1962 Buick special, 1st mass production American V6 

If I Was Your Woman, Gladys Knight and the Pips

CHOICE #1: Buick Special. I loved the V6. In 1977 I purposely purchased a new Buick Skylark over the Chevy Nova so I could have the V6. CHOICE #2: Chrysler.

That was pretty cool, thanks. I have a 1961 and 62 Buick Special, one a V6 the other a V8...both more doors. The 62 was my first car bought by my Dad for me in 1968...still drive it to this day, albeit just on the weekends.

Hey Jay, this Buick Special is in excellent condition inside & out!!! The Special was Buick's small economy car designed to go up against the Ford Falcon, Chevy Corvair & cousin Pontiac Tempest!! If this baby had stock wheel covers it would be perfect!!! Thanks for sharing another fun video!!! 👍👍🙂

My dad had a 62 2 door Special in the late 60's while he was dating my mom. Had no first gear, only 2nd and 3rd, and the hood latch was broken, he had it bolted down. My grandpa used to call it "The bucket of bolts." He said you could hear it coming down the road. In 1969 he traded it in for a 67 Fury III two-door hardtop with 383 2bbl. What an upgrade!

Jay, You had asked me if my my Invicta steering wheel was the same as these are. No, it was a two spoke design but It was far more stylish. And it should have been considering how much more an Invicta cost than this model in.

I need to get one of these, my family name is Buick and I was born in 1962.

1:12 If I remember correctly (and if I don't it's not the first time), the _Special_ name-plate came back for a year or two as a trim level on the Century coupes in '76-'77. I remember print ads that made mention of a three-speed manual transmission standard in that incarnation of the Special. My Mom's favorite car was her "Astro Blue" '66 Special DeLuxe with the white top and factory air conditioning purchased new. That is until many years later when she bought a brand-new '93 Roadmaster.

My first car was a 62 Buick Special V6 as I remember, the steering wheel was the same but matched the color (light brown) of the car perfectly.

Nice review,Jay‼Buick's style and the V-6 were the pluses for this plain Jane. 👀Meticulous research as always💫

nice review Justin. you can tell its a base model with no radio.

Another great episode ☺️👍 keep up the great work ✌️

Had one...3 speed on the floor, peppy little beast, rode nice...

This version of the Buick Special, like the Pontiac Lemans and Olds Jetfire, were built on the same chassis as the Chevy Corvair. Where the Pontiac and Chevy both used Powerglide transaxles, and the Olds used the small version of the Roto-Hydramatic, the Special was totally unique with it's Dynaflow, and unique it was. Unlike the more traditional Dynaflows, although still a non-automatic shifting transmission, the planetary gearset was built into the torque converter. This is why the front of the transmission hump was so large. There was virtually nothing inside the transmission case, so that part didn't have to be very large and that part of the hump was smaller. Had they moved the engine further forward there would have been practically no transmission hump. As the car had the optional aluminum 215 V8 available, the engine, ofcourse being longer, was closer to the radiator so the hump stayed the way it was. This smaller body type was a compact car design. It was GM's late answer to the Rambler American, Studebaker Lark , Plymouth Valiant and Ford Falcon. Dodge hadn't introduced it's Lancer compact until after it saw how well the Valiant was selling and wanted it's own. The Dodge Dart was a short wheelbase car but it actually was a full size car. Oh, GM had lot's of teething problems with the aluminum 215 V8 and ended up selling it to the Rover group, initially using it in it's original size, 3500 cc, even with the Buick "Nail Head" valve covers. Rover was able to iron out all the bugs and increased the engine size to 4.6L in the Range Rover.

I had one of these! Had that Fireball V-6, with the 2 speed auto. Fun little car, parts were exceedingly hard to find, and exceedingly expensive when found! The alternator is indeed after-market, mine still had a generator.

I had Comets & Falcons had lots of fun & easy to work on . These guys with V6 were not around in my neck of woods , however i would take one !

Hey Jay, do you ever get any feedback on whether you showcasing a car was a factor in a car sale? Keep up the good work!

