The 1963-65 Buick Riviera was one of the more memorable designs of the 1960s. However, the car didn’t really look like a Buick. Nor did it sell very well — arguably due to its confused personality and penny pinching by General Motors.
One might think that GM would have tried harder because it was playing catch up. The Riviera came out five years after Ford’s four-seater Thunderbird.
Perhaps GM dragged its feet because it was already so dominant in the upper reaches of the market. In 1962 the automaker captured three-fourths of the premium-priced, big-car market. The only threat was the Thunderbird, which in the early-60s outsold the Buick Electra and the Oldsmobile Ninety-Eight. That was an unexpected achievement for a narrow range of two-door models lacking in the roominess of traditional premium cars.
The 1961-63 Ford Thunderbird had advanced features such as curved side glass and sportier proportions than were typical for cars in the upper reaches of the premium-priced field. Click on image to enlarge (Old Car Advertisements).
The 1963-65 Riviera was a case of too little, too late
As we discuss further here, GM initially responded to the Thunderbird by offering sporty versions of its big cars — the 1962 Pontiac Grand Prix and Oldsmobile Starfire. But then in 1963 Buick came out with a more direct competitor. The results were admirable given that head designer William Mitchell was not given anything close to the latitude of his counterparts at Ford.
The Riviera was cobbled together from GM’s aging big-car body. The result was a design that was not as exotic nor as forward looking as the T-Bird. Indeed, after only one year the Riviera would look dated next to Buick’s new-for-1964 mid-sized Skylark. Not surprisingly, sales were mediocre.
The 1963-65 Buick Riviera was slightly longer, taller, narrower and lighter than the Thunderbird — and had less pronounced long-hood, short-deck proportions. Pictured is a 1963 Riviera (top) and a 1965 T-Bird (Old Car Brochures).
The first-generation Riviera strikes me as illustrating GM’s difficulties in responding to the rise of personal coupes in the first half of the 1960s — and Ford’s “hit ’em where they ain’t” product strategy.
I grant you that this may not be a popular view. Richard M. Langworth and Jan P. Norbye (1985) described the Riviera as “much better looking” than its arch-rival, the Ford Thunderbird. They went on to make the interesting argument that the Riviera’s first-year output of 40,000 units “was a record figure for any Buick in its first year as an entirely new model.”
At the risk of disagreeing with two esteemed historians, I would like to offer another perspective.
Some of the Riviera’s most beautiful lines were in the C-pillar (top image), which seamlessly arched into the deck. The rear of the car had relatively little chrome and understated sheetmetal sculpting for an American car of that era.
The Riviera lacked Buick’s design DNA because it was originally designed by Mitchell to be a Cadillac. The car’s code name was the LaSalle. That’s presumably why the front fender tips hint at the styling of a 1940 LaSalle’s grille, with its thin horizontal lines.
According to Mitchell, Cadillac didn’t want the car. So Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Buick were allowed to make a play for it (Crippen, 1987).
Mitchell steered the car to Buick because it was the only division that agreed to take it without major changes. John DeLorean, who was at Pontiac, “had some crazy ideas . . . and I wouldn’t let him touch it,” Mitchell said. Meanwhile, Oldsmobile wanted to “put a blower on it” (Crippen, 1987).
If Mitchell’s concept had come out as a LaSalle, it presumably would have been a junior Cadillac model in order to compete against the Ford Thunderbird, whose prices hovered between a Series 62 and Buick Electra (Old Car Brochures).
It was understandable that Mitchell wanted to protect a good design concept. In addition, the luxury of hindsight allows us to point to the Mustang as an example of a niche car that did not closely follow the design cues of its parent brand.
That said, the Mustang ended up selling spectacularly well. The Riviera did not. This may have been at least partly because the car was not an ideal fit with Buick. The Riviera was an understated Europeanesque luxury coupe sold by a brand that was most known for swaggering Americana.
Now, it’s true that during the first half of the 1960s Buick’s styling was more subdued. However, after seeing its sales collapse in the late-50s, the brand didn’t really get its mojo back until the second half of the 1960s, when Buick reverted to its more traditional styling.
The 1956 Buick (top image) displayed the brand’s iconic styling. By 1964 it had disappeared except for portholes. However, the 1967 redesign revived the traditional Buick look (Automotive History Preservation Society and Old Car Brochures).
Mitchell succeeds in making the Riviera his way
The 1963 Riviera became one of Mitchell’s favorite projects because of the autonomy he enjoyed during its development. “I didn’t have any engineers looking down my neck. See, within a studio if you went over there today, there might be a Buick meeting. There would be 15 engineers in there picking at it. Then going back and saying, ‘I didn’t like this, I didn’t like that.’ Terrible!”
Of course, one person’s cherished autonomy can be another person’s obstruction. In the book, On a Clear Day You Can See General Motors, DeLorean complained about how Mitchell killed his proposal to downsize GM’s mid-sized cars in 1973-74. Mitchell’s main objection was allegedly that “the car was taking the corporation into a more utilitarian design and away from the longer, lower and sleeker look” (Wright, 1979; p. 182).
Assuming (for the sake of discussion) that DeLorean was telling the truth about his battle with Mitchell, we now know that he had the better argument. In addition, the steady erosion of divisional autonomy in the 1960s and 1970s would ultimately undercut the whole rationale for GM fielding five passenger-car brands.
