(EXPANDED FROM 3/26/2021)
Whatever else one might say about the 1971-73 Buick Riviera, its styling did represent a heroic level of resistance to the brougham look then sweeping through the U.S. auto industry. Instead of slapping onto the Riviera the usual radiator grille and landau roofline, General Motors design head William Mitchell tried to recreate the magic of the boat-tailed 1963-67 Corvette in a large personal coupe.
A website devoted to the 1971-73 Riviera (2021) summarizes differing views on whether the Riviera worked aesthetically. But for all of the debates, production data suggests that the car was not a commercial success over the course of its three-year lifetime.
It was clear something was wrong even in the boat-tailed Buick’s first year. Output was down almost 10 percent from 1970. It’s true that this was almost a third less than that of the Thunderbird 28 percent drop, but the Ford didn’t have all-new styling. In addition, the Riviera’s corporate siblings, the Oldsmobile Toronado and Cadillac Eldorado, both saw double-digit production increases.
The Riviera soldiers through 1972 with minor changes
You would be forgiven if you mistook a 1971 Riviera for a 1972 model, because the latter received only minor changes such as a new grille and taillight treatment. The rear bumper also gained an awkward rubber strip that presumably better protected the boat tail’s tip from parking-lot dings. More visually successful was a vinyl side molding that gave the side sweepsphere greater definition.
The changes didn’t help Riviera sales, which were down slightly even though the full-sized personal coupe market soared by 49 percent. The Riviera was even outsold by the more-expensive Eldorado.
GM tries to clean up the Riviera’s design in 1973
For 1973 the Riviera received more substantial changes. The biggest improvement was the boat-tail’s tip, which was substantially reduced in size. Another positive step was a partial vinyl roof, which served to reduce the visual mass of the car’s fastback roofline.
Less successful was the new front end, which was endowed with a much sturdier bumper. The more upright fascia clashed with the car’s otherwise forward-thrusting design.
Could designers have come up with a better way to meet new federal bumper standards? I suspect so. For example, even if the fascia itself needed to be more vertical, it could have still evoked the dramatic angles of the 1971-72 models by how the grille, headlight surroundings and side-marker lights were shaped.
Instead, designers doubled down on a squared-off look. I don’t know if this was because they already knew the direction of the reskinned 1974 Riviera, but it ended up functioning as a visual transition.
Also see ‘1971-78 Cadillac Eldorado: Collectible Automobile tells only part of the story’
All of these changes didn’t help Riviera production for 1973, which went up a meager 1 percent in a year when the personal coupe market grew by 29 percent.
The 1971-73 Riviera may have been one of the most iconic designs of the decade, but it was not a commercial success. Thus, it made sense that GM would take a different direction when the car was given a reskinning in 1974. However, as we discuss here, that design wasn’t terribly successful either. Indeed, one could plausibly argue that the boat-tailed look might have done just as well if it had been cleverly updated.
NOTES:
This is an expanded version of a “Gallery” feature first posted on March 26, 2021. Production data was from the auto editors of Consumer Guide (2006) and Gunnell (2002).
RE:SOURCES
- Auto editors of Consumer Guide; 2006. Encyclopedia of American Cars. Publications International, Lincolnwood, Ill.
- Buick Riviera; 2021. “History.” Accessed March 24.
- Gunnell, John; 2002. Standard Catalog of American Cars, 1946-1975. Revised 4th Ed. Krause Publications, Iola, WI.
ADVERTISING & BROCHURES:
- oldcaradvertising.com: Oldsmobile Toronado (1971)
- oldcarbrochures.org: Buick Riviera (1971); Cadillac Eldorado (1971)
Steve, I’ll get the comment ball rolling. From what I have read, Mitchell wanted a mid-sized platform for the boat-tail, on which the clay models were said to look good. The problem was timing, the ’73 mid-sized car program being too late. So Riviera joined the ’71 large car program.
