It occurred to us recently that while we’ve written about the 1963-1965 Riviera and the controversial 1971–1973 “boattail,” we keep skipping over the second generation of Buick’s sporty personal luxury coupe. However, the second-generation Riviera outsold its predecessor and its successor combined — also dispatching its groundbreaking Oldsmobile Toronado cousin for good measure. In this installment of Ate Up With Motor, we take a closer look at the 1966 Buick Riviera.
The years from 1957 to 1970 were a curiously bipolar era for General Motors technologically: a fascinating, exciting, and sometimes puzzling mixture of bleeding-edge innovation and dogged adherence to the tried and true. On one hand, the corporation dabbled in everything from air suspension to rear transaxles, some of which would still have been impressive 20 years later. On the other hand, GM often abandoned those ideas almost as quickly as it introduced them. With rare exceptions, there was little on GM’s bread-and-butter products that would have puzzled a mechanic of the late 1930s.
Of all the many production car and truck models GM offered between 1957 and 1970, only five strayed from the familiar pattern of front-engine, rear-wheel drive, and live rear axle (the Corvair, the Pontiac Tempest, the Corvette Sting Ray, the Oldsmobile Toronado, and the 1967-1970 Cadillac Eldorado). Only four GM cars sold in the U.S. during this period offered fewer than six cylinders — two, if we discount imports from Vauxhall and Opel — and none had more than eight. GM’s wilder innovations, like turbocharging and triple turbine automatic transmissions, were seldom offered by more than two divisions at a time and often lasted only a few years.
To see the reasons for that schizophrenia, we need look no farther than GM’s 1966 E-body coupes, the Oldsmobile Toronado and the Buick Riviera (and their Cadillac cousin, the FWD Eldorado). The Toronado is widely considered a landmark automobile; not only was it the first American production car in nearly 30 years with front-wheel drive, its tidy “Unitized Power Package” managed to integrate FWD and big block V8 power in a way experts had insisted was impossible. By comparison, the conventionally engineered Riviera seems almost banal. However, far from being the lesser car, the second-generation Riviera was actually superior in a number of meaningful ways. This is its story.
REPLACING THE RIVIERA
There’s a common misconception among automotive enthusiasts (and some automotive historians) that the moves automakers make from year to year are in direct response to market reaction: that the shape and features of next year’s model is dictated by customer response to this year’s car.
The reality is that as much as automakers would like to respond that quickly to the public mood, the lead times involved in production tooling make it largely impossible. Even in the days before safety and emissions regulations, a major redesign usually took at least two years and involved a lot of expensive overtime, so for better or worse, automotive stylists, engineers, and executives of that era were often developing successors for models that had not yet gone on sale.
Among the few exceptions was the emerging personal luxury genre created by the four-seat Ford Thunderbird. Because such cars were produced in comparatively small numbers, their production runs were longer than those of most family sedans (until 1970, the Thunderbird was on a three-year cycle) and annual facelifts were typically modest. The designers of personal luxury cars were still stuck with the same basic shape for the full production run, but they at least had the luxury of considering public response to the current model before finalizing its replacement.
We must admit that we were not able to track down a lot of detailed information on the styling development of the 1966 Buick Riviera, but based on the chronology of its Toronado counterpart, we can make an educated guess that work began in early to mid-1962, months before the 1963 Riviera went on sale. If so, development began under the direction of Bernard N. Smith, then Buick chief stylist, but most accounts credit the design to stylist David R. Holls, who had been Charles M. Jordan’s assistant at Cadillac from 1957 to 1960, working on the 1959–1961 Cadillacs, and then in the Chevrolet studio until he moved to Buick in 1961. Holls would succeed Smith as head of the Buick studio in 1963.
As we’ve previously discussed, the first Riviera did not originate in the Buick studio at all; it was developed by Ned Nickles (who, it must be said, had previously been Buick’s chief stylist) in a separate special projects studio, under the personal direction of styling vice president William L. Mitchell. The design was inspired both by the 1939–1940 LaSalle, which Mitchell had developed during his tenure as Cadillac chief stylist in the late 1930s, and the razor-edged roofline of a Hooper-bodied Rolls-Royce Mitchell had spotted on a trip to London.
Buick stylists apparently decided the sharply creased look of the original Riviera didn’t have legs (although Mitchell remained infatuated with the theme, which reemerged a decade later as the “sheer look” of the 1976 Cadillac Seville). According to later interviews with Chuck Jordan, then a GM design director, even Holls’ early sketches went in a different direction, with a sleeker, more voluptuous shape and a rakish semi-fastback roof instead of the 1963 car’s angular notchback. (Holls, for his part, described the second-generation Riviera as a natural evolution of its predecessor.)
