(first posted 10/28/2018) When I first spotted this Buick sedan from some distance in a weedy empty lot outside Baker City, Oregon, on our recent trip, I thought it might be a Wildcat sedan, what with those nice Buick styled road wheels. I have some fond memories of ’67 Wildcat, and I was hoping to rekindle them. But as I drove closer, I could see the distinctive three “portholes” on the front fender, a sign that this was not one of the top-dog Buicks. But it was worth stopping for. Of course the course the portholes weren’t the only give-away; the whole front clip on the LeSabre is shorter than the one on the Wildcat, which is the biggest difference between them, as well as their engines.
Speaking of, the LeSabre 400 does not have a 400 cubic inch Buick V8 engine, even though it existed. But it does have something else that has the number 400 in it.
The LeSabre’s optional “400” package was first offered in 1965.
Curiously, there’s no mention of it in the brochure that year, except this rather cryptic shot of the LeSabre’s interior with this on its front seat. Enough of mystery: the 400 package included the four-barrel version of whatever was LeSabre’s standard V8 (300 inch in the ’65; the new 340 starting in ’66) teamed with the Super Turbine (THM) 400 automatic transmission. The non-400 used the two-speed Super Turbine 300 automatic, although it’s impossible to tell in the brochures, as both are simply called “Super Turbine” automatic.
The ’67 brochure does show the 400 package, as well as clarify that the non-400 Super Turbine is a two speed. Of course even the ST-300 wasn’t standard; a three-speed manual was. That even goes for the Wildcat and its standard 430 inch Super Wildcat V8. As was manual steering. But those were unicorns in the real world.
Good luck finding a full-sized Buick with the three-speed manual. Buick was an automatic transmission pioneer, with its venerable Dynaflow, which helped establish the tradition and image of smooth, seamless power. I see that this LeSabre with the 400 package, which only includes the engine and transmission, is a Custom, with an upgraded interior includes the deluxe door armrests.
Needless to say, the 220 (gross) hp standard V8 teamed with the two-speed ST-300 was not exactly one of the brisker big cars of the times, but then the kinds of folks who bought LeSabres weren’t exactly worried about performance. They tended to be pretty mild-mannered as well as on the older side.
These kind of folks, who have been buying Buicks for almost forever. The LeSabre was the Special of the 60s.
Of course some buyers were always ready to pay a bit more for a bit more chrome, nicer interior and in the case of the 400, a state-of-the-art three-speed automatic. Must have felt a bit strange to those moving up from an older Dynaflow.
The back seat shows the original upholstery and almost shows the 39.0″ of leg room. That’s decent, but hardly extravagant. In fact, it’s a bit modest for a 217.5″ long sedan with a 123″ wheelbase, but let’s not get started on the lousy space utilization of big American cars. And by the way, that’s a half-inch less than on a Chevy Impala, which sat on a 119″ wheelbase. Of course, thta menas nothing in term sof interior space, as these GM B-Bodies all had the same passenger compartment; the longer wheelbase versions just had longer front and/or rear ends. Pay more, get less, and it’s harder to park.
As an example, stepping up to the Buick Wildcat (bottom) with its 126″ wheelbase nest zero additional interior space. The Wildcat’s extra length was all in the front end; it shared a longer front clip with the C-Body Electra.
The Electra 225 sat on the same 126″ wheelbase as the Wildcat, and shared its front end, but the C Body had a different roof with a more vertical rear window (shared with the Cadillac and Olds 98), and its rear seat was set a bit further back, resulting in a more commodious 42.2″ of rear leg room. And its rear end was of course different too, with vestigial fins. But underneath, they were all essentially the same, except for bigger brakes and engines. Mix and match, the GM way.
These big swoopy Buicks speak to me, but it’s got to be a Wildcat in order for me to really hear it. I briefly had a girl friend in Iowa City who had her dad’s hand-me-down ’67 Wildcat, and that one really spoke to me, especially when I dropped the hammer at 65 or 70. It crisply dropped into second, opened its secondaries, and the resultant push of its big 430 four barrel against the back of the big bench seat was intoxicating. The girl was not for me and I walked away, but I sure missed that Wildcat.
