posted at the cohort by robadr1
(first posted 2/11/2015) Although some might object, I think this 1959 Buick has been rather suitably modified, except for one key missing detail: it’s lacking the third fin on the rear deck, sticking straight up like a dorsal fin. That way it would look just like GM originally planned for it to look. Seriously.
For the all-new 1959s, the GM stylists were encouraged to let their hair down. Or maybe LSD was put in the water coolers; it was still legal back then, and seen as having therapeutic benefits as well as stimulating creativity. The result was this proposal for the ’59 Buick, which got pretty far along in the planning phase.
Hey, it’s working for me; but then I did indulge in that substance a bit back in the day. Maybe that’s what it took, and when the first sober executive walked in…well, it wasn’t hard to whack off that dorsal fin and clean up the rear end a bit. The rest of the clay and fiberglass mock-up look like they mostly survived for the production ’59.
Now someone just needs to recreate that third fin.
In the creative frenzy that led to the abandonment of the original Harley Earl-led ’59 designs during his vacation in Europe in the late summer of 1956, for fresh ones led by Bill Mitchell, we can assume that the Buick proposal was the first to be “locked in”, because all the other divisions were told to use the basic Buick body shell and adapt it for their divisions. The ’59 Buick is the mother of the whole gaggle of GM ’59 cars, and it’s not hard to see that it is arguably the most organic or cohesive of them all. The rest just had to find themes to try to make their designs look as distinctive as possible. That worked better for some than others.
The Buick reminds me of a ray, with its large horizontal surfaces, fins and rather beady little eyes.
Buick’s love for two large low-set primary instruments was already well under way. Gotta’ love the visibility through that huge windshield.
Here’s the front end of the triple-fin version. Long, low, wide and mean; now somebody out there graft on that third fin on a ’59 Buick. It just doesn’t quite look right without it.
Here’s an in-depth look at the madness that was going on in the GM Design Center during the development of the 1959 models: Special Interest Cars via hemmingsblog.com
I never knew the fin craze had gone that far. Were they trying to out Harley Earl Harley Earl (I’ve heard the rumors that he did the 59 Caddie to either p off the brass or as satire), or the LSD, or some marketing committee thought if two were good, three would be better?
Really like the old girl, looks like something a Grey would drive.
These designs were the “new ones”, after the earlier ’59 design direction was considered to be a dead end, once the ’57 Chryslers had bee seen.
An good detailed look at what was happening then at GM Design: http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/2012/07/22/sia-flashback-gms-far-out-59s-when-imagination-ran-rampant-part-ii/
Thank, Paul- great read.
The early Chevy in the article looks like an updated ’58 and maybe one of the early rejects. I’ve never seen the early rejects from the other divisions. Those would be very interesting to see.
I actually liked the first Cadillac prototype. Yeah, the rockets a little “cartoony”, but that could be trimmed up.
I’m not sure if it looks like a Cadillac or not, but that design should have been used by somebody.
Definitely my favorite of the GM ’59’s. Cadillac was the lousiest of the line.
Looking at the madhouses that were the clay designs back then, I can only credit it to the absence of CAD. You’d start doing details and features in pastels on paper, and at that point all the ideas looked good. Then you went to a 3/8ths scale clay, and things were probably still looking good.
Finally, the full sized clay. And that’s most likely when the “what are we thinking?” set in. Either that, or it was at that point when sales got their first look at the car. Which meant that the final cars always looked more conservative than the full sized clays. And, in most cases, I can only say “thank God!”
I’ve always thought it would be fun for a talented bodyman to take some 1950’s cars and redo them to match some of those clays. Only driveable. Can you imagine the shocks that would create at, say, Pebble Beach? Or even the local antique show?
Oh, how I wish I had a photo of the ’59 Caddy driven by a doctor acquaintance
of my parents. He actually had someone put a third fin in the middle of the trunk lid. Mom and Dad didn’t think much of the guy, and it turned out he was a thoroughgoing quack who’d had his privileges rescinded at more than one local hospital. I’ve always thought that Caddy had already shown us everything we needed to know about him.
