Car number two on my “Great 28” lags infinitesimally behind my favored Continental, and in some ways outpaces it, largely because of its relative attainability. Alas, my window of opportunity has nearly closed, leaving a pinpoint of light at the end of a Buick-shaped tunnel. People have, unfortunately, finally come to the realization that the early Riviera is what I’ve known it to be all along, one of the most beautiful American cars of the postwar era and a dazzling collectible.
It’s not that I’ve circled the sun 37 times without ever being in just the right position to purchase my dream vehicle. I’ve test driven and examined four early Rivs over the last 14 years, each example more expensive than the last, each seeming just a little too time-worn to shell out anywhere near the asking price. The last one I stupidly turned down was a green-on-green ’65 with little rust, mediocre paint, ancient tires, and non-working headlamps for nine and a half grand. I should have pulled the trigger, because even today, less than two years later, that price seems cheap.
It may be that owning a Riviera just isn’t in the cards for me. That in no way extinguishes the discernible pangs of desire every time I see one, especially a ’63. Silver-on-silver. This one closely replicates my dream Riviera. I prefer the base wheelcovers over wires, and a silver interior is so out-of-this-world that I can’t help but fancy it over the seemingly more garden-variety black decor.
Over the years, I’ve taught myself to differentiate a ’63 versus a ’64: the ’63 (as pictured above) has block Buick lettering on the trunklid, as compared to a Riviera script on the ’64s (see baby blue example above); and the ’64 has a hood ornament where none exists on the ’63. Mechanically, the ’63 is 401-propelled (425 optional) through the last of the Dynaflows, whereas the ’64 ushered in the first of the Super-Turbine 400s anchored to the rear of a standard 425 Nailhead.
Of course, the ST400 ameliorates a Riviera “Achilles’ Heel” in some respects, as the Dynaflow was arguably less responsive (albeit much improved over earlier models, including the one under the transmission tunnel of my ’53 Special). For some reason, however, my heart lies with the ’63.
Strangely enough, given my screen name and my penchant for purchasing almost anything from the 1965 model year, the ’65 Riv is my least favorite of the first-generation trifecta. Most likely, I’m in the minority in that opinion, as the hidden headlights, uncluttered quarter panels, and more elegantly integrated rear bumper certainly tidied up the original.
Additionally, ’65 was the first year for the Gran Sport (the Riviera with muscles on its muscles, according to the ads) and its dual-quad 425, perhaps the most attractive and sporting Riviera ever built. In Midnight Blue, a case could be made that it’s among the most attractive GM cars of all time, a litany that includes scores of beautiful pieces of Americana. Under the hood, the 401 curiously became, again, the standard engine for Rivieras in ’65, Gran Sports notwithstanding.
Like most American cars, the Riviera began to slowly lose its original initiative after the ’65 models faded from dealer lots. The ’66-’69 Rivs were still spectacularly attractive, but they were larger and less “European.” Bench seats became more common, and Rivieras evolved into typical American plushmobiles, slightly miniaturized Electras. Styling was still the Riv’s calling card all the way through the last of the “Boattail” ’73s, but with each generation, the car became marginally less special, marginally less a flagship.
But that doesn’t diminish the impact of the sensational original Riviera. While I may forever continue my search in futility for the Riviera that’s right for me, I will always stop in my tracks in the presence of Buick’s inarguable masterpiece.
My #3 car is any Buick Hardtop or Convertible from the 1949 through 1953 model years, but especially ’49 and ’53. I think I covered this car reasonably already with my COAL regarding my ’53 Special.
What a great colour on the cover car! I’m with the hoi-polloi in that I like the hidden light version, but I actually prefer the 66 over this body.
+1 ’50 Buick (any body)
With the grille only an orthodontist could love…
And a blue furry cookie lover. hehehe
Aaron, I’m not an orthodontist…never played one on TV, I can spell “orthodontist” and have been to one a time or two…
But the ’50 is my all-time favorite Buick. 🙂
While the 50 Buick is not my all time favorite Buick it is in the top 5 and it certainly is my favorite 50 GM vehicle.
the 91-96 Park Ave is in my top 5 Buicks, believe it or not. Ahead of it would be the straight eights, the 65 riviera, and the boattails, and something with the aluminum 215 V8.
