Given that they shared the same body shell and were otherwise very similar in their mission and specs except for which wheels were driven, this review of the new 1966 Riviera makes a nice counterpoint to the Toronado review the other day. Does FWD in a very large luxury personal coupe make a difference?
The one significant difference was that despite being down 25 hp (360 vs 385) hp from the Toronado, the Riviera spanked it in acceleration, almost two seconds quicker from 0-60 (8.1 vs. 9.9 sec.) and beat it solidly in the 1/4 mile (16.7 vs. 17.8 sec.). Curiously, the Toronado was a hefty 300 lbs heavier than the Riviera, but the Toro’s higher rated output resulted in both having the exact same 13.1 lb/hp ratio. So much for FWD saving weight!
Ideally this would have been a comparison test; in fact, there’s little reference to the Toronado in it. So without a direct frame of reference it’s a bit hard to make any calls regarding handling. The GS package, which was a bargain at $176.82, included Positraction, dual exhausts, red-line tires, and stiffer suspension. The venerable “nailhead” 425 CID V8 was in its final outing, to be replaced by the more modern but somewhat less bullet-proof 430 V8 in 1967. It sported dual quad carbs and a pretty racy cam to make 360 hp from its undersized valves and ports, but it worked quite effectively.
As to its handling, it was a significant improvement over the non-GS Riviera, but still with the obvious limitations of its size, weight, numb steering, and strong understeer. Everything is relative, and realistically, the lion’s share of Riviera buyers were not likely to be plumbing the limits of its handling.
Although the big finned drums were better than the Toronado’s thanks to the much better weight distribution, they were hardly fine. Like so many American cars then, the rear drums, lacking a proper load-sensitive proportioning valve, locked up causing the tail to swerve. They were rated “Fair” overall.
The giant doors came in for criticism, as they were very heavy and capable of almost crushing a little sports car parked next to it.
As a finale, R&T pointed out that the induction moan of the two carbs on the big V8 was excessive, and it was speculated that this was done on purpose for effect. Probably so.
A good car, with poor braking technology, a decade before that class of car was extremely popular.
I remember being told that GM didn’t have an aversion to selling the public on half-baked technology, which I believe all manufacturers do – it is just that GM is so large they sell more half-baked goods like FWD on big cars – before they should. GM doesn’t put FWD on big luxury cars until after big luxury cars were downsized in the 1980s. I suppose GM learned something with the FWD Toronado and Eldorado that was recycled fifteen years later.
As to big personal luxury cars – the TBirds from 58-66 seemed to better reflect the future Monte Carlo/Gran Prix/Cordoba era better than Riviera or Toronado.
So somehow, big personal luxury cars, with the possible exception of the Lincoln Marks, just never found the level of success imagined back in the early 1960s when Toronado, Eldorado and Riviera were in the planning stages.
I wouldn’t call the original Toronado “half baked” technology. I think they were very well designed and reliable cars.
I would also imagine that the Toro trying to put its 385 horsepower down through the two (or maybe even just one) front bias ply tires would result in considerable wheelspin/traction loss in hard acceleration. The Buick at least gets to take advantage of natural weight transfer onto the back wheels for traction when the tester nailed the throttle.
The engine and transmission of the Toronado were both directly over the front axle, so weak traction wasn’t the reason for its lackluster acceleration performance. 17.8 seconds at 83 miles per hour point to an engine with a generous interpretation of gross horsepower.
“The engine and transmission of the Toronado were both directly over the front axle”
You are ignoring the weight transfer that occurs in acceleration. In hard acceleration the front gets lighter and the rear gets heavier, and the heavier the car and faster the acceleration, the greater the effect. This aids traction on a rwd car as more weight pushes down on the drive wheel(s) but reduces traction on a fwd car.
“Burning rubber” is compulsory in any muscle car, a take on lying down rubber for better traction from the start line of the 1/4 mile.
Disc brakes appeared on European cars around 1960 and a decade latter were pretty much standard . A friends Escort mark3 ,base must have been the last British car with drums at around 1980.
The Rolls-Royce Phantom VI with 4-wheel drums last came out in 1990.
Front drums in 1990?! Wow.
The 300lbs weight difference and a slightly lower (higher numerical) axle ratio were undoubtedly significant factors. The torque both these engines made was essentially the same, but the Buick made it at lower rpm. That combined with the lower weight and more favorable axle ratio would have made it notably quicker off the line, regardless of which wheels were driven.
