Starfire61

Here are a few pics of the hold down. The one on my Starfire was missing for years, & then when I bought my '61 Ninety Eight convertible I was lucky to find that its hold down was still there. I had a duplicate made for the Starfire. It's all 1/4" rod & a few angle brackets. The unseen portion of the hold down that passes through the shroud has a slight upward hook to it. Make sure you know the width of the battery before having one made. It turned out that the original hold down in my Ninety Eight had been modified to accommodate a newer battery, so when I tried to put the copy onto the repro Delco battery on the Starfire it didn't quite fit. After one more trip to the welder everything was OK. Chuck

Wow, that's amazing! I can't wait to see her reply. Congrats all around!!!! Chuck

Yeah, that was a good thought, Glenn, but I agree with Paul- the Cadillac trim looks a little thicker, less curved, & on more of an acute angle than what's on the Olds. Paul brought up a some good points in his post, especially regarding casting numbers. It would be nice to know if that trim is stamped stainless or cast potmetal. Given that the rest of the car looks rather tired, but the trim appears bright, I'm putting my money on stainless. I did notice the overspray & the different shades of blue under the trim, but I guess the implications of it didn't dawn on me as they did for Oldsfan. I just assumed that when the car was painted, whoever did the job removed the trim & reinstalled it rather than try to do a so-so job & mask it all off. Paul's right though- the trim certainly could have been added after the color change. Paul, I did notice the slight overhang & bevel of the center bead molding. That's correct for '61- mine has the same thing. I had a chance to look at my "many convertibles".... you can't have too many.... There is indeed a snap at the position of that hole. The locating pin hypothesis is a good one- something has to keep those fiberglass end pieces from going into orbit when you're cruising along at 70mph! The other thing that crossed my mind is that there may have been a single snap in that position to hold the soft "bootie" portion of the boot. I'll be there are still a couple of snaps on the interior for those booties, too. That's some great info about the fiberglass boot, Paul. I was also unaware that the last year for those was 1960 on the Cadillacs. Bodine, you should make a run of about 1000 of those boots & sell them off on ebay to help pay for the restoration! I assume they'd fit most of the full-sized '61 & '62 GM convertibles, & perhaps '63 & '64, too. Other than tracing down the original owner, Helen Earley was probably the one person who may have known something about this car. We're still very fortunate to have had her around as long as we did. I wish I'd had a chance to meet her- she sounds like an extraordinary person. I recently heard back from Everett Horton. He said that he'd heard some vague rumblings long ago about Florence Henderson possibly having some sort of Olds, but nothing more than that. Chuck

The '62 battery tray & hold down are not the same as the '61. On the '61, one end of the hold down rests in an opening in the radiator support/shroud, while the other end connects to a threaded rod which attaches to the battery tray. I'll post a pic shortly. Chuck

Oldsfan is a parts guru, so perhaps he'll be able to chime in about those numbers on the boot. Now that I have a few good views of it, I'd say it's the same as the one illustrated on the '61 Ninety Eight show car. From the trunk view, the fasteners for the cove point trim don't appear to be anything that would have been used on a production line. Of course, if this is a one-off custom along the lines of the '62 Starfire 4-door that Mike referred to, then I suppose they'd have used whatever was convenient. BTW Mike, I saw your sweet '62 wagon on Paul's site. How's it working out for you? Bodine, I sure wish you were closer- I would jump at the chance to see your car in person. Otherwise, I'm about out of information. Hopefully Glenn's note to Ms. Henderson will yield some results. Regardless, it's clearly a very unusual car & one deserving of a meticulous (read high-dollar) restoration. I've long said I'd never do another body-off restoration on a '61 Starfire- it's a great way to make a small fortune.... if you start with a big one. HOWEVER, if I had that car..... Chuck

Well....did you at least have $1200 worth of fun????