A bit of hyperbole, obviously, but if you were an orthodontist, a patient like this would make a health contribution to the kids’ college fund, I’m just saying…
I don’t know what your budget is, but a cursory look around eBay seems to suggest that the Riviera hasn’t exactly hit stratospheric levels. It’s nothing like the bubble in air-cooled Porsche 911s that has hit in the last few years and made basically none of them attainable for less than $30k.
I just looked as well, and prices for 1st gen Rivieras with a full complement of desirable options that don’t need a lot of work can be similar to the price of a brand new car, easily into the $20s. The best one out there is a ’64 with the base interior, no AC, no power windows, etc, some flaws, and they want $18,500.
That’s a lot of money for an average guy to hold a nice one as a hobby car.
That’s exactly the problem. If I didn’t have any other old cars (or maybe just one), the cost wouldn’t be an issue. I do, however, have five others and a mortgage, blah, blah, blah…
I’ve never paid more than $6500 (initial) on an old car, and second place was $3400. So $18,000 is a lot upfront, certainly more than I’m comfortable with.
The lastest Automobile magazine has an auction price of a 64 Riviera at $1760 (Auctions America). The car is in need of restoration (perhaps upwards of $40,000).
The 65 was the best. Vertical headlights, hidden.
Just like you, I really like the 1949 and 1953 Roadmaster Riviera hardtop coupes. I wish I could get a ’53 with factory a/c. As for the first generation Riviera, my first choice would be a ’65 Gran Sort with the Custom interior trim and ribbed lower body molding. But I do prefer things from the early ones, the 1963’s heater-a/c controls, the lower height of the parkig light grilles on the 1963-64 (compared to the ’65 headlight doors) and the silver gauges (the ’65 were black)…
I also prefer the second generation Riviera to the first. But these need to have the right options as center consoles weren’t standard anymore. I really like the 1966-67 instrument clusters with their full instrumentation. Something that lacked in the 1st generation Riviera (and almost every GM car by that time).
I do own a 67 Riviera Gran Sport that I really like. It has most options including power disc brakes but I wish it had a Nailhead engine instead of that 430…
I agree with you. 63-64 Rivieras with twin headlights look much better than the 65 with its concealed headlights.
The ’63 (well, maybe a 64′) Riviera was one of my first encounter (if not the first one) with american cars.
When I was 4 to 5 years old, I loved when, after visiting my cousins, my aunt and uncle drove me back home because, in the basement of their building, not far from their parking spot, a silver 63 Riviera was slowly dying there with four flat tires and years, if not decades, of dust accumulating upon it.
I remember than the interior was some kind of deep red leather.
It might be the most vivid memory of my younger years.
Proof once again how many American car makers got it right first time.CC effect strikes again as I’ve just been watching Roadhouse.I could easily put up with the 65 but I do like the 63 just a bit more.I remember seeing a gold one from the USAF base near my Grandparents as a kid,my brother liked it so much he got the Corgi model (gold with jewel headlights) for his birthday.
Later Rivieras didn’t look as good,the 66 was an attractive car but after the boat tail was stopped I lost interest.
I remember that Corgi Riviera too. Had one as a kid in New Guinea back in the
60’s.
Thanks for the reminder- hadn’t thought about it in ages.
Ha ha, I just bought one of those gold Corgis recently. The “fiber optic” headlights are a charming feature that even impress my tech-addled kids.
Mi Gawd, I just noticed the front end similarities between the ’64 Riv and a ’63 Plymouth! (gasp)
I think i had one like that once………..
Mine’s on the bookcase ten feet from me.
I prefer the ’65 because that’s actually closer to the way it was originally designed — the Riviera was supposed to have concealed headlights from the start, but it took a while to work out the gritty details. Also, I’d be more inclined to the ’64 or ’65 just because of the Turbo Hydramatic (ST-400).
