(first posted 6/11/2012) Paul Niedermeyer and I have occasionally described ourselves as yin and yang when it comes to Curbside Classics. So, when Paul the Yin brought us a 1967 Pontiac Tempest that was a GTO wannabe awhile back (here), his car reminded me of a car I shot last summer. May I (Yang) present a 1966 Pontiac GTO.
Except maybe it’s not. I really don’t know. I have been wondering how to approach this car for quite awhile, but there is no time like the present. Since Yin gave us red, Yang shall present green. Reef Turquoise, actually. Mrs. JPC and my daughter came home early one evening and announced that there was a cool old car parked outside of the neighborhood Mexican eatery, and that I should go and check it out. I did, and they were right. Here it is. But what, exactly, is it?
As Paul told us, everybody and his brother has taken an old Tempest and turned it into a GTO clone that is indistinguishable from the genuine article to most of us who are unschooled in the VINtracacies of Poncho identification. This is understandable on one level, because the GTO is certainly one of the most iconic cars of the muscle car era, and widely considered to be the one that gave rise to the genre in 1964. It was John DeLorean, as head of the Pontiac Division, who led the guerilla campaign to stuff the big engine in the lightweight A body, contrary to GM’s corporate policy. The lore has become well known that by the time upper management found out about the subterfuge, the car was a hit. DeLorean kept his job and everyone else in the industry jumped on the big engine/small car bandwagon.
Here is my quandry. You will note that this car is an automatic with a column shift and no console separating its bucket seats. A review of the Pontiac sales literature of the time indicates that such a combination was possible. Is this one of those cars? If so, how depressing – a rip-roaring 389 with either a 4 barrel or triple 2 barrels trying to do its job through a miserable 2 speed automatic. Ugh. DeLorean could not have been very happy about that. In the brochure, the full sizer proudly boasts of a Turbo Hydramatic. The GTO? The generic “automatic transmission” doesn’t even merit a name. You can almost see the copywriters blushing just a bit as they typed it. But if anything could overcome the inherent weakness of the two speed drive, it would be the hairy chested big engine in the still-lightweight A body.
So, is this a genuine Goat? Or is this one of those many Tempest 326s that had a little cosmetic surgery (or has “had some work done” as we may more euphamistically say). To paraphrase the title of an old song, I know a little bit about a lot of things, but I don’t know enough about GTOs. So, I am going to leave the CC Commetariat whether this is a genuine GTO or whether it is the result of a Tempest combined with some money, some wrenches and a parts catalog.
But just because I don’t know the answer, doesn’t mean that I am above a little speculation. If you are doing breast augmentation on a Tempest, why do you stop short of a full console/floor shift conversion? Why do you paint it turquoise instead of resale red? And where are those redline tires on the Rally wheels? If you have a real column-shift GTO that has to be one of the rarest of them all, why would you throw in a homemade console thingy and drive the car out to a neighborhood Mexican restaurant and leave it unattended? I guess it does have “The Club” protecting it. And wouldn’t a restoration worthy of such a car have body seams that line up better than these? Just because I can ask these questions, don’t think that I have any idea how to answer any of them.
When I was a kid, my next door neighbor’s mother drove one of these – beige with a black vinyl roof and a 4 speed. One thing that I vividly recall about that car was the plastic woodgrain steering wheel, that I thought was one of the coolest things I had ever seen up to that time. My other vivid memory is how big of a mark the black handgrips on my Schwinn Stingray left along the paint on the left rear fender. Even though it rubbed out, my friend’s mother was not pleased. Mrs. Bordner’s ’66 was my favorite of her three GTOs (she later had a dark green ’68 and a lime green ’71). Still, the car did not carry the street cred among the neighborhood kids of Mr. Colchin’s Avanti down the block. The Avanti was supercharged, you see. And red. And any self-respecting 8 year old could tell you that any car with a supercharger (especially a red one) was faster than any tan car without. This only confirmed the other universal test of a car’s performance. The Avanti’s speedometer went to 160, while the GTO’s topped out at a mere 120. Only as we got older would we pay attention to esoteric things like the additional one hundred cubes under the hood of the Goat that made considerably more than the R2 Avanti’s 290 horses.
I have always considered the 1966 model to be the ultimate GTO. And it’s not just me. At nearly 97,000 units, the ’66 was GTO’s peak of popularity. In fact, this is one of the few 1966 cars that did not drop in sales from 1965’s industry-wide record breaking year. It is not hard to see from the lines of this car how DeLorean’s finely tuned team at the Pontiac Motor Division had their collective fingers on the pulse of the American youth market. The longer I look at this, the more I marvel at its nearly perfect styling. How many cars of the mid 1960s can we say was better looking than this one?
This was the first significant revision since the GTO came out as a 1964 model. I can only imagine the car-lust that this car would have caused on the auto show circuit in late 1965. No need for scantily clad women to drum up enthusiasm at the Pontiac exhibit that year. And is that a young Paul Niedermeyer drooling over the white OHC 6 LeMans Sprint in the background? Pontiac truly did build excitement in 1966.
But back to the question of the day. Is it live or is it Memorex? Does she or doesn’t she? Is you is or is you ain’t? Sorry, I jumped aboard the obsolete metaphor bus, then missed my stop. I see that this car lacks that woodgrain steering wheel. Maybe it was an option, or maybe it came with the console. Or maybe this is the giveaway that this car is (or was) “just” a Tempest.
However, as Paul so ably pointed out, being “just” a Tempest was no small thing in 1966-67. This was a beautiful car, and would have looked no less attractive in anodized aluminum wheelcovers and whitewalls and with that 326 logo on the fender.
Maybe Paul’s red ’67 and this aqua ’66 are not so much Yin and Yang, as they are “before” and “after” GTO plastic surgery. And if I can say nothing else definitively about this car, I can positively state that I like this color MUCH better than I like resale red.
I bet Israel. The clone crowd would have added a floor shift & changed the color to red or black. this is one of my favoriite year GTOs in one of my favorite colors.
On the contrary, there is nothing more stupid to me than a bucket seat column shift car. My step-sister’s ’69 Camaro was ordered the same way — it even had the 2-speed trans.
About 12-13 miles from where we live in rural NC, there’s one of these sitting in an open barn not 40 feet from the road, It’s right there but all you can see are two stacked headlights since the rest of the car is blocked by stacks of old appliances.
I asked wife to stop the car as I had to know what it was — turns out it was real ’66 GTO in the above color, only with black bucket seats & console. Awful 2-speed transmission but the car still wore its original wheelcovers.. The hood was ajar a bit & I noticed a 4-barrel, not three-twos. It was in perfect shape from what I could see & must have been sitting there 15-20 years.
Too bad everyone everyone puts the Rally I or Rally II wheels on these when they restore them “to original”.
