While it may appear this 1964 Pontiac Catalina 2 + 2 is waiting for a tow to the salvage yard, a closer look reveals decent tires and valid license plates. I’ve seen this car parked at a number of locations here in the South Bay, and it’s clear someone is keeping it around for future use. As an owner of a forty year old classic, I’m extremely familiar with the issues related to owning a car as old as this, and based on that experience I have to say this owner is either extremely unconcerned about the appearance of their automobile, or they are treading on the razor edge of insanity.
This is a question we’ve dealt with in other posts, but I had a couple good examples of cars that have traveled far down Entropy Road, which led to this post. We could also ask the question this way: when does a car’s patina cross the line over to neglect?
If the owner simply does not care about vehicle appearance, I suppose this Pontiac can continue to deliver good service for many more years. When it comes to driveline, suspension and brake parts, American cars of the sixties used enough common parts on the dirty side of the car that a reasonably handy person can still find the parts needed to keep one safely on the road. Even if the exact part is not available (for example, a factory fit spark plug wire set), there’s usually a universal part you can modify to fit. The only thing that could kill this car is extreme corrosion, and I see no evidence of that. Mechanically, this car appears to be in good running condition, so maybe it is just a daily driver.
An original car with the patina of regular use does provide restorers with important clues regarding the production process. Things like the hardware used, specific positioning of clamps and other parts, and option packaging can all be checked using these cars. But looking at this one, I’m not sure it’s worth maintaining this time machine.
But something tells me this car was brought down from Washington State as a project car, and that the owner has big dreams of restoring his mighty full sized convertible. Let me tell you, that’s a whole ‘nother thing. While the owner may dream of returning this ride to it’s former glory, from stem to stern, every aspect of it says parts car.
For example, this rear quarter panel may be the nicest sheet metal on the car, and as you can see, a scrape on the back edge of that character line has created a ripple in the sheet metal, exposing it to the elements and leading to a bad case of surface rust. If you flip back to the street side view, you’ll find a dented quarter panel with a big chunk of the rocker panel ripped off behind the driver’s door. All in all, a body that does not inspire confidence.
Here’s a better look at that “surface” rust on the quarter panel, along with a good look a the Catalina badge. I’m not sure if the badge is reusable, but if so, it requires an hour or so of cleaning, plus a very steady hand repainting the indentations with some pin stripe paint. Nothing about this restoration project looks simple.
A close up of the deck lid shows us crazed paint, surface rust and bondo patches, always a bad sign. Whoever laid down the bondo did not do a proper job of body preparation, which is always cause for concern, and if there’s evidence of improper body work, can we consider that an indicator of other improper work? Many times, improper work ties up time and resources budgeted for other aspects of a restoration.
Where to start with this picture? We never want to see rust perforation in sheet metal, but I’m even more concerned about the joint running up between the door and the fender. In theory, the seam should maintain consistent spacing from top to bottom, and if a panel is out of alignment, it should gently taper from one end to the other. The fact that the gap grows and shrinks as our eyes travel up and down the body indicates problems beyond door alignment.
Up front, more issues: the missing grille pieces equal more dollars out of your pocket, and the bumper may have enough rust damage to prevent restoration. I will concede that during this walk around, we saw most of the trim and badges still in place, so the car is relatively complete. It’s just that the parts present and accounted for are all beat up to the extreme.
A look inside does not inspire confidence either. We’ve already seen a ripped convertible top and missing back window. A cracked dash top, missing door panel and bed sheet covered seat add to the list of things gone wrong on this car. Interior soft parts are a huge challenge to locate when performing a restoration, since they often change year to year. If this car were a 1968 A-body, I’d have some confidence these parts were available as reproductions. A ’64 B-body? I’m not so sure.
Is there any upside? Maybe this 2 + 2 badge. Between the top of the line trim level and the convertible body style, this car is among the most collectable ’64 Catalinas out there, but you’ll still spend more in the restoration process than this car will ever return at auction. I don’t see any 421 badges on the fenders, and there’s no four speed shift lever on the center console, so this is NOT a top shelf car.
