An observation from a newbie

[RivGSmusclecar]

I had posted this a few days ago accidently in your other forum.

Anyhow, I am a very proud owner of a Buick Riviera Gran Sport. I have owned this car most of my life. Actually, I stumbled on the musclecars.com website after reading about it on different forum.

The last thing I would want to do while making my first posts here is to start a fight, but if I let this one slide I would be compromising everything I stand for where common sense and freedom of expression is concerned. I have entered a few discussions where the "what makes it a musclecar" topic has come up. People who consider themselves qualified to create the guidelines of this classification often know very little about the cars they leave out. I have read many mistakes in some so called "musclecar" books where the Riviera and some others are concerned, and often times the featured car is not even completely correct. Some of the authors go as far as using the term "granD sportS".....I hate that! It's GRAN SPORT.

First off, I do not mean to offend the person or persons who compiled your list of "musclecars" on your musclecar.com home page, BUT where the Riviera is concerned, you fail to even mention that Buick even made a Gran Sport Riviera or Wildcat model.

The fact that you can classify a full size Impala SS as a musclecar and not a Riviera or Wildcat GS is way beyond my comprehension.

Let me start with some trivia: To the best of my knowlege, the first GS Riviera was made available in 1965, and the GRAN SPORT option included dual 4 barrel carburetion (360 HP and 465 ft lbs of torque is nothing to sneeze at), positraction (with a few different gear ratios available) 3:42 was standard in '66 and '67 on the Riv GS, quick ratio steering, stiffer suspension, GS ornamentation and whatever other option you wanted INCLUDING AIR CONDITIONING. I don't know of very many musclecars that could compete with the rest WITH THE A/C ON! Also, Pontiac and Chevy never even offered an automatic transmission with the dual speed torque converter that these cars have as standard equipment.

For that matter, the '70 RIV GS came with the stage 1 engine, 510 FT Lbs. of torque and very under rated at 370 HP. Many non-GS models even came with stage 1 heads from the factory for reasons unknown!

If that doesn't make a Musclecar but a full sized Impala does, then something is really wrong here.

Before I write a book, please let me point out one more fact.....the '65 Riv GS is not any bigger than a '65 GTO and weighs in nearly the same as a fully optioned GTO.

I parked my '67 Riv GS next to a '67 GTO and mine is only about 6" longer and weighs in at 4,400 LBS. I don't know what the GTO weighs, can't be much less, but I'd hardly consider a 4,400 lb car of that era a "boat" as people who don't even know a pre-'79 Riv is rear wheel drive! What's that Impala weigh anyway? I'll bet it's at least as much, but you call that a musclecar......because it's not a Buick.

I have some Popular Hot Rodding and car and Driver musclecar tests that I am willing to share here that clearly show the performance of these fine cars on their road tests and frankly 15 or 16 second 1/4 mile times on stock cars from that era with bias ply tires ain't too shabby for a luxury car affectionately called "THE BANKER'S HOT ROD". It really does go fast with class, those of us who own one know.

You also never mentioned the Wildcat GS.......this was also a musclecar.......some of these came from the factory with dualquads and a 4 speed........their lack of popularity makes them almost un-heard of. I don't know actual production numbers, but I do know that in '66 only 179 Riv GS models came with dual quads.

If someone can supply me with an email that I could send my scanned literature to be posted I will gladly send it so you can add the Riv GS to your list. The Riviera GS truly deserves to be on it, and those of us who own one should all agree. And in case you didn't notice, I only disputed the car I am truly knowlegable about. Just my

[MrPbody]