The ’63’s transmission wasn’t technically a Dynaflow — it was officially called Twin Turbine — although it was obviously the final descendant of the Dynaflow line, so that’s hairsplitting. It was probably the high water mark for functionality as far as the ‘pure’ torque converter automatics went, but the THM is nearly as smooth and actually has a passing gear, which gives the Riv more snap even with the 401.
A Gran Sport would be tempting, but they were pretty scarce and I assume now carry a hefty premium.
Oddly enough, despite the original intent to have concealed headlights, I prefer the ’63-’64. The headlights are so well done, and the front end is more interesting with them than without. And then of course there’s the practical aspect too.
A ’64 425 is on my wish list.
Not only the headlights but the 1963-64 parking lights are lower than the 1965 headlight doors. I prefer these.
To the taller ones of the 1965…
Thanks for pointing out that difference. It’s subtle but noticeable, and adds to the ’65 somehow feeling a bit less “right”, at least to me.
I’ve had my 64 over 40 years and prefer it (even though I also have a 65) because the entire shape of the 65 fender had to be changed to fit the headlight doors. The 64 has a constant gorgeous curve to the top of the front fenders, the hood matches, the 65 its almost a strait line, and restoring these, the clearance for opening and closing is so close it has to be perfect. I also like that the 64 parking lights are on with low beam, but turn off with high beam because enough light carries from the headlights to make them show up Mine is Cloud metallic (silver)with black interior.
I certainly wouldn’t deny the practical benefits of exposed headlights. As a show piece, though, I like the concealed lights better aesthetically.
I used to prefer the ’65, but there’s something about those light cylinders that points me to the originals – I also prefer the rear bumper and quarter-panel treatment. Those scoops are fake but they help break up a pretty sizable hip that otherwise could be on a contemporary Chevy.
Knew a girl who had one of these. Let her go. Big mistake, at least as far as the car was concerned…
the Riviera.
Will Always be one of my favorite cars.
As a kid I got the Corgi Toys gift set, with the speedboat on a trailer and a pale blue Buick Riviera.
I still believe this car opened the door for the Mustang andit comes from an era when car men and engineers made cars, not accountants and marketing guys.
As a European I have not got a clue, but I’d go for the Wild cat engine, just for the name of it.
We do need people like Bill Mitchell today, who won’t care of what the Japanese are doing, but they’ll just do their own thing.
The engines were all called Wildcat, 401 or 425, the 2x4bbl was Super Wildcat.
Great choice. I’m with you on the 65 being a notch behind on looks. And that anything with silver interior is pure cool. And today marks the first day I have ever been able to tell a 63 Riv from a 64, so thanks for that.
I share your pain on watching the values of favorite cars outpace a guy’s ability to afford one. I have been experiencing this same phenomenon with Forward Look Mopars.
I prefer the ’65 hide-away headlights, but otherwise I guess I prefer the earlier body. I also never knew the subtle differences between 63 and 64 Rivs before.
One day I’d love to pick up a Forward Look car. I’m hoping that the market for these eventually cools, at least on the less popular models. I could be happy with a ’56 DeSoto or New Yorker.
The 4 doors are more attainable, but I have been there once with my 59 Fury sedan and would feel the need to upgrade to one of the pillarless (or roofless) 2 door models. Nice 59 Fury or Sport Fury convertibles are obscenely priced these days, when you can find one.
Yes the convertible premium can be pretty high. I shopped for a ’66 Chrysler convertible in my price range for a long time before finding one. A 2-door or even 4-door hardtop would be OK, but not a pillared sedan. Of course it’s all academic right now anyhow. No more cars for me until I’m done my current restoration.
My dad bought a 56 DeSoto Fireflite new , actually in 1955, I’ve loved it since then, it’s in the Garage, original paint and interior. Hope I clicked the right pic
they are still available in norcal but time is running out.
Surely someone has come up with a set of algorithms to define “beauty”. I know that it is in the eye of the beholder but there are some objects that are generally agreed to be beautiful. This Riv is right at the top of that category for me. Just one of the very best. Coveted it when new and I still do.
A logical choice……
You may be cool, but you’ll never be Spock-leaning-on-a-Riviera cool…
It’s debatable on the first generation Riviera being the epitome of GM styling. That ’63 split-window Corvette makes it a tough call. Who would ever have thought that 1963 would bring not just one, but two of the best car designs, ever, from GM?