The design that emerged was quite sporty-looking, although it was bigger than the 1963–1965 Riviera in almost every dimension. With its kicked-up rear fenders and the pronounced “W” shape of its front end, the new Riviera also bore a stronger relationship to Buick’s forthcoming 1966 intermediate and full-size lines — probably an important consideration in its design.
THE TORONADO CONNECTION
Another factor in the development of the new model was pressure from senior corporate management to make wider use of the Riviera’s body shell. The first-generation Riviera would be basically sui generis; its chassis and running gear were similar to full-size Buicks’, but the body was shared with no other GM car. In General Motors’ thinking, that was an expensive luxury. The Riviera’s body was no less expensive to tool or build than that of the sedans, but the cost had to be amortized over a much smaller production run (in this case, 112,544 units over three model years). Although the Riviera was one of the top Buick models, Buick did not charge a substantial premium for it; the Riviera was priced within $35 of an Electra 225 convertible. As a result, the Riviera was probably less profitable than it might otherwise have been.
GM’s usual answer to that problem was to share basic body shells across models and between divisions, a strategy the corporation had adopted back in the early 1930s. By the summer of 1962, months before the 1963 Riviera went on sale, Edward N. Cole, group vice president of GM’s car and truck group (and formerly general manager of Chevrolet), was pushing for Oldsmobile and Cadillac to introduce their own personal luxury coupes, sharing the “E-body” shell of the next-generation Riviera. This was not a popular decision: Cadillac (at least according to Chuck Jordan) was not terribly interested while both Bill Mitchell and Oldsmobile management wanted the Olds entry to use the smaller A-body intermediate platform. However, Cole insisted, presumably on financial grounds.
While the basic proportions and fixed dimensions of the E-body would be dictated by Buick — in late 1962 and early 1963, the Advanced studio and Oldsmobile’s own designers adapted the Olds design to fit the Buick “package” — Cole wanted Buick and Cadillac to share Oldsmobile’s mechanical layout, which was to include front-wheel drive. (As explained in our Toronado article, Oldsmobile had originally wanted to use FWD in one of its sedan lines, but senior management had balked at the cost.) The engineering development of the FWD package and its associated pieces (including a unique powertrain subframe and new front and rear suspensions) was to be divided between the three divisions, under the direction of the corporate Engineering staff.
Buick general manager Edward D. Rollert decided early on that Buick neither needed nor wanted front-wheel drive. Rollert had arrived at Buick in April 1959, following several disastrous years caused in part by quality issues and reliability problems with new technology like the ill-fated Flight Pitch Dynaflow transmission. He was well aware that he had been appointed to clean house at Buick, and we assume he was understandably reluctant to go down that road again. Buick would still contribute to the engineering of the FWD package, most notably by designing and manufacturing the Unitized Power Package’s slim planetary differential, but Rollert convinced Cole to allow the new Riviera to retain rear-wheel drive and adapt the cruciform frame of the first-generation cars to the new shell.
That decision would make the Riviera and Toronado perhaps the most distinct of any of GM’s shared-platform models. It was common in that era for each division’s version of the corporate body shells to have its own frame, engine, and even transmissions, but the Riviera and Toronado would not only have completely different drivetrain layouts — they would also have different structures. The Toronado (and the 1967 Eldorado) had a semi-unitized body carrying the powertrain and front suspension on a long subframe that ended just ahead of the rear suspension; the Riviera, despite sharing significant portions of the Toronado’s body shell, had a separate, self-supporting chassis.
That chassis was another anomaly. Other than the big Cadillac Series Seventy-Five limousines, the Riviera’s was the last of GM’s X-frames, with no side rails. Buick had adopted the cruciform frame for its full-size models in 1961, creating a similar version for the 1963—1965 Riviera, but Buick was about to phase out that design for its big cars, which went to a perimeter frame for 1965.
Aside from their obvious differences, the perimeter and cruciform frames represented completely different chassis engineering philosophies. Where the perimeter frame was deliberately flexible, allowing it to absorb vibration and road harshness, the cruciform frame was intended to be self-supporting. We suspect Buick’s main rationale for keeping the older frame was that it was already paid for, but combining it with the quasi-unitized E-body shell made the Riviera exceptionally stout. Remarkably, the Riviera was also 250 lb (113 kg) lighter than a Toronado Deluxe.
In other respects, the 1966 Riviera would be largely conventional. Suspension was little changed from the 1963–1965 cars, featuring coil springs all around, unequal length A-arms and an anti-roll bar up front, and a live axle located by three trailing links and a Panhard rod. The drivetrain was also carryover: Buick’s familiar 425 cu. in. (6,970 cc) “Nailhead” V-8 linked to the excellent three-speed Super Turbine 400 (a.k.a. Turbo Hydra-Matic), which Buick introduced in 1964. One welcome returning feature was Buick’s big 12-inch (305mm) brakes, finned aluminum in front (with iron wear surfaces) and finned cast iron in back. They were not discs, which Buick wouldn’t offer until 1967, but as drum brakes went, Buick’s were among the best in the business.
