One of the wonders of a car show, and indeed CC, is finding the familiar car in the unfamiliar setting – a 1948 Morris Minor up against a 1975 Maserati; or as I saw yesterday, a 1990 Cadillac Brougham against a 1955 Morris Oxford and a cricket match. What can be even better is finding the unfamiliar car in the familiar setting – in this case a 1960 Buick Invicta against a Morris Minor Traveller at a predominantly steam traction oriented rally.
Let’s get the confession out of the way – despite too many years (with the Internet Explorer history files and bookcases to prove it) of intensive scholarship and academic rigour, I had not heard of the Invicta. Le Sabre, Electra, Riviera, Skylark were all familiar names, but not Invicta, so some study was required.
From what I can discern, the Invicta was a combination of the body of the Le Sabre with the 325 hp 401 cu (6.6 litre) V8 (of course) engine from the larger Electra. So, this is a car with a length of 217 in. – rather than 225 in. like the top of the range Electra 225 – a wheelbase of over 10 ft and weight of 2 tons. All good reason to upgrade from a mere 6 litre V8, and perhaps why the car was known as the Banker’s Hot Rod. Hot Rods are for straight roads, not bends, as well, which may well be appropriate.
This particular car is a 1960 Invicta hardtop, quite possibly the best looking of a striking range of options, privately imported to the UK recently from Lake Tahoe. It has been fitted with some air suspension mods and non-standard wheels, and is in pretty much concours condition, if modified visually by the non-stock wheels and ride height.
This car does something else as well, in Curbsidelandia. Paul Niedermayer recently showed us the Mercedes-Benz 300d Hardtop – a car with a very different heritage to the Buick but from the same year, and what I described in the comments as “the best looking car on CC this year”. Whether the Buick is better looking than the Mercedes is a personal preference; I’m hard pressed to make a choice but I could be swayed by the subtle references to the confidence and excitement of the jet age in the Buick.
For example, look at how the headlights pick up clues for the B52 engine pods, the rear lights and their surroundings look like afterburners (like this car needs afterburners), the drama of the interior with the mirro-magic instruments, aircraft style switches and the sort of style that only an 18 ft long car can manage.
If you want to find out more about these cars (and I know you do) try this wonderful site www.the1960buick.com, created by someone who clearly knows his stuff.
Another great read,thank you Roger.An attractive car which bridged the transition from fins and chrome to the straight edged early 60s look.It made the 60 Mopar opposition look very old fashioned and though I’m a Ford and Mercury fan I like this car a lot
CC effect nearly strikes as I’m in Blackpool for the punk festival and air show and I’ve seen a 59 Buick in metallic blue with an identical roof .A red 59 Electra coupe from the USAF base near my Grandparents got my brother and myself interested in American cars in the early 60s
Gem,
give my regards to the Tower, and whatever you do, do NOT go to Harry Ramsden’s fish and chips in Blackpool.
Will do Roger.A meat pie still frozen in the middle from Harry Ramsdens is one of the reasons I’m a veggie!One visit was enough,I got away unscathed but my sister had a nasty case of food poisoning
Never realised that a beige car with beige interior could look so glamorous!
Speaking of interiors, what’s wrong with wrap-around windshields? I have never driven a car so equipped – perhaps there are some issues I’m not anticipating, but I have become obsessed with sightlines lately. Must all modern a-pillars be so intrusive in the name of safety?
I know distortion was an issue, but 50 years on I wonder if we could solve this problem. There is just something very appealing about moving down the road in that ’60 Invicta… as though I were in a giant glass fishbowl with a windscreen that wrapped around into the next state. (Credit: P.J. O’Rourke. I think.)
With the wrap-around windshields, I have read and heard the resultant contortion of the a-pillar caused intimate moments between ones knees and the pillar upon entry and exit. Like you, distortion of objects would be preferable to their being totally blocked by the pillar.
I can’t speak from experience in a car, but: John Deere used to have curved windshields on its Sound-Gard cab-equipped tractors until the early 90’s, but went to a more conventional square cab for two reasons: 1. It’s bigger, and 2. any concave reflective surface (such as the inside of the cab at night) will produce a “real image”, essentially a hologram. It looks real, but reach out to grab it and the illusion disappears. Having to stare at something called a “real image” but not actually real for a few hours is hard on the eyes…and the brain.