But if it’s true that the Buick is the best from GM, and the 2nd generation ’68-’70 Dodger Charger is the height of Chrysler styling, what would be Ford’s? I’m guessing most would say the 1st generation Mustang.
I would disagree about the 2nd gen Charger being the peak of Chrysler styling. IMO it’s up there, but not “the best”.
As for Ford, I would proposed the 1961-3 T-bird. Or the Engel-designed Continental; it certainly is one of the most blatantly copied looks.
The second-gen Charger is a great-looking car, but it’s hard to escape the feeling that its basic shape is essentially a slightly bigger ’66-’67 Pontiac Tempest/Le Mans/GTO, so it’s maybe a little derivative (although some aspects of its detailing work better than the Pontiac and it’s hard to deny the sheer meanness of the original ’68 front end).
This is what Mr. Spock drove when he wasn`t on the Enterprise. Captain Kirk drove a `63 split window Corvette.
Or perhaps the Reactor custom car by Gene Winfield. 🙂
Not a bad line on any of them. I think I prefer the slightly fussy-delicate earlier bumper and a TH400, so I’ll take a ’64.
One more ’63 versus ’64 telltale: 1963 taillight lens have a small white circle at the center; 1964’s have the speared “R” in the oval emblem.
1963-65 Riviera are Bill Mitchell as his best. Apparently, they remained one of his all-time favorite design successes for GM, with good reason.
the small white circle is a buick tri shield emblem, at least it’s supposed to be, my 65 has the cats eye with R center. After getting my 64 I kept looking at the hood ornament when driving it was a backward R from the drivers seat. I had a 64 Imperial hood ornament with the ring broken off, I removed the riv emblem and put the eagle on, it bolted right on. From what I’ve read the first Riv was his, the second his mother, the third, Frank Sinatra.
Having owned a ’65 briefly at a time when owning two cars was cool, but not a good idea as I was transitioning from high school to college, I share your pain. I paid maybe $800.00 for a well optioned car in a great color combo – the same dark blue exterior and light blue interior as your Skylark. My car had a rust free body and floor, was very complete, but needed paint, some minor body work, some upholstery, and some mechanical. This was around 1982. A ready to drive and show first gen Riviera would have been about $3-$4,000, about the price of a lower mileage, loaded five year old daily driver GM A body coupe.
I did some cosmetic work to my Riviera and sold it for about $1,200. I’d love to get it back for that!
Had a ’63 about 20 years ago with the 401; had tranny issues and decided to have the original rebuilt instead of converting to the cheaper, more available GM tranny (was that the TH400?). Color was red, although the paint code showed it was originally Arctic White, I believe. Was a rust bucket on the undercarriage; friend of mine following me once said the car looked like the tail was wagging the dog! A/C heating was a nightmare; ALL of the vacuum hoses had been removed—I even bought a shop manual for it, couldn’t make heads or tails of the system, so I bought a JC Whitney add/on heater system and hooked into the existing ductwork. Worked like a charm! Even though the car ran ok (sounded wonderful, not overly loud, but you knew it was comin’ down the street), I should have never bought it; too much to restore. Sold it for much less than I bought it for, and that’s ok. Good memories of a neat old car.
63 and 64 425 engines are not interchangable the rear of the block was changed for the th400. I have two 63 Electra convertibles, and 64 and 65 Riviera’s. 64 Cadillac had to use a special spacer to use the Buick th400.
Aaron,
The ’63-’65 Riviera has always been my favorite GM car of the last 50 years – its design is timeless.
Pictured below is a ’64 that is owned by a friend of mine. He has had the car since the early ’80s. It underwent a restoration in the early 2000s. I have driven the Riv before and I will say this – it is one heck of a beast.
Any Riviera, but especially this version, has that special American only character – banker’s hot rod/weekend country club car. Because of this upper middle class essence of the car the Buick Riviera has always been interesting to me. I have owned three of them (but never the first generation).
Good luck to the writer on finding one sometime.
