At the beginning of the month, an Ebay auction on this white '66 Bonneville convertible with 4spd & Tri-power ended unsuccessfully with a high bid of $18,200. It received a total of 8 bids from 6 different bidders.
Now, with about 3 hours to go on the current auction, the bidding is up to $18,433 and has received 16 bids from 7 different bidders. At least one of the upper end bidders before is one of the upper end bidders now.
Pretty consistent values between these two auctions. Naturally, the reserve has not yet been met (again).
It'll be interesting to see what bidding frenzy (if any) occurs in the next few hours.
Something about the engine looks kinda funny to me though. Here's a pic of it:
Now with just about every Pontiac V-8 I've seen, from 400's and 455, on to the later 350's and even the little 301, I always remembered a l-o-n-g upper radiator hose. In fact, on my '67, it loops over so far that it touches the cap to the power steering pump.
Did earlier 389's have a smaller radiator, perhaps?
They did. In '65 (or maybe it was '66??) they changed from vertical-flow to cross-flow radiators, the latter growing noticably in width. That '62 rad hose matches all the '64s I've owned.
RE: '66 Bonneville convertible---Okay, now we have had two auctions, 13 separate bidders, 24 bids and still we are in the low $18Ks. Now I trust the market has spoken to the owner.
RE: California -- I think it's hard to predict geographical influences on collectible cars except to say that a car like a '64 Pontiac hardtop is a dime a dozen out here so there are many choices for the buyer. If he doesn't like the color or the equipment he can just keep shopping; also, to sell a car for top price in California it has to be rust free. Any sign of rust and the car is dead in the water, you might as well ship it East IMO.
2+2 was a Catalina option 64 thru 67 w/66 being the only year it was a designated model and highest production numbers.I also saw that white 62 bonny on ebay a couple of weeks ago.
Yeah, I remember seeing this black '67 2+2 hardtop on Ebay about a month ago. At the time, I thought to myself, "if only it were a convertible".
$14,800 just seems like awfully strong money for a non-convertible '67 2+2 - unless this was absolutely the finest in captivity and Elvis drove it or something.
...looking at the trunk pic of that '64 Bonneville. Did the Chevy B-body and the Pontiac B-body use a different gas tank design? I just seem to remember some Chevies had a deep well, with the gas tank ahead of it, similar to what Ford has done (and still does) with their big cars. The trunk of that '64 Bonneville though, makes me think more of my '67 Catalina, which has a large, shallow gas tank mounted under the trunk floor, with no deep well.
Just seems kinda weird that GM would differentiate the Chevy and the Pontiac that much. I mean, cosmetic differences and engine/tranny differences are one thing, but changing the gas tanks seems a bit excessive (and expensive). Unless I'm just mixing up different years, here!
I can vouch via personal observation that '59, '61, '63, '64, '65 & '66 full-size Pontiacs all have flat tanks under the trunk pan; no 'deep' tanks ahead of the pan. I try and steer clear of Chevys, so no info from me there...
It may seem weird, but the divisions were probably 97% autonomous back then- including design & engineering. VERY few items were shared among full-sizers. With everybody's frames & suspensions being different, it's easy to understand different tanks, too.
I have to agree with Shiftright here. The '64 Bonneville coupe is a nice design and all, but other than the tri-power, this particular example had nothing 'special' going for it from the factory (buckets, 421, four-speed, power goodies, etc.). It is very nice that it's unrestored and in this condition, but still, it's not perfect. In this economy and it being winter, I have to wonder how much this cat thinks he's gonna get for this car if he's actually scoffed at $8700.
$14,100 didn't take this '65 Catalina 2+2 convertible last time. Let's see where it winds up this time. With over 4 days to go, the bidding is up to $10,099.
Why, after the first run of bids on E-bay failed to meet the reserve, do these owners put the cars out again without budging on the reserve price? To me, putting a vehicle on E-bay and letting buyers from all over the country bid on it is about the best way to judge its true worth. The market has pretty much spoken; if the owner doesn't like it, that's too bad. Either sell the car or stop putting it out for auction with the same reserve price. Can't these owners take a hint?