I believe that it was GM’s practice at the time, that if you ordered an automatic and bucket seats, but not a console, then the shifter would be on the column.
That was still GM’s policy at least well into the ’80s. Manuals by then were always on the floor, console or no, but automatic shifters would be on the column on cars that offered bench seats if you ordered buckets but not a console. On the 1980 X body even console-equipped automatics got a column shift; that was changed for ’81.
Would you please share location in ruaral NC, could the car be for sale?
Thanks,
I dont know anything about the differences between a GTO and Tempest, so I am just pulling this opinion FMA. But I could see a guy with a nice looking Tempest simply slapping on some GTO badges and calling it a day. Its much more expensive to change it out to a floor-shift center console, and since he didnt put stock wheels on it, I would guess he isnt going for the full on restoration anyway. Maybe he did a decent respray and bodywork on the Tempest to get it road ready as a driver, and in the future will be dropping in a mean big block 4-speed combo, just hasnt gotten the funds yet.
Or maybe it really is a super rare 2-sp auto GTO, and the guy just doesn’t care to restore it, he enjoys driving it as is, complete with period correct aftermarket wheels. Those are not my favorite wheels, but they do look good on that car!
As for the color, I like this much better than red anyway, IMO these big long early cars look better in lighter colors.
The rear tail panel was different on the GTO. Changing from Tempest taillights to GTO units required a bit of cutting and welding…not for the faint of heart. The GTO tailights in ’66 are absolutely beautfiul aren’t they?
A lot of LeMans & Tempest cars were bucket seat console cars.
FWIW there’s no such terms as big & small block in the Pontiac lexicon. They are all the same block, with the exception of the short deck 265-301(and the super rare, race-only 303), which isn’t really recognized by the cognoscenti anyway.
Also, the 2-speed auto versions aren’t as rare as you might think. Remember, a lot of people wanted the look but weren’t really had-core performance freaks.
Much like a 2-wheel drive SUV today.
As a kid growing up the S.F. Bay Area, the majority of these I remember seeing on the streets were column shift automatics . . . 2-speeders until ’67. Most of them had the full wheel covers . . . . not rallyes. It seemed older couples had these in the day. And most of the ’67-’69’s I remember seeing had vinyl tops and the 389/400 single quad. Only one I remember in my youth that fit the epitome of what a Goat is to a collectors was a high school acquaintance who had a dark metallic blue ’65 Goat with factory mid-sixties style rallyes, four speed and a 389 with three deuces.
You’d have to slap on an entirely different rear end, too. No easy task. The Le Mans had no louvers. It had cute little parentheses-looking taillights. No louvers.
Well is this you George 1966 GTO from CW?
1966 GTO and 1965 Grand Prix are my Holy Grail. Actually any full-size 1965, especially the 2+2. 421. Mmmmmmmmm.
Whether it is a “Tempest” in a teapot or a genuine GTO makes little difference to me – it’s drop-dead beautiful no matter what.
Come to think of it, dad always wanted the Olds F-85 version of these. I had to agree with him. Me? Make mine a Chevelle…
THere is no “small block” Pontiac V8. From 1955 up to 197?, they were all pretty much the same block. The 421 and 455 had some internal modifications, probably to clear the crankshaft counterweights. But it was all the same block. The 326 (335 actually) was just a smaller displacement 389. There was no “stuffing” a 389 into the space for the 326. Same block. There may have been external differences like water pump housing and pulley arrangement, but the block itself was the same.
You are correct about the Pontiac V8 block being essentially the same block, whether in 326 or 389 form. However, I was referring to displacement rather than physical engine size. There had been a GM policy in place that limited A body models to a maximum displacement of 330 cubic inches, which was the size of the smallest-displacement Olds V8. John DeLorean and Pete Estes snuck their way around the displacement limit and installed the 389 that had previously been available only in the full sized cars.
But your point is a good one, in that it is easy to forget that not everybody in the 60s did the “small block”/”big block” thing. I am no expert in GM V8 engines, for the smaller GM divisions, it was necessary to get more variation in displacement out of a single design than over at Chevrolet or Ford. Pontiac (and I believe) Oldsmobile had V8s that were very versitile from a displacement standpoint.
Well, yes and no. As Fred said, the Pontiac engine is largely the same, whatever the displacement (although the 421/428/455 had larger journals and the 301 was extensively redesigned to reduce its weight). By 1961, both Oldsmobile and Buick had distinct large and small V8s. With later iterations, the big and small block engines had a lot of design similarities, but they weren’t the same in the way a Pontiac 350 and 400 were.
(Incidentally, the Olds and Buick versions of the aluminum 215 were not identical, either. The block is basically the same, but they have different heads and pistons.)
1955 to 1981, Pontiac V8. No small or big blocks.
Only the early transaxle Tempests had the 336 CID size. From 1964, they truly were 326s.
As I recall, in 1964 GTO was an option package for the Le Mans, and not a separate model. That would account for the fact that the VIN doesn’t indicate whether or not a Le Mans is a GTO or not. I would think, however, that the VIN would indicate that the engine was a 389 if it was a real GTO.
Probably not my favorite color but it is a refreshing change to the red, black, or white Goats one used to see in the day. The wheels aren’t quite period correct. The original American Torq Thrust Ds would have had gray spokes with a machined rim. The fully polished units that this car has came way later, but look good anyway.
The option package was the subterfuge they used to sneak in the 389 wasn’t it? Wouldn’t a GTO be the only way to get a 389 in 64?
All I have to offer here is the 1966 Tempest (yes, it’s a “real” one!) that was my grandparents car which ultimately ended up in my posession years later.
OHC Six and two-speed Powerglide, plus the “Wondertouch™” power steering and brakes made this a true road trip car. I remember the grands and my parents always commenting on how easily the car would cruise up to 90 or so.
When I got it, the OHC Six top end had already succombed, so I built a mild four-bolt Chevy 350 and mated it to a THM350. I’ll never forget the evening my grandmother helped me install the engine in the car out in her driveway!
I left the exterior of the car as you see it in the photo – bone stock. It was my “sleeper GTO.”
That car is gorgeous. Nice color combo. LIke the wheelcovers — those were the ones on the GTO “barn find” I blathered about previously.
The two-speed automatic in the mid-sixties Tempest is NOT Powerglide (unless somebody has replaced it with a non-stock transmission). It’s Pontiac’s version of the Super Turbine 300/Jetaway two-speed, minus the variable-pitch stator used by Buick and Olds from 1964-67.
I have always been curious about this. Just how different was this unit from the Powerglide. I recall being around these cars, including many years with my family’s 64 Cutlass. The unit certainly had that PG-like whine at idle in Park. Were these based off of the PG somehow, or did one or some combination of the Divisions get together with a clean sheet of paper to design a fresh 2 speed auto that was not invented at Chevrolet?
