1969 Riviera Fan Shroud Issue

[Ferris]

I have a 69 riviera. Its been running hot and has no fan shroud. I purchased one through OPGI. The problem is the fitment is really odd. It has the tabs at the bottom where the shroud can rest. However, on the top there is absolutely nothing to attach to. There are no holes on the top of the shroud. Has anyone purchased this shroud through OPGI or restoparts. Its the common refabricated shroud that is available. The only thing I can think is that the metal that rests on top of the shroud (which is connected to the radiator, keeps it in place by way of pressure. Surely that cannot be the case. You can see the shroud here https://www.opgi.com/cooling-heating/fans/1963-70-riviera-fan-shrouds/fan-shroud-1967-70-riviera-br01902.html?gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI-MeUs-KmhQMVMlhHAR27kgagEAQYASABEgIqVvD_BwE.

[The 55er]

If tou look at the large picture of the OPGI shroud in your post, you can see a small vertical slit near the top that's slightly offset.  A bolt goes through that slit  from the engine side that attaches the shroud to that restangular metal piece that holds the top of the radiator in place, at least that's how it mounts on my 1967 Riviera. Other than those two tabs on the bottom where the shroud rests, that upper bolt is the only other attachment. 

[Ferris]

Thanks for the info. But now I am probably more confused. I do not see where the bolt would attach to the large metal piece. Last night we tried to install the shroud and the fan is hitting the bottom of the shroud. The fan diameter is not bigger than the circumference of the shroud but it is hitting the bottom where the shroud angles in. In other words, the entire placement of the radiator and and shroud is just off. I do not see what holds the radiator flush with the front part of the bay. It leans and is not very secure. I have picture here. It would seem to me there would be a more secure fastener of the radiator to the front other than the rectangular piece. My rectangular piece Ive seen on other Rivs but I also see an entirely different rectangular piece in google images for a 69. Anyway the pic to the left shows before the shroud and the pic to the right is with the shroud (its totally unsecured at the top and leans into the engine). Its as if the spacer between the engine and the fan is too large but surely that cannot be the case. Seems like the mounting of the radiator is just not very stable. The rectangular piece I would think is original. This Riv has only 19,000 miles on it and I honestly think its a true 19k. Any advice is greatly appreciated.

 

[ABear]

Hmm, something looks wrong in your second pix

 

See the red circles I have added to your pix..

 

#1 Radiator is sitting too far back towards engine almost to the point it isn't being held by the top mount.

 

#2 Hose with numbers 3390 1259 and metal A/C lined seem to be crowding the radiator back towards engine

 

#3 Extra empty hole like something is missing, generally vehicle manufacturers do not add unneeded holes.

 

#4, yeah, about that 19,000 miles, nope. Try adding 100,000 or 200,000 miles to that.. Odometers of those yrs only go to 99,999.9 and then reset to zero and go again. I did that twice to a 1970s car which had 297,000 miles when I parked it.

 

If you had a true 19,000 mile car, you wouldn't have badly repainted valve covers the paint would be a decent smooth coverage, I can see lots of orange peel going on with those and the A/C pump would still be sporting it's original black paint instead of being bare aluminum..

 

Looks to me that the radiator and radiator support has been replaced from a different vehicle/model/yr and crudely installed to get the job done.. Basically wrong radiator parts and that is why your shroud isn't fitting and you do not have anything for the shroud to bolt to.

 

[Ferris]

You make some really good points.

 

Point #1 Yes, it seems like it is sitting too far back to the engine. Totally agree.

Point #2 Agree, you would think it would be flush with the framing.

Point #3 I noticed that yesterday. I would agree.

Point #4 The car was purchased from a guy who bought it supposedly from a one owner several months prior to him selling it to me. He said when he bought it, it was in a garage that was starting to fall down. THe old lady's nephew was selling it for her. Her husband had it for a few years and the engine went bad and he parked it. He bought another riv right after that. So that was the story. Well looking at it, the body is in good shape, there is surface rust. Interior issue is mostly that the seats are brittle. So when I got it I assumed it was 119,000 miles like most would. The license plates seemed to say 95. Well when I got it tagged I noticed two things: 1) the plates said 1975 and 2) an old steel pepsi can was found under the bench seat. So I figured it was parked since 75. It had a vinyl top that I finished tearing off. My guess is that it was outside for a number of years but then got garage stored. The motor was seized. I had the engine rebuilt and yes the valve cover painted was not done well. The AC pump is not original. If you look at the picture you see a Mark IV Coronado aftermarket air conditioner. That explains the pump not being original because it never had factory ac. If you look the brake pedal it is hardly worn. I am fairly convinced it lost oil and he did not want to invest in a rebuild. He parked it in 74 or 75 and never looked back.  If it was parked in 74 or 75 that means that he would have had to put about 20k in miles per year on it. I guess that is possible. Any opinions if its a true 19k would be appreciated.

