At Curbside Classic, we love automotive time capsules, so here’s an interesting one. Not a time capsule from 1963 when this car was new, but rather from about 20 years later. Early 1960s full-size Chevys like this one were certainly not rare when built. The bread and butter of North America’s automotive landscape, about 1.5 million were produced annually between 1961 and ’64. By the 1980s, however, many of the dwindling survivors looked similar to this car. When I’d see a sedan like this Bel Air back then, it would invariably be a grizzled-looking survivor with faded paint, patches of rust, torn upholstery, and worthy of the respect given to something that beat the odds just by surviving.
My brother-in-law sent me these pictures from Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, a climate not known for preserving old vehicles. Yet this car appears to be used regularly, and is the very essence of a genuine Curbside Classic. Seeing a 60-year-old sedan in daily-driver condition is probably more unusual than seeing a new Lamborghini, so let’s celebrate this find and admire this unusual time capsule.
While in 1963, Bel Air occupied the middle rung on Chevy’s full-size ladder, when the nameplate first appeared in 1950 it was used on Chevy’s range-topping hardtop model.
Bel Air remained at the pinnacle of Chevrolet’s range until 1958, when it was displaced by the Impala. Following Impala’s introduction, the formerly toppy Bel Air was relegated to second-fiddle in Chevy status and advertising.
After the flashy 1959-60 models, Chevrolet’s full-sized cars were redesigned for 1961, featuring a cleaner look and (importantly) a de-finned early-60s style.
Each of the next several years brought fairly significant annual design changes, even though the car’s basic platform remained the same. The 1962 model above, for instance, featured completely new sheetmetal, and lost some of the 1961’s unique design elements, such as the “V-shaped” trunklid.
For 1963, Chevrolet’s design changed again. Described in marketing materials as a “clean, refreshing style,” this design shook the remaining vestiges 1950s extravagance and fully embraced the 1960s’ simplicity. The ’63 Chevys looked smooth as a full hardtop (offered only on the higher-end Impala), but even on the standard sedan, pillars were thin and contemporary, giving the roof an almost floating look. Additionally, the wraparound windshield was gone, with a contemporary profile and straight windshield pillars taking its place.
Though these cars gained a bit in exterior dimensions for ’63, the main visual change was that Chevrolet gave its sedans what it considered a “refined luxury look.” In early 1960s parlance, that meant clean lines and an abundance of horizontal design themes. “Luxury” may have been an exaggeration, but it was certainly a clean and classy design representative of its times.
Our featured car is a Bel Air, the middle of Chevrolet’s three full-size models. Entry-level Biscayne sedans listed for $2,373 in 1963, and came rather sparsely equipped. An additional $168 (or 7% of Biscayne’s base price) got buyers a Bel Air, with slightly higher trim levels and easily distinguishable from the Biscayne by some additional exterior flourishes such as the thin strip of bright molding along the lower edge of the doors. A further $117 would upgrade buyers to the ritzier Impala – again quickly identifiable by exterior trim, notably six tail lights and an aluminum rear panel trim piece.
One might assume that as the middle vehicle in this lineup, Bel Air would have been the strongest seller. However, Impalas outsold Bel Airs and Biscaynes combined by almost two-to-one. Most buyers appreciated the added amenities for a relatively modest price premium.
Unsurprisingly, Bel Airs were popular with frugal buyers – not quite the Biscayne’s penalty box, but little in the way of frivolous extras. Chevrolet also promoted Bel Airs as fleet vehicles, and ran a series of ads in business-related publications highlighting the car’s practical features and reasonable operating costs.
As the above ads indicate, full-size Chevrolets came standard with a six-cylinder engine, and had six different V-8s available. Not surprisingly, the 6-cylinder was common on the lost-cost Biscaynes, but V-8s predominated on Chevy’s costlier models. In 1963, three-quarters of Biscaynes were produced with the six, while that decreased to 43 percent of Bel Airs and only 8 percent of Impalas.