In retrospect, I think there was a much better option available: the Camaro/Firebird body. Take a look at the Pegasus show car’s boat-tail gesture (GM Heritage Center):
https://www.gmheritagecenter.com/gm-vehicle-collection/1970_Pontiac_Pegasus_Concept.html
I don’t think it works too well on the truncated rear but certainly the ’75 Camaro/Firebird backlight could have been pulled ahead as a Riviera exclusive for ’71. Up front, somewhat flatter surfacing with Corvette’s hidden headlight assembly would have set the car apart. Inside, high-end materials plus all the luxuries and gadgets of the day. Ride could have been softened, NVH reduced, 4-wheel disc brakes made standard, and perhaps even IRS included, leveraging learnings from Corvette. The car wouldn’t have been marketed as an over-the-top pony car, instead a more sporting version of the mid-sized personal coupe, with a smaller size that would become increasingly right for the times. In all, Riviera could have had good run through the Seventies, and without a lot of additional investment on GM’s part.
Paul, I have been trying to nail down the facts surrounding why the Riviera was placed on the big-car platform. Where has you heard or read that they wanted to place the car on the mid-sized platform but it wouldn’t have been ready in time?
I agree with you about the boat-tail looking better on the F-body. Indeed, I don’t get urge to give the Riviera a boat tail; that doesn’t strike me as fitting with the general look of a personal luxury coupe.
The underlying goal seemed to be to offer a four-place Corvette. If so, why didn’t they put the boat tail on the second-generation Camaro?
Steve, I went digging this morning and can’t find the article that I had read. I took out a thick book from the local library on the history of GM many years ago, might have read it there. But now I can’t find the book! Oh well, will keep looking. If anyone has the Collectible Automobile Magazine from August 1990 that featured the car, perhaps it has something to say about its development.
This morning I cam across this interesting site. Shows side-by-sides of the medium and large versions of the car. I have to say, if cost was a reason for putting the car on the B-platform, I don’t blame them! It’s sometimes easy for a designer to lose perspective when they are deep into an exercise. Seems to me the fundamental problem with this car was its basic theme. Mitchell was grousing about the street he ended up on but I don’t think either car even landed in the right zip code. It was a nice idea and maybe it just needed a slimmer and more bespoke front appearance. Riv had hidden headlights from ’65-69. Perhaps should have stuck with them.
The argument that the large B-platform represented an investment save doesn’t seem to make sense. The roof and rear half of the car are unique as are the front fenders and hood, which appear to use Cadillac/Grandville’s long axle-dash rather than Buick’s shorter one. I am left to conclude that either someone at the top preferred large cars, or it was timing-driven as I first mentioned.
https://www.shannons.com.au/club/news/retroautos/boat-tail-riviera-bill-mitchell-creates-controversy-design-to-driveway-photos/
I think Mitchell’s ’70 Riviera got closer to the classic French cars, its only shortcoming being the awful front. Some time ago I attempted to raise the grill and fender leading edges, and hide the headlights. Seemed to clean things up a bit (courtesy Curbside Classic).
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/wp-content/comment-image/516466.jpg
Paul, thank you for looking for that information.
I think there’s a reasonable critique of putting the Riviera and its siblings on the B-platform: 1) the basic body was too tall for a personal coupe and 2) differentiating the huge number of nameplates on that platform inevitably would lead to stylistic overkill.
You make a good point about the 1970 Riviera. I don’t like it as much as the 1969 model, but it wasn’t a bad way to start nudging the nameplate into the brougham era. The thing that still perplexes me is why did GM give the car a complete reskinning for a single-year production run when the design did not even act as a transition to the 1971 model? Was GM that desperate to overtake Ford that it locked the bean counters in the closet?
I like how you modified the 1970 Riviera. Hidden headlights seemed to be on the way out at that point, but they worked well for this car.
“The thing that still perplexes me is why did GM give the car a complete reskinning for a single-year production run when the design did not even act as a transition to the 1971 model?”
I don’t think the ’70 Riviera was a complete reskin, Steve. The hood and deck definitely look carryover. The front fenders and doors don’t seem to have the crease that the ’69 had, but the ’70’s side trim covers most of that area so its hard to know what’s going on underneath the trim. My guess is that if there was a surface change, it was only through a modification of the dies in that area, because the rest of the surface looks carryover and it wouldn’t make sense to tool new for such a minor change. The rear fenders were definitely new-tooled as were the rear bumpers and front bumper/fascia/grill. All told, Buick didn’t have as much money into that program as it appears.
