64 GTO with 1300 miles?
 

Discuss:

https://barnfinds.com/1964-pontiac-g...genuine-miles/

https://lasvegas.craigslist.org/cto/...413106899.html

Weren't the OE mufflers staggered?

https://images.craigslist.org/00f0f_...t2_600x450.jpg

Why did they pull the heads?

https://images.craigslist.org/00p0p_...sy_600x450.jpg

Two pictures of two different engines. One with power steering and one without power steering.

For a 1200 mile vehicle why did the carbs need to be redichromated?
One picture that carbs look worn and degraded.
The other pictures look fresh but maybe too bright on the dichromate.

Why did someone install a 1965 Tri-Power Linkage on the car?

Tom V.

Hilarious!

Post 2 and 3 highlighted a number of issues with this ‘64.

Block stamp 78XW = 389 / 325 HP / 4 Speed

The list of issues is much longer on this 101,321 genuine mile car.

One picture shows a console, one picture shows no console. How many different cars are for sale? :D

The seller posted the window sticker but the photo is out of focus, that doesn't help either. The problem here is once you start asking important questions on obvious irregularities, the seller gets his back up and your chances of closing a deal just diminished.

This line from the ad clued me in:

"Im not interested in selling it to anyone that is going to drive it daily or use it as primary transportation."

Engine is missing the cover over the front of the bell housing also. Car just looks wrong for an original car.

From the craiglist ad:

"Never modified"

So which is it? An original tri-power car with the wrong block from the factory or an original 4bbl car with an intake and carb swap?

I'm betting on the latter.

That was my concern also. The 78X originally is a 3-spd. 4-bbl block, so how did it end up with tri power which used a 76 block code? The W makes sense as the factory stamped a W after the X to mark unused 3-spd. blocks as 4-spd.

Also, why not just post the PHS? Kind of hard to tell but the jack doesn’t look right; the 64 jack used a “T” style rack.

This is like the third time I’ve seen this vehicle listed for sale and eagle-eyed GTO guys always point out the inconsistencies in the pics versus what is listed. The listing then vanishes.

engine and firewall (in some of the pictures) look freshly-restored. The frame under the oil pan looks like it's touched the ground (or a jack) many many times, and doesn't jive with the 1,300 mile story.

Also - he seems to confuse PHS with the Ford Service that actually does certify cars. He says that PHS certified the miles and story which, of course, they don't.

Well, since it is all very likely a scam isn't that just as well?

The W stamping on the block is from a different set of punches than the other letters. Slightly larger font. Also the valve cover has been swapped from one side to the other in the pics. The fan shroud is from an A/C car. Our 64 which had the H/D cooling option but no A/C did not come with a shroud as I recall. I think the eagle eyed aces on this site have debunked this car on pics alone. Buyer beware.

This seems to be an exercise in deception in the hopes of grabbing the attention(and money) of a less than informed buyer.

Not a 1964 bellhousing , pic is 65 & up .

You are absolutely correct when it's reached this level, a situation I didn't see early on.

The strange thing is the lack of even trying by the seller.

The seller obviously think all Pontiac Guys are stupid and do not pay attention to details.
He is wrong.

Tom V.

ps Thanks Keith for the original post.

Did anyone mention it has the wrong steering wheel as well, looks to be a 65 wheel.

Should I save the photos and the ad somewhere for posterity, or is it not even worth the effort?

K

Well, there's some nice pictures there of at least two different cars, maybe more!

Can we all agree on one thing? The seller is a car salesman and not an enthusiast.

Yes ,it's a 1965 steering wheel too. Good call, I can't believe I missed that. I think the front seats have been redone.

I think we should all agree the seller is some kind of scammer. I'm not even sure there is an actual car for sale by this person.

I'd be interested to see how this car would do at a Barret Jackson or Mecum auction. I'd guess around 55 or 60 because it's a good looking car for sure.

1964 and 1965 Black Deluxe Steering Wheels are the same #9740545.

This bogus car has a 1965 “Horn Bar and Center Cap”.

Imagine, if you will, the new buyer shows up at an event and the experts weigh in on his "authentic barn find survivor" and he gets blasted with the truth. This happened about 3 years at a regional cruise-in. The owner of the 57 Chevy was vehement about the cars original, untouched pedigree. This was true since the PO told him so. There was a lot of snickering 100 feet away from the car.

A lot of these issues are on barn find and not on original ad so some of this might be there fault trying to make it more saleable.

And the restored alternator with silver-painted stator. And the super-shiny condenser on the voltage regulator.

This guy should be arrested

This seller - might have been bent into that position when he bought it.
And trying to recoup his loss

The method they used to access the underside of the car seems almost clever,
also seems very risky and extremely dangerous .

Alternator has the wrong fan and the oil filler cap is a repro!!!

"Bill"!

Your guys are the best!

Apparently he's getting blow back or has seen this thread.... he's changed several of the incriminating pictures last night.

Original picture of the block code area showed 78XW #408209
New picture shows 76XW #487458

Window Sticker does reflect
Vinyl Top
3x2
4spd
Dash Pad
Tach
Posi
and a few other things

Wilmington Delaware dealership

BVZ, can you make out the VIN of the car on the sticker?
The dealer is Union Park Pontiac I believe.

