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

1119912001202120412051213

Comments

  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 46,962
    What barges! As long as a current 4 door Tacoma or Frontier, but not even any leg room in the back. Efficiency was not a thing back then.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD , 2022 Ford Maverick Lariat Ecoboost FWD.

  • sdasda Indian Land, SCMember Posts: 6,193
    I am surprised to see the Cutlass being the quickest and had the shortest stopping distance. The 2.73 rear axle didn't do the LeMans any favors in the acceleration dept. I didn't see mpg figures. I imagine they would be in the 11-13 mpg range.

    2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,172
    edited September 26
    One thing I think is kind of sad is that the LeMans has about the same legroom as the Elite and Charger S/E, but is 2-3" shorter in wheelbase and a good 7-8" shorter overall. So that would seem to indicate that, as bad as these cars were, GM was actually making some slight attempt at space efficiency. However, one reason, I think, that the Ford is so long, is that the bumpers seemed really ill-fitting, and the stuck out too far. I know, all cars had protruding bumpers at the time, but Ford sometimes seemed to take it to the extreme. So it might be that the body of the car wasn't so big, but those bumpers just bloated up the length more than they should. And if they had bumper guards standard, that would add to the published length, without really making the car look any longer.

    Also, even though it just says "LeMans", I think that was actually a Grand LeMans they tested. They mention a base price of $4330. My auto encyclopedia lists $4329 as the base price for a '76 Grand LeMans coupe, whereas a base LeMans coupe was only $3768. The base prices they list for the Elite and Charger S/E are dead-on with my book, and the Cutlass Supreme, like the LeMans, is off by a dollar ($4580) and it's actually a Cutlass Supreme Brougham.

    I thought it was a bit odd, at first, that they'd compare a base LeMans to these other cars. Actually, I'm surprised they didn't compare a Grand Prix.

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,172
    sda said:

    I am surprised to see the Cutlass being the quickest and had the shortest stopping distance. The 2.73 rear axle didn't do the LeMans any favors in the acceleration dept. I didn't see mpg figures. I imagine they would be in the 11-13 mpg range.

    Sadly, I think that 2.73 was an upgrade! IIRC, GM tended to use a 2.73:1 axle with their 350 engines as the base ratio through '72, but then in '73-75 they went to a 2.56:1 and for '76, to a doggy 2.41:1!

    Interesting too, that the LeMans's turning circle is 3.4 feet tighter than the Cutlass (38.4 vs 41.8). I figured they'd be much closer, if not identical.

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America I70 & I75 Member Posts: 26,599
    I wonder about the 3.08 rear axle in the Oldsmobile. I wonder if that was a Salon model which was equivalent of a rally or performance version today, IIRC. OR did Gm routinely increase the axle ratio for a 4-barrel carb, since the image was more power and less fuel mileage anyhow, so a higher ratio won't hurt mileage expectations.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • sdasda Indian Land, SCMember Posts: 6,193
    The. 76 Cutlass Supreme wagon my parents had came with the 2.73 axle and 350 4bbl. I remember 1st gear being really tall and would shift 1-2 around 55 mph. I posted the window sticker of it in the Auto brochures thread.

    2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,172
    edited September 26
    I googled around a bit, and found a few tidbits for '76...

    1) 1976 Cutlass Cruiser wagon with a 350-4bbl: 2.73:1 axle standard, 3.08:1 optional
    2) 1976 Cutlass Supreme coupe/sedan, 350-4bbl (Oldsmobile didn't offer a 350-2bbl in '76): 2.56:1 axle standard, 3.08:1 optional.
    3) 1976 LeMans, 2.41:1 standard with the 350, regardless of whether it was a 2- or 4-bbl.

    I got this info from Automobile Catalogue, so it might not be 100% correct, but they're usually pretty good. However, in this case, they don't list any optional ratios for the LeMans, so either Popular Science typed the wrong axle ratio in, or the Automobile Catalogue site is incomplete (I'd vote for the latter).