I prefer skirts on American cars with lots of lateral overhang, and thus would prefer that the ’66-69 cars had them. But I get the appeal of open wheelhouses. The downward slant of the hood on the ’68-70, to my eye, doesn’t work.
Paul, it get your point that some body parts were carried over. The doors and trunk lid look like they were. However, the 1970’s hood looks similar but doesn’t appear to jut slightly upward in the power dome like on the 1968-69 models. But even if all of those parts were shared, the Riviera was still given a meaningful amount of changes for one year — front and rear quarter panels and bumpers as well as a new rear window. Even the weak-selling Toronado didn’t get as substantial of a rework.
I do give GM credit for maximizing the impact of the Riviera’s changes because they gave the car a substantially different vibe. Alas, it didn’t help sales, nor did it act as a very good transition to the 1971 boat-tailed Riviera aside from the more deeply creased upper side molding. Indeed, one of the things that surprises me about the 1971 is that it ditched the Riviera’s traditional V-shaped rear in favor of a W-shape; the former would have provided at least some continuity.
I like the grill on the ’70 Riviera though it needed to be taller as I had depicted. That said, it’s original height (and style) might have worked wonderfully on a ’71 Camaro-based Riviera. We know the headlights would have packaged in the grill just as they had in the ’69 of similar grill opening shape. The frontal space flanking the grill surround wouldn’t have been nearly as wide on the ’70 Riv, so could have been filled in with signal and/or fog lamps. And the razor-edge look up front could have been carried into the rear via unique rear fascia, lights and bumper.
I never liked Mitchell’s penchant for mid-body crease lines that sent the sheetmetal folding inboard to the rockers, and this was quite severe on the Camaro. Perhaps on the would-be Riv these could have been eliminated if the business case and Mitchell’s mind had allowed, else Camaro’s door outers and rear fenders could have been reused.
Terminology question: What do you mean when you say “Camaro’s door outers and rear fenders could have been reused”?
Sorry, use of “rear fenders” is my bad habit. They are the quarter panels. The door outers are the outer panels of the door. If they were to change in shape, the door jambs that they weld too might need to change too. I’m not a body expert and so would sometimes ask the studio engineers and designers questions. They have their own vocabulary. I worked on the ’19 Blazer and the designers early on referred to it as the “bulldog,” and its A-pillar and side glass were “stiff.” For a while we had a Range Rover Evoque 5-door parked in the exterior studio because it had the proportions and attitude that the designers were after. There was also vocabulary related to fit and finish, or as the older folks called “flush and gap.” A slight raise of a stamped panel at its hemmed edge is called an unwanted “ski jump” if I recall correctly.
Here’s the “Teacup” security desk in the lobby of Design Center. When I went to interview there, I sat in on one of the couches and waited for my future manager to fetch me.
https://www.archdaily.com/940493/etheral-luminosity-from-above-general-motors-technical-center/5ece37f5b3576516560001da-etheral-luminosity-from-above-general-motors-technical-center-photo
Walking through one of the doors in the back of the lobby take you to the executive garage. Go through it to get to the main studios, go up the stairs that you see in the pic to get to the studios from the second floor. I was constantly going through the garage and the Pegasus was parked there for several months, so I had a chance to really scope it out. Also, the execs were required to keep there doors unlocked so we could get in any car at any time to study it.
Wow, those are cool photos. Thank you for sharing them.
Just wiki’d E-body and B-body and it indicates that the ’71 Riviera was on the E, as was ’71 Toro and Eldo. Hmmm. The windshields on all the big GM cars look the same for ’71. Wonder if they are.
My understanding is that the 1963-65 Riviera was based upon a modified full-sized GM body. Thus, it shared the same windshield and even major parts of the dashboard with Buick family cars. From 1966-70 the Riviera switched to a new body that had meaningful differences from the full-sized GM body. Then, for 1971, the Riviera was switched back to using a modified full-sized body. If this is correct, then yes the 1971-76 Riviera shared its windshield with the big Buicks.
I should add that the floorpan on the Riviera appears to be shorter than even Chevy/Pontiac. If so, more up-front cost. This was not a light program!
