Bruce Chunn

Thanks Joe. You're a fountain of Buick knowledge for sure. I'll see how the original switch pitch works and, if it seems solid, leave it in there. Can always go the other way if disaster strikes and I may well look into the 350 in time. Just want to get this on the road to drive a bit before the fall comes crashing in. Thanks again.

Thank you Joe for your input. I now feel much more sure that the issue won't be a show stopper. One more question if I may. When I bought the car, the family told me many things, most of which I think they were either guessing or believing some stories that had evolved from the two prior now deceased owners, a father and son. The "expert" on hand said the transmission was not functional, which he said is why it'd just grind a bit when put into drive and then trying to return to park. Once I got the engine running properly, I noted that the tail shaft of the transmission was turning as it should and the grinding was the transmission trying to go back to park while the tail shaft was turning just like trying to put it in park while rolling. So, the rear end was the culprit. That's being worked now. In the meantime, I ran across a fellow who had a 64 Le Mans convertible that he had removed the transmission from a couple years ago to upgrade to a 350. I had him a phone call and he said he had the build sheet for the transmission which had been rebuilt in 2012 for about $1,200. He said it had about 500 miles on it. My first thought was that it was probably owned by that famous little old lady who only drove to church on Sunday...anyway, I drove to take a look and holy cow, his car was the prettiest thing I'd ever seen. He had upgraded from the 326 to a 400 and the trans to a 350 then he found a 428 tri-power and put that in. He was headed for a 400 transmission. The ST300 he had was no joke. Cleaner than any of my dinner plates, so I happily bought it. The Pontiacs, as I'm sure you know, didn't subscribe to the Olds and Buick variable pitch transmission contraption. The transmission guy I know says it will go in my car just fine. Do you see any red flags with this swap? The Pontiac transmission, as near as I can tell, is the same as my ST300 switch pitch but operates more like the old power glides. The transmission guy said he is no fan of the variable pitch variety and that this swap should be a smart one. Until the rear end gets completed, we won't know the true condition of the original transmission, although I did find several bottles of various Dr. Fix-it magic tranny elixirs in the trunk so I'm assuming the prior owner was trying to fix something with that garbage. However, he may have been dumping the miracle cure stuff in the transmission while the real problem was in the rear end. In the end, while the car is up on the rack in a driveline repair shop, I thought it may be smart to have them stick the known good transmission in it so I don't have that piece to worry about. Your thought on this would be much appreciated. Thanks again.

This should be a simple answer I'd think in a Google search, but I keep running in circles. I have a 66 Special Convertible that has been modified to appear as a 67 Skylark with hood, grille, fenders, skirts, dash, steering wheel and all trim but I don't think that matters in my question today. The issue at hand is that the rear end is shot. One axle (left) broken and the other (right) the shop says is the wrong one, as it's too short and it's chewed up the spider gear. I'd wonder if the two axles were removed prior to my purchase and inadvertently switched when reassembled. I know some rear ends have specific length axles for left/right. Anyway, the current unit is all chewed up and needs replacement. It appears from what I've read that the GS version rear end is definitely different than the standard Skylark. The question is this: Is the Special and standard Skylark the same rear end? I know there are different ratios, but that isn't the primary concern at the moment. A couple wrecking yards say that the Special and Skylark are interchangeable. I'd like to hear that from some of you Buick experts. Thanks in advance for any input.

Thanks for all your input, I appreciate it. The VIN and body tag are the defining items here and it's clear that the "Skylark" I bought isn't so, rather, a Special with an awful lot of window dressing. Somebody had to go to a lot of trouble to make this look the way it does. They even installed a Skylark dash and a 67 steering wheel. Obviously this was done a long time ago, as the telltale signs of age are present in the body panels and interior. On the upside, at least the car has the correct color, interior, transmission, as all the accessories check out. Seems weird that someone would order or the factory decided to build a Special with the accessories this one has, but I guess whoever ordered this one had their reasons. Sometime later, putting the 67 Skylark front end on is pretty straight forward as I understand. One body guy told me they would've had to change out the core support from the way it looks to hang the fenders and grille on without a lot of fanfare. The fender skirts confuse me a bit though, as they just weren't available in 66. Perhaps the 66 and 67 quarter panels were the same and 67 skirts could be added to a 66 later? Anyway, it'll make a nice driver when I get a couple bugs out. When I go to sell it, I'll have to note that it may have been owned by Johnny Cash of the "One piece at a time" fame. The title I got from the seller said it was a Special, which was correct, but I thought maybe it had been mislabeled. The seller adamantly said this was a Skylark owned by his late father and then by his late brother who had jointly owned it since about 1990 until this year. This ownership chain was true by all the paperwork I got but the model was in question. I pointed that out to the DMV folks when I transferred the title and they changed it to Skylark and sent me a title stating such. When I became convinced this was a Special, I went back and had them reissue as a Special on the title. Goes to show how things can get easily screwed up in the paperwork. Any thoughts on the 5C112958 engine code stamped on the driver side front block? I've had no luck with that and understand it should match the production number in the VIN which is 302354 which it obviously doesn't. I'm guessing that the 112958 on the engine was the production number of some car the engine came from. I don't know what the 5C means. The other stamp on passenger side clearly shows LL which is a 65 engine I believe. Also there's the blue/green paint on the block which had been repainted red. Perhaps this was yet one more thing someone did to make it look like something else. Many years ago (about 48) I owned a 66 Gran Sport (I know, don't remind me) with the 401. I believe those engines were always red. The 300 however is the blue/green usually in all the pictures I've looked at. Maybe one of you Buick guys can provide some insight on this engine number and color. Thanks again for all your help. I'm getting a clearer idea of what this animal is and isn't thanks to your comments.

I bought a 66 Skylark and found many oddities later. The VIN and body tag indicate 66 Special. The engine code LL indicates 65 motor. The tail lights are clearly 66. The interior, fenders, rear quarters, hood, grille, and all emblems are clearly 67 Skylark. Single reservoir manual brake master cylinder so that's 66 only. Drum brakes I believe are 66 last year. One repaint original color. Fender skirts that are 67 only. No evidence of prior holes for Special emblems anywhere on the body nor does it appear that it's ever been in a serious crash. All trim is 67 Skylark. I'll post a couple pics. Any advice is appreciated! Thanks, Bruce