(first posted 10/6/2012) Somebody wasn’t content with GM’s decision to not make Riviera ragtops, and took matters–or Sawzall– into hand. CJCars just posted this to the Cohort, and it certainly looked like it could/should have come from from Flint. Well, eventually Buick did offer one in 1982, but that was almost twenty years after the Riviera took up battle with the Thunderbird, which certainly came in convertible versions (through 1966). Somebody just couldn’t wait.
The ’70 Riviera is hardly anybody’s favorite year, a rather blobbified version of what started out in 1966 as a classic Bill Mitchell-mobile of the highest caliber. And its front end has been drastically toned down, looking way too much like one of the lower-rung Buicks. Maybe that’s why this owner took a 1970 to be put to the torch: the least desirable of the gen2 Rivieras. And losing the top has done it some good.
I’m going to have to assume that there’s nothing under that rear cover other than the amputated stumps of the former C-pillar, as fitting a working top would be a mind-boggling undertaking. And those snaps along the belt line suggest a tonneau cover to protect the interior if need be. This car looks to be in California anyway, so it probably goes and hides in the garage during the occasional rain.
And there’s no locks for a top on the windshield header. A Riviera Roadster. Seems like the dash has come in for some customizing too. Someone order too much white vinyl?
It does look good, GM should have made a convertible available in all the pre-Boattail versions.
I agree that front end of the 1970 is the worst to grace any real (RWD) Riv and that ugly carried over to the rest of the Full size line as well.
I agree and the irony of this, GM did studied the possibility to do a 1st-gen Riviera convertible, there is some pictures of a prototype at http://forums.aaca.org/f177/first-generation-riviera-convertible-styling-studies-288190.html
While I think a first gen Riviera convertible might have been a fun car to own, hacking the roof off destroyed one of the most iconic features of the design.
….although it looks a little better with the windows rolled down.
Looks awkward from this angle with the top up….
Top framework was unconventional….
That’s how 1971–1976 GM B and Eldo convertibles work. No interior “landau” arms on the side that fold down/forward, so more elbow room in the back seat. I’ve heard that late AMC convertibles are like that too.
Sorry to disagree with you but the rest of the 1970 Buick Full size line was not ‘ugly’. I learned to drive on my Aunt & Uncle’s 1970 Estate Wagon and I loved the look of that car and its ‘sisters, the Wildcat & Electra 225.
And a sharp Buick wagon it was.
Not a bad roadster. Wonder what they did to stiffen the chassis?
Probably nothing.
I was beat from a couple hours of surfing when I took the photos, but looking at it now answers the question of whether or not there’s a top. I think the answer is clearly no, seeing as there are no provisions for latching a top to the windshield frame. Looks like all those snaps around the base of the window-line are for a tonneau cover, which is probably the only way to protect the interior from the elements other than a garage or the car cover that was rolled up in the back seat.
It looks like a bloated ’69 Skylark Convertible. Which I guess was the issue with the Riviera that year in general. From Dynamic to Generic in 7 years or less. More and More than became a GM problem…..
Yes from the side it does look almost exactly like an overgrown Skylark except for rear bumper area.
After looking up the Delage D8-120 Aérosport that Mitchell wanted the ’70 to look at, I think the problem was that what they were going for — a prewar fastback with separate fenders and a rather dramatic side sweep — wasn’t really feasible on the existing shell. If you compare the Aérosport and the ’70 Riv in profile, the connection is apparent, but it’s ultimately too subtle to make much impression.
To my eye, this works better than the 58 Chevy ‘business coupe’.
It almost looks like it came from the factory this way.
Around a month ago i saw a guy with a “convertible” ’72 deville on ebay that really made you wish the factory had made them. If i had a garage i sure would have bid on it,.
How about a “Shoulda been a convertible” styling CC?
Nice one Tim. I didn’t realise these weren’t made as convertibles, in fact I think/thought I’d actually seen one years ago! I suppose it might have been a one-off conversion.
It was odd, from ‘631\2 you could get a convertible Falcon but not in a Fairlane until ’66. A ’62-63 Fairlane convertible would have been a nice car.