I agree with Glenn- that piece around the cove point looks perfect. If this wasn't done at the factory, somebody spent an awful lot of time & money to do a heck of a nice job. Looking at the additional pics of the trim, I'm pretty confident that it doesn't have the same contour as what was subsequently used in '62. Glenn raises a good point about the attachments- a few pics where the trim is missing to show just how it attaches to the body would also be helpful. I can't tell for sure, but the trailing edge & latch placement of that fiberglass boot strongly resembles the one on the Deauville show car. A pic or two of the leading edge of the boot could provide a good comparison, too. Does the boot have any numbers or markings on it? Have you checked under the backseat for a build sheet? I think the odds of it remaining after all these years is pretty slim, but you never know till you look. This gets more interesting by the day.... what a fascinating car. Glenn, I have Everett's email, so I'll send him a link to this thread to see if he can offer any insight. I can't help with Jim Walkinshaw.....Paul? Chuck

Great pics of the trim, Paul. Perhaps with a few more pics & some more info we'll get a better idea of what's on that Starfire. I had the same thought as you about that bevel...it looks like it's just waiting to snag someone's coat & rip it. I'm under the impression that pic is of the driver's door/rear quarter seam. I wonder if there's a similar bevel at the front of the doors? Bodine, what color is the paint where the trim's missing? Does it match the dark blue on the rest of the car, or is it the original light blue? Tell you what, Paul- we can put that '62 trim on my '61 Starfire as soon as we drop an SBC crate motor into yours, lower it a few inches, throw on some 20" wheels & then finish the car off with one of those super-cool neon kits... Here's a scan of that '61 Ninety Eight show car with the fiberglass boot. This is from the December '96 issue of collectible Automobile. Paul, does that look like the same boot used on the Eldos? Chuck

I initially had the date code interpreted incorrectly & edited the previous post accordingly. The car was built even later than I'd previously thought. On the date code, the first two numbers signify the month, while the following letter signifies the week. This car was built in the 4th week of May, 1961... NOT the fifth week of April. Sorry for the confusion!

OK- The tag helps a lot. You have a mid-production car that was built in Lansing during the 4th week of May, 1961. 05 = 5th month D = 4th week Style 61-3667 = '61 Starfire convertible Body LA 3153 = 3153rd Starfire convertible body built at Lansing Trim 933 = Blue interior Paint H = Glacier Blue (a much lighter blue than what's currently on the car.) Accessories- not sure on this one... in '62 I believe these numbers could indicate biphonic speakers & a power antenna, air, & power vent windows. Does your car have those options? The Starfire was a midyear introduction in '61. In comparison to this car, my Starfire was built in February & has a much lower body number. I'm uncertain if all '61 Starfires were Lansing-built. If they were, this car falls close to the halfway point in production, as about 7600 were built in total. Suffice it to say, it doesn't look like you have a preproduction car that escaped the auto show circuit & wound up on a dealer lot. Nonetheless, I still can't explain the extra trim. Have you been able to determine if the extra trim is stamped stainless, or is it cast & plated pot metal? Looking at it up close, I'm uncertain as to whether it has the same profile as the '62 trim. In cross-section it almost appears triangular. Unfortunately, my '62 just went into the shop, so I can't run out to the garage to compare it. Perhaps Oldsfan can help out here. So the mystery continues. Please post a few pics of the boot & well molding when you have a chance. Other than talking with Florence Henderson, I think the only way to figure this out would be to have this car thoroughly gone over in person by someone who knows them well. Where are you located? If nothing else, I suppose we haven't ruled out the Florence Henderson notion. If this car indeed has AC & power vent windows, that puts it into a fairly exclusive category, even for Starfires. It would seem logical that someone who was so active in Olds advertising back then would wind up with a well-optioned, high-dollar Olds, & perhaps someone in the company saw to it that her car was dressed-up a little better than most. Certainly a fascinating bit of history if at all true, & well-worth preserving. Chuck