Wow, they certainly weren’t cheap! The ’66-’67 Rivieras, were the best looking, with that “show car” styling, along with the ’65, with the clam shell headlights. I rode in a ’66, and I remember noticing that rotating drum speedometer.
Paul, You mention that the 425 was replaced with the more modern but less reliable 430. Just curious what were the issues with the 430 and were they resolved when enlarged to 455? I know the 455 was cited for its light weight when compared to its siblings from Olds, Pontiac and Chevy.
The oiling system has come in for a fair amount of criticism. In reality, in normal use, they seem to be ok. But this engine was not originally designed as a higher-speed, high-performance engine (unlike the Chevy big block), and that’s where the issues most often come up.
My wording was too strong; I’m going to amend that.
I’m not an expert on the subject, but I would hazard to guess that it would rank lowest of the big block GM engines by those that are familiar with them all, and can manage to be unbiased, which is not exactly common.
The Toronado was not very quick out of the hole. I don’t know if that was designed in to prevent damage to the CV joints or what. But in stoplight races it just didn’t seem to snap off the line like rear wheel drive cars.
However, the Toros with their FWD had the ability to go through snow. Until it got so deep the snow would lift the front end off the ground!
The Toro sold me on the ability of FWD and all subsequent cars that were purchased for my wife from 1981 on, were FWD. About half of mine were too.
In yesterdays Road and Track VW test, the fastback’s 1600 brakes were praised, and the bug 1300 brakes were “panned”. Probably because they were drums.
if that was designed in to prevent damage to the CV joints or what.
They are pretty much stronger and more robust than you think since GM fitted the same powertrain and suspension systems in the GMC Motorhome. The base weight of Motorhome is from 10,500 pounds (23-feet version) to 12,500 (26-feet). They do weigh more after kitted out with interior furniture and such.
The worst thing about the ’66 Riv is that it looked so much unlike the ’65. 1965 was a peak year in style: the Grand Prix, Wildcat, F-85, and Riviera. It took them three years to get the Riv style just right, by hiding the lights under what had been big parking lights in 1963-’64. But in ’65 they nailed it, and it lasted only one year.
Almost all of the road tests I’ve read (especially Car Life’s) gushed over the styling of the ’66-’69 Rivieras, more so than they did for the ’63-’65. Today, if prices mean anything, people prefer the earlier car; I know I do, although it’s not by a huge margin.
I’ve had two of these cars, one was a daily driver for years. Yes they were large, but they were smaller than a Coupe De Ville or Chrysler 300. Everything is relative, but handling and performance, and even stopping were pretty good compared to their competitors. They were great road cars, especially compared to a Mustang or Camaro. Imagine it as a bit larger GTO and you’ll understand it’s personality. I love the styling of this series and the strato bench was superior to the buckets since it had a large center armrest. I really miss this type of car and I don’t find anything currently on the market that excites me the way these did. GM found that the market for these personal cars was actually in the lower price rungs, which the downsized ’69 Grand Prix and even more significantly, the Monte Carlo demonstrated.
It seems inexpensive Today at around 6,000 dollars, but that was close to Cadillac territory, something that reduced it’s popularity with buyers. Even applying the inflation index to the price of old cars is misleading, as individual buying power was less than it would seem, and the prices would have seemed higher to a potential buyer in 1966. The Ferrari listed in the classifieds at 9,500 dollars is another example. That would have bought you one and a half Rivs, and it wasn’t a car that you would have used for transportation, it was an enthusiast’s toy.
Back in the early 2000’s I met the owner of an unrestored Aston Martin DB5 at a local car show. He told me that he had bought the car in the l970’s for 9,000 dollars. His buddy, also at the show, had bought a similar 60’s Ferrari at a similar price. He added that all his other friends thought that he was crazy to spend so much money on an old car! It took years before his Wife stopped seeing the purchase as his folly. Both cars were well preserved, but well used examples. He confided that if he ever restored his car that he would never be able to drive it again, as every additional mile would reduce the value of his investment.
Looking at the photo of the Riviera in the driveway (on page 50 of the Road & Track article) reminds me of how much I wished we had something like this to park in our driveway instead of a 1965 Chevrolet Bel Air wagon.