The biggest problem with wrap around windshields was the potential for distortion. I can remember cars where the outdoors, as seen thru the windshield at a 45 degree angle from straight down the road, could look like a mild acid trip. And it wasn’t every windshield, it was definitely variants in production.
Then there was the ability to bark one’s knees on the dogleg getting in and out.
The biggest negative, though, is that they’re synonimous with a period of automotive design that was completely over-the-top and rapidly became badly dated. The older I get, the more I dislike GM’s designs from ’59 and ’60 – and with what I know now, back then I would have bought a ’57 (’58 in Chevrolet) and kept it until the ’61’s came out.
Volvo had a safety concept car (essentially a preview of the C30) with an interesting solution to the A-pillar problem.
http://www.wayward-volvo.org/drop/volvo_scc.html
The page doesn’t illustrate it well, but it also had a brilliant approach to the b-pillar: the structural element bent inside the car, leaving the windows free to have a frameless hard-top type construction. The inward-bending support-structure was supposed to visually align with the C-pillar when you look over your shoulder, so you didn’t lose any visibility from it. Safety-wise, I have to wonder if it’s really a good idea to have the B-pillar closer to your head, but it certainly seems great for visibility.
That’s very interesting to hear; from what I recall and can see on the other photos I have, this car had no B pillar above the top of the doors.
Does that mean that there have been structural modifications too?
There’s definitely a b-pillar; here’s a better picture. I’m not sure about the rest of the structure. Since it was just a concept car (though the shape eventually became the C30) I don’t know if they really made it crash-worthy.
I think the A-pillar in these wrap around styles does not really support the roof well in a roll over, and the rear pillar does not look like much support either.
+1 LOL!
I think in the book “The French Connection” it was the sills of one of these they hid the gear in.
I don’t think it was the sills, or even the rocker panels, where The French Connection drugs were concealed. IIRC, the Invicta had large cavities in the front fenders directly behind the wheel wells, and that’s where the drugs were hidden.
I think you’re right. It was the sills in the movie Lincoln, but a unique dead space in the fenders in the book (and reality) 60 Buick.
That sounds right.
Although I’ve never particularly cared for ’59-’60 Buick front-end styling (one of those faces only a mother could love), the instrument panel of this car is a work of art. Interior designs from the mid-1950s to late-1960s almost make the Great Brougham Epoch interiors of the 1970s to mid-1980s seem like a step back in time. On another note, “Invicta” is probably my favorite Buick name ever. I think it would make a great name for a modern sports sedan or “four-door coupe”.
Great point on the degradation of interior quality. I have a mental mark in my head for the 1968 Cadillac Eldorado, which had a near perfect exterior design, (for its intended mission), but a rather disappointing interior compared to earlier models. I think 1968 in general marked the overall decline of interior quality, while engines peaked in 1970 before being beset by the smog era.
And just how restorable are cars from the malaise era, anyway? Especially the interiors, with thousands of obscure, fussy, low-quality trim pieces that seemed designed to disintegrate in 3 or 4 years 40 years ago. Is it worth it to bring them back?
It was the name of a British Jaguar/SS-ish sporting car pre-WWII.
Invicta S1.
I’m not surprised that you had never heard of the Invicta. For some reason, the Invicta was like an awkward, middle child of the family, overshadowed by a glamorous, older sibling (Electra) and a more popular, younger one (LeSabre). The model name was only used for a few model years before being replaced by the Wildcat.
The Invicta was mentioned in the book, The French Connection, as having handy, hidden cavities within the body — perfect for hiding large amounts of drugs as they were being smuggled.
Buick had a few orphan models like this, including the Centurion in the early 70s. Seems like all their attempts at the often discussed but seldom purchased “bankers hot rods” never really caught on.
GM had a habit of dividing each of their car lines into three models: Low-buck cheapie, high end full-dresser, and something in the middle with elements of both other models. Invariably, the middle of the line model was the forgotten one when it came to sales (Cadillac being the exception, since the deVilles usually had a model underneath it, which invariably sold poorly), and would be dropped after a few years.
Then the three model lineup would be continued by the formerly top-of-the-line model being knocked down a peg by a new even more top-of-the-line model.