    I just looked up the 1976 Elite, and they show a 2.75:1 axle standard with the 400, and a 3.25:1 optional.
    For the Charger SE, 360-4bbl, they show a 2.71:1 standard, with 2.45 or 3.21 optional.
    **Edit: I just looked up the Cutlass Salon with the 350-4bbl. Same 2.56 standard, 3.08 optional ratios as the Supreme.
  • ab348ab348 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CanadaMember Posts: 17,536
    edited September 26
    Easy to see why the Cutlass was such a dominant force in the segment during those years.

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • ab348ab348 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CanadaMember Posts: 17,536
    Power finally came on about 2 hours ago while I was packing up the generator for the night. I never knew I loved electricity so much!

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,584
    $7500 for the Elite, must have been hard loaded. Now I see why the Cutlass was a leading seller for eons.
    andre1969 said:

    Over on curbside classic, in the comments section of one of their articles on the Motortend's 1977 car issue, someone posted the following test sheet, of a few '76 cars. It was of particular interest to me, because one of the cars was a '76 LeMans...
    Gotta say, that acceleration of the LeMans actually makes me embarrassed! Sometimes ignorance is bliss! :o

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,584
    edited September 26
    I think I told the story before, a relative who had the strategy of buying a cheap beater and driving it til it croaked, then rinsing and repeating, had an 80 Cordoba for a little while. I want to say she picked it up in late 1993. The car was kind of a creamy white on burgundy two tone IIRC, burgundy tufted leather, pretty well equipped. I suspect it was a 318 (lean burn?) and had drivability quirks, I remember my dad working on it at least a couple times. I suspect its next stop was the junkyard, I think she replaced it with a 65 Coupe DeVille that she cared for relatively well - eventually it was stolen. She probably went through 2-3 cars a year for several years. Now she's in her early 60s and has driven the same Jeep Liberty for ages.
    andre1969 said:

    Yeah, I've heard the same thing about the drain and fills, versus a full flush. This made me look at my records. Looks like I had the Regal done in 2018, around 72,000 miles and the Ram, also in 2018, around 48,000. The Regal's up to around 105,000 and the Ram has all of ~59000. I had gotten into the habit of doing my 2000 Intrepid every 30,000 miles, as a precaution, because their transmissions had a reputation for being weak. Or, more specifically, at 31K, 62K, 90K, and 123.5K. It was soon going to be due for another one, but then got totaled from a hit-and-run while parked, at 150,351 miles. The previous service had been $105, so I guess on the plus side, that hit and run saved me around $100 or so 😐

    Oh, on an unrelated note, oopsie! Looking at this picture, I think it drives home the point of what was wrong with Chrysler at that time. Well, one of the things that was wrong, at least. At a quick glance, I couldn't tell if that was a Mirada or a Cordoba, and I'm a fan of these cars!

    Obviously, I can tell them from the front, but from the back they just have a generic look. The badge on the right side of the trunk lid is in cursive, and looks like it starts with a "C", so for that I'd think it was a Cordoba. And, it is. In looking at pics online, while the rear-ends are very similar, the taillights on the Cordoba are wider, and the backup lights flank the license plate. On the MIrada, the taillights are narrower, with a bit of body color between them and the license plate, and the backup lights are built into the taillight assembly in a subtle sort of fashion.

    But, if that had been a GM personal luxury coupe of that era, there would be no mistaking one for the other. And even a T-bird/Cougar would have been a noticeable difference.

    In Chrysler's defense, they were pretty much out of money at that point, but still...

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,020
    One thing I think is kind of sad is that the LeMans has about the same legroom as the Elite and Charger S/E, but is 2-3" shorter in wheelbase and a good 7-8" shorter overall. So that would seem to indicate that, as bad as these cars were, GM was actually making some slight attempt at space efficiency.

