Project Cars--You Get to Vote on "Hold 'em or Fold 'em"

lemko

I had a lot of seat time in these big B and C body GM cars of the 1970s. Yes, they were unwieldy boats and probably why I find the 1977-era B and C body cars a vast improvement. My best friend's Dad had a 1973 Impala sedan I would often have the chance to drive and I also had a 1975 Cadillac Sedan DeVille. They were nice to look at, even nicer to sit it, and were fine to drive as long as the pavement was glass smooth and the road die-straight.

lemko

My Grandpop had a dark green 1974 Impala four-door sedan with a matching brocade and vinyl interior. It also had the 350 V-8. He traded a gold 1967 Bel Air sedan for it.

andre1969

Was that the infamous Chevette Transmision GM put on some V8's? You would have thought after the just previous Chevymobile engine debacle that the company would have learned. Bigness = Arrogance.

Yeah, IIRC it was the same transmission. The THM200C was supposedly developed for applications of up to 250 or so ft-lb of torque, and a 6000 lb GVWR, so in theory, it should have been good in any B-body with an engine of up to around 5 liters. Of course, what's good in theory isn't always good in real life.

Another problem is that it had an overly optimistic service interval. I have a 1979 Malibu sales brochure that lists one of the car's strong points as having a transmission that can go 100,000 miles between fluid changes! That probably contributed to early failure of many of them.

As for the timing, the THM200 fiasco happened about the same time as the "Chevymobile" engine thing. The THM200 came out in 1976, and according to Wikipedia, was first used in the Chevette and the RWD X-body. I was always under the impression that the X-body used the THM350 transmission, but perhaps the THM200 was used in the versions that had the Buick 231 V-6?

Like the Oldsmobile engine swapping fiasco, the THM200 was probably more a symptom of GM's success at the time, rather than its arrogance. In the 1977-79 timeframe, GM was on top of the world, and its cars were wildly popular. As a result, they often ran out of one component, and had to swap in another to meet demand. And California presented its own challenge, when it started banning certain engines, such as the Pontiac V-8, and then the Buick 350.

For whatever reason, Oldsmobile gave the 1977 Cutlass first priority when it came to the Olds 350 engine. So supposedly, every '77 V-8 Cutlass ended up wtih an Oldsmobile engine...260, 350, or 403. GM had anticipated that the downsized B/C bodies would cut into midsized sales, and at Chevy, Pontiac, and Buick it did. But the Cutlass was a huge hit that year, selling even better than it did in '76. That was one factor that caused a shortage of Olds 350's to go into the Delta 88. And when California banned Pontiac and Buick V-8's, Olds 350's were substituted, and that added to the shortage.

I think the Olds Delta 88 was the biggest victim of the engine swap, but the Ninety-Eight might have been affected, as well. As for the THM200, I think the biggest victim there might have been any full-sized car equipped with a Pontiac 301 or Chevy 305, so mainly the Caprice/Impala and Catalina/Bonneville. The LeSabre used the Pontiac 301 for a few years, but I think most of them had 350 or 403 engines. I think the Delta 88 used the 301 in '77, but then for '78-79 either used a 305, or eliminated the intermediate engine altogether, so you went from a 260 to a 350.

In later years, the THM200 was improved, and the 4-speed version (THM200R4) is pretty sturdy if you stay away from the 1981-82, maybe the '83 versions as well. It could be beefed up enough that the Grand National and even the '87 GNX were able to use it. Unfortunately, it was typical GM fashion of launch it before the bugs were worked out, and then by the time you get it right, discontinue it!

lemmer

But this '62 Buick looks like fun for not much money.

Mr_Shiftright

nice car, fairly rare (about 8900 verts' made). Only downsides would be very hard to find body parts and tendency of the aluminum V8 to melt down. It's definitely a car where you want the cooling system to be top notch.

With the 4 bbl carb, the car had a fair amount of zip, so if this car is straight and rust free, it's a good buy I think.

omarman

small V8... 2 speed automatic.

Maybe the 215 aluminum V8 with dual path turbine automatic? One of GM's interesting (oddball) early experiments with lighter, more economical cars to compete with the foreign car "fad." I still like the freak show Corvairs from that era best. My dad bought 2 back then, a Corvair van for his business and a Monza for my mom.

lemko

Those look like 1971-73 Pinto wheelcovers on that Special.

lemmer

I think you are right.

isellhondas

I know quite a bit about these cars. I learned to drive on my parent's 1962 Buick Special and later it was my car. I had a nifty '62 Station Wagon too!

This is a very unusual one. It's not the Skylark model yet it does have the 4BBL engine. I think our HOST caught that too and I'm surprised he did. The way to tell without lifting the hood is the grill emblem.