I'm looking forward to seeing some more pics, especially of the boot & trim on the rear quarters. Again, it would be most helpful if you could provide the info off the VIN & Fisher Body Tags. Paul, do you think the '62 quarter molding is flexible enough to bend it to the curve of the '61 cove without kinking it? I've never had mine off the car to know how rigid it is. That's an interesting bit of information about the lack of snaps on the top well molding... I've never seen that before, either. I dug through my pile of Collectible Automobile magazines & found the feature on '61-4 Olds. The auto show car with the fiberglass boot was called the Deauville & was based on the Ninety Eight. Other than the paint job & fiberglass boot, it looked like a stock Ninety Eight convertible from the outside. The interior was quite different. It will be interesting to compare the fiberglass boot on the '61 auto show car to whatever boot is on this Starfire. I'll try to scan & post some pics from the magazine when I have a chance. Chuck

Pat, I've often thought about this sort of thing myself, but find the whole process very intimidating. What about royalties & licensing from GM? Somewhere I heard that's only applicable to repro items with a GM part number, but I'd sure hate to find out the hard way. If I had a pile of money to devote to such a project, I'd love to see the hood & trunk letters for '61 Ninety Eights & Starfires reproduced. Good luck with your project. Chuck

Someody mentioned the Mitsubishi Pajero (Montero in the USA & Spanish countries.) For clarification, in Spanish, Pajero is a rather nasty slang term to describe somebody. I'll let the links fill in the details.... http://chameleon-translations.com/Index-Companies-pajero.shtml http://chameleon-translations.com/Index-Companies-pajero-feedback.shtml http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_Pajero

I usually post over in the Olds forum, but I've been following this thread with great interest, so here's my $0.02 on the newer cars. Since I didn't attend Hershey & contend with the apparent logistical issues, I speak more from my own experience & observations regarding new cars in our hobby as a whole. Let's face it, a substantial portion of this hobby is driven by nostalgia. I think many hobbyists out there initially get into the old car hobby in part through a desire to recapture a certain special time in their lives when things were perhaps simpler, better, & more carefree. A car from a certain point in one's life can stir some powerful memories- we've all seen that happen at shows. Compared to something static like a photo, or something nebulous like an old song, a car takes people back in time in a manner that very few other things can duplicate. The elephant in the room is that there are few people alive today that grew up & had significant interactions with pre-war vehicles. Consequently, I think the nostalgic appeal for them is relatively low. That's not to say that these cars have no market or value- there will always be enthusiasts who appreciate the horseless carriages, the brass cars, the genuine classics & other pre-war vehicles for their inherent attributes & charm. However, those who longed to recapture their glory days of dating in dad's Maxwell have long since left this earth. I had a chance to look at a copy of Hemmings that was probably from the early '70s & was blown away by the number of truly vintage cars in its pages. Where did they all go? Are they all stashed-away in museums? Are they all street rods? Are the owners really, REALLY keeping them away from shows because there are too many newer cars there? Just where are all those old cars???? Or, (sadly) are they languishing in garages & storage buildings because the owners who restored them & loved them have passed-on & the heirs don't quite know what do do with them? I sometimes wonder if we'll see a similar phenomenon with less-popular postwar cars over the next 25 years or so. I often find myself sitting at a cruise with my '61 Olds & the only people that foam at the mouth over the car are those at least 60 years old! Vintage car owners are doing themselves & their hobby a terrible disservice if they adopt an attitude that newer cars are somehow unworthy of sharing a show field. If anything, as the nostalgic appeal of a car fades, its owner has an obligation to keep that car in the sunshine as much as possible to show the public that there's a lot more to the old car hobby than 60's muscle cars & rods. Furthermore, it's vital that the hobby continues to attract new blood, & many of those who take their first plunge into old cars will do so not with a pre-war car, or even a tri-five Chevy, but with a car that's special & meaningful to their own circumstances. I was born in 1967 (I'm no kid....) & missed out on most of the great cars that are hot collectibles today. Only as some of these cars were being driven into the ground by high schoolers in the early 80's did I have a chance to experience them in their faded glory. Otherwise, people in my generation & beyond grew up with downsizing, emission controls, gas crunches, & the 55-mph speed limit. People currently in their 20's have had even less exposure to the older cars. For a Gen Xer, I suppose I'm somewhat of an anachronism in that all of my cars are older than I am. Nonetheless, I very much enjoy seeing cars from the 70's & 80's at shows, especially if they're stock. So many of those cars were considered throwaway items back then that it's a real treat to see one that's restored, (or more likely well-preserved.) I attended a cruise recently where somebody brought a 1975 AMC Pacer. The owner practically needed crowd-control barriers to handle all the people that wanted to see the car & talk to him. Why? In addition to not seeing a Pacer in years, I'd guess that just about everybody knew somebody back then that had one! The enthusiasm over that Pacer was amazing, & if that's what it takes to get people exposed & interested in the old car hobby then I'm all for it. Start restricting these cars & you're cutting the hobby off at the knees. You never know, the guy with the '81 Skylark could have his grandpa's '53 Skylark on blocks in the garage. Discourage him enough & he'll leave the snooty antique people in disgust & turn it into a street rod. I could certainly see myself acquiring a pre-war car someday, but since I seldom see unmodified examples, I don't know what to look out for, what to ask, where to get parts, etc. If the cars & owners are staying away, few are going to be interested in them. We owe it to ourselves & to our hobby to be advocates & ambassadors of restoring, preserving, & presenting the wonderful array of cars that we all admire. Start turning people away & we'll be seeing an awful lot of street rods in the next generation.

