60s-70s big Chevrolets vs. big Fords

andre1969 · June 2002

...the first time around, but I've seen them at old car shows, and pics of them in books and online. Interestingly, back then, the station wagon was usually the most expensive body style of any given model, costing even more than the convertible!

I remember the Pontiac version of the Nomad was called Safari. I think Buick's hardtop wagon was called Caballero, or something along those lines. Chrysler started playing around with hardtop wagons too, around 1960. I think they lasted through 1964, after which they reverted back to the more traditional pillared design.

jerrym3 · June 2002

I can still remember (as a 14 year old kid) how I could not take my eyes off the first 57 Merc that I'd ever seen. Regular Montclair, white/green two tone. Just kept walking around the parked car, amazed.

Another car that mesmerized me in 1960 was a 53 merc, two door hardtop Monterey, black/white top, on a used car lot. We popped the hood, and there was a Cadillac OHV V-8 in place of the Ford flathead.

Mercury interiors in those days were gorgeous. Had a "rolled and pleated" look.

sebringjxi · June 2002

My dad had a Plymouth station wagon as a "work car". It was huge and I remember the coolest thing about it (at the age of 5 or 6) was that once you started it, you could take the keys out of the ignition and play with them! I seem to recall one occasion when I was playing with the keys and Mom put them in her purse. When we stopped at church or where ever we were going she got out and went in while Dad and I parked the car.....uh oh, no key to turn it off with, she had both sets!

If I recall correctly, the Mercury Colony Park Wagon was the most expensive car delivered at our local FoMoCo dealer until he got his first Lincoln Continental--a whopping $11k and some change!

Those were the days!

andre1969 · June 2002

My '67 Catalina is like that, and so is my '68 Dart. You can start 'em up, but then pull the key out. I guess over the years, the ignitions just wore out and got loose. I also had an '88 LeBaron that started doing that eventually.

A friend of mine used to have an '82 Cutlass Supreme that had a loose ignition. He swore up and down it was a standard convenience feature. I had an '82 Supreme though, and mine didn't have that "convenience"!

jrosasmc · June 2002

Your '67 Catalina is still with you?

andre1969 · June 2002

...I'll take that thing to my grave with me. That is, of course, ya wanna make me an offer I can't refuse ;-)

Here's a shameless website plug, if you want to see a few pics of it, along with a few other cars I've had over the years...

http://briefcase.yahoo.com/andre_1969

jrosasmc · June 2002

Wow. I'm quite impressed that you still manage to keep that elderly Pontiac alive.

sebringjxi · June 2002

Don't you just love those big old barges that used to be called "full size" cars! I love the Catalina--and the Firedome Desoto, wasn't that what Jimmy Stewart drove in Vertigo?

Very cool!

corsicachevy · June 2002

Andre - the Catalina wedding picture is beautiful! It rained on my wedding day, so I'm a little envious.

andre1969 · June 2002

Glad you like 'em! I never saw "Vertigo", so I don't know what Jimmy Stewart drove in it. I'm kinda curious now, maybe it's time to take a trip to the video store this weekend?

That wedding day was kinda fun. Perfect day for it, too. It was either late September or early Oct of '94, somewhere around there. That was one of my co-workers. When I got married, it wasn't nearly exciting...a ride in the back seat of an '87 LeSabre down to the courthouse on a hot July day!

grbeck · June 2002

sebringjxi: Yes, it was a 1956 Desoto hardtop coupe, but I don't know which model. The Kim Novak character drove a 1950s Jagaur sedan - painted a vivid green color that matched her outfit. And, if I recall correctly, Jimmy Stewart's female assistant drove a VW Karmann-Ghia! Much of the movie consists of Jimmy Stewart in his DeSoto tailing Kim Novak around San Francisco, so there are plenty of neat "street" shots featuring 1950s cars.

sebringjxi · July 2002

Yeah, I love those oldies like that and try to pick out the cars on the street.....kind of like watching Elvis in a racing movie and seeing all the cool cars he beats!

