I'm considering buying either a '65 Vista Cruiser or '69 Buick Sportwagon, both for sale by local private parties. I'm more interested in the Olds. I read somewhere, possibly on a forum, can't recall where exactly,that GM workers went on strike in 1964 and that '65 wasn't the best year for quality. Is this something I should be concerned about?

The seller says the car is in very good condition overall and mostly original. I don't think it would be fair to assume all '65 GM cars were built with some "attitude". Are there any unbiased, or even biased opinions out there?

 

I have never heard that before. I think 65 is a great year for cars. There were alot of modernizing changes that year in the frames, rear ends,etc. Not to mention most 1965 cars, Olds,chevy,ford, pontiacs, etc looked great.

 

I think 2008 was a bad year for GM, not to mention Ford and Chysler.

 

When talking about a car that has survived intact for 44 years, I can't believe build quality is an issue any longer. Quality aside, I've heard (and read) it said that 1965 was one of the best for GM styling, especially when it came to the fulsize cars. I think the '66 GM intermediates (also among the sharpest of the 60s) were derivative of the big car styling from the prev. year.

 

65 was a terrible year and I hear Vistas have the most problems. For your own good PM me the contact info so I can give that guy a piece of my mind for even offering up something like that for sale. The nerve he has.

 

That's a good point about surviving for 44 years. I'm going to be checking the car over in person anyway. Partly due to nostalgia. My father's Oldsmobile was a '66 wagon he bought from my uncle. I learned to drive with it. It wasn't a VC type wagon though. It was mid-size. I seem to recall it had F85 emblems on it? Did they use "F85" or "Cutlass" in 1966?

 

both F85 was a base and Cutlass was an upgrade

 

I never heard that about 1965. I worked for a Buick dealer back then right after I got out of high school. If I remember, 1965 was a record year for GM. I think they were great cars. I would still love to have a 1965 Skylark Gran Sport with a 4-speed and the nailhead. We had one at the dealership that was set up to race with 4.88 gears, Hooker headers and blueprinted engine. It would not hang with the GTOs due to the small valves in the Buick. I don't remember running any 442's. I just have some fond memories and I always thought it was a beautiful car. I loved the back of the car.

 

I had '62,'64 and '65 Chebbie Impalas, '65 buhog wagon. The '65 chebby was a good car, like night and day compared to the '64. The Buhog was okay, interior was cheesy in the dash area. I think Furd had the problems in '65, typical for a furd frame break in half driving down the street in rust prone areas going back to the 50's, built-in factory self destruct mechanism. I've owned Fords built from the 50's through 90's and I think they're all junk.
With either Vista Cruiser the most important thing to check for is rust around the roof windows and bottom of the rear side glass, lower middle of tailgate where the inner brace traps water and rusts out. You will see rust or rust streaks and paint lifting on the edges around the trim. The headliner can have water stains, lower quarters, dog legs and spare tire well get moisture dripping down from the top and rust out. All the storage compartments rust from moisture trapped under the rubber mat no matter what. I lucked out with mine, I didn't know any better until I heard all the horror stories about roof repair from other Vista and Sporty owners. If I ever buy another I'm taking my trim remover tool with me, explain that thing going through security at the airport.

 

Go out and take a look at it. Make sure you take pictures for us.

 

beautiful cars. I liked the whole stretch of them. even had a base model 69 hardtop 4dr and a 71 rag. the old man still has a 72gs 455. I'd like to find a 67 gs400 rag...some day

 

I never heard of 65's being a bad year either. Besides, any possible issues would have been fixed long ago. Good luck and happy hunting!

 

My '65 with 60K orig mi. runs like swiss time and doesn't look like swiss cheese!

 

my Dad's former , tan 1965 starfire convertible, would not start in the rain, can was bough ti nAug or sept of 1965, then traded in Sept of 1967 fro an Ocean Mist 1968 Toronado (disc brakes, bucket seat no console, Am/Fm wonder bar, COmforton )

 

Awesome 65 Cruiser!!! My favorite wagon

 

Get the Oldsmobile! Buicks are nice cars too, but on this site we can all help you enjoy the Oldsmobile

Scotty, I like your 1965 too! Here's a picture of mine when I first got it, complete with years of dust and chicken poop! I look forward to the day when I have the time and money to restore it.

P1010070.jpg

 

the 69 brakes are far superior if they are discs ...

 

I have a 65 442. This thing is perfect. 70 mph down the freeway with no hands and she tracks straight as an arrow. Everything works and the chrome is a mirror. I love this car. Compared to my 68 L36 Corvette Roadster, it is more than perfect. Did I say I love this car? Go Oldsey!

 

 

had a 65 Malibu, no pics though. The floors were all fiberglass, about an inch of mud in the quarters, and a straight 6 with a rod blown through the block backed up by a three on the tree. jerked out the six and dumped a 295 horse 350 out of a 69 chubby truck. it was a thirty footer but it was fun.

 

WHY would it matter at this point?
If a 1965 model car actually managed to survive 44 years, it must have been one of the good ones.
Whether the build quality was good at the factory at that time is irrelevant at this point.