Tempus fugit. The classic Pontiac arrowhead hasn’t graced a motor vehicle in roughly five years now. Considering its ignominious end, it may be unbelievable to some that Pontiac was perhaps the most successful American automotive brand from 1959 to 1970. Sure, it might have technically ranked third in sales, but Chevrolet and Ford have historically run on their own inertia, like boulders rolling down a hill. Pontiac, on the other hand, excelled for a number of reasons, but it all really started with the “Wide-Track” advertising campaign and this jet-age Catalina.
Pontiac’s success depended largely on three car-loving executives: Bunkie Knudsen, Pete Estes, and John DeLorean. Bunkie Knudsen, of course, was the man who drastically changed Pontiac’s image in the 1950s, and the “wide-track” moniker may or may not be directly attributable to him. Perhaps apocryphally, Bunkie Knudsen told stylists to widen the track of the prototype ’59s because they looked like “football players wearing ballet slippers.” In his article titled “Wide Track: Bunkie Knudsen, Pete Estes, and the Pontiac Renaissance,” however, Aaron Severson of “Ate up with Motor” explains that it was Chuck Jordan of GM Styling that initiated the “wide-track” stance, and Knudsen in particular latched on to the look.
Regardless, the “Wide-Track Pontiac” became a successful advertising campaign that led to a successful car. Pontiac’s gracefully illustrated advertisements by Art Fitzpatrick and Van Kaufman were no less responsible for the new image than the “wide-track” wording. Pontiac portrayed a youthful, vigorous image at just the right time, thanks to its forward-thinking executives.
With that being said, not all ’59 Pontiacs were glamour queens. For all the new publicity Pontiacs were receiving (and were about to receive), it was still possible to order an el-strippo from the Pontiac dealer. Even though stripper Catalinas were soon to be crossing dragstrip finish lines first in Stock and Super Stock classes all across the nation, this specific example was more likely ordered for trips to the supermarket at a sedate pace. This “Sport Sedan” even wore base dog dish hubcaps (which are actually super-cool).
The two-door sedan was, not surprisingly, one of the worst-sellers in the Pontiac lineup in ’59, with 26,102 sold; after all, the 1950s and 1960s belonged to the hardtop bodystyle. Meant for budget-conscious buyers and drag racers, this post coupe would have left the dealership at close to the base price of $2633, with the only visible option being the Hydramatic. This low-optioned Catalina, therefore, raises an interesting point about the GM hierarchy in the 1950s and 1960s.
One could order a basic ’59 Impala Sport Coupe, with its hardtop roofline and a 283, for $2717. At that price, the Impala simply looked more expensive than the base Catalina, even though it cost only 86 dollars more. Therefore, whoever ordered the Catalina likely did so for one of a few reasons: the Pontiac nameplate had more “cachet” than the Chevrolet nameplate, the Pontiac’s base 389 was significantly more powerful than a Chevy 283, or s/he favored the Pontiac’s styling and this is what fit the budget.
At any rate, it’s a happy occurrence for car buffs that the original owner made that decision. In a world where the term “rare” is bandied about with merry abandon, this Catalina deserves the modifier. Can it be the only example with a factory radio-delete plate? A lack of heater-controls and underdash ducts means that this is also a heater-delete car. Save for a base synchromesh transmission, this is undoubtedly the lowest-optioned 1959 Pontiac Catalina on earth.
Judging by the slight wear on the paint, chrome, and carpet, this car might be a unicorn amongst automobiles: the rare all-original, “how does that thing exist?” car. All Pontiacs in 1959 had plenty of chrome and intricate detailing, like this back-up light that parks between double-peaked tailfins. As brazen as it is, this design may be more subdued than Chevy’s “batwing,” and could have led to the original owner’s decision to buy this car instead of an Impala.
The split-grille and ironing board hood also made their debut for 1959, only to disappear in 1960, and reappear for 1961. Pontiac was apparently caught off guard by their popularity, and the 1960 models were already finalized by the time that was apparent. Of course, both became Pontiac styling staples for many years (maybe too many).
The license plate leaves us with perhaps the most accurate sentiment: “Find 1.” 1959 Pontiacs aren’t on every street corner anymore, and finding one as interestingly decontented as this example may be a once-in-a-lifetime occurrence. Although Pontiac’s tale has a sad ending, few nameplates ever rose to the heights that Pontiac did during their glory years, and perhaps that makes this story a bittersweet one.
