Before 1964, the Skylark was a trim option on the Buick Special. But that year, it became a series of its own when it and the Special were promoted from compact to intermediate-size status. Unusual by Detroit standards at the time was its use of a V6 engine as standard equipment. This nice survivor 2-door hardtop has that motor but does need some tinkering with the fuel delivery system. Located in Sante Fe, New Mexico, this Buick is available here on craigslist for $7,100. Another great GM tip brought our way by Rocco B.!
Named after a species of bird (Skylark), the car would be a best-seller for Buick until 1972. After a brief retirement, the Skylark became a Nova-based compact for 1975-79. The 225 cubic inch V6 had cast-iron construction, replacing the previous 215 V8 that used an aluminum block. With a single barrel carburetor, it produced 155 hp. That was all the power you got unless you opted for the 330 V8. The 2-door hardtop version was quite popular as Buick sold more than 42,000 copies like the seller’s car in ’64.
Few details and photos of this Skylark are offered. But what we see looks good though the seller mentions there is “minimal rust.” The body panels seem to be okay, and the color of the paint looks like a really light blue though the seller refers to it as silver. The dark blue vinyl upholstery with bucket seats appears to be quite attractive and has held up well from what we can tell.
At 76,000 miles, the vehicle is said to start, run, and drive, but either the carburetor or fuel lines have an issue that the seller says will require attention. And the windshield wiper motor is bad, so you shouldn’t drive it in inclement weather until that’s fixed. Otherwise, this is described as an original automobile that could be fun to drive once some minor issues are sorted out.
Looks more like thick gray primer in the front end pictures …
and look at the cowl area where the wipers are supposed to be..there’s been some body work going on.
Sb Buick was 300ci. Olds had330 totally different.
Had a 65 with a 340 dual exhaust and 4bbl. Was a quick little car till it got T-boned.
Does it share the core body with a Chevy model?
It shared the platform with the Chevelle
Seems like a very straight car. Just wish there were some engine pictures as a v-6 was new at that time.
I had a 65 skylark with a 255 fireball and 2 speed powerglide. Had to keep a can of has in the trunk as gas gauge didn’t work. It was a nice winter car. This wod be worth 7K not much more
A 225 V6 engine with the Super Turbine 300 two-speed transmission.
My first car was a ’62 Buick Special with the 198 V6.
Depending on the year and body style, these were offered with 300 or 340 V8 options if you didn’t want the V6. There wasn’t a 330 V8 in these.
The Buick 300 was offered in 1964 and 1965.
The Buick 340 was offered in 1966 and 1967. It was replaced by the 350 in 1968.
Olds offered the 330, but Buick never offered it.
The 340 was available as a high performance option in 65 with dual exhaust and 4bbl. My brother had one in a 2dr hardtop. I had a 66 Skylark GranSport at the same time with the 401 nailhead. The 65 was a sharp looking car with the tail light panel that went all the way across.
Mama Mia, we had fun with a car like this.The guy that was my friend since HS, until he drank himself into a nuthouse, I came to Colorado, the guy with the ’58 Bug, the ’63 Dodge with no fender, and the MG Midget, in HS, (’72) his mom had a car just like this. I couldn’t believe the abuse that car took. The front shocks were worn, so he’d put it in low, and stab and release the throttle like 20 times, almost getting the front wheels off the ground. Seemingly nothing could kill it, until someone pulled out in front of him, totaling the car. His mom then bought a newer Cutlass, that she wouldn’t let him drive, which was fine, by then he had the Bug, and a whole new set of stories that can’t be told here.
Several years later, a bar friend had a 4 door like this, I had my MGB, we took off from Milwaukee for Fl. spring break. We made it just inside the Fl. line, when the right rear wheel bearing let go. We jacked up the car, the axle was red hot, so popped right out, went to a nearby town, the local auto parts store had one, pressed it on for us, back in the MG, and back to the car on the interstate. Put it back together, added oil, and off we went. In the 3 hours the other guys sat there on the shoulder,, not one cop went by. Try that today.
As I remember the V-6 wasn’t near as smooth as modern one.
Uneven firing sequence and no balance shafts, those came in with the 3800 Series I and II. Imagine this with the supercharged 3800 Series II and a modern GM transmission! But 65 is my favorite, the full width taillights
Lovely car. 1964 has always been my favourite year for the Buick Special and Skylark. This looks like it’d make a great project car for anyone who wants to do a resto on it. If only more pics were posted.