The 1966 Riviera’s only really novel engineering feature was its windows. Along with the Toronado, the Buick Riviera was the first postwar GM car to abandon the Fisher No-Draft Venti-Planes introduced back in 1933. In their place was a modern flow-through ventilation system that Buick called Circulaire, exhausting cabin air through slots below the backlight. The loss of vent windows was controversial even within GM and would be often criticized in the years to come, but it started an industry trend.
THE EXECUTIVE PONY CAR: 1966 BUICK RIVIERA
The 1966 Buick Riviera made its public debut on September 22, 1965, and went on sale on October 14. By then, it had rather large shoes to fill: While it had not threatened the sales dominance of the Thunderbird (which had outsold the Buick by more than 2 to 1 in 1964 and 1965), the first-generation Riviera had been the clear favorite of the motoring press. The Riviera, particularly with the optional Gran Sport package introduced for 1965, fit perfectly into an automotive journalist’s fantasies of the good life, being sharp-looking, luxurious, fast, and (at least with the optional heavy-duty suspension) reasonably nimble.
The new Riviera was inevitably overshadowed by the Toronado, whose novel engineering captured a stack of press awards, but critical response to the Buick was nonetheless positive. The press was not thrilled with the new Riviera’s larger dimensions or with its 150-odd pounds (67 kg) of extra weight, but the revamped Riviera garnered much praise for its handsome styling.
Contemporary reviews of the 1966 Riviera’s performance must be carefully qualified because it appears that most, if not all, of Buick’s press fleet had the $176.82 Gran Sport package (which included stiffer suspension, a limited-slip differential, and a shorter, 3.42 axle ratio), the optional quick-ratio steering (a nominal $15.79 extra), and the dealer-installed Super Wildcat engine with two four-barrel Carter AFB carburetors and 360 gross horsepower (269 kW), 20 hp (15 kW) more than the standard four-barrel engine setup. Those options were really rather rare in the wild (fewer than 15% of buyers ordered the GS option) and the Riviera’s performance and handling in standard form were somewhat less impressive. The standard springs, for example, were about 40% softer than those of the GS, with a predictable effect on body control and handling.
Even with all the performance options installed, the new Riviera’s acceleration and braking suffered a bit — the 1966 Riviera was heavier than the ’65 and had the same powertrain, brakes, and tires. Nonetheless, the Riviera remained quite quick, capable of 0-60 mph (0-97 km/h) in a bit over 8 seconds and a top speed of more than 120 mph (193 km/h). From the few tests of cars with the standard engine, it appears the second carburetor did little for performance at lower speeds, but added about 3 mph (2 km/h) to the Riviera’s quarter mile trap speeds, bringing them to 86–87 mph (138–140 km/h).
On the road, the fast-ratio steering and GS suspension made the 1966 Riviera reasonably agile for its size, although some critics complained that shock damping still left something to be desired and the turning radius was rather ponderous. The Riviera also had decent brakes. While the performance of its finned drums couldn’t match that of the 1966 Thunderbird’s front discs, the Riviera had decent stopping distances and better-than-average fade resistance for an American car of this era.
In sum, the Riviera was a sort of Establishment pony car: It was similar in concept to sporty specialty cars like the Ford Mustang or Chevrolet Camaro (then still a year away), but big enough and plush enough to be driven by and in polite society. If you could adjust to the Riviera’s sheer size, its road manners weren’t far off the pony cars’ and its straight-line performance was as good or better. In fact, in a stoplight drag race, a Riviera owner stood a fair chance of beating a Mustang with the 271 hp (202 kW) 289 cu. in. (4,728 cc) V8 and four-speed manual transmission — and of course the big Nailhead engine and Super Turbine transmission had none of the sturm und drang of Ford’s high-strung K-code 289.
RIVIERA VS. TORONADO
Inevitably, there were comparisons between the 1966 Buick Riviera and its Oldsmobile cousin, which was logical enough, since the two E-cars were not only nearly identical in size, but also competed for the same market.
Surprisingly, despite the Riviera’s comparative lack of sophistication, the Buick came out on top in many respects. The Toronado’s standard V8 had more rated horsepower and torque than even the dual-carb Super Wildcat engine, but less weight, better weight distribution, and (with the GS package) a shorter axle ratio made the Riviera quicker at any legal speed and the Buick’s stopping power was clearly superior. The Toronado had an obvious edge in wet-weather traction, however, and while the Riviera at least theoretically had more dry-pavement cornering power, reviewers who drove the two cars back to back found little to choose between them in the dry, at least without pushing far harder than any buyer was ever likely to.
