After a year as a long-term substitute in a poor rural school district, I was hired as a full-time teacher in June of 2003. The first thing I did was propose to my girlfriend of three years. The second thing I did was buy this Skylark, for the public employee approved price of $3400. In order, those were the two smartest things I have ever done.
One week before I bought my Skylark, I was fishing in the Upper Peninsula, and my pals and I saw a ’64 Skylark Sport Coupe pulling up to US-2 from a side road. It was white with a black “toupee,” and that set the scene for my first General Motors purchase. I’d always liked ’64 and ’65 Skylarks, and the next week, mine popped up for sale in the Auto Trader for $3900. It was about three hours away from my house, but I talked to the owner and decided to go check it out. My dad came along to drive my Escort wagon home in case I bought the car.
Of course, the ’65 Skylark is similar to the ’64, but the fenders, grille, side trim, bumpers, and (most glamorously) rear taillights were different. I’m smitten by the full-width taillight of the ’65, and Buick heralded its unique qualities in its ads for the Skylark in ’65.
1965 was an all-star year for American cars, with dozens and dozens of appealing choices, but the Skylark acquitted itself well in that record year, in sales and in appearance. A buyer could hardly go wrong with any of the BOP intermediates in ’65.
But back to my car. I test drove it, looked it over, and even got pulled over on the test drive for expired tags. It had checked lacquer paint (in spots), but it had minimal rust and a super clean undercarriage, and it had only 71,500 miles on the odometer. After talking the owner down $500, I drove it home. And I’ve done relatively little to it since!
My Skylark came with the 300-cubic-inch Buick small block with a Carter AFB, rated at 250-horsepower, driving through a Super-Turbine 300 two-speed automatic with switch-pitch torque converter. In 1965, Buick divested itself of the last vestiges of the old aluminum 215 by giving the 300 iron heads and and iron intake manifold. In fact, the ’65 model was the only year for the iron 300 four-barrel manifold, making it quite uncommon and somewhat expensive.
They called my engine the “Wildcat 355.” The number after “Wildcat” usually stood for the torque rating of the engine in Buick-parlance, but this engine is only rated at 335 ft./lbs. of torque. Someone in marketing obviously thought 355 sounded better, or maybe they wanted to compare more favorably to the strong Oldsmobile 330 of the same year. Either way, acceleration is not breathtaking with the 300, but it is long-legged with its 2.78 axle ratio. I’ve gone faster in this car than I’ll admit on the internet. I was a little younger and possibly more stupid 10 years ago.
The Skylark’s previous owner had installed an Edelbrock 1406, but included the original numbers-matching Carter AFB with the car. I’m glad he did, for two reasons. First, the Edelbrock’s linkage never got along with the switch-pitch switch (how’s that for a mouthful?). Second, as a result of having a spare carburetor around (another spare, I should say), I now am using the Edelbrock on my Mustang. Two birds, meet one stone. I like the AFB-style carburetor. It is very seldom the best at everything (power or mileage), but it’s simple, easy to tune, and reliable.
My Skylark came with a fairly nicely redone interior. It had generic blue seat upholstery over the original seat covers (still does, as a matter of fact), but someone put a little time into it, and all I’ve had to do is keep it clean. It’s starting to show its age, but it’s a long way from needing to be redone again. Somebody also added auxiliary gauges for temperature and oil pressure, and that has caused me some anxiety over the years. For much of its tenure with me, one of the only issues I’ve had with the car has been its tendency to run 200 degrees (which is fine), and creep up to 220 or so in traffic on hot days.
I’ve largely solved the problem by flushing the newer crossflow three-row radiator and adding an overflow canister. The car came with a clutch fan and shroud already. The vacuum advance was inoperational when I bought the car, and fixing that helped to a great extent, as well.
I repaired some door and fender rust along the way, blended some paint in, and have been driving it to the tune of 32,000 additional miles over the last 10 years. In the first year, I discovered the Skylark’s one real Achilles’ Heel…a propensity to crack exhaust manifolds. I cracked one on the way to the Buick 100th Anniversary celebration in Flint not long after I bought the car, and that led to a fun day traversing Northern Michigan junkyards. I actually found a ’67 Special with a complete 300 at one of them, and snagged its manifolds for $30. Not bad.
I did, however, have to replace one of them again about three years ago. I have since purchased another spare for the other side. Oh well.
Gas mileage isn’t spectacular, up to 19 MPG on the highway if all planets are aligned, as low as 10 or 11 in 100% city driving, but if I’m going on an all-day journey and I want to take an old car, I’ll grab the keys to the Skylark first. The Mustang has been possessed by mechanical demons for about two years now, the Corvair uses some oil (I plan to replace the pistons/jugs this winter), the Special gets no more than 14 MPG and likes to cruise at 60, and the Dart isn’t completely sorted yet. This is my go to car. Even if ’65 Skylarks had no other positive attributes, I’d love mine for that reason alone.
