Then and Now

[judge_jury_executioner_69]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by projectfolly:
Quote: how many other muscle cars on the road in 69 had hideaway headlights? now the only thing youre buying is a badge. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Off the top of my head,I can think of a few other cars built in in the late 60's that had hideaway headlights:

Chevrolet RS Camaro
Chevrolet Caprice
Cadillac Eldorado
Buick Rivera
Olds Toronado
Corvette
Ford Galaxy/LTDs
Ford Thunderbird
Ford Torino
Lincoln Continental
Mercury Cougar
Full Size Mercurys
Dodge Charger
Plymouth Superbird

There may be others I'm missing.[/QUOTE]

yes thats the hideaway headlights. now how many of those had a front bumper/2 grilles that looked simmilar? how many of those cars still had hood scoops that looked simmilar? and how many of those had rear marker lights that look like simmilar? you can read cant you? yeah go ahead and twist my words to try to make me look stupid and see what you get.

[Tripower455]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>maybe i should define better. better as in fuel economy. hell i cant drive aroudn the block without smelling fumes. or if my gf is following me in her car she can smell the fumes too. if she rides in my car it gives her a headache. anything that adjusts air/fuel,timing.....when needed ( computer) is better. ive been told if you can dial in a carb then theres no hesitation. there is no hesitation with fuel injection. thats what i mean by better. but i have a 428 not a 350 or 346 or whatever. and ill keep it with its lousy economy and slight hesitation over a chevy 5.7L.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


So, let me get this straight....... the "fact" that it is a "Chevy" is the problem?

I've owned a bunch of true Pontiac engines, and 2 LS-1s.

The LS-1 does everything the old engines do, but with much better mileage, much more civilized manners. Oh, and they also pass current emission requirements.

There is NO downside to the engine, and it is a GREAT choice for the new GTO........

[judge_jury_executioner_69]

what year did pontiac stop making their own engines? 78-9? hell they stopped making oldsmobiles let alone their own engines. what about buick? caddy? to make it easier what GM make still makes their own engines? what about the sbc thats been made for 50 +/- years and is still being made/evolved? there is a reason its called a SBC. not a SBGM.

[Trace]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Randy W:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Trace:
Nice post, projectfolly - we all can argue ad infinitum about styling. I for one love the styling of my '04 - sleek & smooth! I like the older cars too, but just sitting in one reminds me the appeal is based on nostalgia - I wouldn't want my modern mechanicals sheathed in such bodywork, anymore than I'd want my '03 Suzuki SV1k to look like a 60's or 70's model Suzuki. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Having modern drivetrains in vintage metal works, too! Check the 'click current pics' on my page; http://mywebpages.comcast.net/toppop52/ <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Randy, you're quite right! Love your Impala! Maybe I'll have to restate my viewpoint: I wouldn't want &lt;my&gt; modern mechanicals in older bodywork, but I'll take &lt;yours&gt; off your hands for you!! Anytime you want to rid yourself of that I'd be glad to provide it a home!

[red70goat]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mr_GTO:
Yea, because I can so find out any info on you from a VIN number.

And yes, I know what a 70 GTO looks like.

And my point was going 60mph down the road and seeing a car that "LOOKS" like a GTO coming the other way, that you really can't tell until it actually passes you.(QUOTE]

I can and always have. Could you tell the difference between a 66/67 Lemans grill insert and a 66/67 Tempest grill insert...from a distance? I doubt it. Do you know what a real restoration is vs a rebuild? I doubt it.

[judge_jury_executioner_69]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tripower455:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by judge_jury_executioner_69:
i hope with 26+ years of technology it would be a better engine. go ahead and take my 428 and put all the computer bs on it and it would be faster too. a computer can tune a lot better/faster then i can. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow, you almost admitted that the LS-1 is a better engine than your 428!

26+ years of technological improvements HAVE resulted in a better engine, even if it isn't painted blue.

So where's the problem? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

maybe i should define better. better as in fuel economy. hell i cant drive aroudn the block without smelling fumes. or if my gf is following me in her car she can smell the fumes too. if she rides in my car it gives her a headache. anything that adjusts air/fuel,timing.....when needed ( computer) is better. ive been told if you can dial in a carb then theres no hesitation. there is no hesitation with fuel injection. thats what i mean by better. but i have a 428 not a 350 or 346 or whatever. and ill keep it with its lousy economy and slight hesitation over a chevy 5.7L.