    The next model year of course, but I remember this particular ad, touting rear-seat legroom in a coupe. Once these cars came out, I wasn't interested in the '77 Colonnades anymore.Picture 1 of 1
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 46,962
    Was the front seat just flopping around? Ad says no release to trigger. That sounds unsafe! I’d be surprised if even legal at that point.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD , 2022 Ford Maverick Lariat Ecoboost FWD.

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,020
    It was an inertia thing....like shoulder belts. When there was deceleration, the seat backs locked.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,172
    edited September 27
    I can't remember, but were GM's downsized midsized coupes the same, not needing to mess with a lever to release the seatbacks? You'd think I'd remember, since I had three of them, but I'm drawing a total blank.

    On the DeSoto, there's no latch; you just push the seatback forward, but it's not as scary as it sounds. The backrests fold inboard, so you can't push them both at once, as they'll bind up against each other. I've never had an issue with them flopping around. However, one time back in the 90's I had some friends in the car, and one in the back seat was leaning over the front some, and I had to slam on the brakes for whatever reason. Now THAT made the seatback pitch forward, and my friend ended up getting thrown into the front seat.

    Ordinarily, in a fast stop, I think the seatbacks would just bind up against each other if it was enough for them to pitch forward, but if you have back seat passengers, that got thrown into the seatback, that changes the dynamics a lot! I also have seatbelts in the car now, although I haven't had anyone in the back seat since it came back from the mechanic.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,020
    edited September 27
    I always wondered what 1976 sales were when Chevelle and Monte Carlo were combined, to make a more-even comparison of sales to the Cutlass.

    As usual, I'm leery of figures from the internet, but the below site shows 495,976 units of Cutlass models sold in the '76 model year, and 324,870 Chevelles and 362,171 Monte Carlos sold that year. Amazing to me that Monte Carlo outsold three bodystyles of Chevelle. So combined, there were about 687,000 Colonnade Chevys sold in '76. It's logical for a Cutlass Supreme to be called a Cutlass of course, but I did chuckle when later, the FWD Ciera and Calais were called 'Cutlass'.

    https://bestsellingcarsblog.com/1977/01/usa-1976-oldsmobile-cutlass-still-americas-favourite/#:~:text=The Oldsmobile Cutlass keeps the,to #3 and 362,171 sales.

    The big Chevy in '77 sold 657,151 units, up 45% from the '76. No big surprise there. Even growing up Chevy, there really wasn't anything to appeal to me in the full-size '76 models.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,020
    edited September 27
    Yeah, after '77, all redesigned GM coupes didn't need to have a latch to get into the back seat, in my memory. That latch started at GM with the '67's and was a government standard I'm pretty sure.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,172
    One interesting side effect in '77, is that with GM's downsizing, sales of the remaining battlestar-galactica-class full-sizers increased a bit. I think part of it is that the economy in general was better in '77 so there were more car buyers in general, but there was some who wanted their full-sized cars to still be mastodon-class.

    GM's full-sized cars did cut into sales of the Colonades to a degree, but there were exceptions. For example, the '77 Cutlass lineup gained pretty substantially over '76. I don't feel like adding up all the permutations, but in '76 the most popular individual model was the base Supreme coupe, with around 180,000 sold. That jumped to 242,000 for 1977. The Regal coupe sold about 124K for '76, but moved around 174K in '77. However, I think this might have also been a reflection of just how popular personal luxury coupes were becoming. The Grand Prix and Monte Carlo were also up for '77.

    Off the top of my head, I remember that the LeMans, which was falling from favor anyway, sold around 96,000 units in 1976 and 80,000 in 1977. I'm too lazy to add up all the Malibu numbers, but just looking them over quickly, it doesn't look like the Malibu was down by much. Again, I think much of it was simply an improving economy.