Getting ever closer to the inner sanctum of the car companies, let’s use their nomenclature. The old phrase “axle-to-dash” no longer applies. Instead, GM uses the term “BOFFA” which stands for ball-of-foot to front axle, and captures precisely and consistently the distance from a driver’s fixed point on the accelerator in static position, to the front wheel centerline. I don’t know what Ford calls it because I never got into those weeds when I was there. The car companies have defined pretty much everything one can measure inside and outside a vehicle, and use it for design, competitive benchmarking and many other things.
Also, an argument in favor of Riviera’s B-body decision being driven by timing is the obvious problem of what to do with a boat-tail that had been designed for the older A-body, once the new A-body launched for the 1973 MY and assuming that its basic shell couldn’t have been pulled ahead two years to allow only the Riviera to launch. Also, the new A-body had a more rotund fuselage appearance to its body, windshield and wide front, so although a Riv on its platform would have been an improvement over the B-body, all would not have been pure sweetness and light.
That’s true, but GM also could have continued the E-body. That would have made the cars more competitive with Ford’s, which through that time period had a unique boy.
Blame G.M.’s 14th-Floor committees for putting the Toronado, Riviera and Eldorado on the large-car platforms, over-ruling John Z. DeLorean for wanting to down-size both the intermediates and the brand “halo” personal luxury cars. My father owned a 1971 Toronado. It was a heavy barge. I had a co-worker whom owned a 1973 Eldorado that was even more barge-like. G.M. blew it. A smaller 1971 Riviera on the Buick Century sedan platform could have been a winner, but Bill Mitchell was over-ruled. Is this G.M.’s version of what happened to Dick Teague and the Tarpon that became the Marlin ?
Hmnm. The Pegasus doesn’t have a true boat tail, looks more like a Sting Ray top grafted on a contemporary Firebird. I love that Aston Martin look about it.
I thank Buick for building a distinctive car. Opinions on it are all over the place, as with every polarizing design. I had a ’71 as well as a ’66 model and a ’70 Coupe de Ville. The 1969 Pontiac Grand Prix debuted as a intermediate personal luxury car and the Chevrolet Monte Carlo followed only a couple of years later in 1971. These were nice cars but they didn’t come from GM’s premium divisions. I don’t think that GM was going to build a similar intermediate sized Riviera to compete with the Grand Prix or Monte Carlo, The Pontiac, but especially the Chevy, were sold in many different equipment levels, a unit that was equipped as fully as a Cadillac or Riviera was always a pretty rare bird. Monte Carlos with base bench seats and hand crank windows were not uncommon. The Riviera was always meant to sell at a higher cost and they were equipped that way from the start. The Buick Regal was the Monte Carlo competitor. I suppose that Buick could have made the Riviera a smaller, cheaper, mass market car. It might even have been a better idea. Ford did that when they switched from the Lincoln Mark IV based Thunderbird to the intermediate based Bird, the lower base price resulted in a huge sales increase. But the cars were not really comparable in statue, as well as quality. Over time, the perception of the T Bird as a premium car was weakened.
Jose, first… just wondering how you liked driving the ’71? The width seems like it would have made the cockpit very comfortable while still giving a “snug” vibe. I heard the suspension was on the firm side, for handling.
Second, what do you think about a Camaro-based Riv with 15 inch wheels, an independent rear suspension, disc brakes all around, a super luxurious interior and a classy front and rear that made it look almost exotic? It might have been a stretch but the ’73 M-B 450SLC would have been a competitor, as would a ’71 Jaguar E-Type 2+2, ’71 Alfa Romeo Montreal and Maserati Indy 2+2. Such a Riviera might have done a good export business too, perhaps powered by the previous Firebird Sprint’s OHC Six.
I tend to see the ’71 Riv and the ’71 Eldo in the same light, namely as incorporating pastiche elements from the 1920s into contemporary GM design language. In the Riv’s case it is the boat tail, evoking the Auburn Speedster. In the Eldo’s case it is the opera coupe fabric covered roof with inset quarter window. We see the Eldo as brougham in our look back to the 1970s lens because it was the more popular historicist allusion in the years that followed ’71.
Further to my previous comment, on the Rare Classic Cars YouTube channel, host Adam has posted an interview with Wayne Kady on the design of the ’71 Eldo. Kady says everyone in the building was doing four fendered cars, inspired by the 1930s and the Great Gatsby. He shows some Eldo sketches with boat tails too.