Our featured car was in the minority – a six-cylinder Bel Air. 1963 marked a milestone for Chevy’s full-size range because the long-produced Stovebolt Six was replaced in favor of a new 230-cu. in. “Turbo-Thrift” engine that produced 140 hp. This new engine produced more power than its predecessor, but was over 20 percent lighter.
The 1961-64 Chevrolets are interesting because the styling changed so markedly with each year. Looking at the ’63 models, simplifying the previous car’s ornamentation resulted in a much plainer design. The early 1960s may have pioneered simplistic luxury, but on lower-end cars, the result could end up being sadly plain. The Chevys wandered close to that line, but in my opinion still ended up being more inspiring that some competitors, such as the equivalent Plymouths.
One wonders if many buyers were a bit surprised by this design’s relative simplicity after years of flashier Chevys. However, if that was the case, sales figures reveal it didn’t make much of a difference. Chevrolet sold 1.57 million full-size cars for 1963, an increase of nearly 150,000 over ’62, and about 380,000 over the 1961 models.
Circling this car, one can quickly find details unique to the ’63 Chevys. This grille, for instance – featuring a horizontal ridge line – was unique to 1963. An emphasis on horizontal lines is a recurring theme in the ’63’s design attributes. Accentuating horizontality, this grille extended the car’s full width, whereas the previous year’s grille design was placed only between the headlights. This small detail really did add to an illusion of width. Not all design changes emphasized lower, lower and wider, though; some were just changes for the sake of changing. For example, amber turn signals represented another new front-end touch for ’63, replacing the previous clear lenses.
Around back we see some more new-for-’63 horizontal themes – the trim surrounding the tail light panel has pointed outer edges, visually stretching out the car. Also new was the trunklid’s depressed center area, creating an artistic-looking rear view.
Here we get a glance at the interior that over a million people per year chose to call home. The previous year’s dashboard was redesigned with more of a jet-age instrument cluster fitting with the times. We can gauge the original owner’s priorities here – a Powerglide automatic transmission ($199 extra), but few other options. This car still contains the original manual (instead of the extra-cost Push-button) AM radio. Newly optional for 1963 Chevrolets was an AM/FM radio, though it had a very small take rate.
This brochure image shows what our featured car’s interior looked like when new. Cloth seating surfaces with vinyl side panels give the car a soft, yet functional appearance.
This car’s original color is tough to ascertain, but it was most likely Satin Silver, since that’s the most closely matching of Bel Air’s five colors that were available with a blue interior.
Sculptured side panels and pointed front and rear fenders that characterize the 1963 redesign can be seen from this angle – again, a horizontal theme. The straight side creaseline runs the car’s complete length, while the lower accent line runs from behind the front fender straight through to the back. All of this accentuates the car’s length (which did, in fact, grow almost an inch between 1962 and ’63).
While Chevrolet again facelifted its full-size cars for 1964, those changes were more modest than those from the previous several years. New bumpers, grille, side moldings and squared-off fender lines provided what Chevrolet called a “longer-looking silhouette”, even though the length actually shrank by a half-inch. Chevy’s full-size line was then completely redesigned for 1965.
For decades a car such as this would have been commonplace enough to blend into the background anywhere in North America. After all, Chevrolet sat on top of the world in 1963, producing 2.2 million cars, or 30 percent of North America’s total automotive output. But with the passage of enough time, even a six-cylinder Bel Air assumes unicorn-like qualities, and it’s delightful to look over the everyday features on a car such as this. May this time capsule continue to ply the shores of Lake Superior for many years to come.
Photographed in July 2023 in Copper Harbor, Michigan.
Unlikely as it may seem a ’63 Bel Air was a luxury car. In Australia.
The locally assembled cars had the 283 2bbl/Powerglide, power steering, power brakes, heater, clock, leather seat facings, and cut pile carpeting.
Outside we got the Impala’s six tail lights.
An Impala in all but name.
Chris,
Having spent the past 60 plus years studying GMH (c.k.d.) assembled 1949 to 1968 Chevrolets and Pontiacs in some detail, I have to correct you own a couple of points.
The 1963 RHD Chevrolet Belair 4 door sedan that GMH assembled as its top of range luxury car was, for the time well equipped, however power brakes were not standard equipment.