The first V6 Buick, was blue and white, but lost its original engine due to lock up, that's one Buick I will always love because, I was a child prodigy in ours because I taught myself how to drive it back in 1969 when I was 9 years old, wish I could get my hands on the 1961-63 2dr4dr wagon today.

I remember seeing these when I was a kid. This, the Pontiac Tempest, and Olds F-85 were perfect for hot rodders to put their motors in. Chevy did that from the start with the 62 Nova (provided you put sub frame connectors in to brace it for strength).

the 4 barrel 215 cu.inch V8 was HOT!!!

The V6 in the sixties ran noticeably rough due to the 90-degree cylinder bank angle and the use of three crank pins. The ideal firing sequence would have 120 degrees of crank rotation between power strokes but the 90-degree V6 alternated between 90 and 150 degrees. Even Kaiser mothballed that engine after a few years because they deemed it too rough for use in the Jeep I remember one of the car-pool Moms for choir practice at Trinity Presbyterian had a '63 Special wagon with three-on-the-tree and under load it felt almost like one of those bed massagers from a sixties Travel Lodge Motel. Another friend's Mom had a Jeep CJ with the V6 and it had the same feel.

My votes, Mercury Comet, and Chrysler Airflow. My uncle had a Comet. He bought it in 62, but I think it might have been a 61 that was still unsold as the year changed. I am talking about model years here. For production, the model year started in late July, for sales the cars debued in the showrooms in mid-October. My uncle was a large, overweight man. One thing I use to notice was how he fit in cars, he always had more room in Ford Motor Company products than in GM products. He yourself to switch between Fords and Chevys, but he got in a couple of other brands over the years. Hense the Comet. He bought a new car every two years. Watching how you fit in these cars and having seen his fit in his cars, I think the Comet has more room than the Buick Special. That is one reason why I choose the Comet, another is that I am a Ford person, prefer Ford products over other makes.

I knew a girl that had one. Nice power (torque) and mpgs was about 25. A bit of a paint shaker at idle but smoothed out quickly as the rpms increased. Overall a pleasant driver but you wouldn't want to crash this car.

My mom got one in 1966 and it lasted until 1977 with almost no maintenance. Interesting two speed automatic. That rubber carpet rusted out the floor. Strong body. Yours doesn’t have the stainless side trim. Responsive powertrain was great in traffic

The wheel looks correct for 62 it's a base Special. Notice the rubber flooring and no power steering. Buick also had color keyed pedals in 62 and 63. The back up lights may have been a option.

Interesting. Previously I've had an impression that the Special was supposed to be a "premium" compact, but this car feels quite spartan. I bet there was some "deluxe" variety with a plusher interior and everything that befits a Buick, and this is probably a "bare bones" base version (even with radio delete !). Like the dashboard layout with all the instruments, levers and knobs nicely grouped in front of the driver, instead of being scattered all over the dashboard, as was the case with many 1960s cars. Not a huge fan of the exterior, though. Mercury Comet - definitely & absolutely; IMO, it was overall the best "compact" car from that time frame. And Chrysler Airflow, mostly because of its historical significance - BUT also because I believe that it is the roomiest of the three due to its unibody design & wider body.

Not a bad looking car for what appears to be a moderately maintained base model Buick with stained kick panels, a goofy looking steering wheel, and aftermarket rims. Is there any way to do a side-by-side comparison of this Buick, and the Pontiac, and Olds versions? Just so you know, I'll take the Packard.

1st scenario I’ll go with the 62 Buick Special but I do like the Mercury Comets . 2nd Scenario I’d go with the Packard .