ANY e-Bay auction is a gamble; a gamble that the guy who is looking for your car specifically has bothered to search for that car within the small 7-day time-frame of your auction. Re-running the auction exposes your item to more people, some repeats who may reconsider, other who didn't see it the first time and are looking for it.
One 7-day auction with --say-- 75 or even 100 hits is NOT a true representation of the market for that item. If the auctions ran for 3 months (God forbid!!) and got 2000 hits, then of course they'd be a MUCH better representation of the item's market value.
I bet it would be remarkably close, the results from 7 days or 3 months. If anything, the bidders who are right there and bidding hot within the 7 days represent the most active, anxious and determined buyers in the US at the moment. They've come to Ebay with checkbook in hand. I don't see why they'd be any different, smarter or dumber than the bidder who shows up in 3 months.
The E-bay auction for the 1965 Catalina 2+2 convertible topped out at $11,650, which is less than the first auction. Maybe the owner will take the hint.
This mild resto-mod '64 Bonneville is still for sale. The high bid at the end of Dec. was $8,700 which the seller turned down. I found out today this car is still for sale and the asking price is $14,900 - which would probably be about right if it were a convertible. But, for a hardtop, that seems stratospheric to me.
I sense the Classic Car dicussion forum is crawling to a halt.
While I realize this Bonneville http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item- =1875004342 has been the subject of earlier discussion, I can remember a time not long ago when a follow-up post (like the one immediately above) about a neat car like this would have elicited tons of responses.
I can tell you that personally I find it less enjoyable when a neat car is posted and the general discussion centers around how overvalued the car (seemingly always) is. True or not- ultimately it boils down to whether the buyer & seller can agree on a price and nothing more.
But what about the car itself?? I'm interested in talking about specs & features, much less so about investment return.
...we've pretty much discussed that particular car at length already, and most of us agreed that the $8700 is at the high end of ballpark for that car. $14,900 is nuts, especially in the current economic environment. It's nice, but that just isn't a fifteen thousand dollar car.
Your points are valid and I'm glad to read them. The reason I gave the updated post about the $14,900 asking price is because heretofore it hadn't been stated. Just thought you all would be interested in knowing about it.
Agree or disagree, it's nice to see some activity in the discussion groups of domestic cars from the 1960's. I feel that the interest in these cars in this discussion group is waning while cars like Volvos and German cars (which I'm sure are interesting in their own right) seem to be capturing the lions share of attention these days.
Thought the previous auction price was much lower.
Had my 67 Galaxie Convertible out on Sunday - drove it about 5 miles just to keep everything lubed and functioning. Man, the car is about 100 times better with the top down.
Posting drops because it's depressing to not be able to drive the car.
However, it' been a good day. The admin assistant here just dropped a new heavy duty 3-hole punch off; now-a-days that feels extravagent. My old one is being dumped into the vacant position's cube, if they ever hire someone.
I traded my 59 Chevy Impala HT East Coast {slightly rusty in rear qtrs) on a 60 Cat 2dr post sedan, it was "different" the 389 was a lo compression variety with a AFB, dual exhaust rated at 281 hp. The lo Comp 2bbl was rated at 215 hp single exhaust. It had a light duty 3 speed stick on the column- I changed that over to a floor shifted from Hurst. Once it was rolling it would fly.. I never checked as to what the rear end ratio was. I wouldn't mend having it back now-no rust and straight body. I traded it in on a 66 Dodge Charger in 68. wouldn't mind the 66 either.....
Hudnut2-- For 1961: the only 8.6:1 389 4bbl SyncroMesh available in the Series 23 Catalina was code B4 (special order). The only available axle ratios were 3.23 (standard), 3.08 (economy) or 3.42 (performance). Did you by chance ever notice a paint daub on one rear axle end? Yellow indicates 3.08, brown for 3.23 and white for 3.42. In all likelyhood, 1960 was exactly the same (except the Catalina was Series 21 in '60).
