I didn’t instantly have a picture of the 1962 Impala pop into my head when I saw a tip by Numskal for just such a Chevy. So I clicked the link just to see what the car looked like. What was it compared to the more familiar Impalas of the mid-1960s? I was instantly smitten. Now the question is, will the car, listed here on craiglist at an asking price of $30,000, find someone with a similar interest and a pocket full of cash? It’s a true California car, waiting for the right buyer in Stockton.
Red steel wheels with full covers. Body side spears of chrome with red accent paint. A complementing character line running the whole length of the body. We’re talking about the perfect moment that punctuates the fins of the 1950s and the Coke-bottle swoopiness of the later 1960s. Add in a 327-V8 with a four-barrel, and you’ve got a car you could cruise in with ease. That’s especially true know that the seller has done the recommissioning job a stored car demands, including replacing the alternator and battery, radiator and fuel pump. No word as to the other usual stuff, like a carb rebuild, fuel tank, and other fluid service. Note that if this will be your driver, power steering and brakes complete the package. But as an investor, you’ll want to know what exactly is meant by “rebuilt driveline.” (The “and transmission” part speaks for itself.)
What would concern me about making this my next vintage car? Its size. This car is much bigger that its profile photos suggest. What does this mean? I don’t know for sure without checking whether this would fit in my garage, at seventeen feet plus. I know for sure it’s going to take up all the space available in most modern parking lots. What would its heft say for the way it drives? Or is “floats” a better word and just what’s expected of an early-60s offering? On another topic, I wonder how easy it will be to fix up the interior and keep things looking original. The driver’s seatback looks considerably worse than almost everything else inside and out. Is the seat skin available? And how’d it get that way when everything else looks so clean? In terms of what this car represents, you have original paint in an attractive Ermine White, so the originality factor is sky high. I do wonder if the hood is a mismatch, and if so, what that indicates. The engine apparently runs, but a photo of the mill would be in order, as would some shots of the underside.
This is a cool coupe, but in no way a muscle car. I know the market on those has gone a bit nuts, but if this seller is firm on his price, you’re almost into GTO territory at $30K. Should you stretch a bit and buy one of those, or is this survivor cool enough to make you forget those letters and others like them (SS, for example)?
What, a ’62 Chev and no 409? Maybe alone, but I never cared for the ’62 Chevy, even though watching vintage drag racing, it was without a doubt the most popular car out there. While I make fun of the 409 as a glorified truck motor, there’s actually merit to that, as some were putting out some serious hp. Took the 427 Ford and the hemi to beat it.
Apparently, since all the painters left the planet, the seat repair folks were close behind. I’ll admit, Walmart seat covers are a bit cheesy, but better than this. While never intended to be a true musclecar, again, I wouldn’t sell this combo short. The 327 was a popular motor and a 4 barrel gave it “power to pass”, more important than anything back then. 0-60 in 7.5 seconds, and 1/4 mile just under 16, for 1962, it had power. The base price for a 6 cylinder was about $2660, and the top of the line wagon at just over $3grand, this car was right in the middle. Of the almost 2 million Chevys sold in 1962, over 1/3 were Impalas, some 700,000. Pretty clear, America loved their Chevrolets.
Again, not sure of what planet these folks come from, I say California, but a growing trend, buy low, sell high. We all know, or should know, this car was found cheap, couple grand tops, they did a little and inflated the price to what I would consider an unacceptable amount. For the rest of the world, are people really buying ’62 Chevys like this for $30grand? If so, I can’t imagine for how much longer.
30 large is a heck of an ask, for sure. More than I could justify in any event. Cool car though, I’d love to cruise A1A in it.
My Mom had a 62′ Impala 2dr Hard Top in 1964. I don’t know what size V8. It was that sea green color. It was a sharp looking ride. She bought it used, and unfortunately, it had a cracked block and I can remember my dad driving it back to the dealer for a refund (heh-heh). My Dad went right back and got a deal on a leftover 64′ Impala 2dr Hard Top, and Dear Old Mom got a great deal on a 65′ Nova. They loved those cars.
62, 64, and 65 feet long! Wow!
We had a 62 impala convert, it was a 327 PG car, my father called it demonic 😮 the wiring was so bad the car would eat batteries and generators like snack food. We sold it for a 64 Malibu 2dr. Which was a very reliable car.
A friend of mine had one of these in ’66 only a convertible. He said the fender badge with crossed flags indicated the Corvette 300 HP 327. For the day it was a good performer.