Inside, the Toronado had the advantage of a flat floor, but this was more a novelty than a real advantage in this class. Some critics preferred the Riviera’s interior treatment; Car Life speculated that Oldsmobile had cut corners on trim to make up for the higher cost of the Toronado’s drivetrain. To top it off, the Riviera cost at least $160 less than the Toronado, although neither was cheap. With every available option, either car was close to $6,000, enough to buy two decently equipped Mustangs.
It was no great surprise, then, that in late 1965, Buick general sales manager Rollie Withers sent an open letter to the press emphatically denying rumors that the Riviera would adopt front-wheel drive. As if to emphasize the point, the Riviera outsold the Toronado, although the margin was fewer than 5,000 units. The Thunderbird still beat them both, but the numbers suggest that Ed Rollert (who had been promoted and replaced as general manager about six months before the Riviera went on sale) had made the right choice in sticking with rear-wheel drive — particularly since some sources suggest each Riviera cost as much as $400 less to build than a Toronado.
The 1966 Buick Riviera outsold its immediate predecessor by around 30%, but that amounted to only about 10,000 units, which was no great feat for an all-new design in a primarily style-driven market segment. The real test came the following year: although the 1967 Riviera looked almost identical to the ’66, sales slipped only 2,549 units. By contrast, sales of the Toronado dropped nearly 50% in its second year.
While the only obvious visual changes to the 1967 Riviera were a new grille and different upholstery patterns, there were several significant mechanical changes. The biggest was an all-new 430 cu. in. (7,041 cc) engine, shared with other full-size Buicks. Developed in part to reduce exhaust emissions, the 430 also had larger valves and better breathing than the old Nailhead, allowing the new engine to match the departed Super Wildcat’s 360 gross horsepower (269 kW) with a single Rochester Quadrajet carburetor. Since the standard Riviera now had a taller 3.07 axle ratio, the average owner was unlikely to notice any difference in performance, although the standard drum brakes were slightly improved to match the bigger engine.
The other big change was that big four-piston front discs were now optional for an extra $78.94, although very few buyers ordered them, probably in part because the disc brakes were not compatible with Buick’s popular and attractive chromed steel wheels. Riviera GS buyers could now order H70-15 Firestone Wide Oval tires or, from early 1967, 225R15 radials. Either choice was a great improvement over the standard 8.45 x 15 tires.
For 1968, the Riviera (and the Toronado) received a more substantial facelift. It was again the work of Dave Holls, although Donald Lasky replaced Holls as Buick chief stylist before the ’68 models debuted.
Like the 1968 Toronado, the revamped Riviera featured a new front-end treatment with a big (and to our eyes, somewhat ungainly looking) wraparound bumper, a split grille, and a longer hood that concealed the windshield wipers. Except for new bodyside moldings, the new Riviera’s profile was largely unchanged, but the nose job and new rear bumper left the 1968 car 4.3 inches (109 mm) longer and noticeably heavier than its predecessor. (Factory shipping weight rose only 33 lb (15 kg), but publications that actually weighed their test cars found curb weights up by more than 100 lb (45 kg).)
The GS package remained available, although as before, it appealed to only 10-11% of Riviera buyers. Buick also offered nothing to match the Toronado’s 400 hp (298 kW) W30 option. Otherwise, the 1968 Riviera had few mechanical changes beyond some minor geometry changes to the rear suspension and of course the various safety features required by new federal regulations. Still, buyers apparently liked the Riviera’s new look, as 1968 sales rose almost by 6,500 units.
Changes to the 1969 Riviera were against modest, including a slightly different grille and a new steering wheel. The big engineering news was minor features buyers were unlikely to notice, such as an electric fuel pump. Most of the new features were shared by Buick’s full-size cars, including variable-rate power steering and revised front suspension geometry that Buick proudly christened Accu-Drive. Accu-Drive allowed the front wheels to lose a little bit of camber in response to bumps, improving stability at the cost of a slight increase in the Riviera’s already-heavy understeer.
Car Life‘s editors, who were deeply skeptical, admitted that Accu-Drive performed as advertised, but judged the handling of their (non-GS) Riviera test car somewhat inferior to that of the 1969 Thunderbird tested in the same issue. Admittedly, that conclusion had less to do with any deficiency of the Riviera than it did with recent suspension improvements for the two-door Thunderbird, which had long been notorious for its marshmallow-like body control.
Even so, the 1969 Riviera’s handling suggested that the model’s executive hot rod days were fast disappearing. An extra 60 lb (27 kg) or so of curb weight didn’t help low-speed performance either. Although the factory shipping weight claimed that the 1969 Riviera was only 19 lb (9 kg) heavier than the 1966 model, Car Life‘s 1969 test car was a hefty 235 lb (107 kg) heavier than their similarly equipped 1966 Riviera GS.
