Did you recently rush to buy a new vehicle before tariff-related price hikes? A reporter is looking to speak with shoppers who felt pressure to act quickly due to expected cost increases; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com for more details by 4/24.
1967 Grand Prix convertible - opinions sought
OK. I know I've been down this path before, but I found a '67 Grand Prix convertible about 2 hours from here. I've seen pictures of the car and it looks OK, but have not inspected it yet. The owner is an older gentleman that owns a body shop along with various other older Pontiacs (mostly 30's - 50's). This Grand Prix represents one of his newer cars and he wants to "thin the herd".
I phoned the owner's son today (I guess the owner either can't or doesn't want to deal with buyers). Reportedly, the car is in good shape and being owned by a body shop owner the son says the car has been well cared for since he bought it 13 years ago. Thus, he's not the original owner.
The car has PS, PB, auto, A/C, factory 8-track that works (big deal?), console, 8-lug wheels and I believe front disc brakes (an option in '67). The color is maroon (not my favorite color by a long shot) with a cream interior and top.
The 400 cid 4 bbl engine is not original in that its out of a '73 Catalina (is this good or bad?). The engine bay and under carriage are reportedly detailed.
One other thing about the paint. As I mentioned, this gentleman has owned the car for 13 years and he repainted it (presumably did it himself - body shop owner, remember?) from a "totally rust-free body". Therefore, the paint job is not terribly old (at least for a 34 year old car) and hopefully of pretty good quality given it was his own car.
His asking price is $16,500 though the son says there's some flexibility. The owner doesn't NEED to sell the car so he's under no pressure to do so (good for him, bad for me). After checking some price guides in conjunction with my overall sense of mid-60's convertible values, I'm thinking $16,500 is awfully strong. I know '67 was the only year for GP convertibles and Pontiac didn't make a ton of them, but value is also a function of the level of demand and I'm not aware of an overwhelming market demand specific to '67 GP convertibles. If I'm wrong, please let me know.
I'm obviously a long way from parking this car in my driveway and of course the inspection will be a critical next step. However, any inspection would include a test drive and that'll have to wait until Spring when the salt is off the roads. If it looks good, I'll hire a mechanic to go over it (though the owner will probably roll his eyes at this suggestion).
I have my own idea as to what I would offer for this car, but would appreciate any thoughts from the "studio audience" out there. One thing in my favor is that I'm not emotionally attached to this particular car (at least not yet) and I'd have no qualms about taking a walk if the seller wants to hold this car until the right (ie., uninformed with more money than common sense) comes along.
Anybody have any seat time experience driving one of these? Any mechanics out there have any suggestions with regard to problem areas (specific to this model) to watch out for?
Let's hear your cheers and jeers.
I phoned the owner's son today (I guess the owner either can't or doesn't want to deal with buyers). Reportedly, the car is in good shape and being owned by a body shop owner the son says the car has been well cared for since he bought it 13 years ago. Thus, he's not the original owner.
The car has PS, PB, auto, A/C, factory 8-track that works (big deal?), console, 8-lug wheels and I believe front disc brakes (an option in '67). The color is maroon (not my favorite color by a long shot) with a cream interior and top.
The 400 cid 4 bbl engine is not original in that its out of a '73 Catalina (is this good or bad?). The engine bay and under carriage are reportedly detailed.
One other thing about the paint. As I mentioned, this gentleman has owned the car for 13 years and he repainted it (presumably did it himself - body shop owner, remember?) from a "totally rust-free body". Therefore, the paint job is not terribly old (at least for a 34 year old car) and hopefully of pretty good quality given it was his own car.
His asking price is $16,500 though the son says there's some flexibility. The owner doesn't NEED to sell the car so he's under no pressure to do so (good for him, bad for me). After checking some price guides in conjunction with my overall sense of mid-60's convertible values, I'm thinking $16,500 is awfully strong. I know '67 was the only year for GP convertibles and Pontiac didn't make a ton of them, but value is also a function of the level of demand and I'm not aware of an overwhelming market demand specific to '67 GP convertibles. If I'm wrong, please let me know.
I'm obviously a long way from parking this car in my driveway and of course the inspection will be a critical next step. However, any inspection would include a test drive and that'll have to wait until Spring when the salt is off the roads. If it looks good, I'll hire a mechanic to go over it (though the owner will probably roll his eyes at this suggestion).