Power Brakes did not become standard équipement on Australian assembled Chevrolets until the 1964 model. 1963 was the first year that power steering became standard equipment.
As you state Australian GMH assembled Chevrolet Belairs from 1962 through to 1965 have six tail lights (Impala trunk lids). However the 1966 GMH assembled Chevrolet Belairs only had 4 tail lights. From 1967 until 1970 GMH only assembled Impala 4 door sedans and 4 door sport sedans.
On a closing note, the leather upholstery used in the Australian assembled Chevrolets until 1966 was considered to be equal in quality to the leather used in Rolls Royces of the time.
I’ve learnt something new. Mine did have power brakes, but it’s been 40 odd years.
Another one I should have kept…….
Chris,
A very high percentage of GMH assembled right hand drive ‘63 Chevrolet Belair 4 door sedan were fitted with PBR ‘after market’ power brake units, but none of them rolled off the GMH assembly line with power brakes as standard equipment.
1963 was also the first year that GMH fitted a heater / demister as standard equipment. A radio did not become standard equipment until 1967.
Over the past 3 or 4 years I have been regularly writing articles that have been published in the Australian magazine ‘Restored Cars’. My articles cover in detail GMH assembled Chevrolet & Pontiac from 1949 through to early in 1970.
The current edition has my article on 1964 models. The edition immediately prior to the current edition has my 1963 article. This is a subject of considerable interest to me, but one that even GMH themselves tried to totally forget.
Its very difficult for Americans to understand that in the 1950s and 1960s, the Chevrolet brand meant high class expensive luxury to Australians.
A ’61 of that same olive color is in my neighborhood now, at the same house where I saw a ’41 Champion several years ago.
Cool find! Copper Harbor is about as far north as you can get in Michigan; it’s at the top of the Keweenaw Peninsula, which is a beautiful area. But it seems like you’re never going to get there when you’re driving.
Cars may last longer up there than they do in more urban settings because they often use sand rather than salt on the roads.
Even though these pictures were taken by relatives, we were in the Keweenaw Peninsula as well this summer. It’s a wonderful place, and one that I’d like to revisit.
I found the size and geography of the Keweenaw surprising, even though it’s someplace I’ve long read about. It takes two hours to drive from bottom to top, and the mountainous terrain isn’t quite what one expects in Michigan. It’s beautiful and serene, and like nowhere else in the Midwest. I couldn’t help wondering about their winter road maintenance – the place gets stupefying amounts of snow, so I wouldn’t be surprised if road salt just isn’t terribly useful. I did see more older cars and trucks in the Upper Peninsula than what I’d expected.
Those of us who inhabit the Lower Peninsula are referred to by Yoopers as “trolls,” who live below the bridge (Mackinac Bridge that is).
Chevrolets of that era were advertised to give a jet smooth ride. Thanks to the 2-speed power glide transmission and V-8 engine.
Great work as always Eric. Gee, I remember occasionally still seeing these on the road in the mid ’70s. A neighbour across the street had one in white, and the rust was alarming. One of the first cars I recall, being able to see the ground through significantly rusted openings in the floorboards. Look at the size of the transmission hump, made six person seating, very undesirable.
As a kid, the plainness and austerity of so many remaining early and mid ’60s cars, did significantly turn me off autos from this era for a number of years. Compounded by typically very dull and badly oxidized paint, and subdued colours. Very conservative from a late ’70s POV.
I do find the ’61 and ’62 designs more commercial and attractive. Found this design a step backwards. More conservative, and less interesting.
Really the 63 is conservative? For some reason I have always had a great desire to own a 63 Impala. It was the rear end treatment that attracted me. OTOH I thought the 64 was boring. Now I have never ridden in a 63,,, go figure. I have only ridden in one Impala in my life and it was a 66 convertible. I have changed the oil in a 64 as two sisters I knew in 1975 at SDSU shared one and asked me if I could. That Bel Air is rare but I know of a 64 around my block that is in similar shape always under a cover. Nothing like rare finds…
Less is sometimes more. Styling tastes are subjective of course. But I found the cleaner bodysides on other 1963 full-sized GM cars, all looked more modern and tidier. For me, the extruded lower bodyside jetstream-like crease on the Chevrolets, looks more dated. Combining that strong lower crease with the enclosed rear wheel archs, doesn’t look as clean or fresh as Catalina, LeSabre or 88, styling to me. More gimmicky.
