I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today! (Archived)

uplanderguy

I'm using Google Chrome as they suggest, and I click on 'Delivery 8' and all that happens is the highlight of the line turns red, and the '+' at the beginning of the line changes to a '-'. No image(s) whatsover.

Technological stuff like this makes me crazy...as does what just happened, and happens often--typing a line of text and the typing just automatically jumps to a line three lines above, sigh.

I have a cheap-a** Samsung notebook, so it's that or something goofy at the Museum today, sigh.

UPDATE: It works on my phone. Just noticed some of the cars have "STINGRAY" nameplates on the front doors, and some don't. Makes me wonder if that's dependent on option group or something, or was something just recently phased-in in production.

fintail

Speaking of the Ventura, when I was a kid, an uncle had a maybe 75-76 Ventura sedan. I remember it was a V8 because he mentioned it, saying something like it was a Buick or Olds engine? Kind of a bronze color with matching interior, wheels similar to on that two door model, I want to say it had bucket seats that were kind of high back in style, but I may be mis-remembering. Vinyl interior, somehow I thought the seats were very out of style, as this was the 80s.

Corvette is a definite value proposition even with its other positives.

uplanderguy

Not a typical old car I lust over, but what a nice color combination, and sweet original car--'66 Electra 225 Custom two-door hardtop:

https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=1112114899575090&set=pcb.1707490372754591

When I was a kid, and now, the only way I can identify a '66 from a '65 is the "Electra 225" was in individual block letters on the rear quarter in '65, and in script in '66.

sda

It is a nice 225, very lightly optioned out. That color was popular from the early to mid 60's. My 62 Galaxie color was similar.

uplanderguy

Saw this pic of an original/authentic '77 Vega on Facebook. I don't care for the '76 and '77 taillights but a nice car despite the heavily-tinted-glass as well.

BUT! This pic was taken at Houmas House, setting of my favorite movie since a kid, "Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte", with Bette Davis, Agnes Moorehead, Olivia deHavilland, Joseph Cotten, Bruce Dern, and Victor Buono! Oh...and Mary Astor!

I posted that and the guy said "It's only about a half-hour from my house but I'm not aware of that movie". He must be younger than me.

The special effects are laughable by today's standards, and there is some scenery-chewing by Davis and Moorehead, but I think for the most part, it's held up. It's long at about 2 hrs. 15 mins. IIRC.

The movie fairly-prominently features two '64 Electra 225 six-window four-door pillared sedans, and a '64 Buick Special four-door sedan. Ironically, they show the doctor in the movie driving a '64 Dodge Dart.

texases

Weren't those amber taillights just decorative? Recent Jalopnik article on that.
https://jalopnik.com/chevys-bean-counters-turned-the-vegas-taillights-into-t-1848484534

uplanderguy

Yes they were, despite looking bad! LOL

I like the wagon and it had the same taillights from '71 to the end. Other than a Cosworth, which wasn't available as a wagon, a wagon is what I'd want if I were looking for a late Vega.

andre1969

That '66 Electra is nice. I dunno why, but for some reason, I tend to associate that color with Oldsmobile. I know it's a color that was offered across the board, in some form or other, but I guess over the years, I've seen a disproportionate number of Oldsmobiles in that shade.

sda

I was watching 'The French Connection'. That 71 LeMans certainly took a beating. Great chase scene, Hackman always enjoyable to watch.

andre1969

I stumbled across this old postcard online. Not the best quality in the world, but there should be a few identifiable cars in there...
If you right-click and open it in a new window, it expands.

BTW, can anybody identify the building? Here's a clue: Just about anyone who was of school age back in the late 80's and early 90's was probably exposed to a barrage of commercials with this building, while on summer vacation. This, commercials for truck driving academy, and lawyer commercials were generously sprinkled through old reruns of "I Love Lucy", "Andy Griffith", "I Dream Of Jeannie", and "Bewitched", not to mention the game shows and such.

texases

Saw this Barris custom on an episode of Perry Mason last night, of all places.
http://www.neautomuseum.org/blog/unique-1963-barris-kustoms-buick-villa-riviera-on-the-block-at-dragone-fall-auction-october-17th/

fintail

55-56 Squire second from right in the frontmost row.

andre1969 said:

I stumbled across this old postcard online. Not the best quality in the world, but there should be a few identifiable cars in there...