Sweet, I’d drive this any day. Looks like they have converted the rear doors to suicide or at least moved the handles to make it look like it has suicide doors.
I noticed that too–I’d like to think they’ve actually been rear-hinged but I don’t know how difficult that would be to accomplish. It’s a nice touch, though if it’s decorative I’m sure the functionality of the rear doors is rather compromised!
The lowrider Electra 225 Riviera really looks nice! I wish I could find a stock one like that in decent shape and at a decent price!
I think if I were ranking the 1959 GM models I’d put Pontiac first with Buick a fairly close second, Chevy a barely visible third, Oldsmobile an out of sight fourth and Cadillac so far in fifth you would need a powerful telescope to see it.
Swap Olds and Cadillac, and you’d have my ranking. I had to Google ’59 Olds to remember what one looked like. Not their best effort. Like it or hate it, you don’t forget a ’59 Caddy.
For me the Poncho is last place. My rank.
#1Buick
#3Chevy
#4Cadillac
#10 Poncho
#11 Olds
Yes there are a few numbers missing to denote the fact that Buick is far in the lead and the Poncho and Olds are not really even in the running.
I like the 59 Cadillacs best, and Chevy and Buick second (one is not better than the other) and Pontiac and Olds last. I don’t really like any of them much except the Cadillacs, and I think the 60 Cadillacs are much better.
It took Chevy, Pontiac, Buick and Olds a couple of years to clean up the fins.
If one likes fins, then I think Pontiac and Olds are worst. Olds and Pontiac did clean up their 1960 models fairly well. Cadillac’s dual fins for 61 and 62 are a bit off I think, unless one likes the fins.
Being an Electra 225 Riviera (the 6-window hardtop bodystyle) it’s an unusual find. Aside from wagons, it had the lowest production of all closed ’59s at 6.324 units. It was outsold by the conventional 4-door hardtop at 10,491, although it appears they were priced identically at $4,300 (about $35k today).
The Buicks have always been my favorite ’59 GM designs. Something sinister about it, but in a subtle way, and in a way that attracts rather than repels. For me anyway. Loved them ever since I first laid eyes on one.
Is the stainless lower-body trim original? I don’t recall seeing one with the small spear behind the front wheelwell, and there seems to be some emblem there that I can’t make out. But I really llke the detail, stock or not! I like everything about this custom job…
the lower trim is stock for thelarger Electra 225, the Electra replaced the Roadmaster, the Electra 225 replaced the Limited series and the only larger size were the 6 window and Vista roof 4 doors, the convert had the same rocker trim but not the rear fender trim. and was slightly smaller, I had several ’59’s but the last was 50 years ago, want another.
I think it’s fine the way it is. Personally, I prefer the 1960 Buick. Its rear fins are still angled, but they’re more rounded at the edges. The same goes for the front.
my ’60 Vista roof Electra
That GM windshield of 1959-60 has to be the coolest of all time, practical considerations aside!
+1
Add to that the wraparound REAR window of the four-window four-door hardtops, and those cars have what must rank as the glassiest greenhouse of all time.
I wish I had pictures. My aunt got a ’59 Electra 225 convertible in the day (a pale blue) and not to be outdone, her sister (my mom) got a 1960 equivalent in brown. When the two of them got together, they would be bringing with them about an acre and a half of sheetmetal. When you’re really young, everything seems really big until you re-encounter childhood memories as an adult, then they get a lot smaller. Except, I can imagine, these cars.
I do remember thinking how mean my aunt’s ’59 looked. The softer edges of the ’60 were a lot friendlier.
I also remember that the ’60 had a speedometer that actually lay flat facing up in front of the steering wheel and what you read was a a reflection from an adjustable mirror. I guess because they could…
AMAZING! I had no idea about this… I agree, someone at least has to make a custom with the central fin.
A nice old Buick to be sure .
I had a fully loaded 1959 Caddy convertible , I foolishly let the L.A.P.D. tow it away for parking too long in one place .
Oops .
-Nate
I think ’59 Buicks look great just the way they are. Glad they ditched the dorsal fin idea.