Just my personal preference, but I much prefer the styling on the full-sized 1963 Pontiacs, Oldsmobiles and Buicks. To me, looks more sophisticated, cleaner, and more modern.
Thanks for the tease of your GLC. Looks awesome!
I find the design cleaner here. Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Buick styling aged better IMO.
Less contrived. Again, styling being subjective. Plus unfortunately, I do associate the Chevrolet’s styling with taxis and government fleets.
Actually you are right. At first I didn’t think that Olds was a 63. The view from the side is nicer than that of the Chevrolet once you look over the whole car. What really mesmerized me about the 63 was the chrome back panel with six taillights seen on the SS. Of course the SS was not all that common. I was only nine at the time and not into cars just yet.
Oh, the GLC is not mine. Belongs to a retired US Navy Chief Warrant Officer who I have know since 1999. He has had it since birth along with two other Japanese vehicles from 1970 and 1976. Their condition is top notch as one would expect from someone who worked on and then oversaw maintenance on the P-3 Orion ASW plane. COAL on both besides 8 other articles that may never get put up…
I just found the styling offered by the three GM medium-priced divisions, more modern and appealing. Their styling looking five years newer, than the 1963 Chevrolets IMO. Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Buick styling would still look clean and fresh by the late ’60s. The ’63-’64 Chevrolets showing their age. Yes, the rear facings of full-sized Chevrolet Impalas were original.
The GLC looks great. Always impressed by California cars where the exterior plastics, still look fresh and new. Very impressive.
We had the Lockheed CP-140 Aurora here in Canada, based upon the Orion. Nice aircraft!
Looking forward to your COAL series. Love your Mazda 626. If you and Paul can get an email address that works for both of you!
In writing this piece, I kept vacillating between which of the early 1960s Chevy designs I preferred. Though I like the clean lines of these ’63s, I do feel they stray into that “sadly plain” category, especially on the lower trim levels.
Overall, I like the rear design of the ’61s, and the cleaner front design of these ’63s. For the mid section, it’s a tossup for me, because I do like ’61 and ’62’s sloping crease line, but then I feel that the straighter A-pillars on the ’63 was an improvement.
Yes, there are elements that are appealing from each model year. But no one design, is strongly appealing to me. Starting to see a fleet look to Chevrolet full-sized four-door sedan styling. Your photographed example, makes me immediately think ‘taxi’. Since I wasn’t there, what I saw by the ’70s, were not flattering examples.
Great write up and what a nice example to come across. Against the grain here, I will speak in favor of the cleaner 63-65 design and I do not feel I’m alone, these years are very recognized in popular culture.
A few years ago my friend came across a cheap but decent ‘61 4 door Bel Air. He enjoyed it for a while, did some cruises and car shows but had a hard time selling it, even cheaply. Not many wanted a ‘61…
Absolutely superb story. These survivor cars are still found in Australia from time to time but to see one in a climate such as Michigan is amazing.
Additionally, to see it run on stock wheels and seemingly with the original motor makes it even more impressive. Cared for correctly those 60s barges can still do a job many years later, and for all of the criticisms that can be found, this example demonstrates that Chevy could and did make a good product and very economically.
Well Justin, I am not certain that I agree 100% with your comment ‘these survivor cars are still found in Australia’.
GMH assembled just under 2000 Chevrolet Belair 4 door sedans in 1963. Few, very few survive in anything close to original spec. Finding one that has not been extensively modified is very hard.
That said, I am aware of an exceptional low mileage ‘63 RHD Belair that recently been offered for sale at around $45,000 AUD. But this is a rare example.
So you’ve just confirmed by the example that you’ve quoted that they do exist in Australia, exactly as I had said.