BTW, can anybody identify the building? Here's a clue: Just about anyone who was of school age back in the late 80's and early 90's was probably exposed to a barrage of commercials with this building, while on summer vacation. This, commercials for truck driving academy, and lawyer commercials were generously sprinkled through old reruns of "I Love Lucy", "Andy Griffith", "I Dream Of Jeannie", and "Bewitched", not to mention the game shows and such.

andre1969

texases said:

Saw this Barris custom on an episode of Perry Mason last night, of all places.
http://www.neautomuseum.org/blog/unique-1963-barris-kustoms-buick-villa-riviera-on-the-block-at-dragone-fall-auction-october-17th/

Small world...I remember it from the "Duplicate Man" episode of The Outer Limits!

uplanderguy

RE.: Jalopnik. I usually think they suck, LOL.

They were the ones with the recent article actually headlined "Nine people forced to buy Impalas in the fourth quarter". "Forced to buy".

Headline was so phenomenally stupid, it made me start looking for a new or lightly-used 2020 Impala. LOL

But then, I'm sort-of a thumb-my-nose, stick-my-tongue-out kind of guy. Current mainstream sucks!

Or at least, is boring.

kyfdx

texases said:

Weren't those amber taillights just decorative? Recent Jalopnik article on that.
https://jalopnik.com/chevys-bean-counters-turned-the-vegas-taillights-into-t-1848484534

Amber tail lights were a thing, about then. Supposedly, gave it a "euro" look. My '77 Cobra II had them, but they were operational turn signals.

uplanderguy

That LeMans four-door hardtop--we've discussed it before I believe, but those GM mid-size four-door hardtops weren't seen much where I was from. I wouldn't say they're rare, but among mainstream GM products, they seem fairly-rare.

uplanderguy

My last Vega pic/comment (no need to say 'thanks!', LOL!) but this green Cosworth came up as a memory in my FB feed. It was sold new at a small dealer in tiny Cochranton, PA, maybe 20 miles from where I grew up.

I like the blue Cosworth with white interior best, followed by the black-on-black, but I do find this one somewhat intriguing due to rarity, which almost-always draws me in. First one I've seen this combo.

At a swap meet maybe 15 years ago I saw a light coffee-brown Cosworth. Totally washed out all the gold trim, yuck.

Since the Cosworth was available in any Vega color in '76, it could have been had in that lime green color we'd discussed recently. I can picture it in my head, but not sure I'd have been too crazy about it.

sda

That is the same color green that we had on mom’s 76 Cutlass Supreme wagon. It was a very nice color that looked great in bright sunlight. The paint had a fair amount of metallic in it that gave it good depth.

uplanderguy

Funny, my parents' '80 Monte Carlo was in a one-year-only dark green metallic, more olive or 'military' than this. But I liked it too and felt it was a good, smooth paint job in an era not known for that.

ab348

uplanderguy said:

The later Monza and Sunbird wagons could be had with a V6; I forgot about that. Pinto wagons could be had with a V6 in those later years as well. I do remember seeing a few of the Monza wagons at the dealers I hung out at, but not many. Those V6's would be more fun to drive of course. I guess 'cause I tend to like sticking my tongue out or thumbing my nose or whatever you like to call it, as a collector car I'd rather have the original Vega (but a late one).

Remember that there was a price-leader "Monza S" that was a Vega hatchback but with the unattractive (to my eyes) base Monza front-end styling they had in those late '70's years? I think I've seen one of those.

I posted a pic of one of those Monza wagons in the wild over at the Mystery Car Pix forum. Also an @andre1969 reference was made there regarding a different vehicle in the same pic.

andre1969

uplanderguy said:

Since the Cosworth was available in any Vega color in '76, it could have been had in that lime green color we'd discussed recently. I can picture it in my head, but not sure I'd have been too crazy about it.

I tried to look for some pics, but couldn't find a really good one. However, here's one that you could probably pick up without hurting the bank account too much...
I think that darker forest/sequoia/berkshire or whatever you call it green is still much nicer, but I think the lime could work.

uplanderguy

I lied. Here's another Vega post, LOL. Here's a lime green '76 wagon that was on BaT. I like the car, but I surely wouldn't have paid $10K for it. I'd have bought a new '76 or '77 without batting an eye, with that engine warranty. I like them then and now waaayyyy better than a Chevette, which was about the same price. But boy, I wouldn't have bought a Vega without the Custom Interior option (Camaro seats and soft vinyl door panels, primarily). I know it's a low-end car, but that standard interior is dismal.

https://bringatrailer.com/listing/1976-chevrolet-vega-7/

uplanderguy

'79 Cutlass Supreme in the not-great light green that year...but under 5,800 miles. I like the slightly-wider wheel opening moldings of the '79 over the '78 and I think that in the '78-80 years, these are the best-looking of the Monte Carlo/GrandPrix/Regal/Cutlass Supreme cars.