I don't know if anybody makes a kit for those pumps. I've had a few rebuilt by Arthur Gould Rebuilders in NY. They charge about $100 & turn it over in a week or two. http://www.arthurgouldrebuilders.com/ Sometimes you see those pumps on Ebay, too. If you have vacuum-operated deluxe heat/ventilation controls you need to be sure you get the correct fuel pump with the vacuum pump on top. Cars with standard controls came with a plain fuel pump. You may want to put a second fuel filter upstream from the pump. I trashed a newly rebuilt pump once with crud from the gas tank. If there's a hard way to learn something I've done it... Chuck

Those are some fascinating pictures. Thanks for posting them. I can't quite tell, is the extra stainless trim on both sides of the cove? I have to admit, I've never seen anything like it before. Do you have any pics of the fiberglass boot you can post? It might be helpful if you could provide the data off the cowl tag. It's located under the hood just in front of the windshield on the driver's side. There should be a date code in the extreme upper left: for example a 12C would indicate the car was built in the third week in December of 1960. There should also be a body number, along with trim, accessory, & paint codes. If your car was some sort of pre-production auto show model, or perhaps a special order along the lines of a COPO car, it may have something unusual stamped on the tag. The VIN, stamped on the driver's doorjamb between the hinges, may also offer a clue as to whether it's a regular-production Starfire, or something different. Depending on what you learn, don't even think about removing any extra trim if you can determine that it's original to the car. If that car left the factory with extra trim & a fiberglass boot, you will be destroying the very thing that makes the car unique & sets it apart from the rest of the Starfires. If the missing extra trim is truly original to the car, replacements could be fabricated. Unless you have access to another set of '61 Starfire heads, I'd suggest having your existing cylinder heads repaired if at all possible. Oldsfan commented in another post recently that the '61 Starfire heads are unique. He's correct. You could certainly fit another set of 394 heads to your car, but they aren't quite the same in terms of valve size. Furthermore, the engine numbers on the 394s are stamped on the heads. The number is on a boss between the two middle cylinders. Change those heads & you'll likely have somebody telling you that you don't have a '61 Starfire engine at all should you go to sell the car. Here are some part numbers that I got in an email from Oldsfan (I'm sure he won't mind me passing this along): '61 non Starfire heads are 580419 '61 Starfire heads are 582836 '62 & '63 are 584782 '61 & '62 domestic head gaskets are 581168 (.025 thick) '63 head gaskets are 588040 (.020 thick) '59 thru '61 exc. Starfire intake valves are 576497 '61 Starfire intake valves are 581790 '62 & '63 intake valves are 583761 '56 thru '61 exc. Starfire exhaust valves are 576498 '61 Starfire exhaust valves are 581791 '62 & '63 exhaust valves are 583762 '61 thru '63 4bbl exc. Starfire camshaft is 581827 '61 Starfire camshaft is 582198 '62 Starfire camshaft is 583875 '63 Starfire camshaft is 588475 Pistons have a bunch of different numbers. Everything else is the same. Trust me on this one, these are not easy or cheap cars to restore properly. You're very ambitious to take one of these on for a first project. I recently participated in a thread on this very subject: http://forums.aaca.org/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/448331#Post448331 Tell me, where are you located? Chuck