 

In either event, all the pics except a few have the same style rectangular plate that mine does not have. Does the Mark IV aftermarket AC system somehow reconfigure the radiator? I am still baffled by the radiator plate I have versus others that I see on the same model but I've seen mine on similar models. I think when I get home I am going to read the stickers on the rectangular plate.

[ABear]

Outside looks in pretty good shape for the age, inside however, it really looks like it had at least 119,000 or 219,000 miles.

 

19,000 miles just seems like an incredible reach when you start considering that within that short mileage someone went to the trouble and expense to install aftermarket A/C, installed a set of aftermarket gauges under the A/C unit, drivers side of the seat is really torn up bad, carpet looks to have a lot of wear, had engine failure within that 19,000 miles and then parked it at only 6 or so yrs old..

 

I would expect a real 19,000 mile vehicle of that age to have much less wear and tear in the drivers side of the seat, in fact, it should be near perfect condition. Heck I had a 93' Cougar that was just showing some wear (wasn't through to the foam) on the drivers seat when we sold it in 2006 and the car had 150,000 miles on it.

 

Not nitpickin, but you need to step back and look at the wear and tear caused by use that was not part of just sitting outside for 40 yrs. You may have one that has 119,000 miles and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that as from a body perspective you don't have rusted through body panels and that is a bonus that you don't need to find body parts that may be difficult or expensive.

 

As long as you don't have rusted out floors and frame, you certainly have a platform to work with that could be restored to a nice running vehicle.

 

As far as determining the last use by plates goes, around my area, was not unusual for folks to trade or swap plates between running and non running vehicles. At one time it was cheaper to go to the DMV, pay a small fee to swap and register the plate to another vehicle rather than buying new plates. Now days in my State the fee is the same cost so most folks just buy a new plate for their next vehicle rather than swapping..

[Ferris]

I was pleased thinking it was a 119,000 miles. Not until I saw the plate and pulled that Pepsi can out did I consider the 19k theory. I dont know much about the after market AC and when people would get that. Like I said this was a base model with no electric windows, etc and no ac. But it does have a buick bug shield! You kind of wonder about people who went through the trouble to get a bug shield. Maybe an FBI profiler would know what that tells you about the owner. The gauge panel was put in by me a month ago to track the oil pressure and temp better. You are right that the carpet has a lot of wear and the seats are torn. I get them getting super brittle over time. The dash and panel are practically flawless. Anyway, I did not pay much attention to the story at first but then when I saw the plates I thought maybe it was true. The guy I was buying it from had too many projects and he was not pushing the story. He just said it was what he was told. I picked it up for 2k and had the motor rebuilt so I am happy. The engine has been running hot since the rebuild (about 210 to 230) so I thought I should get a fan shroud and then change the thermostat to 185. But I cannot get past the shroud issue. I really think that plate on top is different than 90 percent of the ones I see online. I will read the stickers after lunch. One sticker seems like the one you find on all of them but then there is another sticker I do not see on any of them and I wonder if that maybe related to the Mark IV ac system. And no offense to questioning the mileage. I would like to

[c49er]

Wow....19,000 original miles...and it needs the factory fan shroud? Hmmm..

Good to fix it up and enjoy for sure.

 

Edited April 4 by c49er (see edit history)

[Ferris]

Yeah I know. The guy I got it from had the radiator out to try to unlock the motor. It may have gotten lost in the transfer. I'm banking on that Pepsi can though 😆😆😆. Here's the other sticker. 

[ABear]

Shroud isn't going to fix the engine overheating issue.

 

Engine running too hot can come from a host of different things other than not enough air moving through radiator or too high of T stat temp.

 

Overheating can be caused by clogged radiator, wrong water pump (yes, there is such a thing as you can have clockwise and counter clockwise water pumps depending on how the belts are to be routed), wrong ignition timing, cam timing was incorrectly set when assembled (engine will often run even one tooth off on timing chain), carb too lean, vacuum leaks all are very likely.

