When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Hope Im not too far off base here, but I am looking for probably a complete set of side moldings for a 1964 2 door post. This is for, ahem, my 1964 Buick special. The BMD pieces are unobtanium, and the Cutlass models look pretty similar.
Some of mine are really nice, and some have been slightly crunched and repaired. Just for giggles, the trim on mine is 3/4" wide and the front fender spear is about 54(?) inches long. The '64 BMD stuff is one year only. Any help or thoughts would be appreciated. Please PM me with ideas? Thanks! Bill in Two Rivers Wi.
Thanks OldOlds! Larry above is checking too. Ill get some accurate measurements and maybe a profile tomorrow. It would be great if they were the same. TIA !!! Bill
Hey Joe... I hafta agree with you 100% with one caveat; if the lengths and profile are the same (or close) Id be able to use them as "material stock". We used to say, "grind to fit and paint to match" LOL. General Motor interchangeability was a bit more forgiving back then. Think Model T Ford haha. Im new here, but if you ever read any of my project stuff from 65GS.com or V8Buick, youd see that I tend to make odd stuff work.
The Bujik stuff is a one year only part, and I am by no means doing a restoration. I could very easily change the whole trim system to Olds, and no one would be the wiser. Half of what I have is pretty nice, and some is a bit corroded from poor storage. Its all anodized bright, and once its polished then that becomes and ongoing issue.
Even Pat (my wife) says to keep grammas car in its patina. If you take a really nice A body, and a boneyard parts car from Zero to 100, this one is holding its own at about 60.
The panel placement is a non issue. Up or down an inch with a tad of a curve here and there and it looks pretty close.If the profile is close, even the spear ends would probably interchange. Thats pure conjecture, but whats to lose? If I could find a NOS 6 piece set (barring $$$) I'd change over tomorrow. Keep yer GM car all GM. I could go with a roll of self adhesive chinajunk, but that would take the element of artistic license outa the job. Theres something about the tin harmonics of one of the old guys going down the road sounding like a snare drum. Call me Gene Krupa haha.
Any input is always welcomed. Im always game to listen to ideas. Below are pics of mine and a stock pic from barnfinders. Also is the quarter panel patch job and trunk floor Im starting next week, and the young kid and his older sister. Thats my 72 XGS 455. This stuff will all be done in a few months WITH paint. Thats one advantage of being retired; stay BUSY! Thanks again, Bill
I'm no stranger to "making stuff work", but since the ends of the doors are curved, the length of the trim changes as you move it up and down the car. Also, are you SURE the cross section is the same? I'm not familiar with the Buick trim, but given the limited resolution of these photos, I don't know that they are. And obviously the Olds trim doesn't have the tapered ends of the Buick trim. Have you looked into having your old trim repaired? I recently sent the unobtanium wheel opening stainless for my 67 Delta to Dell Metal Polishing in PA. Not only are mine mashed, but a previous owner decided to drill holes for sheet metal screws rather than try to find the correct mounting clips. The quote for the fix was very reasonable.
Well, as I suspected, the cross section of the Buick and Olds trim is completely different. The Buick trim is raised in the center, the Olds trim is depressed. Not even close.
Yeah... the profile/cross section is what really concerned me. Thanks for the close up on that Olds! That tells the story. Just as an FYI, the Buick stuff has an insertable "spear tip" at each end for a nice finish; you can hardly see it. I am thinking that when GM made this kinda stuff it came off a 20 foot long stick and was cut to fit, production wise. I do have a station wagon rear stick with a 20" long spear on the end.
Just thought it may have been a viable alternative. Hmmm I may hafta get an estimate from your PA. guys. Some of that stuff gets outa hand in a hurry. I can "plennish" out the faults but that finish kills me! Did you have yours re-anodized?
If anyone else is following this thred, I just got a 7 piece trunk floor set from JEG's for 239.00 with free shipping. It was here in less than 48 hours. Best deal in town! Bill
Yeah, those are the guys. Stainless doesn't get anodized, it get polished. Aluminum gets anodized. My trim is stainless, as is the 64 Olds trim. I don't know about the Buick.
Hi Bill: Well, this took a quick different turn from the question I expected. As usual, Joe comes up with good information. I happen to have the one year only 64 Skylark driver side front fender without the rot thru at the bottom where they always rust. Here is a link to my Craigslist ad for you to see photos if you are interested:
Thanks Trent, as far as I can tell that IS a 1965 Skylark fender due to the 1-1/2 wide trim. That also has integral "venti-ports" in the trim. Mine are individual as in Joes pic above. Another anomaly LOL. My fenders are actually rock solid with a minor 2x2 holes cut out with a cut off wheel by the previous owner. I have been told that the two years are interchangeable, to a point, where bumper alignment is concerned. The hood to grill fit is another.