But there’s no reason to love it for only one reason. Its reliability is intertwined with those cool taillights and those crisp Bill Mitchell approved lines and the nice ride (for an old car) and the general quality construction. It speaks volumes that the Skylark finally let me down last month on my way to a car cruise in Flint, and it ended up being a crappy tank of gas. Some enyzme cleaner and a little compressed air through the carb passages cleared it all up.
I keep threatening to tear the Skylark apart to repaint everything and polish up the trim, but I never actually do it. Why should I? I like it just as it is for the most part, and I don’t really care if anybody else does. Someday, I’ll feel like I owe it to the car and I’ll finally do it, but who knows when that will be?
At any rate, it’s a perfect rest area for errant ladybugs.
If it comes across like I love my Skylark, it’s because I do. It doesn’t ignite my passion for weird vehicular objects like my Special, Dart, and Corvair do, and it doesn’t have the family heirloom status of the Mustang, but when I dream about road trips on a cold winter evening, I’m always packing the Skylark’s trunk.
Love it. A steal at that price, all day, every day… and great looking to boot.
+1 a stunning looking car
My classic outstayed the wife I had when I snagged it. Hope you had better luck there. The car looks great. I wouldn’t paint it unless rust forced me to.
You have an interesting collection of cars. I had a similar collection once but found that teachers pay and poor knack for mechanics doomed the practice. One antique car and one antique tractor stretch both now.
An inviting story that I enjoyed reading.
I’m still married, so she’s been around longer than all but the Mustang!
I’m lucky to have sort of a green thumb for mechanical objects (although many days things don’t go my way), which makes owning old stuff more attainable. Plus, I most enjoy unusual stuff that’s a little outside the cultural mainstream, which generally makes them more affordable to buy (but more expensive to find parts for). Finally, I kind of like things with just a touch of “beater” to them for some reason, so a 100-point perfect car does not appeal to me. My sensibilities match my salary.
Great story and a wonderful car. GM really did these 1964-65 mid sizers properly. After my family’s extended history with the 64 Cutlass, I understand what you are talking about. I wish I had gotten my drivers license before Mom sold it to my cousins.
Although I like the 64 Olds better than its Buick counterpart, I think those full width taillights sway me to the Skylark if we are comparing 65s. That small (for its class) 300 cid V8 continues to mystify me.
The color combo and sport wheels really make your car stand out. Very, very nice.
Makes me want to pull my ’64 Cutlass out of retirement! The Olds shares a lot of the structure with this Buick. From the belt mouldings up it has the same roof, rear pillar and glass. Mine also has the switch-pitch linkage, but the tranny on the Olds is called the Jet-Away. I still have the original 4GC Rochester 4 bbl on top of the original 330. These cars are fun to drive and they are just the right size in my opinion.
Perfect car, perfect story. I can totally see why you reach for this car first. It may not be a highly sought-after or high-powered classic, but for everyday road tripping I’m sure it’s hard to beat this car.
The old gal looks great. 19 MPG Hwy is actually pretty good for a car like this. A road trip machine for sure. Nice to see you have had it for around 10 years and it shows it’s had lot of care yet gets driven regularly. You got a good deal on it, seems like it’s needed very little in 10years. Not bad for a almost 50 year old car. I agree, I like the full width tailamps on the 65 better. Enjoyable write up, hope you plan on keeping that old beauty around for a long time, it deserves to be appreciated and taken care of.
What does it matter how much gasoline this car uses? It cost $3500.
Nice car ! .
I remember going into the Buick Dealer in West newton to look at them when they came out , looked good then and now too .
My School Chum’s Dad was a Buick Man and had a ’63 when it was two years old , then sold it after a couple more years and bought a ’64 , really nice cars to ride in and he loved driving them anywhere at the drop of a hat .
Please keep your good write ups coming .
-Nate
Man, what a find! I’m not sure if the paint is original, but as I get older I start to move more towards the “it’s only original once” camp. I like some imperfections on my vehicles both because it’s only original once but also because it allows me to enjoy them a little bit more. My current one looks really good from even three feet away, but close up it’s got a lot of scratches and odd imperfections.
I think if I had a “perfect” vehicle, knowing me, I’d be much more afraid of driving it.
Also 19 MPG highway? Wow, that’s pretty impressive for the vintage.
19 is under optimal conditions all the way around…normal is more like 16-17 MPG.
It’s been repainted once, probably 30 years ago. It is kind of liberating to have imperfect paint, because you worry about it less. (I still worry about it, however)… 🙂
Count me as another fan of the ’64-’65 Skylark. I’ve always thought the roof treatment with the two-tone was very cool.