An argument could be made that in the late ’60s the Impala, Galaxie 500, and Fury III occupied the mid line space in the consumer “low price field”. While the brands had four basic trim lines, the base cars were mostly for public service fleets. These mid line cars dominated the sales charts.
Buick renamed the lineup for 1959, with the Electra 225 at the top, replacing the 1958 Limited.
The Electra replaced the Roadmaster, and was shorter than the Electra 225.
The LeSabre replaced the Special.
The 1958 lineup also included a Super and a Century which appear to be replaced by the Invicta.
The 59 lineup is really all new. The Invicta gradually becomes a Wildcat in the 60’s.
I’d really like to see a LeSabre/Invicta side by side with an Electra and Electra 225 to see where the length differences actually are. The Electra and Electra 225 share the same wheel base but have that different overall length. The overall length of the Electra isn’t as big of an increase over the LeSabre as the increase in wheel base. Surprisingly complicated.
I’m quite sure the Electra’s wheelbase was longer in the front end, and that the 225 had an extra stretch in its very rear end sheet metal.
But it isn’t that simple with these Buicks. That side swoop body line has to have posed at least a little challenge if all of the 225’s extension was tacked on the back. The fact that the wheel base grew more than the overall length on the Electra is also interesting which is why I’d love to have them side by side to look at and maybe take a tape measure to.
Good point, Eric. That side swoop would cause real problems wherever the extra length was put in. Easy on a ’59; a real headache on the ’60. You’d need a full set of side panels for each wheelbase for starters, so the swoop didn’t look disjointed. And with extra length in the tail, the swoop would have to end lower down, unless…..?
Roger, this was great; the title alone says it all! You now have me hoping to find an English car that I haven’t heard of. The new Bentley convertible I saw the other day doesn’t count!
for the avoidance of doubt, I do not have a Bentley convertible!
But, I’d be very interested in an American perspective on the less well known and successful UK brands, such as Sunbeam, Austin, Morris or Rover, or indeed the French or Italian ones.
Just why did they all fail?
The more I learn, the more beer you earn!
Austin was the best selling import in the US in the 50s, up to about 1956 or so, when the explosive rise of the VW pushed it aside. Why? The VW really was better suited to American conditions; one could drive a VW wide-open for hours, days and years on end. Try that with just about any Brit car from the 50s through the 70s!
Of course the Brit car might have gone a bit faster in doing so, until it overheated, blew a head gasket, spun a bearing, or whatever….
Brit cars were built for British conditions, which were very different back then. And the climate there is much cooler. Americans wanted a reliable and rugged small car that would run no matter the climate. The VW was simply a superior car for US conditions, and VW backed it with a superb dealer network, another thing the Brit cars lacked here.
Mush the same could be said of all levels of Brit cars, not just the economy cars. The Porsche proved itself to be more rugged, durable and much more comfortable than the generally hard-sprung Brit sports cars. And again, it was much more reliable.
Same thing with the Mercedes. Jaguar owned the US luxury import market in the 50s. But they were undermined by the same problems. You do realize cars like the XK-E were almost fatally flawed with a cooling system not up to US climates and stop and go traffic? Not the Porsche, or Corvette.
Brit cars did fine in the hands of their loyal, loving owners who knew their limitations and issues. But that didn’t apply to the bulk of Americans who fell for a Jag, MG, Sunbeam, Austin America, or what have you, and quickly realized that these cars were not built for the kind of drive-and-forget habits most Americans had.
VW was dead serious about the US market, and they had a product that was better suited to start with and then spent the money it took to keep developing it to make it even more suitable. The Brits never did this, at their peril.
The same thing also happened with the British motorcycle industry. They were beautiful and fast, but always leaked and tended to be temperamental. Honda et al wiped them from the face of the earth with bikes that were worlds better in every way, save perhaps character.
Really, what happened to the British auto industry in the US was just a foreshadowing of what soon happened to it in Europe and in the UK: they weren’t (generally) competitive, especially in terms of reliability and longevity.
And I forgot one more key word: Rust.
Yeah you have a point Paul when a 65 Vauxhall is quoted as having a cruising speed of 100mph its only for an hour or so untill you run out of motorway or gas.
Our neighbor had a new 1960 Electra 225 convertible maroon with maroon leather interior
that I would drool over as a kid.