We owned a 1962 Buick Skylark - which was the nicer model but the same body style. The Skylark was only sold as a 2 door hardtop and 2 door convertible in 1962. It only came with the V8 - but it had more horsepower (185 in 1962) because it came with a 4 barrel carburetor. The Skylark had more exterior chrome trim and much nicer interior appointments. It was a very good car - we were still driving it when it was 19 years old - which was practically unheard of back then. I noticed a few things on this car. The steering wheel on this car is incorrect. It's obviously not from this car because it should be blue and not white, to match the interior. But more importantly, this steering wheel is off a 1962 Oldsmobile F-85 - which is the Oldsmobile sibling of this car. Look up online what a 1962 Buick Special steering wheel is supposed to look like. It has one long horn bar that goes all the way across, and it says "Buick" on the horn bar. If the car has power steering, it says "Buick" in large letters, and "Power Steering" in smaller letters underneath it. The wheels have obviously been replaced also. They are supposed to have wheel covers and white wall tires. On all Buicks of this time period, the brake and gas pedals are color keyed to the interior. It may not be obvious on this car since the interior is navy blue. You are correct that there is very little difference between the 1961 and 1962 Specials. The 1961 Special's front end was made to look similar to the full sized Buick's front end. In 1961 the Special and the Skylark had different grilles. In 1962, they just took the 1961 Skylark's grille and put it on all of the 1962 Specials and Skylarks. In 1961, the "BUICK" lettering on the trunk is a different style. It is also located in the backward facing part of the trunk panel, as opposed to on top of the trunk lid like it is in 1962. This car has a later style GM alternator (I believe it's a 10SI or a 15SI alternator). It should have a generator. I'm not sure the placement is correct either because a generator is much longer, so it would usually be mounted lower than it is here - but I might be wrong on that. This model is the Special Deluxe. It doesn't say "Deluxe" on it, but you can tell from the seat pattern. If your feet slip around on the floor covering, that's because it's a textured rubber floor mat. The transmission is very small in these cars. For one thing, it is an air cooled transmission - it does not have a cooler line running to the radiator like most automatic transmissions have. The small size of the transmission is because it only has 2 forward and 1 reverse gear - but also because the gear changing is not done with traditional gears. Rather, first gear and second gear are actually accomplished by switching the angle of the blades inside the torque converter. Later on GM used this same idea in the mid 60s on some of its cars (Oldsmobiles and Buicks) where the pitch of the torque converter blades switched. This became known as the "switch pitch" transmission. It gave you better acceleration when you stepped down hard on the gas pedal. One of the best things about this car is how small it is. It is MUCH smaller than full sized cars of the time period. It is the same length as the 1982 - 1996 Buick Century / Cutlass Ciera / 6000 / Celebrity - and therefore would be a bit easier to adjust to driving for someone who is not used to the larger size of most older cars. You noticed the idiot lights - that is the one unfortunate thing about these cars - you did not even have an option to get gauges. This is not a problem on the V6 cars since they are made of cast iron. But on V8 cars, which were all aluminum, this could be a problem if the engine overheated. You wouldn't know until the light came on, and at that point it might already be too late. That said, these aluminum engines are good engines. They're very reliable. Overheating them is really their only vulnerability. They made these correctly - they used steel cylinder sleeves, so they lasted a long time. Why didn't they do that when they came out with the all aluminum Vega engine in 1970? Back to the V6 - the entire reason GM created a cast iron V6 for these cars was because the cost to create each aluminum engine was considered too high. The cast iron engine was a more traditional material (cast iron) so it was less expensive to make. The V6 was 198 cu in in 1962 and 1963. In 1964 to 1966, they enlarged the engine to 225 cu in and used it in the next generation of these cars - the 64 - 66 Buick Special and the 64 - 66 Oldsmobile F-85. You are correct, the tooling for this engine was then sold to Kaiser Jeep in 1967. This engine was put into Jeeps from 1967 to about 1970 or 1971. In 1970, AMC bought out Kaiser Jeep, so AMC now had the tooling rights to this engine, but to my knowledge they did not continue putting this engine in Jeeps. After the energy crisis of October 1973 - February 1974 and resultant gas lines, each GM division began looking at ways to produce more fuel efficient cars. In 1974, some high level executives at Buick went to AMC and bought the rights to build the V6 engine back from AMC. In 1975, Buick enlarged the engine to 231 cu in (3.8 liters) and began installing it in the smaller 1975 Buicks (i.e. the Apollo, Skylark, and Century. Possibly also the Regal. Not the full sized Buicks yet - until the later 1970s when the full sized Buicks and GM siblings were downsized). From 1975 - 77 the engine was considered "odd firing". In 1978 they changed the design to "even firing" which resulted in less vibration and smoother performance. This engine was used for many years in late 70s / 1980s rear wheel drive Buicks, but it was also used in Oldsmobiles and Pontiacs of this time period. Chevrolet had a similar sized V6 engine in this time period but it was their own design and was 229 cu in - not the same engine as the Buick V6. Later, starting around 1985, they put fuel injection on this engine and began putting it in front wheel drive cars (e.g. the 1985 Buick Electra). They made further improvements by around 1988 or so and it became known as the 3800 V6. It is also known as one of the most reliable and long lasting engines around. These Buick Specials, and its siblings, the Oldsmobile F-85 and Pontiac Tempest, pioneered a lot of features which were used later on cars - or in some cases were not used again. The Special name was used for the lower priced model, and the Skylark name was used for the higher priced model. By 1969, Skylarks were outselling Specials by a wide margin. However this was not the end of the Special name! In about 1976 or 1977, the Special name was used as a trim level name on the lowest priced Century models. The name "Special" appeared on the side of the car. Even into the 1990s, from about 1993 - 96, the "Century Special" was the lower priced of the two Century models offered. However, the "Special" name did not appear anywhere on the car on the 90s models. One thing is for sure - over the course of many decades, if you got a Buick, you got a nice car, and you almost couldn't go wrong no matter what model you got. They were also considered high quality and very reliable. Their only issue seems to have been not staying current enough as time passed, and people slowly stopped buying them. If you bought this 1962 Buick Special, you'd enjoy it!

