Pity the poor Boattail Riv. Growing up, so far from the land of Buicks, I always admired it from a distance. To a teenage T87, the 1971-72 Riviera was (and to a great extent remains) extremely pleasant to the eye, if for no other reason that it looks utterly distinctive. But there are other reasons for my appreciation of this design, too. And many folks who will disagree and that’s ok, it’s the kind of the theme I was going for this week…
The year was 1971. Dodge had the Polara, and Buick were out to polarize. An all-new Riviera, the first ground-up redesign since 1966, hit the dealerships and ever since, the world has been divided between people who can’t stand this generation of Rivieras and folks who fell under the spell of the boattail. One thing this Buick didn’t do was leave anyone on the fence.
But some people who criticise the 1971-72 Riviera come to this position from a position of appreciation for the design’s intention. Their main issue has to do with how the car was executed – a pretty accurate word, in many ways.
The boattail Riviera’s development was notoriously convoluted. Despite having Bill Mitchell’s full backing, the Buick studio failed to make a positive case for a smaller Riviera, which is what the boattail originally was, being based on the A-body.
Buick designers were referencing skiff-shaped roadsters of the ‘20s and ‘30s – Delages, Isotta-Fraschinis, Auburns and the like – albeit in fastback coupé form, with more than a hint of C2 Corvette in the roof. Not all clays were necessarily handsome, but striking was certainly a term that could be universally applied.
Alas, the project was headed for financial headwinds. To keep costs in check, the B-body had to be used – including the cowl / windshield, doors and the 122-in. wheelbase. The original design (on the right) was altered to fit the larger chassis, but the operation left Bill Mitchell and the Buick designers deeply dissatisfied.
Fair enough: if you’ve been working on a daring design for months only to be told to scale it up to a size that doesn’t really work, the experience would be most frustrating. But the rest of the world didn’t know or care: all they saw was a striking new Riviera.
It was big. It was bold. It was pointy. It didn’t look like anything else on the road. It didn’t even look like a Buick, from certain angles. Not that this was a necessary condition for Rivieras prior to this one.
For the ‘72s, very few changes were implemented. They quoted the 455.7ci (7.5 litre) V8’s power output in net numbers now, bringing it down to 250hp. The grille was given an eggcrate treatment and the louvres on the trunklid were deleted (good riddance). Oh, and they added a side-swipe trim piece on the sides, which did give the profile some Buick family kinship. It also makes it dead easy to do a two-tone paint job, but that was nowhere near fashionable at the time, so I don’t even think it was an option at the time. Our feature car has it, but it has to be a later modification – not a bad one, either.
You can measure the (internal) success of a GM design by how many other divisions copied it. The boattail Riv’s pointy rear was a little too unique to be aped by anyone, but I feel the front end influenced the 1972-76 Vauxhall FE Ventora and VX4/90, though in a very understated manner, of course. But I digress.
I have a problem with GM interiors of this era. They tried very hard to wrap the dash around the driver, with (usually) pretty disastrous results, at least in terms of esthetics. The Riviera’s dash was very much in this vein as well, but here they made it wrap around both the driver and the passenger, so it’s not nearly as ugly as most other GM cars of the early ‘70s. It does mean though that, in the event that a third passenger sit in the middle, they would not only have to contend with the transmission hump, but also the dash’s central spine. Ugh… Just ride in the back.
And although it’s better than most contemporary GM dashes, this is still by far the worst aspect of the car, in my opinion. Fractioning the instrument panel into three bits like this just makes the whole look like it’s falling apart – nothing is straight, nothing really fits right. Full marks for trying, but a lousy concept cannot be salvaged by indifferent implementation.
Some have levelled the very same criticism at the exterior, but although it’s not exactly perfect, at least the execution was as good as anyone could make it. It was not long for this world, of course. The ‘73’s fat front bumper and toned-down tail ruined the look, but GM ditched the whole boattail concept for 1974 anyway.
Pity. But if the ‘70s could be defined in a four-letter word, it could well be that one. Aside from the 1971-73 boattails, Rivieras of the ‘70s were rather atrocious. The 1970 cars (top left) were bloated and bland, the 1974-76 vintages (top right) almost painfully ugly and the 1977-78s (bottom right) so devoid of character that they could have been marketed under a half dozen marques. And let’s not forget what the downsized Rivieras ended up looking like by 1990 (bottom left)… Surely, even those of you who aren’t boattail aficionados will concede that they look a lot better than this selection of Rivieras.
On the flip side, the 1963-65 cars were, of course, legendary, and their immediate successors (1966-67) were also high points in the Riviera saga. The boattails cannot rival the best Buicks of the mid-‘60s. They are in a category of their own – too wild to be classy, but too interesting to be ignored.
Lastly, the record should be corrected as to the boattail’s market performance, or perceived lack thereof. Riviera sales tended to ebb and flow, really. Sure, Riviera production went down by 10% from 1970 to 1971, but that was a pretty modest change and yearly sales stayed at 33-34k for three years running – about what the much-admired ’65 had tallied. Numbers plummeted to about 20k per year on average for model years 1974-78. The downsized 1979-85 generation was the real hit-maker, averaging over 50k sales per annum – unprecedented in the nameplate’s history. The unfortunate 7th gen Riviera (1986-93) was a complete dud, only averaging 15k a year.
