benefited from a racier roof adapted from the B body 4 door hardtop, while the Buick and Olds used the same roof for their 2 and 4 doors.
If you look at the ’65 C-Bodies, I’d argue the situation is reversed. The Cadillacs are very boxy, while the Buick and Olds are more relaxed and assertive, with Buick really pushing its “W front” and the beginning of the Olds dumbell grille.
I don’t know if anything as big as these copies could ever live up to the true meaning of the sports tag, but they have an elegant sporty line to them. These are all handsome cars. Funny how the different roof lines were important and distinctive features then, but don’t seem to offer all that mucg differentiation now.
I loved these when new and I love this one now .
.
CC Effect : I ran across another 1964 Oldslowmobile in South Central L.A. recently and stopped to take some snaps in my new to me iPhone S5 ~ guess what ? it seems I can’t just download my photos to my computer so they’re locked in there, I was going to send them to you alls to share .
.
Dammit .
.
I’m going to go back and ask the boob who sold this iPhone to me to exchange it for an LG, Samsung or other simple and easy to use by stupid old man cell ‘phone….
.
Sheesh .
.
? Did I mention I sat is one of these in the West Newton Olds Dealer when new and they cased me out ? .
.
-Nate
Nate,
I suppose you have a computer running Windows. If so, here’s the free software from Apple that let you download the photos from iPhone or iPad to Windows folder.
https://support.apple.com/en-en/HT204283
After installing and linking the software to the iCloud Photos, you might have to be very patient while all of photos are downloaded to the Windows folder for the first time, especially when you have so many photos. Then, everything is quicker thereafter.
Important tip: you need to enable iCloud Photos in your iPhone to sync all of photos between iPhone, iCloud, and Windows folder.
PS I am sure the Genius Bar at Apple Store could help you.
It’s a lot easier than that. I shoot everything on a 5S. I just plug the phone into a USB port on the PC, then go to “Computer”, and look for the iphone, and tell it to download images. Couldn’t be easier.
I use iMac and MacBook Pro exclusively so I don’t know exactly how it works with Windows. Thanks for the tip, Paul.
One advantage of iCloud is that the photos along with contact book, calendars, and other pertaining data are always there if your iPhone is lost, stolen, or damaged.
The guy who sold you the phone is a “boob” because you purchased a product you can’t operate? This is where so many negative marks in Consumer Reports surveys originate.
Paul ;
.
That was the very first thing I tried and the computer sees the iPhone but says there’s no pictures in it .
OT ; I tried that but it’s so damn complicated and Apple wants WAY too much personal information, I struggled with it a while then gave up . I went to the Apple Store and they couldn’t do it, I have to do it to my computer .
9E : _yes_ most certainly when I specifically told him what I did with it and that I needed dead simple downloading of my photos, by cable .
Everyone brings something to the table ~ I’m a Journeyman Mechanic who’s old and isn’t tech savvy, I know there’s much can do easily that others are always amazed by .
-Nate
If you read the Amazon reviews of hard drives you will see 2 reviews. Those who got it installed correctly and love it and those who didn’t and hate it. The last are often punctuated with “I never had this problem with brand X” Of course on brand X reviews you see “I never had this problem with brand Y”
Count me a big fan of this big car. I was well acquainted with the Ninety-Eight series from the 1965 on while growing up, but the ’64 and back were old enough by the early/ mid ’70s to be fairly thin on the ground in rust country. After much training in the House of Olds, I sort of discovered the ’64 some years ago, and I’ve been smitten since.
I’m familiar with the Sports Coupe as these show up periodically on E-Bay. It’s not really a stretch that Olds came up with this in ’63, it sits in the space that was previously led by the Chrysler 300, and even some Buicks, just sans the console. As much as anything, the advent of mid-size cars in this time helped kill off the sporty side of big sporty cars, and cars like the Riviera and Thunderbird sat in this space offering a lot more flash for your cash.
The concept of this car was just ahead of its time. Go to your Ford dealer, order up an F-150 in Lariat or higher trim, specify the throne buckets and console where not standard, and the concept lives on. It may be no small coincidence that I love this Olds and currently drive such a Ford truck.
I have to agree. I drove a hand me down 69 Buick Wildcat with the big black interior and giant armrests.
I recently had a Dodge Ram with – a big black interior and giant armrests – and it was very nostalgic for me.
I am a big fan of 60’s Rivieras and T birds…. my current ride- an F-150 FX has a black & silver interior with a console that reminds me very much of old T birds.
Fan of the Riviera and T-Bird of the mid ’60s as well. One of my flings with classic car ownership was with a ’65 Riviera – when the buckets and console were standard.
My F-150 is black, and I find the Lariat trim in black to be the most formal and old school looking with its very traditional chrome bumpers. I’ve occasionally referred to it as my ’65 Continental.