    I always thought of the Ford LTD-II as a bit of a failure, but even it was up notably compared to the '76 Torino it replaced. Sales were around 232,000 in '77, up about 20% from the Torino's rougnly 193K. Of course, the LTD-II fell off fast after that. I have a feeling that pressure from GM's downsized intermediates, and even Ford's own Fairmont and Zephyr, put pressure on the LTD-II for '78. The only thing the LTD-II was really better at was if you really needed 3-across seating on a regular basis, or needed a large towing capacity. But if you didn't, a Fairmont or Malibu fit the bill just fine, as did a downsized GM big car, or Ford's still huge LTD.

    One thing interesting about the downsized LeMans...I remember reading that it was considered a bit of a failure, as Pontiac was hoping for much improved sales. It sold about 120,000 units for '78, which is a 50% increase over 1977. If you just use percentage increase, the LeMans was actually the most improved in sales, when it downsized! The Grand Prix and Monte Carlo were down a bit, although the Malibu was up. I think the Cutlass Supreme was down, only slightly, but those Aerobacks slaughtered the lesser models. Similarly, at Buick, the Regal was up, but the Century dropped.

    The LeMans even managed to improve for '79, rising to 136,000 units. Meanwhile the Monte Carlo and Grand Prix were down. The Cutlass Supreme and Regal were up, but the Aeroback models continued to fall. I think the Malibu was down a bit, as well.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,020
    edited September 27
    andre, fellow posted this pic this morning on a Pontiac FB page I follow. Now here's a '69 full-size that has my attention! First real '69 I've seen with bucket seats. Consoles weren't available for some odd reason, but still--this thing is loaded. It's supposedly a Ventura.
    May be an image of car

    Per the original poster, it has: Power Bucket Seat, Rear Defogger, AM/FM Stereo, 8-track, Cruise Control, Custom Sport Steering Wheel, Tilt Wheel, Custom Gauge Cluster, Power Antenna, Power Windows, Remote Deck Lid, A/C

    I've requested him to post some more pics. We'll see how that goes.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,172
    Speak of the Devil...Curbside classic just reposted an old article, covering Motortrend's overview of the '77 GM lineup...

    https://www.curbsideclassic.com/vintage-reviews/vintage-reviews-motor-trends-1977-new-car-issue-general-motors/#more-210937F

    In glancing through, they mention that the Chevelle only dipped about 2% versus '76. Meanwhile, the downsized Caprice/Impala shot up an impressive 56%. I think that's pretty amazing, that the downsizing didn't tank the Chevelle/Malibu sales, but in their defense, they were still a good bit cheaper. And the article itself says that dealers were probably discounting them heavily.
  • benjaminhbenjaminh Member Posts: 6,096
    2018 Acura TLX 2.4 Tech 4WS (mine), 2018 Honda CR-V EX AWD (wife's)
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,020
    edited September 27
    Thanks for posting, andre. Didn't take me long to read that old oft-printed 'fact' that the Vega's powertrain was new/different for '77. It wasn't. The Astre's was. I guess they got rid of the one-barrel, but I often see in online articles that the Vega got the 'Iron Duke' in '77. It didn't. The Vega continued with the much-improved version of the same 140 aluminum four from '76. At the time it had the longest warranty in the industry by far. And it should have, LOL.
  • sdasda Indian Land, SCMember Posts: 6,193
    A good friend had a 77 Vega hatchback. Standard interior, 4sp, am radio, tinted glass. It didn’t burn oil or overheat. He drove it frequently between Knoxville and Cincinnati where his folks lived. That is a fairly taxing drive. At 130k he replaced the head gasket. I helped with that job. The engine had no sludge build up. He drove it for a year or so later when he bought an 83 Cavalier wagon. The Cavalier gave him a lot of trouble. He was glad he bought the GM Goodwrench extended warranty as he had several claims.