[Dragncar]

This is getting interesting,but time consuming.I have a lot of work to do since I plan on heading for the 10s this year.But I can chat with you guys a little before I head out in the garage.Nickv,you have got to do better than call names.And Mr-GTO you have not told me if you think the LS1 would be around if the sbc was never built.But I would like some information from ya if you can get it.On the LS1.What is the rod and main diameter.What is the rod length center to center.And what is the piston pin diameter.The Pontiac motor is out of production,but is it dead.Maybe you had better ask the boys at All Pontiac(IA 2 block)The Kauffmans(thier own aftermarket block and 2 types of heads)The Butlers(aluminum Pontiac block,RA4 heads)And DCI(the Tiger head,which might change everyting as far as big horsepower REAL Pontiacs goes).I have a LOT of respect for those people,almost heros as far as I am concerned.The 95 Impala was about the same size as the 68-72 GTOs,and given GMs lack of RWD cars it was about the best option as I see it.Pontiac could have gotten a hold of that car,put 2 doors on it and made it look like a GTO.I know it is a pipe dream,exactly.So do not build it at all.Now Rabon.Your logic is messed up,why are you talking litres.Who cares about litres.The 347 from the 50s was a Pontiac motor,and it does not mater how many liters it was or when Chevys 350 Came out.The 347 was a Pontiac motor with the big differances being a different main diamitter and where the starter bolted up.But it shared the same rods,head bolt pattern and pretty much everything else with later Pontiac motors.Anyway time to head out into the garage.

[rabon008]

To dragncar: Evidently you lack the basic ability to admit when you're wrong and then
you just resort to name calling. Your own criteria stated, once again, that "If any sbc crank will "lay down in the saddles" correctly it is a sbc." Since you knew that the SAE paper I quoted would very clearly show you that the crank dimensions (along with many other technical details) are entirely different from the sbc, you chose not to buy the paper and not to comment anymore about that point.

So, how's about this: Tell us exactly what criteria makes the LS1 a "small block chevy" engine. As an engineer, I would really like to hear your technical description of what items make the LS1 nothing more than a "small block chevy". I would also like to hear the exact technical criteria that made the original "Pontiac" engines so much more desireable and sought after and worthy of such worship. I am sure that all the engineers in Detroit are just waiting to hear how they should design the next V8 engine to bring back all the power, fuel economy, reliability and charisma of the great Pontiac engines. I am sure the engineers and designers of the LS1 will be completely humiliated. They will surely be ashamed when they hear how they absolutely missed such a golden opportunity to use the Pontiac motor as the design template when they began designing the LS1. Hell, they probably should have just saved GM a ton of money and scrapped the entire LS1 design program in favor of bringing back the so obviously superior, in every way, Pontiac V8.

Enlighten us, oh great captain of engine design. Oh, I'm sorry, I guess now I've called you a name. At least its not "tool".

[The Champ]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by carbking:
For a point of historical accuracy, Chrysler, Dodge, Plymouth, and DeSoto DID in fact have their own engines; as did the Ford Motor Company. The various divisions started using each others engines much earlier than GM (passenger); although GM trucks used various modified passenger division engines as early as the 1920's.

Even after the various Chrysler divisions started sharing engines, the divisions had some say as to accessories. Example, Plymouth used the "price leader" Carter BBR series on their 230, while Dodge used a much more expensive, and much superior Stromberg on their 230. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks for supporting the correct information that I tried imparting to dragncar...

I guess, when I posted that information I mistakenly assumed most people knew and understood the fact that all of the big three have gone to corporate engines. GM, to their credit, held out the longest.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Originally posted by dragncar:
But a real(traditional) Pontiac engine in GTO based on say the 95 Impala platform would have been very,very cool. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why would the GTO be put on an Impala platform? The GTO was never built on the "big" car chassis. That would have been a bigger fraud than any of the things that you claim.

Maybe you need to get away from the gas fumes in the garage - it's obviously affecting your senses...

[Tripower455]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> why drive something that the front end looks more like a VW bug then a muscle car? or that looks like a cavalier,GTP,neon,any other car on the road. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Once again.........