And as long as were gathering opinions, let’s take a look at another car. Once again, this is a car I’ve seen running about here and there, so it’s not simply a curb decoration. Based on the round headlights, I’m calling it out as a ’75 to ’77 Granada coupe, complete with a partial vinyl top (which now appears missing). The condition of the paint and body work is comparable to what we saw on the ’64 Catalina, but with the advantage of a metal roof to protect the interior from the elements.
It seems not to have made much of a difference, however; point by point, this interior seems to suffer from the same defects as found in our ’64 Catalina. Worse, a restoration is even more challenging due to the increased use of plastics to form the dashboard and other interior parts.
If, from this angle, the body work and paint seem to be in better condition than the Pontiac’s, that’s still damning this car with faint praise.
The front end actually includes better parts than the Poncho, with much less corrosion on the bumper, and all grille parts present and accounted for. It even still possesses a hood ornament! But is that enough?
A close up of the quarter window tells us this is a Granada Ghia, a top of the line trim level. However, this shot also exposes a major issue with this car, rust damage brought on when the vinyl top trapped moisture against the roof. I like the lines of a Granada Coupe, but this one doesn’t have the mojo to inspire me.
In closing, I invite you to weigh in on both these cars. Really quite similar in condition, they represent different eras, body styles and market segments. Do those differences inspire you to save one and pitch the other? Are both cars trash or both cars treasure? I know where I stand, but I’m sure opinions will differ, so bring on the debate!
For me the Pontiac has long left the patina enhanced original car stage. It is well in the classic beater stage. With a full frame chassis underneath it probably isn’t in danger of splitting in half or being terminally unsafe but it is a little hard on the eyes. I’d say it still has potential for a restoration. Even as a convertible a full resto might not be financially prudent. The rust doesn’t look too bad from the photos. I could see a quick tear down, a bit of welding, maybe a $50 roller paint job, second hand grill and interior bits. Done reasonably cheaply it could be an affordable and presentable classic driver.
The Granada might be in slightly better shape but the values for good ones are so low it just doesn’t make any sense to fix it up unless you have an emotional tie to it. Someone might spray bomb it flat black for slightly better aesthetics keeping it on the road a few more years.
When my ’66 Bonneville convertible, which I’d owned since I was a teenager in the mid-’70s, was 27 years old (and similarly battered except for the new top I’d installed some years earlier), I finally sold it. By then frame rust had begun to develop. I can’t imagine that the pictured car, now 50 years old, wouldn’t have more substantial frame deterioration; it wouldn’t all be visible.
As for door-to-fender alignment: This was often sloppy even when these cars were new, along with misaligned rocker panel trim, etc. And the big Pontiac convertibles flexed quite a lot when under way; in my Bonneville (admittedly a few inches longer in wheelbase and overall length), a passenger looking at one of the doors for 5 or 10 seconds would soon see it float around in its opening.
Funny that this topic should come up today. I drove past the house of an old man who owns what I believe may be the rustiest car I have ever seen – a 64 Studebaker sedan on which the lower center pillars are rusted away from the rocker panels. Sorry Dave, none of these cars exhibits any real rust. Real, genuine, upper-midwestern rust is a whole different thing from what you California guys call rust. 🙂
These cars both (but the Poncho in particular) look to me like good starting places for at least a modest restoration.
JP-
You’re right about the lack of West Coast rust, but when I see a car like this, I’m immediately concerned about interior sun damage. Out here, the sun fades vinyl wood grain inserts to white, cracks or ripples dash tops, and burns through the tops of seatbacks.
I’ve pulled our gauge clusters on some seventies Fords, and discovered the white plastic used to form the back of the case has turned to chalk- any handling at all, and it crumbles like dry bread.
So I guess we should ship good bodies east, and merge the interiors out of the rust buckets with our rust free metal.
If you want to see a sun damaged interior, check out what this guy started with. This 1965 Chrysler 300 convertible looked like it had been baked in the oven.
http://moparforums.com/forums/f66/1965-chrysler-300-convertible-restoration-profile-6608/
That console-mounted vacuum gauge is to die for. What a beautiful C-body.
