Jump to content

Cruising in 1972 - Where were you?


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, 1935Packard said:

I was cruising around New York City in a convertible just like this.  Fun wheels, with a good suspension, but underpowered at just one mom-power. 

 

76727104_ScreenShot2020-04-25at1_38_43PM.thumb.png.40ffe2d448e68e265dc2e36f57215f9f.png

I like the post 35Packard. Kind of the same situation. 

In '72 I just graduated from college, bought a small house, first child was born, started a new job, life was hectic. The only cruising for me was 70 miles of highway driving in a '70 ss chevelle once a week to pick up a class I missed as a freshman. My cruising days were pretty much over.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oy talk about brane fade. 36365 is a typo, obviously shouldabin 3636S (Carter AFB)

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, plymouthcranbrook said:

Anyone besides me remember Grand-Spaulding Dodge in Chicago? Although more from the 60’s as far as I can remember it went into the early 70’s as a performance Dealer. They did a lot of highly modified Dodges for street and strip.  Went there once with a friend who wanted to see if he could afford to buy a High Performance Dodge Dart. Not a big place but what a bunch of cars!  By the way, he couldn’t.


I took this at the 1965 Super Stock Nationals at York PA

Robert

714272DF-EE46-4212-8457-C79E2000AAC7.thumb.jpeg.5b4b3bfcfbaba894636b8542cc4538d8.jpeg405394A5-715B-4EBF-83C2-19F4C2338EF2.thumb.jpeg.8bdd7c8f7cc49bef6f29e4dd0d13859c.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, padgett said:

Well for the late sixties I was in the service and overseas most of the time. My experience started as a GMI student in 1970 and after Milt started tuning in the late 60s. Must admit that in the early 70s was more into fiddling with Rochester fuel injections. First Pontiac (after Mother's 64 GP with rotohydramatic) was in '72. Was really amazing all of the access a GMI student who was a gearhead had.)

Also guarantee nothing from memory any more. Google is your friend.

 

That said those aluminum headers were for drags only, run too long and they would start dripping on the track .

 

Also even 421s had trips: two Carter AFBs on the ends and another Carter in the middle.

 

ps thought the Carter three barrel was a 3636, was there a meaning to the 5 on the end ?

First time I heard of Milt was the Bobcat work on the 64 or 65 GTO

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/24/2020 at 8:56 AM, padgett said:

Ace Wilson's Royal Pontiac was the home to many "factory" cars. Milt was his best tuner. Any relationship between a Bobcat blueprinted Ram Air IV Pontiac 400 is purely coincidental. Pontiac often used Royal to produce a car that would meet specific performance requirements (like proving a 67 QJ was faster than a tripower). The "stock" 64 GTO test cars with 421s also came from Royal.

 

BTW that Blue White RA V car was interesting officially you had to build a RA V from parts. Everything including the block was "different". Ports were ginourmous. Fahgedabout any street cruising, needed 3k rpm for the fuel to atomise properly. 303 I worked with was even worse. Fun times.

FYI, Pontiac divisions press pool was controlled by Wangers, and Royal prepped all the press pool cars.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

One night in about 1971, we were cruising Woodward Avenue in my Road Runner and came across these three guys in a beer-bottle brown, plain Jane Firebird. The guys were dressed in white shirts and had ties on. Seemed like they were taller guys and they were all crammed in that car. It was kicking EVERYONE'S butt in every race performed that night. The car had no spoilers, scoops, traction devices that we could see, etc., but was REALLY fast. Turns out it was three Pontiac engineers that had the prototype for the Trans-Am Firebird and were "road testing" the 455 mule.

Edited by keiser31 (see edit history)
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

We moved January 1st from Ft. Wayne, Indiana to the Richmond, Virginia metro area where I was assigned to the governor's office and ultimately responsible for government computers, and government interfacing city and county computers, as well as hospitals, etc. MY primary ride was my Belgian version 1967 Citroen DS-21 Pallas, but I also still had the 1969 Pontiac Custom"S" 4-door, ordered essentially as a "GTO in Drag" with all of the goodies to be a serous handling autocross.

 

While I didn't have a lot of time for cruising, I did meet Bruce Woodson and his family. Aside from his multiple Cord, Auburn, and Bantam cars, Bruce, like myself, was a Citroen owner. Thanks to Bruce and his wonderful family I was introduced to AACA, played trumpet with the Richmond Concert Band, and started playing gigs with Bruce. He later gave us a '66 Pontiac Catalina station wagon shortly before the birth of our 2nd child.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Picture taken in 1972 of me examining my latest purchase which had been the Mercedes-Benz Standwagen at the 1956 New York International Automobile Show. Second picture is of the car at the show.  Third picture is of the car at present. 

