1960 Chevrolet Impala

I love this Impala and I don’t care that it has 4 ways to get in!!!!!!

By Angelo Van Bogart

Chevrolet built 497,048 four-door sedans in 1960. No one knows how many of those sedans were Impalas, Bel Airs or Biscaynes, but you can bet the farm that many went to rural America.

Determining how many 1960 Chevy sedans went to farmers is likewise impossible, but John Broucker isn’t concerned about that figure. What he’d really like to know is how many of those 1960 Impala sedans were equipped with a 348-cid V-8 and a four-speed manual transmission like his central Ohio sleeper ordered new by a farmer?

“I called General Motors and all they could tell me was how many were four-door sedans,” he said.

Chevrolet was not particular about the details of its production in this era, but Broucker’s car is certainly rare. Maybe even as rare as hen’s teeth. Broucker himself had a hard time believing the car’s combination when he first heard about the four-speed Impala sedan in 1980.

“The farmer that bought it new, I worked with his sister’s son, his nephew, and he said, ‘My uncle has a 348 four-speed,’ and when I [saw it], I said, ‘That’s a four-door.’ My buddy said it can’t be, it just can’t be, so I called the guy and I bought it.”

Even after buying the car from the original owner, and running into a mechanic who watched the car get unloaded at Progressive Chevrolet in 1960, Broucker sometimes has to defend what some people assume is a clone.

“Honestly, if I was going to clone a car, I wouldn’t clone a four-door ’60 Chevy,” he said.

That still begs the question: Why does a four-door 1960 Chevrolet Impala four-door sedan with a 250-hp Turbo-Thrust 348 and a four-speed with Posi-Traction even exist?

“Back then, if your buddy drove up to you in a four-door four-speed, you’d say, ‘You’re crazy,’” Broucker admits. “But he said he didn’t like the Impala (hardtop), it had the big back window, and he wanted a ‘fooler.’”

For the full fooler (a.k.a. “sleeper”) effect, the original owner even ran little hubcaps and blackwall tires to help the finned Impala fly under the radar. Aside from its performance options, the Impala is otherwise a typical farm sedan and generally lacks creature comforts.

“It doesn’t even have the rear-view mirror on the outside,” Broucker said. “It does have an AM radio, a heater, and the only thing that doesn’t work is the clock in the dash.”

With only 56,000 miles on the odometer, the rest of the Impala works as new, and Broucker said it remains largely original.

“It still has the original clutch,” he said. “I put front brakes and maybe a fan belt on and that’s about it. It has the original paint, original interior and original chrome. Sometimes, people look at the bumpers and say they’re a little wavy, but that’s they way it was. It even has the original generator, and the right rear tailpipe has a couple holes, but it’s the original exhaust.

“Behind all of the six tail lights, they have those little plastic cups on them. These are still on there. Any time anyone changed a light they threw them away.”

The unrestored Impala shows so well, it’s even placed second at the Stan Hywet car show in Akron, Ohio, against restored cars. Broucker believes the car’s excellent level of preservation is partly due to how the original owner stored the car.

“This farmer also worked at the railroad, and [he and his brothers] brought cabooses home and they made garages out of them,” he said. “I bet the thing was 3 feet off the ground and the wood floor helped preserve the car.”

When Broucker first saw the Impala, it was wedged in one of those cabooses.

“It was a real tight fit,” he said. “There was a pot belly stove in the caboose and I don’t know if he used the stove or not. They say the wood doesn’t sweat, it absorbs the moisture.”

The storage served the Impala well through 20 years and 50,000 miles with the original owner. Today, Broucker remains thrilled with the Impala’s condition. However, he hasn’t always found the car thrilling, which is why he’s only added about 6,000 miles to the odometer in his 32 years of ownership.

“Back then, I bought and sold a lot of cars, and for some reason I just held on to this,” he said. “I did think it was neat at first — I just thought it couldn’t be real, but it was. Honestly, I think I kind of lost interest and wondered, ‘Why did I buy a four-door?’ Then I would take it out and drive it and think, ‘This drives pretty nice.’ I was really happy with that.”