Did you buy the black post coupe that was recently on Ebay? That looked like a very nice car (especially if the ghetto wheels were removed.) '61 was actually the last year for the post coupe. It is quite scarce. I think they only built around 4000 of them. Given how relatively inexpensive & ordinary they were when new, I doubt many have survived, & certainly not in the condition of that Ebay car. I haven't seen one that nice in many years. I have a special place in my heart for these- my grandpa had a Platinum Mist (silver) '61 88 2-door post coupe when I was little. It actually had the same interior as that Ebay car. It gave him good service for 11 years until he traded it in on a '72 Cutlass. What parts are you looking for? There's not a lot out there for these cars. Consequently they are not easy to work on- it takes a lot of patience to do them right. I've seen a few 88s with Chevy crate motors in them & it makes my stomach turn....don't do anything to it that can't easily be undone- altering it will only detract from what makes it special & may well decrease its value. Good luck with your car- you have a rare one on your hands. Chuck

If you type a reply (a standard reply, not a "quick reply") you'll notice a "File Manager" link under the reply box. Click on this & you'll be able to browse your image files & select which ones you want to upload. You can upload 5 files- I don't know what the size limit is, but I haven't had any problems using it.

Wow- what a great project! Glad to see you rewarded for your patience. Congratulations!

I seem to recall that Olds had an off-white convertible with a fiberglass boot that was on the auto show circuit back then. The car may have been a Ninety Eight, though- I just can't remember. There was a vintage photo of it in Collectible Automobile magazine years ago when they had a feature on '61-64 Oldsmobiles. Can you post a few pics of the car?

Hey there Paul- I checked my 1963 service manual & it showed the large, square pump with the lower hose connection coming off on an angle on the driver's side. I tried looking around on Ebay, but couldn't find a photo of a '63-4 engine taken at the correct angle. I did find a pic of a '63-4 water pump, which I've attached. It looks like what's shown on that blue '61 Starfire to me. Does anybody know if a '63-4 front cover will fit an older 394? I know the balancers aren't interchangeable as the '63-4 front covers have a larger-diameter front seal, but I'd be curious to know if the two different covers will interchange. Chuck