Within this context, the supposedly polarizing boattail did pretty darn well. And it really put the Riviera on the map, at least as much as the 1963-65 generation did. Aside from the AMC Pacer, I would be hard pressed to think of a more iconic design coming out of Detroit in the first half of the ‘70s. Seeing it in the metal is even more astounding, given how low, long and wide the whole car is, and how novel the shape is – even compared to cars of its era. Boattail, you’ll always find a mooring in T87’s fantasy garage.
Related posts:
Curbside Classic: 1971 Buick Riviera – Bill Mitchell’s Pointy Dead-End, by PN
Curbside Saturday Night: 1971 Buick Riviera – Papa Was A Rolling Stone, by Jason Shafer
Curbside Classic: 1972 Buick Riviera Boattail – Swan Song Or Big Ugly Duck?, by PN
Curbside Classic: 1973 Buick Riviera GS – Be Memorable, by Joseph Dennis
CC Capsule: 1973 Buick Riviera – Sunday Night Surprise, by Joseph Dennis
COAL: Hobby Car of a Lifetime #3 — 1971 Buick Riviera — My Anti Yuppie Statement., by Jose Delgadillo
Cohort Pic(k) Of The Day: 1971 Buick Riviera – The Boattail Visits Japan, by Rich Baron
Cohort Pic(k) Of The Day: 1973 Buick Riviera – Last Of The Boattails, by Rich Baron
The boot/trunk lid vent slats went after one year as it was another of GM’s not-so-brilliant ideas.
It was intended to provide cabin ventilation but ended up draing exhaust fumes in under some conditions and also allowed water into the luggage compartment.
My Dad’s 1971 Cadillac had the louvers. They were supposed to be “flow through ventilation” but in reality were NO ventilation, which is at least better than sucking in exhaust fumes.
On the subject of the boat-tail Riviera, Bud Lindemann did a road test of a 1972 Riviera GS.
It’s surprising they weren’t pushed onto the A Special body of the Monte Carlo and Grand Prix. Imagine it with their giant hood length. The B’s extra width may have caused more problems than the length, which I see as an improvement. It looks like the design requires a lot more tumblehome than the A’s had, which might be the source of the difficulty. The single year ’70 Riv and Toronado sheet metal suggest that tooling cost wasn’t the only problem. And why use the A body for ’71-2, and then have to redo it for ’73 with the Colonnades–which were a year late? Perhaps they originally planned it for ’70.
I don’t believe I’ve seen all these model pics before, only drawings that I thought were far inferior to the finished product.
An update that I made to my 1972 Riviera Silver Arrow IV, that I did an article on a few years ago. Modifications include: Changing the vinyl top color from blue to white for a more unified look. Adding C Pillar fake vent trim (similar to what a concept boat tail had). Adding fake front fender vents (similar to what a concept boat tail had). Adding an engine turned rear package tray center engine turned trim with a Buick Tri-Shield emblem. Adding engine turning aluminum trim to the door panels and seat side trim.
Unfortunately or fortunately, the original paint was and is too good to repaint the car, otherwise I would have considered painting it silver – a color that seems to go with my theme and the cars design really well, as well as being closer to the Silver Arrow III.
Quick walk around of my Silver Arrow IV showing the new changes:
Running out of gas a couple of years ago due to a bad gas gauge – since repaired.
Shows the custom tail lights in action!
I don’t think I’d ever pay for one but this ’72 is attractive IMO .
I am loving looking at the clays .
-Nate
I owned a ’71 Riv for several years. It is a polarizing design, it’s hard to believe that GM would build such an over the top car for regular production. It is a dramatic design, and unlike anything else that was on the market. If you want a unique ’70’s hobby car, this is the car. Compared to my beloved ’66, the ’71 drove more like a Coupe de Ville as opposed to the ’66, which felt like a big muscle car.
Now I have a ’97, and again, it’s an interesting design, quite unique like the boat tail. I have seen fewer last gens on the road or at shows. I like the way the ’97 drives as it is so comfortable and quiet. It’s pretty fast with the supercharger, and even gets good gas mileage. They sold quite a few, approx 80K, where did they all go?
Put me down in the “Like” column for the Boattail. While I’m not old enough to remember them as new, I always admired how the design was completely unique. And of all the car’s details, the one little thing that I like the most is the offset rear license plate – when Buick toned down the car’s design and put the license plate in the middle, the car lost a big chunk of it’s neatness.
I agree about the instrument panel though… just completely unpleasing to the eye.
Quite a car for its era, those body stampings are something else, I like it, but the dashboard seems to ape what is found in US trucks gauges scattered all over the cab with switches out of easy reach, an ergonomic and safety nightmare.
Right from day one I’ve loved the style of these. The size not so much.
They are a standout. They look totally unlike anything else on the road (much as the first and second generation didn’t either), but they tip the balance between formal and sporty by totally throwing out any pretense of formality, practically obliterating the very concept of Formal design – which was not a good place to be at the start of the seventies.
