| FAQ |
| Members List |
| Social Groups |
| Calendar |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
My dad mentioned to me that the GTO scoop was originally supposed to be taller, ala '57 T bird, but the metal was being stretched too thin and was tearing. They kept gradually reducing the height and revising the shape until they could repeatably manufacture a part - and that is what determined the final design. K
__________________
'63 LeMans Convertible '63 Grand Prix '65 GTO - original, unrestored, Dad was original owner, 5000 original mile Royal Pontiac factory racer '74 Chevelle - original owner, 9.56 @ 139 mph besthttp://www.superchevy.com/features/s...hevy-chevelle/ My Pontiac Story: http://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/...d.php?t=560524 "Intro from an old Assembly Plant Guy":http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=342926 |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Bill Nawrot (Wino Bill) 1972 GTO Hdtp One Owner, GTOAA "Concours Best Original" 2007, 2013, and 2019 Auto-Biography http://oneownercollectorcar.com/inde...to-bill-nawrot HPP Sept. 2014 https://www.hotrod.com/articles/1972...-gee-no-g-t-o/ YouTube MCACN 2014 http://youtu.be/1IPQVPevbxU 1967 GTO Conv |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Charles |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
The Ford scoop is smaller in overall area than the GTO scoop despite the height difference so the metal would flow less and not tear when being drawn into the form. I can see the huge GTO scoop being an issue since that is a huge draw (area wise) and if the 1965 hoods were thinner gauge than the 1955 Ford hoods, you could get a problem with metal flow and tearing.
|
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|