I’ve always wondered about the origins of Wide Track. As DeLorean tells it in ‘On a Clear Day…’, Jordan used it on an advanced styling convertible to accommodate IRS. Bunkie saw the clay and told them to put it on a production car. Jan P Norbye writes the ballet slippers story in ‘Pontiac: The Postwar Years’ and also mentions that a copywriter at McManus, John and Adams called Milt Colson came up with the name (according to Jim Wangers). As the stories are told in these two pieces, they could both be correct, albeit sequential.
That 59 is nice.
GM was semi-seriously contemplating independent rear suspension for its sedans for around 1960, an idea that was of course dropped for cost reasons, but I don’t think that had anything to do with the Wide Track look, which was, like a lot of GM’s 1959 styling, prompted by GM’s determination to reclaim styling leadership after getting a bad shock from the 1957 Chryslers. Given some of the weird, weird stuff the stylists came up with during that campaign, it’s really kind of amazing that cars looking as good as this actually emerged from it.
I noticed you referenced On A Clear Day for your article but you don’t give credence to this story? JZDL seems quite specific in recounting.
Well, DeLorean’s book is a valuable resource, but there are things in it that I think must be read with a grain or two of salt. DeLorean was not an unbiased observer and was obviously in an adversarial frame of mind when the book was written (in fact, he had second thoughts of it prior to publication, which is why the book is credited to J. Patrick Wright even though it’s written as a first-person account by DeLorean).
A gorgeous looking car Pontiac got their style right after the ostentatious 58s,there’s a triple carb identical model doing shows in north west England.I’d take this over a Cadillac any day
There’s one here too, it’s for sale, actually. A 1959 Catalina with a tri-power 389 and an all-red interior. Must be pretty unique.
http://www.coolcatclassiccars.com/cccc/page/114/pontiac_catalina_1959.html
Even for a stripper it’s still beautiful. Ornamentation was not spared.
While not all that likely, a possible 4th reason for the original owner choosing a Pontiac over a Chevy is that there was a “difference of opinion” at the Chevy dealership. Think about it, this person wanted an attractive yet inexpensive car and that could just as easily have been a Chevy until the final bit of dealing hit a snag. Buyer gets so ticked off that Chevy looses a customer for years and in keeping with the stripper theme this car is eventually traded for a Firebird with bench front seat and column shifted 3 speed manual in that “bottle green” so ubiquitous on late 60s Pontiacs of all sizes.
You beat me to it; I was also going to mention the original buyer’s relationship to, or experience with, the dealership.
The availability of Hydra-Matic (versus PowerGlide) may have been enough to sway me…
Yes, me also.
That’s exactly how my dad became a Pontiac man. In 1957 he went to buy a new Country Squire at Miller Ford in Darien CT and they were such miscreants that he bought a 1957 Chieftain Safari instead.
Bought a new Pontiac roughly every 3 years – 1961 Tempest, 1964 Catalina, 1967 Catalina and 1970 Executive – all Safaris. Never looked at another Ford.
Your dad had good taste! I wish I could have lived in the 60’s and had a chance to be a Pontiac man. And a wagon is always a good choice.
Nice always liked these and looked at one to buy in Aussie not sure of the model designation but it wasnt a wide track it was a Cheviac with a 283 motor with quite a bit of trim MIA. Funny in a way Chevs in Australia for 59 didnt have a V8 option but their Pontiacs ran a small block.
kiwiBryce…..Did they build the Cheviac in Oz? Or were they a CKD from Canada?
I’m guessing NZ Cheviacs started life in Canada like our(UK) bound ones.Just to make it more confusing regular Chevys and Pontiacs were also sold in the UK alongside the Acadian(a badge engineered Chevy)
Damn, backup lights were standard? I remember on my Uncle Mike’s ’63, same model, same body style, his son installed the backup lights to save a couple of bucks. They were pre-wired, just not installed.
They were likely not standard, and I wonder what was in their place when they were not ordered? Most likely a cheap, thin metal plate of some sort.
Your comment reminds me of how this sort of “pre-wiring” still exists to this day, particularly with pickups. It makes sense; it’s easier and less expensive for the assembly line to carry as few wiring harnesses and subassemblies as possible, I’ve known of guys who have added features to their trucks for the price of a switch, and in a some cases, a computer reflash from a sympathetic dealer.
My ’61 Catalina had plates where the (optional) back up lights would’ve been. That car was a stripper; the Roto Hydra-Matic was the only option. It had the radio delete plate and the heater/defroster was standard, but like most cars in the ’60’s, for a credit, you could order one without.