That is one of the issues that makes this a one year wonder... really shocked that GM would pull something like this, especially with their standardization program. I had a pal in high school that did put a '63 Impala front clip on a 1964. That made ya do a double take.
Guess Ill be calling Dell Metal Monday morning... unless some one knows of a place closer to the Green Bay Wi. area??? Bill
Thanks Trent, as far as I can tell that IS a 1965 Skylark fender due to the 1-1/2 wide trim. That also has integral "venti-ports" in the trim. Mine are individual as in Joes pic above. Another anomaly LOL. My fenders are actually rock solid with a minor 2x2 holes cut out with a cut off wheel by the previous owner. I have been told that the two years are interchangeable, to a point, where bumper alignment is concerned. The hood to grill fit is another.
That is one of the issues that makes this a one year wonder... really shocked that GM would pull something like this, especially with their standardization program. I had a pal in high school that did put a '63 Impala front clip on a 1964. That made ya do a double take.
Guess Ill be calling Dell Metal Monday morning... unless some one knows of a place closer to the Green Bay Wi. area??? Bill
There's no "anomaly". 1964 Specials got the ventiports above the trim. 1964 Skylarks got the wider trim with integral ports. There's nothing mysterious about it. And I don't know what "standardization program" you are talking about. In the 1960s, every GM division was independent with their own engines, sheet metal, and trim. In some cases (like the B-body cars) even the chassis and suspension was different (ie, Delta 88 frame and suspension for the 1960s does not interchange with Impala). Nearly every car line had at least three trim levels (for Olds it was the F-85, F85 Deluxe, and Cutlass) each with different standard equipment, upholstery, and chrome. Front end sheet metal was almost always one-year-only and was certainly unique to each division. It wasn't until the mid-70s that GM started to consolidate and use common sheet metal - not to mention engines (and how did THAT work out, exactly...). There's a reason why GM's market share has plummeted since then.
I always thought the wider trim was a '65 thing. Hmmm The standardization plan (since about 1938 ish) was like a steering gear box, differentials, wheel bearings, brakes, suspension, and a myriad of other stuff not related to body design. There's tons of stuff that interchanges, and me being the dummy I am, thought maybe I could make the trim work. Heck, I blew up a '70 GS rear end and put a 71 Monte Carlo 3:23 posi in it bolt for bolt.
Just sayin'. Bill
And yet, there were all these different rear axles that only shared mounting points and nothing else...
Of course, this is just the A-body cars. The full size used the 8.875" Chevy, the totally different 8.875" Pontiac, or the 9.3" Oldsmobile axle. The Impala used a three link rear suspension with Panhard rod, the Delta used a four link. The Impala used 9.5" brakes, the Delta used 11". The Impala used a 4.75" bolt circle, the Olds used a 5". Should I go on? If you think all this stuff is the same, knock yourself out.
I need to clarify one of my prior posts. The three trim levels for the 1964 Buick A-body cars were the Special, Special Deluxe, and Skylark. The base Special got the ventiports but no side chrome. The Special Deluxe got the ventiports and the narrow side chrome below them. The Skylark got the wide side trim with integral ventiports. The OP's car is a Special Deluxe. It's interesting that Buick called the 2dr post cars "coupes" and the 2dr hardtops "sport coupes".
Hi Bill: What about that Encyclopedia Padavantia? For years I did think the 64/65 Skylark front fenders were the same because they look so close. I got interested in those years because a buddy has a 65 Buick GS with a 4 speed. In order to further verify that the 64 Buick Skylark front fender is a one year only and clearly only a Buick fender I offer these three photos. The left side we have a photo from a finished 1965 Skylark. The bumper is about the same height all the way across the front of the car. The top of the bumper cut out on the fender is about 2" lower than the top of the wheel opening cut out. The center photo is from a finished 1964 Skylark. The bumper clearly wraps up at the front corners and into the fenders. The top of the bumper cut out is about even with the top of the wheel opening cut out. A further difference is the style line along the fender that continues along the side is a little lower on the 1964 Skylark, maybe not a full inch but it looks lower. You would have to measure in person to see how little the difference really is. The third photo is of course my fender, another 64 Skylark fender. Subtle difference, yes? You really have to look them over to see the difference in just the fender. So another example of a one year only part and GM was doing something to make the style different for each year which is one of the reasons why we like to collect these cars because of style. Then Joe explained about the trim differences to give yet further style variations for the same car.