Bugger! That’s quite a lot of sun damage! It looks like it had been sitting in the oven for way too long. Both the folding convertible top and the seats looked burnt to a crisp. I love the restoration. It looks beautiful! 🙂
Gorgeous. Amazing. I hope the Poncho gets such an opportunity.
This old beauty ( 64 2+2 ) was sold new on Long island NY, I purchased it in 2004 from the second owner after it sat under a tree for about 10 years. Replaced the brakes & tires and drove it around Long island for another 8 years. Sold it on Craigs list to a guy who flew in from Marco island Florida to drive it back to Florida in the Winter. I know he made it back to FLA with it. Now its in the Northwest. Probably find it in Alaska or Mexico soon. Good to see its still running. Many stories to go with this car.
The Catalina is junk and probably unsafe to drive. The Granada looks terrific with that rake and appears to be a ’75, which would preclude it from emission checks in CA. It would make a nice beach cruiser but is not worth the cost to “restore”. Fix the top and repaint it to keep the rot at bay. If you had to have a nice one start with something better. Restoring a newer car like the Granada means wrapping the molded parts in a skin which costs too much and never looks right.
The faded “sunrise” plates on the Granada are not period correct but very cool and add to the beachy vibe.
The Catalina is junk and probably unsafe to drive
Based on? You’d probably say the same about my F-100, but I’d have no problem hopping into it and driving it to LA, just to prove to you that it’s impossible to judge a car’s road-worthiness by looking at a picture.
I agree with Paul-
As I said in the post, it appears to be road worthy, and I saw nothing during my walk around that would keep me from riding in it. It’s just cosmetically GONE.
Based on this as I obviously have not seen the car…
“The fact that the gap grows and shrinks as our eyes travel up and down the body indicates problems beyond door alignment.”
… and I did say “probably” 🙂
You hit the nail on the head when you brought up OCD car guys. I have OCD b-a-d and it’s not fun.
I can’t enjoy and don’t want to own a car that isn’t original or restored correctly. A guy like me would never buy a restored car that looked as “good” as this one, unless it was super rare. I would always worry about the quality of the work done, especially when guys “do it themselves”.
Why go through that angst when there are so many restos that started out as solid Cali cars, with pictures to prove it?
A guy like me is too picky, misses out on otherwise nice cars and pays too much. There is also too much stress around what should be an enjoyable pastime.
At the other extreme are guys who have been burned badly from over paying for poor quality “do it yourself” work. Cracks show up in the finish and rust, almost always, comes back. The worst is seeing a guy with an expensive new purchase that has wavy sides at a car show. When he learns enough to know why people aren’t looking at his car it’s too late and he feels bad.
Now fixing up the Catalina yourself to use as a DD is perfectly fine. It would make a fun beach cruiser if it isn’t too far gone underneath. I went to restoration as that seemed to be the speculation in the article about what was next for this car.
The Granada is definitely a ’76 based on the presence of a tilt steering column, which was unavailable in ’75. Also, the HVAC controls appear to be black. In ’77 they changed to a shinier, glassier HVAC panel.
JP is correct on the lack of rust on the Pontiac.
There is a local guy who has a convertible that makes this Pontiac look pristine. Having seen it up close once, he sat on a five gallon bucket to drive and the trunk floor was gone with the wind. The body looked like something that had been dredged out of the river. I have seen him driving it in that condition many times.
Slowly and methodically he has been restoring this car. While I haven’t yet seen it yet this year, I anticipate it will happen.
However, the car is a ’57 Chevrolet. Aftermarket parts are readily available. If the Pontiac owner is determined, he has a good slate to start with.
The Granada? Doable, but its in a different class of chariot.
You west coast guys have a skewed idea of what is and is not restorable. This Pontiac convertible has been bombing around South Boston for years. This is a pontiac convertible that is too far gone, yours is a decent project car by east coast standards.
We have a different perspective. The car is certainly restorable but wouldn’t be worth the effort out here, not to mention the cost, when better condition alternative are so readily available.