Yup they were an option for many cars in that period. I have a owners manual package for a 1963 AMC Rambler Classic 770 and in the package was a small book with add on options. One of the options were for rubber floor mats and back up lights
“Only $86 more” is a relative term. Today, it seems like nothing but, back then, it was quite a bit of money (adjusted for inflation). So, it’s entirely conceivable that someone would take the Chevy over the Poncho for the lower price, particularly when discussing the skinflint price range.
But that’s still a great Catalina which exemplifies the start of the Wide-Track era. For the next decade, Pontiac was ‘the’ car company which could do no wrong across their entire line-up. That’s really saying something in the automotive heyday of the sixties when everyone would build some of their greatest cars. Even the few misses like rope-drive and the OHC six were still cool.
And you have to admire classic car owners that keep their cars original and resist the temptation to add crap (particularly stuff that can’t be easily reversed). Those dog-dish hubcaps, for example, are great. When you think about it, maintaining originality is a whole lot more difficult (and expensive) but, in the long run, worth the effort.
Correct ~ in 1959 that $86 was more than two weeks pay for most Americans .
As much as I love my Chevys , the Hydromatic Drive option (included the backup lamps BTW) would likely have swayed me too .
-Nate
Still, very few people would have just handed over an extra $86 in cash and spread out over a 36-month car note was not a big deal. That’s well within the realm of, “For only $3 more a month, you could be driving this handsome Pontiac.”
Yes and no ~
My guess is you’re fairly Young…..
-Nate
And, keep in mind that when you’re talking interior trim the Catalina had more in common with the Bel Air than the Impala. Yeah, the transmission was better, and the engine was bigger, but otherwise you were not getting an Impala.
This also is a good explanation as to why the Impala was so successful.
My fondest memory of this car belonged to a friend of mine’s dad. He had a dark red one with the big engine – can’t recall if a 389 or larger, but it was pretty quick!
In winter, 1967, shortly after my friend got his driver’s license, he took the Poncho for a spin – a really good one. Sometime not much later his dad really came down on him. Why? Seems his dad recently bought a set of studded snow tires, and for some unknown reason, suddenly all the studs were gone!
Hmmm… I wonder what could possibly have happened to them?
All in all, a real nice ride!
Nice find. One of my favorite body styles of all time.
A really nice find, this car seems to be in near-perfect condition. I think a huge reason for Pontiac’s success was their advertising art by Kaufman and Fitzpatrick that suggested the good life could be yours by driving a Pontiac…I find the artwork stunning.
One thing-is that an aftermarket tachometer mounted under the left side of the dashboard?
Either that but its more likely an oil press/temp gauge, most people add them to older cars like this, maybe one of the ones on the dash is dead, I think this vintage Pontiac has gen or temp and a fuel gauge, but everything else is an idiot light.
Automatic? Ha, luxury. My Father’s 60 Pontiac had the flathead 6 & 3-speed manual. And narrow track chassis. Being a Canadian car I’m sure it had a heater though.
DougD….did you mean an in line 6.? I had a 62 Strato Chief with 261 in line.
Yes ;
Canadian Pontiacs came with the Chevrolet 261 C.I. variant of the Stovebolt 235 engine ~ bigger and more powerful with better designed connecting rods to handle the higher RPM’s , steam holes between the head and the block to cure over heating issues .
This was a truck engine designed for larger than 1.5 ton chassis and it’s still very sought after .
-Nate
I remember it being a flathead, but that doesn’t make sense now that you mention it. Definately a six / 3 speed though.
Ah well, I was only 3 years old when it left.
261’s were OHV’s . . . . and talk about cartoonish . . . the wide track ’59 and ’60 bodies on the Canadian Chevy “X” frame chassis looked like roller skates . . . . and those wheels sat well inboard of the body compared to it’s American cousins . . . .
I love the US Pontiacs. Wide track, Hydromatics and real Pontiac frames and engines. They were available in Canada but at a premium price. A loaded Bonneville neared lower Cadillac prices I’ve been told, explaining the ultra low sales on the Canadian side. The Chevrolet based Pontiac was however a popular vehicle with an excellent sales record.
The first Bonneville I ever saw in Saskatoon looked like this.
As a 6 year old, I thought for a time that were all like this.
Deleting the heater but ordering the slushbox is extremely strange in any case. But in those years Pontiac’s heater controls were a wonderful piece of space-age gadgetry. If I’d been buying a new ’59 and narrowed the choice to Chevy or Pontiac, the heater would have forced me to choose Pontiac.
Not really ;
Lots of American cars came sans heaters then , automatics were already what most Drivers wanted , heaters less so when it was time to count the pennies .