Predictably, most buyers cared not a whit. However much critics (or GM styling executives) may have liked the idea of an oversize luxury pony car or a high-tech engineering showcase, customers seemed more interested in flashy styling, a quiet ride, and pillow-soft suspension. The 1969 Riviera was the first to sell more than 50,000 units — model year production reached 52,872, only 10% of which had the GS option — and the first to outpace the Thunderbird, albeit by only about 3,500 units. The Riviera also left the Toronado for dead, outselling the Oldsmobile by 46%.
THE FINAL FACELIFT
The Riviera and Toronado received a second major facelift for 1970. The styling revamp was fairly extensive and somewhat puzzling, because it would also be short-lived: A third-generation Riviera, designed by Jerry Hirshberg of Buick Studio 2, was already in the works for the 1971 model year, as were a second-generation Toronado and FWD Eldorado.
The rationale for the 1970 makeover is unclear, but we have a lingering suspicion that it was a late decision and that the 1966 E-body shell was originally intended to run for four years, not five. It’s possible that the corporation decided to continue the existing Riviera and Toronado an extra year to make up for disappointing Toronado sales or to allow a four-year run for the Eldorado, which debuted a year later than the others, but if that was the case, why make such a substantial investment in new styling with all-new models only a year away? We have yet to find an authoritative explanation.
In any case, the design for the 1970 Buick Riviera was developed around 1967 under new Buick styling chief Donald Lasky. However, as with the 1963 and 1971 cars, the 1970 reflected the strong influence of Bill Mitchell. Mitchell’s idea was to borrow cues from a prewar Delage, most likely Letourner et Marchand’s spectacular D8-120 Aérosport fastback coupe, an Art Moderne streamliner with a dramatic side sweep that presaged Buick’s later “sweepspear” side trim.
Striking as Marcel Letourner’s original was, its styling themes seemed ill at ease with the Riviera’s flush fenders, serving mainly to make the 1970 Riviera look bulkier than before. The new nose treatment was more successful, wearing its newly exposed quad headlamps far more gracefully than the rather awkward 1970 Toronado, but was also rather anonymous, looking a good deal like Buick’s smaller A-body intermediates.
Under the hood, the 430 cu. in. (7,041 cc) engine was replaced with Buick’s latest 455 cu. in. (7,468 cc) V-8, which superseded both the 430 and the de-bored 400 cu. in. (6,554 cc) V8 previously used on the intermediate GS400. Superficially, the new engine was a 430 with a wider 4 5/16-inch (109.5mm) cylinder bore, but the 455 also had many internal changes, including improved oiling, better water pump seals, and a new coolant recovery system. Gross output rose to 370 horsepower (276 kW) and a whopping 510 lb-ft (691 N-m) of torque, but a taller 2.78 axle ratio on the non-GS model dispelled any illusion that the new Riviera was intended as a performance car. The GS option remained available, but take-up was lower than ever, amounting to only 3,505 cars. (Some sources suggest that the Riviera GS could be ordered with the hotter Stage 1 engine package from the GS455, but even if that was true, we doubt many buyers did so.)
The latest Riviera rated only cursory mention by the automotive press, which seems to have concluded that the Riv was no longer their kind of car. In a 1970 Popular Mechanics survey, even some owners agreed the Riviera wasn’t what it once was, saying they preferred the styling of the 1966–1967 cars. Tellingly, though, most buyer complaints were about the mediocre cargo and rear seat space. As the Riviera became more of a luxury sedan than a big GT, customers expected it to behave like a sedan as well.
Had Buick known when the 1970 Riviera was designed how well the 1968-1969 cars would sell, the division would probably have stood pat for another year. As it was, sales fell 35%, to 37,366. That was still almost 50% better than the still-struggling Toronado, but it was not a great showing in what was otherwise a decent year for Buick.
Although its sporty flair seemed to shrink with each washing, the second-generation Buick Riviera was a solid success, selling 227,669 units in five model years. It only beat the Thunderbird once, but Riviera sales were very close to the combined total of the Toronado and FWD Eldorado (although it must be said that the Eldorado’s lower numbers were mainly due to its deliberately limited production). GM’s accountants undoubtedly also appreciated that the tooling costs of the E-body shell could be amortized over 465,436 cars rather than fewer than 113,000.
While the second-generation Riviera may have been far less innovative than the Toronado in either styling or engineering, it was inarguably a much greater commercial success: the Toronado sold only 143,134 units in five years, less than two-thirds of the Riviera’s volume. The Riviera did have the advantage of an already-established image — when the 1966 Riviera arrived, buyers already knew exactly what a Riviera was and how it fit into the Buick lineup — but even if the Riviera and Toronado had sold equally well, the Riviera would still have been the cheaper to build and probably the more profitable to boot.
