By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
The bad news? It was almost out of oil. As in, down to maybe a quart! :surprise: And low on antifreeze as well. I had recently put antifreeze in, and didn't check the oil all that long ago, and it seemed fine.
I keep a big drip pan under the car in the garage, and it stays pretty dry, so it's not leaking oil or antifreeze. At least, not when it's parked, cooled down, and nothing's under pressure. Although I'd think that if I pulled a hot car into the garage and parked it, something would leak out, until it cooled down?
So, I guess that means it's USING oil and antifreeze. :sick: But, I've never seen any antifreeze in the oil. And I've never seen it blow white smoke, with that sweet antifreeze scent. And it doesn't blow bluish smoke either.
So, it makes me wonder...where the hell is it going?! Anyway, I'm picking the car up today, and I guess I'll just keep a sharper eye on it.
The oil thing REALLY bothers me, though. Especially since the oil pressure idiot light works, and the aftermarket gauge that's hooked up works. The light comes on when the oil gauge shows less than 18 psi or so. Would a car still have good oil pressure with only one quart in it? Also seems odd that it wasn't making any clattering noises.
Nah, it's still pretty clean underneath. So, I dunno what's up with it. When I get the car back though, I'm going to try to drive it as much as possible, weather permitting, keep an extra-close eye on oil and antifreeze levels, be extra-vigilant checking for leaks, and see if anything rears its ugly head. I just hope I'm not looking at an eventual engine rebuild!
My 79 Continental went through about a quart every 7-800 miles without leaking a drop, so I guess its possible that it can be burning some without blue smoke out the back.
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Icon I6L Golf Cart
True, but I've only put about 14,000 miles on my '67 Catalina since I've owned it, and the engine was rebuilt shortly before I bought it. So I'd like to think it has a little life left in it!
Anyway, I picked the car up after work. Luckily, there was a break in the rain, which lasted just long enough for me to get it home and tucked in. It's driving a LOT better. Shifted into third at around 33 mph. And the mechanic fiddled around with the choke enough that it's running a lot better, to boot!
Now, I just need to get religious about checking that oil and antifreeze!
Yeah, I have to admit, sometimes I ask those questions about my Catalina's engine. I've posted this before, but here's what's been done to it...at least, according to the write-up that was taped to the window when I bought it...
1967 Pontiac Catalina Convertible
Original rebuilt 400 engine
Rebuilt Turbo 400 transmission
Dual exhaust, power steering, power brakes, air conditioning
Power convertible top and tilt steering
1000 miles on stock 400 rebuild
New pistons and rings
New rod, main, and cam bearings
New timing chain and gears
New water pump
New oil pump and screen
New Pontiac blueprint Ram Air cam and lifters
Rebuilt 4-barrel Rochester Carb
(Original 2-barrel and intake included)
Heads rebuild, block machined
(All machine work done by NAPA)
I have no idea how well all that stuff was thrown together, but for the most part, the car always seemed to run well. Never would start on the first try and would be cranky warming up, because the choke was messed up and missing parts. And the "rebuilt" transmission tended to leak. Oh, and it always seemed to run hot.
I guess after 16 years and 14,000 miles though, if it was thrown together really bad, it would've most likely blown up by now? While that's not a lot of miles, well, when I was younger, I used to like to show off how it would hold first gear up to about 55 mph all by itself when you floored it, and chirp on the 1-2 upshift. And sometimes, even on the 2-3! So admittedly, the car has been put through its paces from time to time. :shades:
Anyway, thankfully this visit to the repair shop didn't cost much...because about an hour ago, the water heater in my house just blew! :surprise:
Spy on people
Overall, not going to be a good story.
Why he'd think anyone would pay 10 grand is mystifying
It almost looks like one of those test mules that automakers use, where they'll take a front-end that they're proposing and stick it onto an existing car, to test out how it does with cooling, airflow, and such.
For the next project, he plans to put a 300-C front end on an R-body! Actually, that might work if he doesn't alter the front overhang.