If it is a 12A built GTO, the eun is off a bunch even with the newer lower numbered pic. (eun probably around April time frame?)

:confused:

No can't make out VIN at all .
I don't think either of the block code stamp pictures actually are from this car.
Look more like pics he sourced from internet and transposed .


Some semi-unique things on the option content do align with the car.
VinylTop , Back-Up Lamps , DashPad , Tach


A restored UnionPark 3x2 4spd car has upward value , but they are trying to milk the car dry with the 1300 mile claim.
Seems like an under-educated seller looking for needle-in-haystack big spend prospecting investor to buy sight unseen from afar.

Virgin-istic 12A car would not have that Bellhousing or HornBar - the 1300 mile story stops dead right there, that quick. Amongst the mountain of other things that are not Dec 1963 vintage. Carpet, Seats, QtrGlass Rubbers, on and on
Underside of Trunklid and decal do look original.

Car may have some respectable provenance if it could be disclosed and represented honestly without the 1300 mile angle and associated cover-up .

I wonder what happened to all the Rare Vacuum components that would have been on such a low mile 12A ‘64 Tri-Power.

It has the correct welded throttle cable bracket.

The air horn on the center carb is not correct as there should be a “link arm” to activate the vacuum switch as shown on a complete 05B ‘64 unit.

The alternator fan looks correct to me. The oil fill cap is a repro as it has round breather holes opposed to the correct trapezoid holes

For sure a pieced together Tri-Power system. So many indicators that the basic driveline and car are not as advertised.

Tom V.

Best I can read the VIN and reasonable for a 12A build, I suggest 824P76164 or something close to that.

Pretty early Hardtop, only the Convertible and Sports Coupe in the Lemans 22 Series existed at the start of '64 production, PMD began producing the Lemans Hardtop sometime around early Nov. It was immediately more popular than the Sports Coupe and this one was the 1766th Hardtop from the Fisher Body Plant at the Pontiac, Mich home plant.

As mentioned, the EUN in the pic would be for an early May cast block. Hopefully the original block and trans are actually in the car.

76X was the manual trans Engine Assembly for the GTO Tripower. It isn't correct to say it was intended for a 3 spd man trans. It was intended for any man trans build.

The 76X was stamped by the Engine Assembly Plant.

A secondary trans code was supposed to be stamped by the Final Assembly Plant depending on the trans called for in the build.

If the build called for the GTO base 3 spd man trans, no additional code was stamped.

A "W" was added if the build called for a 4 spd UNLESS the 3.90 axle was specified. In that case, the wide ratio Muncie made use of a 6 tooth internal speedo drive gear on the mainshaft, which necessitated a unique trans p/n.

That combination got a "9" added to the primary engine code.

Late in the year and extremely rare was the close ratio Muncie. This trans REQUIRED the Tripower, 3.90 axle, HD Rad, HD Fan, Metallic Brake Linings, and Safe-T-Track. You didn't need to specify the close ratio just because you ordered the 3.90 axle, in fact you could get the 3.90 with the 4 bbl GTO engine.

And the close ratio wasn't even made available until around April. But if the build called for it, an "8" was added to the primary engine code.

The Final Plant was instructed to stamp the secondary trans code AFTER the primary engine code on the block (GTOs weren't the only engines that got secondary trans codes added in '64), but it was not uncommon for the code to be stamped in front of the engine code or over part of the engine code.

On occasion, a 3 spd GTO build would have a 2nd "X" stamped after the 76X (or 78X in the case of a 4 bbl GTO). Wasn't supposed to be stamped but human error was not unknown in the Final Plants.

A Dec built Tripower would have gotten the 3.55 axle as the standard release and the HD Radiator.

This one was built with the Rally Handling Kit. No power steering, the Handling Kit included the HD Shocks and the Quick Ratio Manual Steering Box (the option also would have included the 15/16" dia. front stabilizer bar but that was standard on all GTOs).

Climate controlled storage and only 1300 miles but brakes were replaced. Original foam air cleaners replaced. Wrong bellhousing. I see spiral shocks but I wonder if the date codes and p/ns would match. Taillight paint was an issue on the '64 but seems like this one should not have suffered that fate in just 2 months of use.

Wonder if it has original color coded fuses. My 100,000 mile GTO still has some original fuses. I bet you could find lots of clues during a close inspection that would make no sense for a 1300 mile time capsule.

Common for a restored instrument cluster to be set to 00000.0 during a restoration.

Lots of Corvette guys disconnected the speedo cable to keep their cars "low mileage" back in the day. Maybe the original owner of this GTO did the same thing.

If it legitimately only has 1300 miles, it is unfortunate that somebody so thoroughly messed with it so as to have made it unrecognizable as a low mile car. For $125k I would expect a '64 to knock my socks off with original details. A '64 Inspection Sticker and License Plate just doesn't do it for me.

BTW, my 11D Fremont GTO had the early style jacking decal. No idea when the change to the later decal was made and likely varied depending on Plant. But interesting that this 12A Pontiac GTO has the later decal.

I'm with the rest of you guys. The car is not original or 'never restored in any way'. It has had extensive messing with, and likely has over 100,000 miles on the clock. Likely a very nice, although not original, 50-60k car.

Nice Post John V.
Merry Christmas.

Tom V.