Rivguy,
While I cetainly love the style and pinash of the mid-60s Rivvy, it's not on the list for a couple of reasons. Mainly, the nail-head is a slug. And fragile, as well. They were okay when first introduced in the early '50s. Actually, pretty much "leading edge". Small block Chevy and Pontiac V8 in '55 made ALL the Olds and Buicks of the day obsolete over night. The '59 Cad was the first real challenge to them from within GM.
Rivieras are VERY heavy cars. A '67 GTO with all the trimmings (including the "switch-pitch" TH400 you said wasn't available in Pontiacs), and the "full throttle cutout switch" for A/C, weighs in about 3,600 lbs. dry.
Please don't take this wrong. I LOVE the Riviera. Especially the '63-'65 models. But Rivvy belongs in the same category as Grand Prix and Toronado. it is a "personal luxury car", and a damn fine one, at that. Perhaps the nicest of the three GM offerings. But it is NOT a muscle car, and lucky to be considered a "performance" car.
I read all the reports of fast Buicks. Well, I've seen a couple. But only one that sticks out in my memory. That was T/A Performance's (Phoenix, AZ) Sport Wagon. It was going low 10s when I saw it 15 years ago. I spoke to them a couple weeks ago, and it is now in the high 8s. They claim it to be the fastest normally aspirated door slamming Buick (powered) in the world. If that's true, it's nowhere near the top of the heap, as there are multitudes of Chevys that go 7s in similar configuration. I saw no less than 7 door slammers in the 7s at the last TriPower Nats at Norwalk (ALL Injun engines). There was even one '69 Grand Prix, all steel, and IRON heads, going 8.0@180! That one DID have a nitrous unit on it... It was called "Purple Prix". I have some pics.
You know, of course, '69-'72 GPs are on the same chassis as Rivvy, right? It's known as a "G-Body". Monte Carlo shared the platform, as well. The A-Bodies (Skylark, Tempest, Chevelle, Cutlass) have a 6" shorter wheelbase and are at least 500 lbs. lighter than the G-Bodies.
They get on me all the time for loving the Pontiac. I understand your plight. But realism and experience must play a role here. The Buick is one of the nicer cars out there. But fast? Not really, at least in any volume. People don't race dynos or magazine tests. They race cars. I promote the Pontiac to keep the history alive, and to break paradyms. Pontiac's racing history is as glorious as any manufacturer in the world, and better than most. If Buick had a racing history of any kind, I would promote that, too. The handful of fast cars they built simply aren't enough to consider.
PAX

[RivGSmusclecar]

Originally Posted by MrPbody

Rivguy,
But realism and experience must play a role here.

Pax, the Nailhead is no slug........and certainly not a fragile engine. The Nailhead is one of the most durable engines ever made. And as for Rivs being heavy, try comparing apples to apples. You talk as if magazines favored these cars, when the fact is they do not. Magazine articles mean nothing, no more than a musclecar web page does. Actual facts do.

"But Rivvy belongs in the same category as Grand Prix and Toronado. it is a "personal luxury car"

No.......Toronado is FWD, Grand Prix is not a luxury car.......they are not the same category.

"You know, of course, '69-'72 GPs are on the same chassis as Rivvy, right? It's known as a "G-Body"."

No......the Rivvy is an "E" body.....you are wrong again.

"A '67 GTO with all the trimmings (including the "switch-pitch" TH400 you said wasn't available in Pontiacs), and the "full throttle cutout switch" for A/C,"

You don't even know what a switch pitch converter is.......and you are deciding what makes a musclecar. That's sad.

" But realism and experience must play a role here. "
I'll second that one.

Your statements prove you are mis-guided.

[BuickLeSabre1960]

Originally Posted by RivGSmusclecar

Pax, the Nailhead is no slug........and certainly not a fragile engine. The Nailhead is one of the most durable engines ever made. And as for Rivs being heavy, try comparing apples to apples. You talk as if magazines favored these cars, when the fact is they do not. Magazine articles mean nothing, no more than a musclecar web page does. Actual facts do.

Amen. The nailheads are indestructable. As far as them being slow, they got that reputation because of the transmission they used (a 1-speed) Also, ever heard of TV Tommy Ivo?

[GranSportSedan]

The nailhead engines especially the 64-66 versions are anything but fragile. they use a forged steel crankshaft with fully grooved bearing journals, forged rods and a block that is extremely strong. the down fall for a nailhead is the cylinder heads. they have great port velocity but not a lot of cfm potential. thats why they make so much bottom end torque but not much high rpm hp. a 3 or 4 speed manual tranny 65 or 66 GS is a very fast car on the street, but they dont do as well in the 1/4 mile. I know i own a 65 GS 3 speed and a 65 GS auto and a 66 GS convertible 3 speed.

