(first posted 10/16/2013) She’s real fine, my 409... Well, I guess I rather blew it with my ’64 Chevy CC, seeing as I used only the lyrics of a song for the text (it was very late that night). Because if ever a car was immortalized by a song, this is it. So now I’ll have to actually write something original about the ’63 Impala SS 409. Like taking a good look at that legendary motor under the hood. Or whether the ’63 Impala is better looking than the ’61. Or how about the fact that it seems to inspire women to take their clothes off in its proximity more than any other car?
Well, not in 1963. But do a Google Image search for 1963 Impala, and be prepared. Giddyup, giddyup 409. Well, I’m not going to post any of those here, because I know how distracting that sort of thing can be when we have important historical work to do. Engines are the topic of the day, the 409 in particular. Almost as good as near-naked women.
There’s obviously something about the ’63 Impala coupe that seems to inspire women; or is it the men that pose them with it? Well, it’s a beaut! There’s no denying it, and undoubtedly many consider it the best of the bunch (1961-1964), if not the best looking Chevy ever. It’s certainly going down in history that way…try finding a genuine Curbside Classic ’63 Impala SS, with a 409, no less. I’d long given up hope on that, but then, there it was.
At first glance, I almost kept walking…I just don’t do the typical car-show-cruise-in-mobile-resto-mod kind of ’63 Chevy. I want to remember how they looked and felt in my childhood; isn’t that what CC is largely about? And I want to find them sitting parked on the street. But on closer examination, this one just made the grade, despite the non-stock wheels. At least they weren’t donks, tiny low rider wire wheels, or resto-mod giants. I can live with these.
I was also just a wee bit suspicious when I saw the 409 badge on its front fender. But a closer look put me more at ease. Somebody wouldn’t slap a bent 409 badge on a 327 Impala SS, would they? Do you know what magic that little set of three numerals meant to me in 1963? Seeing a 409 back then in Iowa City was a really big-bore deal, and I always kept a lookout for that possibility, thanks to youthful sharp eyes that could spot those little numerals a half mile away. The first one I saw was a station wagon, wouldn’t you know. And with the Powerglide, no less.
That’s because the overwhelming majority of 409s weren’t all that hot. I’m speaking of the 340 hp version, which had a pretty mild hydraulic cam, modest valves and ports, 10.0:1 compression, and a family-sized four barrel carburetor. It had plenty of grunt where it counted, to haul a wagon-load of kids and stuff up the Rockies on vacation, Powerglide and all. (this engine shot is from Tom’s ’64 409 CC).
The 409 was the next stage of evolution of the Chevy “W” engine, which debuted in 1958 with 348 cubic inches. We did its full story here. It’s a rather unusual engine, in that it doesn’t share anything in common with the famous Chevy small block V8, most of all in its cylinder head design. The top of the block is angled, and the whole combustion chamber is in the bore.
Which means that the cylinder head is quite perfectly flat. This one is from a hi-po 409, showing off its larger valves. And as can be seen from the cross-section above, the valves are staggered, reducing the length of the corresponding port. Those staggered valves also result in the distinctive scalloped valve covers on these engines.
So here’s the real deal, the top of the line 425 hp version, with twin four barrels, big valve heads, 11.0:1 compression, and a mean and lumpy mechanical lifter cam. There was also a 400 hp version, with just one carb. Some say the 348 and 409 have a distinctive exhaust sound, because of those heads. I can’t swear by it, but I did hear a guy’s tri-power 348 a while back as he was showing it off, and there seems to be something to that. Or maybe it’s brain washing. Either way, one of these motors at full chat is a sound to behold.
If a 409/425 wasn’t fast enough, you just had to sidle up to your friendly Chevy dealer and have him order you up a Z-11. This was a drag-race special, with the engine enlarged to 427 cubic inches, and stuffed full of goodies. That resulted in a laughable 5 hp rated increase, to 430 hp. But hp ratings back then were mostly useless anyway.
The Z-11 package cost an extra $1240, which was about a 50% increase over a base Impala coupe. But it was a steal, considering it included a race-ready engine, T-10 four speed, a front clip pretty much all of aluminum, and just about any other goodie in Chevy’s bag of tricks. Shipping weight: 3245 lbs. Seriously. Only 57 were made, and seven are known to exist. Don’t ask what they’re worth.