I suppose someone who really likes the year and could do their own work might be happy with it. But it’s going to take hundreds of hours to get those flat sides straight enough on the repaint. Refurbished big cars with wavy sides sides look like hell. No one wants to look at them at a car show, harsh but true. And I always think… that poor guy didn’t know what he was doing.
Then there is finding the missing trim pieces like someone said.
Paying for it is out of the question and doing it yourself means giving up a chunk of your life for what a ’64 Catalina?
If the fruit is overripe toss it out and pick another off the tree they’re right outside.
Toss it to a midwesterner then, not the crusher! lol
How does a car looking like that stay on the road? Talk about a cop magnet.
I think they are both really cool in an Ace Ventura sort of way.
The car Pixel posted is what most pre-1996 vehicles look like in the Northeast before they flunk safety inspections or break down.
This is the point at which a vehicle is no longer worth saving.
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g162/Superfahotparts/toyo.jpg
Here is another example. Usually Explorers like the one in the background have rusty and jagged wheel wells.
http://clunkbucket.com/wp-content/uploads/rusty-brat-lead.jpg
I can still see the bottoms of the doors, fenders, quarter panels, trunk lid, hood, and there are not holes in the sheet metal so those two cars are saveable.
If you want to see a really rusty vehicle in the Northeast look for General Motor’s Minivans, early 2000s Ford Focuses, and early 2000s Ford Escapes, those are just some of the vehicles that rust so badly.
Unless it was done on purpose, the blue Toyota Tacoma sure looks like it was bent out of shape. Its body look decent, but it hardly looks roadworthy.
The way I see it, a vehicle is “too far gone” if it no longer runs on its own power, nothing works, and its body is so rusted out that, unless you know how to restore the car to like-new condition, it’s just ready for the junkyard.
That Catalina would be a bit of a challenge but it’s far from done IMHO. A full 100 point Concours resto would be too expensive but making a nice driver out of it isn’t out of the question.
Theres hardly any rust in that Pontiac and whats there is easily repairable real rust can still be fixed by just making a new panel, this is the r/h floor pan from my Minx leaking swcreen seals for 50 years does this.
Yeouch! That ain’t pretty!
Yeah it had plenty of holes from water leaks all repaired with new metal.
That’s at least 30% more metal than was left in the pans of my ’62 sunroof Beetle… (c:
Thankfully the heater channels were still solid.
The Pontiac looks very restorable to me, but not if you were looking to make money flipping it. A lot of the sheetmetal looks to be still present, just beat-up, which means that it could be massaged back close to straight with patience.
A new roof will be available from Kee Top or similar. The missing and weathered chrome trim and interior pieces will be tough to find though. NOS dealers, eBay and wreckers in Arizona will be your friends for this stuff. The badging and trim that is present can also be rechromed and repainted.
I can’t tell if the front bumper is rusted through from behind or the chrome is just peeling. The back bumper looks presentable, so I’m going to assume the front is OK. It looks straight, so it would be a good candidate for rechroming.
“NOS dealers, eBay and wreckers in Arizona will be your friends for this stuff.”
Which brings another element into play when discussing this sort of project-
There’s no greater thrill than finally scoring a part you’ve been chasing after for six months. My Mustang II now has a pair of alloy valve covers that I once thought were unobtainable. I found them through using a nationwide Craigslist search. The covers I ended up with came out of an attic somewhere in Wisconsin. The seller found them in a rental property, and put them online with no real idea of their rareity.
Such a score helps keep restoration projects interesting, and gives you that special thrill when the package arrives on your doorstep.
Agreed, I love that feeling when I finally have a piece of unobtainium in my possession. I have a rather large collection of it now, which I’m looking forward to installing on my Windsor once the bodywork and paint are done.
Speaking of valve covers, I scored a set from a Jensen Interceptor that I planned to use on my Windsor. I think they’re the best looking valve covers for Mopar big blocks. After removing the factory wrinkle-black powdercoat, I discovered why they were done in that finish from the factory: it hides a lot of sins. The casting is terrible and the finishing work was done with a grinder.