Many vehicles have come and gone from Broucker’s collection, but the Impala has been a mainstay. In fact, Broucker has pared his collection down to a 1969 Dodge Dart he races in the 1/8 mile and this oddly optioned Impala. That raises the question, would he ever race his Impala?

“I have [thought about it], but I might be embarrassed by it,” he said. “It has a lot of torque, but the point I am at, I don’t want to tear up the clutch.”

Instead, Broucker is content to blend into the car show landscape, making his Impala blend into the sea of hobby cars. For those collectors who enjoy the unusual, stumbling onto this rarity is like finding treasure. Maybe as exciting as finding that needle in the haystack.

From http://www.oldcarsweekly.com

It’s Spring Time….and Beehives are the Buzz Part 2

Resistance

If there is one challenge to the beehive revolution, it’s the perception of the masses. While most engine builders and performance enthusiasts know that the beehive works to improve their engines, many don’t realize the true benefits. Some established enthusiasts are confused and concerned that the smaller valve retainer and single spring used in the beehive system are capable of handling the same high performance loads carried by the conventional spring with two coils.

Beehive springs are a precision component just like any part you select for your engine. Using a tech line expert to help find just the right Beehive springs is critical to your engine’s ultimate performance and durability.

“There are some very knowledgeable engine builders who don’t understand how a single coil spring can be better than a dual conventional spring,” stated Thomas Griffin Head valve spring engineer for COMP Cams.

“The fact is the beehive springs, by virtue of the ovate spring shape and a variety of internal upgrades is compatible with virtually any application where a dual spring is used. That includes some engines with mechanical roller camshafts. The key is to review the required camshaft load and assess the aggressiveness of the camshaft.”

The key profile consideration of a camshaft can be denoted in the camshaft profile section. By reviewing the duration specs for your potential camshaft at 0.050-inch lift and again at 0.200-inch lift, the shape of the lobe can be projected. These are the key figures engineers use to determine beehive spring compatibility. Currently beehive springs for camshafts measuring up to 0.750-inch lift are available.

COMP Cams engineers used a Spintron machine to determine exactly what happens with valve spring dynamics at all levels of engine rpm. This high tech sensor was installed after cutting the cylinder head to make room. The Spintron data noted improved performance at reduced valve seat pressures, among other benefits previously mentioned.

It’s Spring Time….and Beehives are the Buzz Part 1

No this isn’t going to be one of those talks and no we aren’t going to run out and hung a tree, ok…if you must…go ahead I’ll wait…..(insert bored whistling)……(more bored whistling)…..Ok…are you done?!!

As I get closer to getting the heads on the Mustang, I’m going to have to begin picking any changes I want made to the CJ heads. While cruising the web checking out options, I ran across this piece (Corvette related but springs are springs as far as an engine is concerned) and there are some good tips here.

Good reading.

Beehive Springs Sound Great, But Will They Work For You?

by on April 18, 20

Quick! What the fastest moving component in your engine? If you’ve taken a hint from the title of this article, you probably guessed correctly – it’s your valve springs, those tight little bundles of joy that open and close your engine’s valves.

Beehive springs come in a variety of shapes and sizes. The benefits of moving to Beehive springs where possible (and today few situations are not Beehive compatible) are many.

Beehive springs, such as those offered by COMP Cams, offer a huge number of benefits over stock-style cylindrical springs; reduced valve spring mass, faster valve acceleration, increased valve train rigidity, reduced valve train component stress and a whole laundry list of other positives.

Best of all, the word has gotten out and folks all over the country are using them for a wide variety of applications from street performance to extreme racing endeavors. That’s a really good thing.

Along with their success has come some confusion over exactly which beehive is right to purchase. Currently there are over a dozen beehive spring styles out there, each offering some unique take, be it in the seat pocket diameter, ovate wiring diameter, pitch or internal spring “frequency.” Regardless increased selection has bred some minor confusion, albeit easily cured.

Beehive springs are conical shaped springs that employ this powerful shape in the creation of a spring that can deliver both excellent performance and lowered seat pressures. With lower seat pressure, valve train components (especially the pushrods, rockers and lifters) are less stressed to perform the same work.

