Days gone by...

Point 357

US Veteran
Joined
Mar 9, 2013
Messages
376
Reaction score
505
City & State/Province
Lexington Park, Maryland
In another thread I mused about my missing the 'Beaver Cleaver' days and since I have been reviving some memories from mine. Some of my favorites (without mentioning my military days) are the ones from my early twenties. One of my best friends had a red 1967 Chevelle SS396 4spd with a red interior that I loved. The closest that I could find was the red 1968 SS396 4spd Chevelle that I was able to buy at a show.



Man, I miss those days!

And the SS...

And the S&W m66 no dash...
 
Great looking cars!

Any while you're musing the past, just think of all the things we did on 14" biased ply tires. Why I'm here typing this can only be because of some higher power. I sure gave him ample opportunity!
 
First Cars and a Good Time to Grow Up

This is a picture of my first car, a 55 Chev. I got it in 63, and the picture is at HS graduation in 66. In the background is my dad's 65 Pontiac Catalina Convert. The second picture is me going to the prom in 66. I took my dad's Catalina that night.

That was a really good time to grow up as a kid compared to what we have today. Great families, great schools, low crime, and a lot of personal freedom.

I'd love to be able to drive those cars again, and I'd also love to have all that hair again!
 

Attachments

  • CSSteveGrad55ChevyAndPontiacC (800x540).jpg
    CSSteveGrad55ChevyAndPontiacC (800x540).jpg
    246.9 KB
  • CSStevePromPontiacB (800x506).jpg
    CSStevePromPontiacB (800x506).jpg
    236.4 KB
Last edited:
When I was 13 (1968) we went to Europe to visit my grandmother and the rest of the family.I thought that little car was the weirdest thing I'd ever seen :-D
 
When I was 13 (1968) we went to Europe to visit my grandmother and the rest of the family.I thought that little car was the weirdest thing I'd ever seen :-D

Hey man, when I got stuck in Rota Spain I wound up with a Renault 3 GTS. I called it "my little spanish hot rod".

Good times!
 
In another thread I mused about my missing the 'Beaver Cleaver' days and since I have been reviving some memories from mine. Some of my favorites (without mentioning my military days) are the ones from my early twenties. One of my best friends had a red 1967 Chevelle SS396 4spd with a red interior that I loved. The closest that I could find was the red 1968 SS396 4spd Chevelle that I was able to buy at a show.



Man, I miss those days!

And the SS...

And the S&W m66 no dash...

Great looking cars!! I'm not sure the camera had been invented when I got my first car but it's just as well. I went through a few "beaters" before I got one that I'd even want a picture of. But I was happy, and popular too. I had my own car ('36 Ford, 48 Chevy, 51 Stupidbaker, 54 Chevy) since I was 16 and they weren't much to look at but many of my friends were still on their bicycles so my phone stayed hot most of the time. :cool:
 
I remember in high school my friend was complaining the 69 camaro he was considering buy had a 3 speed transmission instead of 4. He refused to buy it at $300.

My heartbreak momment was when my older sister sold the 69 rivera which she inherited from our mom. She left the Islands and the car was suppose to go to me (I was a junior at the time.) So, I ended up car-less throughout high school. She sold it for $400.
 
Point 357,
My first "Hot Rod" also was a 68 Chevelle SS with 396 but mine had the
Automatic on the floor/console. It was red with black stripes and black interior. Loved that car. Also had at one time a 68 Z28 with 302 4-speed.
Wish i still had those two. Yes, even with todays gas prices.
We'll never see days like the mid 60's to early 70's muscle
cars again. But we did get to experience them.

Chuck
 
Isn't Chevy a 305 and Ford a 302???

Point 357,
My first "Hot Rod" also was a 68 Chevelle SS with 396 but mine had the
Automatic on the floor/console. It was red with black stripes and black interior. Loved that car. Also had at one time a 68 Z28 with 302 4-speed.
Wish i still had those two. Yes, even with todays gas prices.
We'll never see days like the mid 60's to early 70's muscle
cars again. But we did get to experience them.

Chuck
 
Isn't Chevy a 305 and Ford a 302???

The 67-69 Z28 Camaro had a 302 engine. The only Chevy to have that displacement. The 305 and 307 motors had different bore/stroke combinations than the 302. It was basically a 327 bore with the stroke of a 283. It was 4.00" bore and 3.00" stroke. It had a better block than a 327 and a better crank than a 283. It had better heads, cam, intake and carb than any of the HP 327s, but was rated at only 290 horsepower, so youngsters could afford insurance. The 302 engine was made just for Trans Am racing, which had a limit on displacement of 5 liters (305 c.i.).
 