 

Depending on where you put your temp probe for the gauges actually can affect the readings you get and may not reflect actual water temp.. Is the factory idiot light sensor still in place? If so, that is where you want to sample the temperature.

 

If you have a IR temp gun. get one, HF sells them cheap, point and shoot. Take temps at the radiator, top and bottom, bottom should be cooler and top will be higher.

 

Verify your initial ignition timing, typically that is done with a timing light which connects to #1 plug and there should be a timing pointer located by the crankshaft pulley and the crank shaft pulley should have some timing markings (some reverse that by having a series of markings on a metal plate and one marking on the crankshaft pulley). Look up the timing specs for that yr and verify it is set to that to start with. Timing is generally done at idle speed with vacuum advance on the distributor disconnected. Check and adjust timing to factory spec then check to see if still getting hot.

 

Since you really don't know the real history, you are going to need to do some diagnosing without just tossing parts at it and hoping that will fix it.

 

 

[Larry Schramm]

I do not remember Buick at that time using a York A/C compressor. Should be a Delco Air or GM tagged compressor. With the aftermarket compressor that might explain you looking for the radiator shroud. 

 

I would agree with the others that the shroud is not the cause of your over heating. Others are making the correct suggestions on what to look at.

 

Edited April 4 by Larry Schramm (see edit history)

[Ferris]

My reading on Mark IVs is they used a York if I recall right. I agree regarding the shroud not solving the overheating problem. It was a side issue that is now annoying.

[Ferris]

1 hour ago, ABear said:

Shroud isn't going to fix the engine overheating issue.

 

Engine running too hot can come from a host of different things other than not enough air moving through radiator or too high of T stat temp.

 

Overheating can be caused by clogged radiator, wrong water pump (yes, there is such a thing as you can have clockwise and counter clockwise water pumps depending on how the belts are to be routed), wrong ignition timing, cam timing was incorrectly set when assembled (engine will often run even one tooth off on timing chain), carb too lean, vacuum leaks all are very likely.

 

Depending on where you put your temp probe for the gauges actually can affect the readings you get and may not reflect actual water temp.. Is the factory idiot light sensor still in place? If so, that is where you want to sample the temperature.

 

If you have a IR temp gun. get one, HF sells them cheap, point and shoot. Take temps at the radiator, top and bottom, bottom should be cooler and top will be higher.

 

Verify your initial ignition timing, typically that is done with a timing light which connects to #1 plug and there should be a timing pointer located by the crankshaft pulley and the crank shaft pulley should have some timing markings (some reverse that by having a series of markings on a metal plate and one marking on the crankshaft pulley). Look up the timing specs for that yr and verify it is set to that to start with. Timing is generally done at idle speed with vacuum advance on the distributor disconnected. Check and adjust timing to factory spec then check to see if still getting hot.

 

Since you really don't know the real history, you are going to need to do some diagnosing without just tossing parts at it and hoping that will fix it.

 

 

Hey thanks for all that great advice. I do agree the shroud is not the underlying problem. I was hoping a thermostat might be the problem, but you are right, there is much to diagnose. A 185 thermostat is a quick and cheap diagnostic check I would think. I have a mechanic working on most of this and so this is not my area of expertise.

[ABear]

Changing T stat temp isn't diagnosing, all that is doing is allowing more water flow at a bit lower temp. You could even just remove the T stat which would do the same thing.

 

Now of course if the mechanic reused the old original T stat when rebuilding the engine, you could have a old sticking T stat.. But, if that was the case, I would simply replace the old T stat with the same temp.. Lowering from OEM spec is sort of like sticking a bandaid on the problem.

 

There are good reasons for the specified temps, typically it is to get the engine to optimal operating temps, gives you best operation and fuel economy.

 

About right now, I would be considering finding a better mechanic..

[Robere210]

I am familiar with this Riv.  It came out of N.W. Arkansas--an area where the roads are salted every winter.  I see NO salt damage underneath this Riv... none whatsoever.

I helped Ferris go pick this Riv up.  I now believe the 19,000 ODO is correct.

The cracked seats I believe are from sun/UV damage, from sitting for years with the sun shining in the driver's side window.

There is no rust on the bottom of the doors, or anywhere except a small amount where the vinyl top existed.