Same basic design, but a little more stout, with extra clutch packs and such. And the BOP bolt pattern of course.
The latter. See, when the senior compacts were introduced for 1961, each originally had a different transmission: Olds had the smaller Roto Hydra-Matic, Buick a two-speed Torque Drive transmission of its own design, and Pontiac the two-speed TempesTorque transaxle, which was based on Powerglide, but had some unique features; both the TempesTorque and Torque Drive had a “split-torque” function in high gear that allowed the engine to turn the output shaft both through the converter and directly through the front planetary, analogous to a diesel-electric locomotive. (The intention was to reduce slippage at cruising speeds.)
Even for GM, having three different automatics was expensive, particularly since none of those three cars was selling in what GM would have considered big numbers. When Buick, Oldsmobile, and Pontiac started planning the more conventional mid-size ’64 A-bodies, there was pressure from upstairs to develop a common automatic transmission. Their engineers sat down and developed a clean-sheet two-speed/torque converter automatic (I think it was primarily a Buick design, with input from the others, but I don’t recall for sure). It inevitably had some similarities with Powerglide, but it wasn’t the same transmission and I doubt they shared any significant components.
The big difference was the variable-pitch stator used on Buick and Oldsmobile versions through 1967. Pontiac never used that feature, perhaps to save money, perhaps because their V-8 wasn’t at all short of torque even in its smaller displacements.
Excellent clarification, except for a minor quibble: diesel-electric locomotives have no mechanical connection of any sort between their power plants and the wheels. They are strictly electric locomotives, with their own generator on board, instead of an external source.
The split-torque function in these automatics reflects a time (late fifties/early-sixties) when fuel consumption was still more of an issue. Gas prices kept dropping all through the sixties, in inflation-adjusted terms, and even more so in terms of purchasing power. Hence the trend to bigger engines and “softer” automatics. For a while, anyway.
I can belatedly add a bit more to this: What really distinguished the Super Turbine 300 (which was initially developed by Buick to replace the Dual Path Turbine Drive used on the Y-body Special/Skylark) from Powerglide was that it was fully vacuum-controlled.
Powerglide had a vacuum modulator that varied engagement pressure based on manifold vacuum, but it still used throttle valve pressure to signal load: Throttle valve pressure pushes the automatic shift valve in the down (low gear) direction, opposed by governor pressure.
With the ST-300, the vacuum modulator controlled both shift points and shift firmness based on manifold pressure rather than the physical movement of the throttle. So, shifts more closely reflected actual load conditions, with automatic altitude compensation to boot. (Turbo Hydra-Matic worked on the same principles, which was one of the reasons why it was smoother than a lot of rivals, even other Simpson gearset automatics.)
Ah, yes – I believe you’ve corrected me before on that… Back when I had the car, I always heard the two-speed referred to as “power glide,” and I’ve always had that stuck in my head.
All I remember was the engine would wiiiiiiiiiiiind out in “first,” and then mush into “second.” You really couldn’t even feel the shift.
Actually Ed, the two-speeder was the Buick developed “Super Turbine” unit made available for B-O-P. The only thing in common with the Chevy Powerglide was that they both were 2-speeders.
FWIW, I cast my vote for it being the real thing. Why would someone go to the trouble of changing out the rear panel and everything else, to leave the column shifter? One of the strategies to sell more GTOs was to offer a wider array of versions, Starting in ’68, even a 2 barrel lo-po version 400 was available. It’s the formula that worked so well for the Mustang.
As mentioned before, a 66 GTO has a totally unique rear panel that makes cloning a LeMans or Tempest into a GTO is not easy, also, the 2 speed automatic and column shift are not “super rare”, true the automatic sucks, but they sold a bunch of them, in fact, due to the nature of the person that would have bought an automatic, you would probably find an automatic survivor today, it wouldn’t have bothered me in 66, I would have gotten a 4 speed anyway.
The wood grain on the dash is another GTO only feature, though the wood wheel was an option. I believe buckets were standard on all GTO’s and the base trans was a3 speed manual transmission with Hurst shifter, neither had a console, it was a stand alone option regardless of manual or automatic, this interior is what you would have gotten if you ordered an automatic, but didn’t spec a console, buckets with a column shift.
I often wonder if some customers that ordered these cars incorrectly assumed that bucket seats also meant floor shift. Why even have bucket seats when there’s nothing separating them? It’s not like these seats were supportive or anything!
Not if they looked at the brochure or order sheet or had a really lame salesman. Options were where they made their money, and it also allowed them to have a lower base price. Take a look at the 60’s Pontiac Performance brochures the words “extra cost” appear many times. Back then you sat down at the salesman’s desk and went through the order sheet line by line while the salesman referred to his order guide and tried to upsell you to getting everything, as well as made sure that it was a combo the factory would build w/o a special order. IE specific axle ratios available with specific transmissions ect.
Bucket seats mean a long-legged man can let a short person/wife drive on long trips. Or vice versa.
In 1966 the baseline transmission was a three-on-the-tree. Check out the ’66 brochure on Old Cars Brochures.
Not on a GTO, GTO’s all had a floor shift 3 speed manual standard with a Hurst linkage, other Pontiacs did have a 3 on the tree however.
Not all 66/67 GTO autos were floor shift. I have an original (53K) 67 built 9/66 that is a column shift with buckets. Column shift on autos was the standard unless you ordered the console. There are numerous pieces of literature out there confirming this. My GTO with the auto/column is no different and just as fast as the auto/console.
Pretty typical . . . .
With the mix and match stuff that can go on with older cars like this, even I’m a little fuzzy on what all a 66 Goat could have. Looking at it, it does look like a genuine Goat, and someone else mentioned the tail lights, which were a lot different. (see my pix)
I could see the column shift even with the GTO package, GM would build all kinds of things if you would ask them.
I subscribe to High Performance Pontiac and I recently read an article in there about a 1972 Trans Am that was painted all red (not an option for ’72 T/A’s) and came with a column shift automatic. It was special ordered by the guy who ran SCCA’s Trans Am division back in the 1970’s. He got what he wanted. So, I could see this happening on a GTO also…
FWIW, I really like this car the way it is. Maybe the only thing better would be a 442, but I wasn’t that crazy about the contemporary styling of the Cutlasses back then. I much prefer the 1968 and later models. I had a 1972, so I am a little biased in that area… 🙂
Any 70 to about 74 or 75 F-body got the column shift if you ordered auto trans and no console. The Trans-Am wasn’t exempt from this policy. Column shift T/As are not as unheard of as you might think.
I may be suffering from the same misconception that the OP has here, that is: no GTOs without consoles and floor shifters. I guess I’ve fallen into the trap that says what’s popular now was popular then…
I can’t remember seeing many F bodies with column shifts, but there may be more out there than I realize. I do remember seeing low line Firebirds with column shifts, but very few.
