My kind of 455

[A Horse With No Name]

But I love the 73-77 GM midsize stuff....

[loki]

270hp... wow. hehe.

not the best looking of any buicks, but i will approve.

[balthazar]

Not my favorite Buick design result, no, but there's no arguing against that motor! Listen to it at .40 secs- does that sound like a anything you'd expect in a (now) old Buick ??

The 455 going in my '59 is a standard BC-code mill from a '72 Riviera. These are damn good, short-stroke big blocks- 510 TRQ in a '70 GS Stage 1- second only to Cadillac's 525 & 550. Great intake/exhaust balance and relatively straight exhaust ports helped make big power.

The '73 & up A-Bodys never did anything for me. I don't care for the dual headlamps over quads (every year prior), the roofline doesn't work for me on a musclecar-type (tho it is a spiritual successor to the '59-60 coupe roofline!) :

...and overall, they seem so much larger & less aggressive than the '68-72s.

Edited November 7, 2010 by balthazar

[A Horse With No Name]

Fantastic B-50 pic, blathzar.

Love it.

And I still love the 68-72 body style better, but like the 73-77 cars.

[Robert Hall]

I like the body sculpturing on the '73-75 Buick A-body coupes..they kind of flattened them out for '76-77..not sure why GM went w/ dual headlights on all of the midsizers in '73 other than being cheap.. I like the intersection of lines where the door, hood, and fender meet...

My favorite 455 powered Buicks would probably be from '71--

Centurion:

Electra:

and of course, the Riviera..

I love the size and styling of that year of big GMs. Pointy.

Edited November 7, 2010 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[balthazar]

Centurion was a decent continuation of the Century/ Invicta/ WIldcat spot in the Buick catalog, but my issue when you get into the early '70s is gross stylistic overlap:

Cripes- just move the parking lights & change the grille texture, otherwise- same design !!

In this, the car become generic to me because the lines begin to blurr so badly.

It's not to say that they're ugly (they're certainly not)- but the soul began draining in '71...

Riviera, of course, was fantastic.

Edited November 7, 2010 by balthazar

[A Horse With No Name]

I remember Rivieras running around town when I was a kid...I miss those days....

But yes, the fullsize early seventies GM cars were fantastic also, I really like the idea of a fullsize two door, the likes of which we will never see built again....

[Paolino]

I remember Rivieras running around town when I was a kid...I miss those days....

But yes, the fullsize early seventies GM cars were fantastic also, I really like the idea of a fullsize two door, the likes of which we will never see built again....

Haha, well, when I was in high school, all I wanted was a Mark VIII... and it's funny--I would never buy a coupe, but because it was so large, it was okay

[Robert Hall]

The '71 Buick front end reminds me a bit of the '70 Impala..similar grille placement, bumper shape, hood shape..

It's amazing to think about how many bodystyles, models, etc were introduced for 1971 w/ the redesign of the B-, C- and E- bodies with distinct sheetmetal (other than some roofs (rooves?)..across 5 divisions with distinct engine choices, etc.

It's just staggering to contemplate, compared to a world like today where a new model is usually only one bodystyle and then it doesn't change much for 4-6 years.

[ocnblu]

Doesn't it stand to reason that it would be advantageous for a car maker to trim the number of platforms and make more variations on each platform? I'd be interested in knowing profit per unit in realtime dollars, GM 1959 v. GM 2010. In 1959 we had a B, C and probably D body that were all closely related. We had a pickup, medium-duty truck which probably shared a cab with the pickup and a Corvette. And the market was covered to great success.

How did this way of doing business lose favor? Gamma, Delta, Epsilon, Alpha, Zeta, Theta, Lambda, Optimus Prime... where does it all end? It's all Greek to me.

[A Horse With No Name]

Doesn't it stand to reason that it would be advantageous for a car maker to trim the number of platforms and make more variations on each platform? I'd be interested in knowing profit per unit in realtime dollars, GM 1959 v. GM 2010. In 1959 we had a B, C and probably D body that were all closely related. We had a pickup, medium-duty truck which probably shared a cab with the pickup and a Corvette. And the market was covered to great success.

How did this way of doing business lose favor? Gamma, Delta, Epsilon, Alpha, Zeta, Theta, Lambda, Optimus Prime... where does it all end? It's all Greek to me.

And all greek to car buyers also, unfortunately.

[SAmadei]

The '71 Buick front end reminds me a bit of the '70 Impala..similar grille placement, bumper shape, hood shape..

Cool photo. That is nearly identical to the Impala my paternal parents had. Not sure if it was a 4 hardtop sedan or a pillared sedan, though. Not sure if the Impala was available as a pillared sedan now that I think of it.

