[Ducks Goat]

Just buy a mini starter, that's what I put on the wife's '60 Ventura.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Birdman98

Well, the starter is toast. Apparently finding a starter for a pre-64 Poncho is very difficult. Ugh.

Nine times out of ten, starters can be easily be rebuilt at home with new brushes, bushings and a solenoid. Every once in a great while the problem may be more severe (like an armature that needs rewinding) but personally I've never run into that. The parts are available from most parts stores (they'll have to order them in) or from Rock Auto, or if you're lucky there's still an auto electric repair shop in your area that will have them in stock.

It's a lot cheaper than buying new, you're not just throwing out a perfectly rebuildable part, and if you're reasonably handy it's not hard to do at all.

Same thing with generators and alternators.

[Jim Hand]

BM 98,
Remember the '60 Pontiacs used metal tubing on the throttle linkage, and not flexible cabling. And the left motor mount had no "safety" design if the rubber portion failed. And it failed too often. The result?

The failed mount will allow the left side of the engine to lift off the mount/frame with very little acceleration input. The metal throttle linkage is designed such that as the left side of the engine lifts, it causes the throttle inkage to pull the carb throttle open! And then it becomes self controlling - as the engine makes more power, it lifts more and opens the throttle further!

Be sure and check the motor mounts carefully. Either replace them for any moderate driving, or install some sort of safety catch on the left mount, or engine, to prevent the engine from lifting off the mount if the rubber fails - especially if you plan to use the Pontiac torque regularly! This info is from direct experience!

Jim Hand

[Birdman98]

I got off my butt today and dug through my attic of spare parts. Cleaned up the starter, installed a new solenoid and the car turns over perfectly.

Now if I could just get it to start. I tried adjusting the points, etc. No spark. It looks like everything ignition was hard wired to a 12V source. The wiring is a disaster in this car. I am going to just drop an extra HEI I have here in it and send it 12V and see what happens. Also going to order a wiring kit.

[Birdman98]

Thanks for the heads up, Jim. I'll check it out.

[Cardo]

That'll be really nice when you get it done. Cool ride. Love the white roof with the red.

[389]

Does this car still have the factory 389/4 speed hydra matic transmission? If so leave it alone, its one of the best combos going for a big cruiser.. I had that combo in my 64 Bonneville and made the mistake of changing it to a 462/th400.. The car never was fun to drive after that.. Those closed chambered 389s make excellent street motors!

I have a good starter for that car if its a hydro transmission. No mini starters made for that set up besides the stock hydro starter is a rock solid unit..

[Birdman98]

Originally Posted by 389

Does this car still have the factory 389/4 speed hydra matic transmission? If so leave it alone, its one of the best combos going for a big cruiser.. I had that combo in my 64 Bonneville and made the mistake of changing it to a 462/th400.. The car never was fun to drive after that.. Those closed chambered 389s make excellent street motors!

I have a good starter for that car if its a hydro transmission. No mini starters made for that set up besides the stock hydro starter is a rock solid unit..

Yes, it is. If everything is fine with it I am going to leave it and cruise it. If the engine or trans is bad I am going to swap to a mild 400 and 4-spd. I really hate automatics, I stockpile 4-spds so I can swap all my cars.

[Ducks Goat]

Originally Posted by 389

Does this car still have the factory 389/4 speed hydra matic transmission? If so leave it alone, its one of the best combos going for a big cruiser.. I had that combo in my 64 Bonneville and made the mistake of changing it to a 462/th400.. The car never was fun to drive after that.. Those closed chambered 389s make excellent street motors!

I have a good starter for that car if its a hydro transmission. No mini starters made for that set up besides the stock hydro starter is a rock solid unit..

There are mini starters made for the ‘60, I put one on my wife’s Ventura.

[Ducks Goat]

Bought mine from Ames

[Birdman98]

So far the cleaned up starter seems to be working ok. I think the distributor is fried because someone hard wired it directly to 12V. Adjusted the points and all that good stuff and nothing. Oh well, wanted to convert it anyway. Dug around in the attic again and found a good HEI distributor so going to install that tonight and see if she lights off!

[59safaricat]

Originally Posted by 389

Does this car still have the factory 389/4 speed hydra matic transmission? If so leave it alone, its one of the best combos going for a big cruiser.