The crossed flags just indicated a 327 of any variety, but certainly not a Vette motor.
There were only 2 327s in ’62 full-size Chevy’s. It was just those 2 (L30/250hp & L74/300hp) that stayed on the BIG Chevy option list thru ’66.
I saw plenty of the insignias without the crossed flags. My friends car was the 300 HP model which was the stock Vette motor. See the comment below yours that shows that motor as available.
Ok, I can see where this is going so this is n be my final comment. A simple V without flag’s indicated a 283, either 2 bbl. or 4 bbl. Crossed flag’s indicated a 327, either 250 horse or 300 horse. Both 327s were also available in Corvettes so I suppose if one had the burning desire, either one when installed in an Impala could be called a “Corvette motor”. My cousin had a 327/375 horse in a 62 Biscayne. Now that was a Vette motor.
I think the only difference between the 62 Vette 250/300hp 327 and everybody else’s 327 was the ignition shielding and the valve covers. 250hp came with single exhaust, 300hp had duals. Dual exhaust was optional on the 250hp, but they didn’t claim any more horsepower. 62 Vettes also had 340/360hp 327. Both had solid lifters and more compression, 340hp had a carb, 360hp had fuel injection. I had a 340hp back in the day, pain in the butt to adjust lifters every few thousand miles.
I wasn’t clear…ALL Vettes had dual exhausts, the optional exhaust was on the Impala.
the cross flags indicates a 327 even the 250 HP one which was the base engine in the Corvette back than 300 HP was a option
Henry where do you get your information I was there in 1962 was 17 years old knew my cars all 250 HP 327 came with 4 barrel and dual exhaust only 327 that came with out stand dual exhaust was one that later came in 1967 it was a 210 HP 2 barrell one
Al, I was there too! My mom bought a 62 impala 4 door with 327/250, had a Carter 4 bbl. Got my driver’s license in it ..I drag raced it unmercifully for a couple of years in Pure Stock class. Pure stock was kind of a class for real drag racers to let their girlfriends race the tow cars while the guys drove their race cars. There were pretty strict rules as to what could to be done to a pure stock car…tires all same size, no engine mods other than timing changes, carb jets and any rear end ratio. Most guys didn’t do any of these things, although I did…everything that was legal. Mom’s car had 327/250 power glide. She didn’t order it, just took one off the lot. Had dual exhaust charge on window sticker of about $15 as I recall. I got really good at switching my 4:11 posi rear end at the track, racing, and then switching it back to the original punkin. Mom never knew! Almost never lost at the track, turned 15.5s all day long.
I’m a Ford Guy. (There is no known cure).
I don’t get paid to write automotive articles.
However, I would be embarrassed if I had to admit that I didn’t know what a ‘62 Impala looks like.
I’m frankly taken aback. 🤷♂️
Obviously, my expectations are way too high.
Excellent point! (I’m a Chevy guy, but I know full well what a “62 Galaxie looks like.)
Bunky than one of your favorite engines in 1962 would have been the same as mine a 406 great engine
Too rough around the edges for the asking price it would take quite a bit to make it really nice like it deserves to be. I like the style of these cars
I always loved the ’62 Impalas. One of my favorite years. #1-’58, #2-’62, #3-64, #4
-’67.
When the ’62 Chevys first came out, I ordered a Super Sport convertible…black with a black top and tan interior…small v8 with Powerglide so my new wife could easily drive it. It came with bucket seats and a console and those three-bladed wheel covers, all of which looked even greater when I put on skirts. But, in spite of it all, I never really liked the looks of that car. I made up for it by trading it on a new ’63 SS convertible with a 327 and a four speed, all done up in Azure Aqua with a white top. Now, THAT car I really liked!!
As well you should have. ’63 SS Impalas were one of the prettiest cars produced in the sixties,
Different strokes for different folks. I’ve had a bunch of Impalas, including a 62, 63, 64 & 66. To my eye, the best looking of the bunch was the 62. Been looking for a 65/409 for years, but no luck so far. If this one were in a little better shape and a lot cheaper I’d be more interested.
Henry I also dragged in stock class was g stock both my sister and I ran g stock in 1963 she had a new Impala convertible 327 250 HP 4 speed I ran a 1958 Impala 348 250 HP factory 3 speed she ran g stock because of the weigh of the convertible 348 was strong it was close but 348 won