The 215 aluminum engine was a great engine but as Shifty said, the cooling system is critical. Mine was only the 2BBL version and it would cruise without effort at 100 MPH and it would whip a 283 Chevy with ease.

The Dual Path automatics were pure junk and they tolerated very little abuse. The transmission shops hated to work on them.

Still if the cars weren't beat (as mine was) they weren't THAT bad but finding Dual Path parts today or a shop willing to work on one may be a challenge.

All of this being said, I wouldn't mind having that little 'vert!

berri

Funny how it didn't take many years for those compacts to grow into intermediates. I kind of liked the funky looks of those early BOP compact model wagons, but the coupes and convertibles were nice too.

lemko

Two elderly ladies who lived next to my grandparents had a burgundy 1963 Buick Special hardtop. I remember seeing it in the early '80s and it looked like it was in tip-top condition. Don't know whatever became of it since that time.

uplanderguy

I used to like the '63 revision and slight upsizing those B-O-P compacts got, but really, I like the '61-'62's better now. I like the Pontiac's styling the best, and would love a maroon '62 LeMans coupe with the 215 V8, which was supposedly only used in 1-2% of production that year.

An experienced mechanic friend of mine says I'm a masochist for wanting a rope-drive Tempest, but they're cute little cars I think.

Mr_Shiftright

Actually they're pretty quick--that's a HUGE 4 cylinder engine in there and it has some torque.

lemko

The Trophy 4 - half a Pontiac 389 V-8!

uplanderguy

Friends of ours had a '62 Tempest wagon, 4-cyl. automatic. I remember that four being rough and noisy. Give me that cute styling with a V8! I know, virtually impossible to find in a Tempest.

andre1969

Friends of ours had a '62 Tempest wagon, 4-cyl. automatic. I remember that four being rough and noisy. Give me that cute styling with a V8! I know, virtually impossible to find in a Tempest.

Useless trivia...when Pontiac started putting a V-8 in the Tempest for 1963, it was marketed as a 326. But if you do the math, its displacement really came out to 336 CID!

It had 250 hp with a 2-bbl carb, 260 with a 2-bbl and higher compression, and 280 with a 4-bbl. I'd imagine these early V-8 Tempests were pretty quick for their era.

In '64, when the "proper" midsized A-bodies came out, GM limited engine size to 330 CID, so the bore was reduced a bit, from 3.78" to 3.72", yielding a true 326 CID engine.

In '68, when the Pontiac 350 came out, it was actually a 354 CID engine, which comes out to 5.8 liters. I guess GM forced them to market it as a 350 though, so that people buying Buick or Olds 350's didn't get miffed that the Pontiac engine was bigger!

But, when people ask me what my '76 LeMans has under the hood, I probably shouldn't start saying "354" or "5.8", lest people look at me like I've lost my mind! :P

hpmctorque

I think the Valiants and Lancers were much better cars, in most respects, than the BOP compacts.

wevk

The Olds Jetfire saga:
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/1962-1963-oldsmobile-f85-jetfire1.htm

Mr_Shiftright

Here's a commercial for the car---the "turbo fluid" was, of course, to cool down combustion temperatures---this was before intercoolers. You can imagine what happened when people forgot to replenish the cooling fluid. I'm not even sure what this fluid was.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iieDedNEYuI

isellhondas

If they actually built '62 Tempests with the Buick 215 engines, they must be just ULTRA rare. I know I've never seen one.

Seems like too much power for that "rope drive" but I guess they did put 326's in the '63's with that bizzare rope drive, rear transmission.

BTW, that little rope drive driveshaft made the BEST prybars ever!! Even now, you can spot one in the corner of an old shop somewhere.

isellhondas

Back in the days when I had my '62 Special Wagon, a local junkyard had a wrecked Olds Jetfire with very low miles. It had been creamed in the rear so everything under the hood was just fine.

I wanted to buy the turbo setup and install it on my buick but the guy who owned the junkyard would only sell me the complete engine and he wanted a fortune for it. He really thought he had something ultra rare and worth a fortune.

I think I dodged a bullet!

Mr_Shiftright

the turbo setup doesn't seem to be worth any more than any other contemporary Olds hardtop.

lemko

You could've tried it, but I would've saved the Special's original engine in case it didn't work out with the Olds turbo unit. Funny you had a Special wagon. My first car was a 1968 Buick Special Deluxe wagon.

isellhondas

I loved my Special Deluxe wagon but my four door was my favorite.

I put on a set of duals and quite a sound system in those days. Vibrasonic and all.