It was indeed last licensed in '75.  That would mean the original owner only drove it 6 years... 3,000+ miles a year vs 20,000 miles a year if you believe the 119K.  The original owner either died or parked it for some unknown reason.  But the virgin brake pedal is pretty good evidence of 19K.

Fan shrouds, when set up correctly DO help with pulling heat out of the radiator... that's why GM put them on.

I've driven this beast... it will lay rubber off the line for 25 feet!!!!

 

[ABear]

17 minutes ago, Robere210 said:

Fan shrouds, when set up correctly DO help with pulling heat out of the radiator... that's why GM put them on.

Not disputing that, pretty much standard on all makes of vehicles from late 60s up. However, once again it is not a fix to running hot.

 

You need to start troubleshooting at the beginning, not at the end.

 

That means you must check the obvious places first, like how about a 55 yr old radiator that has sat around with globs of junk in it that hasn't moved for 49 yrs..

 

That radiator could be partially clogged and you have no way of visually seeing that. So, the simple thing is to measure the top of the radiator and the bottom of the radiator temps. There should be a pretty noticeable temp drop between the top and bottom. If there isn't then you have no or little flow through the radiator (IE clogged).

 

Adding a shroud won't fix that.

 

Cleaning the radiator might fix the problem if not enough difference in temp, if it doesn't then you may have other issues with the engine or need a new radiator.

 

Other things that causes overheating is incorrect engine timing, incorrect cam timing (very easy to miss a tooth when assembling), carb issues as in clogged jet making it run too lean, vacuum leaks (missed hoses or ports that are open).

 

Start at the beginning, check and verify engine timing, if it is off it can and will make a engine over heat.

 

Check the carb mixture, excessive lean or rich  conditions will cause overheating.

 

Verify that the radiator IS in fact the one that belongs, the wrong radiator may not have enough tubes to cool the size of engine properly.

 

After you solve the overheating then apply the shroud.

 

As far as the 19,000 miles goes, well take a look at the top of the radiator.. The paint is well worn off down to the brass near the radiator cap, takes a lot of wear to remove paint that way.. Radiator may not be original, if it is, it has seen more than 19,000 miles.. I suspect it is a "bits a car".. Things have been slapped on, it is up to Ferris to discover what is true and what is false..

 

Yes, the car looks nice, it doesn't look rusted out, I think it will make a nice project but I wouldn't get too excited about the 19,000 vs 119,000, to many condition issues that say it is the latter.

[Ferris]

Well I appreciate all the recommendations on the overheating issues. Will definitely look into it. So I look at google images and almost every 69 Riv has a different plate over the radiator than the plate I have. Mine has the GM sticker on it which is odd. Well I found a few cars that have my identical radiator plate and some of them have aftermarket air. Well, and maybe this doesn't sound right but not one of them from what I can tell has a shroud. I am wondering if the car has AC then it had a shroud and if did not have AC then it did not have a shroud. Hence the two different type of plate one top of the radiator. And if it has aftermarket air would a shroud be recommended. I think I blew money on a stupid shroud.

 

https://www.mecum.com/lots/172291/1969-buick-riviera/

 

https://www.nsclassics.com/used-vehicle-1969-buick-riviera-30k-original-mile-car-mostly-original-paint-see-video-c-5295/

 

https://www.orlandoclassiccars.net/vehicles/641/1969-buick-riviera

[ABear]

Ferris, you may be on to something.

 

Yes, vehicles without factory A/C most likely did not have a shroud.

 

Vehicles which were equipped with factory A/C would most likely have been equipped with a shroud.

 

Vehicles not equipped with factory A/C also may have gotten a basic shallow radiator (two tube).

 

Vehicles equipped with factory A/C most likely would have been equipped with larger deeper radiator (three tube).

 

Reasoning for the shroud would to provide better air flow through A/C coils and the engine radiator as the added A/C coils will reduce free airflow and add extra heat to the air flowing through the engine radiator. Deeper larger radiator on factory A/C equipped vehicles helps to compensate for the additional heat load presented by the A/C coils.

 

Your car most likely would not have had a shroud and the aftermarket A/C install most likely did not include one nor compensate for the additional heat load.

 

Keep in mind, as of right now, your A/C isn't being used so no extra heat load, only some air flow reduction at speed but not enough to overheat so basically shroud will not fix your problem.

 

So.. That puts you back to engine settings, clogged radiator or wrong water pump for the belt setup you have..

