We’ve looked at Muscle cars, in the sense of big block intermediates. But today I thought we’d take a look at where those powerful big blocks came from, the cars that originally bore them.
I’m deliberately going to omit luxury cars. Traditionally Caddies, Lincolns and Imperials had been fast and powerful, sure, but that wasn’t the primary reason people bought them. Appointments and status were the drawcard; being able to outrun most other cars on the road kind of came with the deal. But they’ve already been covered. Let’s take more of a look down-market here.
How far back do we go? I’m going to start at 1961. Sure the fuelie ’57 Chevy was fast, and the blown 312 Ford as well. And probably others that don’t immediately come to mind. But I’ve elected to confine this story to the big blocks, and to begin with the 409 Chevy, and its impact on Super Stock drag racing. Maybe not the most streetable of engines, but it sure got the job done. Besides, to my non-US mind there’s something amusingly incongruous about seeing an eighteen-footer scorching down the drag strip!
As an aside, what must it have been like to be a car guy in the fifties? Just think – only three years after the first small block Chevy, they came out with a 348 big block! This from a company that only offered sixes a short time before.
1961 Chevy SS409
I won’t get into the nitty-gritties of engines, as many of you would know far more than I do. Consider this more of a foreign observer’s guide, a view from the outside. And consider, if you will, that in 1961 a hot family car in my country meant buying Chrysler’s new 145hp Valiant (we didn’t get the small six), instead of Ford’s 90hp (in Australia) Falcon. Most folk who wanted something they knew they could trust stuck with the old faithful 75hp Holden. And here you guys could get a Chevy with 360hp!
Chevy seemed to get the ball rolling when they punched the W-block 348 out to 409 cubes. Otherwise, you were stuck with a 348 (305-350hp, so that would’ve been no slouch, and perhaps a better choice as a daily driver).
For ’62 Chevy loosened the reins, and the 409 was available in the Bel Air hardtop. Now with 380hp.
1962 Chevy 409
Pontiac had always been rather potent since their first V8 in ’55. What had begun as a 287 now displaced 421 cubic inches, and sprouted triple carbs. I was always amazed at how quickly displacements ballooned during the late fifties-early sixties period.
1962 Pontiac 421
If you were a Mopar fan, the answer was 413. Particularly when installed in the smaller lighter ’62 Plymouths and Dodges. They might look weird, but they didn’t hang around.
1962 Dodge 413
1962 Plymouth 413
What about Ford, you ask? Here’s a ’63 Galaxie with the 406.
1963 Ford 406
Chevy kept the 409, but the reskinned body looked heavier. Still plenty fast though!
1963 Chevy 409
Chevy’s next reskin for ’64 was visually lighter.
1964 Chevy 409
The ’64 Dodge was a bit larger than ’62, but still not ‘full size’ by Ford or GM’s standards. Nor was it up to pre-’62 Dodge size. But with the 413 punched out to 426, there was plenty of go.
1964 Dodge 426
Ford now offered a 425hp 427.
1964 Galaxie 427
Also available in Mercury.
1964 Mercurys
All change for 1965! GM cars got this slinky new body; Pontiac perhaps wore it best.
1965 Pontiac 421
As GM went curvy, Ford went square. New chassis and all, but with the 427.
1965 Galaxie 427
Chevy changed engines during the course of the year. Out with the 409 W-motor, and in with the first Rat, here in 396 form.
1965 Chevy 396
This was facelifted for 1966, with the 396 punched out to 427, your choice of 390 or 425hp.
1966 Chevy 427
The ’66 Ford gained a new roofline for the hardtop, a less square front end, and new rear fenders gave the appearance of a GM-style hip. Engine in this Galaxie 7-litre was a 345hp 428.
1966 Ford 428
Around this time, the action had largely switched to the mid-sized muscle cars – and there are plenty of models of them, as we’ve seen. Chevy still offered an Impala SS, here in 427 form – but with ‘only’ 385hp. Only!
1967 Chevy SS427
Ford’s Galaxie XL continued, but by 1969 there wasn’t much interest. The biggest FE blocks had been replaced by a new 429, though the FE continued to be available as a 390. The new engine was more of a luxury powerplant than a strip flyer. Sure there was the Boss 429, but not in this car line. Was Ford half-hearted (as it seemed) or responding to market realities?