    2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav

  • texasestexases Member Posts: 10,201
    Another GM example of 'too little, too late', GM made the Vega engine pretty reliable in '76.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,172
    One thing that's interesting is that the Motortrend writeup says, of the Vega, that the GT trim level is gone for '77, yet they show a picture of a Vega, and it says VEGA GT right on the side! As for the way the Curbside Classic author was slamming the car, saying it's a wonder anybody still bought one in '77, I think that's just a symptom of an improving market. Buyers were shifting back to bigger cars. I'm sure increased competition from the Japanese was also a factor.

    Years ago, I knew a guy, in a Mopar club I used to be in, who once owned a Vega. I forget the year, but he said that other than needing to get one cylinder sleeved, it was a reliable car. I think he had it to around 90-100,000 miles. At the time I knew him, he had a '65 Imperial 4-door hardtop as a classic car, but his new car was a 1994 Concorde. It was only a few years old at the time, but it was already turning out to be pretty troublesome. He said that his Vega was a better car!
  • jwm40517jwm40517 Member Posts: 261
    I assume the statutes of limitation for illegal emission modifications has run out by now. In fall of 1973 I ordered a 1974 Corvette. At the same time I ordered a complete side exhaust system that was an option in 69, I think. All the Corvette frames thru at least 1980 had the same holes for mounting the side exhaust. Drove the car home , jacked it up and changed it out in the driveway. Put away the complete, no catalytic converter stock system with 60 miles on it.

    4 years later, the then girlfriend, bought a 1977 Corvette from a guy in Kansas. It had headers on it and came with the stock exhaust manifolds. I flew from east KY and drove it back with the iron manifolds and 16 cases of Coors beer that was not available in the east back then.

    Later she wanted to get rid of the headers, so we put her iron manifolds back on and installed my NOS stock 1974 exhaust without catalytic converter. It was still on the car when she sold it some years later.

    In 1974 the side exhaust systems were still available from Chevy. I bowled with the parts manager of a little Chevy dealer in Ironton, OH . He gave me the best deal he could at $180.00 for complete set of exhaust and covers. Several people liked the look and I got 4 other sets for friends. Wish I had kept a spare set.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,020
    edited September 27
    andre, one would think from general car posts, that no one ever bought a second Vega. On the Vega site I used to follow on FB, there were quite a few former owners who enjoyed their cars and bought another new one. I met a guy at a local cruise two weeks ago who bought a new '71 GT and a new '76. He did say he got new fenders free for the '71 from GM, which I remember hearing back in the day. It was the darling of the magazines, and in '73 I remember in either C&D or MT, it winning the reader's choice for 'Best Small Car'. My grandparents bought the very first '71 our dealer in town got in. It was a dark green two-door sedan, orangish cheapo interior, rubber floor mats, 3-speed, one barrel, only options AM radio and white-stripe tires. Bottom of sticker, including destination, was $2,257. They sold it to my aunt for $1,200 in 1977 when it had 3,108 miles--really. She lived about 50 miles away and her husband told me he had to change the fuel filter twice on the way home.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 North Central OHMember Posts: 17,918
    @jwm40417,
    So YOU were the inspiration for Smokey and the Bandit. :)
    I just registered my 1991 Mustang in OH. All I needed was a VIN check.
    2020 Ford Explorer XLT, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,020
    Here's the exterior of that '69 Ventura with bucket seats. Again, this is the first one I've ever seen.
    May be an image of car
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,172
    That '69 Ventura is nice. I can't remember the last time I've seen ANY full-sized Ventura, let alone a hardtop coupe with bucket seats.
  • sdasda Indian Land, SCMember Posts: 6,193
    Did the Ventura take the place of the Executive? Ventura 2dr only, Executive 4dr? That is a sharp Ventura. It appears to have most if not all options. It would be interesting to see the window sticker with list of options and total price.