GW II at 105 1.png

'56+New+York+Auto+Show.jpg

Avus Cedar Beach 2_0497 (2).JPG

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, ejboyd5 said:

Picture taken in 1972 of me examining my latest purchase which had been the Mercedes-Benz Standwagen at the 1956 New York International Automobile Show. Second picture is of the car at the show.  Third picture is of the car at present. 

 

'56+New+York+Auto+Show.jpg

 

The 2010 version.

Craig

10cais0052.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, that's quite the car to have back in 72, even more so today! I can only guess how much it was back then, but safe to say it was a good investment. I had a Dinky Toy model of the stainless steel one given to me by friends when we moved in 1960. Have owned a 65 230 SL, 74 &76 450SL, and 84 380 SL but never anything to compare to this 300SL

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ejboyd5 said:

Picture taken in 1972 of me examining my latest purchase which had been the Mercedes-Benz Standwagen at the 1956 New York International Automobile Show. Second picture is of the car at the show.  Third picture is of the car at present. 

 

I thought you were going to say third picture is of me crying because I sold it.  Great surprise to see a picture of the car today.  Hope you are still the happy owner.  Beautiful car.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is left of my memory is a magazine article (C&D ?) on the 67 GTO showing the QJ was faster than a tripower (not hard the little air cleaners really choked the 2Gs) and mentioned that Mr. S had tuned them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And the 68 round port would beat both. The issue is that so many different people did so many different things just to Pontiacs.

That said the late 67 670 heads were probably the best D ports.

And then there was a difference between 067, 068, and 744 cams (My Judge has a 744) just for D-ports.

The  tripower was early (narrow center carb) and late wide center tripower. With stacks a late high rise (as opposed to B-body) tripower could flow over 1,000 cfm (but the triple pots were very restrictive. OTOH a QJ would flow 750 cfm (later large primary ones, 800).

My point is there were many ways to build a Pontiac engine

ps I used to write for Marty Schorr and George Ellis a long time ago in a different world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, padgett said:

And the 68 round port would beat both. The issue is that so many different people did so many different things just to Pontiacs.

That said the late 67 670 heads were probably the best D ports.

And then there was a difference between 067, 068, and 744 cams (My Judge has a 744) just for D-ports.

The  tripower was early (narrow center carb) and late wide center tripower. With stacks a late high rise (as opposed to B-body) tripower could flow over 1,000 cfm (but the triple pots were very restrictive. OTOH a QJ would flow 750 cfm (later large primary ones, 800).

My point is there were many ways to build a Pontiac engine

ps I used to write for Marty Schorr and George Ellis a long time ago in a different world.

No this comparison was just intakes-same car Tri Power won.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I was only 9 years old in Modesto, Calif., but my Dad explained the cruising he did a decade before George Lucas had his experiences that were later immortalized in American Graffiti.  Five year later, my older brother spent many nights cruising McHenry Ave in Modesto---downtown 10th Street having been abandoned in favor of wide open north Modesto.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember the test well. Didn't believe the results then, and with a few years of experience with a couple of carburetors; still don't believe it.

 

As to the title of the thread, in 1972, I had just been bitten by the buy-American bug, and was working on a '64 GTO. Tripower/dogmatic car. My '68 Datsun (before the buy-American bug) was about 3 seconds quicker in the quarter-mile.

 

Jon.

Edited by carbking (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites

No this comparison was just intakes-same car Tri Power won.  " all that was needed was to change the air filters & particularly if on the same engine. (67 400 was better in many ways than a 66 389.)

 

Have a 66 tripower sitting under the bench, someday I may drop it on my 70 RA 400.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, padgett said:

No this comparison was just intakes-same car Tri Power won.  " all that was needed was to change the air filters & particularly if on the same engine. (67 400 was better in many ways than a 66 389.)

 

Have a 66 tripower sitting under the bench, someday I may drop it on my 70 RA 400.

Why certainly the 400 is better than the 389. It's bigger, and the heads valve angle was changed for bigger valves, straighter ports, and a open chamber so no more shrouding of the valves in the old bathtub chamber.

 

But the test was about a 1966 Tri-Power VS a 1969 Q-jet. Both tested on a 1969 GTO with a 400. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Both tested on a 1969 GTO with a 400." and the tripower won as I would expect. We are in agreement. I'd like to see a photograph of the engine & carbs.

