Here’s a tale of two cars for you. The ’91-’96 Chevrolet Caprice (B-body) was derided as a Blimp-O-Mobile at first but then underwent some corrective surgery for the ’93 model year with radiused rear wheel openings and a wider rear track. In ’94, the Impala SS was reborn and joined the Caprice as a stablemate, and with it came the detuned LT-1 engine – a big hit to say the least. For your review today, we have a 1995 Caprice, discovered by Tony P. and hailing from Lompoc, California – it’s in true survivor condition. Read on to learn more!
This vintage B-body was the last of the run for full-size rear-wheel drive Chevies. The Impala, not the Caprice (at least not for U.S. retail consumption), would return in 2000 (W-Body) but it was a front-wheel driver and a completely different kind of car. This example, which has only spun 58K miles on its odometer is said to be an “Absolutely amazing time capsule” and it looks it. The black exterior finish still possesses lots of depth and the chrome-plated exterior plastic bits haven’t done their usual self-destructive thing. This Caprice is outfitted with optional cast aluminum wheels and they still look like new with nary a trace of destructive brake pad dust, general weather exposure wear, or errant curb interaction. This sedan has been garage-stored, and that’s the reason for the sale, the seller claims that he’s losing his two-car garage.
Powering this commodious Caprice is an unphotographed (I don’t know why sellers omit this very important piece of documentation!) 200 net HP, 4.3 liter (262 CI) V8 engine. It’s not the same 262 powerplant that was offered in ’75-’76 (different bore and stroke) though it is based on the SB-II small-block architecture. Assisted by a 4L60-E, four-speed automatic transmission, this Chevy is said to “run smooth and feel like a new car“.
I’ll cut to the chase. GM B-bodies of this generation feature a very “plasticky” interior – not exactly high-quality materials, and the instrument panel, well, is just that, an instrument panel. The upholstery in this car is leather and it appears to have held up well – probably owing to the low mileage and garage storage. The interior is called “Medium Beige” and components such as the carpet are nearly impossible to keep clean. No worries here, however, the entire environment looks to have been very gently and carefully used.
My prediction? This listing won’t last long, these are very popular cars! About 75K Caprice and Impala SS examples rolled off of the Arlington, Texas assembly line in ’95 and they are still sought after today. The Impala SS or a Caprice with the LT1 engine are the preferred versions, but I imagine this car won’t be at a loss for potential buyers. You can view the listing here on craigslist where it’s available for $10,000. What do you think, a good buy?
That other 262 you mention for ’75-76 was a V8, not a V6. They were an engine option in the Monza of that time as well.
Ignore previous comment, thank you:-)
IMO this was the worst of GMS overblown full size RWD vehicles. Even worse was deleted CAPRICE name, replacing it with Impala. I had A Buick Roadmaster and Cadillac RWD Brougham from this era. 👎. Even the top end models were inferior to previous editions.
Sorry, No Sale. The price is as overblown as the car!
This is the utilitarian 4.3 V6 GM correct ?
No, read the engine detail in the post. It was a short lived V8, not the 262 V6. It was only offered in the ’94- ’96 Caprice.
JO
I believe the 4.3 in these cars was a V8
Junk 4.3 V8…no one wants this engine in a Caprice. If it was an LT-1 it would be a winner. Sorry, no dice.
Beautiful car. I remember when this version of the Chevy Caprice debuted. I remember saying “It’s about time they updated the car!”
Nice car I think it’s over priced about $3-4k for a grandpa mobile however it’s a lot cheaper, looks and rides better than the junk Chevrolet has to offer today
Wow, there’s still plenty of hate for these even 30-years later. IIRC the engine displacement that year was 267 ci. Fortunately there are lots of options for displacement replacement. I liked these in both the original and the later refresh. Glwts.
It was actually 265 CI according to Chevrolet’s tech sheet – note the attached and scroll up to the heading.
There was a 267 CI V8 produced between ’79 and ’82 and it was truly a horrid engine. Things like the camshaft and crankshaft (but the cam in particular) would just decide that they had had enough, early on, and grenade that miserably underpowered engine.
This particular V8 (4.3/265) was a huge improvement.
JO
Thanks, Jim, for the clarification. It easy to get confused on some of these small displacement V8s that Chevy made. Just when I think I know something…
I drove the police version of these for a few years. They were absolute rockets, in a straight line. If the rear-end broke loose, at any speed, you were only along for the ride. The under-steer required attention as well. Other than that, great cars.
no LT1. clean car but a V6 and why would post a pic with a gas pump hose in the tank?
Man did you miss it. It’s not a V6, read all of the comments!
JO