This beehive spring weights in at 99 grams, while a comparable conventional spring is 121 grams.

The difference between beehive and conventional cylindrical springs is obvious especially when you compare them in this manner. Note the dramatic difference in retainer diameter equating to less valve train weight.

According to COMP, effective beehive springs can support an additional 700rpm over stock cylindrical springs. How? It just stands to reason that the smaller coils at the top of the spring don’t require as much force to get the valve moving quickly, much quicker than conventional style springs. The higher rpm potential equates to better durability and performance.

There are some very knowledgeable engine builders who don’t understand how a single coil spring can be better than a dual conventional spring.

“Its like watching a race car running 60-foot elapsed times on the drag strip,” stated Bill Godbold, Chief Engineer for COMP Cams. “For example, take two identical cars with equivalent 500 hp engines.

“One has stock suspension and the other a sophisticated racing suspension. The car with the race suspension will get going more quickly and achieves better 60-foot time. The same principle works with beehive spring mechanics.”

 

Thanks for reading.  Part II coming up.

Tim

ZL1 You Are Gonna Want This Car!!

I was very impressed by this car and the numbers.  Yeah…and I drive a Corvette!!!

 

[vodpod id=Video.16057895&w=425&h=350&fv=%26rel%3D0%26border%3D0%26]

, posted with vodpod

Larry Shinoda – Corvettes Designs

I ran across on ton http://www.corvettereport.com and thought I pass it along. If only they made some of these!!!  You got to check out the 1991 C4 body.

Wow – Thanks for reading.  Tim

A Look Back At Corvettes Designed by Larry Shinoda

Dateline: 3.30.12

Hot rodder Shinoda teams up with Bill Mitchell and defined the “Corvette look.”

Perhaps it was “in the stars” that Larry Shinoda was in the right place at the right time. If you strictly look at Shinoda’s resume in 1956, you might ask, “How did this guy get in the front door?” As a young man, the only thing Larry ever graduated from was high school, Army boot camp, and the School of Hard Knocks. Twelve-year-old Larry had his life turned inside out when along with thousands of Japanese-Americans, he and his family were sent to interment camps for the duration of WW II. The experience had a profound effect on his personality. A self-professed “malcontent” Shinoda could be a little difficult to work with.

After his Army tour of duty in Korea, Shinoda attended Art Center School of Design in Los Angeles, but truly hated being there. He could see no purpose in taking the classes in design and the various art mediums, such as watercolor painting. He was a car guy/hot rodder and he wanted to draw and design cars! So he left Art Center without graduating and based strictly on his car illustrations, landed a job at Ford, then Studebaker/Packard. Just a year after starting his career, he landed a job as a designer at General Motors.

The rest is the stuff of legend. Street racing and blowing the doors off of Bill Mitchell’s souped up Buick and quickly being taken under Mitchell’s wing. Things like that happens, but rarely. There was obviously some chemistry between the two men, perhaps it was because both men could be brash and had strong opinions.

Shinoda got his first big break when Mitchell tapped the 28-year-old to translate the body design of the ‘57 Q-Corvette on to the mule chassis from Duntov’s aborted Corvette SS project. The finished car became Mitchell’s 1959 Stingray Racer, which formed the styling theme for the ‘63 Corvette. From there, Shinoda got one peach project after another. It’s worth noting that the design of the Stingray Racer is held in such high esteem that current Corvette chief designer, Tom Peters (C6 Corvette and late model Camaro designer) is on record stating that his ‘09 Corvette Stingray Concept (aka Transformers Corvette) was influenced by the ‘59 Stingray.