Silver on silver? Just saw one on my local craigslist. http://kansascity.craigslist.org/cto/4858750630.html
My lady and I had twin 64 Riviera’s Mine silver with black interior, hers silver with silver interior.
I’ve owned three Rivieras (so far), a ’64, ’71 and (for 2 days) a ’77.
The ’64 was by far the prettiest of the three. It’s 425 engine, with the factory 2-4 barrel carbs option, was scary quick when you “put your foot on the front bumper”. The engine was far superior to the brakes and suspension of the early sixties. It was so pretty, so well proportioned, so elegant, so “perfect” that I would sit in the garage, sipping my morning coffee, just staring at it.
The ’71 was a Gran Sport model equipped with nitrogen gas filled shock absorbers and a set of Sears/Michelin X radial tires. It was the best overall balanced luxury car I have ever owned!
It’s handling and stopping abilities seemed to violate the laws of weight and physics. No Interstate entrance ramp could challenge the thrust of it’s 455 Buick Gran Sport engine. No fuss, No muss, just “Stab & Steer” and out run any and all traffic. It’s overall balance of styling, acceleration, braking, ride quality and styling melted my automotive heart.
Even it’s sometimes single digit gas mileage didn’t sour me on this one! This “Boat Tail Buick” is easily at the top of my “buy it back for the price I sold it for, in the condition I sold it for” car.
I barely put 10 miles on the ’77 when I was offered seven hundred dollars more than I paid for it by a middle aged lady who “just had to have it”. An afternoon spent washing, waxing and detailing that car paid off handsomely. I honestly don’t have any driving impressions of that one. It’s dark metallic gray paint and silver cloth interior, with Buick’s chrome & black factory mag wheels, was classy and sporty (for the time period).
I prefer the 66 or 67 just a tiny bit more than the 63 or 64. Why? To me the styling “morphed” from glamorous to ALMOST space agey (?) in that jump to 66 and it put ALL other cars behind it….at least until the 67 Eldorado hit Cadillac showrooms.
Give me a 66 or 67 Riviera GS in almost any color and I’d be quite proud and happy.
They’re also on my list, but since I like them a touch less than the early Rivs, I treat them separately.
I like to play the game of “predict the classic”: try to figure out which almost-forgotten car today will become tomorrow’s gem. And if the stars align, buy one now! I’ve seen a few cars on my bucket list multiply their prices, and I don’t want to miss out again.
I recently picked up a very low-mileage 1990 Lincoln Mark VII LSC. It looks and drives factory-fresh. It’s actually pretty far down my list of gotta-have-it cars, but I figured I should seize the opportunity because there’s a decent chance it will get pricier. It’s certainly no Riviera, but if it were… I probably couldn’t afford it in the first place!
These are gorgeous cars! To get much of anything that’s a turn key ready to enjoy car, it seems like youre looking at a minimum of $10K. But I did a quickie look on the list of craig, and this one for $2K seems like a good investment. Needs an engine but the body ‘appears’ to be pretty solid:
http://seattle.craigslist.org/sno/cto/4853334252.html
I for one would much rather source a powerplant and install it rather than exterminate the rust mites…
I love the 63-65 Rivera. I had a girlfriend that had a 65 model. The problem is she sold it before we got married.
Even though I always liked the `63 thru `65 Rivs, and had a `64 for a while in the early `70s, I always felt that by `65 the style seemed somewhat dated.Still,that does not mean that this is not a beautiful car.It is, and will always be. It had the style and the power to back it.One of the great `63 GM designs along with the split window Corvette, and the `63 Pontiac Grand Prix.
There’s a silver one for sale in my neighborhood. It’s been on the market for months. If you’d like, I’ll get the details.
Hmmmmm. Yeah, if you’re in the area and you can get a price and take a look around it. A few pictures wouldn’t be terrible either… Don’t put yourself out though. Paying for it and getting it shipped would certainly be a headache.
I’ve never met a Riviera that I didn’t like.
And then there’s the interior too. This is the best picture I’ve found yet, as it has the rather rare optional steering wheel. Drool.
Looks Exactly like the interior of my ’64! The previous owner had deftly replaced the clock with a water temperature gage that mimicked the factory instruments background.