With results like that, it’s little wonder that Buick (and GM) didn’t rush to adopt front-wheel drive in this era or that the corporation had an ambivalent attitude toward new technology even when it didn’t have any specific crippling flaws. The Unitized Power Package was very clever and it worked quite well, but it didn’t work dramatically better than a standard rear-drive layout (except in specific areas like wet traction).
Toronado and Eldorado buyers did appreciate their cars’ front-wheel drive, but many Toronado owners wished Oldsmobile would offer it on something other than a big coupe while a lot of Cadillac customers admitted that they were drawn more to the Eldorado’s sharp looks than its mechanical configuration. General Motors was certainly not categorically opposed to novelty, but the corporation was obviously more interested in innovations that would either sell cars or save money and front-wheel drive (in and of itself) did neither.
GM did stay the course with the E-bodies if only to get its money’s worth; the Unitized Power Package survived through 1985. By 1972, the second-generation Toronado was consistently outselling the Riviera — thanks mostly, we suspect, to the new Toro’s pronounced resemblance to the outgoing Eldorado. The Riviera finally adopted front-wheel drive for 1979, when assembly of the E-bodies was consolidated at the GM plant in Linden, New Jersey. The first FWD Riv would be the most successful of all, although it was not until 1984 until it beat the record set by the 1969 Riviera. By then, of course, front-wheel drive was no longer seen as exotic engineering.
With all this talk of corporate psychology, we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that the second-generation Riviera was an exceptionally good-looking design. The later facelifts are not to our tastes, but the 1966-1967 version is quite sharp. Dave Holls said later that it was one of his favorite designs of the sixties and we wholeheartedly agree.
The author would like to thank Kathy Adelson of the GM Media Archive for her assistance with archival images for this story.
NOTES ON SOURCES
Our sources on the development of the Riviera and its E-body siblings included “1961 Buick Analysis,” Motor Life, November 1960 (Vol. 10, No. 4), reprinted in R.M. Clarke, ed., Buick Performance Portfolio 1947-1962 (Cobham, England: Brooklands Books Ltd., ca. 2000), pp. 108-109; “Autocar Road Test Number 2036: Buick Riviera,” Autocar, July 1965, reprinted in R.M. Clarke, ed., Buick Riviera 1963-78 Performance Portfolio (Cobham, England: Brooklands Books Ltd., ca. 2000), pp. 43-48; the Auto Editors of Consumer Guide, “1961-1964 Cadillac” (16 September 2007, HowStuffWorks.com, auto.howstuffworks. com/ 1961-1964-cadillac.htm, accessed 18 June 2012), “1965-1967 Buick Gran Sport” (25 September 2007, HowStuffWorks.com, auto.howstuffworks. com/ 1965-1967-buick-gran-sport.htm, accessed 12 June 2012), “1966-1970 Buick Riviera” (29 October 2007, HowStuffWorks.com, auto.howstuffworks. com/ 1966-1970-buick-riviera.htm, accessed 15 June 2012), and Encyclopedia of American Cars: Over 65 Years of Automotive History (Lincolnwood, IL: Publications International, 1996); Patricia Ward Biederman, “The Man Who Couldn’t Part With a Car Brochure,” Los Angeles Times, 10 January 2002; Ray Bohacz, “Light my fire! 1967 Buick Wildcat 430-cubic-inch V-8,” Hemmings Classic Car #23, August 2006; John R. Bond, “Road Test & Technical Review: 1963 Buick Riviera,” Car Life, October 1962 (Vol. 9, No. 9), reprinted in Clarke, ed., Buick Riviera 1963-78 Performance Portfolio, pp. 6-11; Jim Brokaw, “Almost a Limousine,” Motor Trend, December 1970 (Vol. 22, No. 12), reprinted in ibid, pp. 103-107; Arch Brown, “1966 Thunderbird: ‘Big Bird,'” Special Interest Autos #106, July-August 1988, reprinted in Terry Ehrich, ed., The Hemmings Motor News Book of Postwar Fords (Bennington, VT: Hemmings Motor News, 2000), pp. 120-127; “Buick Riviera,” Car and Driver, October 1969 (Vol. 