It would appear that we have stumbled across two 1967 Firebirds in the past. Both convertibles. There was aqua car with a 326 V8/automatic and a blue one that claimed to possess the big 428 V8/stick, though it was surely not built that way. In this car we complete the set.
I have written up many finds over the years from an annual car show held in nearby Noblesville, Indiana. I went this year with one son, gambling that the rain that had been blanketing the area for days might break off for a few hours. It was a small show this year and as we walked towards the few intrepid souls who brought their automotive treasures out to share, we walked past this in the parking area.
A red Firebird convertible. Yeah. You all know that I am 1) not a big fan of red cars, and 2) am not a big fan of highly popular models. At least this one looked pretty original. And then I saw the “3.8” and knew exactly what that meant – this car had the unique Pontiac OHC 6 powerplant. And thus began my photo orgy.
I knew about this engine from an early age. My next door neighbors were Pontiac People. Kevin’s mother had a string of GTOs, while his father’s tastes seemed to run in a more European direction. One of his cars was a 1967 LeMans Sprint. I remembered the black decal stripe that ran low along the sides of the light green car with the “Sprint” lettering within it. And I knew what that meant whenever Mr. Bordner would start the car and drive away. The sound of that OHC 6 in front of the four-speed was unlike any of the garden variety V8s that filled our neighborhood in those days.
What’s that? You’ve never heard that sound? Well try this. The best parts are the first thirty seconds, and then again after 1:30 when the driver gets free of traffic ahead.
As I began shooting pictures I heard a voice say “Hey, don’t take pictures – it’s not finished yet.” It was the owner. He was kidding, but said that he was in the process of a full restoration on the car. He has owned this one for decades, using it as a second vehicle through most of the 70’s and 80’s. He confessed to replacing the original 3.8 engine with the slightly newer and larger 4.1 liter (250 cid) version from 1968-69 due to a cam lubrication failure on the original, but otherwise the car is almost completely as Pontiac built it.
The owner of this car and I chatted for a bit but stood on opposite sides of that great fence in the world of old cars – leave it alone or restore it. I am firmly in the “leave it alone” camp, as the car is fully functional and presentable, and thus truly unique. He is in the “it has too many flaws and needs some refreshment” side. Only one of us owns the car so only one of us has an opinion that really counts. And having been irritated by flaws displayed on cars of my own over the years, his urge to improve is understandable.
But of course that does not stop me from loving this one exactly as it is. But what really fascinated me was that engine.
John Z. DeLorean did not think like the rest of the managerial pool at General Motors. His tastes were far more exotic than was the norm among the other execs in Grosse Point. When he saw the need for a six cylinder engine at Pontiac he sought something a little different.
In the U.S. auto industry of the early 1960’s the six cylinder engine was choice of few beyond tightwads or conservative old-timers. It was the age of the V8 and nobody aside from Chrysler seemed to put much imagination into the six.
At GM the choices were few. Chevrolet had long been the home of the six within the company and had come up with a very good one in a 1963 design that replaced the venerable “Blue Flame” that had dated back to the 1930’s. Buick, meanwhile, had cobbled together an iron V6 that could be built from the tooling used for the also-unique 215 cid aluminum block V8.
Although he planned to make do with the Chevrolet six for 1964-65, DeLorean tasked Malcolm McKeller with investigating a new design for Pontiac. With a Mercedes six as his inspiration, McKeller began to investigate an overhead cam design. The biggest problem was that most overhead cams were driven by a long chain that was difficult to keep in tension as it wore. The German manufacturer Glas had come up with a rubber belt, but it was saddled with a service life far too short for a mainstream American design.
Working with engineers at Uniroyal, McKeller worked into a fiberglass-reinforced rubber belt that would be good for the life of the engine. The powerplant’s non-interference design would make sure that a belt failure would not be catastrophic. The engine also pioneered self-adjusting valves that eliminated difficult valve adjustments that were a feature of most other OHC designs.