Even the quixotic automatic headlight dimmer and cruise control still worked on that car!
Beautiful…though I’d still give the interior edge to a Thunderbird of the same time period. But they’re both amazing.
Make a ’65, in that dark blue!
Lovlry, lovely cars
The Great 28… I’m curious how you arrived at the phrase. I have a Chuck Berry compilation from early-mid 80s called the Great 28.
It rhymed…that’s it. 🙂
I’ve always preferred Bo Diddley to Chuck Berry. 🙂
Nice car, definitely agreed that the 1963-64 headlights were much better looking than the 1965 headlights, I rank 1964 to be my favorite year of the 1st generation Riviera’s because it was the first year where the 3 speed automatic replaced the 2 speed automatic and it still had the quad headlights that the 1963 Riviera has, these cars were definitely way ahead of its time IMO.
The point is constantly made, though, that the drivetrains were a step behind the styling. I seriously have to debate this look versus the superior second-gen Buick V8 introduced in ’67 in 430 CID guise.
The Super-Turbine 400 is just Buick’s brand name for the Turbo Hydra-matic 400 introduced by Cadillac in ’64, so the ’65 Riv had the right tranny at least.
From where I’ve read, all of them persisted with X-frames until the boat-tail Riviera came out for 1971, though the ’69’s also had Buick’s across-the-board suspension revisions.
Buick had the ST-400 in 1964 too. But for 1964, the 400 lacked the variable pitch converter that returned in 1965 and it also lacked the two “Low” ranges. So the 1965-67 transmission is a bit more interesting mainly because of the variable pitch feature. I never owned a Buick with a Dynaflow but I drove a ’63 LeSabre with the optional low-compression “Wildcat 375E” 2 barrel 401 (the high compression “Wildcat 410” 401 was standard!) and wasn’t too impressed by it’s performance (the car had a few issues like a fuel leak near the carb…). I mostly hated the PNDLR shift sequence of the Twin Turbine. That alone would be enough for me to avoid a Dynaflow or a Hydramatic. But the ’63 Riviera did have optional leather interior and that option was gone for 1964. So each of the 3 years have it’s plus and minus sides. The new-for-1965 GS package is also very interesting. Not only it includes the 2 Carter AFBs, it also includes the 3.42 posi, and usually faster 15:1 ratio steering.
About the engines, I have Buicks with both the 401, 430 and 455 and I do prefer the 401 over the newer motors.
And I do prefer the styling of the 1966-67 Riviera to the first generation. The 1967 got quite a few improvements over the 1966 but I think the new 430 engine was not among them! It does have more power but also has more issues. Still other things like the mandatory dual master cylinders, available power disc brakes made the 1967 a bit nicer to drive than the 1966.
I searched for years before I found a 1967 Riviera GS with the options I wanted. Mine has disc brakes, the fast ratio steering, the upgrade Custom interior trim with buckets seats and console shift and most options including the power locks, AM-FM stereo, cruise control and a/c. It’s missing headrests, shoulder belts and thanks god, it also misses the unreliable early-style “Automatic Climate Control” that I had in another 1967 Riviera GS (and it was completely messed-up).
Buick designed the turbine 400 trans and it had the variable pitch 64 through 67 on Buick 401-425-430, but Cadillac it was only on the deVille, Eldorado and 60 special in 64, the 62 series and fleetwood 75 had to use the old 4 speed hydramatic , I worked with Buick in the 60’s and the 430 was a terrifically fast engine, but a fast, temporary solution until the 455 could be done, overheat a 430 bad and you have a 4400 pound paperweight, I had several and loved the styling but also ended up with some very heavy paperweights.
On the 64 Rivieras you could get hd suspension and all 64’s came with positrac The Twin Turbine WAS a Dynaflow, there are places in literature It’s been referred to as such, Buick was trying to use the TT name, it had low gear which was totally separate from Drive, which was one speed, but highly variable. My 63 Electra convertible runs easy 0-100 mph in 18 seconds. and weighs more than a riviera. My 63 Electras and 64-65 Rivieras are the most dependable cars I’ve ever had.