One of the kids in my chatechism classes (around 1973 or so) was the daughter of a doctor. None of us had our drivers licenses and sometimes her older sister would drive us in the family’s 67 LeSabre convertible. It was winter so we didn’t get much benefit from that folding top.
Before I bought my 66 Fury III in 1987 I remember test driving a 67 or 68 LeSabre sedan. It must not have been a 400 because I remember being surprised at the cheapness of the interior. Other than that I have zero memory about the way the car ran and drove except that it was not nice enough or special enough to outweigh my bias against vanilla GM sedans of the period.
Outside of Cadillac that went directly from the excellent old-time 4 speed Jetaway HydraMatic to the excellent THM, General Motors really spent about a decade in an automatic transmission wilderness.
So true about GM’s transmission woes. While Chrysler, late to the party, struck gold with TorqueFlite, after a PowerFlite appetizer. Same thing with the A-100 van.
Every GM vehicle I ever owned had some sort of transmission trouble.
High school friends of mine had a 400. It was a very light frosty blue inside and out. A AM radio and automatic were the 2 selected options. It had first been “mom’s” car. After that it was handed to each of the 3 kids. It served for years. It was probably one of the few of it’s kind ever to be entered in a local road rally! Fond memories!
Pinnacle of GM design….the cars were so long that the sweapspear was able to flow so elegantly from front to rear in such a gentle asrc….Love the backlight flowing into the rear deck….GM went from this to the hideous vertcal backlight of the 80’s and 90’s back to the “fast back” style we see again today…What is old is new again.
The sweepspear was graceful on the fullsize Buicks. It didn’t work so well when translated down to the intermediate platform for 1968.
Had it dipped to just over the wheelwell and continued on to the back bumper, it would have been much better.
It works a lot better on the 2dr hardtops. Since I own one, I suspect I’m biased
Neighbor had this car in Burgundy”. Think it had “wheel covers” though. They kind a disappeared.
By “74” it was too rusted to get through “inspection”.Got replaced with a “75 Skylark”. ((also burgundy))
That one was still rolling , into the late “80’s”.
It was surprising to me, but it did seem like a lot of people who mid-sized Buick Skylarks in the ’60s and early ’70s ended up replacing them with Chevy Nova-derived Buick Apollos and Buick Skylarks in the mid ’70s.
+1.
The last Buick I remember with a three-on-the-tree belonged to a nice old man who lived across the street. I think it was a 1971 Skylark post coupe. When he drove his wife shopping, only on nice days, he’d come home, park in the driveway and let her out. He would then get a rag and proceed to wipe the entire car off before putting it back into the garage, until the next nice day.
Back in the late 70s while in the Navy I talked a friend into going to a antique/classic car show and flea market. A few minutes after we arrived we decided to split up. About an hour later my friend ran up to me all excited as he had just put down a deposit on a 66 Wildcat 2 door hardtop. What made him buy a near 15 year old Buick I could not quite figure out. But it was his first car and of course he really loved it. It was that light, metallic, Seafoam Green in and out…not really all that striking to look at. But, in my eyes it did have one saving grace, or should I say it had 4? It had those dynamite Buick road wheels that I thought made any 60s and early 70s Buick look Special (no pun intended).
It may not be the Wildcat, but given that options are slim for anything from this era, I would be quite content with this car. Plus, it would stand out in the present look a like era. Great color. Probably within the constraints of my budget. Thanks for sharing.
I’ve loved the Buick wheels since I was a kid and this was my mom’s car. My parents called it the world’s most beautiful station wagon! I think it’s a 1972 sport wagon but it could be a 1971. Dad got a deal because it had the Chevy six in it and mom said it could barely get up a hill. Given that her previous car was a 1968 VW Squareback, that’s quite a commentary on the lack of power!
Actually, judging by the eggcrate grill, it’s a 1970.
Interesting. Dad bought it new and I don’t think he bought it until 1971 or so but as I said the fokelore is it was a deal, so it may have been sitting on the lot quite some time! Thanks for the help figuring out the year!
