Pontiac wanted to make a statement that all their models were performance cars,so they made up a ringer for a Car and Driver test,along with 3 other cars from various makes that were stock,,,this 2+2 had the 421 @376 HP and TriPower,which was set up by a dragracer for slightly more power ,,all tri powers had problems right off the assembly line,one of the reasons they were dropped,also the distributor was reworked and the timing advanced for more power,,the car had no carpet or insulation or undercoating , manual every thing,no heater, no radio,wide ratio 4 speed trans,and a 3.33 or 3.08 rear axle gear,, and a posi trac, 2 1/2 exhaust pipes, duals ,no mufflers..a team from firestone was there with some Super Stock drag racing street legal tires ,,basically 7 inch wide slicks with a couple of grooves in the tread..this car was made for 0-60 in the fastest time,, no shifting, it hit 60 in first gear..the lowest was 3.7 seconds ,after 4 runs the average was 3.9,, a world record that stood for 45 years for a production line assembled vehicle..and yes you can buy a old Car and Driver magazine from 1965 ,with the test, if you want to read it yourself..
I was a GTO guy but still a poncho fan. I had no idea the 2+2 was that quick! I'm 71, so I well remember when these were new. I was in the 8th grade when an old kid I knew (who dropped out of school, BTW) bought a new 2+2 like the one shown. He used to ride up and down by the school and "punch it" to show it off. His first name was Charles and at times I wonder whatever happened to that guy.
I have that Article by Car and Driver Magazine > They said you could hear that 421 Catalina from Blocks away another car a Ferrari V-12 was modified too but the 421 Cat stomped him with a 3.9 sec. 0-60 🏁🏆😎 Ferrari with its modded V-12 did 0-60 in 6.3 sec.
Graduated High School in 1965 in Pontiac MI, about 20 miles from Detroit. Seems like everybody had a Catalina 2 plus 2. {and all the rest}. Woodward Avenue was a good race track then. Pontiac to Detroit and back. Light to light.
In 1965 I bought a new 65 GTO, 4 speed, no PS or P Brakes, posi, AM radio, no a/c. $2,380, out the door. In 1967, bought a new 67 GTO, vinyl top, a/c PS, PB, 360 hp/quadrajet, posi, tint windows, AM/FM, out the door $4,100.
While I was happy to see the Z16 '65 Chevelle, you omitted another option for that year....the L79 327/350hp. I owned a '65 hardtop with that engine and 4spd. I think it was made on a Monday, as that car was perfect in every way. I still believe it was the best small block engine Chevy ever made. I embarrassed a lot of other GM and Mopar owners with that car. You also omitted the '65 Nova with the same engine/tran combination. Another screamer.
I'm old and was there for it all. The 327 small journal for sure the finest little buzz saw, however when things get serious, nothing trumps the Rat Motor, once they figured out how to keep them alive. Shaft rockers for the win.
Like your videos. The '65 Z16 Chevelle is/was called the L-78, not L-37 as you stated. Also, for '65, Chevrolet rated the L-78 at 425 horse power, not 375. But for 1966 to 1970, when it was a .030 over 402, Chevrolet rated it at 375 horse. I'm lucky enough to have a '69 L-78 396/375 that I got dirt cheap way back in high-school! Still searching for a nice body. Your videos are great thanks.
The 1965 Corvette 396 was rated at 425 horsepower, with solid lifters. The 1965 Z16 Chevelle 396 was the same engine, exact it had a hydraulic lifter camshaft and was rated at 375 horsepower. Posi-Trac wasn't available in the Z16 and the gear ratio was 3.31. The Z16 also had a rear sway bar, that wouldn't be available in a Chevelle again until 1969.
In late '62, a local guy ordered a '63 Ford 500 XL convertible, red/red/white top, 390/3-2bbls with 4-speed. I've seen that motor in the '63 T-Bird roadsters but never in a full-size Ford. Think it was rated at 340hp. The owner kept it for a very long time & it had low mileage. No idea what happened to it but I'd bet very few were made like that.
Those are fast cars however, what happened to the quickest Mopars? lol The ones listed were not. 1965 Plymouth Belvedere 1. Offered until September of 1965. 426 Commando Engine (not a Hemi). 0-60 in 5.5 secs. 1/4 mile in 14.1 seconds. Why Mopar pulled the plug on the insane 413 & 426 max wedge engines (62-64) before the 426 Hemi was ready to roll out still puzzles me or I'd have even quicker cars to post. Cheers.
Muscle cars are two-door midsize cars with full-sized car engines. There were 10 of those available in 1965. It might even be argued that if a car wasn't available with a four-speed manual it wasn't a muscle car.
Muscle cars didn't exist in 1965. There were pony cars and super cars. Muscle car term came into use in the late 1970's and it encompassed both pony and super cars.