I have my own idea as to what I would offer for this car, but would appreciate any thoughts from the "studio audience" out there. One thing in my favor is that I'm not emotionally attached to this particular car (at least not yet) and I'd have no qualms about taking a walk if the seller wants to hold this car until the right (ie., uninformed with more money than common sense) comes along.
Anybody have any seat time experience driving one of these? Any mechanics out there have any suggestions with regard to problem areas (specific to this model) to watch out for?
Let's hear your cheers and jeers.
Tagged:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I think the fact that this example has a 1973 engine takes away considerably from its value. 1973 was the beginning of smog-choked engines with relatively low horsepower, relative to 1967 engines. Unless this engine has been tweaked somewhat, it will likely not perform as well as a 67 GP with a factory engine.
It sounds like a nice car in general, and it has some interesting options (the 8-lug wheels, 8-track and a/c in particular, though this car isn't 'fully loaded', no mention of PW, tilt), but $16.5k sounds pretty steep, unless it's in really exceptional condition. I also don't see values on this car going way up any time soon. The owner sounds quite ambivalent about selling the car (judging by his attitude and his price), to say the least; perhaps he's 'fishing' it out now to gauge interest in the vehicle.
I think I'd be just as happy with a 65-67 Catalina or Bonneville convertible and another $5k left over, personally.
Second, I think that's a nice saleable color combination. Burgundy looks good on these cars and it's manly enough to appeal to their primary market--guys. And a convertible is much more liveable with a light interior. A dark interior will burn you on a hot day.
Third, every article I've ever read on GPs mentions the 67-only convertible in tones of awe, so I guess it's a big deal to GP fans. But my guess is that full-size convertibles aren't going to skyrocket in value anytime soon. GTOs yes, GPs maybe not.
Fourth, to me a '73 engine would actually improve its appeal as a driver. You get a compression ratio you can live with plus the hardened valve seats. Any performance improvement you would have gotten from the '67 engine's higher compression ratio disappeared when 91 octane became the gold standard. Just yank off any smog controls still on the engine if that's legal in your area. I don't think matching numbers is a big deal with most potential buyers of this car. But it's something you can use to get the price down.
Fifth, this car sounds familiar. Did someone else post about it a while back?
Anyone else care to weigh-in?
andre1969?
mr_shiftright?
others?
If there were 5600 built though, they're not THAT rare. I think there were about 10,000 Catalina 'verts built that year, and I'd imagine the Grand Prix had a better survival rate because it was a much more exclusive car to begin with. I mean, my mother bought a '66 Catalina 'vert brand new, when she was 17, so how upscale could they be? ;-)
Anyway, I paid $3775 for my '67 Catalina, but that was back in 1994. It does have a few problems though. The A/C and heater don't work (bad heater control unit, or whatever it's called). There's a leak somewhere in the hydraulic fluid hoses, so I have to put the top up and down by hand, although the motor does work. And the gas gauge doesn't work. But hey, it's a convertible, so I let Mother Nature be my climate control ;-) And when the fuel gets too low, at least the needle will start bouncing back and forth, as a warning!
As for engines, well mine has a 400-4bbl. It was rebuilt just before I bought it. Truthfully, I don't know if it's the original engine or if it came out of another year car. It's pretty fast off the line. Stomp on it, and it'll hold first up to the 50's, and then chirp the tires going into 2nd. It'll still do it with 4 people on board too, so added weight doesn't affect the car too much!
A 1973 400 4-bbl, if it's stock, would put out about 190-200 hp, which, when you think about it, isn't a whole lot of hp to move 2+ tons of car. I think my Catalina weighs around 4000-4200 lb (just a wild guess...base with no options I think they're something like 3910 lb). A Grand Prix would most likely weigh a bit more.
I wonder what kind of fuel mileage a '73 vintage 400 would get, too. Didn't mileage actually start going down on them when they cut compression and added that smog stuff? My '67 gets about 10 mpg city/17-18 highway (if I keep my foot out of it!), and, somehow, runs fine on 87 octane. I suspect though, that somewhere along the line, the timing got cut back, and I've just been too lazy to fiddle around with it.
So deduct accordingly.
The engine swap would probably be of either no consequence on a "driver" but would be a deduct on a "show car", since if you show it you are going to get dinged on unoriginality.
The sounds like it is worth about $10K.
I don't think he's serious about selling if that's the tag he has on it.
Owns a body shop eh?...somehow that fact makes the hair on my neck stand up but that's just me.
I think the guy is looking for a sucker and I think Shifty is being a bit generous.
But then, I haven't seen the car either.
Someday, Parm you'll find your car!