The Z-11 was for the drag racers only. But folks like Junior Johnson got something even more special from the Chevy Skunk Works, the “Mystery Motor” Mark II 427. It wasn’t available through even your most accommodating Chevy dealer. In fact, it was the last legit factory NASCAR engine out of Chevrolet, as a result of GM’s self-imposed racing ban.
This engine is a hybrid of sorts, as it was based on the 4.31″ bore/3.65″ stroke 427 W Z-11 block, but had the “porcupine” heads that would appear on the Mark IV engine a year or so later. Only a handful of these engines were built, and Junior was the only one who really got it running right, racking up seven wins in the 1963 NASCAR season. Maybe the Beach Boys should have been singing about My Mystery Motor 427. Junior was probably singing When I take her to the track she really shines.
I don’t really know what’s under the hood of this ’63 Impala SS. But since it has an aftermarket shifter for what is clearly a three-speed automatic, it does raise a few questions. The scenario I’d most like to imagine is that this was a 340 hp 409 with the Powerglide, which was replaced with a THM 400 or such. The original console is also MIA, presumably because of the aftermarket shift quadrant. Presumably.
The original-style optional tach has a 5000 rpm redline, which sounds about right for a 340 hp 409. As is evident from the steering wheel, this car is clean, but the upholstery and exterior do show signs of wear.
But the little aftermarket tach down there by the shifter has a decidedly higher red line. We’ll probably never know, unless the owner sees this on the internet and checks in. That happens often enough. I’m betting on a slightly warmed-up 409 that started life as the 340 hp version.
Enough of engines, and let’s get back to beauty. As a kid, I had endless debates about the ’61-’64 Chevys. The ’64 inevitably lost, because it was the dullest of the bunch, and that body was getting mighty long in tooth by then; try a little tenderness indeed. The ’62 had its charms, but the ’61 and ’63 had to duke it out in my mental arena endlessly. There never was a final resolution; they both have their charms.
But fifty years later, it’s time to finally settle this battle, and so I’ll let the women decide. A Google image search for the ’61 Impala shows there’s still a healthy number eager to strip with it, but the ’63 wins pants-down. Time to put that argument to bed once and for all. If only I’d had these high-tech aids back in 1963 to help me with that decision, I wouldn’t have been grappling with this problem for half a century.
According to a muscle car book I perused the 60 model 409 was 409 cube 409 hp 0-60 in 4 sec & 1hp for every 8 lb of motor car it was the fastest accelerating car ever made up to 1970 that the book covered and NOT available to the public, you had to be a recognized nascar racer to get one. I guess by 63 they were churning plenty out for the average Tom Dick or Rangi to get one. Nice car
+1,never knew Ronnie Sox raced a Chevy.
I think the ’61 bubble top Impalas are the best looking of the bunch but the ’63 would be a close second. As you said, by 1964 the Chevy was starting to show its age and needed to be replaced. To GM’s credit they made them even better looking with the 1965-66 iterations. As a matter of fact the 65-66 GM B body two door hardtops are arguably the best looking full size cars ever. Opinion I know but there is just something about the way the body surfaces flow on these cars that really appeal to me. About 15 years ago I actually purchased a ’65 Impala hardtop as a project car. Unfortunately the body had rust issues far beyond my ability to deal with and I sold it after a few months. I’m still sort of looking for one (that I can afford) in better condition.
If i remember correctly loads of people fell in love with the 65 Impala and its sales mark of over 1 million sold in 1965 is still a single year record
Count me as a fan of the ’61 ‘bubbletop’ GM cars, not only Chevy, but the cool widetrack Pontiac, too. Given the choice between the two, I’d probably go with the latter. The Tin Indian’s 421 seems like a better engine than the 409, and the styling is cleaner, as well.
As to the 409’s distinctive sound, it can be readily heard at the beginning and end of the song. Supposedly, it was actually Terry Melcher’s 1960 348 Tri-Power, and it took Brian Wilson all night to get the engine revving and over-run sound just the way he wanted it (and it shows).
Even as much of a “Mopar Man” as i am for this time period, a “bubble top” 1961 Chevvy (or Buick or Pontiac) “just melts my butter” (quoting Dolly Parton).