Bob Gibbs

[MrPbody]

Well, again, I must have halucinated all those dropped valves and burnt rings. When I first started in the business, the nail-head was in it's "rebuilder prime". That is, they were approaching 8-10 years in service, and were beginning to fall out (the mid-60s stuff, not the earlier ones).
I did NOT define "muscle car", the guys that sold the first ones did.
Grand Prix IS a "personal luxury car" according to Pontiac literature from the '62 model (the first one, a year ahead of Rivvy). Okay, it may be an "E-body" in the late '60s. But it's still the same, as all the suspension parts from a Rivvy fit a GP, '69-'72. Toronado is FWD, true enough. It is still a "personal luxury car".
You guys miss the point. Buicks are wonderful cars. I said that before, and I like them. ESPECIALLY the early Rivs. But I don't see them anywhere near the level of performance the other GM divisons had at the same time. Saying a Rivvy could run with a Catalina (in '63) is like saying the same '63 Cat could beat up on a '67 GTX with a Hemi... Emotional and not realistic.

[4speedsupreme]

I love olds nailheads. Torque Monster. They were cheap when I was in my late teens. Didn't nailheads float valves at high RPM's for the same reason they are called "nailheads"? As far as the "Whats a muscle car?" question I think its what you think as the owner. One of the old car value guides lists late 70's (78-79)GM intermediates as muscle cars. I know its an oversized engine for the chassis. What about this? My 72 Cutlass started out life as an air conditioned 350 automatic. Muscle car era, but really not a muscle car. Now it is a pre 71 455 bench seat 4 speed with no air, manual steering, and manual brakes. The very definition of a Muscle car. The question is can you build a Muscle car?

[RivGSmusclecar]

I've had a Nailhead in one form or another for the last 25 years.........and never once have I heard of one "burning" rings or "dropping valves". I would suppose if you ran one through the mountains towing a 2 ton trailer with 87 octane crap gas in it you could overheat it and damage a piston.

When my dad had my car before me he drove it for over 60 miles with no oil pressure registering on the guage........the cam got destroyed but you know that motor never spun a bearing? After adding 4 qts. of oil I drove it that way for a year afterwards and could still smoke a Camaro on the way to school! After I rebuilt it I ran it for over 200,000 miles and beat the crap out of it and the day I pulled it from the car it was still running great although it was burning oil.

Nailheads are called that for a reason.......at high RPM's they don't breathe as well as the others do. I tend to disagree with that, the daul quads add up to over 1200CFM and those motors love it. I was amazed at how much more top end power I gained when I installed them. They even make an aftermarket manifold that fits 2 quardajets.......if the Nailhead couldn't breathe, I don't think they would make that. Although there's nothing up there, I've revved mine to the point the valves floated at just over 6,500 RPM very many times so if they drop valves I it's news to me. I have also never spun a bearing. Nailheads wear valve guides if the oil passages in the heads clog up with sludge from lack of oil changes, that's the only weakness I could ever find on mine. Any motor will die if you don't change the oil.

Mrpbody, you should just name this website PONTIACmusclecars.com.........you live in a glass house and can only see outside when there's a Pontiac there. Although I only race upon opportunity, the only GTO I've ever seen was in my rear view mirror, but my car is stock so I can only presume what I was racing was stock also.

[MrPbody]

Actually, the "nail head" nickname comes form the shape of the valve. It looks like BIG nail. Having rebuilt many of them (not in the last 25 years), I recall some very unique features.
If you read all the other posts I answer, you will find, I can take a very objective point of view regarding how to accomplish a certain task, with a muscle car. You will also realize, I have respect for ALL of them. When you start talking about cars you think should be considered a muscle car, and then manipulate the definition to make your beloved model "fit in", I stand up for posterity. My written definition of "muscle car" is NOT MY DEFINITION. It is the accepted definition among those of us that have been involved with them since you could still buy them new.
I like GTO because it set the standard by which all others are measured. Not necessarily performance numbers, but what the car should embody. While they may have made a few hundred Buicks that could run low 14s/high 13s in stock form, they made tens of thousands of Chevelles and GTOs that could do it. Same can be said of the Mopes, though the quality of their cars was already suffering by the late '60s.
As for beating or getting beat by a Pontiac? Well, just like anything else, there's always someone out there faster or bigger or tougher, or whatever, than you (or me) at any given time. But again, reality must check in. How many 7 second Buicks are there with Buick engines? None I ever heard of. T/A Performance claims to be the fastest "true" Buick in the country, in the high 8s. There are no less than 5 8 second Pontiacs right here in the Richmond area. And at least one in the 7s. Door slammers on gasoline!