Automagic or manual trans ? Suspect the carb  was a 69 from the base 400/350 hp. and not a 366 or 370 hp. Also even the base 400 had a different cam if manual (067) or automagic (068). I like a 744.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, padgett said:

"Both tested on a 1969 GTO with a 400." and the tripower won as I would expect. We are in agreement. I'd like to see a photograph of the engine & carbs.

Automagic or manual trans ? Suspect the carb  was a 69 from the base 400/350 hp. and not a 366 or 370 hp. Also even the base 400 had a different cam if manual (067) or automagic (068). I like a 744.

You couldn't use a tri-power on a RA4-370 hp. RA4 cylinder head and intake manifold have taller intake ports, and a special intake manifold gasket. You also can't use the standard 4bbl Q jet manifold because of the tall ports. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Same for a RA-II (68), RA-IV and RA-V (69), all had oval ports. .Tripower manifolds were for D-ports (e.g. RA) only. Of interest only to Pontiac fanatics.

Was talking about the carb, not the head or manifold. QJs 750 and 800 cfm fit the same manifolds. Apples and kumquats.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

60 years ago, when I was much more impressionable than I am today (a lot less experience then ;) ), I used to believe all of the published words in those magazine tests.

 

That tripower/Q-jet test was one I didn't believe even then.

 

A few interesting facts:

 

(1) Pontiac SD Division tried to use the tripower for racing, but gave up on it very early, as it wouldn't compete with the Carter AFB (yes, this was the one with the smaller center carb).

(2) Pontiac paid Carter to sabotage the secondary side of the AFB from 1964 through 1966 limited total CFM from 610 to 575. Just enough the tripower would wind about 200 RPM higher. Remove the sabotage, and guess what happens. Since the sabotage was on the secondary, the AFB ran great on the primary side.

(3) Read Milt Schornack's book. He and his team were grousing about the elimination of the tripower in 1967, until they ran a test of the 1966 tripower that they had been tweaking on for a year, against a bone-stock out of the box 1967 Q-Jet. Got the exact same time. Guess what happened when they started tweaking the Q-Jet?

 

Quoting one of my professors's in grad school answer when I asked him "what is the most important criteria in designing a survey"? "Who is paying for the test". ;)

 

I then asked him to elaborate.

 

He thought about it for a minute, and came up with: "If we are comparing America's favorite non-alcoholic beverage, and the two finalists are Lipton's ice tea, and Hershey's Hot Chocolate, we might conduct our survey in Minneapolis in February, or Atlanta in August depending".

 

The same can be said for many of the magazine tests.

 

Jon.

Edited by carbking (see edit history)
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

And where Pontiac had Milt, Ford had Bud Moore. "Magazine cars" were an open joke in the 60s.

Also what I remember of that test it was a tripower on a 389 vs a QJ on a 400 with the new open chamber 670 heads. Tripower may have been tweaked but was still on a 389 (and if with the stock pots fahgedaboudit).

 

Bottom line: a 67 QJ flows about 750 cfm and a 66 tripower on the high rise GTO manifold (was a low rise also) will flow at least 150 cfm more. Whether the engine can handle it is another issue. (Tripower needs a lot of cam).

 

Have a tripower I could test on my 70 RA but if change will probably go to the dual quads I also have.

 

ps think the 800 cm QJ was first used on the Oldsmobile 455.

pps I also have a 430 cfm 2GC (center carb) that will bolt onto a tripower.. Can make a test say anything yo want and to a layman will not be able to spot the differences. Just by retarding a distributer a tad could make either faster. Back in the day this was just being "creative".

 

BTW just out of curiosity, how many know how to tell the tree different tripower carb sets visually ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Padgett, when Milt ran his test, he ran a tweaked 1966 tripower on a 1967 400, back-to-back with the 1967 Q-Jet.

 

The CFM for the 1966 tripower which was told to me by Pontiac Engineering was 785 maximum (at lower RPM). As the RPM increased, the CFM decreased because of the "join". Was slightly greater than the Q-Jet at lower RPM, and slightly lower than the Q-Jet at higher RPM. Repeat, the number given to me was 785 maximum.

 

Looking at your last question, I am assuming you are dealing only with Pontiac? Caddy, Chevy, and Olds also used tripower. And yes, I can.

 

But back to the original question, I mentioned that in 1972 I was driving a Datsun roadster, and trying to convince myself I could afford an XK-120S (I couldn't) while working on a 1964 GTO.

 

Jon.

Edited by carbking (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites

Working at the Enco gas station wearing a Enco Tiger suit giving away Tiger Tails with every fill up..

Oh and glasses and plates too.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, padgett said:

And where Pontiac had Milt, Ford had Bud Moore. "Magazine cars" were an open joke in the 60s.