The 61’s rear 3/4 view is the greatest thing ever.
The front end, not so great….
Agreed. One of the classic shapes from that angle, but the nose is more than a little awkward. On balance, though, superior to the ’62 or ’64 IMO.
A vote for the 63 here. I spent a lot of time in a white 63 Chevy with red interior. Unfortunately, it was my father’s Bel Air station wagon with a 283/Powerglide. I think he found it unfortunate too, as his next car was a 66 Country Squire.
I consider the 63 Impala 2 door hardtop as the best looking Chevrolet of the 1960s, and possibly the best looking of them all. The right car at the right time. No wonder Virgil Exner got fired.
BTW, that tach under the dash that you call an aftermarket looks for all the world like the factory tach that sat on the console of our 64 Cutlass. Ours was mounted on the top of the console up under the dash, but I could imagine that it would be possible to give the case a 180 degree spin to move the mount to the top. Just wondering.
My mom had one of these back in the day. Not sure which version of the 409 it had – came from the factory with chrome air cleaner and valve covers. She said she never had any problem finding a bag-boy to take her groceries out to the car after shopping – then they’d always ask to pop the hood. They’d ogle the engine for a bit, then ask what transmission was in the car, “Powerglide” came her response – and down went the hood and disappointed bag boys walk away.
Mom always picked out fun cars. She misses Pontiac, still loves her 2005 Bonneville GXP with the Northstar V8. These days she drives a 2011 Camaro convertible. She had wanted a Berlinetta in ’79, but ended-up with a Citation instead. (dad did not pick out fun cars.)
If it had Powerglide, it was the mild 340 hp version. PG was not available on the hi-po versions.
Wish I knew more of the car’s history. My father was a life-long GM employee. I can’t ask him as he died years back. I know my parents picked the car up from the tech center in Warren as opposed to walking into a dealership to get it – so there is some oddness to how the car was acquired.
I’ll have to ask mom if she remembers any of the story – she has talked about being afraid to drive it at first…but she got over that pretty quick.
Mr. Niedermeyer, If you haven’t found your 409 yet, I have one. 63, 70k miles, it is a 2 speed powerglide with the original motor and original valve covers. Upgrades include electric fan, front disc brakes. Its now a 2 x 4 car. Original interior, quite the survivor, chrome is in unbelievable condition, rides like a dream.
I was all of nine years old when the 63s came out, but I think they were my favorites from this time. I think the 62s came in second for me, then the 61s, and way down the list came the blocky-looking 64s. Now, 51 years later, the 63s still look good.
Growing up on a street of row houses, I was subject to many watershed cars coming and going. One was the 63 Impala, one of my buddies parents bought the car new. I’ll venture a guess it had the 327(?). What impressed me most in my 6 year old eyes was the dash. Even today, looking at Paul’s photo of that dash rekindles those memories. Just a fantastic design. Nobody did dashes like GM and this one was the start of a long run of dominant interior design.
But safety being what it was in those days, it wasn’t enough to save my friend’s mother, who was killed one night in that car after striking a tree.
Our next door neighbor in 65 purchased a new Impala. Another watershed moment for Chevy and GM. Were those engineers and designers on some kind of roll, or what?
Dad had a white 2 door Impala similar to this one, only his was a 327 Turbo Fire w. Powerglide on the column. Bench seat, though.
Loved. That. Car. He had it when I was aged 5 through 9.
It’d be a tough call for me on 61 or 62 or 63 or 64. A bubble top would be pretty cool, but I’d take any one of the four. (Make mine a 2 door hardtop, please.)
I have a couple of old magazine road tests for the ’63 Chevy with the 340hp 409 and the PG trans. Car Life was able to run the quarter mile in 15.2secs @ 90 MPH, while Motor Trend only managed a 15.9sec @ 88 MPH. Since the trap speeds were similar, I wonder if MT had a poorer launch technique (they do show the car smoking one tire). MT also had slower 0-30 MPH and 0-60 times. Both Impalas had the same 3:36:1 rear ends. Regardless, any fullsize car from this era running 15 sec 1/4 miles was fast. Also note Car Life reported that they revved the 340 HP 409 to 5800 RPM.
I personally favoured the bubble top ’61 and the ’62 Bel Air. I’d probably pick a ’62 Bel Air with the 409hp 409 if I had to pick.