One could thus argue that Mitchell’s success in bringing his LaSalle concept to market as a Buick was not a good precedent.
General Motors undoubtedly recognized the importance of curved side glass because it was used on the 1961-63 Ford Thunderbird as well as GM’s 1964 mid-sized cars such as the Buick Skylark (Automotive History Preservation Society).
Cost considerations undercut the Riviera’s uniqueness
For all of the creative autonomy Mitchell enjoyed with the Riviera, he also had to work under greater cost controls than his counterparts at Ford. Whereas the Thunderbird was placed on a special platform shared only with the Lincoln Continental, the Riviera used a shortened version of GM’s big-car platform.
That, in turn, meant the Riviera was stuck with flat side glass. In contrast, the 1961-63 Thunderbird was among the few American cars of that era to use curved side glass. (Which, oddly enough, Ford would ditch in 1964 just as the rest of the industry began to follow suit.)
The 1963 Riviera and Corvette were not given curved side glass. This resulted in both cars having overly bulky side sheetmetal. Pictured is a 1964 Corvette (top image) and 1965 Riviera (Automotive History Preservation Society).
The Riviera’s bloated side sheetmetal was accentuated by a track that was two inches narrower than on a Buick Electra. That gave the car a less athletic stance.
Another area Mitchell had to compromise on was with the instrument panel’s design. The basic shape was shared with the 1963-64 full-sized Buicks but given a trendy center console.
Mitchell did a good job of masking how the Riviera’s instrument panel shared major parts with the full-sized Buicks. Even so, the Thunderbird’s interior looked more exotic. Pictured is a 1963 Riviera (top) and a 1965 T-bird (Old Car Brochures).
By the same token, the Riviera had a nicely styled rear compartment with bucket-style seats. However, that didn’t arguably compare in exoticness to the Thunderbird’s curved seatbacks.
The Riviera’s wheelbase was 117 inches, four inches longer than the Thunderbird’s. That may have resulted in more leg room, but the Riviera had less sporting proportions. Pictured is a 1965 Riviera (top) and a T-Bird (Old Car Brochures).
The Riviera was a weak competitor to the Thunderbird
Despite all of these compromises, the 1963-65 Riviera was a solid design. Even so, the T-Bird outsold Mitchell’s handiwork by more than a two-to-one margin.
The 1963 Pontiac Grand Prix’s production surpassed the Thunderbird’s — roughly 73,000 to 63,000 units. This would be the only time that happened until the Grand Prix was downsized in 1969 (Automotive History Preservation Society).
Meanwhile, the Pontiac Grand Prix consistently outsold the first-generation Riviera even though it shared much of its sheetmetal with other full-sized Pontiacs. Of course, the Grand Prix was priced a good $800-$1,000 less than a Riviera and an entry-level Thunderbird. And as the 1960s progressed, the Grand Prix would decline in popularity until it was downsized and given unique sheetmetal in 1969.
Perhaps the biggest lesson we might draw from the 1963-65 Riviera was that it needed a more exclusive design or a lower price.
One option was for GM to wait a year and put the car on a modified mid-sized body. That would have given the Riviera curved side glass and less bulky side styling. The car could have also been smaller, lighter and better handling than the Thunderbird.
For 1965 one of the biggest styling changes was to move the headlights into the leading fender edges where the turn signals were previously located. It was a clever way to give the front end a cleaner look.
Instead, GM did the Riviera on the cheap . . . and got exactly what it paid for. Only in 1966 would the automaker take the luxury personal coupe field seriously. A redesigned Riviera received a new body with fully modern features and as well as proportions more appropriate to a halo coupe.
The second-generation Riviera would not manage to outsell the T-Bird until 1969, but GM’s new triumvirate of personal coupes — the Riviera, Oldsmobile Toronado and Cadillac Eldorado — would quickly overshadow Ford’s.
NOTES:
This story was originally posted on April 22, 2016 and expanded on Feb. 19, 2021 and Dec. 14, 2023. Prices, specifications and production figures were from the auto editors of Consumer Guide (2006), Gunnell (2002) and Automobile Catalog (2023).
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
autohistorypreservationsociety.org: Buick (1956, 1964); Buick Skylark (1964); Chevrolet Corvette (1964); Ford Thunderbird (1962); Pontiac Grand Prix (1963)
Corey Lewis (2022) recently argued that the 1960 Lincoln’s entry-level model was “rebranded as simply ‘Lincoln,’ to compete with the new base model Chrysler New Yorker (1960-1962) and Series 62 Cadillac (1959-1960).” That got me […]
Stuart R. Blond’s biography of Packard head James Nance is among the most unusual books in my automotive library. For one thing, Spellbinder: The Life of James J. Nance, is a two-volume set that stretches […]
(EXPANDED FROM 13/23/2022) Today fastbacks are so common that you can even find them on family sedans. That’s a big shift from the late-1960s, when fastbacks were restricted to a few sporty coupes. “The very […]
17 Comments
I have to disagree with some of the points in the article. I have owned three 66-67’s and one ’71 Riviera and I’ve been a fan of the original model. I was a member of the Riviera Owners Association for many years. I think that the first gen Riviera can best be thought of a limited production vehicle similar to the Cadillac El Dorado Brougham, the Lincoln Mark II, or even the original two seat T Bird. It was intended to be a halo vehicle, much like the Corvette. Unlike these models the Riviera shared more mechanical components with the mainline Buick models although the body was completely unique. It was also higher priced than the contemporary Thunderbird. By the time the Riv was on the market, the LaSalle had been gone for twenty years, I don’t think that many buyers had any connection or memory to that marque. During the period of the late 50’s to the early 60’s there weren’t many design cues that carried on from year to year with most GM cars. I don’t think that the Riviera really suffered from that lack of continuity. The smaller production numbers also gave it an air of exclusivity, which I have read that Buick preferred. Don’t forget that the Riviera preceded the Toronado, the FWD Eldorado, and even the Mustang. It was always going to be a niche market vehicle. When GM brought out the E body, costs could be shared over three models, which probably contributed to their profitability. It also suffered from some de-contenting from that point on, although the option list was long.