Enjoy,

Hal

jrosasmc · July 2002

Are your two sons still driving the Jensen-Healey and Fiat? If so, are those two cars still in good running condition to be driven on a daily basis?

grbeck · July 2002

sebringjxi: In one of Elvis' very first movies, he drives a brand-new 1957 Imperial convertible. When he drives it home to his movie family for the first time, one of them yells out, "The Martians have landed!" In those days, that was probably a compliment!

sebringjxi · July 2002

Both sons drive their cars on a regular basis. Actually the Fiat gets more running time than the JH as that son is now away at college. I am thereby "forced" to drive it on a regular basis to keep the battery charged, brakes operating, etc. He's at the Coast Guard Academy and can' t take a car until his senior year. #2 son thinks he wants to do the same thing, so there's the distinct possibility I might have to choose between them from time to time! What pressure! What stress!

Seriously, both cars were in an excellent state of tune when I bought them, or as the British say, "properly sorted", so I haven't had much trouble with them. Typical things you'd run across with any 20+ year old car, but nothing really wild or expensive. The JH is very un-British-like as it starts and runs everytime you get in it! The Fiat is great in that it just goes! No tinkering, no bother, just get in and drive. Supports the theory of buying as much car as you can on the front end....it'll be worth it later. Both are really unique little cars with a terrific history behind both of them....but that's another whole story!

Enjoy the 4th!

Hal

Mr_Shiftright · July 2002

"fettled" is also what they say about a car that has been tested and proven roadworthy.

jrosasmc · July 2002

How come some, if not all, American V-8 engines are shot by 100k miles and need an overhaul, whereas certain European and Japanese engines aren't?

amazon · July 2002

It's manufacturing tolerances. The [non-permissible content removed] designed their engine with certain internal tolerances in the 20-30/1,000,000 of an inch. This is unheard of in the Ford/ Chevy/ Chrysler small blocks for example.

jrosasmc · July 2002

Why would the 20-30/1000th of an inch matter for engine tolerances? Forgive me, but I'm not a math or engineering expert.

amazon · July 2002

I'm talking about millionths of an inch. It affects engine durability significantly. For example, if the different wear areas are held tightly, these areas will get better lubrication, hence reducing friction, and will therefore last longer. This is just one reason among many others why tolerances are a large factor for engine longevity.

Mr_Shiftright · July 2002

Please don't use the word "[non-permissible content removed]" in Town Hall or I'll have to delete the whole post next time (I don't have a line edit tool).

thanks

Host

amazon · July 2002

Sorry, I meant no offense to anyone. I'll use the word "Japanese" the next time.

BTW, anyone can call me a Swede, since I'm Swedish.

Mr_Shiftright · July 2002

Thanks and understood, but our relationship with Sweden has been smoother.

amazon · July 2002

QUE???

rea98d · July 2002

Well, I've got a '95 Thunderbird with a 4.6 liter V-8 engine that has 212,000 miles on it, and it still runs good, other than burning a little oil. Still makes all the power it ever has, and will get 27.5 MPG out on the highway. Taxi fleets using Ford Crown Victorias with that same 4.6 routinely get 300,000 miles out of them, so my car's not just a fluke. I don't have as much knowldge with Chevys of Chryslers, but I do know my grandfather's old '86 Silverado had over 100,000 miles on it when he died, and was still running strong. Granted, the thing badly needed a paint job (my grandfather was a painter, and had spilled paint all over that truck over the years), one of its gas tanks leaked, and the interior was shot, but the engine and transmission were still going strong. I think my aunt still has that truck. I'll have to check up on it. Anyway from what I've seen, the belief that American V-8's need an overhaul at 100,000 miles is just another automotive myth. Domestic auto makers have been putting V-8's in almost everything since the days of Henry Ford's famous flathead V-8. They know what they're doing, anf they know how to make 'em last.

andre1969 · July 2002

I have a feeling that myth about American V-8's needing an overhaul at 100,000 miles comes around because, back in the day, by the time most cars hit 100,000 miles, they were often old, beat-up used cars that nobody cared about. Once they'd get to that point, people would quit maintaining them...let them run low on oil, antifreeze, start adding fluids when they got low instead of actually changing them out completely, etc.