Unless you're going to drag race the thing (unlikely) what you really need is torque and a willingness to run on 91 octane. You'll find both in a '71-up engine.
A 10.5:1 compression ratio was great back in 1967 but it's a liability now unless you've got knock sensors and computerized engine management. Otherwise you're limited to a CR of around 9:1. Anything higher than that and you have to retard the timing. That reduces power, making the engine lazy and prone to running hot, and reduces mpg.
If Andre's 400 is happy with 87 octane then either the timing is seriously retarded, it was rebuilt with low compression pistons or heads, there's not enough carbon in the combustion chambers yet to create hot spots, or any combination of the above. Trust me, a late-'60s high-compression Pontiac with the usual carboned up chambers won't even tolerate 93 octane unless the timing is set back.
To get a '73 engine up to speed all you need to do is take off the EGR and ported spark and maybe recurve the advance, and you've got an engine that's more suitable for your needs than the original engine. This may sound like a lot of work but it's not. It's a lot easier than living with retarded timing, buying cases of octane booster, or pulling the heads or replacing the pistons to reduce the CR. And pinging will eventually break a piston.
A stock '73 400 will have 170-250 hp. That sounds pathetic until you remember that from '71-up they used net hp ratings. Gross hp would probably range from 230-300 hp. And it's torque that's important in a car like a '67 GP. That's what moves all that weight off the line.
As for originality, I agree that a non-original engine ultimately detracts from the car's value. However, I have to wonder how many full-size convertible buyers really care deeply about this, and if they even *should* care. These guys just want to get in and cruise. Condition, appearance and comfort seem far more important.
My grandmother's '85 LeSabre is carboned up a bit though, and it tells on me every time I try to go cheap and put 87 octane in it! Valve clattering and all sorts of racket. It's fine on 89 though...amazing that 2 octane points can make a difference!
Any idea on what a '67 400 4-bbl should put out, in net terms? I think they were rated around 330 gross, weren't they? What'd that be, about 250 net (roughly?)
Here's a good way to convert gross to net and also to see what a cut in compression ratio does. The standard '70 GP 400 had 10.5:1 CR and put out 350 gross hp. The '71 GP 400 was virtually identical but had an 8.2:1 CR and was rated at 300 gross hp. The '72 GP 400 was substantially similar to the '71 (except in California where it had EGR) and was rated at 250 net hp.
Of course this doesn't take into account other things that happened from '70-'72 like leaned-out carbs and retarded and/or ported advance, but it's close enough.
It's my opinion that a high compression ratio is the single biggest drawback to driving a '60s car today. Forget about niceties like steering, braking, handling, mpg and size. An old high compression engine will not be happy burning 91 octane. It can be mickey moused to run on it but that leads to other problems. You can't "adjust" the compression ratio unless you tear down the engine and not many people want to do that. So you're stuck.
I think we should cut the seller a little slack, at least to the point where he admitted the engine wasn't original. I'll bet 99 out of 100 prospective buyers of that car wouldn't know the difference. Remember, most of them aren't serious collectors, just guys who want a nice nostalgic ride.
In fact, I wonder how many guys are driving around in what they think is an original car that actually has a replacement engine. How many of them know date codes and even where the engine serial number is?
Up until maybe twenty years ago originality wasn't a big deal. If your GTO's engine was tired maybe you swapped in a remanufactured engine or one from a wrecking yard. Maybe the replacement was a GTO engine or maybe it was just the cooking 400 (or even a 350, I've seen it). Or maybe your 400 started looking pretty small compared to a MoPar 440 so you "upgraded" to a 428 or 455.
Now that I'm on a roll, I also have to wonder about future demand for many of today's marginal collectibles. No offense, that's all I've owned with a handful of exceptions, but once you get away from big names like GTO and Mustang, who's going to remember or care 10 or 20 years from now? Just in this thread I see a shift away from the cars I'd want toward newer cars.
Okay I feel better now.
Considering a $10,000 Hyundai will be worth maybe $500 in 10 years, what is the better and more enjoyable 2nd car?
One danger is new cars are so different from big RWD cars from the 50's & 60's, they may be uncomfortable to drive for the next wave of collectors.
I still think younger people will find 60's cars preferable to 70's cars. I got my license in 1982, and that is the fact pattern for me personally.
From a practical standpoint, I guess having the wrong engine with the lower compression ratio etc, is a smart thing to do.
And, you are correct, most people wouldn't care.
I'm no purist, but still can't help but think...this car used to be a 67 Grand Prix.
