1965 Pontiac With Gto Trim on 2040-cars
Camden, North Carolina, United States
Engine:400
Vehicle Title:Clear
Year: 1965
Drive Type: Automatic
Make: Pontiac
Mileage: 0
Model: Tempest
Exterior Color: Blue
Trim: GTO trim
1965 Pontiac Tempest Custom post car with GTO trim. The engine is a 400 with a 1965 GTO Tri Power set up part number is 9778818. Two speed automatic transmission. Engine runs but is missing, it was rebuilt and looks like new under the valve covers, Competition Cam roller tip rockers. New rocker mldg in plastic. Sweet body with very little rust. Will post more pics soon.
|
Pontiac Tempest for Sale
Auto Services in North Carolina
Walkers Auto Repair ★★★★★
Viking Imports Foreign Car Parts & Accessories Inc ★★★★★
Vans Tire & Automotive ★★★★★
Union Automotive Services Inc ★★★★★
Triangle Service ★★★★★
Todd`s Tire Service Inc ★★★★★
Auto blog
This Hoonigan mechanic's twin-turbo Trans Am is wonderful
Thu, Mar 24 2016What do you drive when you work on rally machines for a living? Probably a Subaru WRX, and that's what Gregg Hamilton had for a while until working on his car felt too much like his day job. So when he moved from New Zealand to the US to work for Ken Block (with a few stops along the way) he bought something entirely different. This is Gregg's 1979 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am. It's a throwback to another time, but it's anything but stock. It has that magic combination of a big V8 with a manual transmission and rear drive, just like the tin-top racers Gregg watched in his Kiwi youth. He bought it sight unseen from its previous owner in Alabama, and has been tinkering with it ever since. There's something about the flared wheel arches and the classic Firebird gold-striped black livery that has us smitten. Scope out the six-minute clip above from Petrolicious and see if you don't fall for Gregg's Pontiac as well.
This or That: 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 vs. 1984 Pontiac Fiero
Tue, Feb 10 2015Welcome to another round of This or That, where two Autoblog editors pick a topic, pick a side and pull no punches. Last round pitted yours truly against Associate Editor Brandon Turkus, and my chosen VW Vanagon Syncro narrowly defeated Brandon's 1987 Land Rover. In fact, it was, by far, the closest round we've seen, with 1,907 voters seeing things my way (for 50.8 percent of the vote) versus 1,848 votes for Brandon's Rover (49.2 percent). Sweet, sweet victory! For this latest round of This or That, I've roped Editor Greg Migliore into what I think is a rather fun debate. We've each chosen our favorite terrible cars, setting a price limit of $10,000 to make sure neither of us went too crazy with our automotive atrocities. I think we've both chosen terribly... and I mean that in the best way possible. 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 Jeremy Korzeniewski: Why It's Terrible: Taken in isolation, the Chrysler Crossfire isn't necessarily a terrible car. In fact, it drives pretty darn well, and there's a lot of solid engineering under its slinky shape. Problem is, that engineering was already rather long in the tooth well before Chrysler ever got its hands on it, having come from Mercedes-Benz, which used the basic chassis and drivetrain in a previous version of its SLK coupe and roadster. Granted, the SLK was an okay car, too, but even when new, it hardly set the world on fire with sporty driving dynamics. Chrysler took these decent-but-no-more bits and pieces from the Mercedes parts bin – remember, this car was conceived in the disastrous Merger Of Equals days – and covered them with a rather attractive hard-candy shell. Unfortunately, the super sporty shape wrote checks in the minds of buyers that its well-worn mechanicals were simply unable to cash, though an injection of power courtesy of a supercharged V6 engine in the SRT6 model, as seen here, certainly helped ease some of those woes. In the end, Chrysler was left with a so-called halo car that looked the part but never quite performed the part. It was almost universally panned by critics as an overpriced parts-bin special, which, I must add, was damningly accurate. As a result, sales were very slow, and within the first few months, dealers were clearancing the car at cut-rate prices, just to keep them from taking up too much of the showroom floor. Why It's Not That Terrible, After All: I can speak from personal experience when discussing the Chrysler Crossfire. You see, I owned one. Well, sort of...
Question of the Day: Most degraded car name?
Fri, May 27 2016When Ford came up with a not-so-sporty version of the Pinto and slapped Mustang badges on it in 1974, that was a low point for the Mustang name. When Chrysler applied the venerable Town & Country name on perfectly functional but unglamorous minivans, it saddened many of us. But perhaps the biggest demotion for a once-proud model came when, in 1988, General Motors imported a misery-enhancing Daewoo from Korea and called it the Pontiac LeMans. The original Pontiac LeMans was a great-looking midsize car with fairly advanced (for the time) suspension design and engine options including potent V8s and a screaming overhead-cam straight-six. The Daewoo-based Pontiac LeMans was a cramped, shoddy hooptie that served only to ruin the LeMans name forever, while stealing sales from the Suzuki-based Chevrolet Sprint. Sure, using the once-respected Monterey name on the Mercurized Ford Freestar was bad, but Mercury didn't have long to live at that point. I say the downward spiral of the LeMans name was the most agonizing in automotive history. What do you think? Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Auto News Ford Mercury Pontiac Automotive History Classics questions ford pinto names
2040Cars.com © 2012-2025. All Rights Reserved.
Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.
Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of the 2040Cars User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
0.028 s, 7830 u