As Ralph L says, the A Special would seem to have been the obvious basis for these. I have to wonder whether these would have been more popular in a more manageable (and affordable?) style. We’ll never know.
As an exercise at trying to put myself in the other guy’s shoes, I tried writing an apology/defense/rationale for the ’74 Ugh-body, in response to a feature article at Indie Auto.
https://www.indieauto.org/2024/02/02/did-wayne-kady-screw-up-the-1974-76-buick-riviera/
But the boat tail! This must look like a Martian landing craft in Tokyo traffic.
I love the angles that you chose to shoot in your photos. A very visually striking car.
From one who is definitely not a fan of the 1971-76 B/C body car, I actually kind of like these. If you are going to put up with that platform’s weaknesses (cheap interiors, flimsy bodies) you might as well get one that makes a statement.
I have always been so focused on the cheap materials used in these interiors that I never really paid much attention to the dash layouts. I see what you mean, but these cars kind of followed a design fad of the “driver-centered” instrument panel. This was kind of the
ultimate expression of the look that began with cars like the Corvette and Avanti of the early 60’s. Ultimate expressions are not always great.
By the mid-eighties these had come to look bloated and a bit silly. I appreciate their distinctive style much more with the passage of time. There used to be one in a residential neighborhood in downtown Philadelphia bearing a bumper sticker: “THIS CAR IS ON AN ENERGY DIET”. How do you put a car on a diet? Lower octane gas?
Lol. My guess is the bumper sticker meant they couldn’t afford to drive it! Or, it meant they were apologizing for having such a guzzler in those days by hardly driving it.
The one across the street from me in 1972 when I was a 12 year old car nut made a huge impression on me, and is still my favorite Riviera.
This guy’s ‘72 Riv was a deep emerald green color and I was smitten with it. Its unusual design is what makes it so cool.
I will admit this is the first time I’ve seen that dashboard, and yes, that is a real weak point in the design. But in its defense, it does go with the whole pointy theme.
1973 I purchased a new Pontiac Grand Am, it was not my first choice. I wanted a new Riviera. My new wife said” it looks like its going down the road backwards ” so to keep the peace I gave up on it. However I did love that Grand Am.
One could make the argument this Riv looks like it was pinched hugely on the bum, and the face has an appropriately heavy-browed semi-scowled response, but that’s to be facile.
To be even more so, if possible, it perhaps more looks like the way in which many peoples round the world might perceive America itself – brash, overdone, pompous, inward-looking, nothing like as good as it thinks, over-consumptive and vaguely ridiculous. And it (the car) is definitely all that, and worse besides.
And yet, and yet.
Perhaps also like the good ole US, it’s also glamorous, swoopy, head-turning, bold, luxurious (in style and effect), covetable, generous, and doubtless sybaritic to be in. Classy? Probably not, but I don’t think that was ever the point. Hell, a Mercedes 540K – a wondrous but OTT glamour car – was once described as Hermann Goering on wheels, though minus the medals, but I still want one.
What’s more, it might arguably be the last great gasp of US ’60’s car-look greatness, just before the full effect of the ’70’s arrived, when everybody started smoking weed and painting the world Mission Brown and sleeping with whatever the car-key bowl allowed and dressing in shag-pile suits and completely forgetting how to design anything.
I’d have one – if it came with the five garages needed to shelter it fully.
Living in Houston, Texas and the suburbs, in the 70s, my family would occasionally go down to the coast, Galveston or more often, Kemah, to eat seafood at a nice sit down restaurant. Once when I was a little kid, my Dad’s boss loaned him his boattail Riviera for the evening (probably was my folks’ wedding anniversary)( and might have given him an advance on his paycheck too). It was white with a black top and I think the interior was black too. I remember, even all these years later, riding in the back seat , looking out through that distinctly shaped rear window. The back seat was like my own private nook, plenty of space for me but still cozy. I fell in love with those cars then and still love them to this day. Dad’s best friend from high school was a bachelor in real estate; he always was getting and flipping Hill Country and central Texas properties. He also had a thing for Cadillacs, and had several ’71-74 Eldorado convertibles. I remember Mom and I, riding in the back seat, in what seemed like acres of red leather, on a few of those coastal special dinner trips. This was way before Kemah became the tourist “destination” that it is now…. Houstonians in the know, would go to Jimmie Walker’s, but there were a couple other great restaurants there in the ’70s as well.
Never have been able to afford one of these big beauties, but I collect them in miniature and have several advertisements as well. I agree, the two tone on the pictured Rivvy is quite handsome. These cars always looked like they were going quickly, even standing still. This is a trait they share, in my opinion, with the original ’63-’65 cars. I have a good friend who has a very nice custom ’63. I got the opportunity to sit in the driver’s seat once, and it is amazing how the car seems to almost envelop the driver. I think the 116″ wheelbase A body like the Monte Carlo and Grand Prix were on, would have been an interesting platform for this design, but the one they ended up using still came out very well. And I agree, people either love it or can’t stand it. To my eyes, it looks like the embodiment of the Buick sweep spear side trim that was such a trademark in the earlier years….