It still is, kinda, but, it's not too.
Make any sense?
I wish this matching number business had never been started by GM. Far more exotic and expensive cars don't even bother with this, nor do the collectors care, as long as the engine is period correct in all details.
But, this is just me...others would probably think it's better with a more practical engine in it and it may be in some respects.
But it's a car I would never buy.
Now, if someone had pulled the original 401 engine out and replaced it with a rebuilt 401 from a rebuilder, that wouldn't bother me a bit.
I would agree, though, I would tend not to make mongrels out of 60s convertibles, although a same-make engine swap wouldn't hurt it, I don't think.
I'll admit that if the engine wasn't the exact same one in the car when it rolled off the assembly line there'd be a small corner of me that didn't take the car seriously, and I think that's what Isell is talking about.
That would be true even if the replacement engine was the same make and displacement. But that's just me being around too many purists.
If it was the wrong displacement, or worse, the wrong brand, then I'd start losing interest quickly--unless there was a clear and overwhelming benefit to the swap. I'd buy a '49 Ford with an early Cadillac or Chrysler (a very common swap back in the day) in a heartbeat.
But I'd certainly walk away from that 350 Riveria. That swap reduces the pool of potential buyers exponentially without offering any large benefit. Now if it was a 427/425 I'd be more interested but instead of paying a premium I'd expect a substantial discount.
And if it was a Chevelle with a Buick 455 that's fine. I'm still not interested but no harm, no foul.
This is why I love this forum. You guys are in the know. Keep your comments come'in!
Eight lugs were an early attempt, along with finned aluminum drums and sintered metallic brake linings, at improving the braking of drum-braked cars. In the '50s Detroit's opinion was that disc brakes were dangerous. Eight lugs came out around 1960.
As I recall the eight-lug setup is a special wheel with no center section but instead with eight bosses cast around the inside diameter of the wheel. The holes in the bosses are where the lugs attach the wheel to an exposed finned aluminum brake drum. Fins help brake cooling by radiating heat out of the drum (like a regular finned aluminum drum) but the eight-lug takes this a step further by exposing the entire drum to cooling air. The usual drum is buried inside the wheel away from most of the cooling air stream.
Eight lugs are nicely styled and I think that's mainly why they're so prized.
GM finally offered disc brakes on intermediates in '67 and I wouldn't be surprised if they were available a year earlier on full size cars although I'm just guessing. They're a better design than eight lugs but not nearly as attractive.
I'll bet finding a good set either new or used would be very hard and VERY costly!
Unlike modern wheel rims, it sounds like the 8-lug wheels are designed specifically for, and thus somewhat integrated with, drum brakes. Too bad because I think they're pretty sharp.
Perhaps the first thing I'd do to any classic car (after installing a decent stereo/CD system from Secret Audio) would be to swap out front drums for discs (assuming its mechanically feasible).
Yes, discs stop better. A well maintained drum setup works well also and keeps the car original.
Usually with the gentle driving an older car gets, changing over isn't necessary anyway.
It's just like replacing Tri-Power with a Holley four barrel. Yeah, maybe discs and the Holley work a little better but the original parts got the job done better than most back in the day.
Plus you're going to pay a premium for eight lugs. Better to buy a Buick.
I think it's far more interesting to try to work with obsolete technology, but then I don't have any dependants. Metallic brake linings, aluminum brake drums--they'll stop you well enough unless you're racing up Pike's Peak.
Jeez Parm, next you'll be installing airbags ;-).
Not to mention, a service manual for your car will not for the non-original swapped parts. Minor as well. I just think an original as possible car indicates it has probably been treated well it's whole life.
Not sure what one wants to do with the car, but the 4 wheel drums stop fine on my 67 Galaxie. If a Gran Prix handles like the Galaxie, you won't enjoy driving too quickly anyways.
I don't drive it more than I do for errands because of potential parking lot damage, and the fact a 5 year old could probably figure out how to hot-wire it, steering wheel doesn't lock. Oh yeah, 14 mpg is worse than my Intrepid R/T.
You can always swap these things out if you sell the car to someone who is fussy about all that. Remember, this is a mass produced serial production car, there is no compelling reason not to modify it for everyday use and safety IF...IF...you sense the need for it.
Still, if it didn't have seat belts...those I would install. I would hope they would look fairly original. I would NOT bugger out the hole in the dash for a radio or cut speaker holes in the doors.