“The Cammer’s” block would be based on the Chevrolet casting but would have deeper skirts for strength. Another unique feature was an aluminum accessory drive bolted to the block’s right side, which provided a home for the distributor, oil pump and fuel pump and doubled as a tensioner for the cam belt. The head would also be a unique design, one which featured valves that were extremely large for a six – similar in size to those used in Pontiac’s big 389 cid V8. To keep costs under at least some kind of control, many parts in the engine’s lower end were sourced from Chevrolet’s six.
An early prototype of the engine showed up in the 1964 Banshee concept that DeLorean hoped to build before GM’s Fourteenth Floor nixed the idea. The OHC was introduced for real in the fall of 1965. The very oversquare engine (3.875 inch bore x 3.250 stroke) produced a displacement of 230 cubic inches (3.8L). Even its base version with the 1 bbl carb was a revver, making its peak 165 bhp at 4700 rpm and its peak 216 ft lbs of torque at 2600. Although the OHC had a 25 horsepower advantage over the Chevy, it lacked some of the OHV engine’s low end grunt.
But DeLorean had not gone to all this trouble to power your maiden aunt’s Tempest. There was a high output version called the Sprint, which was where the action was to be found. A Rochester 4 bbl carb, higher compression, more aggressive cam and a unique split exhaust manifold brought those numbers up to 215 bhp @ 5200 rpm and 240 ft lbs at 3800.
The engine was enlarged to 250 cid (4.1L) for 1968-69. Output went up mildly, to 175 bhp on base engines and 230 on Sprints with stick shifts – the Sprint engine with an automatic remained at the smaller engine’s 215 bhp.
Everyone remembers the GTO and the famous Pontiac Super Duty V8s. So why was this groundbreaking six not the success it could have been? One problem was high warranty costs due to premature cam wear and sticky valve lash adjusters. This is one that could surely have been licked with continued development, but the engine was built for only four model years (1966-1969).
Another problem was cost. The engine never achieved the hoped-for manufacturing volumes and it was expensive to build. Pontiac could build a 326 V8 for less money and could charge more for it.
But the biggest problem was the era in which it was introduced. No matter how much it may have sounded like a Jaguar, no six was going to command the market in the era of Peak V8. Power was king and the V8 engine was where the power was to be found. There would be some (like my neighbor) who would appreciate the better balance of a Sprint-powered LeMans, but far too few to make this engine a popular choice.
The final straw came when John DeLorean left Pontac to take over the Divisional Manager’s office at Chevrolet. His successor, F. James McDonald saw no benefit to a costly engine for economy cars and scuttled the project, reverting to Chevrolet power for buyers of six cylinder Pontiacs beginning in 1970. And in fairness to McDonald, even DeLorean had ceased giving the engine much publicity as a performance alternative after 1967. Would the Cammer have led the charmed life of the Buick V6 had it remained alive to see the changes wrought by the 1973 Energy Crisis? We will, of course, never know.
What we do know is that it was the engine that powered this red convertible when it first saw life in 1967. And it was the engine that made me stop for a several minute conversation with this car’s long-time owner.
He was kind enough to start ‘er up and rev it a few times. The memories of Mr. Bordner’s LeMans Sprint came rushing back as I heard the unique OHC snarl. It sounded like no other American six at the time, and has not been duplicated to date.
I just had to smile at this owner’s good fortune when he was looking for good value in a used car decades ago. Used cars, as we all know, bring trade-offs. To get the red Firebird convertible he had to take the six cylinder engine bolted to a column-shifted two speed PRNDL. This trade-off has served his family well over many years and comes with the bonus of having one of the most fascinating engines of the era parked under its hood.
Whether this dedicated owner keeps the car as-is or brings it back to like-new condition he has a unique car that will bring smiles wherever it goes. Whether to typical lovers of Resale Red convertibles or to we fans of the oddball dead-end ideas that make automotive history so addicting.