Also what I remember of that test it was a tripower on a 389 vs a QJ on a 400 with the new open chamber 670 heads. Tripower may have been tweaked but was still on a 389 (and if with the stock pots fahgedaboudit).

 

Bottom line: a 67 QJ flows about 750 cfm and a 66 tripower on the high rise GTO manifold (was a low rise also) will flow at least 150 cfm more. Whether the engine can handle it is another issue. (Tripower needs a lot of cam).

 

Have a tripower I could test on my 70 RA but if change will probably go to the dual quads I also have.

 

ps think the 800 cm QJ was first used on the Oldsmobile 455.

pps I also have a 430 cfm 2GC (center carb) that will bolt onto a tripower.. Can make a test say anything yo want and to a layman will not be able to spot the differences. Just by retarding a distributer a tad could make either faster. Back in the day this was just being "creative".

 

BTW just out of curiosity, how many know how to tell the tree different tripower carb sets visually ?

Padgett, Bud Moore engineering made it's debut in 1961 to run in NASCAR. The car was a 1961 Pontiac driven by Joe Weatherly and the car won 8 NASCAR victories for that year. I forgot to mention that in the 1960 Daytona 500 Cotton Owens ( one of the 4 Pontiac's that at the start of the race that ran away from all the other cars ) was prepped by Bud Moore. Bud Moore also prepped other makes as well.

Back to 1957. 1957 was the year the Pontiac Super Duty group came together although the term wasn't officially used until 1960, and the term was a in house engineering term only. They developed high performance Pontiac parts with Isky, Edelbrock, Nichels engineering and Smokey Yunick.

Ray Nichels engineering was on Pontiac engineering's payroll from 1957-1963 and they prepped the Cotton Owens 57 Pontiac that won the Grand National in 1957.

Smokey Yunick was also on Pontiac Engineering's payroll  from 1958-1963.

After January 1963 G.M. brass ( 14th floor ) ordered all this Pontiac stuff along with Chevrolets racing programs to cease. The above guys went to Ford or Chrysler

FYI, NASCAR Banned Tri-Power and all multi carburetion for the 1958 season and beyond. Cotton Owens 1957 Pontiac Grand National winner was a 317H.P. Tri-Power 347. Tri-Power was brought over to Pontiac Division from it's new Chief Engineer Pete Estes who came from Oldsmobile Engineering in mid year 1956. Olds called it J-2.

Edited by Pfeil (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, carbking said:

Padgett, when Milt ran his test, he ran a tweaked 1966 tripower on a 1967 400, back-to-back with the 1967 Q-Jet.

The CFM for the 1966 tripower which was told to me by Pontiac Engineering was 785 maximum (at lower RPM). As the RPM increased, the CFM decreased because of the "join". Was slightly greater than the Q-Jet at lower RPM, and slightly lower than the Q-Jet at higher RPM. Repeat, the number given to me was 785 maximum.

 

 

Looking at your last question, I am assuming you are dealing only with Pontiac? Caddy, Chevy, and Olds also used tripower. And yes, I can.

 

But back to the original question, I mentioned that in 1972 I was driving a Datsun roadster, and trying to convince myself I could afford an XK-120S (I couldn't) while working on a 1964 GTO.

 

Jon.

The CFM for the 1966 tripower which was told to me by Pontiac Engineering was 785 maximum (at lower RPM). As the RPM increased, the CFM decreased because of the "join". Was slightly greater than the Q-Jet at lower RPM, and slightly lower than the Q-Jet at higher RPM. Repeat, the number given to me was 785 maximum. "

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

And that's why Tri-Power was such a good street setup, plus  Good mileage and easier to keep tune than 2X4's. And 2X4 with the exception of Pontiac only used a idle circuit on Buick, Chevrolet and Cadillac on one of the carburetors. And remember this 3X2 stuff is before Q-jet when 4bbls were much lower CFM.

BTW, Q jet is one of the best carbs for Grand Touring/ road racing-primarily because of it's float location , and you can use the Pontiac throttle body, and air horn and the 71-73 Buick center section for 800CFM. They also get great fuel mileage with their small high velocity primaries. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can believe 785 cfm if the stock air cleaners were in place, the A93C was very restrictive. OTOH just the end carbs of a 66 tripower were capable of 435 CFM. Each

 

Now I need to try to find that '67 article but have no doubt the end result was decreed.

 

BTW the difference between the 750 and 800 QJs was all in the primaries.

 

Now my 900 cfm Rochester FI was a work of art.

 

ps don't forget that 2bbls and 4 bbls are rated differently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...