 

Need to check temps on top and bottom of radiator, if temps near the same, you have clogged radiator and/or no water flow through radiator.. There must be a pretty good temp difference between top hose and bottom hose. Clogged radiator, stuck closed T stat or wrong water pump direction can cause the same issue.. The water pump unfortunately you cannot tell from the outside if it is running the correct direction. Not sure for those yrs if they had two directions, but I do know that IS a thing so that is still in play.

 

Cross flow radiators make it difficult to see how much water flow you have or even look at the tubes.. But you can use  a IR thermometer to scan up and down the radiator and see where the heat is vs less heat.

[c49er]

The carpet heel pad wouldn't be so trashed as is the front of the interior unless a pig drove it to 19,000 miles.

The driver door hinges should have zero up down movement....engine should last longer than 19,000 too.

Why would anyone let a super low milege car go to such waste?

[Robere210]

I think this answers Ferris' fan shroud question.  From a 2016 AACA Thread:

Ferris' Riv did not have factory air, but an aftermarket AC.

 

 

[Ferris]

So the fan hit my shroud gouging it somewhat. So my next technical question is how good are you guys with black sharpies so I can return this damn thing!

[Ferris]

And not since turin has a shroud been so controversial.

[Ferris]

2 hours ago, ABear said:

Ferris, you may be on to something.

 

Yes, vehicles without factory A/C most likely did not have a shroud.

 

Vehicles which were equipped with factory A/C would most likely have been equipped with a shroud.

 

Vehicles not equipped with factory A/C also may have gotten a basic shallow radiator (two tube).

 

Vehicles equipped with factory A/C most likely would have been equipped with larger deeper radiator (three tube).

 

Reasoning for the shroud would to provide better air flow through A/C coils and the engine radiator as the added A/C coils will reduce free airflow and add extra heat to the air flowing through the engine radiator. Deeper larger radiator on factory A/C equipped vehicles helps to compensate for the additional heat load presented by the A/C coils.

 

Your car most likely would not have had a shroud and the aftermarket A/C install most likely did not include one nor compensate for the additional heat load.

 

Keep in mind, as of right now, your A/C isn't being used so no extra heat load, only some air flow reduction at speed but not enough to overheat so basically shroud will not fix your problem.

 

So.. That puts you back to engine settings, clogged radiator or wrong water pump for the belt setup you have..

 

Need to check temps on top and bottom of radiator, if temps near the same, you have clogged radiator and/or no water flow through radiator.. There must be a pretty good temp difference between top hose and bottom hose. Clogged radiator, stuck closed T stat or wrong water pump direction can cause the same issue.. The water pump unfortunately you cannot tell from the outside if it is running the correct direction. Not sure for those yrs if they had two directions, but I do know that IS a thing so that is still in play.

 

Cross flow radiators make it difficult to see how much water flow you have or even look at the tubes.. But you can use  a IR thermometer to scan up and down the radiator and see where the heat is vs less heat.

Hey thanks for all the good advice there. I will post with what happens. 

[Ferris]

2 hours ago, c49er said:

The carpet heel pad wouldn't be so trashed as is the front of the interior unless a pig drove it to 19,000 miles.

The driver door hinges should have zero up down movement....engine should last longer than 19,000 too.

Why would anyone let a super low milege car go to such waste?

 Well how do we know a pig didn't actually drive it. 😆

[Frank DuVal]

4 hours ago, c49er said:

Why would anyone let a super low milege car go to such waste?

It was "just A Used Car" at the time! Seen it more than I wish I had. Elderly driver slowed own and then the family did not want to drive it. Get me one of those small Toyotas or VW Rabbits, hard to get gas, and expensive,  in the 70's you know, embargo and all.😉❗

 

Seat wear is not always a good indication. Had a family friend with a 21K mile 66 Belair in the late 70s. The front seat had already been recovered because the car was parked in the old tight '20s garage so she had to enter and exit from the passenger's door every time she drove it a few miles to the store/church/friends. 

 

Yes, Mark IV used the York compressor. Typical installation here in central VA. Sears was the other one, also York on the ones I saw.

 

And, upper radiator bracket might change with the addition of factory AC on the assembly line.

 

My grandfather bought a new '65 Buick LeSabre and had a Mark IV installed within months. A year later the crank broke and the dealer blamed the add on AC, of course. He traded it on a 67 Special with factory air a year later. Last year for the V-6 until later in the 70s.