    2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav

  • ab348ab348 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CanadaMember Posts: 17,536
    The Ventura is confusing, not just that particular one, but what Pontiac was thinking with the model in general. It seemed to be an upgraded Catalina, and was available in 2 and 4-door hardtops along with a 4-door sedan. The Executive was available in the same 3 body styles and had a similar but not identical interior to the Ventura and had a longer wheelbase. While the main Pontiac brochure has a page for the Ventura, the Accessories (Options) booklet (which is quite extensive) ignores it except for one page where it shows the dash. It seems to treat it as a Catalina sub-model, which I guess it was. It also indicates the hood tach was not available on the full-sizers but I know many of those were dealer-installed on any Pontiac. Meanwhile the Colors and Interiors booklet says bucket seats were available on Catalinas and Bonnevilles but only shows bench variations for the Ventura. Very confusing.

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,172
    I think there was one year, 1960, that the Ventura was listed as a separate model, above the Catalina but below the Star Chief. But every other year, until it became a rebadged Nova, I believe it was just treated as an optional trim level for the Catalina. And I don't think they really kept track of how many were built each year, either.

    In 1971, there was a model called the Catalina Brougham. I guess that sort of replaced the former Ventura?
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,020
    edited September 28

    The Ventura Custom option was on the Catalina. The window sticker will show ‘Catalina’ at the top even though from 1966 on, ‘Catalina’ was nowhere to be seen on the car itself.

    The Executive was on the longer wheelbase but had identical, and I mean identical, interior trim as the Ventura option on the Catalina. The brochure would sometimes picture the distinct cloth interior for one and the vinyl for the other, but both were available in both models and this I can guarantee you after fifty years of looking at them: If two were parked right next to each other and both had cloth OR vinyl interior, the interiors, including door panels, are indistinguishable. Google images would verify that as well.

    I rather like the Ventura as it’s on the shorter wheelbase.

    I like cornering lights on most cars including this one. I wondered about the hood tach myself on this car.

    I think buckets on Catalina in the ‘66-69 era automatically pushed you into getting the Ventura Custom option. I have never even seen a pic of a regular Catalina with bucket seats but have seen several Venturas in the ‘66-‘68 run with them. Buckets were not available on Executives, ever.

    The Pontiac full-size line gave you a lot of choices. Especially ‘67, with the 2+2, and Grand Prix convertible. Only the Brougham convertible was dropped that year but returned for ‘68.

    I’ve seen pics online of a 1970 Ventura hardtop sedan and also a wagon. I believe the odd nature of the Executive wagon coming standard with wood grain when the Bonneville did not was because otherwise a Ventura wagon and an Executive would be identical.

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,020
    '70 Ventura wagon (Ventura Custom option on Catalina; car doesn't say 'Catalina' anywhere on it) with 3-speed:

    https://barnfinds.com/green-stick-shift-1970-pontiac-catalina-wagon/
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,020
    edited September 28
    '69 Ventura bench seat, from the brochure:

    https://www.lov2xlr8.no/brochures/pontiac/p69/bilder/6.jpg

    '69 Executive bench seat, from the brochure:

    https://www.lov2xlr8.no/brochures/pontiac/p69/bilder/5.jpg

    The whole difference between Ventura option and Executive model, is that the Executive was on the longer wheelbase. Not including wagons. That's it.

    Same with Catalina Brougham (formerly Ventura) and Bonneville (formerly Executive) in '71 and '72. The interiors were absolutely identical. Now, the cloth interiors were one design and the all-vinyl was another, but both were available on Catalina Brougham and Bonneville, same as previous Ventura and Executive.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,172
    Interesting; I didn't realize the '71 Catalina Brougham was basically just the Bonneville's interior put in the Catalina. One thing that looks really weird to me is the '71-72 Bonnevilles, where they added the extra wheelbase. Whereas in the past, they pulled the rear axle back a few inches for the bigger models, in '71, they tacked that couple inches ahead of the cowl, making for a longer hood/fenders. To me, it's not really that noticeable, unless you see pics of a Catalina and Bonneville side by side. But, whereas the Catalina looks well-proportioned to me, the Bonneville's front just looks TOO long. I think the Grand Ville pulls off the look a bit better, since it had a more bulked-up roofline.