Love the 61-62 GM Y bodies. Really a fully realized and designed platform. When I was a kid, the parents had a '61 F85 4 door with the aluminum v8 and 3 on the tree...peppy although they would have been happier with an auto. Many parts like the doors swap between all 3.

I had the 63 with the aluminum block engine. Was very hard to find shocks for it, so I just left it as it was called it bouncing Betty. 😅

Hi J. Great video as always. I'd pick the 62 Dodge and the Airflow.

I absolutely love this! Looks like a full-size '61 that got shrunk in the wash, and that modular instrument cluster was decades ahead of its time. My piano teacher had one and was inconsolable when it was totaled. I totally understood. I would really rather have a Buick in the first scenario, and the Airflow has always been a guilty pleasure for me, despite my love of all things Packard, so don't make me choose!

What a. Oil Car,Pretty good Torque

The 1961-62 Buick skylark and special are special to me because when I was 9 years old, my father had 2 cars 1962 Buick triple brown skylark and a blue and white1961buick special, the car I will always love, because I taught myself how to drive in that car,by riding in the back seat and watching my father and my older brother drive it, one night Wednesday night I drove it on my own, without any help, the brown skylark had a originalV 8, but the special original engine was the first V6, but locked up while sitting, so my father replaced it with the same kind of V8 engine 215 engine as the skylark.

I gotta take a 62 Dart over the Buick or Mercury. It just had way more style. Second round goes to the '36 Packard120, but the photo is of a top-of-the-line 1940 Packard 180 (with incorrect hubcaps) which I would take over most cars. .

This initial version of the V6 was perfectly balanced, but odd-firing, since the shared crank pins from the "nailhead" V8 dictated 90 degrees between the opposing pistons and 150 degrees between the adjacent ones. In mid-year 1977, GM offset the crank pins to make the engine almost-even-firing, but less than perfectly balanced. The vibration canceling shaft (or shafts?) they added to make the "3800" finally made the engine as smooth as a good V8.

I had the 62 Skylark between 1996 and 1999 in the rose mist color with the white top and black leather interior. Aluminum V8 engine with the 2 speed Dyna Flow Transmission.I really liked the instantly responsive feel of the 2 speed transmission. I got this car when I was in the 11th grade, I suddenly grew a foot taller, at 6"5 it began to feel cramped. The Skylark was the 2 door Deluxe model with bucket seats and leather. Oddly, a friend had a 62 kelly green color 4 door Special with the bench seats in vinyl which I preferred. The 4 door Special had more interior seating space. These early 60s Buicks proved to lack the modern amenities that make cars comfortable to drive, it didn't have Air Conditioning, it didn't have disc brakes, the generator needed to be rebuilt every 4 months or so. Cosmetically these are nice cars. As daily drivers you need to be rich enough to overhaul their engines, address the suspension so it sits level, add A/C, a stereo, get the clock to work, etc. In the late 1950s and early 1960s, when odometers reached about 60k miles people traded their current cars in for new cars. It's now up to a modern day owner to fully restore these. I wanted to switch the generator to an alternator. I wanted to add A/C, as a kid in high school, I couldn't afford the mechanical maintenance repairs that plaugingly nickel and dimed me beneath the hood of my own 1962 Skylark. If you're 6 feet tall or under, you'll fit comfortably inside this car. Again, you better have the cash to fully restore this car before committing to buying one. Mine had much more down time than flight hours