I want one too! I’m pretty familiar with some of these obscure mid line cars. Probably because it’s the sort of car I buy new from the showroom to this day.
Invicta. What a great name! I’m not sure why, it just is. Buick has played around with the name on a some modern design studies. I hope it comes back.
The Invicta is like the small bowl of porridge that was just right (never mind the laws of thermodynamics). Nothing plain Jane about it, nice standards for its time, but not overwrought and over expensive like the top cars can tend to be. Finding this car with power windows and factory air would be the Holy Grail for me.
Our midwestern neighbors bought two new GM cars for 1960 – a dark blue Corvair 700 four-door sedan with gasoline heater, Powerglide and whitewalls, and an all white Buick Invicta four-door sedan with full power accessories, including windows.
As a car-crazy kid, I was fascinated by both cars and loved the name “Invicta.” The toned-down styling (from 1959) looked great to me and it was a big, quiet, comfortable car that easily held six or seven when we were going to church. We kids loved GM dashboards/interiors of these years: those deeply dished GM steering wheels (my older cousin had a 59 Olds convertible) were very cool and the Buick had that unusual little round pointer (like a miniature monocle) that centered over the gear selection. Great blast from the past.
I always thought 1960 Buicks looked like wax models of the ’59 left out in the sun to melt a little.
For those of us of a certain age, a ’60 Buick means just one thing – the Cruising Vessel!
BTW, if you watch the closing credits for Fast Times at Ridgemont High, the Cruising Vessel is listed among the cast as being portrayed by “Sheldon”.
Yup. That movie certainly made me lust after the 60 and 59 Buicks. Personally my first choice would by the 59 Invicta but I’d take any model and any model 60 too. Invicta is one of those words I stick into the Craigslist search bar from time to time.
Nice looking car. I’ve always preferred the 1960 Buick any day over the 59.
Is that an early-mid ’80’s Olds Custom Cruiser is the first shot?
Its certainly an Olds Custom Cruiser, but I’m not sure of the year. It I can track it down, Ill add another comment here
Well back then the name was not so obscure. It was a valued member of the Buick family. It was referred to as “the bankers hotrod”. In 1960 the Buick tri shield emblem was released and those 3 shields stood for Lesabre, Invicta and Electra.
Every summer when the neighbors at our lake place had their annual blowout, one of the cars parked beside the road would be a 1960 LeSabre 2-door sedan in the same shade of blue as the Cruising Vessel; it didn’t have much in the way of options except an automatic transmission, but always was clean and well-kept. It would invariably be the oldest car of the group.
My Dad bought a one year old 1960 Le Sabre; it was a white with lipstick red interior sedan (with all the windows). We only had it a year before moving and he chose to sell it. I was 8, and I did and still do think these rock. I wish we had a photo of it.
I remember reading that in 1960 a team of drivers ran a Buick Invicta at 120 mph for 10,000 miles non stop in a Daytona endurance test. They used a second Invicta as a refueling vehicle much like air force jets do in mid-air. Refueling would occur at speeds of 115 to 120 mph! They rigged up a special tank, pump and long nozzle on the refueling Buick and a special receiver on the endurance car. I don’t recall what other special prep was done to the endurance car but I don’t think it was much different from stock. I also recall that Tom McCahill really loved the Invicta.
Here you go, T Type:
More memories. I believe it correct to say it replaced Super and Century, although it tilted more toward succeeding the Century. The ’59 was, if I recall correctly, referred to as a Delta styling, softened in the ’60 model. In the interior photo, it is also worth noting the “Redliner” speedometer is actually flat (and reversed) in the top of the dash and what you see as the speedometer was actually a tiltable mirror so every driver could set it to his or her proper angle.
A couple details I remember on the 1960 we had:
– Note the in dash ignition switch. When kept in the unlocked position, the switch can be turned to the start position and the car started without a key. (Very tempting possibilities for a youngster’s consideration).
– To actually operate the engine starter motor, the driver depresses the accelerator pedal which activates a switch that spins the starter.
About that 1960 Daytona endurance run: the press reported that 9 sets of tires were used for those 10,000 miles–and that the Invicta averaged 5.6 mpg (only a bit better than today’s NASCAR cars, I believe).
Just beautiful. I’ve always been a fan of the “angry” ’59 and “swoopy” ’60 Buicks. This one is a superb example of the style!