SouthernBoy

In 1966 I ordered a brand new SS396 Chevelle, taking delivery 4 weeks and 2 days later. I still have the original order form for that car.

Here is a picture of one which is close to what mine looked like except for a few things. While mine was the same body color, mine had a black vinyl top. I didn't have mag wheels.. I had the standard chevy rims painted the same color as the body with the baby moon Chevy bowtie hub caps. I also had different tires.

Otherwise, it pretty much looked like what you see in this photo.

Just thought it was nice to see.


http://www.noneckschevelle.com/image...evelle396a.jpg

BstonBruin

I remember my friend used to have one...dark blue with white racing stripes, it was a 71 i think , what a car!

teranfon

Nice looking car. When did you sell yours?

It's amazing how cars have changed over the years. Safer, much more reliable, comfortable, and in many ways much faster. The muscle of yesterday had a soul however, something that seems to be lacking in many of the new cars currently offered.

Terry

1killercls

Geebus...how old are you?

BstonBruin

Im gonna guess about 60-65?

GreenMonster

Old enough to be your older brother Old enough to be my dad...

<--- born in 66

I've always wanted to own a BB 396 chevy.... the number 396 just sounds good (and it's a bigblock).

treyster

Sweet ride, nothing can beat American muscle!!!

CL Platano

Are you sure we didnt have the same friend A friend of mine had one like that too a 71 blue with white racing stripe.

BEETROOT

this would be fun...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/CA-no...QQcmdZViewItem

SouthernBoy

I sold it in October, 1971.. actually, I believe it was Friday, October 1st. Hated to let it go, but then again, isn't it that way with all the machines we love?

While it's true that many cars today (like our TLs) are faster than the mid-60s American supercars, they are not as quick. My Chevelle would top out at around 134 MPH. But speed wasn't the game.. it was acceleration and in stock form with tires and a sharp drag tune, advancing the timing, Holley carb trick, and lightened advance weights, my Chevelle was a high 13.20 to low 13.30 second machine. After installing headers and an R3310 780 CFM Holley, it dropped to 12.8's.

teranfon

Isn't that the truth? I grew up when the old warriors of the late 60's/early 70's were just that. Old cars that people sold relatively cheaply during the early to mid-eighties. I remember I purchased a 67' Shelby GT 500 for $8500.00 in the early eighties. It needed work, but it would be near impossible to find any sort of desirable muscle car from that era for any sort or reasonable price in today's market. I wished I kept a few too, not for the monetary value, but for thrill of owning a sort of car that will never be duplicated.

12.8's on late sixties/early seventies rubber is VERY respectable. A handicap I think most of the performance cars of that era experienced.

Terry

SouthernBoy

If I had been running the stock tires, which were 7.75 x 14's, there is no way I would have managed low 13's. I ran serveral different tires on that car, rear especially of course, until I found the right combo. Mickey Thompson's in the rear proved to do the job. They were 10" tires (width) and since they were shorter that the stock tires, I had the added bonus of the effect of a lower gear. I had 3.73's out back with the close ratio Muncie M21 4-speed (2.20 first), and with the Mickey Thompson's the rear worked out to be a 3.91.

SouthernBoy

Guess I screwed the pooched with this thread.. about age, that is. I'm pretty sensitive about my age for some reason, and my wife and daughters say I shouldn't be.

I turned 60 this year. But I still have a full head of mostly brown hair, no wrinkles, no pot/beer belly, a decent muscular build, no hearing aid, mild nearsightness (actually my eyes are improving!), and all the parts still work. Most people take me for early to mid 40's. One man at work guessed 38.. either he was being kind or he needed new glasses, but relative to him, 38 may not have been that bad of a guess. I still like the same things I did in my earlier 20's.. all the normal American male things like cars and guns and boats and Rock 'n Roll. I am most definitely not politically correct and love to be a little crazy with friends. Once, a co-worker around my age told me to "act my age" and I responded immediately with "what.. and be like you?". Mentally, I'm still in a time warp of my mid 20's in many ways, but not to the extent that I come across as "trying too hard to be young". It's just me and my personality.

Well, as I said, I guess I screwed the pooch on this one. How about we all keep it under our hats, eh?

SouthernBoy

Incidently, a little on terminology.

The term "musclecar" was never used in the mid-60's when speaking of these brutes. They were tagged "supercars" at that time. The term musclecar did not appear until the 70's.

And the label of supercar was specific to a certain type of car. The were 'A' bodied GM cars (Chevelles, GTO's, 442's, Grand Sports) and other brands of the same type. The rules were simple. A mid-sized coupe with a decent suspension, bigger brakes, the appropriage badging, and most important a big block engine of at least 325 HP. Chevelles with small block engines (even the L79 327/350 HP in the '65) were never called supercars.. they could not enter that exclusive club. Also Corvettes, AC Cobras, Mustangs, Camaros, and Firebirds were also excluded from the supercar class.