It might have only been in 64 and 65 since the GTO was technically an option package, but I do believe that at least a few were made with bench seats. I let my membership in the POCI lapse for a few years now, but IIRC, someone in the club was trying to put together a registry of bench seat GTOs.
I’m sure there are a few column shift T/A’s out there; never saw one in the flesh . . . . . but over the years, I saw a SHITLOAD of Camaros with column shift . . . . the ’74 brochure has an LT with buckets and a column shift THM.
You guys are bringing me around. All of this talk reminds me that my stepmom had a 68 Cutlass Supreme with bucket seats and a column shift automatic. I guess these were more prevalent than I had believed. Still, I am not sure why anyone would have wanted such a combination.
I have wondered the same thing. Automatic Camaros up through the ’77 (& possibly ’78) model year were column shift unless the D55 Console was ordered.
Firebirds were similar although I’m not sure of what year the console became standard. 20 so years ago, a guy was trying to sell me his ’74 Formula 400 Firebird.. It was ordered with the weird Fuel Economy gauge package & was column shift. It may have been a ’75 as I’m not sure if that gauge setup was availiable in ’74. Weird either way.
While the performance enthusiasts might look down on the 2-speed column shift automatic, it is certainly true that a 389 engine in that size car had more than enough torque…it didn’t really need a lot of gears. Like my 383 Barracuda, which would have been fine with a 3-speed transmission instead of the 4-speed as long as it had a syncromesh first gear.
Whatever that car is, it’s a winner. A kid that lived down the street from me in 1970 had a 66 or 67 GTO. A nice car, white with a black interior. He was about 19 or 20 at the time and the car needed a new battery. He would manually push it down our street, jump in and pop the clutch to start it. One day it wouldn’t start as he’s popping the clutch and he coasts down this little hill which led to the river. A couple of minutes later, I see the guy walking back up the hill and back to his house.
He got a new battery after that.
Yes, kids, there were column shift ‘muscle cars’. And, check drag racers and see many have Powerglides, not 4 on the floor as some “assume”.
As to ‘Why would someone want column shifter?’, well, people back then were not like today’s conformist consumer culture.
The Pontiac GTO story has been told over and over and well documented. There is no reason to make “assumptions”.
I was also going to mention that a lot of drag cars have 2-speed automatics. You want the engine to still be in its powerband after each upshift. With factory gearing, I think a lot of cars with 3-speeds would only get through 1st and 2nd gears by the end of the quarter mile anyhow.
There’s also the point we previously discussed vis-à-vis Powerglide, which is that some of the two-speeds, having lighter internals, consumed less horsepower than a three-speed TorqueFlite or THM.
Bingo.
My Challenger doesn’t hit 4th gear until you’re past the finish line, unless I launch it perfectly, and even then, it shifts just as it hits the finish line. My best is a 13.34 at 105.74. I kind of wish it had something like 3.55 gears instead of the 3.06 it has just too see what the difference would be, but the thing is so hard to launch decently now, steeper gears would probably just make tire smoke.
+1 we are used to consoles now but back then a lot of people complained about not being able to slide across the front and exit out the other side. my guess is that it was bought by a some guy who compromised with his wife on the choice of column shift automatic. i can imagine my father doing something like this…
Real or not its a very nice car auto on the tree wouldnt be my choice and Id swap it out but it could be original if it was offered its the gently used cars that have survived cars that got hard use no matter the model usually got scrapped early on.
My brother in law’s then new 67 GTO.
I’ll take a 67 with the 400 and turbo 400 3 speed auto. Put a vinyl top on mine too. I don’t need a hood tach, but I sure would like a/c, hd suspension and the top radio option available.
My mom had a new ’67 GTO hardtop coupe with the 400, 3-speed auto with column shift and no console, Linden Green with black vinyl roof and black Morrokide interior, a/c, power steering and brakes, and positraction, plus a non-factory 8-track/FM player (I think the factory 8-track was only offered in the full-size cars that year). A friend of ours was a Pontiac dealer and this replaced our ’65 Bonneville convertible. Unfortunately I totaled it in a hydroplaning accident on the interstate outside of Hartford on my way to college in 1974; radial tires and disc brakes might have helped, but of course it had bias-plys and drums all around.
I’m surprised to see this one – this whole generation of GM intermediates rusted quickly; in fact our ’67 was stripped and repainted after 3 or 4 years, by the dealer, because it was already starting to rust.
I vote OEM. Looks like a strippo, base GTO hardtop with just a couple of options (auto, radio). Probably originally just came with dog-dish hubcaps, too (although this one looks like it has extra rocker panel trim). Maybe an end-of-model-year car where they just slap on whatever’s left before the model year changeover.
Back then, musclecars could be ordered like the non-musclecar versions simply because they came down the same assembly lines and it was very easy to make the same combinations.
This car has A/C as well.
Ah once upon a time when the dealer would order what you wanted and you wanted what you got…
I kind of miss those days. Just about everybody factory ordered cars and then the wait was on for that call from the dealership. A co-worker at my job in high school factory ordered a new 66 Lemans pillared coupe in metallic blue with buckets and column automatic, 326 engine, AM radio, full wheel covers, blackwalls, no PS or PB. I got to drive it quite a bit and it had would perform pretty well despite the two-speed. It was a little too light in the rear and would fishtail in icy weather if you got on it too fast. Beautiful car, loved the 66-67s. My great aunt’s last car was a factory ordered 67 Tempest Custom coupe with the OHC six and automatic, PS/PB, dog dish caps and blackwalls. Another good one.
I don’t know what sales figures look like but I remember seeing a fair number of GTOs and other muscle cars from this era with column automatics.
Another factory ordered car: a friend in high school special ordered a 67 442 convertible with 4speed and bench seat because he did not want the ladies to sit far away in a bucket seat.
Another factory ordered car: a friend in high school special ordered a 67 442 convertible with 4speed and bench seat because he did not want the ladies to sit far away in a bucket seat.
Yeah just cause you want power doesn’t mean you should have to forego cuddles…
But of course we’re getting to the point where you can’t hardly buy a truck without a console.
The last car I can recall someone factory ordering to get exactally what they wanted was my Dad’s buddy Bob who ordered a 1987 Oldsmobile 442 and managed to place his order before it was announced that 1987 would be the last year for the 442. He ordered his with every option EXCEPT t-tops because every car he every had with t-tops leaked. After the news broke the dealer desperately tried to buy the car back but Bob wouldn’t take any of his offers for it. 😛
T-tops added weight and rattled too.
Not really, many people bought cars right from the dealership lot, my grand parents and parents never ordered a car, they would shop around to see who had what they wanted and they made a deal on that. Yes people could order what they wanted exactly, but most would make do with the instant gratification of driving a new car home right now.
