[6t5gto]

Did a 1965 radiator come with the lower tank having the threaded holes for an automatic even if it was a manual car? I pulled my radiator out of my car today and there are threaded plugs for transmission lines. I thought I heard a long time ago that it came that way whether it was an auto or manual.

[rare4k]

Yes from what I've seen they had screw plugs in them

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

[6t5gto]

My car is a tripower car and the upper and lower hose is on the passenger side as it should be. The radiator cap is more towards the passenger side as it should be, but the petcock is on the driver side. Not sure if that is correct. I did search pictures of radiators and manual 65 GTOs and did not see the threaded plugs. My car is a 12 of 64 build so is that something was an early build thing?

[6t5gto]

Also the dimension is 15 1/2 w x 24 5/8 h x 2 1/2 thick and it is a 4 core so not sure if that's correct either.

[rare4k]

Top and bottom codes on my tri-power radiator

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

[6t5gto]

Does your radiator have the plugs for the transmission lines and what side is the petcock?

[Tom Vaught]

My 64 M/T GTO did not have Auto Trans fittings in the lower tank. KC built car.
Tom V.

[Keith Seymore]

Mine has plugs.

Sept of 1964 built in Pontiac.

Eric white's book indicates the same radiator is used for both manual and auto trans.

K

[Keith Seymore]

Originally Posted by 6t5gto

Did a 1965 radiator come with the lower tank having the threaded holes for an automatic even if it was a manual car? I pulled my radiator out of my car today and there are threaded plugs for transmission lines. I thought I heard a long time ago that it came that way whether it was an auto or manual.

What rear axle ratio?

K

[6t5gto]

3:55

[Tom Vaught]

Thanks for the info that GM used the radiators with the plugs in both trans configurations in 1965. Learn something about 1965 vehicles occasionally.

Sorry for the 1964 info.

Tom V.

[6t5gto]

Mine - December 1964 Pontiac plant

[gtopont]

got my 65 new baltimore car built 3rd week of jan. 4 speed had the plugs

[John V.]

Specific Man Trans Radiators (no oil cooler, no plugs) were released for the '64 A body but IIRC, they were not released until well into the year. The KC and Baltimore built PHS records will identify the specific Rad Code installed. Even after the release of the specific Man Trans Rads, some Man Trans builds show the Auto Trans Rad code on the PHS record, others the Man Trans code and it appears random once the Man Trans Rads existed.

For Service, Pontiac only listed the Auto Trans Rads for the A body in the Master Parts Catalog so my assumption is, you could not get a Service Replacement Man Trans Rad.

I have not studied the '65 Rads very closely. I know the codes are listed in the MPC. Would be pretty easy to check if there were any Man Trans specific Rad codes.

Point is, there would be absolutely no surprise if a Man Trans build got the Auto Trans Rad. But Man Trans specific Rads may have existed and perhaps found on some '65 builds, They definitely were done that way for '64.

Possible that the same happened in '65. Check the MPC and see if there were specific Man Trans Rad codes (and related p/ns) for evidence.

I always imagined that the Man Trans Rads were released in '64 because they could save a few pennies building Rads without the oil cooler. Seems at least plausible that the same logic would have been used in '65.

[Keith Seymore]

Here's why I asked about axle ratio.

These are the charts from Eric's book detailing the radiator releases for 1964 and 1965, respectively.





For '64 it looks to me like a pretty clear split between manual and auto applications.

For '65 you can see the "smaller" radiators did distinguish between auto and manual, but the heaviest duty radiator was used for both.

It's typically based on the business case comprehending the anticipated volume and trade offs relative to piece cost and tooling and added logistics of creating and maintaining another part number. The program team would make the call. It's analogous to the decision as to whether to proliferate a wire harness based on content, or give away content (extra wires and connectors) to avoid proliferating parts.

As you might expect the radiator is called out specifically on the build sheet and, in my case, the code is stenciled on the radiator and everything matches up.











K

[rare4k]

What are your tank codes upper and lower?

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

[Keith Seymore]

For Kansas City built '65's the code is stenciled in a different location:

[Keith Seymore]

Originally Posted by rare4k

What are your tank codes upper and lower?

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

Who are you asking (me or OP)?

K

[6t5gto]

Keith, The location of everything on my radiator is exactly as yours is. I was told that it was the original radiator and have heard that the transmission plugs were correct but became a little suspicious. Thank you for the confirmation.

[John V.]

Keith, I agree that parts proliferation was the likely reason for the choices made.

The '65 chart reminds me that '65 was quite a revision from '64. All '64 GTOs got a tall radiator. But '65 GTOs got a short radiator unless they got AC.