My ’58 Plymouth Plaza was so equipped from new (I was the second owner) ~ FlatHead I6 engine , two speed automatic , those glorious tail fins , no heater and a radio delete plate . very strange , ordered for the middle class man in Pasadena , Ca. , I got it for $75 when he croaked and his Wife saw my daily ” we FIx or BUY any car or truck ” advert in The Star News .
Luckily , it barely missed getting used (up) in Christine , they were looking for cheap Plymouth two door sedans and I only wanted $600 for this pristine base model but no aluminum trims killed the deal .
Whew .
-Nate
Even Cadillac did not make a radio or heater standard back then, but the Hydramatic was. We can only guess whether any actually left the factory so equipped.
The weird thing is that by 1959, power steering and power brakes were also standard on Cadillacs, but the heater still wasn’t for another couple of years. I think Cadillac’s nominal rationale about that and the radio was that since there were several different heaters and radios available, not making one of them standard gave the buyer the opportunity to select the version they wanted rather than being stuck with the standard one (to which my response is, “Uh huh…”). I agree with you — I can’t imagine there were many heater-less ’59 Cadillacs.
One consideration about the Hydra-Matic is that by around this time, not having automatic was becoming a real burden on resale values. Dealer price guides started presuming cars had automatic and knocking off value for a stick. Some people do think about that kind of thing when ordering new cars, I suppose.
Heater/defroster would’ve been a standard Pontiac item in ’59 . . . as it was on most cars by then. As I mentioned earlier up the string of posts . . . . you could order it without . . . . a ‘delete credit.’ I am assuming that maybe this car when new was in a clime that didn’t need the heater or defroster much. I remember a 1965 Plymouth Sport Fury that was a Makiki (Honolulu District) car when ordered new . . . . in other words, no use on the flat streets for a defroster or heater . . . it was a delete option as was the radio. I saw this car when a guy bought it from an estate; 318 Polyhead and a Torqueflite. No P/S or no P/B. Open the hood, and there’s “just engine” . . .
Basically, by this period, if you got a heater/defroster delete, it was because you wanted to lighten it for racing, had no use for it where you may have lived, or (and the tertiary, I’m sure), wanted the credit.
One like this, finished in medium turquoise metallic with matching interior and white top was the first new car I knowing rode in. My great-aunt Pauline brought her gleaming new ’59 Pontiac to show it to us and take us for a drive. Not completely low-optioned, it had Hydramatic, whitewalls and full wheelcovers and of course two-tone paint. Don’t really remember much about the ride, though I’m sure it was smoother and nicer than our old ’54 Ford Mainline.
I got to thinking about that $86 difference in price between this car and an Impala so I got out my Encyclopedia of American Cars to look at what’s what.
Maybe I’m reading it wrong but a Catalina 2 door like this is a 2 door SEDAN. The Encyclopedia does not show a direct equivalent as an Impala…it shows Impalas as hardtops only in 1959. The truly equivalent Chevy to this Pontiac might be a Bel Air 2 door sedan and that would have under cut the price of this Catalina by nearly $130.
Which means that the original owner probably wanted the flashier (relatively) Pontiac OR there was a disagreement at the Chevy dealership.
I am now inclined to wonder if this car was sent to the Pontiac dealership like this…where it sat until the 1960 models hit the dealership and some smart bargain hunter snapped it up.
Impala was a 2-door hardtop and convertible only in 1958. For 1959, it went to a full line (4-door sedan, 2-door hardtop, convertible, and I’m pretty certain a 4-door hardtop). If you wanted a 2-door sedan, you bought a Bel Air.
Yeah, you’ve got the equivalencies right. An Impala was closer to the middle Pontiac (Star Chief?), and had a few touches (armrests, inside door pulls, special steering wheel) that was above what that model had.
The Impala was something of a unique car in the GM line. It definitely gave the buyer a bit more flash than he was paying for, and definitely gave Chevrolet something to compete against Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Buick low end lines – for a fair bit less money. No wonder it was so successful.
And for all the talk about engine and transmission, to the average buyer a 283 and Powerglide was just fine, thank you very much. Most buyers would have guess that both cars had the same transmission, and may have only been vaguely aware that each division had its own engines.
Agreed; comparing this two door to the Impala hardtop is not a direct comparison. The Catalina interior trim level was probably somewhere between the two, but the fact that it was a two door sedan means that it conveys more of a Bel Air image.
FWIW, there was an Impala 2-door sedan in 1961, the only year for that oddity.
I too, was surprised the first time I encountered one, not in the metal, but in the brochure.
I once had the Bel Air model!
I’d sure love to know the production number on the Impala 2dr. Sedan.
I’ll bet it’s well under 20,000!