While many of the magazines of today, and even then, would road test these cars and report E.T.'s in the mid-14's at around 98 MPH, the real facts were witnessed every weekend at the nation's drag strips. The 13 second barrier was the norm and the low 13's were common. Best times I saw for supercars back then (street machines, mind you) were in the lower 12's.

And these cars were built far better that today's machines.. especially FWD ones. Here I'm talking about strenght of parts in the drive train. They had far stronger clutches, transmissions, and final drive components. They had to because of the types of cars they were and what the companies knew the buyers were going to do with them. Win on Sunday, sell on Monday was a real mantra. If you went to a drag race on a Sunday and saw some GM supercars just killing the competition, run after run, power shift after power shift, you ain't gonna go out Monday and buy a Ford Fairlane with a 390 in it. These things would take some unbelievable punishment.

Where our modern cars excel is in finese and finery. Yes the brakes are better (though I order sintered metallic brake linings for my Chevelle), the suspension systems are better, handling is better, engines are more effiecient and a LOT cleaner burning. And today's engines produce more power per cubic inch than most any of the engines in the hot cars back then. But there is an aura about the mid-60's supercars that will last. Many were great to look at and all had their place in the public's eye at the time.

Water-S

12.8s is still awesome by todays standards if you ask me. you gotta have a heavy hitter(like a Z06 or Ford GT or some car pretty heavily modded that's probably spraying to beat that)

SouthernBoy

For those who have never experienced the thrill of a mid-60's supercar, pumping out serious torque in the realm of 420-450 lb/ft while charging down the quarter mile, I feel for you. Also, the suspensions of the Gm supercars were setup up for drag racing. They can stock with traction bars, though they were called trailing arms. But they did the same thing.. they preloaded the rear axle from weight transfer to gain traction.

Yes the 12.8 bracket is serious air. And you're right.. even by today's standards. But then again, look at the 2006 Z06 with its 11.7 second, 127 MPH quarter mile. That is, indeed, a VERY serious 1320 pass. I do not know of one factory produced and generally available car in the 60's that would do that. I DO know of some rare ones that would not only match those times, but exceed them. However, the word "rare" is the byword with this. The current Z06 is available at your Chevy dealer and can be ordered by most anyone. In the 60's, this was nearly impossible, unless you went to a place like Baldwin Chevrolet on Long Island or Nickey or a few others. As far as factory available material, extremely unlikely you would find something to run close to 130 MPH and 11.7 seconds in the quarter. And forget about being able to do this and take the wife to dinner in style in the same car.

teranfon

Hi Southernboy

Here's a picture I thought you might appreciate. My 1986 Grand National. Purchased in 1986 and except for a few modifications its still basically factory specification. It still retains its original paint and trim. It's driven no more than 200 miles a year, but has gone down the track a few times. Drag radials, 24 lbs. boost, and C16 it has dropped into the twelves.

Water-S

those were sleepers and half. I once pulled up next to one in my buddy's Integra Type R which has a pipe intake and headers. there was a slightly rusting (few minor rust sections) on a Grand National he revs to me. well i thought it's some late 30's early 40s dude who's trying to re live his "glory days." so i rev back. but of course the Type R's rev a higher pitch rev. he smoked me BAD.

SouthernBoy

I well remember those cars. The GN Buicks had a running battle with the 302 CID Mustangs during the later 80's. Somewhere in my basement I have an issue of Car and Driver that road tested a GNX and managed a 13.9 quarter mile. Pretty impressive out of a 231 cubic inch V6 pushrod engine.

Your 12 second times stand next to incredible.

teranfon

I have that issue as well. It seems that C & D were somewhat in disbelief that a Grand National ran 0-60 in 4.9 seconds and the quarter mile in 13.9 seconds with factory 215's . In the months that followed they commented that a Buick engineer told them the GN was actually making over 285 hp to the wheels. In just a few short years the GN's and TR's were popping up at racetracks throughout Canada and the US running high 12's with a reprogrammed ECU, drag radials, additional boost, and race fuel. Its not uncommon for a highly modified version to run into the 10's or even better. It seems as the years go by it becomes more difficult to find one in original condition that hasn't been modified for track duty. I'm sure you experienced the same with the cars from the late 60's. Cars that people routinely modified without a concern for originality. Thanks for all the great memories. Tonight I think I'm going to remove the cover from the mistress and take her for a spin.

http://www.canadiandriver.com/articl...d_national.htm

Terry

SouthernBoy

My hat's truly off to you, my friend. Though we are of a different era, we both celebrate the same things. Each period has its masterpieces. The 60's had the supercars, the 70's.. well we can pretty much forget the 70's. The 80's saw the re-birth of performance in cars like the re-invented 302 (5.0) Mustang and the Buick GN's. And now the 2000's have the CTS-V's and the Z06's and yes, even the TL's and other multi-faceted cars. I love it.