15, No. 4), reprinted in R.M. Clarke, ed., Buick Muscle Cars 1963-1973 (Cobham, England: Brooklands Books Ltd., ca. 2001), p. 99; “Buick Riviera,” World Automotive, 1968, reprinted in Clarke, ed., Buick Riviera 1963-78 Performance Portfolio, p. 96; “Buick Riviera: beauty only skin deep?” Road Test, July 1966, reprinted in ibid, pp. 64-69; “Buick Riviera Gran Sport,” Car and Driver, June 1965 (Vol. 10, No. 12), reprinted in ibid, pp. 38-42; “Buick Riviera GS,” Car and Driver, August 1966 (Vol. 12, No. 2), reprinted in Clarke, ed., Buick Muscle Cars 1963-1973, pp. 56-59; “Car and Driver Road Research Report: Buick Riviera,” Car and Driver, December 1963 (Vol. 9, No. 6), reprinted in Clarke, ed., Buick Riviera 1963-78 Performance Portfolio, pp. 23-29 and 55; “Car Life Road Test: Chevrolet Impala SS,” Car Life March 1965 (Vol. 11, No. 6), reprinted in Impala & SS Muscle Portfolio 1958-1972, ed. R.M. Clarke (Cobham, England: Brooklands Books Ltd., ca. 1996), pp. 71–75; “Car Life Road Test: 1965 Ford Thunderbird,” Car Life, November 1964 (Vol. 11, No. 2), reprinted in R.M. Clarke, ed., Thunderbird Performance Portfolio 1964-1976 (Cobham, England: Brooklands Books Ltd., ca. 2000), pp. 37-41; “Car Life Road Test: Buick LeSabre 400: A Budget-Priced, Conservative Luxury Car,” Car Life, January 1965 (Vol. 11, No. 12), reprinted in Clarke, ed., Buick Muscle Cars 1963-1973, pp. 33-37; “Car Life Road Test: Oldsmobile Toronado,” Car Life, February 1966 (Vol. 12, No. 5), reprinted in R.M. Clarke, ed., Oldsmobile Muscle Portfolio 1964-1971, pp. 43-47; “Car Life Road Test: Riviera Gran Sport,” Car Life, February 1966 (Vol. 13, No. 1), reprinted in Clarke, ed., Buick Riviera 1963-78 Performance Portfolio, pp. 56-61; “Car Life Road Test: Riviera: A Superb Combination of Styling, Performance, Ride and Comfort,” Car Life, November 1967 (Vol. 14, No. 10), reprinted in ibid, pp. 85-89; “Car Life Road Test: Riviera for the Freeways,” Car Life, February 1969 (Vol. 16, No. 1), reprinted in ibid, pp. 91-95; “Cars Road Test: Buick’s Riviera GS Is the Grandest Sport of Them All!” Cars, October 1967, reprinted in Clarke, ed., Buick Muscle Cars 1963-1973, pp. 75-78 and 105; “Driving the Hot ’67s: Buick Riviera,” Motor Trend, October 1966 (Vol. 18, No. 10), reprinted in Clarke, ed., Buick Riviera 1963-78 Performance Portfolio, p. 77; “Cole, Edward N.,” Generations of GM, GM Heritage Center, no date, history.gmheritagecenter. com, accessed 22 June 2012; Terry B. Dunham and Lawrence R. Gustin, The Buick: A Complete History (An Automobile Quarterly Magnificent Marque Book), Third Edition (Kurtztown, PA: Automobile Quarterly, 1987); Jim Dunne and Jan P. Norbye, Buick 1946-1978: The Classic Postwar Years (Osceola, WI: MBI, Inc./Motorbooks International, 1978, 1993, Second Edition); John Ethridge, “5 Luxury Specialty Cars,” Motor Trend, August 1967 (Vol. 19, No. 7), reprinted in Clarke, ed., Buick Riviera 1963-78 Performance Portfolio, pp. 78-83; Darwin Falk and Ray Knott, “What is a Gran Sport/G.S./Stage 1?” The Riview, rivowners. org, accessed 11 June 2012; Craig Fitzgerald, “The Lost Riv: 1966-1970 Buick Riviera,” Hemmings Motor News, January 2010; John Gunnell, ed., Standard Catalog of American Cars 1946-1975 Revised 4th Edition (Iola, WI: Krause Publications, 2002); Bill Hartford, “Too Rough a Ride for the Soft Life,” Popular Mechanics, July 1969 (Vol. 131, No. 7), pp. 122-125; Tim Howley, “driveReport: 1958 Thunderbird: Flying Off in a New Direction,” Special Interest Autos #151, January-February 1996, reprinted in Ehrich, ed., The Hemmings Motor News Book of Postwar Fords, pp. 86-94; John F. Katz, “SIA comparisonReport: 1966 Oldsmobile Toronado vs. 1967 Cadillac Eldorado: The Front Line of Front-Wheel Drive,” Special Interest Autos #168, November-December 1998, reprinted in Terry Ehrich, ed., The Hemmings Motor News Book of Cadillacs (Hemmings Motor News Collector-Car Books) (Bennington, VT: Hemmings Motor News, 2000), pp. 110-119; Steve Kelly, “Mister