That was kind of the point though…an Impala was really, in many ways, a nicer car for a little more money…but you could have also gotten a Bel Air way cheaper than a Catalina.
As much as I like the Catalina, I’d rather have a hardtop, so I would have tried to swing the extra 86 dollars for the Impala.
The closest Pontiac equivalent to the Impala was likely the Ventura, which combined the Bonneville level trim with the (shorter) Catalina wheelbase. FWIW the Star Chief was a combination of the Catalina trim on the Bonneville wheelbase. All 1959 Pontiacs had the 389 CI engine; it came in several levels of tune, starting with a base two barrel and running through various iterations of four barrels. Even the base engine, combined with the low first gear of the “old school” Hydramatic, was capable of generating some impressive burn outs.
Syke, all excellent points. We forget how the Chevrolet Impala completely dominated the American car market in the 1960s. Others tried to copy it but the key to Impala’s success was its youthful flair that carefully borrowed from both Corvette and Cadillac. And resale value was always class-leading. Within GM, the Pontiac Ventura seemed to be targeted directly at the Impala. The 1964-70 Buick LeSabre, although more conservatively styled, also followed the Impala value formula. And like Impala, the LeSabre always scored highly in Consumer Reports reviews.
Well it could be that the original buyer was simply a brand loyalist, and bought nothing but Pontiacs – as did their parents and grand parents!
Anyone know what was the last car in the US with a heater-delete option?
Probably around 1968 or so, I think that at a certain point the heater needed to be standard for the federal required window defrosters, so you couldn’t delete it anymore. It was not that unusual to see cars down in Florida with heater delete, usually as a cheapo “ad car” to bring people in on that “$2200” Chevelle, but then used to switch them to a nicer car. I know of people that have seen a few heater delete 60’s vintage cars in the junkyards down here in Miami back when 60’s cars were common in the scrapyards.
I have been told, by people who would know better than I, that some cars were available in Hawai’i into the 1970s with air conditioners but no heaters. I understand that this configuration was particularly common on foreign cars in which the air conditioning, by design, was not fully integrated into a unified HVAC system. I personally have never seen this, nor have I ever visited Hawai’i.
But then, I personally have never seen a mainland car without a heater either, though I do not doubt that they exist.
I consider that the original buyer of this strippo Catalina probably bought it, instead of an equivalent Chevy, for the bigger engine and the Hydramatic.
US cars in Mexico came without heaters well into the late 70s.
If you wanted a heater, you had to take AC too, the full HVAC monty.
Yeah, if you wanted to get air conditioning, you had to get the heater too.
To this day, cars sold in the Philippines have no heaters. Not necessary.
I know that heater deletes continued well into the 80s in US possessions like Puerto Rico. However Hawaii is a State, and I would think there would no exemptions from Federal rules.
FWIW, any US car with a factory AC system is guaranteed to have heating as well, as there would be no economic benefit in deleting integrated components from from these systems. Nobody would say, for example, “put in AC but leave out the heater core ’cause I aint payin fer it, Gater!”
Now, an hang-on, under-dash type is a different story, and I’m sure Hawaii teemed with many cars so-equipped back in the day.
Have you ever seen an 80’s car with a heater delete?
I’m wondering because, Puerto Rico is a pretty small market in the overall scheme of things, I can’t see them tooling up heater control blanks and block off plates for the firewall for Puerto Rico only, especially by the 80’s when I would imagine that the majority of cars sold in PR would have air con.
Were the famed “Iraqi Malibus” heater-delete? Seems they’d be a prime candidate for no heater.
It gets fairly chilly in Baghdad in the winter, with highs around 16 degrees C; 62 F, and nights to near freezing.
Although they did have heaters, I think the Iraqi-Taxi Malibus didn’t have a/c…
The Iraqi Malibus had AC.
In the old days, Hawaii cars would just about ALL come with a heater/defroster integrated control, and like some on the mainland, could have an under-dash dealer installed unit added, but this was few and far between. Most cars out here depending on the price, started to come with integrated HVACs. If you live mauka (mountain), in the cooler time of year November-March, you definitely will use the defroster (and sometimes the heat).
Beat me to it. This one may have been a “ad car”.
“Not a low-priced car, but a luxurious Pontiac with big V-8 and automatic transmission for $2499 this weekend only.”
A friend of mines remembers his parents buying the “ad car” a 1969 AMC Rambler American 2 door sedan, no radio, 3 speed manual and black walls, it was $1895 or something like that, then they paid the dealer $42 to have a manual tune AM radio installed, bare bones.