GM found their mass market with the intermediate based personal cars such as the Monte Carlo, Grand Prix and Oldsmobile Cutlass coupes.
The first gen Riviera can be considered a typical act of GM hubris and attributed to Bill Mitchell’s personality. I feel it is one of the 1960’s most beautiful and timeless designs.
I agree that the Riviera was one of the better designs to come out of the 1960s. However, I think it would have looked even better with curved side glass (which would hopefully have trimmed the car’s rather pontoonish side sheetmetal). Note that only one year later GM was putting curved side glass on its mid-sized cars. In the post I’ve swapped out a photo and modified a caption to make that point better.
I’m not implying that the Riviera should have been a Cadillac. That would have amounted to GM’s prestige division trying to compete with a Ford. One of GM’s premium-priced brands would have been much better positioned to do so. In theory, Buick was the best choice for a more luxury-oriented personal coupe — it just didn’t get the right car.
It wouldn’t have taken all that much to give the Riviera at least a hint of Buick’s design heritage. For example, a variation of the sweepspear could have worked fine with exposed rear-wheel openings. The problem was that Mitchell didn’t even try — and he got away with it.
I have not seen GM’s production projections for the 1963 Riviera but doubt management would have given the car completely new sheetmetal if it was intended to be a limited-production model like the 1954 Skylark convertible. The Standard Catalog says that the Riviera’s factory price for 1963 was $4,333, which was similar to an Electra 225 convertible. Thunderbird prices started at $4,445 and went up to $5,563 for the roadster model. Why would GM slightly underprice the T-Bird if they were going for exclusivity rather than volume?
All that said, we like the cars we like — and will inevitably have varying views. That’s cool.
Another reason Buick got the Riviera was that it actively campaigned for it. Buick needed a halo car because going from number three in industry sales in 1955 to practically oblivion by 1961. GM was contemplating even eliminating Buick like Chrysler jettisoned DeSoto as the medium priced market consolidated. Cadillac didn’t have the production capacity for another model, so it really was best that Buick got the Riviera.
GM, real struggle with personal coupes was the utter failure of upper management to really understand the concept. Unique, niche market cars kept getting run through some kind of corporate algorithm that demanded that every car seat six passengers. The second generation Riviera had a front bench seat. There’s even a TV commercial watchable on YouTube showing six people piling out of this personal coupe. The Toronado, Eldorado, Monte Carlo, Corvair were all heavily promoted with front bench seats. Maybe front buckets violated some deeply held family values mandate at GM because pressing the seeming necessity of six passenger capacity was relentless.
That makes sense. Another factor could have been cost. My guess is that a bench seat would have allowed an automaker to price its base model lower than if it had buckets with a center console.
Spot-on, Steve. Center consoles carry a lot of cost in the structure, trim and relocation of shifter from column to floor. A bench seat is simpler and makes the car feel roomier. Carmakers like to sell consumers big vehicles with lots of open air, because air carries no cost. That one reason why they make so much money on pick-ups.
I am going to add an observation: G.M. tried to introduce the concept of personal luxury in 1953 with production cars that were developed out of the Motorama cars: The Corvette for the sporty set (pre-Duntov and V-8), the Buick Skylark, the Oldsmobile Fiesta and the only other car that survived beyond 1954, the Cadillac Eldorado. Ford tried to match the Corvette with the two-seat, 1955-1957 Thunderbird. Of course, the dying Packard had their Caribbeans, and Studebaker had the Presidential Speedster which evolved into the Golden Hawk and the Gran Turismo Hawk. But it was Chrysler which launched a high-performance, personal luxury car, the Chrysler 300 in 1955. By the time the 300-F arrived in 1960, Chrysler had a real American drivers’ car that had better performance than a Thunderbird and luxury to match. (The letter-car 300s’ interiors only got better until the run ended with the 300-L.)