I think most of the 1959 GM cars are beautiful except for Oldsmobile and Pontiac, the latter only because of the V-shaped fins.
Agree, the Olds and Poncho just aren’t even in the same league as the Buick, Chevy and Caddy.
Re: abandonment of the original Harley Earl-led ’59 designs..
Has anyone ever seen images of these? I’ve searched in Google, Bing, etc, but have never been able to find any. I have read they were just modifications of the rather baroque ’58s, and GM brass were none too pleased with the sales reports on that batch of chrome hogs. I’d love to see pictures of them.
During that era, GM was on a three-year schedule for bodies. For 1959, the “senior” cars – Oldsmobile, Buick and Cadillac – were scheduled to receive a final facelift of the body originally introduced for 1957. An all-new body would have debuted for 1960. Since Chevrolet and Pontiac had received a new body for 1958, they would have used that body through the 1960 model year, with heavy facelifts for 1959 and 1960. Those were the original plans.
There have been a few photos of what looks like early proposals for the originally planned 1959 cars. One is a very rounded and heavy car with a front end clearly inspired by the 1951 LeSabre show car. The other proposal looks like a heavily facelifted version of the 1958 Buick. Either car would have lagged far behind what Ford and Chrysler rolled out for 1959.
Also remember that GM was already planning the Corvair for a 1960 introduction. This gave GM an added incentive to get all of its full-size cars on the same schedule for facelifts and renewals.
The original ’59 cars were to be warmed over 58’s aka ‘jukeboxes’. Collectible Automobile has pictures of them in an article about the 59’s
There is a couple in the Hemmings link Paul provided on one of his first comments here.
Edit: http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/2012/07/22/sia-flashback-gms-far-out-59s-when-imagination-ran-rampant-part-ii/
Thanks, Ramon. That’s exactly what I was looking for. What a fascinating story, auto design certainly is a lot more structured today.
Regarding what killed the central fin, a trunk lid with a fin jutting up out of the middle could not have been an easy part to mass produce. I bet that was also a factor.
I’ll bet the cars that were finally approved for production were no picnics to build on the assembly line either. We don’t often think of the poor people who had to live with these designs and put them together in the factories, I’ll bet there are lots of interesting stories there to tell. Would make a great CC!
I do like the final Buick designs. I’m looking at that huge windshield with the center-pivoting wipers and just thinking that’s a lot of glass in the curvearound corner that’s not getting wiped, was probably a vision nightmare in the rain and snow.
At least it’s glass even if it’s not swept by the wipers. In my current car prey much the whole corner is taken up by an enormous A-pillar, which I often have to peer around at junctions. I think the size must be due to the air bags in it, but it’s just as bad all round the car. Visibility is terrible. It’s a joy when I hop in my old mini and can see everything around me, just by turning my head.
The stamping guys would hate it!
I’d be highly surprised if this could have been stamped. I think the fin would have to be two pressings, and then joined to the trunk lid. Just a bad idea all round really
I like the 59 Buick more every year. I still have the image in my brain of the angry white 59 Electra pacing the opening lap of the 1959 Indy race.
The rear view of the 3 fin proposal reminds me of the creature from the black lagoon.
This piece reminds me of how an original-looking black 59 Cadillac 4 door passed me going the other way yesterday, and I didn’t have time to turn around and follow it. Drat. But it was that kind of day, with a first gen Olds Aurora with a carriage roof that did the same thing.
Here it is.
Love the 3 fin look I’d drive that for sure, theres something about 59 models that draws me in probably because they were the first new cars I could focus on as a toddler.
1959 was the highpoint for GM styling because it was the year they got their 1957 Chrysler Forward Look clones into production. The dorsal fin would have been disastrous for rearward visibility to starboard. I’m surprised someone at GM figured that out, considering this was just a few years before they ignored such a fundamental competency and made the split-window Sting Ray.
Yeah, but the split-window Sting Ray was hardly a mainstream-production car in GM terms, compared with how many ’59 Buicks they’d sell.
Buick’s traditional clientele had a tough time accepting these cars as it was. The third fin wouldn’t have made it any easier for the dealers to sell these cars.