Ford dealers around here ordered vehicles in unpopular colors to offer for these weekend specials. Eventually someone bought them, but they did the job getting folks into the showroom. Around 1970, our pool man picked up a new Ranchero in black with three on the tree for a song. I almost bought a brick red Explorer stick shift ad car.
We used to do that to at the Pontiac dealer I worked at, this was in the 90’s though, so the stripper ad cars weren’t really that “stripped” but we used to try to order them in the most unflattering color available for that particular model to try to discourage selling them.
My son in San Antonio bought a Hyundai Accent that was one of those ad specials. No radio, no nothing but A/C (which in other markets, would not have been standard – I remember Kia Rio base models in Hawaii that had no A/C, no radio, no power steering) . . . his has roll-up windows, but being San Antonio, the air WAS part of the package. He still has that car.
Parked curbside in Virginia City, Montana is a red and white version of this car, but no idea if it is as lightly equipped as this Pontiac. Really lovely cars.
Pontiac was an aspirational vehicle for many back then. Perhaps someone just really wanted a Poncho and this was as cheap as they could go. To me the ’59 looked really old by ’62, love it now.
A torquey 389 Pontiac engine and 4 speed hydramatic tranny, compared to a Chevy 283 and 2 speed “Slip ‘n Slide” PowerGlide, with more restrained styling, for less than $90.00 more??
A “Win/Win Situation” IMO.
The styling may have been an issue. Chevrolet was definitely one of GM’s wilder excesses for ’59 which the Pontiac was relatively benign by late 50’s standards. The Chevy styling was definitely polarizing, which is why Ford beat them that year, with a car that they figured was too much of a wallflower to compete. Little did they know.
Motorheads may have understood the transmission difference, but to the average 1959 buyer, all they were looking for was two pedals on the floor. How many speeds and how it shifted didn’t really matter. How else do you think Chevrolet got away with Powerglide for so long? It worked, it worked well, and it shifted automatically. Period.
And, as mentioned above, the difference was more than $86.00.
You raise a good point, Skye. Not every buyer was interested in horsepower & torque numbers or how many gears an automatic transmission contained or how well it shifted (or slurped) it’s gear changes.
But surely in 1959, as today, there were buyers who knew better? Discerning buyers who knew what was a better design and/or product available?
Even back then, my precocious, pre-school brain absorbed the comments of my “enthusiast” Father & friends discussing the merits (or lack there of) of PowerGlides, Hydramatics, Cruise-a-matics and TorqueFlite transmissions.
The “Least Common Denominator” product was seldom accepted in my family.
But surely in 1959, as today, there were buyers who knew better? Discerning buyers who knew what was a better design and/or product available?
Quite true. A lot of men who were farmers, or worked in various trades and such were much more knowledgeable about automobile technology back then, and often based buying decision on that. I met a lot of older men back then that were very finicky about their cars and which brands/engines/transmissions/etc. were best, and why. I can really see a farmer or such buying this Catalina precisely because of its power train.
Yup! My extended family consisted (at the time of this car’s birth) of third generation wheat farmers, electrical engineers and emerging (in the late 1950’s) television technical support staff.
Other kids in the 1960’s learned to read from “My Weekly Reader” or “Boy’s Life”. I had to figure out what “Popular Science”, “Car & Driver” and “Mechanics Illustrated” was talking about. (And Dad DID quiz me!)
Farmers are the most versatile and all-round people on the planet. That’s a fact, and I know what I’m talking about. I’ve met a few hundred of them in my life.
Maintaining and repairing machinery (both old and new equipment), electricity, building and construction, welding, restoring, landscaping, accounting, management, etc.etc. And then I’m still not talking about their core business.
I was raised in the suburbs, but have lived on a small farm for over a decade now, where I’ve learned that farming is 10% planting and harvesting and 90% fixing equipment.
Your hobby-farm is just an excuse to work on old machinery 🙂
Paul,
my dad was a farmer and he very carefully chose his Pontiacs, John Deere tractors and Allis Chalmers Gleaner combines!
Yup, farm kids make the best Engineers and mechanical designers, because they come with strength of materials and hydraulics experience.
I was only a part time farm kid, so got partial benefit.
Good points as the postwar (and especially the 1950s) buyer wanted a no-clutch car. The car shifted without using a clutch and that truly was all that mattered. Put it in drive and simply go. Only the true performance oriented cared and, as so many Chevy ads in 1959 pointed out, you could tailor your new ’59 Chevy to whatever you wanted. Two notable ’59 Chevy ads has a family man who ordered his ’59 Impala sedan to carry his family and to satisfy his performance blood with a 289 fuelie and a close-ratio four speed, HD brakes and suspension. Another has a long distance salesman who wanted the comfort, but little else and chose a Biscayne sedan with a six and overdrive.
