Traffic in most of Tokyo is usually light on weekends. Except in a few places, like Harajuku – that’s always a very busy area, with vast crowds on the sidewalks going to the parks and shops, and streets congested by all manner of motor vehicles. Thanks to this fact, instead of having one stupid blurry shot of this amazing blue Buick, I was able to tag along (I was on a bike, which did help) and snap away.
Ah, Buicks of the ‘50s! Hard to pick a favourite, isn’t it? The over-the-top cetacean ’50, the Last-of-the-Straights 1953 Special, the near perfection of the 1955–56–57 trio (way more attractive than the Tri-Five Chevys, in my opinion), the dramatic 1959-60… I never cared for the 1958 and the 1951-52s are a bit generic. I never really thought much about the ‘54s, chiefly because the three MYs that came right after were so great. Seeing this one burbling past has opened my eyes, though.
Yes, mea maxima culpa. I misjudged the 1954 Buick. The big ones, anyway. On this 127-inch wheelbase, the bulk of the body is spread out a bit better than on the shorter Supers and Specials. And this Riviera hardtop coupe design also looks incredibly good, with those windows down… The open rear wheel, a signature design feature of the 1955-57 Buicks I always adored, is already present in the ‘54s – a fact that I hadn’t really picked up on until seeing this one in the metal.
This post won’t bother much with historical facts and technical data about these cars, really. This has all be gone into thoroughly by other CContributors who know a lot more than I ever will about ‘50s Buicks (specifically Jon Stephenson for the ’54 Roadmaster and Paul’s essential post on the 5.3 litre “Nailhead” V8 that was once behind this beauty’s toothy grille).
I say “once” because I doubt this Buick, lovely though it may be on the outside, is all original underneath. The wheels are a bit of a giveaway. I don’t know for sure, but the engine sounded suspiciously LS-ish… Of course, I don’t exactly have the Nailhead’n’Dynaflow melody memorized – there weren’t many ‘50s Buicks where and when I grew up.
Whatever was propelling this barge is fine by me – one can be a purist with a Buick in the US, but out here, an ocean away from spares and specialists, reliability is perhaps more important. And if a more modern drivetrain (as long as it’s not something really inappropriate, like a Diesel… or a Ford engine) is what it takes for this sublime classic to beautify the streets, then so be it.
The more I look at this blue beauty, the better it gets. I’m still keener on the 1955-57 Buicks, but this close encounter with a 1954 Riviera has caused me to reconsider my top five ‘50s Buicks. The sheer madness (and straight-eightedness) of the 1950 Buick means it’s still in fourth place, but the ’59 just got demoted. Congrats, Riv, you made the list.
Related posts:
Curbside Classic: 1954 Buick Roadmaster – The Distinguished Rocket Ship, by Jon Stevenson
Design History: Buick’s Fully-Open Rear Wheel Wells (1953 – 1957) – The Year-By-Year Opening, by PN
The new for ‘54 wrap around windshield, shared with Olds and Cadillac, was a stroke of genius and really put these cars at the styling forefront. It made all the flat windshield cars seem old and stodgy. It was such a dramatically successful design that all GM, Ford and Chrysler products had the wrap around in ‘55.
The ‘54 Buick was notable as having standard V-8 power across the board and bringing back the Century, with the bigger Roadmaster/Super V-8 on the smaller Special platform.
It wasn’t just the fishbowl windshield; the whole car took a giant leap into the mid-’50s stylistically. At this time, GM’s C body was entirely different from the smaller B body, not just a stretched version of it, and the C body got redesigned a year ahead of the smaller GM cars. Of the three divisions that used the C body, Buick wore the new proportions best. A ’54 Chevy by comparison still looks a bit mired in the 1940s with its tall roof and pontoon rear fenders.
oops should be A body not B. GM confuses me with their re-use of letters for their platforms; “A body” will always make me think of a Chevelle and its ilk, that or the later FWD cars like the Cutlass Ciera.
Gorgeous car. Love the color combination.
I may have a new favorite Riviera.
The old fav being the ’72 Boattail as I mentioned the other day. The only reason I love that one so much is seeing it brand new across the street from where I grew up with my 11-12 year old eyes. I know everyone here prefers the First Gen Riv (’63-’65). Wait, this is a ’54. How the heck does THAT work out? 😉 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buick_Riviera
They used Riviera to designate their hardtop models in the 50s. Olds used Holiday. Not sure when that ended.
1958 was the last year.