I have always loved this model! While the interior isn't exciting, it's not terrible either, and I actually love the dash. Very simple. In the "would you rather" I would definitely choose the Buick.

1962 Dart was Dodge's standard size car. The comparable Dodge to the Buick Special was the Lancer.

I would take that crazy Dodge Dart. Front lights are epic. Good show. I knew the song, but too late to punch it in.

Excellent

Good Craftsmanship Jay!

If GM would have kept this car and the Pontiac tempest,olds cutlass, chevy. II and the corvair ,there never would have been a Japanese invasion.

The script used for 'Special' on the front sides, is identical to the one used by GMH on their version of a similar looking vehicle. The total body design however seems to be an homage to the Ford Falcon, where they have simply applied exaggeration to some of the lines and curves. GM held very tight reins over the local subsidiary branch offices in Melbourne, Australia, somewhat less so than Ford, yet for some reason GMH sold the 'All Australian' concept so well that most people believed it. Though really all that we did was except a smaller scaled copy of an American vehicle and shifted the steering wheel to the right. Just enough interior customisation was used to stand apart from other vehicles. Sometimes it is interesting looking from the inside, and other times, to observe from the outside holds its own benefits.

The spear on the hood, pre dates the production Sting Ray, but comes from earlier Corvette concept and racing car design. It's amusing listening to youngsters, trying to describe every day '60s styling, when we have lived with with this stuff for 60 years. Large steering wheels were necessary, before power steering became a popular option, and few compacts of the day had it, because they didn't weigh enough to need it. The '62 Dart was full size that year, the Lancer was Dodge's compact car, based on the Valiant. My Grandmother had a '62 Lancer Hardtop.

It's amazing how this engine evolved into one of the best, most reliable V6s of the 1980s-2008, the series II 3800. 200 HP naturally aspirated was quite impressive for 1995 and the fuel economy was awesome for an all iron/ pushrod design. The supercharged L67 version was even more impressive. I believe it was also the first ultra low emissions engine in the US in the 1990s. To think it all started in 1962.

I find the structure of the front seats in every GM coupe I have ever seen interesting. When the seats are canted forward, the bottom rear lip of the front seat looks to be a structural element, which retains the seat in place, removing any chance of tilting the seat backwards.

Nice Buick. That particular 62 is a bottom-line stripper. The only options on that whole car or automatic transmission and heater. That was the cheapest version of that car. The cheapest version had a manual transmission and no heater. I could tell by the steering wheel and the fact that had no arm rests in the back. That V6 had an unusual feature for 6 cylinders. A Rochester 2gc two-barrel carburetor. Single exhaust however.

That is the base model with that goofy steering wheel. The Special Deluxes had a much nicer wheel that was also used on the large model Buicks. I owned two Special Deluxes with the aluminum V 8. Amazing cars! They would easily hit 100 MPH and more and would cruise without effort all day at 80 MPH. The Dual Path Automatics may have been the WORST automatics ever produced. Many transmission shops refused to work on them. Some people thought the aluminum V8’s were junk but that sure wasn’t my experience! Loved those cars. Not so much the V-6’s. They shook and vibrated!