I know I could look it up in my '64 Pontiac brochure, but I'll throw this out to the group. What was the difference between a Bonneville and a Bonneville Brougham? I suspect the Brougham has more "stuff". Kind of like the difference between a 65-66 Olds 98 Sedan and the 98 LS.
Check out the head rests. Pretty cutting edge for 1966.
parm- in '64-66 the Bonneville Brougham option was an interior upholstery upgrade for the 4-dr hardtops only. It was offered from '64-70, tho the body styles it was offered on changed and more features were added to the option in later years.
Catalina: vinyl seats, thinly padded vinyl door trim, no door carpeting. I think you could get cloth in the 4-door pillared sedan, but everything else was vinyl.
Ventura: trim package for the Catalina, added nicer vinyl, carpet on the lower door panels, maybe more fake wood, pull straps on the doors, etc.
Executive/Star Chief: basically a Catalina interior in the bigger Bonneville body. As for bigger, all that extra length was added in the trunk, and even though it had a longer wheelbase the passenger cabin for the Bonneville/Executive was the same size as the Catalina.
Bonneville: top-grade vinyl seats, thicker-padded door panels, larger arm rests, carpeted lower door panels, etc.
Brougham: high-quality cloth interior, using that ritzy stuff (jaquard?) that was common on Cadillacs and such back then, not the cheaper nylon "panty-cloth" type stuff. The Broughams I've seen had cloth door panels too.
The Brougham was probably Pontiac's first attempt to climb into Electra/98 territory, so they offered appropriate interiors. In the 70's the Grand Ville took over that role, but around '76 the Bonneville Brougham reverted to that role. In the later 70's, the Brougham had the same kind of pimped-up, loose pillow-look velour interiors that you'd see in an Electra, 98, and cloth-interior Caddies.
Yes, you could get cloth inserts for AT LEAST the Catalina 4-dr sedan -as I own a '64 so equipped- but I cannot verify for the other Catalina body styles.
For the '64 Bonneville, you could get Preston cloth & expanded Morrokide (Pontiac's superb leather-imitation vinyl which has an amazing longevity), straight Morrokide, or genuine leather/Morrokide in the Bonneville convertible only. The Brougham was Preston cloth & Morrokide only, with a 'recommended' Cordova top.
But the Catalina for '63-65 did not have any wood. Bonnevilles & GPs did, but it was REAL wood, not fake (I don't believe the SC got wood trim, I don't think so). GPs featured it on the dash & the steering wheel spokes. It wasn't until '67 that Pontiac's interior wood changed over to plastic-imitation.
For '64, and probably a few surrounding years, the Ventura did NOT get door pull straps nor door panel carpeting (the GP did have the door panel carpeting). The primary feature of the Ventura option was Tri-tone upholstery, with matching tri-tone door panels. They were quite attractive; I had a burgandy/red/white Ventura sedan years back and was easily able to sell the interior when I parted out the car. The upholstery had a bit more padding & contour than a non-Ventura Catalina, also.
I never did check the axle ratio on the 60 Cat, but thanks for the color code tidbit. I think that it probably had the 3.08 ratio, once it was rolling, it would move. Coming out of Glendale, AZ going towards Luke AFB it was four lane, and a guy who I worked with, had a 66 427 Chevy (rich dad?} we would "test" the road.. I saw alot of that Chevy's taillight.
I'd say the current $8,500 is plenty. Hate to think what the reserve is.
Check out the size of the trunk lid! Reminds me of an aircraft carrier - with enough room underneath to carry the golf bags for a foursome or two.
I'm trying to decide if I like it better with or without the rear wheel skirts. Also, to my eye, this is one of the few convertibles that may actually look better with the top "up".
At least this Bonneville is not stuck out on the west or east coast. We're having a particularly snowy winter here in Indiana - but then, so is everybody east of the Mississippi and north of the Mason-Dixon. An inspection trip down to Alabama would not be without its appeal right about now.
Hope to get enough comments to fill this car's trunk.
Keeping in mind we're judging from smallish, slightly fuzzy snapshots...