As for Mopar engines, the small-block and big-block V-8's, as well as the old poly-head and hemi-head V-8's that came before them, were virtually indestructible, as was the Slant 6. From what I've heard though, the 360 wasn't as reliable as the other smallblocks, mainly because it had thinner water jackets and was more prone to overheating with age. And in 1989, they had a run of bad camshafts. If you got stuck with one of these gems, between 70-90,000 miles, the #8 cam lobe would disintegrate by that time. If you got lucky, then the engine would run until the car either got junked or wrecked, or abused.

With GM engines, I'd always heard that the Chevy smallblock was pretty weak structurally. Still, I had an '86 Monte Carlo with a 305, that had about 192,000 miles on it when it got wrecked. My granddad also had an '85 Silverado with a 305. He's passed on, but my mother still has the truck. I think it only has about 100-110K miles on it. It doesn't get driven a whole lot, but does get used to haul hay and other stuff, and to pull my Mom & stepdad's boat. I'm guessing that old age and overwork will take its toll on that truck before high mileage does.

One thing that's interesting too, is how well non-metallic paint holds up over the years, compared to metallics. My grandparents bought that Silverado the same year as their '85 LeSabre, which we still have. Both of 'em are still on their original paint jobs. The truck is a non-metallic red with a white roof, and white lower body. Still nice and shiny, after all these years. The Buick is a dark metallic gray. It looked good until it was about 10 years old, but then started to go. Today, the sides still look ok, but the hood and trunk are shot...hopelessly spider-webbed and cracked to oblivion. Sad thing too, is that the truck was always outside, while the Buick was parked in the garage, at least up until around 1990-91. Grandmom worked up through 1994, and there was a covered parking garage at work. So the Silverado actually got more sun-time than the LeSabre, but ended up holding up better.

amazon · July 2002

How many of those have had their engines overhauled?

jrosasmc · July 2002

Just out of curiosity, does the Chevy 350 engine have any design flaws or inherent defects that would affect durability?

andre1969 · July 2002

...but I've heard a few things about the Chevy 350 and all the smallblocks. Some of this came from a Chrysler group though, so take it with a grain or two of salt! :-P

Anyway, when the Chevy smallblock came out in 1955, it was very advanced and lightweight, actually weighing less than the inline-6 that was the base Chevy engine. The only problem is, that lightness was achieved by using lighter, flimsier components and a more fragile block. They'd last if you took care of them, but wouldn't hold up to abuse like the heavier, less "advanced" engines of the time.

As the engines got bigger, which usually meant thinner cylinder walls, water jackets, etc, they became more fragile. Evidently though, there must be ways around this fragility, as racers routinely build these things up to get much more hp than General Motors ever imagined. Then again, I'm sure they're not using stock, run-of-the-mill GM parts!

By the time the '70's came around, the Chevy V-8's were known for having crankshafts prone to early failure.

Still, the only problems my family has encountered with a Chevy smallblock was my Grandparents' 1972 Impala, which had a 350 2bbl. Granddad gave it a valve job around the 60-70,000 mile mark.

jerrym3 · July 2002

Seem to recall that my 57 Chevy was designed with an ignition switch that allowed you to take the keys out. I think that without the key, the switch could not be twisted over to the "lock" position, but all accessory power was cut off unless you turned the switch.

In those days, I never used the keys and let the car sit outside in front of the house. Those days are gone, unfortunately.