Yes, currently there is ‘one’ example available but it’s the only low mileage example that I have seen in the past 50 years and the reality is that the next owner is unlikely to appreciate its originality and more like to fit disc brakes, after market wheels and loud exhaust.
Let me assure you, that correct original survivor examples are very few and far between. The few examples that exist amount to fewer than perhaps 5 cars and these car rarely come on the market.
Factory RHD early 1960s Chevrolets are seriously rare, rarer than any 409 4 speed coupes!
Hence my phrase, “from time to time”. The car you have identified is available and surviving at this time, exactly as I had said. I’m not sure if you actually maintain an ownership register for one of these but feel free to share it if you do.
I had reached the age of 3 when these were introduced, so they have been around for my entire life, and were extremely common for the first 1/3 of that life. Both of the 63 Chevys in my family past were Bel Airs, oddly enough. My father had a white wagon and a step-grandpa had a brown sedan with a white painted roof. He kept that one until the mid 70’s, and it was quite rusty with terribly chalky paint (that looked gray instead of brown) by then.
I have always found the 63 the most attractive Chevrolet of the entire decade. I think the 64 is very plain, but find the 63 to have lots of visual interest. The pointed front and rear fenders, the heavy side sculpting on the lower body, and the complicated shape of the rear of the car make these visually interesting.
You mention an “instrument cluster” – I can tell you that there are precious few instruments in that cluster. Like a speedo and gas gauge. OK, maybe a clock, too. In other words, what I have always called the old “GM full instrumentation package”. But that can be forgiven now, and I salute the guy who keeps this one running.
OK – so I realize now that “cluster” was a bit of an exaggeration. But it’s a good-looking dash, so from a few feet away it really looks like a cluster!
I too like the ’63s more than the ’64 design (those pointed fenders are a good touch), but I’m still on the fence about which of these ’61-63 designs I like the most.
I went to high school in a small town near Madison, Wisconsin in the early 1970s. At that time these early ‘60s full size Chevies were the prototypical beater. Four doors, six cylinders, three on the tree, maybe a radio. Usually owned by local farmers, and at the end of their useful life (LOTS of salt on the roads during the endless winters) these cars were sold to high school students for a couple hundred bucks. Far more affordable than the Mustangs and Camaros we really wanted.
Prototypical high school beaters when I attended HS in the early ’80s were any 1968-72 GM A body, The muscle-car versions were already becoming valuable, but the millions of basic Chevelles or Le Mans sedans or post coupes with a 6 cylinder or one of the smaller V8’s? That was a $400 used car…
The dash is identical to my Dad’s ’64 Impala wagon. I sat in the middle, Mom to the right, and Dad driving. It was made of metal!! There were seat belts, but no one used them at the time.
Great find. Six cylinder powerglide would not set any records but perhaps it has helped this example proceed slowly towards the end on it’s useful life. Not there yet for sure.
Although I appreciate all the full sized Chevys from this period, the trunk overhang does look rather comical compared to what we’re used to in 2023.
I must admit I don’t get the kid on the ladder trying to get the cat down from the roof on the ’61. What advertising idiot dreamt that one up? Why not have the kid in front of the car playing with the cat? I don’t see the relevance of showing how tall the car is when long and low was typical of the day.
Good point. I don’t get that either, but given the ’63 Bel Air image shown here too, maybe Chevy’s artistic director in those days just had a thing for illustrating random kids on ladders?
They are just props to add visual interest to the illustrations. Too much predictability, and the drawings would be boring. With unusual negative space, it draws attention. Without taking away from the car.
Recall how Norman Rockefeller paintings always had unique subjects, in unexpected poses. It captures your attention!
From 1961-1964, Chevrolet showed how to create a well balanced, strong and clean design. While my favorite is the 1961, the next three years are also superb. This is not a “plain” car at all. When compared to the 1965 Ford or Plymouth that tried to copy – it isn’t any competition. The Chevrolet exterior design is leaner, faster and better looking. The proportions are perfect. A key is using horizontal head and tail lights. These compliment the overall design. Making those tail light round is like adding salt and butter to stewed tomatoes – just the right thing to do.