Good luck with your car! Regards, Trent in Los Angeles
Thanks Joe! Saved that brochure as a file for future reference... Ive known all along about subtle differences, but some of this sheds a new light on it. Hell, even my '72 XGS has a Type "O" 2:73(?) open in it. At first glance I had an AH HA moment thinking it was a 12 bolt Chevy. The '64 has an 8.3 @ 3:23 BMD rear end in it. The4 cars only got 34K on it so Im keeping that as a "builder" for a 3:73 or a tad bigger.
GM still beat the crap outa dodge and Ford on standardizing tho... My dad was a GM engineer for 30+ years (Electro-Motive Division) in LaGrange Il. (Locomotives and Navy power) and was GM through and through. All except for Model T's which is what I learned on at about 5 Y.O.How many kids today know how to scrape a bearing to fit against prussian blue? That "art" got me through a 30 year career as a steam and gas turbine engineer at ComEd in Chicago.
Most of the T's interchanged parts (within reason!) from about 1910 - 1927 with not much more finesse than a long pinch bar and a hammer LOL. Gaskets home made outa shirt cardboard and permatex.YECHHHH! Not necessarily identical, but still interchangeable nonetheless. I guess when yer a YOOT growing up and blow the rear end outa the car, anything that will still bolt up makes it "good to go".
So the '64 Special DeLuxe (this one has carpets, radio, PS & now a dual PB system) had a V6 and a 3 on the tree. Gramma quit driving the car in 1980. So its a barn find with a perfect interior. She just liked to sideswipe the garage door frame hence the need for trim, haha.
This last winter I built a 465 (455 + .030) with a cam and nice valve job and installed a Super T-10. Still had to play with motor mounts and a few other things, but the driveshaft was perfect, the trans mount was perfect and the 3:23 gear is "adequate" for the 465 torque monster. New springs and shocks etc etc. Not too bad for a 64 year old cripple with 2 fake knees and two fake shoulders eh? BTW, thats all flat on a cold concrete floor.
So I can tell yer a guy that knows his stuff; KUDOS! On V8 Buick theres a guy they call the wizard that orders everything from rotauto and has his "tech" install it while he's getting a manicure across the street. What a cheezdick. A real copy and paste wizeguy to boot.
Should I go on? If you think all this stuff is the same, knock yourself out.
Please dont go there OK? One wizard in this world is enough LOL. Again, thanks for the sales brochure !! Sorry If I came across as curt, but Im staving off a case of influenza yesterday and today since wintering and shrink wrapping my 1963 36 foot aluminum Roamer that Ive owned since 1973. Gets tuffer and tuffer every year! Gotta slug some coffee and go back to the couch! Bill
Last edited by yachtsmanbill; October 26th, 2019 at 02:33 PM.
DANG Trent! What a comparison. That really explained the difference that I knew existed, but wasnt sure exactly what it was. I have a pal locally here thats in need of that fender. Still available? He's building an 8 second street 'Lark with an all aluminum 568 (?) Tomahawk motor. . His '70 white GSX was in the low 9's. Ill be happy to pass that along if youd like. How much??
Heres the front end of the BADLASS. I see the difference now! Im gonna take a quick look for his latest Lark pic... gimme a second... Bill
Hey Bill: That is one fast Buick! Yes, it took me a while to figure out the difference in the front fenders. It is such a small difference you have to line them up to see it. Once you see the difference in the bumpers, the fender difference makes sense. So to make a style change for Buick Skylark in 65, they had to make a new tooling for the bumper and the fender to make it happen which required a big investment for the presses for the new parts. Amazing. Then add all the other models and GM Divisions. Keep in mind that the full size GM wide got a new body redesign for 65, go they had a lot going on at the time. GM did a lot to make style changes. GM took the full size wagon body for 1970 and made Buick exterior panels (front clip and sides) for the wagon which was used only one year. Chevy and BOP all got a totally new wagon for 1971 with the clam shell - disappearing tailgate and rear window. Olds did not get a full size wagon for 1970 and waited till 1971 for their Custom Cruiser. Olds had the Vista Crusier called a bigger wagon and the flat top for a smaller wagon. Buick cancelled the Sport Wagon glass roof wagon for 70 and just had the Special wagon. Buick and Olds did not have a full size wagon from 65-69. Did Buick make that full size to just make up for cancelling the Sport Wagon? I am not sure, but it was more expensive than to keep the glass roof one more year. Amazing the money and effort spent for style like the small change in the 64/65 Skylark fenders.
I do still have the fender for sale - here is the link with a bunch of photos:
Hi Bill,
thanks, but I have one NOS and one super condition original.
What I can think of right now is a set of front signal light lens.
I have one ok and one cracked..
Hi Bill: Thanks anyway for the thought, good your buddy is all set. Best of luck with your Buick and hope you enjoy it a bunch! Regards, Trent in Los Angeles
October 24th, 2019, 03:37 PM
Bill