While we're strolling, driving or in my case gimping down memory lane, don't forget the music. I'm sure we all have tunes that trigger memories from way back when music was really music.
 
Point 357, I know exactly what you mean. There were so many wonderful cars back then but the Chevelle SSs were somehow special. Couldn't afford back then but, was able to pick this one up several years ago.

 
My first car was a high mileage 52 Ford with straight six and three on the tree. I had a couple more clunkers before I graduated high school in 1966. My first real hot rod I got in 1969. It was a 1968 Dodge Coronet with a 383 cubic inch V8 with a four barrel carb and some other speed goodies. It was painted black and white with red lights and siren and what the car couldn't catch the radio usually could.

They just had Cruising The Coast on the Mississippi Gulf Coast a couple of weeks ago. It usually starts the first week of October every year and runs for nine days. It's only 50 miles from me so I was down there on several different days. There were thousands of old cars of all types. Every day I went down there I saw something different. You guys that like old cars might want to look into that next year.
 
Point 357, I know exactly what you mean. There were so many wonderful cars back then but the Chevelle SSs were somehow special. Couldn't afford back then but, was able to pick this one up several years ago.


Your 1970 Chevelle SS is something I can only wish for today. The demand prices for this type of car have gone freaking haywire!!!

I sold this one for $4500.00 IN 1980. Today? $60 to 70 thousand.
Keep the old stuff, it'll be worth something soon, guys.

 
While my 68 SS Chevelle 396 was a great looking car i always
had the bug for a 70 SS with the 454. Never was able to
get one of those and like Point has said, for a nice one these
days your looking at 50K easy and more.
Thanks to wbraswell for the comments on the Chevy 302
motors. It was'nt as strong as the big blocks but it could
get you off the line quick.

Chuck
 
The 68 Z28 302 engine with ADVERTISED HORSEPOWER of 290 or so,

WAS ACTUALLY 500+ I believe.

Those were the days.
 
Yeah that's funny when you think about it. In the 60's they played down the horsepower saying it was less than it really was. Today they lie to you in the other direction saying it is more than it really is.
 
Well, as a former owner of a Boss 302 Mustang, I can tell you for a fact that the 302s of the Z28 and Boss were nowhere near 500 horsepower. They were more like 350-370, if they were in good tune and the valves adjusted tight. If the valves were loose and poor gas, they would be lucky to make 275. Those cars had NO chance against an 70 model LS-6Chevelle, 450HP 454, in a drag race, in stock trim. One of my best friends got an LS-6 SS454 for graduation in 1970. No other muscle car ever beat him, and he was always up for a race. That monster could destroy some part of the drive train every year. Have you ever heard an M-22 transmission lunched? It sounds like a bomb. We pulled a set of 4.56 gears out of the rear end once that had 4 teeth left on the ring gear. Ahhh, the good old days!
 
Last edited:
Yeah that's funny when you think about it. In the 60's they played down the horsepower saying it was less than it really was. Today they lie to you in the other direction saying it is more than it really is.

Another note along this same line when it comes to horsepower is it used to be rated as brake horsepower or power to the rear wheels and in recent years the manufacturers started rating horsepower as measured at the flywheel and to me that is not a true representation. Looks good on paper for the manufacturers though.
 
Another note along this same line when it comes to horsepower is it used to be rated as brake horsepower or power to the rear wheels and in recent years the manufacturers started rating horsepower as measured at the flywheel and to me that is not a true representation. Looks good on paper for the manufacturers though.

You've got that sort of backwards. Brake horsepower is just another term for flywheel power. Brake doesn't refer to car wheel brakes but rather an engine dynamometer's water brake.

Back in the good ol' days, they rated engines for gross horsepower at the flywheel, which meant they basically put a bare engine on a stand minus accessories (alternator, water pump, etc.), put open headers on it and let 'er rip, resulting in overblown power numbers nowhere near what the engines made in reality under car hoods.

The move to net hp ratings in the '70s, which considered accessory losses, was a step in the right direction as these figures reflected more realistic flywheel power numbers but there was still a lot of room for error (either accidental or intentional).

Today's engines fall under a new set of strict SAE guidelines reflecting true flywheel power with no fudging of numbers or otherwise cheating the rules: About - Certified Power (SAE J1349 and J1995) - SAE International

In short, the numbers engines make today are far closer to the truth than numbers published for engines back in the good ol' days. Old-timers don't like to hear it but their hot rods and muscle cars made nowhere near the 300, 400, 500 horsepower GM, Ford and Chrysler told them they did back then.
 