 

Edited April 5 by Frank DuVal (see edit history)

[ABear]

Not to continue the 19K miles thing, but I did think of a way that may be helpful to verify the mileage is that low..

 

Tires!

 

At 19K miles, the tires that were on the vehicle should have not been worn out enough to warrant replacing them unless someone was being dirt stupid doing burn outs. So, if indeed the vehicle only has 19K miles, it should have original OEM tires from factory which would match the spare tire in the trunk.

 

Now, how do we prove the tire theory you ask..

 

Simple, since the manufacture date of the vehicle up until today, tire manufacturers have changed the sizing identification of the tires.

 

Looking up for that yr, the vehicle manufacturer OEM spec tire size was 8.55-15.

 

That sizing spec was replaced in the early 1970s by a newer alpha-numeric code for passenger vehicles.

 

The alpha-numeric code was used up to late 1970's for passenger vehicles and transitioned to what we now use and know as the "metric" P sizes for passenger vehicles.

 

If what you have is what you say it is, that vehicle should have been sporting the OEM 8.55-15 tires which even if replaced in the early 70's may have still been available.. If it had Alpha-numeric tires or metric "P" tires, it has more than the mileage than stated..

 

I would say, that one could look for date codes, but from what I understand those were not mandated until maybe the 1980's, maybe the 1990s and would have been optional. If there is a code on tires made before 2000 the code will be a three digit number, after 2000 a four digit date code was mandated.

 

But one must keep in mind, odometers back then can and were often rolled back, they do not have any mechanism to prevent roll back via a reversed drill. Often speedo and odometer were disconnected and vehicle was driven without speedo or odometer operating.. Very simple to do on older vehicles, just remove the cable or drive gear from the transmission.. Many shady used car dealers and even other people did that to get more money on trade or selling. This was pretty common as back then factory warranty was only 12K miles or 1 yr which ever came first, which was standard normal auto warranties up until you hit the 1990s when companies started offering higher mileage and yrs..

[Larry Schramm]

When I was a car rep I looked at a car that absolutely did not have the mileage as stated on the odometer. It showed the car was still under warranty which I could tell it had at least three to four times the mileage. 

 

After looking around I removed the speedometer cables on the cruise control transducer and found one end absolutely dirty black.  The owner had been driving the car with the speedometer cable disconnected so the mileage would not show accurately. 

 

I super glued the speedometer ends to the transducer. Problem fixed.

Edited April 5 by Larry Schramm (see edit history)

[Ferris]

5 hours ago, ABear said:

Not to continue the 19K miles thing, but I did think of a way that may be helpful to verify the mileage is that low..

 

Tires!

 

At 19K miles, the tires that were on the vehicle should have not been worn out enough to warrant replacing them unless someone was being dirt stupid doing burn outs. So, if indeed the vehicle only has 19K miles, it should have original OEM tires from factory which would match the spare tire in the trunk.

 

Now, how do we prove the tire theory you ask..

 

Simple, since the manufacture date of the vehicle up until today, tire manufacturers have changed the sizing identification of the tires.

 

Looking up for that yr, the vehicle manufacturer OEM spec tire size was 8.55-15.

 

That sizing spec was replaced in the early 1970s by a newer alpha-numeric code for passenger vehicles.

 

The alpha-numeric code was used up to late 1970's for passenger vehicles and transitioned to what we now use and know as the "metric" P sizes for passenger vehicles.

 

If what you have is what you say it is, that vehicle should have been sporting the OEM 8.55-15 tires which even if replaced in the early 70's may have still been available.. If it had Alpha-numeric tires or metric "P" tires, it has more than the mileage than stated..

 

I would say, that one could look for date codes, but from what I understand those were not mandated until maybe the 1980's, maybe the 1990s and would have been optional. If there is a code on tires made before 2000 the code will be a three digit number, after 2000 a four digit date code was mandated.

 

But one must keep in mind, odometers back then can and were often rolled back, they do not have any mechanism to prevent roll back via a reversed drill. Often speedo and odometer were disconnected and vehicle was driven without speedo or odometer operating.. Very simple to do on older vehicles, just remove the cable or drive gear from the transmission.. Many shady used car dealers and even other people did that to get more money on trade or selling. This was pretty common as back then factory warranty was only 12K miles or 1 yr which ever came first, which was standard normal auto warranties up until you hit the 1990s when companies started offering higher mileage and yrs..

