1963 Riviera questions

[Guest carguyforsure]

I have a late model year 1963 Riviera that has a 1964 engine and transmission. There are also several 1964 trim pieces on the car. I was told that these were factory installed. I tried to check on the possibility that this was the case, but I can't verify the story. Does anybody know if it is possible?

[Rusty_OToole]

Check the serial number or see if you can get the records of the car from Buick. I believe they used to sell this info for $35. If your car was made late in the model year it is possible it got some parts scheduled for the next year model. It happens, especially on low production models like Riviera.

[John_S_in_Penna]

Don't let anyone's well-meaning "advice" compel you to

change those items.  I know the owner of a late-1953

Packard Caribbean that is all original.  Interestingly,

it has some 1954 Caribbean components, including

a 1954 Continental kit and a 1954 interior.

[joe_padavano]

Advice or not, the story of late model year discrepancies is told frequently, and it's usually BS.  The reality is that by the 1960s GM spent a lot of time and money on controlling vehicle configuration and did not haphazardly install unintended parts. Later model year parts did not magically show up on the assembly line.  If there was a factory-authorized configuration change late in the model year, factory documents were created to substantiate that and allow the manufacturing planners to assure the right parts got to the assembly line.  These documents  would be engineering drawings (such as those found in the Product Information Manuals) and Technical Service Bulletins for the dealership service departments.  Such changes would also be documented in the factory parts books.  The material exists to prove or disprove this.  Research is required.

[Rusty_OToole]

Joe you are quite right. They did not install random parts on the assembly line. But they did make running changes that were documented as you say. That is why I suggested he get the build records from Buick and find out exactly what his car had on it.

 

Have also noticed that when manufacturers  have a new transmission or other improvement they often phase it in on an expensive, lower production model like Cadillac or Chrysler Imperial first. In some cases several months, or a year before the cheaper mass produced models. So it makes sense that if such changes were made, and I am not saying they were, that Buick's Riviera might be one of the first to get them.

[joe_padavano]

44 minutes ago, Rusty_OToole said:

Joe you are quite right. They did not install random parts on the assembly line. But they did make running changes that were documented as you say. That is why I suggested he get the build records from Buick and find out exactly what his car had on it.

 

Which is also what I said. The point is, these would not be "1964" parts.  They would be 1963 "second design" or some such nomenclature in the factory documentation. It's also rare (though not completely unheard of) for such changes to be made late in the model year, as it would have been much more cost effective to just wait until model year changeover.

 

I have no idea how easy it is to get records from Buick (I know that they don't exist for Oldsmobiles of that vintage).  In any case, simply looking at readily available TSBs and a contemporary parts book should answer the question.

Edited November 4, 2016 by joe_padavano (see edit history)

[emjay]

Perhaps GM was well disciplined but AMC was not.  I had a new 74 Hornet with a 75 color and grille purchased off the lot in September 1974, titled as a 74.  BTW, it replaced a 74 Hornet purchase at the end of August in 73.  Both cars were on the lot and there are very distinct differences between 73, 74, and 75.

[joe_padavano]

3 minutes ago, emjay said:

Perhaps GM was well disciplined but AMC was not.  I had a new 74 Hornet with a 75 color and grille purchased off the lot in September 1974, titled as a 74.  BTW, it replaced a 74 Hornet purchase at the end of August in 73.  Both cars were on the lot and there are very distinct differences between 73, 74, and 75.

 

Well, the question was about GM, not AMC or Packard.  Smaller automakers may have done different things.  One thing GM was (and is) really good at is bureaucracy and rigid enforcement of rules, especially if it means increased profit.  I've talked to folks who worked the assembly line for Oldsmobile at Lansing in the 1960s, and they state very unambiguously that there was NO "end of year" parts shenanigans, period.  They recounted the process in place to prevent such an occurrence.

[sean1997]

The car in question is not a late model year car, but built in the first half of the model year:

 

http://www.teambuick.com/forums/showthread.php?26290-1963-Riviera-questions&p=102770#post102770

[cheezestaak2000]

the good general often has had an ooops. in the mid 70's part of my job was to check in the oldsmobiles as they came off the car carrier. once found a 1978 cutlass with a complete buick regal interior. that's how it came in, and that's how it went out.

 

[padgett]

Thought 63-64 had a Dynaflow trans and 65 THM400. Thread in link mentions a 400. THM400 in a 63 is probably a bolt in and worthwhile improvement (3 speed vs 2) but not stock

[sean1997]

1963 was the last year for the Dynaflow.

[TexRiv_63]

I suggest you crosspost this in the Buick Riviera forum here, the ROA group are the experts and should be able to help. If the car is midyear production my guess would be that it was not factory built that way but rather modified somewhere along the way.

[joe_padavano]

15 hours ago, padgett said:

Thought 63-64 had a Dynaflow trans and 65 THM400. Thread in link mentions a 400. THM400 in a 63 is probably a bolt in and worthwhile improvement (3 speed vs 2) but not stock

64 had the Super Turbine 400, which was a TH400 with a Nailhead bellhousing.

[padgett]

Thank you, learned something, guess I always fixated on the 65 because was closest to the original design. Did the ST400 have the switch-pitch ?