I’ve liked the styling of the full size GM cars from the early to mid sixties from the start. I thought that the wrap around rear window of the pillared sedans was very attractive and that the ’63 and ’64 Olds 88s were some of the best looking cars from that time. The peaked fender tops and small fins are especially attractive. Here is a picture of my ’64 Dynamic 88 taken in 1997, bad paint and all. It had sat for nine years after the original owner wrecked it. It had 57,000 miles on it. Many of my friends thought I had odd taste in cars, but I loved the fact that it was a four door sedan. The damage to it was quite bad. I replaced all of the bent pieces and drove this car over 17,000 miles. This was the best driving full size car I’ve ever owned. Silky smooth, more than enough power, great visibility and impressive, straight line, stopping power for a car it’s size. Certainly not a Sports Sedan, but in my opinion, a very attractive automobile.
I adore this roofline. And I’m glad I’m not the only person who thinks Olds had too dang many nameplates in the 60s.
this is the 98 Custom Sports Coupe…
I wouldn’t kick one out of bed for eating crackers, that’s for sure.
I’ve found my new “most appealing full size coupe” of the 60s.
Oldsmobile would eventually return to the sporty big car with bucket seats theme late in the 98’s long run, albeit as a sedan. Those newer “Touring Sedans” didn’t pull off the “sporty” theme even as convincingly as these ’64 hardtops did.
I beg to differ. I love those.
A friend in college’s dad had a ’64 Starfire convertible, he could use it when dad was away on business. It was terrific. Funny that the total impracticality of the “modifications” (non-bucket bucket seats, vacuum gauge buried on the console, silver strip down the side, but same suspension) never occurred to me, it was just fun driving it around! We judged cars far more naively back in the 1960s.
Oops, sorry, it was a ’63. Still cool.
When I looked at the impossibly long rear end, I can’t help but wonder how those drivers would be able to negotiate the streets in San Francisco and the ramps in parking garages without bending the whole rear end or scrap the bottom…
meh…you get used to it
I go to SF semi regularly for Giants games and my ex wife lives on a giant hill in Crockett. I prefer taking the bike places mostly because I can park just about anywhere but actually navigating streets and tight spots is pretty easy in the Electra because its turning circle is substantially tighter than you think.
tighter than my 95 Pathy or my friends 2008 Nissan Altima
You absolutely do drag ass in these cars, it is an art to negotiate driveways and such without doing so. You do get instant notification of failure. They are also prone to getting high centered on plowed snowbanks.
LOL I would never want to drive the Electra in the snow.
peg leg rear end + big torque =yikes
I dropped the front end about an 1.5″ and the rear about .5″ I do have helper air bags in the rear springs but only have a few pounds of air in them as the rear suspension is pretty controlled at the moment. Bilstein shocks keep it from bottoming out at speed but slow speed and steep hills do require more thought than a modern car.
There can never be too many “sporty elegance” big coups for me! Nice example here…
+1
And Dave B’s line “instant notification of failure” is hilarious and accurate. Filed for future applications
One thing about these 60s American cars is that had trunks as big as some pickup trucks do today. Maybe that is why sedan popularity is dropping these days.
Americans do seem to be obsessed with moving “stuff”. Europeans don’t seem to obsess over it like we do.
Folks who shopped among the GM brands would pick out the one that “looked the best”.
OTOH, there were some* who would not look at other divisions than Buick. Chevy was “too cheap”, Pontiac/Olds “too radical” and Caddy “too snobby”.
*My Grandparents
I’d describe these Oldsmobiles as looking tough and purposeful.
Nice car but seriously needs some nice looking rims and lowered 5 inches. Add a pare of flowmasters and a high end thumping audio and watch the thumbs up.
The Jetstar I/Starfire thing seemed like a case of the tail wagging the dog from a merchandising standpoint: Trying to satisfy both the dealers who wanted something to rival the Pontiac Grand Prix in price and the ones who liked the profit margins of the “fully loaded” Starfire at the cost of establishing a coherent identity for either.
I like the styling of the ’64 Olds, but with the benefit of hindsight would probably have preferred the ’64 Buick Wildcat for this sort of thing. Badge cachet aside, the Buick had significantly better brakes and the new Turbo Hydra-Matic (Super Turbine 400) while big Oldsmobiles still had the Roto Hydra-Matic.
Dad had a ’63 Dynamic 88 hardtop so I was pretty familiar with the Olds line-up that year. Was always puzzled as to why would anyone buy a ’98 Custom Sports Coupe when the much glitzier and desirable Starfire could be had for less. Not only were there several different 2 dr. hardtops this year (and in ’64), but 2 different 4 dr. HT’s as well, a six-window and traditional model.