My e mail name is Rivguy. I have been a fan of early Rivs for a long time. The first gen was the most distinctive and the interior was specific to this model. The bucket seats front and rear, the console and overhead controls were limited to the first generation. Typical of GM specials after the first couple of model years they are decontented and cheapened. Of the three original years I prefer the ’65 as I like the hidden headlights, lack of fake side scoops and the tailights integrated into the bumper. I have owned two 66s, a 67 and a ’71. For me I loved the revised smoother custom like styling of the ’66, it looks like a Motorama show car. It still has the 425 Nailhead, a classic in it’s own right. The “custom” level interior had the dual release handles and more elaborate door panels. Both of my 66s had the Astro bench, which looks like a pair of buckets separated by a large fold down arm rest. This was really comfortable and suited the spirit of the car. My 67 had the buckets and console with the basket handle shifter with real wood veneer. These cars were comfortable, fast and handled well. Really a great road car. I wish that they were a bit smaller but they had to be the right size for their market niche. These Rivs were popular and sold pretty well, 69 being the best year until 1985. My first Riv was the 71. What a crazy looking car but crazy cool and probably the best performing of GMs specialty cars. GM was able to continue production with average sales ot around 35,000 units. GM kept a stable of cars: Grand prix, Riviera, Toronado and Eldorado even though they were never big sellers.
My favourites have always been the 1963 and 64 Buick Riviera.
Wasn’t there a plan for a ragtop? It would have been gorgeous.
There was a prototype convertible with hidden top when down. Type in 63-65 Buick Riviera convertible on google and you’ll see it along with customs. There were a handful of convertibles made each of the first three years, that look great but you loose the razor edge roof
The ’66-’67 design is absolutely stunning in its own right…but for me the ’65 has to be “peak Riviera”. Love the original design but with the hidden lamps (and one of the more unique headlight door mechanisms), and without the rear fender “pitchfork”. A ’65 GS is perhaps the best Buick of all time, at least in my opinion. But…I’d be happy with any of the 1963 to 1969 Rivs.
Truly Bill Mitchell’s masterpiece. Rare is the car that needs no improvements whatsoever, exterior or interior. The ’63 and “64 examples are just plain perfect. Athletic, modern, taut, powerful. What the T-Bird was until it started putting on a few pounds around this time.
63-64 Riviera’s are the ‘cream of the crop’. I always thought 65-66 Impala’s ‘borrowed’ heavily from the former. Can’t argue with success and both are great looking cars. The prices on many cars from this era are insane!
I’ve always liked the 1963 and 64 Buick Riviera more than that of the 65 Riviera. I’ve always found the 1963 and 64 model years more attractive than the 65.
I have owned both a highly optioned 63 and a high optioned 65 GS. Both purchased in the early 80s before values for excellent cars increased much. Having said that, each car was in very nice driver/local show winner condition and while not cheap, represented real value. Having owned both for a long time my opinion is that, with the exception of the “wood” wheel and aluminum valve covers of the ’65 GS ( which I also installed on my ’63) the ’63 was a much nicer car. The lack of the ribbed aluminum dash, the cheapened switchgear and leather deletion on the ’65 really cheapened its overall feel and while I too love the ’65 hidden headlights, I grew to love the fender nacelle lights on the ’63 and felt the front end on the ’63 was actually more sophisticated and European and the ’65 more “American” and kitschy. I will never understand people’s preference for the ’65 rear end over the ’63-64. So, If I could get a ’63 with the running gear of a ’65 GS, that would be my preference. But IMO the ’65’s cheaper interior and to a degree its exterior, gives the ’63 preference IMO. The ’63 Riv I owned (Sliver Dawn/Black deluxe leather interior) was the only American postwar car I owned that could reside in the same warehouse along with the 60’s era Aston Martins I had at the time without looking like either an over-gilded clown car (my ’59 Eldorado) or just a “great look but far too large” (my ’67 Eldorado) by comparison.
“If I could get the ’63 with the running gear of a 65 You can, it’s called a 1964 Riviera. You could get all the GS equipment on the 64 of a 65 GS, it just wasn’t labeled yet. My silver 64 has all of it.