Not literally, no; most cars were bought off the lot. I was trying to say that lots of people – from all income levels and all walks of life – ordered cars in the 60’s. I grew up in a small midwestern town and I could provide dozens of examples from family, friends, and neighbors. Even waitresses at the restaurant I worked for in high school ordered cars, everything from the LeMans noted above to an Impala SS, to a first-in-town 65 Mustang (Tropical Turquoise, a great color – my cousin later ordered a 67 Mustang in Frost Turquoise). One uncle always ordered his Chevies because he wanted a nice model but with no equipment – what dealer would have stocked his 66 Impala with a six cylinder, three on the tree, and dog dish caps?
It was a fun experience sitting down with the salesman and the order book but for me as a kid it was sometimes disappointing because my Dad wouldn’t order much in terms of optional equipment and I wanted a lot more boxes checked off! That would change later on when he bought fully loaded cars off the showroom floor so I guess not ordering had its advantages, too…
My family never ordered – they were people who would go into the lot in mid-summer to buy at the tail end of the model year. You either took what was on the lot, or the dealer would try to find one close to what you wanted and trade for it. My mother never would have ordered power windows in her 72 Cutlass Supreme – that would be decadent, you see. But because Cutlass Supreme coupes were in short supply in July of 1972, she gave up on her first choice on color and took the power windows to get one with air.
We had one family friend who insisted that you should NEVER order a car. If you picked the one in front of you, you knew what you had and didn’t risk getting one that was put together badly. But then, he was a Chrysler guy, so his fear was quite a reasonable one in the early 1970s.
Before the 70’s most cars were ordered by the purchaser it wasn’t until the mid 70’s that the shift was made. Prior to that time dealers didn’t stock that many cars and the cars the stocked they ordered based on what they thought they could sell. After the first energy crisis and the resulting economic woes mfgs, to keep the lines running, starting making cars they thought they could sell. The next thing you know we were introduced rebates to move the cars that were overproduced or were the EXACT car that someone wanted.
Remember until the mid 70’s the Olds advertising tag line was “Can we build one for you?” and they switched it to “We built one for you” after the switch was made from most cars being ordered to most cars being bought off the lot.
I may have told this story before, but in 1971 I was working at a resort parking cars. In pulled a fairly new (1970 IIRC) Chevelle wagon, woodgrain sides, etc, looking loaded. I walked around the back and noticed a baby crib in the rear area (how did anyone survive?). I gave the driver his ticket, and got in, First thing I noticed was that it had a clutch… wth? Then I saw it had a 4 speed (bench seat). I fired it up, it had the SS dash, Tach, etc. I gunned it, and the cowl induction flap opened up! I was thinking ‘what?’. I parked it, and looked it over, woodgrain, SS 396 emblems on the fenders, on the grill. Opened the hood, all the SS pieces, cowl induction, etc. Looked under it, dual exhausts, 12 bolt rear, and so on. Being your basic 17 y/o car freak, I knew what an SS had, and this car had it all. I’d seen some strange ‘one offs’ before, but this took the cake. I kept the keys in my pocket, so I’d be sure I got the car out. When the owner came out, I brought the car down, and, as he handed me my tip, I asked him “where the heck did you get this car?” He told me that he’d wanted an SS, his wife wanted a wagon, and after about 6 or 7 weeks going back and forth with the factory, and a cooperative dealer, this is what he got. He said he’d had to put down a pretty hefty deposit, and they called him the day it was due in, so he could watch it come off the transporter. He waited while they prepped it, and took it home. He was really proud of his car, and I don’t blame him.
PS, I posted this story on a Chevelle forum, and got FLAMED “You’re full of s**t, they NEVER built that car!!!!”…. or “The owner LIED to you!!!”.. “IT WAS A CLONE!!!! (why someone would clone a less than one year old version of a car as common as grass, they wouldn’t address). Course, since Chevrolet doesn’t have any build records from those years, it’s impossible to say what was or wasn’t built. I knew quite a few ‘custom ordered’ cars around the rural community where I grew up. Dealers would do damn near anything if it’d sell a car. It was by no means uncommon for someone to go thru the books and manage to get some “impossible” cars built, if they were patient. Anyway, if you’re going to go berserk about this, save your breath. It’s just a story about a really neat car I saw years ago. I saw it, I drove it, I talked to the owner, it was real.
I still wonder what happened to that car.
I’m guessing it’s legit, but it’s just a guess. GTOs were a rare beast in Canada until about 1970. I do know column shifts were fairly common in muscle cars, despite some folks assumptions that they all came with buckets and console. I recall 2 firebirds, a ’68 and a ’71, with 400s and column shift automatics. The ’68 had a weird bench seat with bucket type backs and a drop down arm rest. The ’71 had standard high back buckets with nothing in between. Maybe it was a Pontiac thing.
I installed a Hurst Autostick in the ’71 for the guy that owned it and thats why I remember it. So weird combos like that do exist.
Whatever it is, I love it, especially the colour.
This is off topic, I guess, but here goes anyway. Why do new cars come equipped with alloy style wheels, or, at least plastic wheel covers Mage to look like them? What happened to hubcaps with trim rings like the new “New Beetle” offers? Cheaper, and just as useful.
Fuel economy, performance, ride, braking and handling. Aluminum wheels are lighter than steel wheels (at least quality Aluminum wheels). Since it is a rotating mass weight loss there provides a greater benefit to acceleration, braking and fuel economy than the same amount of weight reduction on a non-rotating part. Since wheels are an unsprung weight it means their motion is harder to control so make them lighter and the shocks don’t have to be as stiff to control them and you get better ride and handling.
The plastic wheel covers made to look like aluminum wheels are so the low end models blend in better and they are much much cheaper and lighter than stainless steel the traditional wheel cover material.
FWIW, I would hazard a guess with the lightweight steel wheels that are available these days that it would be a tie compared to the 18, 19 & 20 + alloy wheels that are common on many cars.
For me, I have a car with the steel wheels and full plastic wheel covers. Living in snow country with our daily driver, it is much less expensive to replace a steel wheel and plastic wheel cover than it is an alloy wheel. No matter how hard you try, it’s surprisingly easy to find a pothole or slide into a curb or some other similar catastrophe.
A replacement 17″ steel wheel for my 2009 Pontiac G6? $100. A replacement wheel cover? $40. A replacement 17″ alloy wheel? Between $180 to $240. Each. GM wheels are relatively cheap, too.
A friend of mine pranged a factory alloy on his Ford 500 when it was new; while his insurance covered the replacement, he was shocked to find out that it cost $400 to do so. Just the wheel. The tire was an extra $140 on top of that…
I can’t begin to imagine what those factory 20″ wheels go for, even on the used market. It’s got to be an arm and a leg…
I love alloy wheels on my cars, but for a DD in this part of the world, it’s a hard sell to me.