1969 Ford
Chevy’s 427 had been replaced by a 454, but there was no longer an SS for it to go in. With the 454, this Impala Custom Coupe offered 345 or 390hp. No four-on-the-floor – for all that AMT’s model has a floor shift!
1970 Chevy
So the sixties were an amazing time for big-engined full-sizers. But emphasis was changing from performance to luxury, from blitzing the strip to cruising a different kind of strip. And you didn’t need a thirsty, temperamental, expensive-to-insure highly tuned big block if that was your aim.
The growing-engines story was told so nicely and concisely that I had to go back and slow down and ooh-and-ah at the fine modelmaking. I built a few of those AMT, etc. kits back then–but they looked this good only to my young eyes. Thanks for your column today!
Thank you, George. The growing-engines bit was what really amazed me about American cars of this era as a kid. Not that many people really needed all that much engine, but that the manufacturers offered it to you. In Australia, American cars were regarded as over-powered (and under-braked), and that was with the small V8s.
Over the last 20 years or so the American kit-makers seem to have finally embraced your country’s automotive heritage and brought out modern quality kits of these sixties classics. From a modeller’s point of view, it took them long enough…
Peter: Stunning models as usual. I could almost swear the ’65 Impala was real! The ’62 Dodge Dart was my first car (and I also noted the red one as well!) Alas, although it was the top line 440, it only had a Poly 318 engine! 🙂
Thanks Moparman. Yet that Poly 318 would have had enough power for a new driver to get into trouble, I’m sure! Yep, those ’62s were fairly popular down under; I remember seeing quite a few around on the street. I built the red one back in the seventies, the purple one about ten years ago, and gave it a bit of an upgrade underhood
.
Wow Peter. Your craftsmanship is really something and I enjoyed the words as well. That blue 427 Galaxie in particular catches my eye.
Hey thanks, Jograd. American cars of this era were a luxury item in my country, and the idea that ‘you guys’ could get them with even more power and more luxury stuff was just mind-blowing to me as a kid. Still seems amazing in 2025. It was certainly a different age.
Glad you like the Galaxie. I went a bit different with that one. I’d built a stock one before (several, to be honest!) and white painted tops were popular here in the sixties. Add some bright blue paint, a slight rake, larger-diameter but still classic-style mags, and it’s a different look for the old ’65.
You never fail to amaze me! Splendid work.
Thanks Paul. Of all my models, the sixties would probably be the decade I’ve built most of, with multiples of many. It was ‘just’ a matter of deciding which models to show.
Great work as usual, Peter. I love the detail on the lede 1962 Chevy. The 1990s New York license plates are a crowning touch.
Thanks Jeff. The kit manufacturers usually provice a choice of license plate decals nowadays; the NY ones on that Impala would have been new the year that kit came out. Such a change from the old practice of engraving ‘1966’ on the plate area of the bumper, and adds another degree of realism. For a while there they got taken to task for always using the same old states (California and Michigan seemed to be the default), but by the nineties they were offering some variety.
I thought he meant the ’66… (the lede photo), although Jeff could’ve been talking about the third picture down. THAT’s a ’62. 😉
Great work as usual, Peter. The ’70 Impala is a beautiful shade of blue, as is the aforementioned ’66.
Like others have mentioned, the 1965 Galaxie 427 is perfect!
Quick Question: Since there’ve been a lot of repeats lately, there have been a few comments by someone named ‘Old Pete’ wherein models were mentioned (and even shown). Are you one in the same? As a long time commenter here on these pages, I’ve noticed your posts (if it is you) before, but now that you’re a contributor, it looks like your using you name. This is all assumed until confirmed, of course.
It reminds me of our own VinceC, as he at one time went by Bill Mitchell.
I’ll bet you have a model of his Torino somewhere in that vast collection! 😉
Yes Rick, I am indeed ‘Old Pete’ from way back; when I got my laptop it not-so-helpfully posted under my real name for a few weeks before I noticed, despite me thinking I’d carried over all my passwords and handles.
That ’70 is a period Holden colour called Cyan Blue; quite popular back in the day. I can’t quite remember what I used on the ’66; it may have been the ‘proper’ Chevy Nassau Blue. That sort of thing happens around here occasionally.
Seems I’ve really hit a nerve with that ’65 Galaxie. I had been going to show my red one, but felt the bright blue showed off the lines better.
Vince’s Torino? Not quite. I’ve got a gap between ’71 and ’76. The collection might be vast but it’s, um, rather eclectic.
Peter, I’m coming to appreciate your criteria for your various categorizations as much as your models & musings, themselves! My picks of this great bunch would be the ’65 Pontiac and the ’70 Chevrolet.
Thanks Joseph. It’s sometimes tricky to decide what models to group in a given feature. Often I’ll begin with a broad idea, then a check of my photo files will reveal way too many models that fit the brief I’ve given myself, and I begin to whittle things down. That may result in a multi-part series (we’ve had a few of them) or a single, shorter, more narrowly-focused article. LIke today’s. There’s something about a huge, powerful, maybe barely-streetable engine in a regular family car that’s appealling…
Your attention to detail is amazing. Conversely, I must be a big picture guy as the finer details you so deftly use to bring a model to life are something I totally overlook on the rare occasion I build a model.
As an example, I have a version of the ’63 Galaxie you have. Instead of taking the time to sweat the details with all the chrome like you did, and make it mimic real life, I slathered blue all over the poor thing – same shade, inside and out, including the wheels. I was young and enthusiastic but the poor thing just looks sad. Yours looks enjoyed but vibrant. All of your models are outstanding.
Thanks Jason. Right from the time I was a kid, I always wanted ‘my cars’ to look as realistic as possible. Washing Dad’s car every weekend made me aware of all the shiny stuff, and what a huge part it played in the overall look; chrome stood out against the medium blue Morris and the Falcon that followed. Initially I accented details on my Matchbox cars, and later models, with silver paint and a fine brush, and started using adhesive foil on models back in the eighties. Using a hobby knife and a metal straight-edge gives a more even finish than a brush these days! Here’s a more recent ’63.
Fantastic models as always! Love the blues and teals especially and GM’s curvaceous mid-60s styling, but the ’61 Chevy is also one of my favorites.
At first glance, with the angle of the shot, I thought the first photo was of a 1969 Plymouth Fury. Just goes to support the old saying that after the Exner era, Mopar was generally content to mimic GM’s styling 3 years later!
Hey, thanks 210delray! I hadn’t set out to do a post full of blues and teals, but they did seem to be very popular in the sixties.
Good point about the lede shot; I can see how you might have mistaken it for a later Plymouth at a glance.
The 1961 SS409 is superb. And I will cast another vote for the 65 Galaxie as well.
I know the Pontiac styling around this time was popular, but I find them a bit over done and bulky, I would pick a 65 Galaxie all day over them.
Would the full size 1965 and onwards Furys and Dodge Monacos be rare in model form, my all time favourite big engined full sizer would the Sport Fury GT.
Thanks jonco43. I’ve done a few of those ’61 SS409s, but I think that one’s the most photogenic.
I have something of a soft spot for the ’65 Galaxie, as it manages to be boxy without being plain. I think it’s down to proportions and that sharp mid-body crease. So often the big US cars of this era look as though the trunk is too long, but the Ford avoids that; the ’66 is less successful to my eyes.
Yes, those big mid-late sixties Mopars are indeed rare. They’ve never been reissued, as far as I know; in contrast to the B-bodies which have been pretty much constantly available.
Excellent as usual. Am I seeing correctly that you opened up the trunk on the ’64 Impala?
In the real world, I’ve always been satisfied with the 383 in my ’65 Chrysler and am sometimes amused by the folks who absolutely have to have a 413 or 440 in a C body.
Thanks Dan, The ’64 is the much more recent Revell kit which comes with an opening trunk.
And yep, it’s hard to imagine what a 383 couldn’t do – maybe pulling an absolutely huge trailer or boat once or twice a year? And yet so many folk would naturally go for the big engine back in the sixties – a test drive might show the smaller one was quite powerful enough. Especially when we’re talking about a Chrysler.