I read lots of compliments regarding the Pontiac of this era, but the Chevrolets are just better looking. There is an art to minimalism and this generation of Chevrolets showed how to do that in a full sized car. There was no need for ornamentation. There was no need for styling gimmicks.
Too often we don’t stop to look at how well a simple design is crafted. Any mistakes on these cars would stick out like an eyesore. It was easy to see rust on these. It is easy to overlook how well Chevrolet design were artists in modern design here.
Chevrolet still impresses. It is rare that they make styling mistakes.
Yup, this is the way I remember them, ’70s-early 80s. Really hard to find now.
Among full-size Chevys, I would see a fair amount of 55-57s, almost no 58s, a few 59s, many more 60s, 61s were rarer, 63-64 most common. More Impalas than Bel Airs, and Biscaynes were rare. I would see more Chevys than comparable Fords, and virtually no Plymouths!
These were typically “little old lady” (or “old man”) cars–elderly people who only drove to the supermarket and the foot doctor, didn’t want to go through the fuss of buying a new car, liked what they were used to, and resisted change. How many cars of this era surviving today were inadvertently preserved by people like this?
I wrote a similar post about the 64s:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/uncategorized/ccs-for-sale-two-1964-chevrolet-biscayne-sedans-plain-and-unmolested/
That was a great article about those ’64s. And when I first saw this one, I thought it was that Desert Beige color, in part because that seemed to be the predominant color I remember, and also it was faded to look beige-ish. But the blue interior led me to think otherwise.
I always thought it was sad that the upscale name like Bel Air became second fiddle. I don’t know if marketing would have worked for the time, but Impala could have been the sport model and Bel Air could have been a more sedate, but with some “luxury”, model…..(at least with 6 lights across the back and leave the Biscayne with 4.)
Things sort of worked that way later when Caprice became top tier. But by then Bel Air had the low statis stigma stuck to it when it could have been a better fit when Ford and Chevy were starting to emphasize luxury at an affordable price.
That aside, the ’61 is my favorite. I remember our black ’60 Brookwood looked suddenly much out of date when the ’61 s came. I wanted so much for my Dad to get that but I understood he was too practical to change cars that soon.
An interesting point to me was the Ford sold better that year and still had tail fins. Could it be that enough people weren’t prepared to part with them yet? By ’62, they were gone.
Minor detail: this is the only year for full size Chevys to have that six cylinder badge on the front fender, presumably as a nod to the brand new 230 inch Turbo Thrift six under the hood, which finally replaced the venerable 235 six.
Regarding the “weighs 20% lighter”, that seems a bit modest, as the new 230 six weighed only 440 lbs compared to the 630 lbs for the 235, or about 30% lighter. That reduction went straight to the total curb weight; the ’63 Bel Air 6 4-door weighed only 3280 lbs, 200 less than the ’62, quite light for the times.
I found this on eBay
I did image serches for 230 and this badge, according to the eBay seller was for the 1964-1967 Chevrolets. Looking through Old Car Brochures didn’t turn up anything looking like it on full size Chevrolets, however. Based on what I saw in the brochures, full sized Chevrolets either had the “V” badge with flags NOT designating the size of the engine, OR the “V” badge WITH the size of V8 numerically above it.
So if anything, I think this badge could have been used on a Chevelle. It seems that the 230 Turbo Thrift wasn’t badged on full sized Chevys after 1963.
That badge was used on Chevelles and Chevy IIs to indicate that the optional 230 six had been specified instead of the standard 194 six. It was not used on full size Chevys.
That was the conclusion I reached as well. It’s always tricky to prove a negative. So I suspect based on the brochures I’ve looked through after 1963 for a 230 Turbo Thrift badge, 1963’s little “bug” on its fender was discontinued and there wasn’t anything in use for those full size Chevrolets with this engine after. That 1963 badge on the full size Chevrolets didn’t even look as nice as these that were on the intermediate and compact Chevrolets.