And, what's up with installing banks of gauges under, on and atop the dash? A year later, they look like a bad mistake (like they didn't the minute they were installed?). Who needs to know how many RPM's they're turning in a 60's sedan with an automatic anyway? I've seen less instrumentation in the space shuttle. Nova's, Chevelles and Impala's (maybe its a Chevy thing?) seem to be the biggest offenders. If they weren't needed in 1965, why are they now?
I know, it's because someone has spiced up the motor to the point where it's living on the edge temperature-wise.
I've said it once and I'll say it again. If you want to go fast, go buy a late model Camaro SS or Ram Air Firebird - exponentially better cars for this purpose.
Wow, I'm beginning to get light-headed standing up here on this soap box. I'll watch my step as I descend back to terra firma.
Second, though, is something that you've touched on, Parm. They've hot-rodded the engine. Whenever I've gone to car shows, it seems very rare to see a Chevy with an original engine. Usually a '57 has a 327 or 350, or a 454 under the hood. 350's seem to be the swap-out of choice for '60's cars, too. I could be wrong, but it usually seems that Ford and Mopar owners tend to keep their engines a bit more stock.
I've gotta confess though, my '67 Catalina has aftermarket gauges on it. It only came with the speedo, gas gauge, and amp gauge as standard. Oil pressure and temperature are mounted underneath the dash, where at least they're not too tacky! It came that way, though. The oil gauge is hooked up, but the temp gauge isn't.
It's a big business in California and I bet it will get bigger, because these upgraded cars, if done professionally and beautifully, are worth every bit as much, if not more, than their bone-stock counterparts. I have seen modernized 55-57 Chevies sell for $50,000.
However, it should be understood that the modernization has to be impeccable and the external car should not be much, if any, modified.
Given that these are serial production cars still available in large numbers, I don't see anything "wrong" with this at all. It's a great way to enjoy your "classic" and have it approach modern car capabilities. The idea of spending $50K on a car and doing the rounds of car shows on trailers and waxing your car in the garage gets old, especially to younger collectors.
Of course, I would not do this to an old Ferrari or a '63 Vette Split Window. But to a Chevy passenger car or an old MGB, have at it if that's your pleasure.
I've not seen this extension with Catalina's or Bonneville's of the same (or similar) year.
Is this feature unique to the Grand Prix?
In place of A/C vents at this middle position in the dash, I've seen on some Grand Prix's what appears to be a knock-out plate. Oddly enough, the words "Grand Prix" appear on this plate. ;-)
I'm guessing that 1967 Grand Prix's with this "Grand Prix plate" DO NOT have factory A/C.
Am I right or wrong?
The car "should" have it.
What about the 2 lower vents though? Did they only come with the A/C?
So, I take it your Catalina has factory A/C?
Anyways, the 67 Galaxie convertible has no dash vents, just the two under the front center of the dash. It also has the two "ram air" vents, one on each side by the doors, that you pull out to let air flow through when the car is moving.
I can count on one hand the number of times I used the a/c in my 92 Miata. I have not missed it yet, but maybe I am not in the mainstream.
My Catalina has a/c, but it doesn't work. I really haven't bothered to mess with it too much, because I just don't drive the car on really hot days. Even though I own a few gas guzzling monsters, I'll play the tree hugger on hot, muggy days with ozone warnings, and just drive the Intrepid instead.
My Catalina's a light creamy yellow with a black top and black vinyl interior. If I leave the top down and leave it out in the sun, I can really feel the burn if I jump into it with shorts and a tank top! Somehow though, it doesn't feel as bad as some of the cars I remember as a kid, like Mom's '75 LeMans or the '80 Malibu she ended up giving me. I think part of it is that those cars just heated up more inside, like a miniature greenhouse effect. They also didn't have ventillation as good either, as both of 'em had fixed rear windows, no vent windows, and no under-dash vents. They did have the climate control system where you could set it to "vent" and outside air would blow through the a/c ducts, but it just didn't feel as "fresh". Or as strong.
I remember ages ago, asking Mom if her '66 Catalina had air conditioning and she responded something along the lines of "Of course not. Why would it need air conditioning? It was a convertible!!"
While the Galaxie is incredibly roomy, and rides well enough, 35 years on a car with it's roof cut off doen't make it compare favorably in the driving department with a new sedan. I think when they put power steering on a car then, they wanted to make sure every 90 lb. 90 year old woman could turn the car easily. Numb is an understatement.
Luckily, the Galaxie has a parchment interior, though white vinyl gets plenty hot as well.
Man, cannot wait for drive-in season to start again!
I think when these cars were built people didn't worry about skin cancer and getting their hair mussed so much.