Buick did not offer anything other than two V-8s in 1972…350 and 455….the 350 could be had with a 2bbl or 4bbl and the 455 came in two states of tune…standard and higher performance Stage 1.
Here I was thinking it came with a 250 cu. in. six!
My great uncle bought a brand new 1967 full size Pontiac sedan and it was a stripper – OHC six, automatic and nothing else – I don’t think it even had AC!
Not a US Pontiac, all full size US Pontiacs had at least a 389 V-8 in the 1960’s – a reason they were the smart choice over the Buicks and Oldsmobiles and certainly the Chevies.
The 1960’s “Pontiacs” w/ sixes were Canadian – they looked like Pontiacs but were essentially Chevies w/ Pontiacs facades.
General Motors of Canada offered a line of full-size Pontiac cars that were styled like U.S market models, but were actually Chevrolets under their skins. Model lineup during this period included the base Strato-Chief, mid-range Laurentian, and top-of-the-line Parisienne series. Under their exteriors, however, these cars featured Chevrolet frames, engines, and even dimensions. Interiors (except for instrument panels which were Pontiac-based) were a combination of Chevy and Pontiac styling. During the early 1960s, Pontiacs featured the controversial “X” frame used on the big Chevys, as well as the complete Chevy lineup of OHV straight Sixes, small-block 283 and 327 cubic inch V8s, and the big-block 348 and 409 V8s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac#Canadian/export_models
I recall how radical these Buicks looked when I rode my bile to Brooks Buick on York Rd in the fall of ’66. The ’67 Olds 88s I’d just seen down the street at Stu Berger Olds were kind of uninspired in comparison, except for the Toronado, of course. But that wild sweep on the ’67 Buick’s side and the narrow full-width rear lights really set these full-side Buicks apart. It looked kind of nautical, and years later a waggish customizer came up with a wild ’67 Buick in navy and white with a “bridge” mounted on the roof top, and it looked sort of right!
IMO GM cars peaked in the years ’65 to ’70, but particularly at the end of the period when 2 spd trans were phased out in most B bodies, Chev being the last? My ’68 Caprice 4 door hardtop unusually has a THM400 attached to it’s 4 bbl 327, making for a very satisfying powertrain. Minimal to no pollution controls, collapsible steering columns, and improving transmission, chassis, suspension, and steering components make these very satisfying cars to drive, even today, and their build quality was still reasonable, something one couldn’t say a just few short years later.
I really like your Caprice! My first car was a ’68 Wildcat that I bought when it was 24 years old. It was a $600 driver but had plenty of power and the optional “performance axle” which consisted of a 3.42 posi rear axle which made it happier than most late seventies and 80s cars that my schoolmates had in 1992…
I had to get another Buick after this one was totaled in an accident in 2000 so I ended buying my current ’67 Riviera.
Love your 3 Buicks too Phil! While I can’t ride in your ’68 Wildcat, your ’67 Riv, ’75 Electra, and ’65 Wildcat (all owner restored and amazing) that I did ride in are awesome! Here’s hoping you can take a ride in a ’68 Caprice sometime soon! RA
Maybe the most beautiful Buick sedan. I love the way the old fifties chrome sweepspear was reprised into a scallop in the sheetmetal flowing back – though the guys in stamping might not have been so enthused.
I got my grandfather’s 69 Wildcat as a hand me down around 1976. The last in a long line of Buicks he owned. It had the 430 4 bbl, 340 hp I believe. Gas was only 55 cents a gallon at the time but it still hurt to fill it up. Fastest, most comfortable car I ever owned.
Stereo, arm rests, speed warning buzzer, huge trunk (the leaky GM kind). College days were pretty fun then. I still have a thing for Buicks.
The 400 option was strictly powertrain. It had no bearing on trim level. There was a choice of standard LeSabre or LeSabre Custom in that department.
Quite right; I’ve amended the text to reflect that.
Roger, perhaps you could lend some insight. My 67 LeSabre coupe has the 340-4 engine and the 3 speed Super Turbine along with the speed minder, remote driver’s side door mirror. Trim inside is almost identical to that cataloged for the 400 package but I don’t have the badging on my quarters. Nothing has been changed as it all matches the build sheet.