From 59 to the early 70s all Impalas looked great in all body styles.I always thought it was a test of a great looker to have all the various body styles look equally good,something few manufacturers managed but Chevy did with this one.The 65 Dodge Coronet is another design which looks equally good as a sedan/hardtop/convertible or wagon.I love this 63 especially that trim around the lights,I did a similair look on my brothers BSA A65 Lightning when I used valve grinding paste and the grinding tool on the alloy engine plates he made.When it comes to 61 – 64 Impalas make mine a 61 bubble top in red with red interior smallblock V8 2 barrell cruiser please
The inherent “sound” of any engine depends primarily on its layout and firing pattern/interval. A crossplane V8 sounds like any other crossplane V8, the valves or shape of the combustion chamber don’t enter into it.
The exhaust system can fine-tune the sound coming from the engine if you prefer a particular character.
The valvetrain does influence what the engine sounds like, though. A gear-driven cam and solid lifters tend to be noticeably noisier than a chain-driven cam and hydraulics, for instance.
“… the ’61 and ’63 had to duke it out in my mental arena”
No they didn’t, your “mental arena” just hadn’t seen the ’65 yet
I was going to make a similar comment. The early 60s Chevys were so forgettable that to this day I have to pause when trying to identify the year. The full-sized Fords were better looking until ’65 and then it was all Chevy until ’69, at least for me.
+1 My mother had a ’63 and I just hated that car, I was so happy to see that uninspired brick go.
+2. <68, though. After that it was Fuselage till the GM 71s.
Wow! My late uncle owned a ’63 SS with a 409, 4 speed, black on black. I loved that car! I was crushed when he traded it in for a new ’65 Pontiac Grand Prix…
Still own my ’63 SS Impala 4 speed 409 car. Just a mild 340 HP version, fun car to drive and row the gears in. Own a ’65 Impala SS with a 327 and powerglide and a ’70 Impala sport coupe with a L48 300 350 (my personal favorite car to drive out of them all).
The hottest 409’s were real hot but they had their issues.
Today it’s actually easier to build a pump gas 500hp Ford 390 FE stroker than a pump gas 500hp W series.
Agree with the comments that 61-63 seem to blend in my mind. Didn’t help any that I went overseas in the middle of those runs. I am reminded of a 62 (I think) station wagon that used to drag on the east coast when I was stationed in New London. Named “the dogcatcher”. Get other cars when I google that so suppose it was a popular name.
That car was an all steel wagon with a 409 and (I think) automatic of some variety. To say it was competitive with others in it’s class is to sell it short. There are a couple dragsters that stuck with me for years. It was one of them and the 409 sure has a place in my memory. I don’t know if anyone else remembers them or the Butterfield and Kiss big block Camaro but they sure represent showmanship well.
Of the ’61-’64 shoe box Chevy’s, I always liked the ’63. Black with red interior and buckets, please.
My uncle had a 63 Coupe with the 327. Not sure if the tranny was a Powerglide or Turbo-hydramatic. It was a very nice car with a comfortable ride and good straight line performance, which he was always willing to demonstrate for a car crazy teenager. The build quality appeared to me to be very good in spite of the fact that full size Chevy cars were being produced at phenomenal rates that year. I was a committed Ford guy at the time but I had to admit to myself that this Chevy was superior to our 62 Galaxie 500.
When I was growing up, the older gentlemen 2 doors up the street from us had a 327 version of the ’63 Impala that looked very similar to the subject car. I want to say his was a pearl white trimmed in red, but my 6 year old memories may be fuzzy on the ‘pearl’ part. This car was beautiful though; I even think it made more of an impression on me than my Dad’s 283 powered ’66 Impala fastback in Firethorn Red, or 307 powered ’68 Impala Custom in Grecian Green.
I agree with Paul as far a favorites go for this generation. The 62 has its charms… In fact, in that car, I like the opposite color scheme. But the 61 and 63 are toss-ups, but I’d probably favor the 63 as well. In both of the latter, white with red trim is my favorite. Well, the 61 looks nice in light blue, too. The 64 is too boxy, but when done up in a dark blue trimmed in white, the big old box is still a pretty nice looking car.