Here’s my ’65. click on picture for rotation.
Pretty!
If I had the garage space I could go for this. Not unreasonably high for a 60yo car in what appears to be pretty decent shape. Not sure about parts availability but why would you restore this car anyway? Get it running, make it safe, and enjoy it. Keep the investment low because it’s really not a special car. It’s not a desirable muscle car or even a historically important one. Definitely a car to take care of and pass on to the kids. IMHO . . .
Right? I’d keep what I can original as possible, while also upgrading certain things. It doesn’t have to be “special” to be worth driving and enjoying.
This an odd fire V6. It has a distinct sound to it. Buick sold the tooling to Jeep/Kaiser in 66 where it became the Dauntless V6. Buick V6s up until 76-77 were odd fire in the 231. My Jeep has the Dauntless.
This would be cool with the supercharged 3800 (dependent of the odd-fire), mounted longitudinally of course.
That’s interesting. Didn’t Buick also sell the 215v8 to Rover? And if so, why would other car companies be interested in engines that were being discontinued (by Buick) for less than the best operational performance for the time?
It had nothing to do with “less than the best operational performance”. The 215 aluminum V8 was a staunch performing (for its size), lightweight aluminum engine that Rover literally used in its vehicles (Including Triumph and MG) from 1965 to 2006. The V6? Buick bought this back from AMC in 1974 for its power/weight ratio and overall economy and it became as ubiquitous to GM as the 350 Chevy. GM wanted to actually buy the 215 back as well. Rover told them to take a walk…
It was 1965. Americans wanted big V8s and horsepower. Gas was .25 a gallon or less. They were not interested in the small V8/V6 and truly innovative engines and technologies that GM had invested in (such as the OHC 6), during the early 1960s. Detroit came to regret the shortsighted decisions it made at the time by the 1980s…
I wish I was surprised. GM and car makers in general rarely if ever think about what the customers want or need. They always assume that that’s what they want and go ahead and offer it. That being said, someone had to have bought a V6 powered car. I know I would’ve
Rover, being British, had to deal with European gas prices at the time, which were much higher than here in North America, so light weight and good mileage were much more highly prized than here in the land of the super slab. Also, GM was having issues with the aluminum blocks warping, that they didn’t want to spend the time and money to fix, especially since each aluminum motor cost $300 more than a cast iron equivalent to make. Rover was selling the engines in premium models, where the prospective customers were more willing to absorb the higher cost of the aluminum block.
Decendent! Geez, auto-correct is out of control.
My best friend in high school lived around the corner and his folks bought him a 64 Skylark for his high school car. His was beige with saddle tan buckets and a four speed, with the V6. His dad didn’t want him to have too much horsepower. It was a great cruiser for a high school kid. We went everywhere in it and it looked like the muscle cars, but wasn’t. He could loaf around and all the other kids thought he was a model of restraint. Nope, just didn’t do any good to hot-rod it, it had no guts. But it sure did look good, and the girls didn’t know any different.
Had a 64 SkyLark 4 door hard top. I thought it had a 340 but must have been a 300. It had aluminum heads, Rochester four barrel, 2 speed auto. It had an impressive amount of power and would do an impressive one wheel burnout, until I busted the drive side motor mount
The 340 V8 wasn’t available until the 1966 model year.
Sorry Rick but there were a few high performance “Baby GranSports” with a 4 bbl high compression dual exhaust 340’s in 65. My brother had one with bucket seats and console. Pale yellow and black vinyl topped 2 door. Living in Detroit we had dealers that could order rare options. Having been built late in the model year might have had something to do with it. My 66 had the 401 nailhead. I have owned many Buick’s including a 55 Special 2dr with a 322 nailhead.
I bought a 1964 f85 deluxe with this engine. The car had 40,000 miles. I replaced the nylon timing gear and chain and drove the car for a total of 156,000iles total and replaced the V6 with a 330 4 speed. The v6 rangrest once it got rolling and I got highway of about 23 mpg
I kind of wish I’d rebuilt the v6 but I still have it just in case
Good looking car that are seldom seen today. Worthy of preservation. Auntie Ann had a ’65 with the white two tone over dark green and gray upholstery. Nice car.
Perfect for a 327 and 4 speed.
Too easy!
Looks like a 1965 hood. “Almost the same” is as good as off by a mile.
Deal of the day here.
I’ve always found the 1964 Buick Skylark more attractive than the 1965 Buick Skylark. Look at the front of the car and you’ll see why.