What was the phobia about disc brakes?
A customer had to wait till the late’60s to obtain these as a option or OEM on premium Detroit vehicles while Euro brands included these as standard equipment.
You are certainly right about buyers of GM cars (Corvettes excepted), but the rest of the industry moved faster. The Studebaker Avanti and GT Hawk (the whole Stude line, in fact) offered Bendix discs in 1963-64 (as did AMC in 1965). Both Ford and Chrysler were offering them in at least part of their lineups by 1966 – Ford was the most aggressive of the Big 3 in rolling them out in 1965 in T-Birds and Lincolns.
The August 2021 issue of Collectible Automobile has a photo feature on a stunning ice blue 1964 Studebaker Daytona Convertible Coupe that has the optional disc brakes. I never realized how slow GM was to offer them. Our 1965 Thunderbird coupe had the standard front discs and they performed so much better than the drum brakes on my friend’s 1964 Thunderbird convertible. Almost from the beginning contemporary road testers constantly complained about the heavy four-seat Thunderbird’s poor brake performance so maybe Ford had an extra incentive to make the change.
The Not Invented Here factor?
Mostly the we’re too cheap factor.
Until the brake manufacturers came up with the one piece, single piston, sliding/floating caliper unit.
Even in my ’61 MGA the calipers were “fixed”, solidly mounted to the spindle.
The Caliper was made from two pcs. bolted together.
Inboard and outboard sides each had their own cylinder. Hydraulic pressure moved the pistons into contact with the rotor.
As cars got heavier they increased the pistons to two per side. What could possibly go wrong?
Well, the now four pistons could and did stick/seize in the bores.
Braking became uneven. Leaks from the two halves or from the piston bores became common.
These 4 piston calipers became problematic.
I worked on a few of these systems as they aged.
There are companies that rebuild these old calipers with stainless steel sleeves, coated pistons resistant to rust and better seals.
Ask any older Corvette owner about the problems they encountered.
It is by no means a bad system, just vulnerable to rust and corrosion.
Interesting R&T refers to the Riviera GS as a “Musclecar” – this was not a common term until after the original muscle car era ended, when it was retroactively applied. No mention of the controversial X frame, which was dropped on all other GM cars by 1965 but retained on the Riv until the 1971 boattail. It didn’t seem to have hurt handling any, and the body was apparently beefed up on the sides to compensate for the lack of a perimeter frame, not unlike what unibodies do.
The big Buicks used aluminum finned brake drums in that era, which did at least shed heat well. The ’70 Riv still came standard with drum brakes, and performed very well in tests, IIRC. I suspect the ’66 lacked a proportioning valve, like the Toronado did.
Buick was very proud of their drum brakes. As their cars got heavier in the late 50’s, early 60’s their drum brakes would fade very quickly. Buick devoted a lot of engineering effort to try to develop some of the best drum brakes in the industry. As discs brakes became more ubiquitous it was obvious that Buick’s drums couldn’t keep up….In a way they went kicking and screaming into disc brakes
Absolutely flawless style, from any angle. Dare I say – I like the 1966 and ’67 editions only slightly less than the originals. Back when Flint had game.
In that era disc brake technology in American cars did not guarantee good stopping ability. In 1970 Popular Science ran a comparison test of the Riviera, Toronado, Thunderbird, Grand Prix and Monte Carlo. All the cars except the Riviera had disc brakes yet the Riviera’s drum brakes were judges to be better than the others by a significant margin. The Buick stopped from 60 in 140 feet while the T Bird with discs required a whopping 207 feet.
https://books.google.ca/books?id=VQEAAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA36&lpg=PA36&dq=popular+science+buick+riviera+test&source=bl&ots=ofMh03uIgz&sig=ACfU3U2tlxMkX6JfQqinTHmFwRw4URwaNw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjgxaGzuObwAhWCMH0KHeZiBfkQ6AEwGnoECBkQAw#v=onepage&q=popular%20science%20buick%20riviera%20test&f=false
back then with drums and before ABS you had to modulate brakes yourself and also give some pause when braking hard to let them cool a little, it took more skill and foresight, bit like when riding bike, you don’t just slam then because you’d kill yourself instantly.
Meh…rather have a Chrysler. Maybe a GTX…Maybe a 300.