A friend of mine drove his family’s ’64 convertible when at Lincoln City during the weekends in the mid to late 60’s. There were a group of 5 of us roughly the same high school age that our folks owned beach houses on or near Devils lake. Somebody could always get a car, but his family had a large, varied collection of cars. His dad drove an Imperial which he never got to drive, his mothers XKE that he occasionally got to drive-problem with that it was a 2 person car, the ’64 Falcon Convertible which he had the most, a ’63 Chevrolet SW, a ’64 Pkmouth SW and last at the bottom of the desirability list was a beat ’60 something GMC Carryall. One of the other guys his older brother had a 1965 GTO converbile that he bought new in ’65. We were all willing to go for a ride in it when invited, at the time we all thought it was the world’s fastest car looking through a 14 tear old’s viewpoint. It was interesting to say the least in those days.
I always wanted to see this done to a ’67 or ’68 Cougar, and wonder if enough Mustang parts would transfer to allow for a working top.
There are a few real 67-68 Cougar convertible conversions.
Here’s one for sale, has kind of a hinky looking rear fenders though.
http://www.barnfinds.com/1968-mercury-cougar-convertible/
Here are several more:
http://webpages.charter.net/bpratt/6768cougarcv.htm
I’ ll give you 7k for it.
nice car, I’ve always thought the 1970 front end was a major improvement over the 1968-69 front end and it was also the first and only year of the high compression 455 cubic inch V8.
Never liked the 1970 Riviera very much – at all, but it does look cool with the top down.
Kind of compensates for the sad way it is “looking at you”.
What’s going on with those ‘mini’ fender skirts? I never noticed those before. While certainly better than the full fender skirts of the previous couple years cars, why didn’t Buick simply make it part of the quarter panel stamping? Odd. Unless maybe they just recycled the old quarter panels which had to have some sort of filler, whether it be the full or mini style.
AFAIK, the 70 Riviera rear fender is a new stamping for one year.
The “Delage” look is a combination of the side trim and full skirt. Buyers could mix and match the skirt options (full skirt or just a lip) with the side trim or delete the side trim.
A permanent full skirt makes it pretty tough to reach all five lug nuts and remove the tire.
That’s because there were two styles of skirts available. here’s a car with the full skirts.
Like the top job. Hate the “remodeled” dash. As far as the rest of the 70 “look” , I don’t hate on it like most do. It’s ok, not great, but ok.
I wonder how much body flexing and rumblings are going on while the car is bein driven. Auto manufactures didn`t beef up the chassis and frames on their ragtops for nothing. Structural integrity is the issue here. Did Mr. Sawsall compensate for the top removal?
I think this one would look better with the full skirts as on the white one pictured above. All in all though, not bad.
Still think the ’70 Riv with its less distinctive “face” presents more like a peer to the A special/G-platform cars and less like a companion to the Toronado/Eldorado (though to be fair both of them got hit with the ugly stick much harder than the Riv did for ’70!)
Like the convertible conversion, think it should have been made available on all 66-70 Rivs. The hardtop with vinyl cover looks almost like a convertible with top up, so a drop top would have been a natural.
I think the ’70’s tortured front prevented the car from becoming an all-time American classic. Had the designers raised the grill so that the hood flowed forward without the notched down shape, and hid the lights behind doors flanking the grill – maybe only single bulbs would have packaged – I think it would have all come together. Would prefer the ’68-69 rear bumper/taillights but the ’70 version works fine. Definitely would go with the skirts, and probably turbine wheel covers. The odd inward-slanting shape of the front bumper might have needed straightened but I love that pointy grill, just needed to be taller to get rid of the squashed look. There was still the issue of too much cheap black plastic on the I/P.
I read recently why 1970 dropped hidden headlights.1966-69 headlights when hidden were face up under the hood. Feds told Buick no more as they thought when they were rolling forward and dropping down they could confuse or blind oncoming traffic. With no time or budget to come up with another hidden headlight design, Buick just left them exposed. Can’t see this being any worse than doors popping up as in most other designs.
By the way, Mahoning63, I really like the new front end you present. Kind of Continental-ish. As with 1968-69, I was bewildered and appalled when I saw the 1970 Riviera and what had become of the beautiful 1966-67 design. In hindsight, I can now appreciate more what they were tryng to achieve at the time. That 1970 can actually be bad-ass looking with the right color and trim. Check out some Google pictures. That conclusion after 38 years!
Wow, make that 48 years!!