[4speedsupreme]

I think the term "nailhead" comes from the fact that the valves are almost staight up and down in the head instead of on an angle like most V-8's.

[terzmo]

It's not my definition...and I've been driving for 40 years...

[RivGSmusclecar]

Pbody......I didn't mean to slam you so hard........but regardless of who is making the picks of what's a musclecar and what's not......many of these guys don't know enough about the cars they are disqualifying to say one way or the other. When I read webpages like the one here that tries to say what is and what isn't it simply makes me laugh.

I have just as many people at car shows walk up to my Riv and tell me what a great musclecar I have..........including show judges.....and when I win something, there's always a few sore losers who complain that it isn't and should not have been in the musclecar class in the first place. In the stock class there are those who say it doesn't belong there either. Once a guy with a Pontiac 2+2 something walked over to me one day and said his is and mine isn't. If you're going to disqualify my car which is prolly lighter than that car or the Impala SS that angers me. It seems like you guys bend the "rules" to suit yourselves. One full sized car is too heavy but another one is not. Then they use a heavily optioned car in comparison to a stripped down one to manipulate the weights.

Just because the GTO may be the first car referred to as "musclecar" it should not set the standard for everything else! Where that Impala SS is concerned, there is not one feature it has that a Riv GS does not have. And the Riv GS has a more powerful motor to start with.....isn't that where the muscle comes from in the fist place.......the motor? Don't talk horsepower, it's the torque that gets you moving and the Buicks have always had the most torque. Just for comparison, the '70 455 has 510 ft lbs........the 426 HEMI was either 5 more or 5 less. If that's not muscle, then please excuse me while I puke.

[terzmo]

as far as torque or hp..it's the guy/car that crosses the finish line first...1/4 mile times are not in favor of great riding...gas guzzling...heavy cars

[MrPbody]

I have never, nor will I ever, consider an Impala OR a Catalina (the base model of the 2+2), a muscle car. They are full-size performance cars. Same is true of the Furys, 500 XLs, Marauaders, Polaras, Ambassadors, Wildcats, Starfires, etc...
Again, we come back to the "my opinion" thing. The "definition" has nothing to do with "opinion", BY DEFINITION. If I weren't quoting from a book written by the people that were actually THERE, and saying "In my opinion", I would agree to the argument. John Z. DeLorean and Jim Wangers defined what a "muscle car" is/was. That is a matter of historic fact, not an opinion. Even Hot Rod Magazine, Popular Hot Rodding, Car Craft Magazine, Muscle Car Magazine, Motor Trend , and the list can go on forever, credit GTO with being the "first" muscle car. I don't usually site magazine articles for "facts", but my dad always taught me, "5,000 Frenchmen can't be wrong!" That means, if the majority in a given subject, all say the same thing, it's probably true...
The valves for the "nail head" have a very large head on them, resembling a large finishing nail. The valve angle is VERY steep, as pointed out. That led to the funny looking pistons with the big ol' knot on top. As we have learned over the years, the steep valve angle does not lend itself well to high performance flow characteristics. Chevy builders go to great lengths to "roll" the head over to decrease the valve angle (the primary purpose of "angle milling").
It is popular in today's society, to rewrite history to make it more favorable to a certain side of an argument, or to make it more politically palatable. Let the government and political parties muddy the water with self-serving BS. As technicians, we like to keep our eye on the ball. No matter how hard you try, you can't change the past. There can only be one "first". Why is it such a big deal to you, that GTO is that one?

[MagicRat]

Originally Posted by MrPbody

The valves for the "nail head" have a very large head on them, resembling a large finishing nail.

I think you mean the head of the valve is very small, relative to the stem, making them look like a common nail.
Finishing nails have just about no head at all, and look nothing like valves.

But MrPbody is correct. The Riv GS is not a muscle car, based on the popular definition, but there is no reason why anyone should take offense to this point.
It makes no difference what you call it, the GS is a nice car.

I have a mildly modified '68 T-bird with a 429. Dispite the fact that it looks, sounds and goes like a muscle car it just is NOT a muscle car.
It is a personal luxury car, like the GS. Personally, I dont care what its called. I still like it.

I am thankful the personal luxury cars are not muscle cars. If they were, they would have the high muscle car price and would not be affordable!!