In the period of 1956 through 1958, G.M. had a complete management change with the retirement of Alfred Sloan, Harlowe Curtice and Harley Earl. Sloan was the brilliant manager of the car guys, whom he trusted; however, as Ed Cray reported in his excellent book, “Chrome Colossus”, the ascension of Frederick Donner and the finance guys in New York with the inherent weakness of Donner appointing John F. Gordon to G.M.’s presidency, set a path that G.M. was going to produce high-volume cars. (I am still amazed that the Corvette survived and the Corvair (and its Y-body platform variants) program did not get axed in 1958. All I can figure is that Ed Cole must have had Donner’s ear and was as good a salesman as he was an engineer.) Somehow, Donner must have focused on G.M.A.D. (General Motors Assembly Division) rather than going after specific programs, so that cars like the Corvette and the Riviera did not become targets of Donner’s New York bean-counters, so long as a Riviera did not cost more to manufacture than a Buick Electra, hence the flat-glass side windows and other cost-saving measures. After all, the 1963-1965 Buick Riviera was not a technical “tour de force”, using the 401-cu.-in. “Nailhead” V-8 and the shortened cruciform X-frame that Buick adopted in 1961. In my opinion, the Thunderbird was luxurious, but the 1961 through 1966 unit-body cars were heavy, not as nimble as the styling suggested, and the Ford 390 was prone to overheating in traffic on hot days. My late uncle owned both a 1961 coupe and a 1966 coupe. As a teenage boy, the T-Birds were dream cars, especially seeing the ’61’s “Swing Away” steering column. The bucket seat interiors of the T-Birds (and the ’60s Chrysler 300s) were the stuff of car show concept cars. The Buick had nice vinyl bucket seats, but only optional leather trim, while the Thunderbird could be optionally upholstered in full leather. My wife’s uncle owned a 1964 Riviera, and later a 1967 Riviera, both of which I drove in 1969. The Rivieras seemed narrower and less luxurious than the two Thunderbirds in which I rode as a teenager. Several years ago, I rode in a Chrysler 300-H convertible in the back seat with a leather interior. Frankly, the Chrysler was more luxurious, rode better and was definitely faster than either the Riviera or the Thunderbird that I recall.
In 1961, G.M. tamed the wild styling response of 1959-1960 to the Chrysler Forward Look with a trim, distinctive full-size line-up from the Chevrolet to the Cadillac. But each G.M. division planned and introduced bucket seat, “sporty” coupes and ragtops: The Chevrolet Impala SuperSport, the Pontiac Grand Prix, the Buick Wildcat, the resurrection of the Oldsmobile Starfire, and Cadillac still had its Eldorado. My senior year in high school (1969), a very lucky classmate was given a 1965 red-metallic Oldsmobile Starfire coupe, which I have still strongly admire as much as I love the Pontiac Grand Prix of 1962 through 1964. But like the Rivieras I have encountered, the interiors were typical G.M. and not as exclusive as the same period Thunderbirds or the Chrysler 300 letter cars. Perhaps all this goes back to the financial constraints Frederick Donner and his minions put in place to keep G.M.’s “car guys” (like Bill Mitchell and John DeLorean) in check. Another uncle of my late wife’s bought a 1969 Pontiac Grand Prix SJ optioned to the hilt. (My father and two of my wife’s uncles worked for Allison Engineering Division, General Motors, in Indianapolis, so they all had reached the G.M. Employee discount purchase program status.) The ’69 G.P. was an exciting car (428, I believe), but again, the Morrokide surfaces were not as nice as the leather seats in the Thunderbirds or the Chrysler 300 letter cars. G.M.’s interiors, even on the top tier C-body cars were built to a cost-point: Good but rarely great ! Will the 2025 Cadillac Celestiq finally break through ?
I’ve read this article several times and I’m fascinated by your viewpoint, Steve. I own a ’63 Riviera and a ’63 Thunderbird, so I’m aware of the strengths and weaknesses of both, but only from the perspective of today. With that being said, I can’t imagine that the Riviera’s styling was the reason for its lack of sales compared to the T-Bird. In every magazine review from the period I’ve ever read, the Riviera’s styling was praised as being among the best looking from America, and I can’t imagine the lack of curved side glass affected most people’s opinion of it.
Additionally, by 1963 the Thunderbird was on the last year of a styling cycle that was based on the X-100 concept car from the mid-1950s, so if anything, its styling looked backward rather than forward. Granted, it’s a striking car that I’ve always loved, but I don’t see its styling being more modern than the Riviera’s.
With that being said, I can only imagine that the T-Bird’s name recognition and six (nine, really) model years of success bolstered its image to the point that it was THE car to have in that field. As you mention, Buick was coming off some lean years in 1963, so the brand itself would be no great selling point, and the lack of a similarity to the rest of the line would thus be insignificant. I can’t agree that sweepspears would have helped, as the ’64 Skylark you mentioned did without them, and the portholes were given lip service as part of the side trim.
It’s probable that by 1965, the Riviera did look one generation removed from the more modern GM full-sized cars (and the redesigned Thunderbird), which may be why the second-generation Riviera was somewhat more successful – it was still beautiful but more modern. There was no hiding the fact that the first-generation car (along with the Bullet Bird) was designed in the late 1950s.
Regarding the Grand Prix, I think it’s hard to bring it into the discussion because its price was so much lower than both the Riviera and the Thunderbird’s. Twenty-five percent is and was a lot of money, and the Grand Prix simply looked great for three-quarters the price.
Values today seem to have vindicated the first-generation Riviera, however, as they usually sell for significantly more money than T-Birds of the era (not counting Sports Roadsters, perhaps).