Agreed.

1st gear is almost 4:1 (3.97) and 2nd gear (2.55) is steeper than 1st gear in a TH400. When those 4 speed dual coupling hydros are working and adjusted properly, they're offer butter smooth shifting. Those are my all time favorite automatic transmission.

I had no problems getting a rebuilt starter for my '59 a few years back. I don't care for mini starters in anything old, they just don't right in a vintage auto. I really hate it when the Mopar crowed swaps a mini-starter in place of the original gear reduction units. Those gear reduction Chrysler starters have coolest, most unique sound when engaged.

[Birdman98]

Well, the Big Cat is alive! Installed an HEI and bootlegged 12V to it and hit it with some starting fluid. Sucker fired right up. Ran good too as long as it had starting fluid in it. Going to check out the fuel system later and get this thing running off the tank. So far so good!

[trynsave]

Originally Posted by TAKerry

Good deal, looks like you have some work ahead of you, but hey, its a bubble top, cant go wrong.

no bubble top in 60-2 dr hardtop

[U47]

Originally Posted by Birdman98

Finally brought our new project home. My boys have officially named it the Big Cat. Understandably so, it is as long as my 1995 K2500 Suburban.

It is an original 389 4bbl automatic car, has a few aftermarket parts on it like the Cragars, some Holley aluminum valve covers, converted to newer alternator, Edelbrock carb and a bunch of cheapo gauges along with a wood grain Grant wheel. It's like 70s street machine special. Paint sucks and has some body filler in it, but overall the car is super solid.

Got it home last night, put a new ignition switch on it and prepped some stuff under the hood and hit the key. Turned over but starter sounded like a box of rocks. After a few seconds the starter locked up. I have a new one on order and will be picking it up this afternoon.

Good thing it's not a Bonneville. If it was it would be seven inches longer than your Suburban!

[Birdman98]

Originally Posted by U47

Good thing it's not a Bonneville. If it was it would be seven inches longer than your Suburban!

I bought a 62 once for parts, so I hear ya!

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by trynsave

no bubble top in 60-2 dr hardtop

?? 1960 and 1961 did indeed have the 'bubble top' rear window. It was dropped for 1962 Pontiacs, although it was continued that year for Chevrolet.

[U47]

Originally Posted by Stuart

?? 1960 and 1961 did indeed have the 'bubble top' rear window. It was dropped for 1962 Pontiacs, although it was continued that year for Chevrolet.

All GM hardtops in 1959 and 1960 use the same canopy / bubble top. The whole roof section is the bubble top. The bubble top is somewhat diminished for 1961 because of the re-designed front windshield/front "A" pillar, where as the 59-60 windshield is a true wraparound. For 62 only the Chevy Bel-Air retains the 1961 hardtop canopy while all the rest of the "B" body cars including Impala implement the new "BOW" Roof hardtop. "C" body cars use another version of the hardtop of which Pontiac and Chevrolet are not a part of.. Olds and Buick use "B" and "C" bodies.

[Birdman98]

Originally Posted by U47

All GM hardtops in 1959 and 1960 use the same canopy / bubble top. The whole roof section is the bubble top. The bubble top is somewhat diminished for 1961 because of the re-designed front windshield/front "A" pillar, where as the 59-60 windshield is a true wraparound. For 62 only the Chevy Bel-Air retains the 1961 hardtop canopy while all the rest of the "B" body cars including Impala implement the new "BOW" Roof hardtop. "C" body cars use another version of the hardtop of which Pontiac and Chevrolet are not a part of.. Olds and Buick use "B" and "C" bodies.

The 2-door post cars didn't have the big back glass though, did they?

[U47]

Originally Posted by Birdman98

The 2-door post cars didn't have the big back glass though, did they?

No, although similar to the same contour, the post cars had a longer roof with a smaller back glass which means a different length trunk/ trunk lid. Sitting in the hardtop's back seat and looking straight up you were looking at the sky and on the contrary sitting in the Post 2 dr. sedan and looking up you would see the roof.
When my dad's 59 Cat, hardtop coupe was new we took a drive out to my sisters house with my grandfather about 2hrs away and by the time we got there my grandfather had a raging sunburn on his bald spot!