Then, for ’64, Olds muddied the waters more, adding the Jetstar 88 series, which sat below the previous bottom rung Dynamic 88. Jetstar 88’s featured the Cutlass 330 c.i. V-8 and 2 speed automatic, while Dynamics retained the big-block 394’s. As the article noted, the Jetstar I was a real anomaly, basically a decontented Starfire with the big 345 h.p. engine.
The best explanation for all of this was that GM was such a behemoth at the time and cranked out all sorts of unique, low production models just because it could.
“The best explanation for all of this was that GM was such a behemoth at the time and cranked out all sorts of unique, low production models just because it could.”
Well and back in those days if you knew the ordering codes, had a sympathetic salesman/dealer, you could order just about any combo you wanted.
Almost bought this 63 sedan, think it looks great, but my needs mean something with fins. Looks to be in great condition and for $13k seems a steal to me, but everyone wants coupes it seems…
more pics
sorry cant seem to post more than one at a time
Love big, hardtop coupes. I wish you could buy one today.
With the 1963 MY, both Olds and Buick finally took actions to significantly visually differentiate the 98’s and Electras from their lower series models. Although the frontal styling was generally shared, series-specific side trim and especially exclusive rear quarters, tailight, etc. made these cars instantly recognizeable and so appealing. Prior to this, other than additional trim and the extended deck, the top-line models weren’t that always obviously that, even if they shared the big C-Body. With this new approach, 98 and Electra became Bill Mitchell’s vehicles (no pun intended) to express his taste for formal, trailored luxury car styling. Personally, I prefer the ’63 98 styling, especially those gorgeous taillights, but the ’64 just by degrees a close second.
Of the proliferation of Olds sporting two door hardtops, the Jetstar I was simply management taking a cue from the Pontiac Grand Prix, trying to get a piece of that segment. Its base price was only a $100 more than Grand Prix, offering Olds loyalist temped by the Pontiac a choice to keep them in the fold. Seems to have been temporarily popular but also cannabalized Starfire sales, which wasn’t the result they must have intended. Both Jetstar I and Starfire did attract ‘sport model’ buyers to the Olds showroom, who were then stunned and delighted to find the marvelous Toronado, quickly traded.
Bucket seats and console in large luxury cars: this trend might have percolated up from the sporty compacts initiated by the Corvair Monza, but there was also the Eldorado influence. The 98 Custom sport coupe along with the Mercury Monterey S-55, Buick Wildcat and Chrysler 300 Sport specified these as defining features of the model and/or series. While they might seem incongruous, even Lincoln had them optional.
One of the first. fittingly one of the last also, with a several year hiatus in between.
(’81 Model shown)
It also appears to be the same shift lever design as the 60’s models.
I owned a 1964 Oldsmobile 98 Custom Sports Coupe in 1970 and miss that car terribly. If some hit-and-run moron hadn’t trashed it for me, I’d still have it today. If I ever win the lottery, the first thing I’ll do is find one. Just out of curiosity, what were the differences between the 1963 and 1964 Oldsmobile 98 Custom Sports Coupes?
On another note, I downloaded the catalog image at the top of the article but it’s really low resolution. I then went to eBay to try and find the catalog from which it was scanned. I ordered one but it didn’t contain that photo and description. Paul Niedermeyer, can you point me to the specific document you obtained that page from or possibly do a better scan for me? I need to have that picture and description printed and framed to hang on my wall.
My favorite car all time: 64 olds luxury sedan six window. Optional Starfire motor would be icing on the cake. Hey don’t forget front side turn lights and the rear window defogger. Olds had it all. tw
Huge! such a long rear deck on these GM full-sizers of that era. I remember the back bumpers and possibly exhaust tips scraping the pavement when backing out a steep driveway.
This is still a problem with the “high water curbs” on my 1923 bungalow ~ even my old VW Bug’s exhaust tips will scrape loudly unless I angle in sharply .
-Nate
The big Oldsmobile hardtops were fine on a smoothly paved, straight line road with no curves.
But their marshmallow suspensions and scary, fade prone brakes made them a handful on any other type of road.
Alas, they were no match for a same year Chrysler.
The sad fact is Mr. Reimer ;
This can be said for most MoPars over same year GM / Fords .
The simple fact that A Bodies easily outperform and out last other brands Pony Cars is like a stone in my shoe .
In the 1970’s when no one cared I was rehabbing first generation Chevy II NOVAS and daily driving them, luckily only one peer had and Mopars so the poor ride and substandard (? unsafe ?) handling & brakes were not so glaring .
-Nate
-Nate
I think to some extent this car was another reflection of Oldsmobile’s struggle to come to grips with the Thunderbird, which existed outside the Sloan ladder, but was a definite threat to the senior Oldsmobiles in price and market, and one the Starfire hadn’t been terribly successful in combating.