Aaron, welcome to Indie Auto. It may be helpful to know that our focus isn’t on the collectibility of a given car, but rather how it did or didn’t impact the decline and fall of the U.S. automobile industry. So it’s more about business strategy. It may also be helpful to know that we try to separate out what we as individuals may think about a given car from whether it was successful in the marketplace. For example, it’s entirely fine if someone really likes the Edsel, but that’s a different conversation than whether it furthered Ford’s business objectives.
The first-generation Riviera is a good example of a car that generally receives high marks by historians, armchair and professional. I didn’t argue that it was an unsuccessful design, but rather than it was half hearted. It would have really benefitted from curved side glass and perhaps a lower cowl.
Talking about styling details can be challenging because one almost inevitably starts to bump into personal taste, but I do think it relevant that the Riviera didn’t look at all like a Buick. The 1966-69 models strike me as having a better balance than the first-generation models between offering a distinctive look and integrating Buick cues such as the w-shaped rear and a faint sweepspear along the lower sides.
Thanks for your reply, Steve. I have your website bookmarked and drop in from time to time to read your articles, so I understand what you’ve set out to do. In this particular case, I just feel like there has to be more to it. After all, the second-generation Riviera didn’t see a spectacular increase in sales from 1965 to 1966 (34,000 to 45,000), even though it featured a whole new body incorporating some of the styling improvements you mentioned. The Thunderbird’s sales rose from 63,000 to 92,000 from 1963 to 1964, however, with the new generation. The 1966 Thunderbird with its three-year-old bodystyle still outsold the new Riviera by almost 25,000 units.
I think it’s important to note that the Riviera’s sales stayed stable and continued to increase through the second-generation car’s lifespan. It didn’t change much in appearance, so perhaps it was the increased acceptance of the Riviera nameplate, or a change in Buick’s overall desirability as a make, or because people didn’t especially like the Thunderbird’s 1967 restyle.
Aaron, you make a good point that second-generation Riviera sales didn’t increase all that much. Might that have partly reflected the changing nature of the market?
The big personal coupe field became more crowded with the arrival of the Toronado, Eldorado and Mark III. The latter two may have only been indirect competitors because of their higher price tags, but they arguably diluted the star power of the Thunderbird and Riviera. Meanwhile, the Cougar XR-7 may have drawn away some buyers who found a smaller luxury personal coupe appealing. The bottom line is that from 1964-69 the T-Bird and Riviera went from being quite special to merely niche cars.
Might the 1966 Riviera have sold as well as the Thunderbird in the absence of the Toronado? I don’t say that to over-glorify the second-generation Riviera; the T-Bird’s more formal styling may have been a better fit with the big personal coupe field than the Riviera’s semi-fastback. But at least it was a less compromised effort.
You also make a good point that the Riviera’s gradually increasing sales may have reflected a growing acceptance of the nameplate. That presumably would have been particularly important against the T-Bird, which by the standards of the time had an exceptional level of stature. I suspect that Buick’s rebound in the big-car market could have also been helpful.
And, yes, the 1967 T-Bird didn’t sell as well as past first-year redesigns . . . and lost altitude more quickly than past generations. Might that have been at least to some degree inevitable give the market’s fragmentation?
There’s no doubt that the democratization of that market must have had something to do with declining sales of any individual brand name, but Riviera sales actually increased between 1966 and 1969. Granted, it was by fewer than 10,000 units, but that’s still against the grain for previous sales statistics for the Riviera and Thunderbird both when looking at units sold during a styling generation. The Toronado may have had an impact on the sales of the 1966 Riviera, but its sales fell off precipitously for 1967, so who knows?
I’d be surprised if anyone was cross shopping a Riviera/Thunderbird and a Cougar, but maybe? I wonder what brand loyalty was like in the Riviera/Thunderbird class. It couldn’t have been as strong as it would have been in the intermediate/full-size markets.
All the Pontiacs of the 70s took whacks from the ugly stick, even the 2nd gen Firebird which got more and more garish as it aged. The first new Pontiac design of the ’70s that appealed to me was the downsized A body Grand Prix in ’78 which looked more modern than the baroque-lite ’78 Monte Carlo. The two consistently best styled GM divisions from 1970-1980 were Chevrolet and Oldsmobile.
Hmm. The 63-65 Riv had a crisp, powerful look with the grille leaning forward. It looked muscular. Hot rods were big then, and the quintessential hot rod was built around the 28-32 Ford five window coupe. The Riv gave a modern reimagining of a 32 Ford hot rod. The 61-63 Bird was called the banana bird for a reason. The Riv had a masculine vibe, the Bird more feminine.
At this link is a two-part YouTube presentation of a Ford dealer instructional filmstrip (complete with beeps) about the new competitors to the Thunderbird, the Riviera and the Studebaker Avanti. It is interesting to hear how Ford Sales saw the newcomers and how they wanted their car to compared to them:
I have to disagree with some of the points in the article. I have owned three 66-67’s and one ’71 Riviera and I’ve been a fan of the original model. I was a member of the Riviera Owners Association for many years. I think that the first gen Riviera can best be thought of a limited production vehicle similar to the Cadillac El Dorado Brougham, the Lincoln Mark II, or even the original two seat T Bird. It was intended to be a halo vehicle, much like the Corvette. Unlike these models the Riviera shared more mechanical components with the mainline Buick models although the body was completely unique. It was also higher priced than the contemporary Thunderbird. By the time the Riv was on the market, the LaSalle had been gone for twenty years, I don’t think that many buyers had any connection or memory to that marque. During the period of the late 50’s to the early 60’s there weren’t many design cues that carried on from year to year with most GM cars. I don’t think that the Riviera really suffered from that lack of continuity. The smaller production numbers also gave it an air of exclusivity, which I have read that Buick preferred. Don’t forget that the Riviera preceded the Toronado, the FWD Eldorado, and even the Mustang. It was always going to be a niche market vehicle. When GM brought out the E body, costs could be shared over three models, which probably contributed to their profitability. It also suffered from some de-contenting from that point on, although the option list was long.
