[63Banshee]

Absolutely one of my favorite cars of all time. Just a hint of what Pontiac Engineers were up to before the racing ban.

What are the specs of the torque tube on the super duty cars? I would think they’d get in a bind with all that torque.

[tom s]

the TQ tube had a bumper on the rear and I believe the drive shaft was harder,otherwise the same as a 326 auto shaft and tube.Tom

[63Banshee]

A bumper?

I wonder if I can run substantial power through a cryo treated 326 shaft...

[tom s]

I have one of the 4 speed SD auto trans and I talked to Arni about it last week.He told me he NEVER broke the trans or drive shaft.The weak spot is the ring and pinion,he and Bill Blair both told me they lasted about 10 runs.Tom

[Brian Baker]

Originally Posted by chief many horses

Yes and no---- In the S.D. case, if it's the truth, the car was replaced and the vin tag was installed - so to speak. In a re-stamp or remanufacture of a part, (such as to make the trans. hydraulics work), again, if changes are documented and to be used as a museum piece to show the way it should have been - there is a difference. Museums around the world are full of re-manufactured history. Documentation of changes are the key issues here, is it done to decieve? I've personally sat in on Scott's seminars at times and really had to do some hard thinking when he would say right out what he had to do in circumstances where parts were just not available. I don't suppose that if someone is outwardly saying what he is doing that he is purposely causing deception. He's telling you like it is, but maybe you do know more of this situation than I do.

That is NOT what I'm talking about...it's NOT what Tieman was talking about in the HPP article...and you know it, so stop skirting the issue.

I'm talking about restamping a block at a customers request so they can have a numbers matching vehicle...it's deceiptful.

[Brian Baker]

Originally Posted by 68Prix

How could you "deceive for profit" if every one in the hobby knows about it?

Nobody knew about Gartzman's car being a rebody until he foolishly let it slip to the wrong person.

Nobody knew about Tieman restamping blocks until he himself admitted it in HPP.

Nobody knew about the questionable trail of ownership on this wagon until Misus spoke up.

[chief many horses]

Brian, It's not that I'm trying to skirt the issue, (which would be just another form of deception), it's that you must have more solid facts on this issue than I Have. I guess the real issue here is that you seem to feel that both Scott and Randy are, (and were), deceitful liars in this business that we call a hobby, and whether you're right or wrong - once a persons reputation is taken from him, it's a long way back. I do hope that your evidence is strong enough to be their judge.

[Brian Baker]

Chief...I never said anything about Randy. As for Scott...he said it himself, in an HPP article, many years ago. He took so much heat for it from the readership, that 2 issues later he issued somewhat of a retraction, but we already knew the truth. The truth being, that it is widely accepted in the restoration business to restamp blocks, transmission cases, etc. in an effort to produce a "numbers matching" vehicle where one previously didn't exist, and that Scott has participated in such practices himself. There's your evidence. Do I have to dig my back issues out of the attic and scan them?

[chief many horses]

Thanks for the info., and for the record, I'm also against re-stamping. Case closed.

[63Banshee]

Hard to believe this thread is nearly 2 years old now. I wanted to bring it back for no other reason than it's the coolest Pontiac I've seen on any forum and no one should miss out.

[Keith Seymore]

Thanks for digging this thread back out, Dave.

As an aside, I saw this car right after Scott finished it. It was at Stanton (Mid Michigan Motorplex) and Scott was actually making passes in it!

The words "beautiful restoration" do not do it justice; Scott had little "baggies" on the pedals so they would not get dirty!

K