Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!



  • parmparm Posts: 724
    I had to reformat my drive and lost all of my favorite bookmarks. Does anybody recall the name of the website that has the paint carts for classic cars? I think I came to find out about this website through this classic car town hall, but it's been quite awhile ago.

    By the way, I'm surprised nobody chimed in on the post above.

    Hope someone can help me out with regard to the paint chart website. Thanks.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 58,445
    SOLD for $361!!!

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

    Share Your Vehicle Reviews Here

  • speedshiftspeedshift Posts: 1,598
    Reminds me of the guy who claimed here that his "mildly modified" Chevelle would get into the nines on a good day. When I said that might be stretching things a bit he offered to let me sit in his car and have my picture taken (I'm editing quite a bit). I've always regretted that I didn't say "but I'm not 1/24th scale" and now it's too late.
  • carnut4carnut4 Posts: 574
    If you mean that paint chip chart posted awhile back showing the 62 Cad colors, here's the address

    Keep us posted on your search. Still think you should go for 61-62 Cad!

  • parmparm Posts: 724
    Thanks for the paint code website. With regard to going for the Cadillac (my preference being 1962-1964), I would if I could find one worth having at an affordable price. However, I've also come to the conclusion that I'd probably be equally happy with a nice '65 Olds 98, '64 Pontiac Bonneville, '66 Buick Electra 225 or Wildcat or a '67 Pontiac Grand Prix (all convertibles, naturally) as well as a few others.

    And so, the search continues . . . .
  • carnut4carnut4 Posts: 574
    Those are all nice cars, and in some ways better [Turbo 400 trans, etc] than the earlier Cads. Those Buick Electra convertibles are especially nice-probably the closest you can get to a Cad in pure luxury. I would also expand your list to include the 67 Electra, since it had a completely new engine that year, [a 430 in Electras], that was vastly improved over the old "nailhead" design before it.
    Otherwise, the 66-67s were much the same-at least in convertible form.
    Anyway, glad I saved the paint link for you.
  • Here in the midwest, convertible season is only a couple more months. If you are patient, with the economy declining, prices on the less "collectible" models should be coming down.

    For instance, on, there are 18 64-68 Bonneville Convertibles for sale.

    Makes me feel special, there are 30 Gaxalie convertibles of the same model years noted above for sale. I knew my 67 was not that special, so I was not going to go cross country to find one.

    However, every year a few more bite the dust, so eventually.....
  • parmparm Posts: 724
    1966 Bonneville 4-speed with Tri-power. Check it out.

    Was tri-power still available in '66?

  • speedshiftspeedshift Posts: 1,598
    Tri-Power was available through '66. In addition to all the options mentioned it looks like it might have the sport steering wheel too.
  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 19,809
    Now that is a car that I REALLY REALLY like!

    What a prize!
  • argentargent Posts: 176
    '66 was the final year for Tri-Power. For the 1967 model year GM issued a corporate ban on multi-carb set-ups for all cars except the Corvette (which added a set of tri-power 427s to its lineup).
  • parmparm Posts: 724
    I couldn't remember if the ban on Tri-Power came into effect in '66 or '67.
  • parmparm Posts: 724
    Wish the seller spent as much time on the interior as he did detailing the engine.

    The interior, while not bad, is not great either. Looks like there are some worn through spots on the console next to the shifter. Also, what's up with that red capped switch below the dash on the left side (to the immediate right of the parking brake release? Looks like an after market do-dad or perhaps this is a factory thing that controls the choke?

    Also, as long as I'm being picky, I'm not a big fan of white cars with a black interior.
  • Didn't see a subject, though I know a discussion has been done in the past.

  • parmparm Posts: 724
    Actually, I like the 66-67 Lincoln convertibles and I probably started the thread that gone blown off.

    As I recall, I was strongly advised to stay away from Lincolns as the mechanism that raises and lowers the trunk lid was reportedly a problem waiting to happen. Admittedly, it probably has enough wiring and electrical relays to make even Thomas Edison blush.

    It'll be interesting to watch this one. I'm thinking $16K is in excess of this car's value.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 58,445
    Oh, it's only about $5,000 overpriced. A mere 50% error in pricing. Let's see what the public votes.

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

    Share Your Vehicle Reviews Here

  • speedshiftspeedshift Posts: 1,598
    I know there's a ceiling on its value but it does have all the Pontiac bells and whistles. I don't think any other car maker offered all those performance and appearance features. I'm with Isell, if I had to pick one convertible boat it would that one. I drove a '65 or '66 2+2 four speed 421 Tri-Power once and just sitting behind all those big chromey gauges, with that huge hood stretching off toward the horizon, is quite an experience.
  • ghuletghulet Posts: 2,628
    I've always adored the styling of the '65-66 (especially) big Pontiacs. This one has all the right stuff for a Pontiac: tri-power, four speed, buckets, wood wheel, eight lug wheels, factory air and power windows. It's a big, luxury sport boat. I'm wondering what the reserve is on it. Parm, keep us updated.
  • speedshiftspeedshift Posts: 1,598
    Yes, she's a beauty but I'm disappointed with the dash--it's too Chevy-like for me. That low-profile air cleaner is the same one used on GTOs and I think the design goes back to the Corvette 283.

    We're all agreed that Parm should be driving Pontiac but what about a backup choice? Maybe a '65 Impala SS (only year full gauges were standard although it's still not a knock-out dash) with maybe a 396/425? Would that be nice? Or how about a 327/300 with four speed?
  • parmparm Posts: 724
    Actually, I was kind of thinking of letting my membership in the Pontiac Oakland Club International (POCI) lapse.

