[Stuart]

That 3.9 seconds from zero to 60 is probably one of the most controversial test numbers ever published in a car magazine - it's been the topic of discussion in many subsequent articles (even in C & D) over the years. Considering the skinny bias ply tires that were on the car, I think it was the result of an overeager thumb on the pushbutton of the hand held stop watch that was used for timing back then, but there also could have been some editorial creative license in writing the story.

I've been a full size Pontiac fan all my life, but I think it would be tough to get one to accelerate that fast even if you dropped it off a cliff.

edited to add: Looking at that out take photo above I see the 2+2 was equipped with what looks like NASCAR racing tires, which would have improved its chances quite a bit, but even so I think the 3.9 second number was probably embellished one way or another.

[Heybuck]

Back in 1999, I was in Portland OR and I enjoyed a few days staying with Peter Klabo.

Peter drove me up to a small town called Dulles right up the Washington? river. Past Mt St.Helens anyway.

In Dulles we met with a Pontiac guy whose name escapes me but in his garage he had a red 1965 2+2 which we all admired. Peter later told me he felt that particular car was the car used in the Car & Driver article. I'd never heard of the article in question but he explained it to me and I've since read a reprint of it.

Was it the actual car??? I don't know. Peter Klabo is long dead so I can't ask him but I very clearly remember the car in the garage. I would have loved to own it back then and it still holds good memories now. I hope the car still exists somewhere.

Ian

[Wareagle]

Originally Posted by Stuart

That 3.9 seconds from zero to 60 is probably one of the most controversial test numbers ever published in a car magazine - it's been the topic of discussion in many subsequent articles (even in C & D) over the years. Considering the skinny bias ply tires that were on the car, I think it was the result of an overeager thumb on the pushbutton of the hand held stop watch that was used for timing back then, but there also could have been some editorial creative license in writing the story.

I've been a full size Pontiac fan all my life, but I think it would be tough to get one to accelerate that fast even if you dropped it off a cliff.

edited to add: Looking at that out take photo above I see the 2+2 was equipped with what looks like NASCAR racing tires, which would have improved its chances quite a bit, but even so I think the 3.9 second number was probably embellished one way or another.

Royal Pontiac wasn't messing around then they came to Win For Rear Gears The Catalina was running 4.11's and softer compound tires but still considered street according to the article - There is a guy that's on the Pontiac Power pages on Facebook who has a Catalina that runs 9's in the 1/4 NA - 455 4 Bolt main Block etc. here's the pic

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Wareagle

RThere is a guy that's on the Pontiac Power pages on Facebook who has a Catalina that runs 9's in the 1/4 NA - 455 4 Bolt main Block etc. here's the pic

With today's technology and tires I believe it, but back in 1965 I don't know.

Certainly, Royal Pontiac was doing a lot for these cars but there was only so much they had available to them at the time. Anyway, this is taking the discussion off topic so I'll stop now...

For the record I like Canadian Pontiacs even if they are based on a Chevy drivetrain. They had some interesting models that we never got in US versions -I recall seeing a 1970 2+2 at the POCI nationals in Red Wing, MN that had a 427 engine that was very cool. Another one I saw once was a 1960 Safari two door station wagon.