It's rust free because it's an Arkansas car and I didn't ask why and how it's all the way up here in god forsaken Youngstown. She sure is big too - two hundred and sixteen and a half inches long and unlike many big cars from that era that are actually quite cramped inside, the interior felt cavernous and airy. Behind the wheel I didn't mind the lack of a power seat adjuster either - just a door to door bench seat drenched in "Naugahyde"; a very catchy name GM called their wears-like-iron vinyl upholstery back then. The height was fine for me and the steering wheel angle too despite no tilt or telescoping adjustment. Front seat was a little springy, though and offered absolutely no support what so ever. The test drive, although short, was epic.
Driving an old car is a trip back in time that even trumps walking through your childhood home after decades away since most likely a lot of your home has changed. I know mine did to the extent I barely recognized a square inch of the interior. An original time capsule like this? Surreal. Don't get me wrong, this is a horrible car although it sounded great and its 400 engine pulled it off the line like a freight train. The steering was incredibly over boosted - not unlike it was like when new. The shocks were dead, though, and did little to cushion me from the undulations of Youngstown's legendarily horrible streets. That along with the springy seats made for what I would imagine would be an exhausting car to drive. Even with new shocks. And springs for that matter. Still, that big V-8 in a very good state of tune was a hoot to peg.
Our literal golden oldie has one of two Pontiac 400 cubic inch V-8's offered in 1969, hence the 400 on the fender (if you can see it). Standard was a 290 horsepower 400 that required premium fuel while a no cost option 265 horse version was also offered. Why? Who knows. A four barrel 400 was offered as well that made 330 horsepower while a 428 engine making 390 hp topped the engine lineup. Those horsepower number sound like contemporary numbers but keep in mind these are generous SAE "gross" ratings - subtract forty percent of the gross to get reasonably close to what the "net" would be. So, if our Catalina here makes 290 gross horses, she'd make approximately 174 net. The math makes sense considering contemporary road test results of this car with a 400 "two barrel" engine have it going from zero to sixty in 9.3 seconds. It felt much stronger than that because the lion's share of the engine's torque comes on right off idle. That's always fun.
For 1969, the Catalina was Pontiac's middle model in their full size triumvirate between the entry level "Executive" and their top drawer "Bonneville". Sharing underpinnings with the Chevrolet Impala and Caprice, Oldsmobile 88 and Buick Wildcat and LeSabre, the Catalina was part of one of my favorite eras and types of American automobiles - GM full size cars made between 1965 and 1970. Somewhat ironic although I've come to fathom it a total coincidence, I was born in 1964 and these would have been my first experience with brand new cars. Epitomizing GM styling at its high point, these cars were bolted together quite well too and had interiors that were equally as handsome being devoid of injection molded plastic. In a time when the size of a car was still a bragging point, GM's replacements for these cars come 1971 may have been bigger but they certainly weren't better. In many regards they were literally gigantic steps backwards.
Our literal golden oldie has one of two Pontiac 400 cubic inch V-8's offered in 1969, hence the 400 on the fender (if you can see it). Standard was a 290 horsepower 400 that required premium fuel while a no cost option 265 horse version was also offered. Why? Who knows. A four barrel 400 was offered as well that made 330 horsepower while a 428 engine making 390 hp topped the engine lineup. Those horsepower number sound like contemporary numbers but keep in mind these are generous SAE "gross" ratings - subtract forty percent of the gross to get reasonably close to what the "net" would be. So, if our Catalina here makes 290 gross horses, she'd make approximately 174 net. The math makes sense considering contemporary road test results of this car with a 400 "two barrel" engine have it going from zero to sixty in 9.3 seconds. It felt much stronger than that because the lion's share of the engine's torque comes on right off idle. That's always fun.
For 1969, the Catalina was Pontiac's middle model in their full size triumvirate between the entry level "Executive" and their top drawer "Bonneville". Sharing underpinnings with the Chevrolet Impala and Caprice, Oldsmobile 88 and Buick Wildcat and LeSabre, the Catalina was part of one of my favorite eras and types of American automobiles - GM full size cars made between 1965 and 1970. Somewhat ironic although I've come to fathom it a total coincidence, I was born in 1964 and these would have been my first experience with brand new cars. Epitomizing GM styling at its high point, these cars were bolted together quite well too and had interiors that were equally as handsome being devoid of injection molded plastic. In a time when the size of a car was still a bragging point, GM's replacements for these cars come 1971 may have been bigger but they certainly weren't better. In many regards they were literally gigantic steps backwards.
Driving this big old Poncho, really all cars of this era, aside from the beauty of their "Coke bottle" styling, I was amazed at how primitive it is compared even to cars that would be made not ten years later. Please note I didn't say they were better but driven by myriad circumstances, those later cars had engineering advances that were seemingly moon shot like compared to this car that hearkened from a by gone era of automobile design that placed form over function. Sometimes the good old days were actually really good.
Juxtapose this car and cars just like it against Apollo 11. While it's been said the Apollo space ships, had less computing power than a modern iPhone, the damn thing still landed on the freakin' moon for crying out loud. Meanwhile, mortals down here drove automobiles that had more in common with a Conestoga Wagon than a moon lander. So, where the Apollo's advanced for their time or were cars like our Catalina stuck in an automotive stone age with no impetus to evolve in 1969? Me thinks, like so often is the case in life, the answer to that question lies somewhere in the middle.
Juxtapose this car and cars just like it against Apollo 11. While it's been said the Apollo space ships, had less computing power than a modern iPhone, the damn thing still landed on the freakin' moon for crying out loud. Meanwhile, mortals down here drove automobiles that had more in common with a Conestoga Wagon than a moon lander. So, where the Apollo's advanced for their time or were cars like our Catalina stuck in an automotive stone age with no impetus to evolve in 1969? Me thinks, like so often is the case in life, the answer to that question lies somewhere in the middle.
Hi thanks for posting thiis
ReplyDelete