@@AquilarDeherda I'm guessing he meant what was the source of the times. Pretty sure the times came from various magazines which weren't all mentioned. Car and Driver tested cars as they were given. Hot Rod and Car Craft seems to always tweak them (adjusted tire pressure for greatest footprint, flipped air cleaner lids upside down, remove power steering belt, etc.). Worst case, hoping PD Evolution didn't use Automobile Catalog and their 1/4-mile calculations.
It's too bad Crysler didn't hide Valiant roots to the Barracuda like ford did for the Mustang's Falcon roots. It actually beat the Mustang to market. I guess we'll never know how that would've panned out.
DO YOUR HOMEWORK....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I FINISHED WATCHING DURING THE '65 OLDS 442 segment where you mentioned that it had a 3spd Automatic. It did not... And I have just known that off the top of my head for over 45 years now. Young bucks like you who are seeking whatever fame and whatever fortune you get over the internet most often do not impress me AT ALL! Again, do your homework!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The error that I pointed out I am sure was not the only one!
![[ENGSUB] UNPRODUCTIVE DAY ใช้ชีวิต (เปื่อยๆ) ด้วยกัน 1 วัน! | OUROAD CLOSEFRiEND SS2 EP.9](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/pyYKZ3kra9w/mqdefault.jpg)
Pontiac wanted to make a statement that all their models were performance cars,so they made up a ringer for a Car and Driver test,along with 3 other cars from various makes that were stock,,,this 2+2 had the 421 @376 HP and TriPower,which was set up by a dragracer for slightly more power ,,all tri powers had problems right off the assembly line,one of the reasons they were dropped,also the distributor was reworked and the timing advanced for more power,,the car had no carpet or insulation or undercoating , manual every thing,no heater, no radio,wide ratio 4 speed trans,and a 3.33 or 3.08 rear axle gear,, and a posi trac, 2 1/2 exhaust pipes, duals ,no mufflers..a team from firestone was there with some Super Stock drag racing street legal tires ,,basically 7 inch wide slicks with a couple of grooves in the tread..this car was made for 0-60 in the fastest time,, no shifting, it hit 60 in first gear..the lowest was 3.7 seconds ,after 4 runs the average was 3.9,, a world record that stood for 45 years for a production line assembled vehicle..and yes you can buy a old Car and Driver magazine from 1965 ,with the test, if you want to read it yourself..
I was a GTO guy but still a poncho fan. I had no idea the 2+2 was that quick! I'm 71, so I well remember when these were new. I was in the 8th grade when an old kid I knew (who dropped out of school, BTW) bought a new 2+2 like the one shown. He used to ride up and down by the school and "punch it" to show it off. His first name was Charles and at times I wonder whatever happened to that guy.
I have that Article by Car and Driver Magazine > They said you could hear that 421 Catalina from Blocks away another car a Ferrari V-12 was modified too but the 421 Cat stomped him with a 3.9 sec. 0-60 🏁🏆😎 Ferrari with its modded V-12 did 0-60 in 6.3 sec.
I was 5 that year, the Beatles blasted over the radios that year and those cars were so cool, the 1950's, 60's cars were the best.
I know it's not the fastest but that Riviera is just beautiful
I always loved that style. I remember seeing a lot of them
@@jeffreyallen2232Muscle car for Daddy warbucks!!!!
I love boxy cars. The '65 Galaxie is one of my favorite cars.
I had a 65 barracuda. With a few tricks I could run the high 13 s without any trouble. Gave some of those boys fits . They were fun cars.
My uncle had one of those Catalina's. Damn nice car.
I love this stuff. I wish I had every one of them.
Graduated High School in 1965 in Pontiac MI, about 20 miles from Detroit. Seems like everybody had a Catalina 2 plus 2. {and all the rest}. Woodward Avenue was a good race track then. Pontiac to Detroit and back. Light to light.
In 1965 I bought a new 65 GTO, 4 speed, no PS or P Brakes, posi, AM radio, no a/c. $2,380, out the door. In 1967, bought a new 67 GTO, vinyl top, a/c PS, PB, 360 hp/quadrajet, posi, tint windows, AM/FM, out the door $4,100.
While I was happy to see the Z16 '65 Chevelle, you omitted another option for that year....the L79 327/350hp. I owned a '65 hardtop with that engine and 4spd. I think it was made on a Monday, as that car was perfect in every way. I still believe it was the best small block engine Chevy ever made. I embarrassed a lot of other GM and Mopar owners with that car. You also omitted the '65 Nova with the same engine/tran combination. Another screamer.
I'm old and was there for it all. The 327 small journal for sure the finest little buzz saw, however when things get serious, nothing trumps the Rat Motor, once they figured out how to keep them alive. Shaft rockers for the win.
L79 option in the nova broke 💔's of more deep pocket big block owners...