Your car reminds me a lot of my ’65 Riviera. Same dark blue exterior, medium blue interior (great colors for a ’65 Buick). Similar patina on the paint and chrome. From 15 feet in the right light, I’ll bet your car still looks like new.
Aw man, a dark blue ’65 Riv in similar condition to my Skylark is one of my dream cars! How about a picture?
I had this for about a year in the early ’80s. I was in high school, and tried for some “action” shots.
It would be hard for me to buy another ’65 because this one was so perfect as far as I was concerned. Deluxe interior, AC, power windows, tilt, remote trunk, wire covers – terrific colors.
The body and paint were rougher than the photos show, but it was amazingly rust free. It came from a small Iowa town based on some records it had.
Sold it around 1983 – college was coming and having two cars was too many.
A few CC’s in the background. The neighbor had a rather rare car, I caught the rear quarter in one photo.
Isn’t that a great looking car? I have been sooooo close to pulling the trigger on several Rivieras, and they just needed a little more work than I thought they were worth. Now they’re just out of financial reach for me. Ah well…
I paid about a grand for it in ’82 and got maybe $1,200 when I sold it. Mainly I put elbow grease into detailing it, and lots of work to bring the paint back. Also pushed out a few dents and a pretty good push into the passenger door. It was an excellent base for restoration. Ran okay and the AC worked. The prices today for corrupted restorations are ridiculous.
Definitely a nice-looking Riviera! I would have loved to have something like that as a high school student…
I assume you’re not talking about the Pinto as your neighbor’s rare car! I can’t quite make out what’s lurking at the next house down though…
I was thinking the ’68 Barracuda whose rear fender we see in the foreground of the last shot.
Old Pete, you are right. It was a convertible at that. There would have been a ’71 ‘Cuda coupe sitting in the street in front of it.
Chris, tThe driveway next door has a ’69-’70 LeSabre sedan, and a VW Kammback. The master of the house was a Buick guy, and went through two rounds while we were neighbors. An orange ’70 Skylark hardtop coupe with a white vinyl top was in the garage for the Mrs. They went through a handful of VW’s as 3rd and 4th cars beginning with OPEC I. The son was a Barracuda boy, and went through three. He was quite a bit older than me.
That vintage ad at the Portland Rose Festival is really cool, that festival is still going strong. I bet Buick was a sponsor that year.
I just think it’s cool as can be that you have all those antiques and actually drive and enjoy them! And…you live in snow country to boot.
My hat’s off to you, and this Buick!
Always had a fondness for the ’64-’65 Skylarks. There was a doctor up the street with a ’64 that I wanted when I got old enough to drive, and a classmate who’s Dad was also a doctor had one of these new.
The auto market in the mid-’60s seemed focused on broughams and intermediates, but your posts help me realize that the compacts offered then served up plenty of style, too.
I don’t know much about these cars, but the write-up was bar-none. Excellent, and I felt as if I knew you just through the writing. Great piece, and the detail pictures are nice!
Nice ride, I like the looks and its size.
As far as I know Edelbrock carbs are fully based on the good old Carters. Edelbrock Performer Series = Carter AFB, Thunder Series = Carter AVS.
My ’69 Plymouth still has its Carter AVS. I’m not interested in mpg. And I’m even less interested in 0-60 or 1/4 mile times. All I know is that the car runs flawlessly at any given rpm, all year round.
That’s absolutely correct. I’ve been trying to tune for mileage with a wideband O2 sensor lately, and I’ve found that if I tune for mileage, the car invariably runs like garbage and doesn’t really get any better mileage. So now I tune for driveability…
A beautiful Buick you have Aaron, and as usual in your write-ups, a lot I can relate to. I’m also a fan of full-width taillights and Carter/Edelbrock carbs, and have struggled with overheating issues. My “go-to” car was always my ’66 Chrysler Windsor, until I tore it apart for a thorough restoration.
That is one sharp, clean, handsome car. I’m also a huge fan of the full-width taillights, such as also on the original (1966-67) Charger and also the current Charger. And, also a few other cars. The other thing that really sets the car off nicely is the wheels. Overall, just a nice trim, decent-sized car. And, you found a low-mileage example for a decent price. Looks like it should hold up well for many years to come.
Lucky you to get such a nice car for below market value. The Skylarks from the mid-sixties were one of my favourite Buicks from back then. The styling has aged well.
If I see one car at a show that lights my fire I consider the day well spent. This year’s Peach Day car show in Brigham City, Utah had this ’65 Skylark convertible that knocked my socks off. The car was anything but stock and the bumpers alone, which were tucked into the bodywork, probably cost more than $3500 alone. But hey! I go to car shows for the same reason I go to topless bars-for a few minutes of fantasy and lascivious thoughts. And as we know, fantasy is better than reality.
Great-looking old Skylark, and it really does sound like a steal at the price. Those full-width tails are a fantastic detail and the shape overall is crisp and elegant with all the right touches. Glad to hear you and the Skylark have had a happy “marriage” so far and may it continue for many years!