If I recall correctly, Buick was one of the few makes to suffer lower sales in 1959 than in 1958 (the other was DeSoto), despite being all-new from road to roof. The abandonment of the portholes and Buick’s long-established series names hardly helped.
Supposedly Chrysler had seriously considered producing the 1961 full-size Plymouth with a single dorsal fin placed in the middle of the deck lid. Fortunately, wiser heads prevailed, although the 1961 Plymouth was also tough sale even in its “de-finned” state.
Can see why the ‘portholes’ returned for ’60, ’61.
Wonder when they decided to ‘de-fin’ the 1961’s? Maybe around the time the 59’s came out?
I read somewhere once, very much tongue-in-cheek, that Buick’s clientele couldn’t find the right dealer without the portholes! Considering how different the car looked for ’59…..
The fins on GM cars were trimmed for the 1960 model year, so the decision to reign them in must have been made as soon as the first 1959s were rolling off the production lines.
Supposedly even GM stylists admitted that the 1959s had gone “too far” with over-the-top styling, so there was an agreement on the need to dial everything back a notch…or two or three.
Exner also proposed an OFF-CENTER dorsal fin, with everything else off-center to match. Three taillights on one side, one on the other side.
Violated the most basic rule of auto design. Cars are horses. Or sometimes dogs or gazelles or tigers, but always mammals. They are four-footed beasts with bilateral symmetry.
I heard about these, but I never saw an actual design proposal. Sounds strange though.
Take a look at the Plymouth XNR show car and you’ll get a general idea.
I dunno. The XNR seemed to be influenced more by racing and Grand Prix designs. That is evident,but I wonder how Chrysler would carry it out on their bread and butter sedans. Three headlights on one side, one on the other. Seems to defy all laws of automotive design.
It is quite common for the clay mock ups to be radically different from side to side. Some times it is two competing basic designs and sometimes later in the process it will be the low end model on one side and the high end on the other. Take Chevy as a great example it would be expected to see one side with one or two tail lights and the other side to have 2 or 3 to represent the Biscayne, BelAir, Impala, Caprice variations.
These were mock-ups of the full-size 1962Plymouth. The clay model is the final 1962 Plymouth but with the off-center features.
I can’t find the photos, but if you do find the photos and see the Plymouth model, there is an off-center wind split on the hood that continues through the deck lid. The “shadow box” for the rear license plate is also off-center, and there are two taillights on one side and one on the other side.
This was not a case of management viewing two styling proposals on the same clay mock-up. The off-center details were clearly part of the final proposal.
Lynn Townsend was horrified when he saw the final versions of the 1962 Plymouth and Dodge. He couldn’t change much about the final car, but he did order that the off-center features be removed immediately.
Unless you were there how can you say for certain that they weren’t two different proposals for the details of the final design. It was quite common to do that. No reason to do 2 full size mock ups once they had the main features defined and they were just down to the details, either final trim or for the trim on various models within the line.
Because I’ve seen them too; they were asymmetrical. here’s one image, that I found from a search, from one of our own posts: https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-american/curbside-classic-1962-plymouth-fury-if-you-think-this-is-bad/
I saw the front in a magazine once. I’m not sure it’s anywhere on the web. But the rear shows it very clearly.
And how does that prove that they were clearly proposing to produce the car in that configuration? You can find lots of asymmetrical mockups, some more asymmetrical/radically different than others and you’ll find that the car that made it to production followed one or the other side.
IMHO, Ex was understandably swayed by race car asymmetry, and took it as far as he could. The XNR looks OK to us because we were softened to the look by D Jaguars and Scarabs with off center windshields and speed cone headrests. He slipped it in wherever possible, like the high back driver seats in Mopars of the early ’60s. The problem with that design school for a family car is that, philosophically, it makes passengers seem like an afterthought. Whose significant other is going agree on an auto purchase that makes them feel as if they are riding in a sidecar?
They would have had to careful not to make the central fin so tall that it interfered with opening the trunk lid.
Dear Mr. Niedermeyer,
Do you ever sleep?