Also, any consideration given to a Pontiac 2+2 Convertible? My understanding it is basically a more powerful Catalina Convertible. I really like the full size Pontiacs from that era.
How are prices holding up on cars from this era? I assume the weakening economy is hurting cars in the $5,000 to $15,000 range?
The Catalina in 1967 was the standard basic big car for Pontiac. Standard engine was a 400 2-bbl with something like 290 hp. There was a credit option for a lower-compression 400 that only put out 256 hp, but would run on lower octane fuel. The Catalina rode a 121" wheelbase, and was about 215" long overall.
There was a trim package called "Ventura" for the Catalina, but I'm not sure what it added. Probably just an upgraded interior with stuff like carpeting on the lower door panels, different trim, etc. A guy at work has a '69 Catalina Ventura, and it looks nicer inside than regular Catalinas I've seen, but not as nice as the '69 Bonneville I had. Also, I don't know if this package was available on convertibles, or just the sedans, coupes, and hardtops.
Next step up was a car called the Executive. Some years it was called Star Chief, but the Executive name took over, I believe, for 1966. It had the longer 124" wheelbase, shared with the Bonneville, but the Catalina's weaker engine, and more basic interior. I don't think it was offered as a convertible either...just 2- and 4-door hardtops and a pillared 4-door sedans. No pillared 2-door sedan though, or wagons.
Top of the line was the Bonneville. It rode a 124" wheelbase, but I forget the overall length. Somewhere in the low 220's". A Bonneville or Executive was no bigger inside than a Catalina though, despite the longer wheelbase. They added it all to the back, behind the back seat. So you got a longer trunk, and maybe a smoother ride because of the longer wheelbase. And if GM was anything like the Mopars of the era, you also got a big gap between the back of the seat and the axle housing for all sorts of junk and debris to fall into, never to return. The Bonneville had a 400 4-bbl standard, that put out something like 325-330 hp. I'd guess the low-compression V-8 was a credit option, but not sure. Inside, Bonnevilles had nicer interiors. Longer armrests, carpeted door panels, nicer vinyls and trim, etc.
Then there was the Grand Prix. It rode the shorter Catalina chassis, but had a much more upscale interior. I'm not sure, but I think bucket seats were standard. At least I've never seen one with a bench! They also had a different front-end, with the hidden headlights and the turn signals mounted high above the grille. I'm pretty sure the Grand Prix had the 400 4-bbl standard, but not positive. For some reason, I thought the 428 was standard somewhere in the Pontiac lineup.
As for the Catalina 2+2, it was a sportier version of the Catalina, but I'm not sure what it had as standard. Most of the ones I've seen in pictures had bucket seats, center console, 421/428 V-8's, 8-lug wheels, and nicer trim. It was available as a hardtop coupe or convertible. The Catalina was the only big Pontiac offered as a pillared 2-door sedan, but I doubt if you could get a 2+2 2-door sedan. For the most part, I think the 2+2 was kind of Pontiac's response to Chevy's Impala SS, although it gave you a little more guts. The Chevy SS was just a trim package that could be had with any engine, even a 6, while the 2+2 at least gave you a stronger engine than the regular Catalina (not sure if it was a 389/400 or a 421/428 though)
Hope all this isn't too confusing! And Speedshift, Isell, Shifty, etc, feel free to jump in if I left anything out, mixed anything up, or was just flat-out wrong on something ;-) I wasn't around in 1967, so I'm not going on memory here ;-)
All of this sounded accurate.
I was around in '67 and have memories of the neighbors across the street bringing home a new '62 Grand Prix. It was baby blue with dark blue interior. I thought it was the prettiest car I had ever seen.
Also, accoring to one of my books, the 428 was standard on the Bonneville in 1969 only (perhaps they were trying to get rid of the remaining 428s, as big Pontiacs offered 455s from 1970 on). The 400 4v, as Andre said, was standard in 67 and 68.
All I remember about my '69 Bonneville is that I think it had the 360 hp setup. It would really haul. That is, when it wasn't eating starters or finding some other way to fail on me!
I'm pretty sure you could get AC with the 428. There were a couple of 428s but none of them were too rough to work with AC. That was a big car engine upgrade and big cars often came with AC.
The Ventura was an interior trim option on the Catalina hardtop and convertible.
The 2+2 came standard with the base 389-2v in '64, then the 421 or 428 from 65 on.
Incidentally, I'm pretty sure you couldn't get a/c with a Hemi, either ;-)