It’s interesting to see the different opinions on “peak styling” for those years. At the time, as a kid, I disliked the ‘63’s and preferred the ‘61-62 and the subsequent ‘64, though of course when the sleek ‘65 Chevy, and in fact the Ford with its sharp edges and stacked lights, appeared I felt we’d entered a new modern era. Looking back now, they’re all good, but of the pre-65 years I think the 1962 looks best. Not many of these seen as daily drivers here in coastal California now; in fact I feel like they were already infrequently seen old cars by the Seventies. Except for Beetles, old Volvo’s, pickups and early Mustangs, not much seemed to hang around after ten years or so.
Always liked these cars. My parents had a ’63 Bel Air four door sedan with six and manual trans like this but theirs was red with a white painted roof.
Perhaps because we had a ’61 Impala I’m partial to that year. One thing I never could figure out, Impalas had three tail lights – two red and one white, Bel-Airs had two reds, and Biscayne had one red and one (non-functional) white. That was unless you sprung for the optional backup lights on the Bel-Air then you had one red and one white – looking like a Biscayne from the back.
This ’63 looks identical to the one Tom Cruise’s character drove in “A Few Good Men”. A solid, humble 4-door sedan.
Wow – you’re right. Oddly, I’ve never seen that movie.
Well – with the 1957, there really wasn’t a way to add tail lights. For 1958, the new Impalas had their own rear fenders with a deeper curve towards the trunk deck that permitted the addition of three tail lights. The others, Bel-Air, Biscayne and Delray had the same fenders with a chrome tail light pod that only accommodated two on each side. Back up lights were optional during those years, so when you get to the Biscayne and Delray entry level, it wasn’t uncommon to see one tail light with a dummy tail light next to it.
From 1958 to 1971, the number of tail lights separated Impala from the BelAir and Biscayne, that is, until Biscayne was phased out. In 1972, all full size Chevrolets had three-sectional tail lights, but only the Impala had tiny chrome trim around each while the BelAir was flat black.
As a kid, I could always tell the top of the Chevy line by the number of tail lights – with few exceptions, such as the Caprice in 1966 which had horizontal chrome trim on its tail lights.
One small note: the 1962 did not have all-new sheet metal — much of it was carryover from the 1961, with changes limited mostly to front and rear ends of the car. This never occurred to me actually until once a few years ago I came across an ad for a ’61 Impala that had a ’62 front clip (or maybe it was the other way around, ’62 with a ’61 front clip), making the carryover aspects of the body design obvious. I suspect it might be a similar story with the ’63 and ’64 models.
Yes, and it is the same with the ’63 and ’64. This is most obvious in both cases in the doors, which undoubtedly would interchange in both cases.
In the mid 60s I was in high school in suburban Toronto. Once I was given a ride by the mother of a classmate. She drove a Biscayne (not a BelAir), but it was the only true stripper that I have ever ridden in. No radio, no carpets, and 3 speed column shift. I am sure it was a 6. Very unusual for a fairly affluent suburb, but more comfortable than the back seat of a Metropolitan that I once was given a ride in.
Nice to see a survivor like this, but not a great fan of the styling of the ’62-’64 full size Chevs – to me they look like the boxes the ’61s came in.
This despite a lowrider ’63 Impala convertible (“Touch of Gold”) being Ice Cube’s whip in my favorite movie – Boys ‘N The Hood…
Great piece as always, Eric.
When I was little, my Dad had a ‘66 Impala in Firethorn Red which was our family car. A woman he worked with lived 2 doors up and her husband had a beautiful ’63 Impala SS in white with some red accents that really made an impression on 5-6 year old me.
His car always seemed way cooler than Dad’s, even though ours was newer.
But yeah, full size Chevys were everywhere in those days, like Camrys and Accords today.
I still think if I had to pick a favorite sixties Chevy, it would be the 1968. Dad traded his ‘66 in on a ‘68 Impala Custom Coupe in Grecian Green and it was always a favorite to this day for me.
Thanks! One thing I didn’t include here was that I find the amount of sales of these cars to be mind-boggling my modern standards. While Toyota now sells about 300,000 Camrys in the US each year, Chevy sold four or five times that number of full-size cars back in the 1960s. Just amazing, in perspective. So they were were everywhere.