    For '73, they moved them all to the same wheelbase, and probably, nobody even noticed.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,172
    I had to laugh at the creative writing for that '69 Ventura. For me, the name conjures up images of sitting in gridlocked traffic on a highway in California, on a Code Red pollution day. Or I picture Roy Schneider running a Nova-based model under the rear of a semi trailer. But, that's what happens when you try to apply modern-day thinking to the past, I guess :p
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,020
    edited September 28
    Yeah, almost like it was written by someone at J. Peterman!

  • ab348ab348 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CanadaMember Posts: 17,536

    '69 Ventura bench seat, from the brochure:

    https://www.lov2xlr8.no/brochures/pontiac/p69/bilder/6.jpg

    '69 Executive bench seat, from the brochure:

    https://www.lov2xlr8.no/brochures/pontiac/p69/bilder/5.jpg

    Yes, they looked different to me but that was because of the color differences. With a second look they seem identical.

    It remains very confusing why (at least in '69) the brochure lists it as a separate model but the options books do not and only list the various Catalina models. There was no separate Ventura model number code either. It's as if Pontiac didn't even know WTH to make of it.

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,020
    That is weird that in '69 the brochure acts like the Ventura is a separate model. In the '70 brochure, the Ventura interior is not shown (see Executive, LOL), but the Ventura is mentioned in a short paragraph in the Catalina section, mentioning, "if you feel like Diamond Jim", to consider the Ventura Custom option.

    That '69 black hardtop is very, very nice, but it's begging for a console. I don't know why they didn't offer one that year. '69 Impala and Caprice could be had with them, as could Delta 88 Royale and Wildcat Custom. Still, I like that car a lot.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,020
    '67 and '68 Ventura trim added very little to Catalina IMHO. Door panels were the same, and the seats were a bit thicker-looking. In '69 the Ventura (and Executive) got different door panels, with carpet at the bottom, over the Catalina.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,584
    On the Ventura note, I saw one on the road today, maybe a 73-74. Also saw a 61 Impala 4 door HT, looked pretty nice and was probably at least a light restoration.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,172

    That '69 black hardtop is very, very nice, but it's begging for a console. I don't know why they didn't offer one that year. '69 Impala and Caprice could be had with them, as could Delta 88 Royale and Wildcat Custom. Still, I like that car a lot.

    Considering that Pontiac was supposed to be the "Excitement/Performance" division, you'd think a console would've been mandatory! Maybe they thought it would compete too much with the Grand Prix, or something?
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,020

    Yeah, the Grand Prix thing occurred to me too. When the ‘69 GP was introduced, for the first time since ‘64 it was only available with a console and floor shift.

  • tjc78tjc78 South JerseyMember Posts: 14,384

    What on Earth?

    https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRmHvdra/

    Grabbed a few screen shots for those not on TT




    2020 Volvo XC90 T6 Momentum / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,172
    ^^
  • sdasda Indian Land, SCMember Posts: 6,193
    Two days ago, a light gold 71 Chevy Kingswood Estate. It looked complete and straight but the paint looked a bit dull.

    2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,172
    edited October 1
    Well, it's been a long time coming, but my '79 New Yorker finally came home from the old place yesterday...


    This tow truck driver did a really good job lining it up, and getting it perfectly inside the garage.
  • sdasda Indian Land, SCMember Posts: 6,193
    andre1969 said:

    Well, it's been a long time coming, but my '79 New Yorker finally came home from the old place yesterday...

    This tow truck driver did a really good job, lining up, and getting it perfectly inside the garage.

    Is the paint decent where a thorough wash, polish, wax would be beneficial? I like the dark blue. Does it have a dark blue leather interior?

    2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav

Sign In or Register to comment.