One thing to consider is total tire and wheel weight. Yes a smaller steel wheel may not weigh that much less than the larger Aluminum wheel but that high profile tire weighs a fair amount more than the low profile one.
I’m not so sure about the cost of replacing the steel and a wheel cover being less. For less than the same cost you quoted I got brand new 17″ aluminum for my wife’s Grand Marquis, granted they are aftermarket OE replacements but the factory wheels weren’t that much more.
However the pricing can vary greatly. For example lots of the OE Mustang 17″ wheels can be had for about what you paid for the steel wheel and wheel cover. On the other hand the list price for 1 OE wheel for my Marauder was over $1200 when they were still available, But with slightly different machining for the center cap and sold as for a V6 Mustang they are about $200 each.
Hi Eric – I was strictly comparing OEM 17″ Pontiac/GM wheels to one another, but from a recycler, not a dealer or factory source. Those prices would be much higher. Additionally, some wheels are less expensive on the market than others; there are (originally) Chevy or Saturn fitments that would work on my car, and they were less money than the ‘original’ Pontiac wheels. Truly, the combinations are almost infinite.
My major issue is that steel wheels on modern cars are pretty darn lightweight as opposed to the ones from years ago. Regardless, they’re pretty darn cheap and look pretty good when clothed in a full wheel cover as they are today. Very durable for life here in the snowbelt where poop happens.
As an example, my wife had a fender bender, her car got sideswiped by a Camry. Our front bumper cover and fender are a little distorted. Oddly, the wheel cover is bore the brunt of the damage. If the same thing happened to an alloy wheel, I’d be out almost $200! As it is, the steel wheel is fine, and I need to order a plastic wheel cover for about $40.
Granted, that’s probably a rare circumstance, but multiply this several times during the usable life of a car, and it adds up.
That said, I still want to drop about $800 for a set of factory alloys. I love the look of them. What can I say? 🙂
Ouch, $100 for a used steel wheel, those prices I quoted were for new.
Search E-bay for used/take-offs if you want to upgrade to factory alloys. I’ve got lots of ones for the summer tires for various cars for pretty cheap. I’ve never spent more than about $500 to my door for a set of 4.
That is a beautiful car. One of the definite high points of Bill Mitchell’s styling prowess.
Our strippo ’67 Chevy Bel Air back in the day was the exact same color, of course with a different name since it was on a Chevy instead of a Pontiac.
Are these modern wheels aluminum or some alloy? Cars come equipped with them with all wheel sizes, not just with those silly 19 and 20 inch wheels. Frankly, I doubt they contribute much to the ride of 90per cent of the vehicles sold with them. They come on everything from subcompacts to one ton pickup trucks. For my ranch trucks, we replace them with steel wheels and sell the mag ones back to the dealer. In our experience, they just don’t hold up well with hard use
Looks like these are 17″ wheels, which would be the absolute maximum I’d run on a car like this. The suspension geometry just doesn’t work with real low profile rubber. 16″ would give a more fitting appearance however.
I admire the valuable data you provide in your articles or blog posts.
If it helps I purchased my 1966 GTO in May of 1968. It has a ST-300 2sp on the column. I always had trouble convincing people it is stock. I have the as built from PHS. I’m in the process of a frame off restoration. No shifter holes cut in the floor.
Bob
Hi Rick, sorry not for sale.
I will be needing a torque converter for my ST-300 with the veriable-pitch stator also called switch-pitch.
any infor where I can find one?
Thanks,Bob
I think the rear bumper is G.T.O.
That is a True G.T.O I have the same care that I’m currently restoring. reef Turquise and Turquise interior also. 389 2 spd on the column.The car was built in California and I have the build sheet that just happened to be under the back seat.I feel these were very rare cars. I would love to get my hands on the actual numbers. Thanks if there are any production numbers on these i would love to see them.
I did a little more research on my 66 GTO.
It came as built ST-300, 2 sp on the column.
Standard torque converter, not a variable pitch like the Old’s and Buick.
Like you,I would also like to know how many were built this way.
Had mine since 1968, doing a frame off restoration.
I did a little more research on my 66 GTO.
It came as built ST-300, 2 sp on the column.
Standard torque converter, not a variable pitch like the Old’s and Buick.
Like you,I would also like to know how many were built this way.
Had mine since 1968, doing a frame off restoration.
He Robert,
I highly suggest contacting Pontiac Historical Services, http://www.phs-online.com
They will give (sell) you exactly what you want to know. I believe they even provide a copy of the original window sticker as well as build number and production info. The package comes with a lot of great info. I used them once and was very impressed with what I got for the price. I believe it is still less than $100.00 for the package.
Nice car, we need some pictures.
Hi Philhawk,
I did order from PHS.
It says 2sp standard on the column, optional on the floor.
It”s doesn’t say how many were built on the column.
Thanks for your reply, any info we can get helps.
Happy New Year
Robert and Phil Thanks for your help.
I was talking to some of my Drag Racing buddy’s and they said that you could really build up that 2spd for the Drag Strip.
That’s something I may be interested in.
Not that I’ll be taking a total restoration to the Strip.
What info can you get on what has to be done?
Thanks, Bob
Me either. But I will see what I can find out.
As others have said, it is most likely a real GTO. The easiest way to be sure is to check the VIN. In ’66, the GTO was it’s own model, not simply an option package on the Tempest like ’64 and ’65. If the first 3 digits are 242, then it’s a GTO.
That reminds me of a GTO that was in my neighborhood growing up. It was a silver ’68, 2 barrel 400 with an automatic on the column.
It’s owner bought it new, right before shipping off to Vietnam, where he was KIA. His parents kept the car at least into the early ’90’s, which was the last time I saw it. We hounded the owner for YEARS to sell it. It was garage kept and driven regularly and as close to a factory perfect GTO you’ll ever find. My friend lived next door, and every time the owner’s dad washed it, we’d go over and bugged him about it. He was very cool about our bothering him though and would answer our questions about it. Now, as a dad myself, I can see why he kept that car and took such good care of it as a remebrance of his son.
I’ve always wondered what happened to that car, and hope that another family member has taken it, or at least it was sold to someone who would care for it properly.
BTW, here is a pic of my “restified” ’66 GTO ‘vert. It was originally a 4bbl, 4 speed, Montero Red, with black interior and white top. It now sports a full roller 462, heavily modded ’66 Tripower KRE heads, Tremec TKO 600 5 speed, 4:11 Moser 12 bolt. It runs 7.60s/mid 90s in the 1/8th mile.
As others have said, it is most likely a real GTO. The easiest way to be sure is to check the VIN. In ’66, the GTO was it’s own model, not simply an option package on the Tempest like ’64 and ’65. If the first 3 digits are 242, then it’s a GTO. ’72 through ’74 models reverted back to option status.
The column shift, no console discussion reminds me of a GTO that was in my neighborhood growing up. It was a silver ’68, 2 barrel 400 with an automatic on the column.