Your output is prodigious.
Your site is my favorite.
Thanks
Paul Trautman
I can do this in my sleep. -_-
I generally despise lowriders, but this actually looks OK. I’d even say “good” if not for the exhaust. Neat find!
I’ve been a long time fan of 59 Buicks since I saw a red Electra coupe from the USAF base and it got my brother and myself interested in American cars.
It’s probably got the angriest most pissed off face of any car(much more than a 58 Fury) though the 59 Dodge comes pretty close.
I’m probably a minority in this opinion, but I think these ’59 Buicks are by far the ugliest designs of any car from this period. The front looks like the face of an angry Donald Duck.
Exactly right! Thank God that GM stylists removed that hideous looking third fin. That rear end clip is strange enough. Never really cared for these or the very overdone `58 Wurlitzer jukeboxes, but the `60s are fairly nice looking,almost restrained looking when compared to this.
But the ’60 got all that wacky sculpting on the sides. I prefer the ’59’s clean sides, though I do like the ’60 grille better.
I actually like the ’60’s sculpted sides, although I generally like sculpted sides on any car. The grilles were certainly much better on those.
+1. If not the ugliest, a close second to the ’58-’60 Lincolns.
IMO, while the Lincolns weren’t that attractive, the Buick design came off far more offensive.
I’ve always thought it looked like what Bruce Wayne would drive when not being Batman. (“Quick, chum, we will resume our civilian identities and no one will ever suspect we’re really Batman and Robin!”)
Tee hee!
This ’59 GM movie goes all the way through the design/clay/prototype/production process. We see bits of all the Chevy/BOP/Caddy cars, but our ’59 Buick can be seen at 3:12 (clay), 9:05 & 9:49 (prototype testing): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACWMbeXd31s
Awesome story, there, Paul. Did I previously mention that I was big into planes in the years before I was into cars as a young kid? OK, actually I was into both for quite a while until a few years before I could drive when cars became number1.
Oh, and about the LSD, there are some declassified documents that reveal that the CIA did (sometimes) give unsuspecting civilians, often college students, military members and even other CIA employees LSD and other drugs to observe how they reacted. Most people are completely unaware of all the stuff the CIA has pulled inside our own country when, by their very charter, they are to operate outside the US and forbidden to do that stuff within our own country. Not to go completely off-topic, but there’s also documentation that since inception, they’ve been involved in propaganda and assassinations numerous times within the US. Don’t take my word for it – do some research; it has come out in some legal cases.
Photo of the ’59 design clays can be found in the old Special Interest Auto magazine and even those of the aborted continuations of the ’58 architecture in it and the book “A Century of Automotive Style: 100 Years of American Car Design” by Michael Lamm and Dave Holls. I recommend it to all auto history enthusiasts. The ’59 Buick looked angry because they named after a dead Greek broad after being master of the road for decades!
The wild ’59 styling was a short-lived phenomenon instigated by Exner who for once one-upper the vaunted Misterl………and knew it! The compressed timeframe forced GM to abandoned it’s usual A-B-C body program, so even the Chevy and Cadillac shared the same substructures. Cadillac buyers got to enjoy the same interior space as the Biscayne driver, but with those wild styles in an optimistic time, who cared?
Now, find the photos of the ’59 frontal styling prototypes with the high-beam headlights stacked in the middle, like the EMD locomotive! The ’59 Chevy version is unbelievable!
A Buick with a rare third fin I would guess would have to be a prototype and no doubt EXTREMELY valuable in terms of a collector car. Are there any out there? We’re any sold? If so, are any still in existence? I would be curious to find out? That third fin does make for a highly unusual design, but might block the rear view of the driver, especially when moving to the right lane on the freeway. I’m very interested in what was the actual story about these three-fin Buicks.
It was a design concept, in clay and a fiberglass mock-up; not a real car. And of course it wasn’t approved for production.
Check out the link to an article in the second comment of this post.
Maybe you could put the link on the article itself? Many people seem to have overlooked it, and is really an incredible article.
Done!