My maternal Grandfather (1893-1968) lived with us after my maternal Grandmother died two months before I was born in 1959. Grandpa Bill Maher was a Pontiac (or Studebaker) guy, mostly Pontiac from the 1930s as I remember him saying, “No Chevrolets for me! I rolled over in back in something-squat.” He may have had a point as, although Chevy/Pontiac bodies were similar, the chassis even in the 30s had variances in track, wheelbase (naturally), springing and axles. We moved from San Francisco to San Rafael when I was six months old and at the time, he had a ’54 Pontiac Chieftain 2-door that my Dad tells me was a Hydra-Matic and a six. He bought the ’61 Catalina Safari for my Mom and Dad for the kids, but he regularly drove that one ’til he died. He hated driving the ’65 Dodge my Dad had (trading HIS ’55 Pontiac and if only my Mom had the Pontiac wagon out and about).
I am not sure where Aaron65 prices are from, and I am not disputing them, but looking at the classic car database for the lowest priced car:
Pontiac Catalina 2 door sport sedan – $2390
Impala 2 door sport coupe – $2478 but the 4 door is $6 cheaper
Bel Air 2 door $2280
Buick LeSabre 2 door $2485
Olds 88 2 door $2574
This suggests that the hierarchy puts Buick under Olds. The 98 and Electra 225 base pricing is not clear either, as the Buick sedans are higher priced, but the 98 convertible is highest priced. I have the opinion that the hierarchy is a muddled mess in the middle with the only clear hierarchy being that Chevy is at the low priced end and Cadillac is at the high priced end. A nice Impala will cost more than the low end of Pontiac, Buick or Oldsmobile.
I got the prices from Krause’s “Standard Catalogs.” They may or may not be accurate, and some parts of the country were undoubtedly different.
The Classic Car Database may not include shipping which varied depending on the distance from Detroit. You made an interesting point about the hierarchy. My prices show that the Bel Air is about $100 less than the Catalina, and a Buick is $100 more with the Olds $200 more roughly speaking. An Impala hardtop is about as much as the basic Olds 88.
Don’t forget–the Impala came standard with a six-cylinder engine. V8s were about a hundred dollars extra.
The prices I posted are for the 283 V8 on the Chevrolets. Optional V8 engines were available for the Chevrolets, and two automatic transmissions, turboglide as well as powerglide.
All of the prices were for manual transmissions as they are standard for Buick, Olds and others. Prices for options is not listed in the database.
And Chevy in 1959 and 1960 counted sixes and V-8s as separate models . . .
Don’t forget the old disclaimer: “Prices slightly higher in the west and south”, which existed into the early/mid-1970s!
The erosion of Sloan’s GM price ladder started as early as 1941, when Pontiac offered a “C” body Torpedo car of it’s own. The 1950s saw Buick Division very aggressive in pricing Specials right near (or sometimes lower) than some Chevy Pontiac and Olds models. GM was big enough to survive such internal overlap and cannibalism of sales between divisions; Chrysler, not so lucky as this way of doing business killed Desoto and Plymouth. At Ford, it brought Mercury close to extinction a couple of times before its ultimate demise in this decade (2011). This cannibalistic divisional competition helped to really kill off Edsel and reduced Mercury back to being a fancier Ford for 1961 . . . .
For those who actually drive much , the two door post Sedan’s body made for far better handling and overall life .
I’da loved to buy one of these with a 261 and Hydromatic ~ that combo was very popular in late 1950’s Chevrolet Light Duty Trucks and they were superb Road Travelers , the Pontiac here , if so equipped would have made the perfect Long Distance American Touring rig .
Good ride , good handling , roomy and comfy plus cheap to run , nearly unkillable .
-Nate
I Quite Agree.
My Father (and Grandfather) avoided the more stylish hardtop models because of their increased flexability (and later on rattles and groans) endemic to this design in favor of less stylish, but long lasting “solid post” sedan models.
Every time I would struggle to close the sitting-on-an-incline parked ’53 Studebaker Starliner 2 door hardtop door my Father would smirk his “I TOLD you so!” face at me.
Yabbutt ;
He didn’t have a ” Hill Holder ” did he ? =8-) .
Those frameless doors that rattled like Moroccas after a couple years drove us bonkers , I learned many tips & tricks to quiet them down .
FWIW , all through the 1970’s & 1980’s ’59 GM products wore WORTHLESS ~ I’d buy ’em and crush ’em for about $45 each , you couldn’t give away a bat wing hard top Chevy back then .
