Having taken a double-dip into the rather drab and dull world of 1964 Biscaynes, how about we cleanse the palate with the other end of the ’64 Chevy spectrum, an Impala SS coupe, as shot by William Rubano. Unlike so many of its kind, it’s bone-stock; that alone is refreshing, even if the rather dull styling that year can only be perked up so much, especially in that beige color. Pass the hot sauce, please!
I think we’ve all agreed here over the years that the ’64 is the least visually pleasing of the ’61 – ’64 generation (clockwise, from top left). As someone said the other day: it looks like the box the ’61 came in. Well said. The ’64s suffered from two accounts: Not only were they the end of the line, and after four years, the basic shape was bound to be getting old, especially in a time when we expected rapid change. And then of course they were the most visually boring ones, with that very generic front end, side trim that made them look flatter than their predecessors, and equally dull rear end.
Pity the poor designers: while the hot-shots were cooking up the radically different ’65s, the second-stringers had to do something to differentiate the ’64 from the ’63. They did that, but not in a good way. Oh well, it made the ’65s even that more exciting. Maybe that’s why they did it, to create an even bigger contrast. If so, it was very successful.
1964 was the first year for the Impala SS as a separate series, thus we know that some 100k of these V8 coupes were sold, this one with the popular 327 ci V8 option, either in 250 or 300 hp form. And all of 1,998 six cylinder coupes. But that was just the warm-up act; in 1965 a total of 243k Impala SS were sold, very much the high water mark, as by 1966, it was half that, and quickly dropping.
But then the ’65 Impala SS coupe was everything the ’64 wasn’t, and then some.
Related:
CC 1965 Impala SS Coupe: The Peak Chevrolet Experience; The Peak Big Car Experience PN
Tarted up cheapies dont come better than the Australian late 50s efforts, base model Delrays with leather seat facings rebadged as Bel Air, six cylinder only and sold at premium prices.
NZ only slightly better we did have the optional V8 but automatic was unknown untill 1960 but we did have genuine Bel Airs but only in four door.
I’ve got an old magazine of Dad’s from 1961 which compares all the automatics on the Aussie market – all nine of them! I remember one (Hillman?) had the Hobbs mechamatic.
It has just now occurred to me (after all these many years) that there was probably a concerted effort to visually tie the 64 big Chevy to the new 64 Chevelle. Which was (to me) a mistake because the 64 Chevelle/Malibu was the least attractive of all of the new A body cars. I guess the big car was attractive in comparison?
Back in the Day, I thought that the ’63 to ’66 Chevy models were interchangeable in desirability. However Chevies of all years had their fans especially among enthusiasts. The ’64 -’66 were especially popular with Lowriders, although there were hi-po “Street machines” built out of these same model years, during this same period. My Brother bought a nice ’64 SS, beige like this one, that he had re painted and reupholstered that he built it into a Lowrider. He drove that thing everywhere. The interior and exterior trim was very nice on this model. There was machine turned trim on the dash, console and exterior side spear. The interior of these SS models is so much better looking than even the standard Impala version.
My family had a ’63 Impala station wagon in saddle tan with Powerglide/250hp 327 powertrain. Eventually my father got a ’64 SS convertible in red with the Powerglide/300hp 327 powertrain. I drove them both as a new driver. They drove similarly. Both cars had factory AC and the ’64 had an AM/FM radio so they were well equipped. I preferred the styling of the ’63.
As noted previously, my father had a new 1963 Bel Air in white. When the ’64 came out, the eight-year old me was confused. Wasn’t the new model supposed to be better looking than the previous one? To me, the ’64 suggested a slight return to the bulbous cars of the ’50’s, which by that time looked bloated, overwrought and rusty besides. compared to the early ’60’s big chevys. The ’65 redeemed itself, although within a few more years the bloat would return; not to be rectified until 1977.
Although I have read (FB) about people who seem to be religious about their ’64 Chevys, I believe the 1961 is the best looker of the bunch, and Chev didn’t make as handsome a full size car until 1966.
As a kid, I liked the ’63 best. The ’63 big Ford was also my fav of that era.
Agree with you the ‘61 was best. Athletic and trim, especially when compared to the ‘58-‘60. Followed close by the ‘63, where all the angles and creases just worked so well together.
The ‘64 was easily the worst. Like Chevy just felt obligated to make it different from the ‘63. It wasn’t terrible mind you, but every change made from the beautiful ‘63 was for the worst.
I would like to meet the 2000 people who ordered an Impala SS with a six-cylinder engine.
I saw one at a car show a few years ago with the six, but I can’t remember if it was a 63 or 64. It also had a three-on-the-tree, making it a real unicorn.
Yes, not very Super Sport (SS), in a six cylinder. In fact not much Super Sport in a 64 at all. Doesn’t look very Super nor does it look very Sporty.
My personal favorite of the group is the 1964 Impala SS, mainly because my wonderful Aunt Dodie owned one for a while (between her ’61-62 Comet and ’69 Coronet wagon). 327/PG with buckets and floor shifter, it quickly became one of the coolest family cars, right behind Uncle Don’s 356. Loved the sound of the dual exhaust, and even at 7 years of age I dreamed of one day driving it like a wild teenager, but that never happened.