This car is so low it would be undrivable. It could be a lowrider with hydraulics, or it could be bagged, which is a lot cheaper. I do like the chrome smoothies, not so sure about the vinyl top. And the exhaust pipes should have been run straight out the back under the rear bumper, unless there wasn’t room to keep them from dragging. Anyway I look at it, I see a waste of a classic car that I would have preferred had been left stock, with the possible exception of the wheels, which are just bolt on
The 59 Buick is a great looking car, and this low-rider doesn’t offend the senses.
I hope someone eventually makes a tri-fin replica. This Edsel below was produced by Charlie Wells based on a ’60 prototype. (pic: edsel.net)
One of the few Edsel fans here,I like it a lot.
Yep, I love the 60 Fords and Edsels, and I think this guy did a pretty good job of it.
You throw down the gauntlet, Monsieur! You know I will pick it up! And, the way to make it truly American is to cover it with padded vinyl.
Splendid! Damn, I want that car, just like that. I already did before I sent it to your shop, but now I’m really coveting it. Thanks for making me fulfilled and frustrated at the same time 🙂
Found this period photo of Pittsburgh PA, taken around 1964 based on the cars that can be identified. As luck would have it, there’s a ’59 Chevy and a trolley (we called it a “streetcar”) headed toward the camera, a ’60 Cadillac moving away from the camera, and what appears to be a new 1964 Rambler American 2-door hardtop parked at the far right, along with a classic Pittsburgh-style house.
Lets get really crazy and graft on a ’61 Imperial fin with the dangling dingleberry taillight.
Perfect center high mount stop light!
Mean looking Buick….photo on Davie Street, Vancouver BC
That back end of the original 1959 Buick design looks like a kid making a face at the driver behind him.
This is an interesting CC; my Dad spent 32 years working about 500 feet from where all the photos were taken. He was in Die Engineering, made the wood models that were the next step after the clay and fiberglass stage. Design made wood templates of all the surfaces of the cars so my Dad’s crew could keep their model within .010″ of the blueprint. After they finished, there was an entire crew of ‘checkers’ that would verify the model was to spec.
The models were then sent to the die shop, where a hydraulic tracer attachment would go over the entire model and those movements would move the cutter head on a milling machine that was cutting the actual metal stamping die that would bang out the parts.
Dad always said they were working on cars about 3 years before they actually sold. But the dates on the pictures would indicate it was only about a year for the ’59 cars. I don’t know how they were able to do it that fast. When you think about all the parts that had to be made, all the tooling made, rip out the old dies and install and fine tune the new ones. Then all the vendor supplied items, just doesn’t seem possible.
They had an open house at the Tech Center exactly one time. Early ’60s, all the models were covered with tarps so no spying. I wish I had been older than 10 so I had more of an appreciation of what was going on,.
It’s what JPC and others have touched on, but I love these big quad lamp Buicks from 1958-84. Big, elegant, yet slightly sinister/rakish in a way the Cadillac and Oldsmobile 98 weren’t. That language is expressed in fine-toothed grills, sharp and untapered fins, the sweepspear, and in a trademark set off characteristic such as the slanted headlights here or the “shovel-nose” on the ’77-’84.
There’s a beautiful grey one that has not been lowered that I see in midtown from time to time.
It’s ironic but right across from where the subject car was photographed there used to be a restaurant that had ’59 Pontiac perched above the entrance.
https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/v/t1.0-9/s480x480/558457_391714497512989_1109147270_n.jpg?oh=abc310c3a96723da535967ec033a45d5&oe=55627054&__gda__=1433050318_3bdc7306766d5c217ba9e43c2c47eaf8
A new link to a shot of Doll & Penny’s Cafe…late ’80’s maybe?
https://searcharchives.vancouver.ca/uploads/r/null/9/2/a/92a6a529958bad51a662441e06d18b66102a52d38575337de678fe289647a32e/eb9d8f1e-03ca-4c86-b481-0b8bc425cea0-2018-020.5753.jpg?token=17f82d05853e7456a0142bd765aa4af495fb9af795165eb2a6ec42168565285b
I remember that Pontiac up there!