It's amazing to think about how many bodystyles, models, etc were introduced for 1971 w/ the redesign of the B-, C- and E- bodies with distinct sheetmetal (other than some roofs (rooves?)..across 5 divisions with distinct engine choices, etc.

It's just staggering to contemplate, compared to a world like today where a new model is usually only one bodystyle and then it doesn't change much for 4-6 years.

It is staggering to contemplate. And not only the bodystyles, sheetmetal and yearly changes, but the fact that you could a car ordered to your exact specs... even things not available on the menu (Plum Crazy '70 Nova SS, for example). This was before fully computerized inventory was possible, so all those parts needed to be accurately predicted and warehoused. Detroit in the '60s was truly a impressive operation.

I realize that federal regulations and economics has made a lot of this impossible... but I feel Detroit has gotten lazy, too (Same with Japan)... I feel, with the improvements in computers and JIT inventory/logistics, I feel GM could provide a lot more individualization... body styles, special options, colors... and while it may be a small hit to the bottom line, it would reward them with more sales, and loyalty.

[SAmadei]

And all greek to car buyers also, unfortunately.

Agreed. Why do we need 5 boring 4 door sedans each 6" apart (or less) in length. To me, a car buyer is looking for big... or small. Give them the most car you can fit in that footprint.

[balthazar]

Cubitar ~ >>"The '71 Buick front end reminds me a bit of the '70 Impala..similar grille placement, bumper shape, hood shape.."<<

My pic link broke, but look at the '71 Impy- in twilight at 20 paces, you wouldn't be able to tell them apart.

>>"It's amazing to think about how many bodystyles, models, etc were introduced for 1971 w/ the redesign of the B-, C- and E- bodies with distinct sheetmetal (other than some roofs (rooves?)..across 5 divisions with distinct engine choices, etc."<<

Well, this is really no different that the years recently preceeding, but I'll stick to my impression that the stylistic distinctions become notably muddy starting in '71 or thereabouts. GM Styling thought they could spread some lightly-fuzzed Cadillac cues to Chevrolet because of the price differences (Chevy Chevy, it's always Chevy that screws with a good plan ), and Buick & Olds kind of averaged out between the 2. At least Pontiac retained clear stylistic independence... relatively.

ocnblu ~ >>"Doesn't it stand to reason that it would be advantageous for a car maker to trim the number of platforms and make more variations on each platform? I'd be interested in knowing profit per unit in realtime dollars, GM 1959 v. GM 2010."<<

Some (myself included) have advocated doing this, and in fact feel it's inevitable (contraction of models). The ever-increasing competition, the depressed economy... if they alone keep up over the next decade, you'll HAVE to see this happen.

>>"In 1959 we had a B, C and probably D body that were all closely related. We had a pickup, medium-duty truck which probably shared a cab with the pickup and a Corvette. And the market was covered to great success."<<

Note tho that there was but 1 D-Body, the Series 75 Cadillac limousine, but point made. Yes- light & medium-duty trucks shared the same cabs. It has to come full circle- ESP with the costs of bringing one model to market- the business case for making a profit on Car X, Platform Y has to be getting thinner & thinner.

Edited November 7, 2010 by balthazar

[ocnblu]

Let's trim it down to Delta, Alpha (with compact pickup and SUV variants, along with the gamut of car styles) and Zeta for cars and a full-size truck platform.

Delta hatch (2 and 4 door), coupe, sedan, wagon, MPV, CUV. Split the bodystyles up among Chevy and Buick.

Alpha premium roadster (Corvette), coupe, sedan and convertible Cadillac. Alpha premium SUV, Cadillac.

Alpha volume coupe, convertible, sedan and wagon, Chevy and Buick.

Alpha pickup, small van and SUV, Chevy and GMC.

Zeta sedan short, Chevy and Buick.

Zeta sedan long, Cadillac.

Full-size truck platform, Chevy and GMC vans, SUVs and pickups.

Edited November 7, 2010 by ocnblu

[Robert Hall]

Let's trim it down to Delta, Alpha (with compact pickup and SUV variants, along with the gamut of car styles) and Zeta for cars and a full-size truck platform.

Delta hatch (2 and 4 door), coupe, sedan, wagon, MPV, CUV. Split the bodystyles up among Chevy and Buick.

Alpha premium roadster (Corvette), coupe, sedan and convertible Cadillac. Alpha premium SUV, Cadillac.

Alpha volume coupe, convertible, sedan and wagon, Chevy and Buick.

Alpha pickup, small van and SUV, Chevy and GMC.

Zeta sedan short, Chevy and Buick.

Zeta sedan long, Cadillac.

Full-size truck platform, Chevy and GMC vans and pickups.

Got to have Epsilon II in there for the FWD mainstreamers..

[A Horse With No Name]

I like the way this is shaping up in your mind, 'blu.