The new GTO is a RWD, V-8, manual transmission comfortable car with room for 4 adults. Oh, and it also handles and accelerates well..... There is not one other car available today that meets this criteria, which, BTW, describes an old GTO as well (except for the handling part ), unless you spend quite a bit more money.

My Formula looked "good" by most accounts. It was not half the car the new GTO is. Should I sell the GTO and buy another 'bird because it looks better? Why drive a car that looks good, but doesn't have all of the other, more important features.

What do you drive as a daily driver? If you tell me it's your '69, then I will understand your myopic view on the subject, since you obviously don't go very far on a daily basis, and looks win over practicality and reliability.

[Dragncar]

You guys are missing the point I am trying to make.I do not care about the liters or realy even the CID.I want to know the internal dimmentions of the LS1.Agine,rod center to center,rod and main diamiters,Main bearing spacing,thrust cap location,piston pin diameter.Head bolt pattern.If any sbc crank will "lay down in the saddles" correctly it is a sbc.I find it hard to believe GM would not use as much off the shelf parts as possible,"new sheat of paper" or not.It is very expensive to make new crank and rod forgings.People have been trying to get a 4340 forged crank for real Pontiacs for years and still no luck.

[rabon008]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dragncar:
And do not compaire the 04 GTO to the 64 GTO as far as driveability,comfort ect.That is just stupid.If you are going to do that compare all cars from 64 to 04.We all know the differances. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I compared the '04 GTO to the '02 WS6 in driving comfort and, even in that small two year span, there is a huge difference. The new GTO is a pleasure to drive, in every way.

[judge_jury_executioner_69]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by projectfolly:
I apologize in advance for rambling. For what its worth, I just thought I would weigh in on the '04 GTO issue. First, I own a '69 Judge, and a yellow '04. To me, its pretty cool to open the garage door and see them sitting next to each other. I grew up in a GM family, my Father, Uncles & Grandfather all worked for GM, most of them at Pontiac Motors when there was such a thing as divisional autonomy within GM. So to say I like Pontiacs is a understatement. Anyway, after reading all the comments about the styling of the new GTO in particular the comment that they look like a Cavalier or a lot of other cars on the road, I tended to agree. It then occured to me that when I was a kid, and the "classic" GTOs we know an love were driven as real every day cars, I remember that the GTO looked an awful lot like another entry level GM car called the Tempest. In fact I had to look fairly close at the Pontiac A bodies to discern if it was a GTO or a Tempest or a LeMans, especially the earlier cars. In fact the overall shape of the car was very similar to other makes on the road at the time, so they blended in to the automotive landscape of the time quite well. It seems that most people rember only the GTO and not the rest of the A body line that suported it. The A body 4 door wagons, Tempest, LeMans carried the GTO as the GTO did not stand on its own. When I drive my Judge in todays traffic it stands out from all the other cars as should any car that is 35 years old. When I drive my new GTO, yes it belnds in but I do get lots of positive comments and interestingly enough from kids. This may have something to do with the fact that its yellow and stands out in terms of color alone.
I applaud Lutz for spearheading the Manaro to the states as the GTO. It is a great car, and it is a great car to live with on a daily basis and I'm happy that Pontiac actually has a V8 rear wheel drive 4 passenger coupe. Lutz understood that with the demise of the F car, Pontiac really had nothing left in the lineup that could maintian Pontiac's performance image. While I would like to see the GTO styling as more retro to the original in the same sense that the new Mustang is, without the GTO, Pontiac would be another boring front wheel drive division of GM with only body cladding and red lit intstrument clusters to set their cars apart from the other divisions. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

thats your opinion and youre intitled to it. what upsets me is that the GTO was the first muscle car. it started all of this. how can you slap a chevy motor in an australlian car and call it a pontiac? ive said before im only 22 so i didnt have the expierence of you guys growing up with real muscle cars (big motors). i choose to drive a pontiac because they are diffrent then chevy (real pontiacs). the styling/performance is sub par for a GTO. true cars looked similar 30+ years ago. but when you bring a cars name back after 30+ years youd think it would look somewhat like the origional cars. it only makes sense. why would you call something a GTO and make it look like a grand am or a cavalier?