The pic of the prototype with the 3rd fin looks like someone has photo shopped it.Is this another spoof article?
No. Seriously.
Oh dear..I was seriously hoping in the name of industrial art and aesthetic decency that it wasnt true.Maybe its the vacuum effect when the old order gives way to the new … like when Catholicism was challenged by Protestantism in Europe in the 17th century we saw a rise in the hysteria of witchcraft trials.Looks like the transition from Harley Earl to Bill Mitchell produced some bizarre and irrational knee jerk reactions too.
At least the production models were ok and much better than the awful 58 Buick and Slobmobile
hope my obscure and off beam theological analogy didnt offend anyone.Just happens that history and religion fascinates me like old cars do
210delray: That Pittsburgh photo is circa 1966 as the Port Authority was dismantling the street car system. That house was still standing in the early 2000s It’s near the Jane Street loop in Wilkinsburg,I haven’t been there in a while. This area has declined in last 30 years so I don’t know if it still is there (sad….) I used to live in Swissvale (close by) and drove a Caddy going the same direction countless times (Mine was 10 years newer though!)
Just noticed that the builder of this car has gone to the trouble of ‘suiciding’ the rear doors too. With all the extraneous tinsel still intact, I wasn’t expecting a mod like that!
Quickly scanning through previous comments, I don’t think I saw anyone pick up on something else. That roof looks like the ’59 Cadillac six-window hardtop roof. I could be wrong, but I don’t think I’ve seen it on any other ’59 GM car. It sure doesn’t show up on any Buicks in the ’59 brochure; all of their 4-doors seem to be the Vista style–the flat roof and wraparound rear window.
That’s the Electra 225 Riviera four door hardtop, also available in 1960. Here’s the picture in the ’59 brochure:
Thanks–somehow I missed that, even when I was looking right at it!
https://www.kindigit.com/gallery/59-buick-invicta/
A friends ‘59 restomod, blue suade shoes.
Never liked them new, but it is really cool.
Dave
I wonder if the original design used single headlights for symmetry with the taillights, and the duals were added later. That would have taken some of the anger out of the front face. Still an improvement over the ’58s.
I can take the middle fin for the novelty but that rear bumper treatment is truly bizarre. It really does look like a kid making a face at the following car… Are these angrier than the ’61 Plymouth?
The rear bumper treatment reminds me of a funny face that Harpo Marx used to make that he called “the gookie”.
The video of its design & production shows an early one with horizontal quad headlights. Who was high when that was changed?
If GM, Ford, & Chrysler had devoted most of the styling budget to quality control and engineering improvements instead of nonsense just think where we could have been today…..
Yea, but that would have made a hell of a lot more boring world for us car nuts…
What would we have discussed then at CC?
The new Buick 1959 head rests compared to Chrysler’s mowe to not build cars with more than 100 HP or Ford’s new outside rear mirrors with built in back lights?
Just a thought from a cold Stockholm
Cheers
But is that the “American Way”? 🙂
I have to agree with you though, for styling to have gotten so out of control as to taken some of those ideas as far as fibreglass models, there was a lot of money being splashed around that could have been put to better use for the long-term. Undoubtedly it must have been fun while it lasted.
Something CC haven’t discussed, but would be of great importance for the humanity is what car had most cigarette lighters and ash trays.
I sadly miss my Imperial Crown 4dr ht 1967. It had 4 lighters and 4 ashtrays. I always felt guilty for the front and rear centre passengers that was treated so unequal not having their own lighter and ash tray.
If I remember right, you could order your new Bristol car with ‘Continental’ type of front ashtray. Big enough for several Cohiba Churchills cigars. But I might be wrong…
Something I hadn’t noticed before is the vestigial ‘hood bump’ on the 1959 Buick. Chevrolet and Pontiac eliminated it completely on their ’59’s, and Cadillac’s was even more more subtle.
That seemed weird, a hangover from the high hoods of the forties and early fifties. Like the infamous three-piece back window on certain ’57s. As though Harley Earl really, really didn’t want to let go of an obsolete aesthetic.
Yes, and then the bump was gone on the ’60 Buick.