People commented on raking the 62 Dodge Dart over this Model. The 62 Dart would had been more appealing to consumer's eyes in 62 had the sedans a coupes worn the same molding and rear end as the 62 Dart wagon had. The 62 Dart Wagon had straight blade side moldings instead of a brow molding toward the rear. However this Buick is in a different size category

I have one of these With the Aluminium v8 💯 ❤😊

WYR1: I've said before, the word _interesting_ used to describe a car feature is usually a polite way to say, "What the hell were they thinking?" The Special V6 is interesting. The 215 V8 was well-thought-out but interesting in that it was expensive to produce for a low-price compact car. The Dart, especially the '62 was late Exner, so interesting (hideous, actually) that I wouldn't be seen in the same parking lot with one. It really doesn't belong in a compact comparison anyhow, as it was much bigger than even the senior compacts. And the Chevy II in its debut year was quite an attractive package. The Comet wasn't bad, probably would be my choice among the offerings here present, but the new-for-'62 Ford Fairlane was the class in the unit-body compact-derived field. The more up-scale '62 Mercury Meteor was far better looking with the jet-tube taillights, and that would be my choice, then the Chevy II. The elephant in the room, though, was the body-on-frame Studebaker Lark. Still built around the full-size '58 Commander passenger cabin, More convenient entry and egress and a wider range of engine options, I'd pass up any of the unit-body jobs for the Stude. WYR2: Without hesitation, Packard. Best looking of the lot and remember, Henry Ford's last ride was in a Packard.

Would I rather? Hmm. "Wouldn't you really rather have a Buick?" But I could not put a 413 in it. Oh well. Go with the Buick.

Thank you for another review. You do locate some interesting cars. You did your homework too. There was a Buick Special trim level in later years on the Century. Pontiac and Oldsmobile had their versions as well. Oldsmobile's version went to become the Cutlass. You also do a good job going into the details of the vehicles as well. Thank you again.

I was taught how to drive a car on my Mom's V8 215 special.

Would you rather: Scenario1) 1962 Buick Special 4 door hard top, so adults can sit in the back. Scenario 2) 1936 Packard 120. Absolutely!

A Mythbusters glovebox verdict... _it's plausible!_

a true sleeper, for gran turismo 4

Jay the 3.5. V8 went to Rover in the U.K.

My first car paid 120. 00 drove it for one year !

That V6 was innovative, but it was released before it was properly tested and developed. The 90-150-90-150-90-150 degree firing order of the first and second generation (and early third generation as well) was not fit to power any car carrying the Buick name.

1:21 I believe the "Special" designation came back briefly in 1976 and 1977 for the bargain-priced, plastic-nosed, V6-only version of the Century. Centurys from other model years of that era are sometimes referred to as "specials", but I don't think GM sold them as such. That begs the question: if you customize a Buick Special, does that make it a "special Special"?

The first 3.2 V6 Buick engines were at the time based on the nailhead engine a design that also spawned the first aluminum V8 engine,an engine that would be later sold to rover of the UK. But the first V6 engine was already ahead of it's time but needed a substantial amount of work that that would come 2 decades later in the form of the regal Grand national turbo V6 engine 1984-87 3800,V6 engine from 1988-09 from wheel drive V6 engine 1988-09,in Australia to Holden motors for rear drive cars from 1988-04, sold only in F body cars in America from 1996-02, the 3800 engine was known as a Buick engine because of it's original inventor was David Dunbar Buick back in 1912 as a prototype engine, but when David Dunbar Buick struck oil he sold the right tohis name and his inventions including the firstV 6 to William Durant for 100,000 $ and a hand shake.

Okay, I would prefer: 1. 1962 Dodge Dart. These cars have taken a beating image-wise over the years, and I don't think they're ugly. They are out of the ordinary but not the dogs they're made out to be. 2. 1936:Chrysler Airflow. I thought the aerodynamic styling made it very interesting, even if the public didn't think so at the time. BTW was the '62 Special considered a compact or an intermediate?

You had pictured a 1940 Packard… probably the Packard either way. Come for the other choice.

Ever see a Pontiac Tempest with the sawed off 4 cylinder?

I think it's a very decent looking automobile. the interior does leave a lot to be desired but considering that it was marketed as a economical alternative to the larger models, it makes sense. I think I prefer the '61 steering wheel. If I was given the choice I would rather have the Buick over the other two, and the second scenario, I really like the look of the Packard best. 😎 Video, the vanity really nice also !

Looks like the steering wheel belongs in a boat!