I can't tell what engine but I'll guess a 260.

Ahem, the ad is a bit light on details, LOL. But if that Vega above sold for $10K, maybe someone will pay $25K for this car.

https://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/7ebfeab7-c3ce-461d-acb2-a710423dc264/?fbclid=IwAR0bTCOh7V0Gmv-cl8d4WPahYyDbIQrq46-z6PRSXNZ__d6IvlZWGuaNYNU

UPDATE: Pic shows it's the Chevy 305 4-barrel, good.

andre1969

I tried to zoom in the engine, to look and see if it had the tell-tale tall oil filler tube at the front, that signified an Olds engine. But, I couldn't get it to zoom. Still, I didn't see the filler tube. I did find a VIN decoder though, and it looks like the "H" (5th character of the VIN) denotes the Chevy 305-4bbl! (LG4). So, at least you don't have to whip out the sundial if you want to time it from 0-60

**Edit...d'oh, I should've just looked all the way to the end of the pics. They have a sign at the end that mentions it's a "Rare" 305-4bbl.

***Edit #2. Just wanted to add, Uplander, I agree with you. With the '78-80 personal luxury coupes, I like the Cutlass the best as well. It just seems to the most tasteful, overall to me. The Monte is a bit too flamboyant, and I didn't like those "non-Monte" taillights. The Grand Prix, I don't like the front...the narrow grille and the quad headlights with the turn signal between them; that look just seems too big for the car. The Regal's not too bad, but I just prefer the Cutlass.

sda

The color on the 79 Cutlass is not my favorite. Nice car overall. Back then I would have preferred an Olds have an Olds engine, but since that would probably mean the weak 260 V8 or Olds diesel, the Chevy 305 is best.

fintail

This was spotted by someone on another forum I read, I thought it might be relevant to a certain someone here, maybe more than one:

ab348

I always thought those last-gen C-body Plymouths were handsome cars. Almost GM-like.

uplanderguy

That's a nice car and good color. That may have been the last year the "Fury III" name was used. I'm thinking after '74 they might've all been "Gran Furys".

I definitely think the '71 GM full-sizes were inspiration. The big, curved windshield with thin pillars covered completely with bright metal, and the shape of the rear door glass in sedans to me are particularly close to the GM big cars of the same period.

A distinct feature of these Mopars, including the Dodge Monaco, was they had a bit of a rear fin.

andre1969

Probably a surprise to nobody here, but I LOVE that '74 Fury! Even in that color.

I'd have to look it up to be sure, but I think for '74 the nomenclature went Fury I/I/III, which equated roughly to Biscayne/Bel Air/Impala, and then they had Fury Gran Coupe and Gran Sedan, to go after the Caprice.

For '75, they called them all Gran Fury, with the Fury nameplate transferring to what had been the Satellite/Sebring. This year I think they went with Base, Custom, and Brougham, with the Brougham getting the different front-end that had the single headlights with the vertical turn signals inboard of them. In '76-77, all of them had that single headlight front.

I really like the style of these...the 4-headlight models at least. To my eye at least, they manage to look big, but without looking fat. And the styling is clean and simple, with a minimum of fussy details. I wonder if that might have been part of the problem though...by 1974, people were wanting more of that fussy pretense in their cars, and these just didn't have it.

There's definitely a GM vibe in them, too. I think it's even stronger with the Dodge Monaco. Its grille was a bit lower, and it had a swoop in the side, that definitely makes the car look Buick-ish when the light hits it just right...

uplanderguy

I think the Monaco reminds me more of the big Chevy of the time than the Plymouth. Something about the front wheel openings and the area directly above the front wheel openings leading to the peaked front fenders.

sda

I found this comparison of Gross HP and Net HP informative. 71 Firebird. Notice the 455 HO has the least reduction in HP between Gross and Net.

ab348

@sda that is interesting. I don't know how Pontiac engineers did it but the 455 HO engine seemed to be the only one that remained very strong through the mid-'70s.

stickguy

Might have been underrated early in the decade and by the end it was accurate?

kyfdx

Would be interesting to see the '72 chart, as that's when they changed how they calculated HP

texases

Here's an explanation of gross vs. net hp:

"In the most simple terms, gross horsepower is what a bare engine (no accessories) running optimal timing through headers is capable of. Net ratings are what the engine produces when all accessories are present and the proper exhaust system is hooked up."