Hey BJM- Case & point illustrating that these cars are indeed available, yet you need to be careful & well-informed about what you're buying. Here's a '61 Starfire that's just appeared on Ebay: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=160161992000&ssPageName=ADME:B:EF:US:11 I borrowed a few pics off the listing & posted them here. Looks pretty decent & has AC, which is very unusual, even on a Starfire. The color, if correct, is either Aqua or Glacier Blue- both '61 Olds colors- but without a pic of the cowl tag & paint code it's hard to tell for sure. Now let's look at what's wrong with it. Most obvious (& most easily corrected) are the incorrect wheelcovers. The top boot should be blue to match the interior, & the correct boot should have the same tuck & rolled treatment as the seats. The aluminum floor inserts appear to be missing (though they may be under the mats.) These inserts were fixed to the floor & were unique to '61 only. They are exceedingly difficult to replace. Also missing is the correct rear seat speaker grille. The correct grille was a Starfire-only piece that had the same stylized globe logo that was used on the radiator grille & the steering wheel center. The speaker grille currently on the car is correct for a Ninety Eight, though I'm unsure if it was also used on the Super & Dynamic 88s. Looking at the interior, the seats appear pretty good, though I'm not certain if they're done in leather. Those big tacks or screws on the rear quarter panels above the armrests shouldn't be there. The broad, framed-in areas of the door panels surrounding the armrests are currently upholstered in blue, but they should be covered with a ribbed, aluminized mylar material instead. Under the hood lies the most subtle problem of all. The front cover on the engine is not right for a '61-2 Olds 394. The correct cover has a small, round water pump face with the outlet for the lower radiator hose pointing straight down. Note in the photo that the water pump is large & rectangular with the lower radiator outlet pointing off at a 45-degree angle- this is from a '63-4 394. I'm not enough of an Olds engine guru to know if a '63-4 front cover will fit a '61-2 394 block. Perhaps someone else can chime in on that. Nonetheless, until proven otherwise, I'd suspect that this car doesn't have a '61 Starfire engine. I've read a lot of comments on these boards about folks being elitists & snobs, etc. about what's "correct" for certain cars, so I hope nobody else reading this post takes offense & feels I'm trashing some guy's car. That's certainly not my intention at all. However, I do wish to illustrate the point that there are a lot of details on these cars that need to be looked at when considering a purchase. This particular Starfire looks good & would no doubt make a fine cruiser. An informed buyer would recognize its problems upfront & pay accordingly. I have no idea what the seller's looking to get out of the car- he may well have a very realistic reserve on it. Regardless, these are becoming high-dollar cars, & I always cringe when I see guys looking for showcar money for vehicles that have obvious flaws..... it makes me wonder about some of the nice-looking cars I see that I'm less familiar with. Educate yourself & ask a lot of questions, BJM. You can't have too much information!

Looking at that MN car, I'd say it's likely a parts car & definitely overpriced. I wouldn't buy it without laying my own eyes on it & spending a lot of time going over & under the car. Somebody with a lot of resources or ability could possibly restore it, but speaking from my own experience it's not an easy undertaking & certainly not one that would make any financial sense. My car looked quite similar to this when I bought it back in 1995, but it ran (sort of) & had an intact top & interior. Off & on it took about 10 years & two parts cars to restore. The only major parts that remain from the original car are the doors, trunk lid, & drivetrain. Floors, frame, quarters, cowl, front clip, & bumpers all came from parts cars. You start on one of these & get so far into it that you don't have much choice other than to press on & finish it. I'd have been much better off in the long run with a better car out of the gate. I easily could have bought several very nice '61 Starfires with what I sank into this one. Since then I've acquired a few more cars & have become very selective about which cars to plunge into. '61 Starfires aren't falling out of trees like Impalas, but they're out there. In the current market of rods & muscle cars, a car like this tends to get overlooked by all but a discerning few. Your average cruise night fan doesn't even know what it is. I've seen several decent driver-quality cars on Ebay or in Hemmings over the last few years. For between $20-30K you could likely pick up a nice driver that you could enjoy as-is & fix up along the way without breaking the bank & tying up years of your life with a big restoration. Be patient, save your cash, & wait for the right car to come along- you'll be glad you did. Good Luck! Chuck

Thanks!