The 4 door 6 window hardtop model of the Electra 225 which was more luxurious than other models continued with the name “Riviera” from 1959 to 1962. For 1963-64 the model still existed but it was known as the “6 window hardtop model”. In 1965 the new “C” bodies didn’t have the 6 window hardtop anymore but Buick reintroduced the “Limited” trim option on the Electra 225 Custom 4 door hardtop that had similar interior trim.
I say “once” because I doubt this Buick, lovely though it may be on the outside, is all original underneath. The wheels are a bit of a giveaway.
The wheels are nothing other than wider versions of the originals. Chromed like that and with the baby moons, it was a look that screams 1950s. Very appropriate, and nothing at all to suggest that it’s not essentially original otherwise. The very original steering wheel and steering column reinforces that. Restomods invariably use modern steering columns and steering wheels.
As to the engine sounding “suspiciously LS-ish”, (how exactly does an LS sound differently than other V8s?) keep in mind that the nailhead was known for its rather distinctive sound, which would be nicely amplified by some period-correct low-restriction mufflers. This car screams “original” to me, with the minor exception of somewhat wider rims, that look very appropriate and tasteful in filling out the wheel wells a bit.
Nice! One thing though – you fall into that common trap of grouping B/C body GM cars into that 1955-56-57 cycle of the A bodies. The B/C body Buick and the B body Olds was on a 1954-55-56 cycle (as was the Cadillac). The 57 was all new and the 58 was a very clever and thorough restyling of the 57 body.
So, this 54 groups nicely with the 55 and 56 you already like for a very good reason. Personally, I cannot really agree with your take on the 57, which is kind of like the cartoon version of the 56 in my eyes. But to each his own.
What a treat to get to see this big boat at sail!
Couldn’t have said it better myself, a nice concise explanation of GM’s B/C body evolution during the 1954-58 time frame!
I agree with you also on the ’57 Buick being a cartoon version of the preceding year, same to a lesser extent on the ’57 Olds.
Clever? I think not. Monstrous is more like it.
In the 70s, the steering gear of our ’56 Olds 88 had a persistent leak, which we were told was common for the year, so they replaced it with a ’57 (maybe that was what they could find). I guess the lowered height didn’t make that impossible.
When I was born, we had a ’57 Olds hardtop wagon, which, with the Buick, was certainly an improvement over the frumpy, pillared ’56.
What’s not original at all about this Roadmaster is painting the bottom of the front bumper blue! Who thought that looked good?
The ’53, ’54, ’55 Buicks were the only cars I can remember that made the two tone combination green and yellow look presentable. The two blues on this ’54 look very nice.
I didn’t notice the front bumper at first glance. In my view, it works to reduce the chrominess of the front end and mimics the bladed look of bumpers that became common in the 60s.
I’ll bet the owner has a bulldog–or a serious underbite.
I think Japan must have perfected the time-tunnel. It’s like a giant temporal Wet-Vac, with the intake positioned exactly at the end of Detroit assembly lines in 1954 or 1967 or any chosen year. A car is sucked off the line and simultaneously deposited in modern Tokyo.
There’s a great detail shop in that tunnel. There’s no way the paint looked like that…
Wow, what an amazing find! Top of the line, 2-door hardtop, fine condition, and stunning in that 2-tone blue.
The only one more expensive was the Skylark – and how interesting that the 54 Skylark I saw at a show about a month ago was the same colors.
Original or not, I’d take it over anything else in these photos. And the painted bumper is fine with me.
“… streets congested by all manner of motor vehicles… I was able to tag along … and snap away…”.
Memories of being a pedestrian in NYC and doing a lot of walking. I’d often be side by side with one vehicle for more than a mile (20 blocks) if traffic was stop-and-creep.
I wasn’t taking photos. That can get one into trouble in NYC regardless of the fact it is legal. Besides, this was the 1970s, cameras were not yet in not-yet-invented cell phones.
Four portholes, no B pillar, and Dynaflow. Very nice find. If it is original, it starts, stops, sounds like, and turns like an old wooden cabin cruiser.
Beautiful car and captures of it! I especially like the context of where it is, given the bent toward appreciation of certain aspects of old Americana in this part of the world. Nicely done.
No reason the Buick can’t be reliable. Sure its not going to start as effortlessly as a modern car, but with regular servicing it’s not a issue.
As an owner of a 53 year old car, I reckon the only way to keep an old car reliable is to use it regularly.
Compare this to any model Packard in 1954. Even though the ’55 Packard was great…
The ’54, ’55 & ’56 All Shared the Same Body Style. The ’57 Model Was Lower and Wider.