Taken together, this car, the Starfire, and the Jetstar I seem like an attempt by Oldsmobile to fight the Thunderbird with all the tools the normal GM hierarchy and product strategy allowed: with flashy exterior trim or without; fully loaded or more normally equipped, big or bigger. None of those combinations really hit that specialty car sweet spot, and I’m sure Olds dealers were saying so.
As notes, they didn’t handle or otherwise perform as well as rhe Chryslers.
But such a good looking design! Look at the angles on that almost-Engel!
Or perhaps the Engels on this car really Marks the spot!
Still the contemporary and slightly later Chryslers are nicer. Why not both?
I didn’t then and don’t now understand why they were called “Sports Coupes” To me they were 2 door sedans. I didn’t notice anything about stiffer springs or sway bars or shocks or recalibrated suspensions, just a 2 door sedan with fender skirts. A coupe with fender skirts!!! C’mon, really?
On the options side, there is a flip side to having a thousand options, or rather the lack thereof. I was recently window shopping Hyundais and found a sunroof cost $10K. Or at least to get a sunroof cost $10K, because they seemingly only sold packages and you either bought strippers or fully loaded. I didn’t dig too deeply, but it appeared there was nothing in the middle, just loaded or a stripper. Unlike some burgers, you couldn’t get it your way.
Sport Coupe was just a name for a certain type of two door hardtop. Usually a higher trim line, with buckets and console shift. A bigger V8 /auto with optional power assists, fancy full wheel covers. Performance options to the motor or chassis might have been available as trailer towing packages, but were rarely ordered.
The special bodied “specialty cars” like the T Bird, Toronado, Riviera, ElDo, were more appealing to those who wanted a more “individual” car.Though these weren’t particularly any sportier in reality.
Yup. There were a number of heavy-duty options on the Ninety-Eight option list — heavy-duty Hydra-Matic ($16.14), heavy-duty frame and springs ($19.37 on sedans and hardtops, $3.77 on convertibles, which already had a reinforced frame), Superlift rear shocks ($40.35), heavy-duty cooling ($26.90, included as standard with air conditioning), and a heavy-duty generator (standard with air conditioning, $6.46 without) — but they were all clearly oriented for trailer towing. (A trailer wiring harness was an extra $10.76.)
Those extras were probably worthwhile for general use as well (cars of this vintage weren’t generously endowed with radiator or generator capacity), but there was nothing like a handling package, and certainly no heavy-duty brakes.
The Custom Sport Coupe didn’t have a BIGGER engine (all big Oldsmobiles except the Jetstar 88 had the 394), but it did come standard with the Starfire engine, which had slightly higher compression and dual exhausts for an extra 15 hp (345 vs. 330 hp). You could order that on other Ninety-Eight or Super 88 body styles for $64.56, although I sincerely doubt most people would perceive a difference in performance with cars this heavy.
What nice thing can I say about a car I never owned, drove or even saw? That hasn’t been already said?
When equipped with the console shifter on the Roto Hydramatic, pulling the lever all the way back to reverse might be one of the few intuitive examples of the Olds PNDSLR shift quadrant. Faint praise, but the only recommendation I’ll make.
I guess I never understood Olds trying to position the 98 as a sporty car. For all their imposing exterior presence, inside I didn’t find these barges any more comfortable inside than a nicely equipped Impala. They sure didn’t perform or handle any better either.
I guess I better qualify my comment by admitting I have no personal experience with this particular model though I did on occasion ride in a 98 4-door.
My dad traded in his 63 F85 wagon with 215 V8 and 3-on-the-tree(!) for a 64 Dynamic88 black wagon. First car we ever owned with AC and PW! It was a beast, but a comfortable one.
I drive a 1982 Olds 98 coupe today, Just illustrates that GM kept this concept clear into the 80’s. I prefer 4 doors, but the advantage of the 2 door is being able to look out the side windows with a big unobstructed view without the center post of most 4 doors. Cadillac Coupe DeVille’s were also very popular for many years.
Many people bought the Olds 98 because it wasn’t a Cadillac. They wanted the luxury of a Cadillac, and could afford one. But bought the Olds 98 because it was less pretentious, but just as nice. This was often tru of local business owners and local doctors and lawyers. The Olds, even in 98 trim, created less distance with their employees, customers and patients, than a Cadillac would. This was especially true in smaller to medium sized towns and cities. It was the genius of GM to realize this, which is why they let the Buick Electra and Olds 98 close the gap with Cadillac in everything but price.
At auction here in the Netherlands is a very nice 98 2d hardtop with bucket seats. It has an issue with bubbles under the (not original?) paint and some other quirks but it looks nice to me (original carpet?). Good color too. Not expensive but you will only hear after the auction end if the seller agrees to sell the car for the hammer price (an awful method of doing an auction if you ask me). Be quick if you want the car, auction ends in 29 hours.
https://www.classiccar-auctions.com/nl/lot-details/21678/oldsmobile-98-1964
interior