[rabon008]

Why would you call something a GTO when it's a Tempest with a BIGA$$ engine? Answer: Because it is a GTO. Same deal with the '04.

LS1 a "Chevy motor"? I think GM Powertrain might disagree with you on that one.

[Mr_GTO]

Jeff Smith doesn't work for GM and that was an article by Jeff Smith, not from anyone at GM. Keep trying...

[Nickv]

Well, seeing that the RAM IV engine was given the RPO LS1, seems rather fitting that the 04 GTO has an LS1.

[rabon008]

I am not in disagreement here about the Caddy engine, just wanted to point out that the 1957, 347 c.i.d. Pontiac engine was also fuel injected, giving it just a little more in common with the LS1. I know you guys like your carbs (and I do too) but we just aren't getting them back.

[judge_jury_executioner_69]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mr_GTO:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by judge_jury_executioner_69:

can you tell me what car the origional LT1 was put into? a camaro. who makes the slowmaro? you should know that the LT1 evolved into the LS1 which evolved into the LS2.

heres a link for ya

http://www.nastyz28.com/camaro/z28lt1.html ( slowmaro link )

heres another
http://www.theautochannel.com/vehicl.../70vette.frame ( corvette link )

i could go on and on but its obvious you cant admit that the LT1 is a "GM" engine.

heres a lonk for ya about the LS1

http://www.gm.com/company/racing/tec...orvetteC5R.htm

as you were saying....... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


You took the short bus to school right?

Again, SHOW ME WHERE A GM SITE SAYS THE LS1 iS A CHEVROLET MOTOR. THe C5R says the LS1 is a GM engine, not a CHEVROLET engine.

The old LT-1 is a Chevy. The last LT1 was BASED off the old SBC and it WAS a GM Powertrain motor also.

The new LS1/LS2 share NOTHING but bearings and bore spacing with the old SBC. It was a clean sheet of paper design.

Keep trying and try to become some what educated on the subject at hand. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

you did read the first paragraph right ? the one in bold ? before you said show me where it says the LT1/LS1/LS6/LS2 was a chevy motor. i did that with the LT1. now you say the LS1 isnt a chevy motor but a "GM" motor. the site says GM's family of LS1 overhead-valve V-8 engines can trace its roots to the fabled Chevrolet small-block V-8, yet the LS1 is much more than an offshoot from the small-block family tree. The LS1 continues the small-block's longstanding virtues of compact size, simplicity, reliability and high specific output. i can read between the lines here. yes the LS1 was a clean sheet of paper design. same with the "newer" LT1 or in other words the chevy 350 evolved into the LT1 which evolved into the LS1. who rode the short bus to school ?

[Goat luver]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mr_GTO:
Feel free to post a pic of that 70 GTO you claim to own.


Yeah, c'mon Mr "Whatza Moron" let's see your beloved Goat.

I asked for pics in a posting a few weeks ago......... still waiting!

[Trace]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tripower455:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Hey dragncar, I have a pontiac 400 on a stand in my garage. When I blow up this pos ls1, I'm going to shoehorn the 400 into the 04. Could it get some respect then? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think that would put you in the top category, you know, the "People who get it".

I guess, since I don't fit in in any of Dragoncars "categories" of Pontiac guys, that I am not a Pontiac guy, even though I own a '66 GTO tripower convertible _and_ a 2004...... not to mention previously owning a '77 GP. a '69 428 GP, a '66 GTO hardtop and a 2001 Formula (which wasn't a real Pontiac either, since it had that inferior LS-1 in it).

You know, I really want to be a Pontiac guy..... I think I'll just sell the '04 and use my '66 for my daily driver, like a real Pontiac guy would. It'll LOVE that 370 mile roundtrip to work each week, and sitting in the airport parking lot for 3-4 days every week. I'll just get a second mortgage to pay for the gas and parts and hope it makes it............. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, tripower, YOU ARE a Pontiac guy... with a brain!

No offense, please, to some of the other posters here (you know who you are), but perhaps the lack of, uh, competence in expressing yourselves might also be revealing of certain other, uh...shortcomings? Cognition is, alas, both a product of learning & heredity. Deficiencies in either of these &, well, the cake just doesn't rise.