Last edited:
Well, as a former owner of a Boss 302 Mustang, I can tell you for a fact that the 302s of the Z28 and Boss were nowhere near 500 horsepower. They were more like 350-370, if they were in good tune and the valves adjusted tight. If the valves were loose and poor gas, they would be lucky to make 275. Those cars had NO chance against an 70 model LS-6Chevelle, 450HP 454, in a drag race, in stock trim. One of my best friends got an LS-6 SS454 for graduation in 1970. No other muscle car ever beat him, and he was always up for a race. That monster could destroy some part of the drive train every year. Have you ever heard an M-22 transmission lunched? It sounds like a bomb. We pulled a set of 4.56 gears out of the rear end once that had 4 teeth left on the ring gear. Ahhh, the good old days!

Yes, those big bore/short stroke 302s were made for high-rev road racing, not drag racing. They made pitiful torque and were easily beaten in stoplight combat.
 
Seems like a few of us don't think the modern cars are as fast as the old ones. You are very sadly mistaken. With modern technology, like computer controlled ignition and fuel injection, along with modern transmissions and tires, the old cars are no match today's offerings. Plus today's cars will do it with all the creature comforts, and on **** gasoline. No old big block Corvette is a match for a ZO-6. Today's average cars with 4 and 6 cyl engines are faster than many of yesterday's V8 cars. Today's 6cyl. Mustang is a lot quicker than a '65 with a 289-225HP. I don't know if there is any car made now that was as slow as an old VW Beetle, and certainly not one as slow as the VW Van. Of course, the old cars did look a whole lot better, but they were primitive and had to be worked on all the time. I love old cars, I just don't want to drive one everyday.
 
My buddy had a '68 chevrolet chevelle SS 396/375hp. He blew it up drag racing it but under warranty chevy rebuilt it. The mechanic did an awesome job and the new engine ran better than the first one. What a car. I believe these were actually 425hp. But for probably insurance purposes the manufacturer reduced it to 375 hp.

With the weight kit with the lighter springs installed in the distributor, the vaccumne hose connected and using the timing tape on the crank we had the full advance of the timing set at 50 degrees at 2,000rpm. We staggeed jetted the carb as the how to build big blocks said. We tapped the N5 champion plugs at .032" and set the accell points at .017". We used a blue point ignition cap because it had the copper posts and was cheaper than the accel cap. It ran like gang blisters when it hit 2,000rpm and all the way up to 6,800rpm. That was the red line for the solid lifter Chevy cam on the dump.
 
Seems like a few of us don't think the modern cars are as fast as the old ones. You are very sadly mistaken...

I've got an '05 Pontiac GTO with only 4K miles on it put away in storage.

It'll be interesting to see what a near-new all-original example of not only Pontiac's last GTO but also the marque's most powerful (400 hp/400 lb. ft.), quickest (0-60 4.6 seconds, high 12s quarter mile) and fastest (175 mph with computer limiter disabled) production GTO ever might bring at auction in 25 years or so. The rarest paint option and 6-speed instead of auto should help, too. :)

Guy across the street has a beautiful copper-colored '67 he takes out of the garage once in awhile on Sundays. I watch him back that thing out every time, just a beautiful car, incredible exhaust note, everything an old GTO is supposed to be. He jokes with me about why I never take mine out but admits it would eat his car's lunch in a race.
 
Last edited:
I'm full of useless car trivia from the 60s and 70s. Horsepower ratings were toyed with by all the big brands back then. Usually they would underate motors, for insurance purposes or, for factory race cars, to get an advantage in NHRA Stock and Super Stock racing. In the 1965 model year, Chevy introduced their new big block engine, the 396, in the Corvette, rated at 425HP, then later that year, they put the same motor in the Chevelle and rated it 375HP. Hmmmm. The GTOs, and 442s, seemed to have only about 20 HP difference between their standard engine and all their optional ones. Then in 1970 their engines grew to 455 cu.in. and still had almost the same ratings, even the Ram Air Pontiac and W Olds engines. Gee, better heads, 55 more cubes, better cam, no horsepower. Chrysler had their street Hemi rated at 425HP, and in 1968 produced factory race car Darts and Barracudas with almost none of the same engine parts, except maybe the block, still 425HP. Yeah, right. In 1968 Ford took their 428 T-bird engine, put it in Mustangs and Torinos, added big heads, better intake, more cam, bigger carb, called it the Cobra Jet, and had almost the same rating as the T-bird engine they started with. Chevy L-88 and ZL-1 427s were factory race engines and were rated at 5HP more than the regular solid cam 427 at 425HP. They actually made 500HP or more.
 
Back
Top