I spent a ton of time smoothing and polishing them. I was almost finished, when one day I realized that there isn’t a lot of clearance between the drivers side valve cover and the later-year brake booster that I had installed. I checked and, sure enough, not enough clearance to install it. 🙁 I don’t want to put them on my convertible because I want it to look stock under the hood. So now I have a set of rare, beautiful valve covers to hang on the wall. 😛
The Catalina looks like a HS beater from the 70’s. Do these have X frames like the same year Chevy?
If frame is rusty, brakes are weak, and steering ready to die, then it should be taken off the road. I like the ‘Patina’ look, but the ‘super beater’ rust bucket? No way.
Pontiac didn’t use the X frame.
Pontiac only used the X-frame for 1958-1960. In 1961 it went to a perimeter style frame. The only exception is Canadian Pontiacs used the Chevrolet X-frame from 1961-64.
Way beyond my limited skills.It would be saved if it was a GTO,early Mustang or anything with a hemi.Unless you’re doing it all yourself I can see the cost outweighing a restored car pretty soon.
I’m in with all the East Coast guys, the Pontiac has definately crossed the patina threshold into decay but it looks like a great project car.
With the chrome and interior issues it’s not a good full resto candidate, but you could make it a presentable driver with some hard work and dollars spent.
The Granada looks just fine as is. It’s a cockroach so no attention is expected or required.
I was on vacation in Victoria, BC in 2002. This guy pulled up in a yellow early 70’s Pontiac Tempest (Nova clone). He was the second owner, and it had been his daily driver for something like 20 years. He said he was thinking of buying another car and getting it restored.
From the pattern of rust-through, I was sure that the body had rusted from behind due to condensation forming on the backside of the sheetmetal. That meant there would be considerable areas around the visible rust-through that would also be tissue-paper thin, and difficult to repair. I didn’t say anything to discourage the guy, but I doubted that any kind of restoration would ever happen on that car.
I have to say this owner is either extremely unconcerned about the appearance of their automobile, or they are treading on the razor edge of insanity.
We could also ask the question this way: when does a car’s patina cross the line over to neglect?
The question I have is why are we being asked to judge this car and its owner? Why is this owner either negligent or insane? There are many other possibilities than those two.
Why can’t we just enjoy this awesome old Pontiac for what it is? Who knows or cares why the owner has it, and keeps it like this? It’s his car to enjoy however he wants to. And the good thing is it’s not terminally ill.
FWIW, in SoCal, this car is good to go like this for another 25-50 years, if that’s what its owner wants. Those little surface rust spots are insignificant. Maybe it’ll get fixed up, or maybe the owner can’t afford to do anything with it now, but enjoys owning a classic Pontiac convertible. I was young and poor once too.
Or maybe he’s sitting on a pile of parts in his garage, and hasn’t gotten to it yet. So many possibilities.
Maybe it’s an LA thing, which might explain why I moved to Eugene. But I can tell you here in Eugene, nobody would be asking these questions. They would just say “cool car, man!”, and not question your sanity.
Can we possibly just loosen up a little and appreciate old beaters for what they are? The rat rod thing started a quarter century ago, as a reaction to all the perfectly restored cars. They can get boring, you know. My hat’s off to anyone who keeps an old car alive; I much prefer this than a resto-mod. There’s some genuine living history here. It’s cars like this that inspired me to start documenting beaters, as Curbside Classics, before they’re all gone and painted resale red.
This car is NOT boring; it’s very cool. I’d have no problem driving it (it’s not much worse than my F-100), but then I’m undoubtedly on the razor’s edge of insanity. 🙂
I’m with you, Paul.
Golf Clap Mr. N.
I agree. Why can’t it be enjoyed as is?
This car is totally interesting, 1964 was the first year for the 2+2 option package, though the 421 wasn’t standard in 1964, it was an option which became standard on 2+2 optioned cars in 1965. A real 1964 2+2 convertible is a pretty rare car, and worth saving either way.