The '61 Starfire debuted as a mid-year model & was one of GM's first efforts at a "personal luxury car" in the vein of the Ford T-Bird. 7600 were built- all convertibles. With a base price of around $4700 it was the most expensive Olds in the '61 lineup, slightly more even than the Ninety Eight convertible. The cars were built on the 123" wheelbase 88 platform, & the frame, sheet metal & glass is fully interchangable between the Starfires & both 88 models. The Ninety Eight had a 126" wheelbase & a 6" greater overall length. Ninety Eights had longer rear quarters, a longer rear overhang, & more leg room in the back seat. Doors, decklid, & front clip interchange between 88s & 98s. The engine in the Starfire was a specially-tuned 394 with high-compression pistons, a hotter cam, & possibly unique heads (I'd have to check on that one...) The engine had 10.25:1 compression & was rated at 330hp & 440 ft.-lbs. of torque (vs. 10:1 compression in the Skyrocket engine standard in the Super 88 & 98.) The engine had dual-exhausts & was fully-dressed with chrome valve covers, oil filler, & air cleaner. The Starfire rearend differed from the rest of the line in that it had a 3.42:1 ratio. A posi unit was available, which is rather rare today. On the inside, the Starfire had leather bucket seats & a console. Power windows & driver's seat were standard. AC, power vent windows, Safety Sentinel Speedo, Wonderbar, & Guidematic are some of the more desirable options. The dash is the same among all full-sized '61 Olds, but the remainder of the interior trim was mostly unique to the Starfire. So you're looking to restore one of these? My first bit of advice is to find somebody who's dead or getting divorced & buy their already-restored car. Still want to restore one??? OK then- everybody gets their shorts in a knot about the trim on these cars, but the understated Achilles heel on them is the frame. The convertible frame differs from the rest of the line in that it is fully-boxed in. They have a terrible tendency to rust out in front of the rear axles where the wheel arches connect to the torque boxes. Because of the box configuration, crud & moisture builds up in there & rusts it out from the inside. This can also happen in the frame rails under the doors, but by the time you see it there you'll already have a severe problem at the rear axle. If you see frame rot, don't walk- run away. (Unless you have a complete car with a decent drivetrain- you may want to think about parting it out.) Finding, buying, & transporting a decent '61 Olds convertible frame is not something to embark upon with great zeal. Don't ask me how I know.... Before paying for a Starfire, make sure the car has a Starfire engine. I've seen cars sold as Starfires that turn out to have Skyrocket, or even low-compression 88 engines in them. I don't have the '61 engine codes handy, but I can get them for you if you like. The 394 is a tough engine & mechanical parts are expensive, but available. These motors tend to develop lifter ticks & top end noise, & every one I've owned has had a fair share of blowby. If you have a chance to do a leakdown test on the motor don't be at all surprised if you're disappointed in the results. The Roto-Hydramatic, or Slim-Jim trans is not one of GM's milestones. It debuted in '61 & was supposed to be smaller, lighter, & better than the 4-speed Jetaway that it replaced. While it admirably met the first two criteria, it was erratic, trouble-prone, & leaky to the point that GM dumped it after only 4 years. These transmissions are expensive to work on, & a lot of trans guys won't touch them. It's possible to retrofit a TH-400 or 700-R4 to the 394, but the bolt patterns & bellhousings differ, the driveshaft & crossmember need to be altered, & the new shift pattern won't match the console (Olds used PNDSLR.) An older Jetaway Hydramatic will bolt right up to the 394, but you'd likely have to modify the trans hump in the floor as there wouldn't be enough clearance for the larger trans. Still interested? Bodies tend to rust in the typical places. There's always more rust in the car than what you see. If it's really rusted out, it's likely not worth fixing unless you're in love with that particular car, or you're a body guy who's looking for a challenge. Used trim pieces are out there, though it may be hard to find a set of aluminum side panels with a matching patina. Finding NOS, especially a full set, would be like discovering plutonium (& probably cost more). You can have the aluminum buffed & reanodized- you wind up losing the fine-milled pattern in the panels, but it looks better than dings & scratches. There's a guy reproducing aluminum for 1962. I hear it's nice, but haven't personally seen it. I've heard a rumor that he may reproduce the '61 panels, too, but haven't confirmed this. Starfire badges have also been reproduced, but that's about it. The dual hood spears are Starfire-only & very hard to find. I've seen a few otherwise restored cars sold without rocker moldings. Though the part was shared with the Super 88, it seems that there aren't a whole lot of those floating around either. On the interior, much of the door panel trim was unique to the '61 Starfire. The bucket seats have metal backs & were not used by Olds beyond 1961 (in '62 the buckets had upholstered seatbacks.) I've seen these seats used on a '60 Eldo & a '59 Bonneville- no doubt there were other applications for them. I knew somebody who had a '61 Starfire with missing seats- he wound up buying a whole other car just to replace them! I could go on & on. These are gorgeous cars when they're done right, with remarkable performance for a vehicle of their size. They are not cheap or easy to work on. Feel free to PM me, & please post a few pics of the car you're considering! Chuck