I'd take the 61, much nicer steering wheel. That said I worked on these when I started ot in the mid 60's as a mechanic. That early V6 was rough.These were nice on the road. Would you rather? 62 Dart. Why? Had one! (Yes I've had a lot of cars, over 50 in my 75 years) 2nd Packard. Ps. the mixed wheels don't get it, but an easy change.

I can’t say I care for the steering wheel. 😮

Actually GMC had the first V-6 in 1960,also a V-12 displacement ranging from 305 to 701 cubic inches.

My dad has a 66 Buick special

9:12 Wasn't the "Slim Jim" transmission designed for these cars? It was not GM's finest moment, but it probably made that small transmission tunnel possible.

Do the side ports on the front fender have a function or are they just decorative? (The side ports on older Buicks have the function of helping cool the motor.) thanks

2:30 That '62 steering wheel looks identical to the wheel used in the Olds F85, looks cheap in comparison to the '61 And is that a clutch pedal?

Comet by a country mile. Buick engine was rough as a washboard, Dodge was just weird. I would actually choose a '62 Studebaker Lark over any of the choices presented. The 259 V8 with the power kit and overdrive was a sweet-running powertrain, passenger access was better than any of the rest. Packard 120 likewise. If you could get a Packard, you wouldn't be seen dead in a Cadillac. Henry Ford went to his final reward in a Packard because there were no hearses on any type of Ford chassis (including Lincoln or Mercury) anywhere in North America. The mortuary had Cadillacs and LaSalles and had to rent a Packard from a competitor. The joke goes, the Ford family was afraid if they tried to put the old man into a Cadillac he would have gotten out and walked.

‘62 Chevy II

Almost anyone can sit in the drivers seat. If they are bigger then you their weight will cause them to sit lower in the seat. So you should not say anyone bigger than you can not buy that car. It all depends on the person.

62 Buick and Caddy

252 Olds (Odd-Fire) Cast-Iron V6

While this was the first mass produced "passenger car" American V6, it was not the first mass produced American gasoline V6. That honor goes to GMC truck for the 1960 models. And GMC V6's used splayed crankpins for even firing from the start. And before that, the General Motors Diesel 6V71 circa 1957.

Dart and Packard

The 1962 shown has the base steering wheel

That car looks like it's done drag style. It was an ugly duckling in it's day like the Pontiac Tempest, or the Oldsmobile F-85. Today it brings back a lot of memories of when times were much better. I think I would take the Chrysler air flow if money was no object.

Dodge Dart, Had a 65 buick Special the V6 had a fiber timing gear even after replacing it the car never ran right again and it was a gas hog I had the 2 speed automatic in all honesty I think it was a powerglide

......like the Pontiac Tempest and Olds F-85, the base cars were low-content, cheaply trimmed, and yet over-priced for what you got.....can't believe they sold 110k, and I'm sure they didn't sell many stripped down to base.....for similar dollars , one could get a Chevy Biscayne/Bel Air, new '62 Ford Fairlane, or the newly downsized Plymouth Savoy/Belvedere, amongst others that were far superior to the B-O-P's.........

The large steering wheels of the era were because the cars did not have power steering.

Mercury Comet 1,Packard

1:38 Non-standard wheels on the '62 don't do its appearance any favors.

Choices: Dart, Cadillac 60. Dart because it was one of the ugliest cars ever, but also one of the most distinctive. And with a V8 - even the base engine, it's quicker (lighter) than most of its competitors. The 36 Cad 60 was a seminal car, being a totally new price class for Cadillac, above LaSalle, but far below previous base Cadillacs. It was also significantly more expensive than the Packard 120 - which competed against the LaSalle and Buick Century.

A Sedan has Four Doors. A Coupe has Two doors. There were not...nor are there "Two door Sedans" as you describe.

Rather 1: Dodge Dart (and you thought the 48 Chrysler was ugly?) 2: Packard

1962 dodge . I like to be different .

Packard 120

Buick venti ports mean: 3 on one side equals v6 Four-v8

1962 mercury comet

Question 1; 1962. Question 2; unsure.

If I were your woman. Gladys Knight and the Pips.

$2,300 dollars was a good bit of cash for a car in 1962, and I don’t think this vehicle warranted that price. Too small, too chintzy.