GM found their mass market with the intermediate based personal cars such as the Monte Carlo, Grand Prix and Oldsmobile Cutlass coupes.
The first gen Riviera can be considered a typical act of GM hubris and attributed to Bill Mitchell’s personality. I feel it is one of the 1960’s most beautiful and timeless designs.
I agree that the Riviera was one of the better designs to come out of the 1960s. However, I think it would have looked even better with curved side glass (which would hopefully have trimmed the car’s rather pontoonish side sheetmetal). Note that only one year later GM was putting curved side glass on its mid-sized cars. In the post I’ve swapped out a photo and modified a caption to make that point better.
I’m not implying that the Riviera should have been a Cadillac. That would have amounted to GM’s prestige division trying to compete with a Ford. One of GM’s premium-priced brands would have been much better positioned to do so. In theory, Buick was the best choice for a more luxury-oriented personal coupe — it just didn’t get the right car.
It wouldn’t have taken all that much to give the Riviera at least a hint of Buick’s design heritage. For example, a variation of the sweepspear could have worked fine with exposed rear-wheel openings. The problem was that Mitchell didn’t even try — and he got away with it.
I have not seen GM’s production projections for the 1963 Riviera but doubt management would have given the car completely new sheetmetal if it was intended to be a limited-production model like the 1954 Skylark convertible. The Standard Catalog says that the Riviera’s factory price for 1963 was $4,333, which was similar to an Electra 225 convertible. Thunderbird prices started at $4,445 and went up to $5,563 for the roadster model. Why would GM slightly underprice the T-Bird if they were going for exclusivity rather than volume?
All that said, we like the cars we like — and will inevitably have varying views. That’s cool.
Another reason Buick got the Riviera was that it actively campaigned for it. Buick needed a halo car because going from number three in industry sales in 1955 to practically oblivion by 1961. GM was contemplating even eliminating Buick like Chrysler jettisoned DeSoto as the medium priced market consolidated. Cadillac didn’t have the production capacity for another model, so it really was best that Buick got the Riviera.
Good point.
GM, real struggle with personal coupes was the utter failure of upper management to really understand the concept. Unique, niche market cars kept getting run through some kind of corporate algorithm that demanded that every car seat six passengers. The second generation Riviera had a front bench seat. There’s even a TV commercial watchable on YouTube showing six people piling out of this personal coupe. The Toronado, Eldorado, Monte Carlo, Corvair were all heavily promoted with front bench seats. Maybe front buckets violated some deeply held family values mandate at GM because pressing the seeming necessity of six passenger capacity was relentless.
That makes sense. Another factor could have been cost. My guess is that a bench seat would have allowed an automaker to price its base model lower than if it had buckets with a center console.
Spot-on, Steve. Center consoles carry a lot of cost in the structure, trim and relocation of shifter from column to floor. A bench seat is simpler and makes the car feel roomier. Carmakers like to sell consumers big vehicles with lots of open air, because air carries no cost. That one reason why they make so much money on pick-ups.
Maybe that’s one reason 4 door pickups and pickup based SUVs are so popular. They are the only truly roomy vehicles left.
I am going to add an observation: G.M. tried to introduce the concept of personal luxury in 1953 with production cars that were developed out of the Motorama cars: The Corvette for the sporty set (pre-Duntov and V-8), the Buick Skylark, the Oldsmobile Fiesta and the only other car that survived beyond 1954, the Cadillac Eldorado. Ford tried to match the Corvette with the two-seat, 1955-1957 Thunderbird. Of course, the dying Packard had their Caribbeans, and Studebaker had the Presidential Speedster which evolved into the Golden Hawk and the Gran Turismo Hawk. But it was Chrysler which launched a high-performance, personal luxury car, the Chrysler 300 in 1955. By the time the 300-F arrived in 1960, Chrysler had a real American drivers’ car that had better performance than a Thunderbird and luxury to match. (The letter-car 300s’ interiors only got better until the run ended with the 300-L.)