By ’63, or maybe a few years later, you had to be a really “thrifty” shopper to buy a Biscayne, at least as an individual buyer. The Biscayne was mostly for taxi/police/fleet. I’m sure if an individual went into a Chevy store intent on ordering a Biscayne, the salesman would work very hard to move them up to a Bel Air.
I had an older cousin whose family car was a 1968 Bel Air. Straight six, Powerglide, no A/C, maybe it had P/S and P/B, but that’s it. Even as cheap as he was, he still wouldn’t drive a Biscayne.
Call me crazy, but I love Plain Jane four-doors like the ’63 Bel Air featured here. It’s mind-boggling to realize that such cars dominated America’s automotive landscape once while being almost non-existent today.
This Bel Air is almost identical with my current ride, a ’64 Bel Air with the 230, Powerglide and nothing else.
My Bel Air came from GM’s assembly plant in Antwerp, Belgium, and survived almost 60 years in the Netherlands with plenty of rain and saliferous sea air. God alone knows how many hundreds of thousands of miles the car has already covered in its life so far.
As a matter of fact, the engine is not the one this car rolled off the assembly line with, but rather a substitute taken from a ’67 Camaro, according to the engine number. Still, it’s an unmodified 230 and that’s good enough for me.
The little Six runs well and picks up speed willingly when pressed, even beyond 60 mph. It’s even quite economical. I routinely cover 500 kilometers (310 miles) or more with one tank of gas (18 gallons), mostly in urban and rural areas. Not bad for a heavy car with a small engine.
One of the previous owners gave it a non-original two-tone paint job that I like much better than the original beige. There’s still quite a bit of Bondo on the car, a shortcoming that is being corrected bit by bit in my ongoing “rolling rehab” of the Bel Air.
Musclepower steering and braking took a little getting used to again after decades of driving power-everything luxo-cruisers like my DD ’95 Buick Park Avenue.
Since my Bel Air is an export model, it almost certainly came with a standard heavy-duty suspension usually reserved for taxicabs and cop cars in the US. It sure is not soft and flabby and body roll is low. Also, the Six puts a lot less weight on the front wheels, which brings the Chevy close to an ideal 50/50 weight distribution.
Anyway, I’m really glad I was able to save this ultra-rare low-key sedan from being crushed, parted out, or modified (aka mutilated) beyond recognition.
Here’s a snapshot of the engine.
And, finally, a view of the instrument panel. The speedometer indicates kilometers per hour, by the way.
Nice survivor .
In high school these were the #1 favorite of Low Riders and every lunch period the biggest local club would park nose to tail on both sides of the street filling two blocks .
The engine call out badge is for the 192 CI i6 engines ~ 230 & 250s had their numbers on the top .
Similar to how the base V-8 badge on these same cars was a V sans any numbers, it signified the base 283 CID .
Millions ! wow, I know they were popular but not that much .
-Nate
Nate,
The “230” decal on top of the air cleaner is an aftermarket item that I put there just for the fun of it.
I also have an OEM-type decal for the valve cover, but I kinda like the other one better.
Mike
I was talking about the front fender call out .
-Nate
I see. You were referring to the “6” badge on the ’63 featured here, which is non-original, as you correctly point out.
Full-size Chevys with Sixes didn’t have any external engine callout badges for most of 1960s except the ’63 with the front fender badge you described and the ’68 with the displacement numerals in the front side marker bezels.
I’m not sure about the ’69 – ’73 big Chevy with the 250 having any engine callout badges at all.
Mike
I remember as a child growing up in Cincinnati Ohio, that my parents at one time or another owned 2 1963 Chevrolet SS Impalas. 1 was like a greenish blue with a white top, and the other one was copper in color. I can remember those cars. I just wish I could go back into those days, because my father picked up the copper Impala for 50.00 dollars used from a private owner but this was around 1974 or 1975 . I just love seeing old cars still on the road. And both of those cars had the 283 small block V8 engine, my father said that was one of Chevrolets better engines.