Further Reading:
1967 Tempest OHC 6 (COAL by RL Plaut)
1967 Pontiac Firebird “428” Convertible – Truth In Badge Engineering (Paul Niedermeyer)
1967 Pontiac Firebird – Dig That Aqua Paint (Tom Klockau)
1969 Pontiac Tempest Custom S – The Ex-Secretary’s Wanna Be GTO (Paul Niedermeyer)
Cammer: The Pontiac OHC Six (Aaron Severson at Ate Up With Motor)
I remember reading that John D had plastic surgery when he went Hollywood, that picture confirms it.
That said, he did a great job at Pontiac. The decline set in w/ his departure.
Way back in high school, late 70’s, buddy of mine had a ’67 Firebird for his first car. Sprint 6 with the three speed. He couldn’t wait till he could yank that piddly 6 out for a proper v-8. Sad. He still has the car, now running the usual 350/ 4 speed combo. He thinks it’s great and just looks confused if someone mention’s he trashed a good car. He didn’t get it back then and still doesn’t! Oh well, at least he enjoys it!
The people constantly inquiring with the owner of this Firebird, asking when he’s going to dump the six, might explain his “Nope, Not Today” t-shirt.
Great write-up! Very informative. Very nice car too!
While I don’t mind the column shifter, I’ve always felt GM handicapped these cars with the 2-speed powerglides.
The 2 speed automatic would be interesting to experience on one of these. I always understood that the 2 speed’s biggest handicap was the lack of an intermediate gear. But a six that winds out to around 5k or more for its sweet spot would seem to be less bothered by the lack of a middle gear which is normally there to keep revs down in passing situations.
Of course the lack of a lower low would hurt because of the scarcity of off-the-line torque.
As I’ve written about before, my grandparents owned a ’66 Tempest with the OHC6 and Pontiac’s version of the Super Turbine 300 two-speed automatic (not a Powerglide!). I occasionally drove the car during college and painted my uncle’s car in return for the car not long after graduating; the six had succumbed to the common issue of top-end oiling failure at that point, so a SBC/TH350 swap was performed.
While the OHC6/ST300 wasn’t super fast off the line, speed would just build and build. It was not unlike driving a CVT with exception that engine revs more closely matched actual road speed. I remember my Grandpa always pointing out that, “You’ll be doin’ 90 without even realizing it!” It took a little planning driving in town, though, as there was always a lag in getting things moving promptly when needed.
Always loved the ‘Wondertouch’ power steering and brakes – great name! You could steer with your pinky (about 73 turns, lock-to-lock) and panic brake by breathing on the pedal.
An engine ahead of its time. These are fun to look at but is it due to what it is or the relative novelty of it? I suppose it doesn’t matter.
You have a great point about potential of this engine had it stuck around. Just imagine this being used in your mother’s Luxury LeMans or even the more widespread use of it after the 1977 downsizing. The engine options on a new Bonneville could have been a two- or four-barrel OHC six. Later bolted to a four-speed automatic these could have been fun to drive with admirable fuel economy.
Interesting that the OHC, in hotter form, added about quarter the power again of the Chev six. I say this because the Holden pushrod six of 1963 (unrelated to the Chev motor, believe it or not) later got a hot version with three smallish carbs and higher lift cam, which reliably put out about the same proportional increase. That example really does bring into question just what benefit the non-crossflow OHC Pontiac actually brought, especially for the extra investment needed. Could a beefed Chev six have done the same without the cost or risks?
One thing the hot pushrod couldn’t do is SOUND like a poky OHC six. Does anyone have any theories as to why an OHC (or DOHC) six sound is so distinct? Doesn’t matter if it’s some ancient Wolseley or Aston or Jag or this very Ponty, there’s always a tenor rumble that even a nice pushrod jobbie never reaches: but why?