It’s owner bought it new, right before shipping off to Vietnam, where he was KIA. His parents kept the car at least into the early ’90’s, which was the last time I saw it. We hounded the owner for YEARS to sell it. It was garage kept and driven regularly and as close to a factory perfect GTO you’ll ever find. My friend lived next door, and every time the owner’s dad washed it, we’d go over and bugged him about it. He was very cool about our bothering him though and would answer our questions about it. Now, as a dad myself, I can see why he kept that car and took such good care of it as a remebrance of his son.
I’ve always wondered what happened to that car, and hope that another family member has taken it, or at least it was sold to someone who would care for it properly.
BTW, here is a pic of my ground up “restified” ’66 GTO ‘vert. It was originally a 4bbl, 4 speed (no console), Montero Red, with black interior and white top. It now sports a full roller 462, heavily modded ’66 Tripower KRE heads, Tremec TKO 600 5 speed, 4:11 Moser 12 bolt. It runs 7.60s/mid 90s in the 1/8th mile.
This is the genuine deal. Cloners certainly wouldn’t have gone to the trouble to add GTO badges to the door panels and of course, you have the faux woodgrain.
Yes – column shift automatics were indeed standard fare (when the AT was ordered) for GTOs . . . . I grew up in the S.F. Bay Area and remember seeing quite of few ’60s Goats with column shift automatics.
The Jetaway/Super Turbine 2-speeder was there for a reason; THM didn’t/wasn’t available for the ’64 A’s as THM (developed by Buick Division) was a ’64 MY option for the Cadillac (which used the old 4-speed HydraMatic as standard) and the Buick Electra 225. ’65 GM cars (B’s and C’s) offered THM and they were coupled only to big block engines.
The A bodies introduced for ’64 utilized the 2-speeds for cost and engineering reasons and the fact THM would be initially offered on the big cars first. The floor pan stampings were not initially designed nor stamped to surround the THM . . . . this would be rectified for the ’67MY when THM became available . . . . but at first only for big block cars. ’68MY finally saw THM (350s) filter down to small block cars – intermediate/full size and the compacts beginning in ’69 . . . . but as an option – of course. PG’s/Super Turbines/Jetaways were still the first tier automatics through ’70.
All the posts missed the point of the column shift; leeway to make out. Wonder how many posters wouldn’t be here today if their parent had ordered a console.
Something I enjoy with car of the 60’s are the share creased lines and square shoulders.
Today, most everything looks like it comes out a of tube of toothpaste.
JP, next time you see the car and its owner ask him if it’s a legit GTO. You could also ask to see the body tag or VIN number but that might be pushing it.
It’s my favorite year of GTO and I had a 1/25th scale kit of the car. As one of my fellow Canadians said up above we didn’t get these cars until well after the Auto Pact was signed. They’d always turn my head when American tourists showed up in one. Fine Moines indeed!
I can’t imagine the feature car not being a GTO from the factory. It would just take too much effort to convert both the interior and the rear taillight panel of a pedestrian Tempest/Lemans. Without fail, all of the GTO ‘tribute’ cars I’ve seen are given away by the non-GTO taillights. Not too difficult to slap on some repop GTO emblems and a scooped Goat hood. But the other changes take quite a bit more effort.
With that said, JP’s disbelief is understandable. I mean, a relatively basic GTO with options like a 2-speed auto on the column and A/C? Who would order, let alone buy, a brand-new 1966 GTO so equipped? After all these years seeing legions of pristine, car show Goats equipped with Hurst dual-gate auto and 4-speed floor shifters, it’s tough to imagine that there were plenty of GTOs equipped much less seriously. I mean, the GTO was one of the most popular (if not necessarily the fastest) performance cars to ever hit showroom floors. How could one ever leave the factory so mundanely equipped?
On top of that, consider that there are zero new cars that come with a front bench seat and column mounted automatic (the last was the previous generation Impala). The only way to get a new column-mounted auto is to buy a full-size pickup (or maybe one of the full-size SUVs). So, in that context, a column-mounted automatic in a bucket seat car is quite an anachronism.
These basic sixties’ musclecars were a lot more common than one might think. Besides GM, Chrysler musclecars with bucket seat interiors also frequently came with column-mounted automatics, although they usually also had a fold-down center armrest. I don’t really know about bucket seat Fords but I kind of doubt it since, unlike the other guys, a non-console, floor-mounted auto shifter was widely available, mainly starting with the Mustang. I think the only example of a non-console, floor auto shifter in a non-Ford might have been in the early, first-generation A-body Barracuda.
The hardest of making that year of GTO clone would be the taillights. Seems like too much effort.
But as others have said it was easier back then to mix together some oddball options.
I remember drooling over one of these in the “Chequered Flag” back in about 97. Was the same mint colour but may have been a 67. Already way out of my price range in those days.
Whether it is a real GTO or not doesn’t matter to me. It is drop dead gorgeous! If someone went through painstaking, tedious amounts of time. money and energy to create a GTO that is fooling even the most trained eyes then kudos to them. They obviously did a great job! If it is a real GTO, awesome too.
Quite a few GTO’s of this generation were sparsely equipped. Many young guys skrimped and saved for a Goat and didn’t have the bucks for a lot of options. An older cousin had a 1965 pillared coupe with only one option – AM radio. Recall it had buckets, with the 3 speed on the floor. Still was the epitome of cool in 1965. Bought new, it lasted maybe 2 years before stolen and wrecked. He later bought a 1969. A few more options this time – AM radio, power steering, full gages, rally wheels and the very nice wood steering wheel.
Seemed that GTO’s identity subtly changed a bit with the next generation in 1968. Still fast as hell with the 350 HP 400, but more seemed to have automatic, A/C and other luxury options.
I will say that after paying more attention to GM A body cars over the last few years, I would now vote that this is the real thing. That taillight panel would be very difficult to replace, and if someone were going to go to that trouble, why not put every other muscle car cliche on the car too.
This one turned out to be a one-time-only sighting, and I have never seen it since. But it remains one of my more favorite finds to share here.
I see a panther lurking in the background 🙂
In 2016, the appearance of buckets without a console and having a column shifter may seem odd to most of us, but every combination under the sun has existed in terms of seating, consoles, and shifter location. I don’t believe this GTO would have looked all that odd to a lot of people in 1966. The ’60s were a time of experimentation in more ways than one, and American manufacturers offered a lot, optional at extra cost, of course.
From what I can recall, a full console in a car where they were optional was a fairly big deal, and kind of pricy. I did some digging, and the best indicator of price I’ve been able to find is the 1963 Pontiac line. A console with a built-in tach in the full-size was $161.00. That is $1,263.46 in today’s dollars! I don’t have any reason to believe this included bucket seats. In the Tempest, bucket seats were $134.00. A Tempest LeMans “console shift” was $48.00. I’m not sure if this was merely moving the shifter from the column to the console, or if it included the console. But, as you can see, the minimum price for a bucket / console package on the ’63 Tempest LeMans was $1,427.88 in todays dollars. Another way to look at it, the package increased the base price of a Tempest LeMans by a rather considerable 7.5%!