Seems weird to me that they chose to have a Man Trans specific Rad without Trans Oil Cooler for the Tall Rad but not for the standard short Rad, the TT.

In '64, the Tripower got the HD tall Rad early year. In January, the '64 Tripower was downgraded from a standard 3.55 axle to a 3.23 axle. But it continued to get the HD Rad. I have contended this was an oversight. Sometime in March it appears that PMD wised up and the Tripower was downgraded to the same 2" thick tall Rad that the 4 bbl GTO was getting.

For '65, the only GTOs getting a Tall Rad seem to be the ones with AC. And in this case there were two versions, the Code TX (auto trans) and Code TV (man trans without Oil Cooler).

So even if proliferation was the argument, were there really fewer Man Trans Tripowers as compared to AC equipped Man Trans 326 A bodies and GTOs? I suspect they underestimated and if you check the '66 Charts, they may have corrected the misjudgment for '66.

As mentioned, the '64 GTOs only got the tall Rad. The late release Man Trans tall Rad codes were the Code 150 and the Code 159. Only the last 2 digits of the Code will appear on the '64 KC and Balt PHS docs.

By p/n, the Code 150 was p/n 3003450. It was the 2" thick Tall Rad without Trans Oil Cooler.

The Code 159 was p/n 3003459. It was the 2-5/8" thick Tall Rad without Trans Oil Cooler.

The Auto Trans Tall Rad was Code 157, p/n 3002157 for the 2".

And Code 158, p/n 3002158 for the Auto Trans 2-5/8" Tall Rad.

All early '64 GTOs got the Code 157 or Code 158 Rad. After the release of the Code 150 and Code 159, some Man Trans GTOs continued to get built with the Code 157 and Code 158 Rads.

And as I mentioned earlier, the Service Replacements were only listed with the Trans Oil Cooler.

I don't know when the Code 150 and Code 159 were released but they were not listed on the Rad Chart in the '64 Tempest Inspector's Guide that contained all Engineering Releases and Supersedures as of Dec 19, 1963.

After all this and taking another look at the '64 Inspector's Guide, I think I now understand what happened.

In '64, the Short 15.5" Rads were NOT used with AC or for any GTO. The only Man Trans A bodies that could have used a specific Man Trans Short Rad were the 326 builds without AC.

First I notice that there is an error in the Inspector's Guide for the Code 155 Rad. Code 153 was the 2" thick Short Rad that was standard for a 326 with auto trans. It included a Trans Oil Cooler.

The Code 155 was the 2" thick Short Rad that was standard for a 326 with man trans. It did not have a Trans Oil Cooler. But the application usage shown in the Inspector's Guide was the same as for the Code 153, in other words it showed the usage with Auto Trans when it should not have.

Meanwhile, the standard Rad for the 326 HO (4 bbl) was a 2" thick Short Rad, Code 156. It included a Trans Oil Cooler. The p/n was 3158956. It had tighter fin spacing than the Code 153/Code 155.

Turns out there was no equivalent 2" Short Rad released in '64 without Trans Oil Cooler for use with Man Trans.

And to round out the '64 applications, there was a Heavy Duty Cooling option for use with any 326. It was the Code 154. It was 2-5/8" thick and also included a Trans Oil Cooler. The p/n was 3158154 and same as with the Code 156, there was no equivalent for this Short Rad without Trans Oil Cooler for use with Man Trans.

So whether by oversight or a desire to avoid a proliferation of low volume components, it seems Pontiac only released Man Trans specific Rads for the 2" and 2-5/8" Tall Rads but only one of the two 2" Short Rads.

And they also did not release a Man Trans specific Rad for the 2-5/8" thick Short (15.5" tall) Rad. This was the '64 equivalent to the '65 Code TT.

The big change was to downgrade the GTO from the Tall Rads in '64 to the Short Rads in '65.

The use of the Short Rad for the GTO meant that there was no longer a need for a 2" thick Tall Rad which eliminated the need for a '65 equivalent for the '64 Code 157 and Code 150 2" thick Tall Rads.

With that exception, I think the same Rad choices carried over for '65 but because the GTO without AC now used the Short Rad, there was no Man Trans specific 2-5/8" thick Rad without Oil Cooler available for the Tripower, only the 4 bbl using the 2" Rad.

The only way to get a Tall Rad in a '65 GTO was to order AC. For a Tripower '65 GTO, I believe that meant the shortest rear gear you could get was the 3.23 when AC was optioned.

And with AC and Man Trans, you would have gotten the Code TV Rad without Trans Oil Cooler.

I realize Keith answered the question. But Keith knows I like to dig deeper and can't ever explain as succinctly as he can. Hence this long post.