carnut4 · July 2002

Andre-I agree with your theory in post 327. Back in the 50s and 60s, 100,000 miles was thought to be ALOT-and I think people tended to neglect their cars at that point, because they would soon trade anyway. In those days, the yearly styling changes and "planned obsolescence" encouraged people to abandon their cars every 2-3 years and get the new one. That doesn't mean those American V8s weren't capable [with some exceptions] of going way past the 100,000 mile mark.
One thing might affect this attitude too-the old Ford flathead V8s were notorious for needing rings and valves around the 40,000 mile mark. Some of the early ones were notorious for failure as well. But what the heck-they only had 3 main bearings. Many people adopted an "anti-V8" attitude, and would only buy sixes. Then too there were sixes like the Mopar flathead, that were known to go past the 100,000 mile mark [taxies for example] and lasted way longer than the Ford V8s.
I think you're right about the Mopar V8s durability. My old 72 Dodge Van with 318 torqueflite had 191,000 miles on the original engine and trans, and now it has over 220,000, and it still runs strong-the guy says its reliable as hell. Of course, I changed the oil and filter every 2-3000 miles for all the 20 years I had it. My current Dodge Van has 100,000, and runs like new-doesn't burn a drop of oil. I expect to get at least another 50 thou without even a valve job.
I think may be the use of unleaded fuel, and better lubricants has increased the longevity of all engines today. But heck "most V8s are shot at 100,000"-no way-I've known of many that go the 150-200,000 mile mark-with regular maintenance, that is. And that includes small-block Chevies. If anything, I think the low-stressed, slower turning and simpler V8s would last longer, [all else-maintenance,etc being egual] than a highly stressed, faster turning 4 or V6.

carnut4 · July 2002

Yeah I remember Chevies were like this for years-my 55, you could take out the key while it was running, and turn it off and on without the key. My 62 Impala SS is like this too. Anyone kbow when Chevy stopped making em like this? I know it had to be at least by 1969, when they passed some antitheft law that mandated a locking steering clumn.

rea98d · July 2002

From what I hear, if you can live with oil consumption, well cared for older 4.6 Fords will go 300,000 miles with no major engine work needed. They newer ones will need an intake manifold or three replaced along the way, but no overhauls. Ford is on the verge of having a very reliable engine. They just need to go back to aluminum intake manifolds, and use better valve stem seats. And for most taxis, considering the price of parts for the modular engine, it would probably be cheaper to buy another car at auction than to rebuild the engine on a 150,000-200,000 mile car. A lot of taxi companies buy cars from police auctions with over 150,000 on the clock for only a few thousand, compared to over 20,000 for a new one from Ford, with the expectation of getting another 150,000 or so out of it. When the car is on the road 8 hours a day, day in and day out, it doesn't take long to rack that many miles up. With what they pay for the cars, and the mileage on them, it doesn't make sense to rebuild the engines. They drive 'em til something big like an engine or transmission goes out, scrap 'em and buy another.

Mr_Shiftright · July 2002

I've heard of such engine mileages but never have I been able to verify 300K on an engine that wasn't overhauled in some way. I've never had it proven to me but I guess it is possible. It's just hard to prove if you aren't the original owner. I'm very doubtful of it myself. But I certainly do believe that entire cars go 300K (I've seen the speedos) and even way more than that with major component replacements (e.g. Irv's Volvo). I'm up to 230K on my car and will let you know if I get to 300K without an engine (this will take 3 years or so).

speedshift · July 2002

Both my '67 and '69 GTOs had around 100k and were extremely strong. I think the fastest the '67 did was a 14.76 and the '69 did just under 15 seconds. I had another '67 with over 170k on what the seller told me was the original untouched engine that ran smoothly and didn't burn or leak any oil.

The GTO 400 used chrome top rings and the premium Morraine 400 bearings. The only real weakness was the timing chain, which started to stretch around 100k.

Let's see, my parents' '66 Impala 283 started to burn oil around 100k but I'm not sure how well maintained it was. The Powerglide starting slipping shortly after so they sold it to some guys who claimed to have driven it to Mexico City and back in that condition.

I bought a '68 Cougar 390 with an indicated 80k on it that I assumed was 180k but may have been 280k--apparently the 390 goes a long time. I drove it for about 5K with minimal oil consumption and then one day it suddenly started smoking so much I could have gone into mosquito abatement.

jerrym3 · July 2002

I've got an 89 TownCar 302 with 127,000 miles. Runs like a clock; burns the same amount of oil that it did when new.

Except for some front end bushing "squeaks", car rides like new. Changed the load leveler shocks at 110,000.

302 motor seems to pull better uphill than my 94 ThunderBird 4.6. Same rear end ratios (3:27).