. . .One probably doesn’t want to know how much an original 425 horse 409 wagon is worth. Surely they made one or two? Although, looking at all the variations of full size Chevys ’61 – ’64, I’d pick a ’62 Bel Air 409 Sport Coupe in deep blue.
Interesting car. In the 10th picture – and again a few pics down (same car I suspect) one can see the air intake for the air cleaner/carbides camping from the firewall. I’ve never seen ts before! Is that something special for test aortic user car or was this a feature of this engine? I am also wondering why the intake would be designed like this…
A more literal form of cowl induction, to take in cold air from outside the engine bay
High school buddy had a white over red 327 SS – beautiful old car! In the late 70s it wasn’t too tough for a teenager to buy full-sized 60s sleds. Nobody wanted them, not even a pristine 62 Impala SS. Some low-life with no insurance went left of center – in a Fiat, of all things! – and the SS was totaled. He parted out the interior, sold the engine/tranny to a drag racer and scrapped what was left. If I remember correctly he about broke even. My all time favorite car to bum a ride in…next to the old Toyota Hi-Lux owned by the cute blonde down the road…
From what I remember(I was 10 when they came out in ’61) that they were regarded as somewhat fragile only having a two bolt main. Once the porcupine head 427 came out available with 4 bolt mains the 409 was pushed aside.
61 and 63 are my favs too, whichever one I’m standing next to at the moment is my favorite, I could never pick one definitively. I don’t quite know what it is that I like less about the 62 and 64 but they just don’t catch my eye like these.
The W engine design is pretty interesting, another neat piece from GM’s most creative period.
I think we need more songs about Honda CRVs.
I can’t wait to see the lyrical visionary who rhymes CRV with Prius C.
Something along the lines of, “It happened in the carpool lane where the moms are wide” comes to mind.
Different song, of course…
The fuddy duddys at CR did a test on a 63 impala coupe with a six cylinder!
oh,bitch bitch bitch oh my no back seat room wind noise and on and on
I myself would have preferred a big block Sport Fury
And at that time Chevy and the Impala just decimated Ford
So Ford was winning all these races . Was it doing them any good?
For me the 63 is the quintessential Chevy. I had a neighbor years ago who had one that was 409 equipped with a 3 speed on the column. There can’t be too many left like that.
Well, I must be the odd one out here as I can’t seem to like the ’63’s styling. I prefer the lighter, more athletic-looking ’61 and ’62 – particularly the ’61’s front end. They look like they’re moving when standing still; the falling crease on the side contributes to that. And also the lighter roofline. To me, the ’63 just looks heavy and bulky, static and immovable. It looks more like a Cadillac (probably the whole idea), but lacks the visual sportiness of the earlier ones.
Great find though.
In 1961 a fellow up the street came home with a new Impala SS white with red interior 348/340 4speed. I was entranced by the clatter of the solid lifters. I don’t imagine that many like that were made.
Personally I’ll take a 1961
http://www.hotrod.com/cars/featured/1504-original-4-speed-1961-chevrolet-impala-has-just-34000-miles/
My first car…`’63 Impala SS with 409, 4-speed…dark green over light green vinyl bucket seats, factory steering column mounted tach, chrome reverse wheels, and it even had a “reverberator”! Purchased it for $800 in fall of 1969 & sold it for $800 in the spring of 1970 when I ordered a ’70 Malibu convertible (fathom blue over black and, ironically, with a 6 cylinder, automatic – what was I thinking!!). The Impala was an awesome car to drive…but, I was always afraid of speeding tickets…if only I would have kept it, eh?
I wouldn’t turn down either a ’61 or a ’63, but on looks alone, I’m team ’61. My dates to both my junior and senior proms had their dads’ ’61 Impala two-door, and ’61 Brookwood parked in the driveway whenever I went over to their respective houses. Maybe that has something to do with my fondness for them.
Does anyone know if the motor sound effects on “409” were actually a 409?
The engine sound effects were supposedly from a 348 not a 409.
Nice, but the `62 Bel Air bubble back coupe with the 409 and a 4 speed manual is Da Bomb!
Another great article. You say to not ask what a Z-11 would be worth, but I can guess what it’s worth…..more than most of us will ever have! These SS’s represent a real concerted effort to make full size muscle a priority, but I would assume that as time went on, that power to weight ratios became more of a priority for people, as did gas mileage.