In the period of 1956 through 1958, G.M. had a complete management change with the retirement of Alfred Sloan, Harlowe Curtice and Harley Earl. Sloan was the brilliant manager of the car guys, whom he trusted; however, as Ed Cray reported in his excellent book, “Chrome Colossus”, the ascension of Frederick Donner and the finance guys in New York with the inherent weakness of Donner appointing John F. Gordon to G.M.’s presidency, set a path that G.M. was going to produce high-volume cars. (I am still amazed that the Corvette survived and the Corvair (and its Y-body platform variants) program did not get axed in 1958. All I can figure is that Ed Cole must have had Donner’s ear and was as good a salesman as he was an engineer.) Somehow, Donner must have focused on G.M.A.D. (General Motors Assembly Division) rather than going after specific programs, so that cars like the Corvette and the Riviera did not become targets of Donner’s New York bean-counters, so long as a Riviera did not cost more to manufacture than a Buick Electra, hence the flat-glass side windows and other cost-saving measures. After all, the 1963-1965 Buick Riviera was not a technical “tour de force”, using the 401-cu.-in. “Nailhead” V-8 and the shortened cruciform X-frame that Buick adopted in 1961. In my opinion, the Thunderbird was luxurious, but the 1961 through 1966 unit-body cars were heavy, not as nimble as the styling suggested, and the Ford 390 was prone to overheating in traffic on hot days. My late uncle owned both a 1961 coupe and a 1966 coupe. As a teenage boy, the T-Birds were dream cars, especially seeing the ’61’s “Swing Away” steering column. The bucket seat interiors of the T-Birds (and the ’60s Chrysler 300s) were the stuff of car show concept cars. The Buick had nice vinyl bucket seats, but only optional leather trim, while the Thunderbird could be optionally upholstered in full leather. My wife’s uncle owned a 1964 Riviera, and later a 1967 Riviera, both of which I drove in 1969. The Rivieras seemed narrower and less luxurious than the two Thunderbirds in which I rode as a teenager. Several years ago, I rode in a Chrysler 300-H convertible in the back seat with a leather interior. Frankly, the Chrysler was more luxurious, rode better and was definitely faster than either the Riviera or the Thunderbird that I recall.
In 1961, G.M. tamed the wild styling response of 1959-1960 to the Chrysler Forward Look with a trim, distinctive full-size line-up from the Chevrolet to the Cadillac. But each G.M. division planned and introduced bucket seat, “sporty” coupes and ragtops: The Chevrolet Impala SuperSport, the Pontiac Grand Prix, the Buick Wildcat, the resurrection of the Oldsmobile Starfire, and Cadillac still had its Eldorado. My senior year in high school (1969), a very lucky classmate was given a 1965 red-metallic Oldsmobile Starfire coupe, which I have still strongly admire as much as I love the Pontiac Grand Prix of 1962 through 1964. But like the Rivieras I have encountered, the interiors were typical G.M. and not as exclusive as the same period Thunderbirds or the Chrysler 300 letter cars. Perhaps all this goes back to the financial constraints Frederick Donner and his minions put in place to keep G.M.’s “car guys” (like Bill Mitchell and John DeLorean) in check. Another uncle of my late wife’s bought a 1969 Pontiac Grand Prix SJ optioned to the hilt. (My father and two of my wife’s uncles worked for Allison Engineering Division, General Motors, in Indianapolis, so they all had reached the G.M. Employee discount purchase program status.) The ’69 G.P. was an exciting car (428, I believe), but again, the Morrokide surfaces were not as nice as the leather seats in the Thunderbirds or the Chrysler 300 letter cars. G.M.’s interiors, even on the top tier C-body cars were built to a cost-point: Good but rarely great ! Will the 2025 Cadillac Celestiq finally break through ?
I’ve read this article several times and I’m fascinated by your viewpoint, Steve. I own a ’63 Riviera and a ’63 Thunderbird, so I’m aware of the strengths and weaknesses of both, but only from the perspective of today. With that being said, I can’t imagine that the Riviera’s styling was the reason for its lack of sales compared to the T-Bird. In every magazine review from the period I’ve ever read, the Riviera’s styling was praised as being among the best looking from America, and I can’t imagine the lack of curved side glass affected most people’s opinion of it.
Additionally, by 1963 the Thunderbird was on the last year of a styling cycle that was based on the X-100 concept car from the mid-1950s, so if anything, its styling looked backward rather than forward. Granted, it’s a striking car that I’ve always loved, but I don’t see its styling being more modern than the Riviera’s.
With that being said, I can only imagine that the T-Bird’s name recognition and six (nine, really) model years of success bolstered its image to the point that it was THE car to have in that field. As you mention, Buick was coming off some lean years in 1963, so the brand itself would be no great selling point, and the lack of a similarity to the rest of the line would thus be insignificant. I can’t agree that sweepspears would have helped, as the ’64 Skylark you mentioned did without them, and the portholes were given lip service as part of the side trim.
It’s probable that by 1965, the Riviera did look one generation removed from the more modern GM full-sized cars (and the redesigned Thunderbird), which may be why the second-generation Riviera was somewhat more successful – it was still beautiful but more modern. There was no hiding the fact that the first-generation car (along with the Bullet Bird) was designed in the late 1950s.
Regarding the Grand Prix, I think it’s hard to bring it into the discussion because its price was so much lower than both the Riviera and the Thunderbird’s. Twenty-five percent is and was a lot of money, and the Grand Prix simply looked great for three-quarters the price.
Values today seem to have vindicated the first-generation Riviera, however, as they usually sell for significantly more money than T-Birds of the era (not counting Sports Roadsters, perhaps).
Aaron, welcome to Indie Auto. It may be helpful to know that our focus isn’t on the collectibility of a given car, but rather how it did or didn’t impact the decline and fall of the U.S. automobile industry. So it’s more about business strategy. It may also be helpful to know that we try to separate out what we as individuals may think about a given car from whether it was successful in the marketplace. For example, it’s entirely fine if someone really likes the Edsel, but that’s a different conversation than whether it furthered Ford’s business objectives.