If you want weird, how about a ’64 Thunderbird with standard full console and the shifter always on the column? In the same showroom, a full console on a 1964 Galaxie 500 XL always got you a manual or automatic shifter in the console.
Here’s the evidence……….
The TBird had the column shift because that was the way the Swing Away steering column worked. Putting the lever in Park unlocked the column to allow it to swing out of the way and to the right. When you swung it back and moved the lever into any gear, the column was locked in place. The Swing Away column was available in some regular Fords too, and always with a column shift. Obviously, the growing popularity floor shifts (and the standard tilt column from GM even more) spelled the end to Ford’s unique system.
Ahh, that explains a lot.
When I had my ’65 Riviera, I cross shopped it with similar era T-Birds, and I could not understand what Ford was doing with the shifter – the Riv had a standard automatic shifter in the console.
I had the opportunity to Swing Away a few of those T-Bird columns, but I never put the issues together.
That may explain another thing, when I started a little research this morning, I was thinking of a loaded ’64 Galaxie 500 XL four door hardtop I had seen several times about 20 years ago. I was convinced it had no shifter in the console. When you look at Old Car Brochures, or internet photos of the XL interior, it always has a manual or auto shifter in the console.
I’m beginning to wonder if I recall a unicorn – a loaded XL four door hardtop with a Swing Away. It sure was a pretty and sort of unusual looking car.
I went back for a quick look at the ’64 brochure, and the Galaxie XL was available with a Swing Away, I still can’t find a picture of a console and Swing Away in the same car, but I’ll swear that I did see such a car several times! Even a full compliment of power window switches in the console. Ford must have had a half dozen bespoke console top plates for the XL.
The Swing Away came out in the 61 Thunderbirds, and I only know all of this because I had one. The cars were so low and the wheel so close to the seat, it seemed a good idea. The idea of a floor shift was pretty avant garde in 1961, especially on anything that was not an outright sports car, so the Swing Away column seemed like the perfect solution. I forget when it was offered on Galaxies, maybe 1963-64? The take rate was always really low in Galaxies, so they were not common at all.
My brother has a ’63 Galaxie that was an “Executive” car, we purchased it from the niece of the Ford Regional Rep (who always offered his Demos to family members at year end). It is fully loaded, AM/FM (first year) Thunderbird 390, PW/PB/PS, Electric Windows, AC, and Swing Away wheel.
He has, however, modified it a bit.
https://sites.google.com/site/brothersoldcars/
As usual on this site, I read these posts and they jog memories…
One evening in the early to mid-70’s, I watched a ’66-67 GTO park at the telephone company across the street in Findlay, OH from where I was standing with my parents. I recall that it was dark blue with a contrasting vinyl top, not sure what color the top was all these years later. Naturally, this caused my car-geeky 14-15 year old self to pay attention.
MUCH to my surprise, a middle-aged woman got out of the car and went into the phone company building for some reason. She came back out again about 15-20 minutes later. As she left in the Goat, I could TELL it had an automatic. It also didn’t have the rumbling mufflers one would expect, either.
I’d bet it had a column-shifted automatic…..
It would be interesting to see a break-out of GTOs that were not heavily equipped with performance options but, instead, skewed more towards comfort items such as column automatic and A/C. In fact, it’s conceivable that a big part of the GTO’s allure was that it was somewhat Mustang-like in covering other market demographics. Like the Mustang, it was possible to option a GTO in a manner that wasn’t so much a hardcore, one-dimensional performance car suitable only for track use, but one that could be comfortably driven on a daily basis.
If the numbers were significant enough, it would surely have gotten Delorean’s attention and may have been an inspiration and/or influenced the downsizing of the full-size Grand Prix to the successful, long-hood, short-deck 1969 car which is credited with bringing the personal luxury coupe to the intermediate ranks.
Whatever their proportion of total production, I doubt that “comfort”-equipped GTOs like my mother’s 1967 (which, as mentioned above/in 2012, had column-shift THM automatic, a/c, and no console) had much effect on the conception of the 1969 Grand Prix.
Consoles were standard equipment in all GPs for 1969-70 (and possibly later years as well). The bench seat, with column shift and no console, was essentially a special-order option that became available late in the 1969 model run. Here’s a quote from the 1970 GP brochure at oldcarbrochures.com: “Between buckets there’s a vinyl-covered console, which houses a floor-mounted shift. Quite irregular. The sight of all that sitting smack in the middle of a ‘luxury’ car may take some getting used to.”
What the 1966-67 GTO did lend to the 1969 GP was its wheelbase. De Lorean’s idea of a pseudo-“classical” design was made possible by the abandonment of the 116-inch wheelbase for two-door intermediates after 1967, and its repurposing that yielded the GP’s extra-long (although largely useless) hood.
I happen to be the owner of a real 1966 GTO, also reef turquoise, that has a 2sp automatic, bucket seats, no console. 4bbl carb. I call it a “gentlemen’s GTO”. It also has an electric antenna, remote driver’s side mirror, and a factory reverb on the AM radio. It came from the factory with wire wheel covers. It’s a beautiful car, but it certainly was not a Friday night dragster. I bought with 82k miles it from the original owner who used it as a family car for ~12 years. He died before it was finally sold by the family, but his daughter told me she learned to drive in that car. She’s in her 60’s now.
I have 69 gto it has auto 2 speed on the column shifter bench seat car an rear quarter markers from 68 gto date 12B which decode IMO Dec 2nd week 1968 very early build.
Whichever it is, it is wonderfully proportioned, clean design.
Wheel in the clones LOL, like GTHO Falcons round here Ford made 300 and only 1500 remain
My brother, as it happens, actually had a real ’66 GTO, purchased, as I recall, in 1967. It was a low mileage number, light blue with a white vinyl top and, fortunately, a four speed manual. The dealer said that it was owned by a lady school teacher. Sure. I was only fourteen, but as we lived in Idaho, I already had a drivers license, so yes, I drove it. In fact, he let me drive it to school and I was BMOC for a day. As I recall, it was fast, very fast. And it was beautiful. The photos of this one do look legit, at least so far as I recall the details from long ago, but it’s hard to imagine someone spending the money to buy a GTO and settling for the Powerglide.
Sadly, I was the last in the family to see it as my brother went into the army in late ’68 and then on to Vietnam, never to return. He left instructions to sell his car and I went with the prospective owner (in the GTO) to his home town in Wyoming to get the money from his bank. I hope the GTO still exist somewhere in this world and looks as good as this one.