I am fortunate to have lived through these times and more importantly, to have come to appreciate what each has to offer. In the 60's, I was hardcore Chevy all the way.. with an appreciation for some other fine examples of supercar fame. But all that's gone now. I can appreciate fine machinery from any and all sources, regardless of brand loyalty or origination. Personally, I prefer American iron, but I will certainly examine and buy whatever happens to satisfy my wants and desires at the time. Witness my '04 TL for starters. There is just so much good stuff out there today. It never ceases to amaze me that people on this website are so anti-American in their car preferences when they just might be shutting out the very car of their dreams. I say examine them all and see what best fits your wants.

Enjoy and thanks for the memories.

teranfon

I agree entirely. And I think we're both fortunate to witness and experience a re-birth of powerful machinery. There is both good and bad in all manufacturers, but I think each contribute in some way to the excellent products available today. I'm looking so forward to the new Shelby Mustang. I love my six-speed Accord greatly, but the old warriors can still sit around the campfire and sing their songs. Tonight I'll lay a little rubber with the GN in their memory.

Terry

SouthernBoy

I absolutely love what Ford has done with the new version of the Mustang. Someone was definitely doing their homework with this one. The beauty of the design is that it appeals to those who grew up with the originals AND the young set of today who love it because it doesn't look like everything else. Great idea.

The new GT500 due out this summer should be awesome. With 475 HP and 475 lb/ft of torque, they have a winner already.

Yep, we have some great choices once again. Think of me when you smoke the tires in your GN.

GreenMonster

Closest thing I had to a muscle car was a 77 Cutlass Supreme w/ a 310hp 350cid rocket motor (1970 block)... Good times !!

Southernboy, we'll keep it under our hats... If it makes you feel any better, I had you pegged as a young wannabe ricer punk from the south

SouthernBoy

"I had you pegged as a young wannabe ricer punk from the south".

Get outta town! Really?? WOW. Well let's see.. I'll take the "young" and the "south" parts.. can I pass on the "wannabe ricer punk", though?

Seriously, I tend not to relate too well to "older" people because... well because they're.. old. At least so many of them "act" old. When my daughters were in high school, our house had a lot of their friends around and a lot of boys because both of them were, and are, VERY nice looking. Foxes would be the operative word. Anyway for a time back then, most of my and my wife's friends were teenagers! Really. I had my '88 Mustang LX 302 CID and some of the boys were gearheads. Also I was the Athletic Club Booster president for two years so most of the kids in their high school knew me. We had a blast.

Anyway, I have to admit there are times when I get a charge out of smoking some kid at a light with a hole shot because he thinks he can knock off some older dude. I can still launch pretty well and shift pretty fast.

Yeah, we'll should keep all of this under our hats.

Shoofin

I still have my '66 Mustang Fastback I'm trying to finish restoring...

teranfon

It'll come. Most of the appeal of a car restoration is knowing, as you finish the final details, is that YOU made it whole again.

Terry

SouthernBoy

Lucky man. You have a real classic there. Which engine does it carry? And in what state of tune?

Shoofin

The engine that came with it was from a '70 Mustang. It's a 302 motor. '66 should have been a 289, which is pretty much the same block as a 302. I was contemplating either fixing the engine up completely, or ditching it in favor for a modded 351W. State of tune now, the suspension is 75% done, need to finish up the brake upgrade, the interior is bare metal, the bodywork/painting was done but it came out like shit so it will need to be repainted again. It still needs a good amount of work everywhere pretty much.

GreenMonster

Yeah, you just seems younger then your posts let on...

Even tho' I'll be 40 this year, I tend to think of myself as the kid that never grew up... so I know how you feel...

SouthernBoy

"the kid that never grew up..."

SouthernBoy

Yep. While the Mustang was first introduced in April, 1964, there never was a '64 Mustang. That was a 1965 and two engines were offered. An inline 6 and a 260 small block at 164 HP (I ran one with my 1964 Corvair Spyder and beat it).

In the Fall of '64, Ford upped the anti to the 289 and in '65, you could get the 289/271 HI-PO which was not all that strong but it sure sounded sweet with good exhaust and solid lifters. In 1966, there were several 289's offered (this is what I am referring to by "state of tune"), the best of which was the Shelby GT350 which used the 289 but I think with a "30" overbore, plus some other goodies (hotter cam, hi-rise intake manifold, dual-feed Holley, headers, better heads, etc.).

Were I you, I might just stay with the 302 and used the finned aluminum valve covers, a good cam and intake manifold, a Holley, headers, and perhaps AFR heads.