Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today! (Archived)
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Yeah, that would be the '68-69 Dart GTS, which came with something like 275 hp with the 340-4bbl, and 290 with the 6-pack. There was also a stripper model called the Swinger 340, which might have also offered the 6-pack.
The Barracuda offered it, as well.
I think by '70 though, the 340-6 pack might have been dropped, leaving just the 4-bbl.
http://files.conceptcarz.com/img/Studebaker/64-Studebaker-hawk-R2-DV_11-SJ_014.j- - pg
The emblem at the bottom of the front fenders indicates Avanti power, which also means the car has either a 4-speed or Powershift trans (PRND21) and disk brakes, and full gauges including a tach.
And only 1,767 built between August and December 20, 1963.
And from what I've heard, you were actually better off without a lot of those early disc brake systems. Supposedly many of them weren't so hot, went out of adjustment very easily, etc. My '69 Bonneville had pretty good disc brakes, but by that time, I think they pretty much got the formula worked out for them.
HP numbers were simply measured at a lower rpm than a higher rpm would produce.
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
I think you could get an automatic with a '65 Corvair convertible. They wouldn't be too hard to maintain--a few simple tweaks would fix most problems. I think the "Corsa" was the turbo version, and I'd probably pass on that---the turbo system was quite primitive and badly engineered---near useless. I suppose one could tweak that, too, but at what cost to engine life I dunno.
I don't much like turbo or supercharging on big American V8s, at least not how they did it in the 1960s. Big block V8s should have twin-turbos IMO. Modern S-chargers are pretty slick, though---very compact, intercooled and not fussy at all.
My current car is SCharged, so I'm no luddite.
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
1) '62 Tempest LeMans coupe V8 (I know, a mechanical nightmare)
2) '69 Corvair Monza Coupe, 4-carb 140 hp (I know, Corvair owners will say that a 110 is easier to maintain)
3) '65 Pontiac Bonneville Sports Coupe, bucket seats and console
4) '65 Impala SS Coupe--not a bad angle anywhere on the car IMO
5) '67-70 Eldorado
6) (and this totally blows out-of-the-water my typical aversion to huge cars)--'65 or '66 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham. Stunning instrument panel, stunning interior, clean bodysides, those wonderful wide rocker moldings and individual "FLEETWOOD" letters...an awesome, U.S. luxury car of its time.
HP numbers were simply measured at a lower rpm than a higher rpm would produce.
I remember reading an old Popular Mechanics, which tested a few engines around 1968 or 1969 to see how much hp they really put out, compared to the claims. The Mopar 340, rated at 275 hp gross, actually put out something like 245 hp, which incidentally is about what it put out once they started rating it in net hp.
I don't remember much in the way of specifics of the other engines, other than one was a Ford big block and one was an Old big block in a 4-4-2. The Ford engine put out something like 75% of its advertised hp, which is about the rule-of-thumb in the gross-to-net conversion. The Olds was a pretty big liar though, only putting out around 60-65%, as I recall.
I guess that doesn't mean ALL Olds engines were like that, though. There could have been enough variance in them that Popular mechanics just got ahold of a bad one?
HP numbers were simply measured at a lower rpm than a higher rpm would produce.
I remember reading an old Popular Mechanics, which tested a few engines around 1968 or 1969 to see how much hp they really put out, compared to the claims. The Mopar 340, rated at 275 hp gross, actually put out something like 245 hp, which incidentally is about what it put out once they started rating it in net hp.
I don't remember much in the way of specifics of the other engines, other than one was a Ford big block and one was an Old big block in a 4-4-2. The Ford engine put out something like 75% of its advertised hp, which is about the rule-of-thumb in the gross-to-net conversion. The Olds was a pretty big liar though, only putting out around 60-65%, as I recall.
I guess that doesn't mean ALL Olds engines were like that, though. There could have been enough variance in them that Popular mechanics just got ahold of a bad one?
I also remember reading some Mopar enthusiast magazine that compared three Darts. One had a 340, one had a 383, and one had the 426 Hemi. As I recall, the 383 gave no advantage over the 340, and just made the car harder to handle. IIRC, they mentioned that even the 440 wouldn't be much of an improvement, as the weight would mostly offset the extra power. The Hemi was definitely quicker, but was even more of a pain to drive.
Just out of curiosity, what would be a bigger chore to deal with...a 1969 Nova with a 396 or a 1969 Dart with a 440? I've heard that the Nova was actually designed from the get-go to be able to handle a big-block fairly easily, while it had to be shoehorned a bit into the Dart. But, IIRC the Chevy big-block is heavier than a Mopar big-block wedge (but not the Hemi)
Also, I'd go with a modern front disk brake setup (calipers, booster, plus dual reservoir master cylinder), that's one upgrade that's pretty easy to do.
And the Dart will rise again!
That "corsa/spyder" thing certainly is confusing
Nice thing about the '65 on up Corvairs, you don't need disc brakes---the drum brakes on that car are about the best ever put on an American automobile.
I don't think you could get power steering with a 440 Dart, although I have seen later conversions with it, so I guess it's possible with some shoehorning.
http://musclecars.howstuffworks.com/classic-muscle-cars/1968-dodge-dart-gts-440.- htm
It says that about 650 1968-69 Darts were converted to 440's. I wonder then, how many had the 383? I've read that either 50 or 75 1968 Darts were equipped with the 426 Hemi.