I remember these sort of cars as being bigger and roomier it must have been some kind of illusion, but of course the local choices were smaller in every dimension, cool car though/
If Sir Alec Issigonis, designer of the Mini, had seen the space efficiency of American cars of the 60s and 70s, he’d have died of a heart attack. Much of the length was taken up by the long hood purely for styling purposes. The common “fuselage” shape which tucked in the bottom of the doors stole precious hiproom. Low rooflines meant seats had to be reclined which took up legroom. It says a lot that US automakers were able to downsize their cars without reducing, and in some cases increasing, interior space.
Paul, thanks for giving some attention to the Buick LeSabre. My coupe has all the “400” options except the door cards don’t have the vertical chrome bands. 340 -4 barrel and the Super Turbine are present, but no red “400” badging on the quarter panels. Car was a dealer order as shown on the build sheet. Even has the same upholstery as the catalog photo. Weird
The 400 package only included the engine and THM-400 transmission. The interior depended on whether it was a base LeSabre or a Custom. Is it a ’67 too?
it’s a 67 coupe. Must be a base model. Odd to me how it has so many options including factory air and it’s not a Custom. Nice when you could order options ala carte. Seems like the original owner, a gentleman from the Ukraine was a conservative sort who didn’t want much chrome gingerbread but insisted on value, comfort, power and style.
Well, at least the Buick 400 meant something in the powertrain, even if not the motor. Versus the 60’s Dodge Coronet 440 trim level, just a random #, which some still assume means 440 big block V8.
Sweet car! I one this exact model and color. I also own a 67 wildcat 2 door!! My baby.
My Dad bought a 67 LeSabre in 68. Blue with white top. 340 engine. Our first car with air conditioning. Man,was that AC cold! That car was so comfortable and rode so good. I really loved the cloth interior. Kind of embroidered. Maybe Demask, if that’s the term?
We had a ’68 Electra pillared sedan, the roomiest non-Fleetwood backseat that GM sold. When it was almost new, a gas jockey left the radiator cap off and it overheated. The A/C never worked as well after that, and my dad would put his hand in front of the vent and say “Needs more Freon.” But he never did anything else about it. The temp. and wiper controls were awkward thumbwheels that year.
It was the first car I drove in traffic, on a narrow urban 4 lane at rush hour. By then, it was pretty beat, and 3 years later, it was firing on seven cylinders, so he sold it.
They were probably wishing they’d used another name for the LeSabre 400 package by ’67 to avoid confusion with the new GS 400 model of the Skylark/Special, which did include a 400 cid engine (I assume based on the new 430 V8), but not an automatic. In ’68, they added a GS 350.
And it is listed as an option for LeSabre and Sportwagon:
https://www.oldcarbrochures.com/static/NA/Buick/1967_Buick/1967_Buick_Brochure_1/1967%20Buick-54.html
There’s even a little picture of the badge on the following page. That’s actually making a pretty big deal about an extra gear in the transmission. There’s no picture at all of the Riviera GS, just two descriptions of what the package (not a model) entails.
I think framed glass sedans look pretty nice when the frames are fully-silvered like this. Oddly, the ’65-’70 C body pillared sedans are frameless.
To further muddy the waters, I was always confused by the 1969 Buick A-Body Sportwagon 400, which was the same TH400 option package we’re talking about ,but also did have a 400 engine available. So some 400’s had a 400 and 400, while other 400’s had a 400 and 350. Try to wrap your mind around that as a pre-internet kid…
The 4 door sedans had 1-2″ more rear legroom than the hardtops in this period (’65-’70), and more headroom (higher roof). I believe that applies to both B and C bodies. They used the same Electra/98 sedan roof panels on the sharper-edged Cadillac de Ville/Calais, which looks a little odd, but they were relatively poor sellers for all three divisions.
I thought I knew all the big Buicks from the 60s – but clearly I was wrong. What a weird hook for an option package.
So many sweet Buicks ! .
-Nate