1965 Impala SS 4-speed 425hp 396 ran 15.1 quarter mile times. Only year for that HP in a 396.
1965 Corvette also had the 396/425HP engine
Like your videos. The '65 Z16 Chevelle is/was called the L-78, not L-37 as you stated. Also, for '65, Chevrolet rated the L-78 at 425 horse power, not 375. But for 1966 to 1970, when it was a .030 over 402, Chevrolet rated it at 375 horse. I'm lucky enough to have a '69 L-78 396/375 that I got dirt cheap way back in high-school! Still searching for a nice body. Your videos are great thanks.
The 1965 Corvette 396 was rated at 425 horsepower, with solid lifters. The 1965 Z16 Chevelle 396 was the same engine, exact it had a hydraulic lifter camshaft and was rated at 375 horsepower. Posi-Trac wasn't available in the Z16 and the gear ratio was 3.31. The Z16 also had a rear sway bar, that wouldn't be available in a Chevelle again until 1969.
I like this video apparently 👍
In late '62, a local guy ordered a '63 Ford 500 XL convertible, red/red/white top, 390/3-2bbls with 4-speed. I've seen that motor in the '63 T-Bird roadsters but never in a full-size Ford. Think it was rated at 340hp. The owner kept it for a very long time & it had low mileage. No idea what happened to it but I'd bet very few were made like that.
No, it wasn't a 406 either!
There are several others I would have added to this lineup.
The hatred of whoopie is phenomenal, she needs to understand that her hatred will end in hell.
🤣 Whoopi Goldberg?
Those are fast cars however, what happened to the quickest Mopars? lol The ones listed were not. 1965 Plymouth Belvedere 1. Offered until September of 1965. 426 Commando Engine (not a Hemi). 0-60 in 5.5 secs. 1/4 mile in 14.1 seconds. Why Mopar pulled the plug on the insane 413 & 426 max wedge engines (62-64) before the 426 Hemi was ready to roll out still puzzles me or I'd have even quicker cars to post. Cheers.
Muscle cars are two-door midsize cars with full-sized car engines. There were 10 of those available in 1965. It might even be argued that if a car wasn't available with a four-speed manual it wasn't a muscle car.
Muscle cars didn't exist in 1965. There were pony cars and super cars. Muscle car term came into use in the late 1970's and it encompassed both pony and super cars.
How did you come to these rankings?
Did you even watch/listen to video?? #10 15.9, #9 15.5, #8 15.5, #7 15.4, #6 15.3, #5 15.0, #4 14.9, #3 14.7, #2 14.6, #1 14.5. *WHAT DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND?!*
@@AquilarDeherda I'm guessing he meant what was the source of the times. Pretty sure the times came from various magazines which weren't all mentioned. Car and Driver tested cars as they were given. Hot Rod and Car Craft seems to always tweak them (adjusted tire pressure for greatest footprint, flipped air cleaner lids upside down, remove power steering belt, etc.). Worst case, hoping PD Evolution didn't use Automobile Catalog and their 1/4-mile calculations.
@@justme307 Ohhhhhhhh, and you're his/her spokesperson........a primadonna that self-highlights??????? You're "pretty sure"?? Get lost BOZO.
Hey what about the 65 Chevelle SS with the L-79 327 CI 350 horse engine
It's too bad Crysler didn't hide Valiant roots to the Barracuda like ford did for the Mustang's Falcon roots. It actually beat the Mustang to market. I guess we'll never know how that would've panned out.
Wow…. A whole 235 hp? 15 sec 1/4/mile……hahaha
🇺🇸🇬🇪🇺🇸🇬🇪🇺🇸🇬🇪 როგორც ყოველთვის ღმერთი ფარავდეს ამერიკას საუკუნიდან საუკუნამდე ამინ.
Hey thanks man 👍🏻 we could sure use some of that these days. Thanks for the positive words.
oops - no 3 speed auto in any gm intermediates til next year...
What do you consider intermediate?
Buick Riviera = Lead sled
In 1965I had nova Tudor 100 with a 327 275 hp with 4.10 gear it would run 14.0 flat at 98 mp but a guess it was not a muscle car
Do Corvette C1s not qualify as muscle cars? Surely the top optioned Corvette would have beaten all.
Absolutely 👍
lol
So damn cheap if you're making $100k today.😥
Cobra??? 65 396 Vette?
Just so laughably slow compared to anything after 1970.
But so cheap, compared today.😥
Huh? Cars got slower in the 70’s and early 80’s, not faster.
DO YOUR HOMEWORK....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I FINISHED WATCHING DURING THE '65 OLDS 442 segment where you mentioned that it had a 3spd Automatic. It did not... And I have just known that off the top of my head for over 45 years now. Young bucks like you who are seeking whatever fame and whatever fortune you get over the internet most often do not impress me AT ALL! Again, do your homework!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The error that I pointed out I am sure was not the only one!
At least they had a human read a script instead of an AI ignoramus
The populist economists have started doing car videos now.
Hj