Well I like the topic so please continue. The story behind the car again was this guy who likes to buy older gm cars bought it and realized that he was gonna have to put more money in it then he could afford. He knew the motor was seized so he was hoping he get it home and get undone. Well he couldnt. He told me the story of the people he got it from a few months prior, one owner, sitting in a garage, engine went bad after several years so the guy immediately bought another one, guy died, wife's nephew told her she should get rid of the car as the garage roof was beginning to fall in. The guy I got it from picked it up and sold it to me for I think $2300. He never once mentioned low miles. He like me may have assumed it was 119k. 

 

The problem with the tire idea (and its a good one) is that the guy I bought from put some tires on it which I think when I checked a month ago were about 6 years old. So by the time I got it, he had already replaced tires. I can ask if he still has them, but I doubt he does.

 

I am convinced that the car was parked in 74 or 75 and not driven again. My guess is that it had an oiling issue. I believe the story since no one tried to puff up this vehicle as low mileage. Thus there is no reason to disbelieve it. Now, no one said it had 19k original miles either. Around these parts, especially in the 70s people did not commute all over the place is my thinking unless they were a salesman or something. Plus there is the issue of the old pepsi can and the 75 tags. Then again, an engine blowing at 19k is not likely but not impossible. So we either have to believe this guy put 20k per year on the car or 3k per year is what I am saying. That carpet issue could be from some water damage. The dash is absolutely immaculate. The body is almost immaculate. There is some sag on the driver door which would cut against a 19k theory. Who knows. I first believed it was 119k until I saw the tags and then that aligned with the history. 

 

I have heard that looking at the odometer and seeing if the numbers line up even is indicative of original miles. If not, it cuts against original miles.

 

I guess its all academic anyways. I am not ever going to sell it as some low mileage vehicle but its fun to try to figure it out. I will post a pic of the odometer this evening.

 

One last thing, the guy I bought from said these people's last name was Presley. They claimed relations to Elvis. It is possible. Now I need to find out if the King bought it for them! I am not content with just a 19k ride. He did buy Pricilla a 63 Riv after all.

 

 

Edited April 5 by Ferris (see edit history)

[ABear]

1 hour ago, Ferris said:

I have heard that looking at the odometer and seeing if the numbers line up even is indicative of original miles. If not, it cuts against original miles.

No, mechanical odometers are not 100% precise in how the numbers line up, there is considerable amount of mechanical slop in the drive train that turns the numbers so not unusual to see some up and down of the numbers or even 100% alignment of the numbers once and a while..

 

I think you have an interesting story, but one that is downright difficult to prove unless you have really good provenance.

 

Busted motor after 19K miles and 6 yrs doesn't seem plausible, even back then money didn't grow on trees.. Not a lot of folks parked vehicles after 6 yrs around my neck of the woods especially if they had any knowledge or experience of what life was like during the Great Depression of the 1920s.. My parents were born and raised through those times, absolutely nothing was thrown out, it got fixed and used again.  End of WW2 did bring a lot of money and jobs but still you had a lot of older generations that really did care about the cost of buying new things and it was less cost to repair older things.

 

As far as record of proof, not unusual for folks to drive vehicles on road with expired tags and expired registration.. Not to mention often what happens with vehicles taken off the public roads they get driven pretty hard often off road.. Have a BIL that back yrs ago used to take anything he could get his hands on and go hill climbing as he called it.. Basically finding the steepest backwoods dirt hill and see if he could make it to the top.. Yeah he trashed a lot of used cars..

[Ferris]

I took a picture of the odometer and I dug in between the bench of the front seat and these are the items I found. Nothing to me post dates 1975 at least at first glance. There was nothing in between the backseat bench.

[TerryB]

The green glass thing is a lid to an old time wire topped glass canning jar.  The size would probably be for a pint jar.  Those type of jars are much older than the car.

[Ferris]

Well that should add 2 more dollars of value to the car😆

[Robere210]

On 4/4/2024 at 8:19 PM, Ferris said:

 Well how do we know a pig didn't actually drive it. 😆

The Riv came out of ARKANSAS after all!  I'm voting for the pig. 

Several months ago I rolled into my vet's office with a kitty that needed neutering.  The car next to me did indeed have a pig in the front seat.  Pig was just sitting there.  Ferris has the picture.  Hopefully he will post it here.

[Robere210]

I'm developing a Hunka Hunka Burnin' Love for this car. 

