Motor Trend lauded the 1964 Oldsmobile Vista-Cruiser and Buick Sports Wagon for being as roomy as a full-sized wagon even though they were based on General Motors’ mid-sized body. Indeed, cargo room was 6.4 cubic feet greater than a big GM wagon despite being as much as 800 pounds lighter.
“There’s no doubt that the lines of this bubble-top wagon will help it sell, mainly because it offers something different — and this always goes over big with John Q. Public,” wrote Jim Wright. “More important, though, is the fact that the bubble is more than just a styling and sales gimmick — it’s completely functional” (1964, p. 23).
The bubble-top twins were stretched five inches in wheelbase (to 120 inches) from the regular GM mid-sized wagons. This, combined with raising the roofline in the cargo area, allowed GM designers to sandwich in a forward-facing third-row seat accessed by a side door. In those years cargo-area seats generally pointed backward and were accessed through the tailgate.
Wright also lauded the extra glass area, which “gives rear seat (and to an extent front-seat) passengers a greater view of the surrounding countryside. Passengers can now see upward as well as around them, and this can be an important attribute in a car that’ll no doubt play a big role in a lot of vacation plans. We found it especially welcome in mountain areas” (1964, p. 23).
The base price for a 1964 Sports Wagon was $2,989, which was around $200 more than a regular Special wagon but almost $600 below a LeSabre full-sized wagon. The base Vista-Cruiser was priced slightly lower at $2,938. Motor Trend complained that a standard V6 that came with the Buick was underpowered, but Collectible Automobile stated that production models only came with a V8, which was Oldsmobile’s approach.
The bubble tops were an increasing rare GM innovation
The bubble-top wagons were one of the last engineering innovations that GM would give its mid-sized cars in the 1960s. This was quite a shift in approach from its predecessor, the Y-body compacts. They had experimented with exotic engineering such as a rear transaxle and turbocharging.
With the 1964 upsizing, GM instead focused on styling. Each of GM’s four A-body entries was given unique sheetmetal. This stood in contrast to their early Y-body predecessors, which shared so much sheetmetal that they could be confused.
Ads for the 1964 Oldsmobile Vista-Cruiser and the 1965 Buick Sportwagon (the name changed from Sports Wagon) were starkly different. Click on images to enlarge (Old Car Advertisements).
Although the shape of the roof may remind one of a “Scenicruiser” Greyhound bus, it may not have been directly inspired by them, according Collectible Automobile (Heilig, 2005).
Motor Trend devoted more page space to the Sports Wagon than the Vista-Cruiser, perhaps because it had longer access to a test vehicle. The irony here is that Oldsmobile appears to have given more visibility to its wagon — and ended up keeping it in production longer than Buick did. Indeed, the name Vista-Cruiser became synonymous with this type of wagon.
Mid-sized wagons sold better than their big brothers
Motor Trend didn’t quite know how to classify the bubble-top wagons. “The 120-inch wheelbase of these wagons creates an odd situation for both the Special and the F-85. This puts them up in the standard-sized class, where they’ll be competing against their larger brothers as well as Ford, Plymouth, Chevrolet and Dodge” (Wright, 1964; p. 25).
That proved to be a good move for both Buick and Oldsmobile, whose big wagons had not been struggling in the marketplace. Both the Vista-Cruiser and Sports Wagon were introduced in February 1964, but they sold respectably — and so their brand’s full-sized wagons were dropped in 1965.
Also see ‘Did smaller cars cannibalize GM’s premium-priced big cars in the 1960s?’
In 1965 the bubble-top wagons peaked at roughly 60,000 units. From there sales zig-zagged around, but by 1969 the Oldsmobile was outselling the Buick by a three-to-two margin. So in 1970 Buick ditched the bubble top whereas Olds soldiered on through 1972.
Once Buick and Oldsmobile added back big wagons they didn’t sell all that well — and were doomed for a downsizing in 1977 that put them in a similar ballpark as the bubble-top wagons. GM might as well have just stuck with them.
NOTES:
Production figures and specifications were from the auto editors of Consumer Guide (1993) and Flory (2004).
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- Auto editors of Consumer Guide; 1993. Encyclopedia of American Cars. Publications International, Lincolnwood, Ill.
- Flory, J. “Kelly” Jr.; 2004. American Cars, 1960-1972. McFarland & Co., Inc.
- Heilig, John; 2005. “1964-72 Oldsmobile Vista-Cruiser and Buick Sportwagon: Different Outlook.” Collectible Automobile. March issue: pp. 8-19.
- Wright, Jim; 1964. “Olds F-85 Vista Cruiser Wagon.” Motor Trend. March issue: pp. 20-21.
- ——; 1964. “Room at the top: Buick Skylark Wagon.” Motor Trend. March issue: pp. 23-27.
ADVERTISING & BROCHURES:
- oldcaradvertising.com: Buick (1965); Oldsmobile (1964)
- oldcarbrochures.org: Oldsmobile (1964 1971)
The one problem about the Olds Vista-Cruiser and the Buick Sport Wagon is that even though the roof glass is tinted, air-conditioning was NOT standard, and in summer months especially, there was additional solar radiation entering the car, which might make the owner(s) wish the air option box had been checked. I wonder how many V-6 wagons were ordered with the 225-cu.-in. / 155-horsepower engine and a 3,405 lb. curb weight for 1964-1965 models. The V-6 would not have been a good match for air AND the two-speed automatic !
There were 6 1964 442’s made in the wagon. They had 315 hp 330 ci V8’s along with 4-soeed manual transmissions.
When Olds eliminated the Vista Cruiser’s unique roof rear windows for 1973, it tried to make up for it by offering the Cutlass wagon with a sunroof dubbed the “Vista Vent.”
While the wagon experienced the bloat of the other Colonnade intermediates, retention of the Vista Cruiser’s unique rear roof window would have made the car stand out in the wagon field.
The other missed opportunity for Olds was basing its large wagon on the Toronado instead of the conventional B-body. Imagine a Toronado Vista Cruiser (with four doors)…the flat floor permitted by the front-wheel-drive layout would have been a real advantage in a large wagon. Buyers of a large wagon would also have appreciated the surefooted front-wheel-drive. That would have made Oldsmobile’s biggest wagon stand out among the offerings of the other GM divisions.
Oldsmobile Chief Engineer John Beltz – who was one of the chief proponents of the Toronado – wanted to build a Toronado wagon, but Ed Cole shot down that idea, telling Beltz that he needed to focus on “selling what he had first.” (Sales of the 1966-70 Toronado had been lackluster.)
Interestingly, in the Popular Mechanics “Owners Report” on the 1970 Toronado, a few owners wanted Olds to offer a Toronado wagon.
We had a 69 Vista Cruiser dark green metallic 400 CU. Came with Crager Mags and it was HOT fast. Black tufted interior and STEREO ! REALLY NICE CAR.
Once again, Ed Cole carried the 14th Floor message to John Beltz. A four-door Toronado and a Toronado Vista Cruiser would have been a seller, in my opinion. Oldsmobile had the engineering down for both a front-drive F-85 / Cutlass and an 88, but Cole nixed these options. If Oldsmobile had completely become G.M.’s front-drive division, they might have survived. Having driven a 1966 Toronado, it was a great piece of automotive engineering, but the platform should have replaced the 88 / 98 as Oldsmobile’s full-size platform in sedan form.