So maybe the stock exhaust used on the 455 was close to the headers? It would seem the hp hit from hooking up the accessories shouldn't be that different between engines.

Also: @sda - is that table for the same engine, gross vs. net? Or for the change that occurred the year the rating changed, like '71 vs. '72, which could include lots of other changes (compression, emissions, etc)?

andre1969

One thing I never understood...why would the gross hp peak at a different rpm from the net? I could understand if they were comparing two different engines, from different years, where they messed around with the compression or other things. But in this case, it's just showing the same 1971 engines, just in two different hp ratings.

I notice peak torque comes on at different rpms as well, with the exception of the 250-6cyl.

texases

andre1969 said:

One thing I never understood...why would the gross hp peak at a different rpm from the net? I could understand if they were comparing two different engines, from different years, where they messed around with the compression or other things. But in this case, it's just showing the same 1971 engines, just in two different hp ratings.

I notice peak torque comes on at different rpms as well, with the exception of the 250-6cyl.

Peak hp and torque rpms changes because of the different exhaust system, I'd think.

andre1969

On the subject of gross hp vs net...for gross hp, they even take away the alternator and the engine's water pump! So for net hp, they add that back in.

But, what about things like power steering and air conditioning? I have a feeling net hp doesn't take them into account, since in 1971, there was a lot of variance in how cars were equipped, so many of them did not have power steering or a/c.

I've always wondered why they never bothered to measure the hp of a car at the wheel, or brake, or whatever, since in the end, that's what really matters. These days, there's not a huge difference in the way cars are equipped. Most of them have power steering and a/c, and I don't think there's a lot of variance in transmissions. But, back in the day, measuring horsepower that way might have been a lot more difficult.

It's also going to produce a lower number, so not nearly as impressive sounding.

sda

@texases That chart was copied from the 71 Pontiac brochure. It is very possible the HP figures would be less for 72.

ab348

Here is the Firebird engine chart from the '72 brochure:

sda

Looks like all engines went down in HP and TQ except the 250 six which remained unchanged.

texases

Anyone here watch 'Engine Masters' on the Motor Trend channel? They go through various engine mods and see how it affects the results on the dyno. My favorite was them getting 300 hp (gross) out of a 225 slant 6 with just the addition of a supercharger. They eventually blew the head gasket as they tried to get even more hp, but no damage to the pistons, etc.

kyfdx

sda said:

Looks like all engines went down in HP and TQ except the 250 six which remained unchanged.

Real world, they probably didn't change much. The method of measurement is the big change, between those two years.

texases

How did the method of measurement change for the net power numbers?

uplanderguy

At the time, I remember 'net' being described as 'as installed in the vehicle'.

imidazol97

I recall those days of the horsepower race in numbers.

The gross horsepower was the number the car company wanted you to
think you were driving.
The net horsepower was the number you were actually driving in your car, maybe.

kyfdx

Even net HP is not at the drive wheels. Most cars lose about 20%, from the output to the wheels

stickguy

Sometimes the reported number was much lower, because that’s what they wanted the insurance company to think.

roadburner

stickguy said:

Sometimes the reported number was much lower, because that’s what they wanted the insurance company to think.

That was definitely the case with the 428 CJ.

andre1969

Here's a dumb question...if you bought a '77 LeMans in Canada and got the 350, would it have been a Pontiac 350 or a Chevy? I remember AB348 saying his old '77 LeMans had a Chevy 305, whereas in the US they would have used a Pontiac 301 that year.

I was looking through the Canadian LeMans brochure, and noticed that for the coupe/sedan, they were showing the 250/4.1 inline-6 as standard, a 305-2bbl optional, and a 350-4bbl optional above that. But oddly, on the wagon they showed a Pontiac 301-2bbl as standard, and a 400-4bbl optional. I'm presuming that would've been a Pontiac 400, since the Chevy 400 went away after '76.

At least, in the US cars it did. I just looked at the '77 Chevy trucks brochure, and they're still showing a 400-4bbl as an option. So I guess it could've persisted in the Canadian market, as well?

It's interesting that they'd use a Pontiac 301 in the LeMans wagon, but a Chevy 305 in the coupes and sedans.