The first-generation Riviera is a good example of a car that generally receives high marks by historians, armchair and professional. I didn’t argue that it was an unsuccessful design, but rather than it was half hearted. It would have really benefitted from curved side glass and perhaps a lower cowl.
Talking about styling details can be challenging because one almost inevitably starts to bump into personal taste, but I do think it relevant that the Riviera didn’t look at all like a Buick. The 1966-69 models strike me as having a better balance than the first-generation models between offering a distinctive look and integrating Buick cues such as the w-shaped rear and a faint sweepspear along the lower sides.
Thanks for your reply, Steve. I have your website bookmarked and drop in from time to time to read your articles, so I understand what you’ve set out to do. In this particular case, I just feel like there has to be more to it. After all, the second-generation Riviera didn’t see a spectacular increase in sales from 1965 to 1966 (34,000 to 45,000), even though it featured a whole new body incorporating some of the styling improvements you mentioned. The Thunderbird’s sales rose from 63,000 to 92,000 from 1963 to 1964, however, with the new generation. The 1966 Thunderbird with its three-year-old bodystyle still outsold the new Riviera by almost 25,000 units.
I think it’s important to note that the Riviera’s sales stayed stable and continued to increase through the second-generation car’s lifespan. It didn’t change much in appearance, so perhaps it was the increased acceptance of the Riviera nameplate, or a change in Buick’s overall desirability as a make, or because people didn’t especially like the Thunderbird’s 1967 restyle.
Aaron, you make a good point that second-generation Riviera sales didn’t increase all that much. Might that have partly reflected the changing nature of the market?
The big personal coupe field became more crowded with the arrival of the Toronado, Eldorado and Mark III. The latter two may have only been indirect competitors because of their higher price tags, but they arguably diluted the star power of the Thunderbird and Riviera. Meanwhile, the Cougar XR-7 may have drawn away some buyers who found a smaller luxury personal coupe appealing. The bottom line is that from 1964-69 the T-Bird and Riviera went from being quite special to merely niche cars.
Might the 1966 Riviera have sold as well as the Thunderbird in the absence of the Toronado? I don’t say that to over-glorify the second-generation Riviera; the T-Bird’s more formal styling may have been a better fit with the big personal coupe field than the Riviera’s semi-fastback. But at least it was a less compromised effort.
You also make a good point that the Riviera’s gradually increasing sales may have reflected a growing acceptance of the nameplate. That presumably would have been particularly important against the T-Bird, which by the standards of the time had an exceptional level of stature. I suspect that Buick’s rebound in the big-car market could have also been helpful.
And, yes, the 1967 T-Bird didn’t sell as well as past first-year redesigns . . . and lost altitude more quickly than past generations. Might that have been at least to some degree inevitable give the market’s fragmentation?
There’s no doubt that the democratization of that market must have had something to do with declining sales of any individual brand name, but Riviera sales actually increased between 1966 and 1969. Granted, it was by fewer than 10,000 units, but that’s still against the grain for previous sales statistics for the Riviera and Thunderbird both when looking at units sold during a styling generation. The Toronado may have had an impact on the sales of the 1966 Riviera, but its sales fell off precipitously for 1967, so who knows?
I’d be surprised if anyone was cross shopping a Riviera/Thunderbird and a Cougar, but maybe? I wonder what brand loyalty was like in the Riviera/Thunderbird class. It couldn’t have been as strong as it would have been in the intermediate/full-size markets.
All the Pontiacs of the 70s took whacks from the ugly stick, even the 2nd gen Firebird which got more and more garish as it aged. The first new Pontiac design of the ’70s that appealed to me was the downsized A body Grand Prix in ’78 which looked more modern than the baroque-lite ’78 Monte Carlo. The two consistently best styled GM divisions from 1970-1980 were Chevrolet and Oldsmobile.
Hmm. The 63-65 Riv had a crisp, powerful look with the grille leaning forward. It looked muscular. Hot rods were big then, and the quintessential hot rod was built around the 28-32 Ford five window coupe. The Riv gave a modern reimagining of a 32 Ford hot rod. The 61-63 Bird was called the banana bird for a reason. The Riv had a masculine vibe, the Bird more feminine.
At this link is a two-part YouTube presentation of a Ford dealer instructional filmstrip (complete with beeps) about the new competitors to the Thunderbird, the Riviera and the Studebaker Avanti. It is interesting to hear how Ford Sales saw the newcomers and how they wanted their car to compared to them:
Part 1:
https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?&q=1963+thunderbird+vs++riviera+youtube&qpvt=1963+thunderbird+vs++riviera+youtube&mid=C4DE3833B7A2B46F04CEC4DE3833B7A2B46F04CE&&FORM=VRDGAR
Part 2:
https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=1963%20thunderbird%20vs%20%20riviera%20youtube&mid=24CF933FE8B4B0C3C67524CF933FE8B4B0C3C675&ajaxhist=0
I also came across an August 1986 comparison of a ’63 Riviera and a ’63 Thunderbird conducted by Special Interest Autos, raised to the internet by Hemmings in 2011:
https://www.hemmings.com/stories/2011/05/01/sia-flashback-two-kinds-of-personal-luxury-riviera-and-thunderbird-for-1963