Dull colors make even high end models look cheap. That mid 60’s GM beige was one of the worst. Uncle’s otherwise well styled ’65 Wildcat looked especially terrible in that color.
I don’t know why but it seemed like beige was a popular GM color, even through ’66 I recall. It seems so dull and boring, And GM had many other colors that looked so much nicer.
Call me crazy but I like the 64 Biscayne more visually, the roofline works better to me than the Impalas lower “steel convertible top” roof, and the lack of bright trim on the sides let’s you focus your eye to the natural bodylines, that aren’t all that bad. 63s work better with the Impala goods, 64s are just so bland the stripper trim compliments it better
The ’64 Impala exterior may have seem bland to some, but not me; that’s my green four-door hardtop in the collage. On the other hand, the interior has a spectacularly 60s psychedelic upholstery pattern (best in red, blue or green).
I miss this kind of upholstery. It as lively and had sparkling colours. Now everything is either grey or black. It is much easier to keep clean but it’s boring.
Back when the ’61 Impala came out I didn’t care much for it, but now in retrospective I prefer the 1961 much more than the ’62, ’63, ’64 and even the 1965. The 1961 was relatively trim and looked great with the bubble top roof on the two door hard top. Unfortunately after the 1961 it was longer, lower, wider (and heavier). And I never cared much for the “steel convertible top.” As far as the bland styling on the 1964, I always thought the designers were aiming for a tie-in with the 1964 Malibu-which I always thought was by far the least attractive of the GM intermediates.
You and I think alike. The ’61 looks like a car in motion.
“Rollin’ in my six four”
Immediately thought of this line from the Dr Dre/Snoop Dog track “Let Me Ride” when I saw this pic. As mentioned, they were super popular in the Lowrider circles, granted in much brighter hues. This was always my favorite year, love love love the tail lights, but my preference is heavily skewed by 1990s high school nostalgia. During the early 2010s in Blacksburg VA, a Tech student/football defenceman had a 64 burgundy over white 2 door that was wonderfully stock in appearance with the exception of a hydraulic suspension set up. Seeing that ride cruise through the downtown nose up or on 3 wheels never failed to make me smile.
Increasingly I understand that my affection for cars from the past is tied to friends and family who owned them. One of my BFF in college had a 64 white SS coupe like this one with 327/PG and we all loved it. I think the 64 was fairly well received at the time, especially since the 64 Ford was an even less successful restyle of the popular 63. Of course 65 changed everything for the big cars from Chevrolet and Ford as well as introducing the Mustang and it was a spectacular year for car sales.
Too bad Zackman apparently isn’t around here anymore – to defend his beloved yellow 64 SS convertible..
Memories of dad’s SS for that year: Two barrel 327 with Powerglide. Red with a red interior. Of course, that was the easiest sell on the used lot when his 65 arrived.
Back in 1964 I liked the ‘64’s best. Because they were new, and I was just seven years old, and to a kid newer was better. Then the ‘65’s came out. And they were really cool; not just because they were newer, but because they were really good. Looking back now, I’d say the ‘61 was nicest of the pre-65’s.
Incoming from @Zachman…!
My favourite of these would be the ’61. The ’62 still has that light, fleet, poised-for-action look. The ’63 just looks heavy and stodgy; while the ’64 looks lighter it’s not the looker the ’61 is.
All….my…..friends…know the low rider….
As a car-crazed kid in the mid-’60s, I would pester the neighbors with questions about their vehicles. One had a ’64 Impala SS, which he proudly told me was the most expensive Chevy that year. I remember it having every imaginable accessory, such as curb feelers, and he was endlessly cleaning and waxing and fussing over it.
As to ranking the looks of the ’61 thru ’64 versions, my favorite would be a mash-up of two years. The ’61 back end is the best, due to the V-shaped dip in the middle that nicely divides that wide expanse. I favor the front clip of the ’62 – the way the parking lights are curved to hug the headlights is a nice detail.
As a kid, I was disappointed with the ’61 Chevy when it came out. I thought the 1959-60 space-age wraparound windshield was the coolest thing, and the return to near-normalcy on the ’61 was a letdown. I especially liked the ’60 with the chrome jet on the body sides, with an exhaust trail behind on the Impala; also preferred the round taillights over the “cats eyes” of the ’59.
Even though our family got a ’61 toward the end of that model year, my car drawings always featured the ’60. That finally changed when the ’63 came out.
Now, of the 1959-64 generation, I agree with most here that the 1961 has the best exterior styling (but the 1959-60 has the coolest instrument panel).
Hah, yes, the 1964s were indeed the least attractive, but the ’65s more than made up for it. One of my favorite car designs. I remember as a kid loving the ’64 in Matchbox form (#20, a yellow taxi that was basically a hardtop Impala with “TAXI” across the hood….must have been a hack without any signage on roof or signs that a pedestrian could notice). But there was a dearth of standard American cars in the Matchbox-size toy field at the time. If you had nothing to compare it to, the ’64 is okay. But when one sees the other full-sized Chevrolet model years, it looks as if Ford was inspiring the design team on this.