Somehow, I have a feeling that there are more Hemi Darts running around now than there were when new!
They also used the lighter, cheaper seats out of the A100 van, rather than normal GTS buckets or even a bench.
IIRC, they also came standard with racing slicks and a sticker on the dashboard that said "Track use only", "Not for street use" or something like that.
Having browsed through an online brochure of the '65 Corvair, I can make it even more confusing. The 140 hp non-turbo engine was standard in the Corsa, with the 180 hp turbo engine optional. The 140 hp engine was optional in the other models.
Now here is the interesting part; in the Corsa neither engine could be paired with an automatic. However, if the 140 hp engine was specified in another model, you could get an auto.
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
A 1 to 2 beer car yarn:
I had an obscure Mazda---an RX4 wagon--and I really liked that car. It was quite upscale vis a vis a 70s Honda or Toyota. Had trouble with it though, and it was the first rotary engine I ever took apart. Came to find out that they required a very high degree of precision for rebuilding and I wasn't equipped to do that. However, I sold it at a profit anyway. I later heard that local auto racer Jim Smoot parted out the wagon but rebuilt the engine and put it into an MGB, with the Mazda transmission. Rumor had it that that little sucker moved right along!.
My Uncle had a 1960 Corvair and liked it a lot, but it was very cold in the winter. I think it had a gasoline heater which he did not run because it did not work or he did not run it because it killed his gas mileage. Either way, he was scrapping ice off the inside of the glass so he could see out.
Many friends who owned Corvairs seemed to like them, and the main complaint seemed to be that they leaked oil. BTW, it was strange to hear how quiet the turbocharged Coavairs were at the drag strip even without mufflers. The turbo broke up the exhaust noise.
If I had a Corsa, I'd certainly put in an extra oil cooler, electronic ignition, and different carburetors. If I had a turbo model, I'd add some kind of knock sensor.
Hard to believe they were down to 6,000 units for the '69 model year. Them's Studebaker numbers!
Of course GM was the King of the Hill in 1960, and could afford to be lavish. They still hadn't made their marketing blunders nor entered into the extreme profit-killing deals with the UAW. Ford was still reeling from the Edsel debacle, where they lost a bundle of money, and Chrysler was still the perennial #3 and looking for inspiration. Foreign intervention wasn't a big problem yet, and gas mileage and emissions barely a consideration, if at all.
Iacocca revived Ford, and Chrysler made a big comeback in the mid/late 60s, and everything was pretty groovy in Detroit until the 1973 gas crunch and the subsequent miscalculations by the Big Three.
Detroit sure went up and down up and down in the 70s/80s/90s didn't they? But finally their rigid management style and terrible labor relations got the best of them.
The Corvair was just one more promising Detroit car that was left to die on the vine because of under-development.
I wonder what it looked like? I tried searching, but can't find anything. Wikipedia mentioned it looked something like a 1973 Grand Am. Also, supposedly the THM350 transmission had been modified so that it could be used with the Corvair, so that would have finally given the Corvair a 3-speed automatic.
Still, I wonder if something as big and beefy as a THM350 would have robbed too much power from the small Corvair engine? And, I guess as time went by, it would have been increasingly difficult to meet emissions standards. I think air-cooled engines tend to be "dirtier" and harder to clean up than water-cooled, although I don't know if there's any truth to that.
Looking back, maybe it's best the Corvair was retired when it was. Had it lasted into the 70's, I'm sure they would have made a mess of it!
The Corvair platform was shared with no other GM product, so I'm sure it was expensive to produce..especially with volume down those last few years. It was built at Ypsilanti, MI, where Novas were also built, but when the '69 Nova took off, GM moved Corvair production to a tiny corner of the plant. GM didn't even bother to give the '69 Corvair the locking steering column all their other '69's had. All the Corvair got was the square ignition key.
I'd still really enjoy one though. If I weren't into Studebakers, Corvairs would be the next old car I'd own.
He finished it, drove it for a little while, and pretty much lost interest. I dunno if it was his age or exactly what that led to that. He kept it for a few years with little use, before finally selling it. The thing with Corvairs is that they don't tend to bring very good money, and he was happy to get what I think was $5K for it. I was in it a couple of times and it seemed like fun to drive.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59voKreB2j8
http://www.corvaircorsa.com/turbo02.html
Here's couple of nifty ones modified for blow through:
http://www.corvaircorsa.com/binnie01.html
http://www.auto-addiction.com/66-Corvair.htm#The%20Power%20Train
I owned a 1964 Spyder convertible back in the day.
Seems like with that stock setup you'd need very high rpm to get much boost.
Here's a pic I took of it, with my car just poking into the lower right corner, as a reference for the color:
Turns out my Catalina's color is actually called "Montego Cream". Chevy called it "Capri Cream". GM must have been on a Mercury kick that year! FWIW, Olds called it "Cameo Ivory" while Buick just went with "Ivory". I guess the marketing department was running out of ideas by the time they got to Buick!
I kinda like that evening orchid color, too. To me though, it seems like more of a luxury car color, or an early 60's color, so maybe that's why it didn't last? I Looking through the paint charts, it appears only Chevy and Pontiac offered it? Pontiac called it "Iris Mist". Interesting that Cadillac, Buick, and Olds didn't offer anything like it by that time. I could picture a Cadillac, especially, looking really good in that color.