Dating myself. Doubt if many know what Vibrasonic even was!

srs_49

Vibrasonic - wasn't that the springs in the audio system to give some reverberation? I remember them going "sproing" when you hit a bump!

texases

I thought about those 'springs'. Only thing I found on Google was a Fender amp from that period... :confuse:

isellhondas

There was a box in the trunk that delayed the sound to the rear speaker for about a 10th of a second and, yes there were springs.

It sounded like an echo chamber and we really thought they were so cool!

They were made by Motorola.

In the mid sixties they were factory option in some cars especially GM who simply called them Reverb. They had a switch on the dash. I think ford called theirs Studio Sonic Sound although I can't remember ever seeing a Ford product with one.

EDIT: My memory served me well!


Ford StudioSonic sound system
Ford owners can enjoy 'concert hall listening" right in their cars with studiosonic. This system reproduces music with full tonal quality. Did it work, who knows.
dated june 1964

explorerx4

From one of the posts in the article link:

The "Turbo-Rocket Fluid" was a mix of water, methanol, and a rust inhibitor", the MAIN reason for the mixture wasn't for "freezing in winter/prevent rusting"--it was to utilize the methanol fluid to decrease the intake air temperature and keep the 10.25:1 compression V8 from pre-detonating under boost. Normally, it had a max. of 5 lbs. of boost WITH the "Turb.Rockt. Fluid". When the "Fluid" ran out, a mechanical system would step in and lower the available boost to avoid detonation.

xwesx

So, basically an early meth injection kit? I have a couple friends here that use meth injection on their WRX. They squeeze some pretty impressive performance out of those cars.

Mr_Shiftright

Did the article say it was to prevent "freezing"? That's silly. Well I sure hope that mechanical intervention worked when it had to.

explorerx4

It was not in the article, but from a comment about the article.

texases

I think it's to prevent freezing in the tank that's one purpose of the methanol.

And it's not 'early', super/turbo charged aircraft engines in WWII had methanol/water injection.

Mr_Shiftright

Oh yeah, if you were using water injection solely, then it goes without saying that you'd need something else in the tank. Not as much as bombers over Germany I'd hope! (gets pretty cold up there at 30,000 feet).

stickguy

Was that 5 bullets, or 6?

http://southjersey.craigslist.org/cto/2904703471.html

stickguy

http://southjersey.craigslist.org/cto/2904684543.html

au1994

For $7500? Um...no.

qbrozen

Good engine and trans. Not currently running.

That's interesting. So if I find a rust-free car with some rust, we might have a match made in heaven!

fintail

I like how "Beauty" and "Head Turner" are in quotes.

andre1969

I also love it when someone divides the mileage by the age of the car, and then touts the average yearly miles as something low, and to be proud of.

Heck, by that reasoning, my old '68 Dart would've only gone about 7682 miles per year!

texases

For that car 'low miles' and 'always garaged' probably means 'in the shop 6 months/year'! :P

fintail

I see that a lot in dealer ads here - "low miles for year".

I also like that the Jag needs a $250 part - knowing that thing, the engine has to be removed to replace it, 15 hours of labor if you can find someone to touch it.

I assume a V12 XJS with 125K miles is usually considered to be used up.

steine13

For that car 'low miles' and 'always garaged' probably means 'in the shop 6 months/year'!

A wise man once told me that with a Jaguar, it's the "vertical miles" that count.

You know: Up and down the hoist.

Cheers -Mathias

Mr_Shiftright

Picture a whale in the vast ocean, swimming through a huge pool of krill in order to feed.

Now picture that whale as an XJS V-12 needing work, and picture the krill as dollar bills escaping in a swarm from your bank account.

lemko

Sheesh! I'd fell luckier playing Russian Roulette with a .44 Magnum with five bullets in the cylinder rather than taking a chance on that Jaguar!

Mr_Shiftright

Cars like that, with needs like that, and with miles like that, are essentially parts cars.

gsemike

They can basically kiss most of that investment away

This is only few miles away
Much better for same money I don't like the grandpa hubcap look but get some wheels and you're in cruise night for cheap

stickguy

my 2nd car (in HS) was a '74 duster. yellow with a 3 speed stick on the floor. and a moonroof.

Mr_Shiftright

both rusted cars though. I get a little woozy when they throw in repair panels with the car. "Hey, here's a rear clip in case you'll be needin' it". :surprise:

stickguy

I remember those rotted away rear quarters. My father had a rivet gun, so we pop riveted some sheet tin of some kind onto it. For some reason they got painted white (on a yellow car) but nothing beyond that. So you could see the rivets I think, but still looked better than nothing.

I do recall the kid in town that bought it from me did something fancier with it, but I have no clue what at this point.

Mr_Shiftright

If you look closely at the first Duster, notice that flat-blacked section by the rocker panels. Ten bucks says there's not a magnet in the world that will stick to anything within a foot of that rocker panel.