Yes it has rust and it might not be easy to restore, isn’t that the definition of a “project”? BTW, this car is TOTALLY restorable, it needs work, but again, isn’t that the point? You pre-determine your level of involvement when you are looking for a project car, if just buying a couple of reproduction floor mats and a hubcap is a much as you want to get involved, then this one isn’t for you.
You want easy? get a champagne Corolla during the next “Toyotathon!” or go to a classic car dealer and get a nice re-sale red Chevelle SS “clone” with a 350 and some chrome valve covers and done.
Almost everything this car needs is available a click away from Hemmings, Ames, or Performance Years.
“The question I have is why are we being asked to judge this car and its owner? Why is this owner either negligent or insane? There are many other possibilities than those two.”
BINGO Paul!
And at various times since I first learned to drive I’ve resembled those remarks. The ’57 Chevy 150 I drove to college, got married in and eventually traded for a new S-10 (but not before I buying another ’57 project car) had its moments when it was multiple colors, had no door panels and cracked windows.
But it WAS a 1957 Chevrolet. And I WAS visibly working on it as time and $$ allowed…and both were in short supply early in our marriage.
But did I mention it was a ’57 Chevy? And in my book…that trumped driving, well, most everything else out there when I had it. Besides “Tusk” was my calling card, instant conversation starter and conduit to making friendships that have lasted to this day.
Can’t wait to tear into my ’57 Handyman. Which doesn’t look much different than the Bonneville but all the hard-to-find-and-expensive stuff is there.
I’m agree with you regarding your truck, Paul- It’s a working vehicle and earned it’s scars with pride. But this is a 60’s era convertible, the polar opposite of a work truck
When the Bonneville sat on the showroom floor, so much of it’s cachet came from shiny paint, bright chrome and shapely fenders. GM led the charge in good looking cars, and for this car that magic is just gone. I’m certainly not preaching a frame off restoration, but at least patch the holes and establish one paint color!
The owner may be headed in that direction, but if this were mine, it would sit in the shop until further visual improvements occurred.
If that makes me superficial, I can live with that- I guess that explains why I live in LA. 😉
Thanks, Paul. I couldn’t have said it better.
count me in!
Most projects are labors of love, cost be damned. I like the car and will spend what it takes to complete it propositions- you should expect to lose money if you sell it.
If you are in it to flip it, most projects don’t pencil out.
Maybe that guy is going through the same thing that I am, with aging relatives and luckless friends throwing a monkey wrench into your plans every time you turn around.
I’ve told my parents many times, only half-jokingly, that it’s their fault I never got to finish restoring my Cougar, what with my Dad’s obsession with gardening and my mom’s obsession with keeping up appearances around the house. Life sucks when you’re an only child.
My life would be so much easier if my mom and pop would just fracking learn to appreciate and make do with what they already have.
Put me in with the “way too good to abandon” crowd on this one. The rust doesn’t look bad, nothing about it screams “unsafe” and all things considered it’s a pretty cool old Poncho. Trying to do a full restoration would, of course, be financially prohibitive, or even trying to make something that would place at a local car show. You’d want a better starting point for that. But as a driver? As long as the frame isn’t rusted out, the suspension isn’t totally wasted, and the brakes are good, rock on. Some minor bodywork, a little paint, some trim, and a back window for that top, and it’d be a fun cruiser. No need for a period-correct redo of the interior either–find a door panel somewhere and throw a seat cover over that bench. And keep rollin’. Same with the Granada. We don’t know the owners’ reasons for driving them this way and we don’t need to, though it might be interesting to find out.
Heck, many would call me crazy for wanting to restore my Malibu. It’s a relatively plain ’79 4-door base model, with 175K miles, 267/TH200, tired interior, and a few rusty spots (around the back window being the only worrisome one). Oh, and it hasn’t run since 2001. One look and “not worth it” would be the common assessment when I could probably buy one in much better shape for less than $2000. But in my case it’s emotional attachment–my grandfather bought the car new, my mother drove it through most of my childhood, and it was my first car when I turned 16. I wouldn’t dream of parting with it and am fully and rationally aware that I will be spending more than it’s worth just to get it back on the road, and I’m ok with that. Maybe either of these cars, or many others just like them, are somewhere along that same spectrum.