    Because of their performance image, big Pontiacs seem to go for bigger money. That's probably why I've been leaning toward Buicks and Oldsmobiles lately - though at $19,000, that maroon 98 convertible I like so much at Duffy's certainly isn't flying under the radar price wise.

    Here's a picky point, but for me an issue worth considering, that tends to steer me away from Pontiacs (but, only slightly). As cool looking as buckets seats are, I think I'd prefer a bench seat (but only if it has 6-way power). Why? Because, a 6-way bench would be a much more comfortable ride. Furthermore, you generally get a pull-down center arm rest which adds to the comfort level. 6-way power seats are fairly common with full-size Buicks & Oldsmobiles.

    GM buckets back then were only 4-way (sans a rake adjustment) but more often than not were usually just the manual, fixed rake angle, slide-on-a-track variety. And, this is typically what I find in Grand Prix's, Catalina's and most Bonnevilles - though I've seen some Bonnie's with 6-way bench seats.

    The manual seats would be virtually maintenance-free to be sure (that's good). But, I just don't think they'd offer the comfort I'm looking for. When I was younger, my body would conform to anything and not care. My '72 Grand Prix and '77 Trans Am had fixed buckets (with slide adjustment) and they were never a problem. Actually, my T/A had the factory custom buckets and they were very comfortable. But, now that I've reached the ripe old age of 42, it seems most of the bucket seats from the mid-60's I sit in aren't places I'd like to spend a lot of time in.

    I sat in a guy's 67 Grand Prix convertible fairly recently and while I thought the car was neat, I didn't relish the thought of doing any serious touring in it.

    So, call me annal or call me old (perhaps both?). But, I look at it this way. The last thing I want to do is drop $10,000 (or whatever the number turns out to be) on a toy I can't get comfortable in behind the wheel. It would defeat the purpose of the whole experience. I want a car that even the mere anticipation of driving it puts a smile on my face.

    So, will it be a Pontiac? Maybe. But, it's gotta be one with a comfortable driver's seat.

    I freely admit I'm being critical. But, give me credit for knowing what I want.

    Gotta go now. I'm late from my group therapy session. ;-)
  • speedshiftspeedshift Posts: 1,598
    How about a '65-7 Ford or Mercury? 390, C-6 automatic, 9" rear end--the drivetrain is just about indestructable. Handsome cars and not too big (Shifty just choked). The Merc in particular might be a lot of car for the money. Or have we had this discussion?
  • parmparm Posts: 724
    Funny you should mention that. I saw a '67 S-55 Mercury convertible a couple of years ago that was in a parade. Actually, this is probably the car that got my juices flowing wanting a 60's convertible.

    I was no stranger to Mercury in that we had a couple of new Colony Park station wagons (one was a '67) when I was a kid. But, I'd never even heard of an S-55 until then. That night I jumped on the internet to learn about them and it opened up a whole new world. I've not been the same since. Just ask my wife.
  • andys120andys120 Loudon NHPosts: 18,877
    about seats and driving position. Truth is that this is an area where tremendous strides have been made in the past 30-40 years. I can tell you that the seats in even the more luxurious cars were lousy. Yes, power adjustments help make them bearable for long trips but I'd be wary of anything with a non-power seat and/or lacking a tilt-wheel.

    2000 BMW 528i, 2001 BMW 330CiC

  • parmparm Posts: 724

    With 3 days to go, the bidding is up to $18,200. Any guesses as to the top bid and whether the reserve will be met?

    Here's my two cents. Whatever the high bid turns out to be, it will still be below the reserve.

  • parmparm Posts: 724

    Here's what looks to be an interesting 1965 Catalina 2+2 convertible. Problem is, the 1965 tri-power motor is not original to this specific car.

    Assuming the car really is an actual 2+2, how much of a "hit" does the value of this car take due to the non-original engine? Or, does it take any hit (?) since the motor that's in there is a 421 tri-power (the Holy Grail itself).

  • ghuletghulet Posts: 2,628 the whole engine not original (block)? The seller just mentions that 'the tri-power unit is not original, probably from a GTO' (was the tri-power unit on the 389 the same as on the 421?).
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 58,445
    There may or may not be a discount, depending on the condition of the car and what the new buyer wants to do with it.

    I'd say it's a wash if there's a contemporary 421 in there and if the car is bought to be driven.

    I don't think there's any such thing as a 2+2 convertible is there? The name 2+2 means
    "coupe" by definition.

    RE: Bid on 66 Bonnie --- price bid was market correct. Kruse is just holding out for Ebay over-retail frenzy I guess.
    Certainly with an 11 year old repaint and a rebuilt engine the car could hardly be called "original" anymore. Sounds like a nice car but a private party should not find this bid insulting in any way. Another $1,000 or so surely should buy it. If they want more, it'll have to go live auction with the drinks flowing.

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

    Share Your Vehicle Reviews Here

  • parmparm Posts: 724

    I must say I'm rather surprised to see that $18,200 for this '66 Bonneville convertible is market correct. Personally, I don't know whether it is or it isn't. I'm only trying to learn at the foot of the master ;-)

    But, I do know that CPI shows $13,000 as the value for a '66 Bonneville convertible in excellent condition. And, I recall you saying in the past that the 4-speed probably doesn't impact the price one way or another. So, there is a fairly wide gap between CPI and this "market correct" figure of $18,200.

    I only bring this up given your history of preferring CPI for determining "real world" values.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 23,040
    ...but I'm almost positive that there was a 2+2 convertible for a few years. Maybe it didn't last as long as the hardtop coupe, but I'm sure I've seen pics of them.

    I have a Consumer Guide auto encyclopedia, and I'm pretty sure it has a pic of a '65 Catalina 2+2 'vert, in blue. I'll look it up when I get a chance.
Sign In or Register to comment.