One passage from the June 1979 column of C&D was intriguing enough to me to paraphrase it here for all ... he wrote this from Geneva, while attending the Geneva Auto Show.
Breakfasted all by myself in the very elegant Hotel de la Paix, just around the corner on the lakefront, then cabbed to the show in a lovely, clean '78 Chevrolet Caprice. There's a surprising assortment of American GM products on the streets of Geneva. Camaros and Firebirds, big Chevys, the odd Corvette, but most impressive are the new Malibu sedans and station wagons. The Chevrolet Malibu looks as though it was designed for Europe. The car is perfectly at home in these surroundings, looking elegant and purposeful all at once. I'll bet the that F41 suspension would Mr. Well-To-Do Swiss Burgher and his Malibu through the Alps pretty smartly too. Not as well as a BMW or a Rover 3500, perhaps, but a lot better than any American car that preceded it.
There you have it, andre .. an independent perspective on a car you've mentioned frequently.
"I am willing to part with it" How benevolent
Can probably make your money back this winter
Could be OK Given the resale on Accords, this could be OK if he comes down a bit
As nice as these come but the price keeps dropping
For you Panther fans
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Heck, normally I don't mind GM's '73-77 Colonade cars, but even I don't like that thing! It's mainly the home-made looking interior accents and the landau top that blanks out the quarter windows, that kills it for me.
And I don't even want to think what kind of hp the 455 was putting out by 1975. I think there was a hot version of it in '73-74 that still put out 250 hp, but for '75 I think it was just a 190-200 hp lump. A 2.56:1 axle ratio was standard, with a 2.73:1 or 3.08 optional.
A sad finale, indeed. I wonder if there are any vintage road tests published online for it?
I had a '76 Trans-Am with the 455 and 4-speed, I think it was around 200 hp.
Good torque, could do some nice donuts (I was around 20 when I owned it) but I'm sure it was nothing like the 70-71 Super Dutys.
This book also lists a 400 being offered in the Delta 88 and 98, with 185 hp, and it's showing what looks like a Pontiac bore and stroke (4.12 x 3.75) I wonder if this is correct, or a misprint? Interestingly, that engine also shows up as an option for the '75 LeSabre in California. Odd...I wonder what Buick and Olds were doing with Pontiac engines? The Olds engines were cleaner running and would have been better suited to California standards...in fact, Cali ended up banning the Pontiac engines for 1977!
Just to show how fast things got bad, the book also lists a 200 hp 350 being offered in the Cutlass for 1974. I found a 0-60 time online of 8.9 seconds. For 1975, the 350 with 170 hp was dropped to 11.4. I wouldn't be surprised if the '74 350 would actually outrun the '75 455!
I thought '74 was generally the nadir for power and performance, and that things began to improve with the installation of catalytic converters in '75. Maybe Olds was an anomaly.
Things took longer than that to turn around (kind of like our current economic situation). The 0-60 times I have are uniformly bad from '74 through '81, with major improvements only starting in '82. MPGs were such a priority back then, they didn't use the efficiency for acceration, it seems.
If I ended up with one of those or something like the 442 above, I am guessing the 1st temptation would be to yank the lump of an engine and the primitive emissions stuff out and put in some sort of crate engine. double the power, and probably 10x the drive-ability!
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
The Catalytic converter definitely improved things from the standpoint of ease to start, warming up, fuel economy, reducing sputtering and stalling, etc. And, I think it got more of the hp to the road, if that makes sense. So, a 150 hp engine in 1975 would probably perform better than a 150 hp engine in 1974 did.
However, a lot of engines still got an hp cut from 1974-75. For instance, Olds offered two 350's in 1974: 180 hp and 200. I'm not sure if that's a 2bbl and a 4bbl carb, or if they're both 4bbl and one's just tuned hotter. For 1975, the 350 came in 145, 165, and 170 hp guises. In 1974, the 455 was offered with 210, 230, or 275 hp (I wonder if that 275 hp was something that was advertised but then canceled at the ast minute...that's a LOT of hp for 1974!). For 1975, the 455 was down to 190 hp or 215.