Mr_Shiftright · July 2002

Most modern engines seem to run really strong up to 150-175K and then they start to falter. Things just wear out over time, no matter how well you take care of it. Nothing is a perpetual motiion machine, of course, and friction and stress slowly take their toll.

Older V8s were pretty crudely built. I remember seeing a video of a 50s assembly line with some guy smacking pistons into a block with a big wooden mallet! I don't remember which car it was though.

jrosasmc · July 2002

So these older American V-8s didn't stand a chance of seeing 100k miles?

andre1969 · July 2002

Because of the fact that they were more crudely built, to sloppier tolerances, they were often "over-built", to withstand stress and abuse. What they lacked in precision they made up for in bulk!

Also, remember those old V-8's didn't have to strain very hard, in comparison to today's cars.

jrosasmc · July 2002

Today's modern car engines tend to go up to high rpm's, which puts ridiculous strain on them, right?

badgerpaul · July 2002

I think '64 was the last year you could take the key out by design. I had a '66 Impala that the key would fall out of when it was on, but that's because it was worn out. You could also take the key's out of Buick's of the same vintage.

sebringjxi · July 2002

is when you see a 2-5 year old Honda, Toyota, Suburu, etc. that looks like it's fogging for mosquitoes! Makes me wonder what in the #@!*! did they do to that car to make it do that. My company has a fleet of Taurus with the base V6, they come in off the road with 90--120K on them and people snatch them up a bargain prices. I had a friend who bought one with 110k on it, drove it another 120k, put a new radiator and a/c compressor on it and gave it to his teenage son..... I think he's shooting for a 1/4 million!

There should be no reason today, except for a "manufacturing mistake" or unusual internal failure, that with proper oil changes, any car should go 100K or more.

sebringjxi · July 2002

Have you seen the Automobile article on the Mercury Maurader..... they tested it in Hawaii and compared it to one of the all time greats of TV Land--Steve McGarrett's black Mercurys from Hawaii Five-O! I always wished mom's 69 Marquis (429-4V) had been black so I could be my own teen-age McGarrett!

Book 'em Dano!

Mr_Shiftright · July 2002

Hey, I met one of the hawaiian guys paddling the canoe in the opening credits. Funny character.

sebringjxi · July 2002

That was really a cool show. Too bad you can't catch it on re-runs any more. Heck, I don't even get to see Magnum any more either! Ah, that's another bulletin board!

Enjoy the reruns in the A/C!

speedshift · July 2002

Don't tell me this guy is living off the residuals.

Mr_Shiftright · July 2002

No, he's living off cheap wine as I recall.

ab348 · July 2002

I dunno where you got the impression that American V-8s were short-lived compared to Japanese/other foreign makes. My experience tells me exactly the reverse is true. It was not uncommon for an overbuilt, understressed domestic V-8 to go to several hundred thousand miles with reasonable care. I haven't seen too many Asian cars in particular last that long. If it's not the high revs that do them in it's the fact that they are designed to be disposable cars. When they break, they're gone. Don't believe the myth of Asian auto superiority. They have some good qualities, but they are far from invincible.

ghulet · July 2002

Only two things, engine-wise, I can think of that make Japanese engines 'less durable' than American engines (at least in the recent past, this was true):

-Japanese engines typically had timing belts; if they snap, some of the engines would self-destruct.
-In aluminum engines, if overheated, the heads will warp, causing permanent seizure

Both are preventable. Usually, '80s Japanese sedans died due to rust more than because of mechanical failure.

Mr_Shiftright · July 2002

Japanese engines were beautifully built in the 70s compared to American V8s, which were very crude in casting and pretty inefficient for their size.

Reliability? American V8s were pretty good, and could withstand abuse. I don't know about mileages of 200K being "common". I rarely ever saw that without at least head work and rings and bearings. The bottom ends were strong though. An American V8 would run on 7 cylinders, puking oil through the rings and valve guides, 5 lbs of oil pressure. These are probably the 200K unopened engines you might have seen, the crippled survivors.

Nowadays, a 200K unopened engine is quite believable, due to so many gains in metallurgy, oils, fuels, etc.

60s-70s big Chevrolets vs. big Fords

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles