Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
1960's Pontiacs
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1755252155
And, it's in great shape too!
Tagged:
0
Comments
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.
http://autocolorlibrary.com
Keep us posted on your search. Still think you should go for 61-62 Cad!
And so, the search continues . . . .
Otherwise, the 66-67s were much the same-at least in convertible form.
Anyway, glad I saved the paint link for you.
For instance, on Collectorcartraderonline.com, 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.....
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1873503917
Was tri-power still available in '66?
What a prize!
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.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1873084935
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.
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?
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. ;-)
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.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
Pontiac never let exact terminology get in the way of marketing. GTO wasn't a homologated Gran Turismo. Grand Prix never ran in one (except the stoplight variety).
The trips could be off any Pontiac from 1958-66, not just a GTO. They sold a ton of Tri-Power Catalinas in the early '60s.
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
Per the magazine, the 2+2 first showed up in 1964 as on option package on the Catalina. Again, in 1965 it was a Catalina option. In 1966 it was a distinct model of it's own. The 2+2's last hurrah was in '67, again as an option package.
Collector Car's article profiles generally include a sidebar about recent values. Interestingly enough, they use CPI as their reference source for values.
Ah, well, no big deal.
66 Pontiac: By "market correct" I mean "high retail", and I think with an add-on for tri-power, and an ad-on for knowing the history and owenrship (called "documented provenance" in the trade), and an add-on for low miles, you could justify going over CPI, as CPI does not factor these premiums in. Tri-power alone is often 25%.
But I'd have to see the car. If I saw tape lines for the repaint or rusty manifolds, etc., I'd knock the car hard---as might the bidders who are bidding blind on this baby.
The only production figures I see listed are for 1966, when 6,383 were built. They don't break it down by body style though. All other years it's just listed in with regular Catalina production, since it was just an option package in those other years.
As for the nomenclature, I guess they called it 2+2 partly because it came standard with bucket seats up front. They still had a bench in the back though, didn't they? I mean, it wasn't 4 buckets like a '66 Charger or anything, was it?
But, the gas guage doesn't work?
Why don't people take the time and trouble to fix things like that? I mean, they spend thousands of dollars on the car but don't fix a lousy gas guage?
And, brother, that Poncho NEEDS a functioning gas guage! Open up all of those carbs for a block, and you'll use three gallons!
With a little less than 2 days to go, the bidding on this '65 2+2 convertible is up to $13,952 (and 26 cents!). So, where's the price ceiling on this car?
Pretty cool color combination if you ask me. The non-original tri-power set up, automatic transmission and manually operated top (weren't power tops standard on all full-size GM convertibles back then?) probably keeps the hard-core muscle car guys &/or collectors away and thus keeps the value from attaining orbit status.
This car seems to look good in all the right places. If only it had a 6-way power drivers seat!
Fixing the turn signal indicator involves removing the steering wheel which requires a puller. The top was probably power but the hydraulics are leaking so the top has been disconnected from the raising mechanism--very common. Small stuff but all this plus the gas gauge suggests the current owner isn't a perfectionist.
What's with painting the 8-lugs black? Aside from that the car looks good, or as good as you can tell from the photos.
If anything I think it's the color that holds the car back. Color might be the most important thing, especially to guys who just want a convertible, not necessarily a piece of Pontiac history. Different is not necessarily good.
I do like that color too. Actually, I think my Mom's '66 was kind of that color. I don't know, it's been ages since I've seen a pic of it. It mght've been more of a goldish or champagne, but I recall kind of a greenish tint.
I wonder where the bidding will stop.
The buckets seats are cool to look at but, I suspect they're way too upright for me.
Speedshift, what's up with the color? Sure, it's not "retail red", but I rather like the metallic green. Then again, I'd prefer bucket seats too. Of course, if GM would've made 6-way power bucket seats back then, I'd be all over them.
I don't know if it's that most people only like certain colors (could well be, that's why the same basic colors tend to hang around) or if they're afraid someone will say "that's a weird color".
Colors go in and out of fashion but that particular shade of green has been out longer than it's been in--how many cars have you seen that color? It's kind of '60s trendy and trendy doesn't usually have staying power. Like that Lime Gold that Mustangs and Cougars came in back then and hasn't been seen since. Or like the Avocado Green and Harvest Gold that instantly identify appliances from the late '60s.
Maybe it's just me. Color is my life ;-).
Parm, GM did sell power buckets (driver's side only, tilting, which indicates to me that the fore and aft are still manual) for the '65 big Pontiacs ($71 option). Good luck finding one. I imagine it's even more rare than most of the options that you find on fairly 'loaded' Pontiacs of the era (tilt wheel, a/c, power windows, 8-tracks with reverb, etc.).
The 8-lug rims being black on the e-Bay car is correct for '64-68 8-lugs.
You could also get the 2+2 option on the convertible in '64 (the 2+2 was available as a convert or 2-dr hardtop in all 4 model/option years).
"GTO" Tri-Powers can indeed be used on full-size Pontiacs, as they both use Pontiac engines. The only diff is mechanical vs. vacuum linkage (which is why you are a fool to pay a premium for a "GTO Tri-Power" over one from a Bonneville). The qualifier is not model interchanges, but year interchanges. '65 & 66 (and later) heads can swap Tri-Ps, '64 and earlier are different and will not bolt up to post-65 heads.
Otherwise, the assertion I thought I read earlier that the 2+2 tri-power is 'the same' (given that GTO was offered with 389 only, 2+2 had 421s only) is obviously wrong.