Things did improve a little bit in 1975, maybe up through 1978, perhaps as the auto makers learned to live with the catalytic converter and the fuel and emission standards of the time. But then in 1979 it seemed performance, driveability, etc, started to suffer again, and the hp ratings began to drop. I'd say things hit a new low again around 1981-82. Tall axle ratios, all the electronic control systems they were shoving in the cars, and all those undersized V-8's (Ford's 255, GM's 260, 265, and 267) all contributed to cars that were slow, unrleliable, and that wouldn't always start. Then in '83, things got a little better. For one thing, all those dumb little V-8's got dropped, the computer systems improved, and reliability did, as well.
I think 1985 was a major turnaround year, although one reason it might stick out to me is that my grandparents bought two new vehicles that year...an '85 LeSabre and an '85 Silverado. And Mom bought and '86 Monte Carlo the following year. They were all good cars. I still have the pickup. And at 25 years of age, and despite the 4-bbl carburetor and crude electronics, it probably runs better today than most 1979-82 cars did when they were brand-new!
I've seen that 7.7 number thrown about in several places for the 1974 GTO. I think the test was of a stick shift car, which no doubt helped. FWIW, the original 1964 GTO, with a 389-4bbl, was only good for about 7.5 with a stick shift. Everything being factory stock, of course.
The problem though, is that was as good as it got in 1974. With the 1964, at least, if you wanted better performance, you could get the tri-Power. And in later years, they started shoving some pretty powerful 455's under the hood.
And, in 1974, that new GTO had to compete not only with the 360 Duster/Dart Sport, which would walk it like a dog, but also had to compete with any number of much more powerful used musclecars, that were still cheap and abundant. In 1973, for example, my Dad bought a '64 GTO for $400.
By 1974, I think Ford was pretty much out of the hot compact market, although I guess a Maverick with a 302 and the right gearing could be pretty quick. And I can't remember, but did they ever put the 351 in the Maverick?
Here's a link to a typical Maverick project car likely to show up on CL from time to time. It seems like most of the survivors are the six cylinder models which Grandpa kept in the garage-if he didn't buy a Pacer or slant six Dart instead.
My oldest brother bought a new '72 Maverick Grabber with the 302/automatic. By '77, he had removed the factory drivetrain and was preparing to swap in a 406 FE block V8, C-6 automatic and a 9" Mustang rear axle.
When I first saw his project in progress he'd just had a friend torch/notch the Maverick shock towers and was looking for a shop to narrow the Mustang axle to fit. Most surprising to me at the time was that he had purchased a set of Hooker headers which were specifically made for a big block engine swap in a Maverick. I couldn't understand why he didn't just buy a Mustang.
I've read about others since then who swap bigger engines into the Maverick/Comet. But with a heavier drivetrain and a beefed up platform to sort out, how much advantage could there be versus a Mustang build up?
Well sometimes projects defy logic---they are done for the same illogical reason as people climbing mountains amidst great suffering.
No, although I imagine that a few individuals might have stuck a 351 Cleveland in one.
Considering all the aftermarket stuff for the small block Ford V8 (better flowing heads, stroker kits, etc) it seems even more puzzling to me why the Maverick is an engine swap project for many people. But it could be because so many survivor cars are the six cylinder models.
280SLs usually aren't up for engine swaps anyway are they?
That thing is just a handful of years newer than my old car, but it looks so much more modern.
I'm not sure where the "fun" is in this car but I'll keep looking, especially if it has the diabolical floor shift. You'll spend half your road time trying to find the right gear. This car screams for an automatic.
Between the head and the block (I think) on my car, it once had a coolant leak - kind of the reverse of a typical head gasket failure, it would leak onto the outside of the engine,...I suspect that's not a good thing, and I think it happened because in an emergency I once ran water as coolant and didn't flush it out soon enough.
I love the literary style of the ad!
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
I wonder if the heater problem is a broken control unit on the dash, those cars have the weird fragile levers like a fintail. It doesn't get terribly cold in Victoria...open the sunroof and enjoy a crisp day.