You raise a great question about why those OHC designs sound so uniformly different from the more conventional OHVs. I will join you in hoping that some of our engineering-types can help us out on this.
Just wrote a reply about your comment, and POOF! it was gone!
And for those who have never heard the unique sound these put out, here is something I found that gives a little sample. The best parts are the first 30 seconds, then after 1:30.
Ha, that’s exactly the video I’d been listening too, I’ve never heard one of these engines.
All inline sixes sound pleasing because of the even firing order, but the OHC has the valves canted over which reduces the angling of the ports. The manifolds look better designed than the usual non performance six log manifolds. I’d suspect the cam profile is hotter than typical, all of which contributes to letting more happy sounds out the intake and exhaust 🙂
“unique split exhaust manifold” is the short answer. In England or Australia, were OHV sixes ever factory equipped with anything other than the “log” manifolds that all other American sixes had?
The sweet exhaust note of my 325i had to have been the result of a completely split system all the way back to the rear muffler. The 250ci six in my old Chevy pickup sounded like we remember along with the GM three speed first gear whine.
It’s not the location of the camshaft; it’s everything else: camshaft profile, exhaust porting/manifold (most critically), and other aspects. A pushrod Triumph 2.5 six in a TR-5/250 or TR-6 (and other pushrod high output engines like the old BMW-based Bristol six and others) sounds every bit as nice as these OHC engines. The reality is that there weren’t many high-output pushrod sixes from the ’60s up.
Yes, a better pushrod cylinder head on a Chevy six would have made just as much power, and there’s plenty of modifed Chevy sixes out there to prove it. It would have been quite easy to essentially adapt a six cylinder version of a high output sbc V8 head, which has since been done a number of times, to great effect. DeLorean wanted the sexy image of an OHC engine.
In reality, he was 6 years too late with it. An OHC six in the new 1961 Tempest, with its irs and transaxle would have been sooo much sweeter than the rough half-V8 four it had. But the Chevy six didn’t come along until 1962, and DeLorean waited a few years after that. By 1966, cars were getting heavier, power accessories were becoming more common, gas was getting cheaper (in adjusted prices) and V8s were the solution on all accounts. The Sprint Six was too little, too late.
You raise some great What-Ifs. If Pontiac had been ahead of the curve and had the OHC ready for the 61 Tempest, the Tempest would have been a really sweet car. Also, perhaps Buick (and Oldsmobile) would have picked the Pontiac six instead of the paint-shaker 90 degree V6 that Buick cobbled together.
OTOH the OHC would have been a difficult fit for the FWD revolution of the early 80s and also (as originally configured, at least) lacked the low end torque that made the Buick V6 so satisfying to so many Americans in so many cars for so many years.
It’s true that Detroit’s late-60s fixation with V8s could be justified by sales figures. For example, in 1968 only 17 percent of Pontiac Firebird buyers opted for the OHC six rather than a V8 . . . and a mere 2,525 high-performance versions were produced.
However, during that same time period the imports were once again surging. In 1968 Volkswagen sales surpassed 580,000 units. That was higher than total output for mid-tier domestic brands such as Oldsmobile and Mercury. By 1970 the market for big-block “muscle cars” collapsed due to a recession and escalating insurance rates. Meanwhile, six-cylinder compacts such as the Ford Maverick and Plymouth Duster soared in popularity.
If DeLorean had stayed at Pontiac even a few years longer I suspect that he would have seen the OHC six as a valuable means of helping to differentiate the brand’s compact Ventura. Instead of being a boring, badge-engineered Nova, it could have appealed to import intenders. Picture in your mind a Grand Am for the masses. Maybe not a huge seller, but enough to help redefine Pontiac’s image in a very different decade.
Pontiac lost its way in the 1970s. It didn’t do brougham all that well and its main success with sporty cars was with an increasingly bloated Trans Am. Management didn’t get why premium-priced imports such as BMW, Audi and Volvo were doing so well. This is another example of what Brock Yates called “Detroit Mind” – the failure to see how rapidly consumer tastes were changing.
As much as technical aficionados love engines like the Pontiac OHC six, there is little reason for it from a production standpoint. It means a whole new engine family that will never have the volume to pay for it. Like Paul said, this engine might have been something circa 1962, but by 1965, the economy was booming and, hubba-hubba, it was all V-8’s. Any why not, how many people gave a hoot about pumping lead into the air in a 10 mpg sled? Not many.
There is simply not enough profit in a motor like this. When GM killed it, the real reason was product line simplification. The accountants killed any kind of unique engineering at GM. It got to the point of all their cars were the same.
Wow, this car is very…. red. Those wheels. Those tires….
I never knew the Blue Flame six started out at Buick. This engine doesn’t seem to muster up much enthusiasm; it’s usually discussed in the context of “can you believe this thing once powered Corvettes?” or “why did the buyer cheap out and not get an SBC for an extra $62?”
Which is why I almost walked right past it.
A great story on a car that is not often seen at car shows. A few years ago a 1967 LeMans Sprint was parked in the lot of a local grocery store. It was obviously a daily driver – in good shape, but hardly pristine. It made that unique noise when the owner came out and started the engine.
The six is another example of GM bringing out promising new technology, only to abandon it for something that was “good enough” and cheaper.
One thing that surprises me about the Firebird is how plain that dashboard is. It would not be out of a place in an AMC car (except for the Ambassador or Marlin) from that era.
This engine sort of shows the cracks forming in the old Divisional structure. When every Division only needed one basic engine design things were easy. But by the early 60s more were needed, so the Divisions either cobbled one up from what they had or went shopping at another Division that already had it.
The Buick V6 and Pontiac Trophy 4 were made from what was on hand. This OHC 6 was one of the few times (the 215 aluminum V8 was another) when something was cooked more or less from scratch (though the OHC had its share of Chevy parts). New engine designs are expensive. Ford or Chrysler could spread them across nameplates but that was not the GM way, something that changed by the 70s.
Over at Oldsmobile, which had been known as GM’s “engineering” division, F-85 buyers raised the hood to see a Chevy six, but at least it was painted gold.
Oldsmobile and V-8s had been synonymous since 1949.
Most likely the Chevy six was offered to placate the dealers, who wanted a low-price version to advertise. Potential buyers who took that bait would then be “switched” to a model equipped with a V-8. (There were fewer consumer protections in those days.)
New engines ARE expensive, but not nearly as so as automatic transmissions. And the General had WAY too many of them.
Great point, JP. I suppose that I respect and admire the OHC 6 moreso for the uniqueness and the cachet (though small) that it would have brought Pontiac, especially to further define their brand after languishing without real identity before the early 60’s or so. Once the upper management axed specific brand engine choices, it did homogenize things a lot more……even if the OHC 6 wasn’t that profitable.
The Camaro-Firebird dash was inspired by the ’65 Corvair design. I happen to like the hooded round instruments. What I think we can agree on is too much red paint. A red Corvair interior got a black or silver finish on much of the dash.
“What’s that? You’ve never heard that sound? Well try this. ” “With a Mercedes six as his inspiration”
There was only one Pontiac OHC in Ontevideo, an acqua with white vinyl sport coupe Tempest. And though I saw it multiple times, I didn’t remember its sound.
Playing the video, I recognized the vrooom as belonging to another car I knew but couldn’t pinpoint it. The explanation came with the mention of the Mercedes six, before the twin cam era.
I’d say the inspiration must be the 1954-1961 Mercedes-Benz M198 engine. Inline-six, OHC, 3.0 liter displacement. Mind you, with direct fuel injection.
The Pontiac Sprint OHC six was not the first American OHC six of the post-war era. The 1963 Jeep Tornado Six beat it by four years, and coincidentally also had 230 CID (3.8L). Unlike the iron wedge-head Pontiac, the Willys hemi head was alloy, looking very European (it was designed by an Italian).
Its block was the venerable long-stroke Continental-based 226 CID Willys six, increased slightly to 230 inches. It had teething issues and was replaced by the AMC pushrod six after just a few years, and the Tornado OHC was sent to Argentina, where it was used in the Rambler American-based IKA Torino, and the very great effect. The Tornado six was developed into a splendid high performance engine that acquitted itself even in some European endurance races.
Given the timing, one can’t help but wonder whether DeLorean was inspired/influenced by this Willys OHC conversion. Ironically, the IKA Torino ended up being much more in line with his vision of a Euro-style compact high performance American six cylinder car.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-american/cohort-classic-1971-ika-torino-ts-the-legendary-rambler-south-american/
The other interesting parallel was that both engines were dogged by lubrication failure issues, things that could likely have been resolved given time and resources, but also things that no doubt dampened buyer enthusiasm.
After a little looking, it seems that these are probably Jeep Peoples’ least favorite engine ever put in Jeeps. They apparently lack low end torque even with the long stroke design. The Pontiac design at least found a more suitable application in sporty cars bought by drivers who liked rpms.
They apparently lack low end torque even with the long stroke design.
It’s difficult to improve hp without increasing the torque peak. Or almost impossible. But that was the design goal of the Tornado, and it came quite close. The 226 Continental flathead made 105 hp@3600 rpm, and 195 lb.ft. of torque at 1400 rpm. The Tornado made 140 hp @4000, and 210 lb.ft. @1750 rpm. That’s actually a very decent trade off.
The AMC 232 six that replaced the Tornado made 145hp@4300, and 215lb.ft@1600. Very similar, actually.
I’d say that the problem with the Tornado (in addition to lube/cooling issues) was essentially the same as with Pontiac owners; cars (and Jeeps) were getting heavier, and folks were spoiled by cheap V8 torque.
There’s nothing inherent about a hemi head or OHC that implies a high torque peak. it’s all in how it’s tuned. The legendary Hall-Scott gas truck/bus engines were all hemi head OHC designs, and were tuned for brutal torque that was vastly greater than diesel engines and significantly more than the typical flathead truck gas engines. They were unbeatable in torque output (as well as fuel consumption).
To reiterate what Paul wrote, torque is mostly about brake mean effective pressure (bmep) which is mostly about tuning and volumetric efficiency. To the extent that OHC might help intake and exhaust port layout, and thus efficiency, because you don’t need to go around pushrods, yeah it might help a bit. Long stroke engines don’t inherently have more torque because of leverage, they are just tuned that way since they can’t rev due to mechanical stresses. Ditto pushrod engines. OHC can rev higher, hence is tuned for higher rpm torque peak and thus more HP. By the way, the Pontiac seems to be the same bore x stroke as the Chevy 6.
Hi Paul,
When I saw this post, the first thing I thought was to wonder what you would have to say because this seems right up your alley. Nice to read your words again, if only in the comment section.
Gonna use my real name from now on, no more TheMann, because why not?
Once again, CC reminds me of cars I drove briefly long ago, but had forgotten about. In this case, unfortunately not an OHC Pontiac, but a ‘67 Firebird with a 326 and a column shift Powerglide. It may have even had a front bench seat … was that offered in the F Body? In any case, I recall it as an exceedingly unsporty feeling car.
Bench seats were optional (at extra cost) in Firebirds and Camaros, at least through 1969 and perhaps after that as well. I have no idea what the take rate was on the bench seat but it must have been really, really low. In theory a bench seat was an option on early Mustangs as well, although I have never seen one in the wild. Any pony car with a factory bench seat would be a unicorn for sure.
Thanks, I was pretty sure I remembered right. Column shift and bench seat on a Firebird just seemed weird. I’m pretty sure it was a ‘67, possibly ‘68; and I drove it in about ‘86 or ‘87.
John DeLorean had a weak chin, so he made up for this gentle appearance by turning into a fantastic car man. He always went beyond necessary as though he had to overcome a perception.
Nearing the apex of his auto career, he bought himself the chin he wanted so badly. Then he felt complete. For the next twenty years he was a rooster that earned his keep. His increased confidence was like a corporate magnet, attracting talent, youth and the ladies. He went Hollywood. He was a star. When his youth faded, he focused on capturing a permanent youthful legacy with a futuristic sports car. For a few years, he pulled it off.
There are a lot of reasons why some succeed in Detroit and others don’t. DeLorean wasn’t the first, or will be the last peacock strutting around an auto corporation’s design department. Auto designers are artists with every creative temperament that creative people exhibit. They live a creative life. They model their creations on their visions. DeLorean did that and he earned his spot in auto history even if his creative ego failed him in a big way later on in life.
Pontiac benefited from DeLorean and had its best years following his visions. No committee or group-think could ever match reproduce his direction or even continue keeping Pontiac ahead of the market. Later Pontiac could appeal to creatives with plastic, glue and overwrought design elements, but usually failed to look authentic like DeLorean did during his time leading Pontiac. The man with the fake chin knew how to make Pontiac look like it wasn’t fake.
He was a car nerd that turned into a butterfly, thank to plastic surgery. Cool.
That’s an interesting way to describe DeLorean. He certainly had an artistic flair. He also strikes me as having serious psychological issues. For all of his complaints about General Motors’ bureaucracy, it did keep his negative behaviors in check to a certain degree. DeLorean’s ego may have been big enough to try to run his own show, but he simply didn’t have the temperament for it.
A weak chin is an asset if you grow up eating soup.
Good history of the OHC 6 at AUWM:
https://ateupwithmotor.com/model-histories/pontiac-ohc-six-history/
Absolutely, which is why I linked to it under “further reading” at the bottom. 🙂
It’s really the nice the way it is, I’d leave it alone.
It definitely has a touch of the Jaguar XK engine in the upper rev range
A guy I know had one when he was in high school. His dad was a body man so they painted it copper and he put mags on it and jacked it up in the back. Several years later when he, too was a body and paint man he decided to restore it and return it to its original red. In fact, except for the hubcaps , his had full covers and whitewalls, it looked just like this one. It too was in Indiana. Anyway, he started taking it to car shows and used to laugh at all the possible engines people thought it was that he had “swapped into” his car. He later sold it at a the Auburn Cord Duesenberg auction. That was in the mid ’80’s.
I like these Pontiacs with the OHC six. Years ago I saw an engine for sale at a wrecking yard. I got to see all the details close up. This was an enthusiast’s engine. They would love to pop the hood and show it off. I’m sure that they would liken it to the great Jaguar XK motor, Austin Healey, or TR6 big six. There really isn’t any advantage to the six in an American sporty car of this period. It doesn’t produce more power than the V8 and many times it outweighs the small block V8s. It might return a bit better fuel economy but for the money the V8 was still a better buy. I certainly like straight sixes. I had a couple of early Datsun Zs and the fuel injected six is just a neat motor. My ’70 Mustang had a 250 cid engine, nice enough, but a 289 V8 is just a sweet little motor that suited a performance oriented early Mustang better. My ’97 Jag XJ6 has a beautiful six and I love driving it. I also love looking under the hood and seeing that long aluminium lump.
What really hurt the American small sixes was the poor manifolding. Many had integral manifolds cast into the head which were difficult to improve. They also had poor flowing log type exhaust manifolds. The Mopar Slant Six had a separate intake manifold and was available with factory high performance packages. For some reason I still find all of them still appealing. I guess I just like being a contrarian.
Another nice write up a very unique piece of Pontiac’s history!
Glad you like my old YouTube video, Below are some of my related links to more on my ’66.
Cheers.
https://www.pinterest.com/mrbigbluesky/