True confessions: I’m not quite the fan of this generation Chevy as I once was, but then we all grow up, hopefully. And then JPC’s repeated anti-Chevy lobbying has had its effect: Seats too low, Powerglide, particularly dull steering, undersized brakes, soft springs, did I miss something, Jim? But then this ’62 Bel Air Bubble appears on the Cohort (posted by paulvaranasi) and I can’t resist. This is a very attractive car, despite its faults. And as most of you know, something of an anomaly.
For 1962, GM abandoned the glassy, fastbacky “bubble” hardtop across all of its lines, and the B-Body cars now sported what amounted to a fake convertible top in steel, right down to the “bows” appearing to protrude. At the time, as a GM acolyte, I accepted it as the latest design gospel according to St. Bill. But I had some pangs of doubt (coincidentally, this was the year I first hooked Catechism class). “Are we sure this is really better?”
St. Bill must have been listening, because he threw us doubters a bone: the 1962 Bel Air Sport Coupe carried the 1961’s bubble roof over, for one more year. Although from this very strategically angled shot of it in the brochure, you’d never know it. Coincidence?
Let’s not be shy about that. Say it loud; I have glass and I’m proud! Actually, given the brochure and the lack of any Bel Air bubbles at the dealer and around town, it was probably six months or so before I actually cottoned to its existence. And was I ever surprised: “Aw shucks, Bill; you shouldn’t have”. But he did, or somebody snuck it by him, more likely. And Bubble enthusiasts will forever be grateful for that. My tattered faith was restored some then, as it is now, somewhat. Let’s see, 327/300 and four speed stick. How about we do a little competition with your favorite big ’62, Jim? A Drag race and fuel economy run, results combined. Gee; is my faith coming back?
I love the bubble cars. id want mine with black exterior and red interior with the 327 and a four speed. or if I where to build one it would be the same color combo with one of those new aluminum 4 ohh nines that that one company (dont remember the name) builds. and a five speed tremec with a four speed ball on top of a hurst shifter from that era. Oh man if money where no object id have one huge full garage..
I doubt any ever left the factory looking that good. Did they even come in that color?
My dad had a 63 metallic green four door, more a less a stripper. The fit and finish off the dealers lot with mileage in the teens wasn’t anything like this car. Within 4 years it was a rust bucket. I doubt GM or any of the other makers took special care making the car in the photo.
I think we romanticize old cars when we see one today in a shape that they never were.
Back in the day when this was brand new, it was probably “meh”. Credit has to be given to the owner(s) who turned it into what it is.
Personally I think the car would look better metallic green with dog dishes or the optional wheelcovers pictured in the Jet-Smooth Ad above. At least it’s not wearing the cliche Chevy Rally Wheels with “factory” disc brake center caps.
While I don’t really care for pre ’65 Chevies, the greenhouse on this car is amazing. Driving this thing has got to be a dream. Can you imagine the visibility it must have?
On the flipside, driving one of these with black interior must have been hellish in hot climates…especially since most were probably manual steering, manual transmission, etc.
My father had a 1963 Chevy Bel Air in a deep metallic green. No power anything with a 230 six and three on the tree. I drove it frequently in city traffic and it wasn’t bad. Fifty years later I’ve pretty much pussed out and doubt I would enjoy driving it in Northern Virginia rush hour traffic.
My Dad had a 64 Biscayne 2 dr in azure aqua. Same 6 cyl and 3 speed.
Your right, the car was not bad in traffic. The 6 had enough power. When he traded it in 72 for a new Polara, the hood, roof, trunk and chrome looked like a new car. Everything else was junkyard.
The drag racers at the time (Dyno Don Nicholson et al) ran 409 bubble tops. To a 13-year old, these cars were cool as hell. While having our ’58 Plymouth worked on at the local Chevy dealer in Nevada, Missouri, I was able to get up and personal with a brand new Impala Sport Coupe with a white roof and bright red body. It was very well finished (not quite to the $15,000 paint job of the subject) and shiny. In spite of not being a bubble top, it was very attractive and desirable.
I was about to correct you, Kevin … Dyno Don raced Mercurys not Chevys. But then I thought I should check Wikipedia … and sure enough, he switched from Chevy to Mercury in 1964. I’m probably 5 or 6 years younger than you, and those few years make a huge difference in the indelible memories of automotive history, which were burned into our brains from Hot Rod, Road & Track and AMT 3-in-1 model kits.
At the Carlisle GM show last year, someone showed an all-original 1965 Chevrolet Impala convertible. The car was red, and I was surprised at how good the factory paint job looked.
I can attest that even my ’77 Chevelle has rather poor build quality. If you look closely, nothing lines up very well. It’s never been taken apart either. When I finally get off my duff, it’ll get time spent realigning to better than factory panel gaps. and then finally get a new paint job.
Even my friends ’79 El Camino SS that we restored, the striping was godawful from the factory, and we put it back together that way. as it was two-toned the same way as the original paint was.
Build quality for GM cars – indeed, for all of the domestic industry – went downhill between the early 1960s and the late 1970s. It was one reason an increasing number of people switched to the imports.
Those appear to be mid ’60s Hurst wheels. Perfect for the car. Many years ago I passed up a rusty but saveable ’62 bubble top. It was a particularly unattractive shade of pale yellow and had a 283 powerglide, all of which would have to be changed in my opinion at the time. 900 bucks or best offer didn’t seem worth it.
D’oh!
I thought those wheels had a decidedly vintage look to them. Originals; or is someone reproducing them?
Rocket wheels makes a number of classic style wheels as does Wheel Vintiques. There are a couple of others that make 60’s style wheels too. Hard to say if these are repos or not but they look in pretty good condition so I’d guess they are repos.
My thoughts, the bubble top may have had an aerodynamic or weight advantage which justified carrying it over a year on the “sport” model. Second is that the later faux convertible look was very popular with the low rider crowd, and finally at first glance that bubble top really looks like a Ford.
I’ll be the contrarian and put in a plug for the formal-roofed ’62. That brochure pic with the jet and airport in the background is just great! I much prefer the stock wheel covers and whitewalls too.
That said, the ’61-62 bubbletop is a beautiful car. The owner of the Cohort car is likely a happy man indeed.
I prefer the fake convertible style too.
As I recall, that fake convertible style was responsible for the era of vinyl roof treatments, in this case to look more like a convertible. My father traded in our 55 Belair 2dr HT for a 62 Impala SS 250HP PG.
Dad’s 2nd car was a 1962 Bel Air sedan, 283 V8 and powerglide. He put cherry bomb mufflers on it, jacked up the rear suspension, rear road slicks on Cragar SS wheels (he admits he couldn’t afford Cragars on all four corners), and left the factory steel wheels/hubcaps and the whitewalls it came with on the front.
When he’s telling the story this is usually the point where he turns to my mother and says: “And your parents still let you go out with me.”
Love the bubble top 61/62s. I loathe 63/64s with the boxy faux vert top.
Dyno Don was the first Super Stocker to run in the 12s in his 409. I’m not sure whether this was in 1961 or 62.
The shot below shows Hayden Proffitt (foreground) from Fullerton, CA and Dave Strickler from York, PA driving “Old Reliable”. Bill “Grumpy” Jenkins tuned the car for Strickler.
Love those bubble-tops. Our family car at the time was a flat-roof ’61 Bel Air 2-door sedan with the old Stovebolt 235 six, 3-on-the-tree, and not much else. It was turquoise metallic.
At the same time, my aunt bought a new ’61 Olds Dynamic 88 bubble-top. Quite the contrast, with its airy greenhouse (not that the flat roof was confining), Rocket V8 power, and the infamous Roto-Hydramatic (although I don’t remember the tranny being problematic). The car was medium blue, with a matching cloth and vinyl interior. It had whitewalls with dog-dish hubcaps and trim rings. Riding in the back seat, I recall you could see the sky by looking straight up.
She kept the car long enough that I was able to drive it; I actually preferred the manual steering in our bare-bones ’67 Chevy (that replaced the ’61), because the Olds’ power steering had basically no road feel.
Wasn’t it awesome when you could still buy cars like this with such a huge glass area? (matched with really powerful a/c I hope!). I miss great visibility and the feeling of airiness.
Back in those days nobody had a/c.
My dad’s 56 Ford didn’t have A/C but their ’65 Comet had it. But then again they lived in Houston when they bought it.
No a/c in my aunt’s car; that was the norm in Pittsburgh then. You just rolled down the windows!
The only car that I’d experienced with air up to about the mid-60s (or maybe even later) was my great uncle’s 1958 Cadillac Fleetwood Sixty Special.
“Seats too low, Powerglide, particularly dull steering, undersized brakes, soft springs, did I miss something, Jim?”
No, I think you have it. 🙂 I actually like the look of the bubbletop, just like I like the Ford Starliners better than the regular Galaxie hardtops.
What hits me about this car is that was another example of what would become common in the 60s. Chevy trying to do its own thing but then doing a quick reverse to follow Ford. Ford had been doing the big formal C pillar look since the 58 TBird, and the 59 Ford was a huge seller. Chevy’s 61 continued its traditional theme while Ford continued to push the more formal look. After a single year, Chevy gave up and followed Ford on rooflines (arguably coming up with an even more attractive treatment). The 62 Bel Air bubbletop seems to me the idea of someone in accounting “Hey – we have to pay for that tooling, you can’t stop making that yet.”
The formal roof hardtop coupe is an example of GM making lemonade out of lemons. The wide C pillar and flat roof were obviously inspired by the Ford Galaxie and Thunderbird, but GM added its own flourishes with the pressed-in convertible top “bows” and slightly more “formal” rear window. People loved it, and Ford and Chrysler quickly offered the same styling features in their cars.
I doubt the ’62 Bel Air bubble-top contributed much payback on the tooling for GM; they were rare birds even back in the day (I was there)!
Considering that the same roof was used on all GM B-body 2-door hardtops in ’61 (and with only a slight variation for Cadillac), I’d say GM probably made good on its investment.