Looks good to me…. make a great sleeper. “Restore” everything underneath, frame, mechanicals, etc. and surprise the hell out a few folks.
I’m voting with my midwestern eyes and would agree that provided the frame is sound, the Pontiac seems quite restorable. The blue fender and hood, and I think the front bumper as well, seem to indicate someone is chipping away at it. I’m not an expert at bodywork, but it would seem like somebody “media blasting” it (is that the term?) might find some pretty workable metal in it.
Lacking rust, a decent sedan parts car would make for a lot of fairly easy clean up on this.
Both the blue and light cream color look period correct. I’d be torn as to which to choose, both would be quite good looking. Since the cream is likely correct for this car, I’d probably go with that.
That Granada looks exactly like the median-condition mid-70s American car in Caracas, and no one who owns any of those is about to give it up, so I’d say the Granada has lots of life left in it.
Speaking of insanity, here’s what my Vega looked like for about a year while I was in college:
An old colleague of my mom, let’s just call him George, drove an early ’80s rusted Suburban, held completely together by duct tape. Apparently he used to camp in it when he’d go on fishing trips out on Martha’s Vineyard. From this it earned the nickname “The George Motel”.
I’ve restored worse cars than these. But I can’t really remember when.
That Pontiac is definitely worth saving and saveable. My 64 Impala looked that bad for a while. Just don’t give up and work on it a little at a time.
in Michigan that Catalina would be known as “great project with a lot of potential”
The Catalina’s status as a convertible alone makes it worth saving. Original Parts Group, Year One, National Parts Depot, and other sell replacement parts for these. Due to it’s similarity to other Bs, brand new reproduction seat upholstery and interior panels for a ’62-’64 Chevy Impala ( readily available ) would probably work if the owner isn’t concerned with 100% originality. The top and glass is the same also.
The Poncho is pretty rough, but only someone who REALLY loves a ’64 ragtop catalina could justify the effort. Myself, Im pretty ‘meh’ on it. If it were a ’64 Sport Fury….well damn the costs and full speed ahead!
The Granada doesn’t look like it needs TOO much work to make a presentable car. Trouble is again….at what point have you put in more than you could ever recover from the car? The lines of the car aren’t bad looking for a malaise-era midsize coupe. The neo-classic grille is an eyesore though. I do like the rake as well, but those ‘sawblade’ style wheels…good riddance. If it were my car, Id cut out the rust, hammer out any dents and spray bomb it flat black. Id rip that whole front grille off and fab up something like Mad Max’s Interceptor to complete the look. Swap on some weathered but structurally sound slot mags, gut the interior and rebuild it like a race car and swap in some go-bits out of a boneyard Panther, run some straight pipes out the sides.. And then hoon the hell out of it!
How about a ’65 Skylark convertible?
The Catalina is just a click away from a full resto.
http://www.opgi.com/catalina/
The Granada, not so much.
Something isn’t right here.This looks like Canadian Parisienne, not a Catalina. Devoid of any ornamentation, the wipers are the giveaway.
All US Pontiacs (all B & C body BOPS for that matter) had opposed wipers, this car has parallel ones like a Chevy. Yet the Catalina badges look original to the car.
It looks like a Canadian model alright.
Good catch on the wipers. A Parisienne would have had the name plate letters on the quarter. Very strange combo. Did thet ever sell Caralinas in Canada? I wonder if it is an X-Frame car since that would settle the issue.
Catalinas were sold in Canada but they were very rare.
The interior fixtures like the wheel and signal stalk are US Pontiac, but the wipers….
Another thing, from this angle, I think I can barely make out a muffler and pipe under the drivers door, which would indicate an X-frame. I respectfully request that Mr. Skinner take a look underneath if he ever encounters it again.
The Pontiac? If the running gear is good and the body and chassis safe, I would patch the holes, get a new top and try and source what every interior parts I could.
I wouldn’t worry about colour matching inside, just whatever would cover the bare metal.
Paint the bodywork matt black, and you would have a pretty nice rat cruiser that could be used without worry.
Oh and leave the badges and chrome as is too!
+1. The only thing that really bugs me about this is the mismatched colour on the front clip.
I think the Pontiac is too far gone for me. I’m sure the bottom is rusted out like a flintstone car. The Grenada would be OK if it has a 351 in it. If it were mine I would get a Versailles front clip and trunk lid. Still it is a compact and I could never see my self getting one. They having one. I drove one as a cab and it held up but just seemed to small and flimsy and it had annoying door handles that no one could figure out how to open and it burned as much gas as a full sized ltd. So I would turn them both down. I it was a t bird I would be interested.
Ive owned and driven dozens of cars in worse condition than those two when you pay under $500 and its registered you really cant be fussy about a few dents rust spots and upholstery tears and Ive driven such junk heaps the length and breadth of Australia 100s of kms from any repair facilities, why? because if it stops from something serious/expensive its no financial loss to walk away.
c’est une ‘rodent’auto!! lol (the bebe spawn of the original ratrods) ..these are THE BEST wheels you can own!!! 🙂
…wherever you rumble, grumble, shudder and shake guys want to talk to you and the chicks want a ride ..this the way to instant automotive Elvis Presleydom 🙂
That Catalina has maybe two days of rust repair to do. The dent in the left quarter would cause me more concern than the rust. Even slapping an even coat of epoxy primer on it would make it look totally presentable. You’d never make money doing it, but if you wanted a Catalina 2+2 convert. to drive, this doesn’t look like a bad option.
Considering that it has good rubber, the Poncho might be mechanically fine and is in the process of restoration. A ’64 Pontiac in any condition is a rare sight here in Ontario, and a car like that would be snapped up and restored into a nice fair-weather ride. It doesn’t have to be showroom-original, but there’s plenty you can do with an old car like that – your only restriction is your imagination and your wallet. Besides, a good-looking car isn’t worth much if the brakes, steering and drivetrain are shot. As for the Granada, I was never a big fan of them. Still, they’re easier to get parts for. I’d strip it, paint it flat black and drop a Mustang GT drivetrain into it.
My own opinion is pretty close to Paul’s, I think. I would say though that both of the Pontiac’s bumpers appear to be quite straight. That’s a strong point if a restoration or a refurbishment is planned. I’ve seen so freakin’ many otherwise nice cars around here whose bumpers were dented or twisted….
Granadas, on the other hand, were pieces of crap from the get-go. If the owner’s getting some use out of it he’s lucky.
It’s barely broken in. Got another 150K, easy.
Who knows what the Catalina owner is thinking? Who cares? Maybe he’s irrational about convertibles, as I admit proudly to being, and has neither the time, inclination nor resources to restore the thing. In many ways, I’d rather drive an old, time-beaten ’64 Pontiac convertible over a sterile, cloned 2014 Utilappliance. More power to him. There’s nothing like the pure joy of driving open-air style, whatever you’re piloting.
A quick search of the inter-toobs shows Catalina convertibles going from 18k and up for drivers. Hagerty shows the 2+2 convertible going for $28k for the base model and up to $38-40k for the tri-power 421. Restoration costs could easily exceed value unless you were able to do most of the work yourself.
I had never considered a late 70’s Granada worth rescuing or collectable. It might make a cheap toy though. Find a wrecked Mustang, swap the rims and tires, snatch the engine and tranny for a swap, a few rattle cans of satin or matte black paint, and your ready to raise hell til ya break it. Might even be able to reuse the bucket seats from the ‘Stang too.
Most likely, the Poncho will be someone’s unrealized dream, the Ford is some kids first car with hot rod dreams, both probably will soon be in the scrapyard.
I know I’ve posted this link before but I’d like to invite you to look through this gallery. It is a document of my “restoration” of a 1964 Mercury Comet. While perusing keep in mind that as of right now I have less that $4000 in the car including the $350 purchase price. It’s easy to get overwhelmed when looking at cars in this condition but if the body is reasonably solid and the engine turns the car can probably be saved in your home garage.
https://plus.google.com/photos/109020522851068365085/albums/5629038676719951297