Car looks veryy nice & straight. I never cared for skirtless Bonnes- they have no chrome trim on the rear wheel openings so they don't match the fronts plus the lower body is broken, however, it's easily overlooked with flashy enough wheels/caps, like these hard-to-find spinners. I also always preferred the earlier Bonnes; '66s seem a bit plain without the rear grillework of '63-65. Looks like a low-optioned car, maybe only PS/PB. If your interested and go inspect it, check those big die-cast rocker moldings well; they'd be pricey to have restored. Some of the interior shots look like there's some weathering (beyond the obvious leather insert aging).
Overall: not the most desirable for the Bonne enthusiast, but a great looking cruiser for the 'marque unattached'. I won't guess on it's FMV based on these pics alone, but 8500 seems a good starting point for a clean, low-miles, original, top-line convertible.
...judging from the amount of cracking in the leather inserts, and the fading of the carpet, I'd question either the mileage or the claim that it's always been garaged.
I do like the big '66 Pontiacs, but I like the '65's better...I think the forward thrust of the headlights gives a sportier look. I'd forgotten about the rear-end treatment on the '66 too. The taillights just seem kinda plain, compared to the rest of the car.
Parm, as for that trunk lid, well, Pontiac Bonnevilles back then must have had some of the longest trunks in the industry! They rode a 3-inch longer wheelbase than the Catalina, and I think were about 8 or 9 inches longer overall, but all that length was in the trunk, whereas in something like an Electra or 98, some of the extra length would have showed up in the passenger cabin (mainly the rear seat).
As for the price, considering there's only one bid on it and the auction is half over, I'd say it's a bit overpriced. And "above average condition" has got to be about the most over-abused terms ever, when it comes to old cars. When you figure the "average" 1966 car was junked years ago, well then EVERYTHING that's out there and still running is above average!!
I agree, the price is more than fair, maybe even over-priced. But as was mentioned, one does really have to see the car in "person". Still, the price would be plenty even for a pretty nice car. It could even be a shill bid since it is a) solitary and b) below reserve---rather suspicious, as we Ebay veterans know (wink, wink).
Let me recite the NEW MANTRA for the collectible car market in 2003:
"Nobody wants projects anymore"
In other words, people will still pay top dollar for top cars, but cars with "needs" brings a very steep decline in pricing from average on down to poor.
Isn't a fixed price "auction" against the very principal of e-Bay? Whatever.
Yeah- without that '61 being a 4-spd with an aluminum nose- it's way overpriced. And why would anyone put a new top on a car that needed to be completely restored???
The seller describes the car has having "minor problems." If these really are "minor problems" (which is debatable, considering that the problems include a missing air conditioning compressor and rust spots), he should fix them before putting the car up for sale. Either that, or start asking a realistic price.
Comments
Just curious. For cars like this '64 Bonneville, do you see much difference in the prices paid across the country?
This car happens to be in Tennessee where the cost of living is less than California.
At the beginning of the month, an Ebay auction on this white '66 Bonneville convertible with 4spd & Tri-power ended unsuccessfully with a high bid of $18,200. It received a total of 8 bids from 6 different bidders.
Now, with about 3 hours to go on the current auction, the bidding is up to $18,433 and has received 16 bids from 7 different bidders. At least one of the upper end bidders before is one of the upper end bidders now.
Pretty consistent values between these two auctions. Naturally, the reserve has not yet been met (again).
It'll be interesting to see what bidding frenzy (if any) occurs in the next few hours.
Here's a '62 Bonneville convertible that looks like what a mild hot rodder may have done to it at the time.
Pretty car.
At $26,500, pretty high price as well.
Now with just about every Pontiac V-8 I've seen, from 400's and 455, on to the later 350's and even the little 301, I always remembered a l-o-n-g upper radiator hose. In fact, on my '67, it loops over so far that it touches the cap to the power steering pump.
Did earlier 389's have a smaller radiator, perhaps?
RE: '66 Bonneville convertible---Okay, now we have had two auctions, 13 separate bidders, 24 bids and still we are in the low $18Ks. Now I trust the market has spoken to the owner.
RE: California -- I think it's hard to predict geographical influences on collectible cars except to say that a car like a '64 Pontiac hardtop is a dime a dozen out here so there are many choices for the buyer. If he doesn't like the color or the equipment he can just keep shopping; also, to sell a car for top price in California it has to be rust free. Any sign of rust and the car is dead in the water, you might as well ship it East IMO.
2+2 was a Catalina option 64 thru 67 w/66 being the only year it was a designated model and highest production numbers.I also saw that white 62 bonny on ebay a couple of weeks ago.
Yeah, I remember seeing this black '67 2+2 hardtop on Ebay about a month ago. At the time, I thought to myself, "if only it were a convertible".
$14,800 just seems like awfully strong money for a non-convertible '67 2+2 - unless this was absolutely the finest in captivity and Elvis drove it or something.
Did we ever come to a consensus as to a reasonable value for this car?
Did we ever come to a consensus as to a reasonable value for this car?
Just seems kinda weird that GM would differentiate the Chevy and the Pontiac that much. I mean, cosmetic differences and engine/tranny differences are one thing, but changing the gas tanks seems a bit excessive (and expensive). Unless I'm just mixing up different years, here!
It may seem weird, but the divisions were probably 97% autonomous back then- including design & engineering. VERY few items were shared among full-sizers. With everybody's frames & suspensions being different, it's easy to understand different tanks, too.
$14,100 didn't take this '65 Catalina 2+2 convertible last time. Let's see where it winds up this time. With over 4 days to go, the bidding is up to $10,099.
One 7-day auction with --say-- 75 or even 100 hits is NOT a true representation of the market for that item. If the auctions ran for 3 months (God forbid!!) and got 2000 hits, then of course they'd be a MUCH better representation of the item's market value.
This mild resto-mod '64 Bonneville is still for sale. The high bid at the end of Dec. was $8,700 which the seller turned down. I found out today this car is still for sale and the asking price is $14,900 - which would probably be about right if it were a convertible. But, for a hardtop, that seems stratospheric to me.
While I realize this Bonneville http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item- =1875004342 has been the subject of earlier discussion, I can remember a time not long ago when a follow-up post (like the one immediately above) about a neat car like this would have elicited tons of responses.
Where is everybody???????
But what about the car itself?? I'm interested in talking about specs & features, much less so about investment return.
Agree or disagree, it's nice to see some activity in the discussion groups of domestic cars from the 1960's. I feel that the interest in these cars in this discussion group is waning while cars like Volvos and German cars (which I'm sure are interesting in their own right) seem to be capturing the lions share of attention these days.
Just an observation.
Thought the previous auction price was much lower.
Had my 67 Galaxie Convertible out on Sunday - drove it about 5 miles just to keep everything lubed and functioning. Man, the car is about 100 times better with the top down.
Posting drops because it's depressing to not be able to drive the car.
However, it' been a good day. The admin assistant here just dropped a new heavy duty 3-hole punch off; now-a-days that feels extravagent. My old one is being dumped into the vacant position's cube, if they ever hire someone.
I know I could look it up in my '64 Pontiac brochure, but I'll throw this out to the group. What was the difference between a Bonneville and a Bonneville Brougham? I suspect the Brougham has more "stuff". Kind of like the difference between a 65-66 Olds 98 Sedan and the 98 LS.
Check out the head rests. Pretty cutting edge for 1966.
A Brougham is an old carriage term, and should mean either a carriage or an automobile with closed passenger compartment but open driver compartment.
In the 60s, it became kitschy to substitute brougham for an option package of some sort.
"Opera coupe" or "town car" or "coupe de ville" are other pretentious misnomers used by GM & Ford.
Catalina: vinyl seats, thinly padded vinyl door trim, no door carpeting. I think you could get cloth in the 4-door pillared sedan, but everything else was vinyl.
Ventura: trim package for the Catalina, added nicer vinyl, carpet on the lower door panels, maybe more fake wood, pull straps on the doors, etc.
Executive/Star Chief: basically a Catalina interior in the bigger Bonneville body. As for bigger, all that extra length was added in the trunk, and even though it had a longer wheelbase the passenger cabin for the Bonneville/Executive was the same size as the Catalina.
Bonneville: top-grade vinyl seats, thicker-padded door panels, larger arm rests, carpeted lower door panels, etc.
Brougham: high-quality cloth interior, using that ritzy stuff (jaquard?) that was common on Cadillacs and such back then, not the cheaper nylon "panty-cloth" type stuff. The Broughams I've seen had cloth door panels too.
The Brougham was probably Pontiac's first attempt to climb into Electra/98 territory, so they offered appropriate interiors. In the 70's the Grand Ville took over that role, but around '76 the Bonneville Brougham reverted to that role. In the later 70's, the Brougham had the same kind of pimped-up, loose pillow-look velour interiors that you'd see in an Electra, 98, and cloth-interior Caddies.
For the '64 Bonneville, you could get Preston cloth & expanded Morrokide (Pontiac's superb leather-imitation vinyl which has an amazing longevity), straight Morrokide, or genuine leather/Morrokide in the Bonneville convertible only. The Brougham was Preston cloth & Morrokide only, with a 'recommended' Cordova top.
But the Catalina for '63-65 did not have any wood. Bonnevilles & GPs did, but it was REAL wood, not fake (I don't believe the SC got wood trim, I don't think so). GPs featured it on the dash & the steering wheel spokes. It wasn't until '67 that Pontiac's interior wood changed over to plastic-imitation.
I'd say the current $8,500 is plenty. Hate to think what the reserve is.
Check out the size of the trunk lid! Reminds me of an aircraft carrier - with enough room underneath to carry the golf bags for a foursome or two.
I'm trying to decide if I like it better with or without the rear wheel skirts. Also, to my eye, this is one of the few convertibles that may actually look better with the top "up".
At least this Bonneville is not stuck out on the west or east coast. We're having a particularly snowy winter here in Indiana - but then, so is everybody east of the Mississippi and north of the Mason-Dixon. An inspection trip down to Alabama would not be without its appeal right about now.
Hope to get enough comments to fill this car's trunk.
Car looks veryy nice & straight. I never cared for skirtless Bonnes- they have no chrome trim on the rear wheel openings so they don't match the fronts plus the lower body is broken, however, it's easily overlooked with flashy enough wheels/caps, like these hard-to-find spinners. I also always preferred the earlier Bonnes; '66s seem a bit plain without the rear grillework of '63-65. Looks like a low-optioned car, maybe only PS/PB. If your interested and go inspect it, check those big die-cast rocker moldings well; they'd be pricey to have restored. Some of the interior shots look like there's some weathering (beyond the obvious leather insert aging).
Overall: not the most desirable for the Bonne enthusiast, but a great looking cruiser for the 'marque unattached'. I won't guess on it's FMV based on these pics alone, but 8500 seems a good starting point for a clean, low-miles, original, top-line convertible.
I do like the big '66 Pontiacs, but I like the '65's better...I think the forward thrust of the headlights gives a sportier look. I'd forgotten about the rear-end treatment on the '66 too. The taillights just seem kinda plain, compared to the rest of the car.
Parm, as for that trunk lid, well, Pontiac Bonnevilles back then must have had some of the longest trunks in the industry! They rode a 3-inch longer wheelbase than the Catalina, and I think were about 8 or 9 inches longer overall, but all that length was in the trunk, whereas in something like an Electra or 98, some of the extra length would have showed up in the passenger cabin (mainly the rear seat).
As for the price, considering there's only one bid on it and the auction is half over, I'd say it's a bit overpriced. And "above average condition" has got to be about the most over-abused terms ever, when it comes to old cars. When you figure the "average" 1966 car was junked years ago, well then EVERYTHING that's out there and still running is above average!!
Let me recite the NEW MANTRA for the collectible car market in 2003:
"Nobody wants projects anymore"
In other words, people will still pay top dollar for top cars, but cars with "needs" brings a very steep decline in pricing from average on down to poor.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item- =2404077877&category=6418
Yeah- without that '61 being a 4-spd with an aluminum nose- it's way overpriced. And why would anyone put a new top on a car that needed to be completely restored???
He should kick himself in the butt for letting that much money go.