Interesting how roof shapes were in rapid flux during that period. The formal roof took over briefly, but then Ford introduced a much more sloping rear window on its 63 1/2 Galaxie 2-door hardtop. Then GM upped the ante in ’65 with those spectacular semi-fastbacks.
“Seats too low, Powerglide, particularly dull steering, undersized brakes, soft springs”
I should have Paul come drive my ’64 Impala since I’m just an hour up the road. Maybe I’m just used to how the seats sit, although I’ve seen similar complaints from road tests at the time.
But compared with other cars of its era, the power steering in my Impala actually gives you a little bit of feel, even though you have to twirl that big wheel a lot (which I actually kinda like). Chevy’s brake drums were actually decent sized, and I have no trouble slowing down on my favorite hilly road, although I recognize the limitations of drum brakes and don’t push them too hard.
Nor do I have any complaints about the suspension; the springs may be soft, but unlike its contemporaries, it’s not at all floaty. The ’64 Impala I learned to drive in would heel over when I drove it briskly over a winding road, but it was stable and easy to handle, despite the skinny bias plies. I solved that problem with the Impala I have now with wider tires and a rear stabilizer bar. Add a set of good shocks, and I’ve got a car that’s a pleasure to drive and lives up to its Jet Smooth ad claims. True, my car has been slightly modified, but the inherent goodness was already there.
The Powerglide is definitely a minus, and it’s ridiculous that Chevy stuck with it for far too long. When high gear started going out on mine, I put in a THM700R4, which dropped highway RPMs by 1,000 and increased gas mileage by 2-3 MPG. Fortunately, the 1-2 shift happens at about the same point as it did on the Powerglide, and the 2-3 and 3-4 shifts are virtually imperceptible, so it doesn’t feel that much different.
Back to the subject car, I love the bubble tops, as well as the more formal rooflines from 1962-64. But I especially like the 1961-64 four-door hardtop rooflines and the more even proportions you get with the two extra doors.
I think Paul was just reciting the litany he has heard so often from me. Some of these things may have been fixed for 64, but driving my college roomie’s 62 Bel Air 2 door sedan was like a prison sentence after having been used to my 59 Plymouth Fury. As a Mopar lover, I (of course) have some pretty relaxed standards for how power steering should feel, but my God, man – nobody should have to live with 6 full turns lock to lock. 🙂
It sounds like you have a nice car. I would imagine that doubling the gears in the tranny would make the car much more liveable.
It’s definitely quieter at highway speeds.
There’s a nearly 180º turn I have to make getting on or off my favorite back road, and there’s some serious wheel twirling involved.
http://goo.gl/maps/EL61E
First of all, I absolutely HATE show cars. Like a commenter said above, these cars did not look like that when new, and seeing overly-perfect cars of ANY vintage – well, if I were a bad guy, I’d want to key every stinkin’ one of them – with a diamond cutter!
Now, back to my regularly scheduled comment:
An associate in the air force in 1970 owned one of these 1962 Bel-Air bubbles. His was a factory darker metallic red with matching interior.
It was a fairly nice car, but even at that what is now considered a fairly young age, it had its share of patina. He was from Phoenix and that sunshine as well as the Sacramento valley sun did its work on it.
Those too young to remember or weren’t even around then have to realize cars didn’t age like now. They got old…quick!
That being said, of course I would love to have that car, but I would have it painted in an original hue, not looking like it’s on fire or from fantasy world.
I agree with you — as much as I love old cars, I don’t care for show cars. Unrestored showroom new cars are interesting but still I never really know what I’m looking at. Israel or clever fakery? I want to see the real thing, not what some guy I don’t know THINKS I should see.
Aged vehicles with a some patina are my favorite. Still nice but not too nice to feel guilty about driving it around and occasionally flexing its muscles.
That color is called Roman Red and is a stock 62 color. But I’m sure it’s not the crappy laquers of the day. Probably base clear. I like it!!!
Just stumbled in here – completely new to the site, but Mr Cavanaugh already owes me for another keyboard. ‘Chevrolet copying Ford’?!?!? I spit my iced tea all over the place. Then my sides began to hurt from laughing so hard.
I don’t want to get into , nor start, another Chevy vs Ford debate/argument. It’s pointless and neither side will ever concede. But come on, let’s be serious and consider reality here.
And zackman…dude. Relax. And stay away from car shows. sheesh.
I love this car, but I don’t care for the color. Maybe in midnight blue.
If it were a ’61, it would be perfect.
Chevy designers had all the cylinders firing during those years.
In later 1968 I was looking for a ’62 Impala HT because I liked the sweet roof line. Well, I found a Belair instead. I first layed eyes on it I thought it was a “California Custom”. Very common back then. I asked the seller if it was a custom. No, he said, it is original. 77,300 mi. It was a 2dr HT however. It was red on red, 327 w/3sp. Perfect original condition. We never called it a Bubbletop. It was just a Belair. I drove it to college here in Bakersfield. Honestly, it was no big deal. I paid $550. Really!!!!! I have since purchased another ’62 Belair HT (2008) factory 4sp., 327. Very original but rusty(fromNJ). Sweet car!!
1962 chevy bel air Red CAR