A buddy of mine and I took one old pristine ’59 Chevy Bel Air and mercilessly thrashed it one night , we made a point of scraping all that priceless stain steel trims off it and bash in the rear end , taillights etc. ~ shameless . it still ran just fine by the time we were done and still got us $75 in scrap value .
Times were very different back then .
-Nate
That’s really not fair since those ‘flexible flyer’ ’53 Studebakers are a gimme as they could quite possibly have one of the most flexible frames ever put on a car. It’s a real shame, too, because they were such beautiful cars, otherwise.
With a much more rigid, Big 3 hardtop, it wouldn’t have been nearly as hard to close the door on an incline.
261 sixes were Canadian only . . . . Hydra-Matic was n/a in Canada in Pontiacs in that day . . .
I know this Billy ;
Please don’t expect my dreams to conform to reality ! .
I’m building my Shop Truck right now ~ 1969 Chevrolet C/10 with 292 CIC i^ and 350C Turbo Hydromatic Slush box ~ another rig GM didn’t see fit to build but swapping the parts around isn’t that difficult , I imagine the only holes I’ll need to drill are for the lockup relay .
261 Sixes were Canadian only for CARS , not for Medium Duty trucks .
-Nate
One of my all time favorites! Love pretty much all the GM and Chrysler offerings for ’59. Great year.
I thought I had a photo of a very similar 1960 Catalina I saw at the Cruz in Port Orchard one year, but it seems that this glimpse of its taillights is the best I can do.
I’m believe that Pontiac’s best years were the 1960s, from 1959 to 1969.
Most include 1970-72, also. It wasn’t until the colonnade years when Pontiac began the long, gradual downward spiral, culminating with the Aztek and Solstice, then the final, outright termination a few years later.
Options can be fascinating. For a while in the early sixties we and our neighbours on both sides all had ’62 Falcon (XL in Aussie terms) sedans in the same colour scheme: a turquoise colour with a white roof and turquoise interior. It was very popular. I soon became an “expert” at spotting differences between the three cars, and one thing that really stood out was the different options.
Ours, JBH-559, was an ex-government fleet car, manual with heater, no radio, and one front fender mirror. Eric’s, HYG-286, was an automatic, with heater but no other options. Don’s, HXP-323, was an automatic with no heater or radio, a weathershield on the driver’s door, and a different style of mirror to ours. I remember how the windows fogged up when Betty drove us to school in that Falcon on winter mornings, and being told to keep my fingers off the windows! I also remember the row of chrome “blanks” on the bottom of the dash where the various optional controls weren’t. Ours definitely seemed better than theirs!
The XL an ex had was auto no heater no radio. I remember those blanks as well. Car was white with oyster coloured interior and it had a grilled sunshade over the windscreen.
Love this car! Pontiac was the best-looking of GM’s ’59s.
My favourite cars of 1959 are the Chevy, the 1959 Oldsmobile, and the Cadillac.
Great car. On the Pontiac v. Chevy thing, I think the Pontiac name was important. Stepping out of the Ford Chevy Plymouth price class was a culturally significant move. I think that there were folks who had reached an age where to drive a GM car that was not a Chevy was an important thing.
I saw this in my extended family. Oldsmobiles were the standard and Pontiacs were an acceptable alternative. Lots of both, but nary a single Chevy until maybe the 80s.
FWIW, an aunt and uncle drove a 60 Catalina with a radio delete that was a hand me down from his parents. A 4 door sedan with automatic and wheelcovers.
Having lived on a Dairy Farm in Rural New Hampshire in the 1960’s I can attest to the constant maintenance of things , mostly because of the hard workouts everything got daily .
I know thousands of ” Farm Fixes ” that work really well but modern City bred Folks don’t understand them so I often don’t mention them when doing my Tech Advice on the various Forums I’m on .
-Nate
I’d sure like to hear them!
Prolly not with your fine cars Aaron .
-Nate
In 1947 a Work Mate of mine got out of the Army and wanted to buy a new car ~ back then you had to wait in line and pay extra so when he saw an advert for ” brand new Chevrolet for $700 !! ” he was on it like white on rice ~ when he got there it was a brush painted dull brown 4 door stripper , not even a heater , it also had some kind of FUGLY ad on seat covers that didn’t match ~ he argued and fought with them , nearly had to go get a Cop to force them to sell it to him for the advertised price but he persevered and drove it home , washed off the nasty water based brushed on paint and ripped off the seat covers , drove it for 10 years , maybe longer and loved every mile behind the wheel .
Dealers *can* be pond scum , not all are .
-Nate