Still sounded good!
No, no, no. It’s the 1962.. that is the better-looking big Chevy of that era.
My 63 Red with red interior was a 340 HP 4 sp. Bought it in 64 from a friend & he bought a new 64 327/300HP 4 sp. My tack red lined at 6,000 rpm. Got two trophies at Bunker Hill Drag Strip in 1964. Had cut outs open & 8″ recap slicks on it. Fastest run was 13.79 & most of time ran low, low 14’s. I bought a 66 Nova L79 in 1967 & sold the 409 for $800. One of the dumbest things I ever did. Was still no rust & great interior. Did need motor to be rebuilt, cause had a little over 100,000 miles on it. Was probably my favorite car of all time. I still have the trophies from it & I’m now 74 yrs. old. Still go about once a year to Muncie Dragway & watch.
That factory tach looks like a total afterthought, like they forgot to leave room for it on the main gauge panel.
My ranking of this generation of Impalas by looks: 1963 > 1964 > 1962 > 1961. Why exactly has the 1964 model become so essential for the low-rider crowd, along with a popular shout-out in rap songs? The ’58-’63 use the same X frame underneath, and some of them look better than the vaunted 64.
Despite being well known, “409” was actually the B side of that Beach Boys record, with “Surfin’ Safari” on the A side. These guys were so overflowing with first-rate tuneage back then that great songs like “Don’t Worry, Baby”, “In My Room”, and “Let Him Run Wild” had to be relegated to the flip sides of their singles. What in the Lord’s name (literally) was “God Only Knows” doing on the B side of a 45? (Full list of A and B sides here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beach_Boys_discography#1960s ; the run from 1962-72 is amazing.)
My grandfather had one of these. He was a prominent auto parts dealer in San Diego and knew all the dealer parts and service people. He would buy cars that were orphaned when a sailor placed an order and then didn’t take delivery due to a deployment. One of these was the hi-po 409. My grandmother hated it, as she was a matronly 58 year old housewife who mainly went to garden club and bridge games with officers wives. She couldn’t pull out into traffic without spinning the tires. Grandpa wasn’t too keen on it either as the drivetrain made a whine and it sucked down super premium gas at the rate of about 8 mpg. Traded it in 67 on a Coupe deVille to make grandma happy.
Wow, grandma went from a 409 4sp to a Coupe deVille? Big jump!
Did all Impalas with a 409 have it written on the fender, or just the SS? We had a ’63 wagon that I’m pretty sure didn’t have the fender marking, but I can’t imagine my dad not getting the larger engine if one was available. It had dealer-installed A/C under the dash and wheelcovers that looked like stylized wire wheels and were almost as difficult to clean.
I believe all Chevys had their engines noted on the front fender. 6cyl, 283, 327 and 409s.
A favorite older cousin had ordered a new ’63 or ’64 Impala SS convertible with 409 (400 or 425 hp version) and 4 speed. I was thrilled to get a few rides in it. What a sound on a summer night with the top down. He was never short of a date. He kept it about 2 years and got an offer he couldn’t turn down. If my memory is correct, he got what he had paid for it. He then got a new special order Chevy II, ’66 I think) with the top tilt 327 (L79?)
As a car obsessed 9 year old in 1963, a 99 cent pair of stick-on flags from Western Auto turned our 62 283 Belair 4 dr into a 327! No need for costly engine swap.
While there were no bad looking Chevys in the ’60s, the GM two year styling cycle produced its best results at Chevrolet with the first iteration of each cycle. I’d take the ’61 over the ’62, the ’63 over the ’64, etc.
Years ago, I put a fair number of dollars into a church raffle for a ’63 red convertible. I spent two weeks waiting for the results, dreaming of driving that car. It was not to be.
The great thing about a discussion like this is there’s no “correct” answer – everyone has their favorite model year which is the “best looking” one. I’ve always leaned towards 1962 & 1963 with the beautiful rear end. And also love the the four-taillight ’65 Biscaynes & Bel Airs more than the Impalas. It just looks so much more subtle. And now I’m loving the 1969’s with the chrome wrapped front end. So much more modern looking than the ’65 & ’66.
A bubble-top ’61 would be my choice, but I’d go with the Pontiac Ventura version before the Chevy.