It also sounds like you’ve done well in your actual marriage in finding a woman who lets you indulge your love of old cars to the tune of five classics! I *might* be able to get away with two, if the stars align just right…
I took my drivers test in a 1965 Skylark, not a GS tho. Was 2 tone white over pink. It was my Grandma’s car and newest in the family about 1969. Passed first time!
Aaron, thank you; I had been hoping to hear more about your Skylark.
This is a great looking A-body. It’s easy to see why this is your go-to car; it certainly is a good size and likely a great road car. It sounds like it is about as trouble-free as one can find for this age.
Driving it to Indiana?
Hey Jason,
I don’t think I’ll be able to make it to Indiana this year…oh well.
If I did, I’d probably drive this though… 🙂
Love that taillight strip. One thing I really enjoy about your cars is that they present well, but aren’t perfect. I’m not a slave for patina, but like with a pair of white converse sneakers, the first scuff (or scratch) means one can then enjoy the car rather than worry about it.
Wow, that’s un-freakin-believable that you scored such a sweetheart deal on that ride! Must be some kind of miracle for that car not to be rusted into oblivion.
This is seriously one sweet looking ride, man. Black suits it perfect and the Kelsey-hayes wheels couldn’t be put to better use.
I like this era of Sylarks They have very clean styling .
This write up makes me doubly sad ,about the only GM vehicle I wish I had back. My 66 Buick Sportwagon with the vista view roof line. It was a perfectly sized station wagon in my opinion. A very well built rattle free wagon .
I had several Buicks of mid-’50s through mid-’60s vintage “back in the day” and they were, as GM intended in those days, mostly premium automobiles. It sounds like you really scored on that one.
I can only echo the comments above, thanks for telling the story Aaron. There is something to be said for the simpler life of keeping it (or returning it to) standard spec. Presentable but not perfect is a good way to have the car too, less stress equals more enjoyment. On the hot running have you considered changing the thermostat, or do you know what temp rating it has?
I want my ’67 back. Silver mist with black vinyl roof; 300 2-bbl with the 2-speed and Switch-Pitch. Wouldn’t fly, but was brisk. First car I paid for myself. (My real first car was a hand-me -down 1966 Catalina 4-door sedan. Worn out.)
More than likely the bottom half of the radiator is clogged, or possibly the fins are somewhat bent. The thermostat can do very little about that.
It’s all good now; she runs 190 or so all the time, cooler on cool days. I’ve found that adding an overflow or catch can cools things down a bit on some cars.
I’m using a 180* thermostat.
Aaron—You have a beautiful Skylark.My late father’s last Buick was a 1965 Skylark sedan V6.I was 9 years old when my father and mother returned from Sydney to Tasmania with our new Buick,late at night,and we four children stayed up late so we could rush outside to see the new car when they arrived home.The 1965 Skylark has always been one of my favourite Buick designs.Your car is a very fine example of the marque.
I admire your passion for cars and loyalty to your spouse. Your Skylark is beautiful and you shouldn’t change a thing. You seem to have it together and are in a peaceful place. I regularly fight the urge to browse Craigslist or attend a Mecum auction to add to my brood, but the wife (correctly) points out that we have four cars and a two car garage. Be well friend.
Great car! I’ve often thought 1965-66 was the highwater mark for North American car styling.
The body style of the 64and 65 are my favorite. Back in 78 I bought a low mileage 74 pinto squire wagon thinking that being newly married i should be more responsible and have a more reliable car. It was only a year later that I traded the pinto for a 64 skylark convertible. The used car dealer thought I was nuts. I drove and enjoyed the skylark till I found an orginal owner 65 gs convertible automatic. Because of the birth of my second son I sold the GS once again thinking that I was being responsible. Big mistake! I really missed that car while driving my Honda. I found another 65 gs convertible automatic with factory air in 1990. This one is in pretty bad shape but I’m still planning to fix it up, I just don’t want to let another one go!
I’ve always liked the appearance of the ’65 Skylarks, of all the 1965 GM intermediates I like the Skylark and the Pontiac Tempest the best. Pontiac clearly had the most aggressive styling of the bunch, the Skylark is very classy and attractive. The GM intermediates from the period of 1965 to 1967 have always been my favorites from a styling standpoint.
I also have a soft spot for the 65 Skylark. My parents bought a 65 SportWagon in 68, and we had many good memories and long trips. Many years later, I found a twin of our original SportWagon and I had to bring it home. It also has the Wildcat 355 engine, which moves the wagon along quite well. It is the perfect size for a wagon, and speaks to the great design of the GM A bodies in 64-65. I hope you’re still enjoying your Skylark! Here’s a pic of my SportWagon.
Nice Sportwagon!
I still have the Skylark – 20 years last June!