Here is a picture of when it was parked out at my place, before Ferris got it running.  Note the well-trained guard cat watching over it.

 

Also note how straight the sheet metal on the side of the car is.

 

 

Edited April 6 by Robere210 (see edit history)

[Ferris]

22 minutes ago, Robere210 said:

The Riv came out of ARKANSAS after all!  I'm voting for the pig. 

Several months ago I rolled into my vet's office with a kitty that needed neutering.  The car next to me did indeed have a pig in the front seat.  Pig was just sitting there.  Ferris has the picture.  Hopefully he will post it here.

Don't tell me a pig couldn't have put 19k on a car! In the ozarks it can happen.

[Robere210]

Here is the picture I took in my vet's parking lot some months ago.  We are 30 miles from the Arkansas border.

I like that his owners left the window down so he could get air.

 

So I think this proves a pig indeed was responsible for the trashed carpet and cracked upholstery.  Now we just have to find out if it was Elvis' pig.

 

[Frank DuVal]

On 4/5/2024 at 1:29 PM, ABear said:

At 19K miles, the tires that were on the vehicle should have not been worn out enough to warrant replacing them unless someone was being dirt stupid doing burn outs. So, if indeed the vehicle only has 19K miles, it should have original OEM tires from factory which would match the spare tire in the trunk.

Not buying it. My 66 Chevrolet Biscayne wagon with a 283 and three speed would wear out fiberglass belted tires (I bought the wagon in 1974 and drove it until 1982) every 12K miles or so. I would actually get free replacements on the tire warranty. Sure, the front end might have been out, but, I got it aligned every year during one of the state inspections (every 6 months back then). 

 

I bought a 1957 Olds once (in the late 70s) with 14K miles. The original tires had been snow capped and regular recapped! Of course those 50s tires were not good for even 10 K miles. U.S. Royal Safety 8s. Yes, documented 14 K miles from all the inspection receipts in the glove box. Two receipts every year, pretty easy to see a pattern.😉

 

Now a days if we don't get 50K miles out of tires something is wrong!🤣

Edited April 7 by Frank DuVal (see edit history)

[c49er]

15 hours ago, Robere210 said:

Here is the picture I took in my vet's parking lot some months ago.  We are 30 miles from the Arkansas border.

I like that his owners left the window down so he could get air.

 

So I think this proves a pig indeed was responsible for the trashed carpet and cracked upholstery.  Now we just have to find out if it was Elvis' pig.

 

That's Arnold the pig....Green Acres Riviera... is the place for you!😂

[Larry Schramm]

I remember in the late 60's / early 70's if you got 20,000 miles from a set of tires that was a WOW experience.  I remember when I got to that number on a set of BF Goodrich tires and my Dad could not believe it because it was that unusual.

 

I agree that today 50,000 miles is the minimum.  I usually get more than 100,000 on a set of tires, but I watch the tire pressures and keep them at the maximum pressure as noted on the sidewall of the tire.

Edited April 7 by Larry Schramm (see edit history)

[Ferris]

On 4/5/2024 at 7:08 PM, ABear said:

No, mechanical odometers are not 100% precise in how the numbers line up, there is considerable amount of mechanical slop in the drive train that turns the numbers so not unusual to see some up and down of the numbers or even 100% alignment of the numbers once and a while..

 

I think you have an interesting story, but one that is downright difficult to prove unless you have really good provenance.

 

Busted motor after 19K miles and 6 yrs doesn't seem plausible, even back then money didn't grow on trees.. Not a lot of folks parked vehicles after 6 yrs around my neck of the woods especially if they had any knowledge or experience of what life was like during the Great Depression of the 1920s.. My parents were born and raised through those times, absolutely nothing was thrown out, it got fixed and used again.  End of WW2 did bring a lot of money and jobs but still you had a lot of older generations that really did care about the cost of buying new things and it was less cost to repair older things.

 

As far as record of proof, not unusual for folks to drive vehicles on road with expired tags and expired registration.. Not to mention often what happens with vehicles taken off the public roads they get driven pretty hard often off road.. Have a BIL that back yrs ago used to take anything he could get his hands on and go hill climbing as he called it.. Basically finding the steepest backwoods dirt hill and see if he could make it to the top.. Yeah he trashed a lot of used cars..

I do have the original spare in the trunk. If the guy who I bought it from still has the tires he took off of it that would as you say tell a lot.