Muscle of 1970,” Hot Rod, November 1969 (Vol. 22, No. 11), reprinted in Clarke, Buick Muscle Cars 1963-1973, pp. 96-98; Ray Knott, “Evolution of the Riviera – 1966,” The Riview, July-August 2002 (Vol. 18, No. 5); “Evolution of the Riviera – 1967,” The Riview, September-October 2002 (Vol. 18, No. 6); “Evolution of the Riviera – 1968,” The Riview, November-December 2002 (Vol. 18, No. 7); “Evolution of the Riviera – 1969,” The Riview, January-February 2003 (Vol. 18, No. 8); and “Evolution of the Riviera – 1970,” The Riview, March-April 2003 (Vol. 18, No. 9), rivowners. org, accessed 11 June 2012; David LaChance, “Buyer’s Guide: 1966-’67 Buick Riviera GS,” Hemmings Muscle Machines #34, July 2006; Michael Lamm, “PM Owners Report: Buick Riviera,” Popular Mechanics, September 1970 (Vol. 134, No. 3), pp. 96- 99, “The Car You Wear: 1963 Buick Riviera,” Special Interest Autos #33 (March-April 1976), reprinted in Terry Ehrich, ed., The Hemmings Book of Buicks (Hemmings Motor News Collector-Car Books) (Bennington, VT: Hemmings Motor News, 2001), pp. 94-100, “Toronado Owners Really Dig FWD but say Gas Mileage a Bummer,” Popular Mechanics, June 1970 (Vol. 133, No. 6), pp. 118-121, and “Toro & Cord: So different and yet so much alike!” Special Interest Autos #35, July-August 1976, reprinted in Terry Ehrich, ed., The Hemmings Book of Oldsmobiles (Bennington, VT: Hemmings Motor News, 2001), pp. 100-107; Michael Lamm and Dave Holls, Century of Automotive Style: 100 Years of American Car Design (Stockton, CA: Lamm-Morada Publishing Co. Inc., 1997), pp. 181-184; Richard M. Langworth, James M. Flammang, and the Auto Editors of Consumer Guide, Great American Cars of the ’60s (Lincolnwood, IL: Publications International Ltd., 1992); “Letourneur & Marchand Delage D8-120 Aerosport Coupe” (no date, Coachbuild , coachbuild. com, accessed 24 June 2012); Matthew Litwin, “Clamshell Elegance,” Hemmings Motor News, June 2007; Robert McVay, “Buick Riviera GS Road Test,” Motor Trend, February 1966 (Vol. 18, No. 1), reprinted in Clarke, ed., Buick Riviera 1963-78 Performance Portfolio, pp. 62-63, and “Mustang Road Test: Ford’s top-performance Mustang has quarter-horse agility, race-horse stamina, show-horse style,” Motor Trend, August 1964 (Vol. 16, No. 8), pp. 44-49; “Oldsmobile Toronado: The Most Carefully Engineered and Thoroughly Tested Car,” Car Life, November 1965 (Vol. 12, No. 2), pp. 28-37; Productioncars.com, Book of Automobile Production and Sales Figures, 1945-2005; “Riviera Gran Sport,” Road & Track, February 1966 (Vol. 17, No. 6), reprinted in Clarke, ed., Buick Muscle Cars 1963-1973, pp. 44-47; “Car Life Road Test: 1965 Ford Thunderbird,” Car Life, November 1964 (Vol. 11, No. 2), reprinted in Clarke, ed., Thunderbird Performance Portfolio 1964-1976, pp. 37-41; “Toronado vs. Riviera,” Cars, September 1966, reprinted in Clarke, ed., Buick Riviera 1963-78 Performance Portfolio, pp. 70-76; C. Van Tune, “Retrospect: Riviera: 1963–1973 Buick Riviera,” Motor Trend Vol. 46, No. 1 (January 1994), reprinted in ibid, pp. 130–132; Daniel Vaughan, “1936 Delage D8-120” (2007, 2010, Conceptcarz.com, www.conceptcarz. com, accessed 24 June 2012); a comment from stylist John Houlihan on “Buick Riviera Boattail 1971 1972 1973” (18 July 2000, Buick-Riviera.com, www.buick-riviera. com/ houlihan_history.html, accessed 13 June 2013); and a letter by John Houlihan to the editors of Collectible Automobile, reprinted with permission by Gary Smith in “Who Designed the ’71 Boattail Riviera?” (25 July 2010, Dean’s Garage, deansgarage. com/ 2010/ who-designed-the-%E2%80%9971-boattail-riveria/, accessed 13 June 2013).
- Das Boattail: The 1971–1973 Buick Riviera
- Gaudy but Glamorous: 1958–1966 Ford Thunderbird
- Take Me to Your Style Leader: The 1938–1942 Cadillac Sixty Special
- Out in Front: The Front-Wheel-Drive Oldsmobile Toronado, Part 1
- This Time, It’s Personal: The 1967-1970 Cadillac Eldorado
- Wouldn’t You Really Rather: A Brief History of the Buick Gran Sport