During his almost 13 years at GM, Larry designed numerous special Corvettes, Corvairs, and several race cars, as well as his usual duties working out the styling details of various production cars. Presented here are Larry Shinoda’s most important Corvette designs. Later this week, we’ll take a look at Larry’s very slick Corvairs, and race cars, including the body design for Pat Flaherty’s 1956 Indy 500-winning Watson-Offenhauser.– Scott


1959 Stingray Racer
The 1959 Stingray Racer is still a stunningly beautiful car design. The idea of a “broad, flat top surface” was to create a reverse airfoil that would pull the car down. The problem was that the sharp leading edge was too high and at high speed, more air was knifing under the car rather than going over the car, causing a serious front lift problem. The production Sting Rays and even the Grand Sport Corvettes all had the same trouble. This could have been corrected with a slight forward rake, if the nose had drooped down a n inch or so, and a chin spoiled was added. The Grand Sport replica cars from Duntov Motors use these corrections and front end stays where it belongs at high speed – DOWN.


1963 Sting Ray Concept Art
The road to fully worked out new car designs was littered with concept art – most of which was probably thrown away. Here we see a headlight treatment study. Sorting out the production car’s rotating hidden-headlight design was a brilliant but challenging project. Note the absence of hood lines and windshield wipers. It also looks like they were considering scoops on the back edge of the doors.


1961 Mako Shark I Showcar – AKA “The Corvette Shark”

With the basic Sting Ray design approved for production, Bill Mitchell had Shinoda design an exaggerated version for a teaser show car. Known today as the Mako Shark-I, the car’s original name was simply, “Corvette Shark.” 1961 was still the “Jet Age,” so the car was originally shown with a plexi bubble top. It was kind of “Jetsons” neat-looking, but would anyone really want one for their daily driver?


1963 4-Seater Sting Ray Split-Window Coupe

The XP-720 4-Seater Corvette Sting Ray was an exploration into the possibility of the Corvette competing with the much better-selling Ford Thunderbird. Ed Cole, head of the GM car and truck group, thought it was a pretty good idea. After all, GM is in the business of selling cars – LOTS of cars. Since the public bought 73,051 Thunderbirds in 1961, compared to 10, 939 Corvettes, it seemed like a no-brainer. The story goes that a tall executive got stuck in the back seat and needed quite a bit of help getting out. The 4-seater concept was quickly dropped. Good!


1963 Production Corvette Sting Ray Split-Window Coupe

Look at 1963 cars from America and Europe and there’s NOTHING like the Corvete Sting Ray. The split-window was one of Bill Mitchell’s pet design elements and was a one year deal. Although the design concept of a “split rear window” wasn’t new with the Sting Ray (the 1950 VW Beetle had a “split” rear window), the overall presentation of the Split-Window Coupe Sting Ray looked like NOTHING else.


1964 XP-819 Rear-Engine Corvette Engineering Study

The Corvair was the only production car to come out of Ed Cole’s ‘57 Q-Chevrolet initiative and was considered very exotic when it came out in 1960. But trouble quickly set in and it wasn’t just Ralph Nader’s doing. The early Corvairs were not good cars. But the “rear-engine” concept was very alluring to Chevy engineer Frank Winchell. Frank insisted that with the correct size tires the inherent oversteering problem could be corrected. Winchell envisioned a rear-engine Corvette and Zora Duntov said, “No!” To prove his point, Winchell had Shinoda design a pretty body to cover the big V8 engine hanging out behind the trans-axle. Upon seeing Shinoda’s rough full-size drawing, Duntov asked, “Where did you cheat?” Where he cheated was that there were no real rear bumpers or crash zone on the back end. The concept was quickly dropped. it was also discovered that the car did excellent wheelies!


1966 Running Mako Shark-II Showcar

Bill Mitchell verbalized the parameters of the design and Larry Shinoda and a small group of designers and stylists worked out the details. It was as if lightning had struck twice – first with the Sting Ray and a few years later with the Mako Shark-II. The exaggerated fender humps have become THE signature Corvette profile. A non-running full-size version was shown to GM’s management in ‘65 and received unanimous approval as the next Corvette. While the new body and interior designs were being worked out, a second “running” Mako Shark-II was built to keep the Corvette fans stoked. Almost 50 years later, the Mako Shark-II is still a jaw-dropper!


1991 Mears-Shinoda C4 Corvette Body Kit

Larry left GM in 1968, stayed at Ford for one year, then formed his own design studio where he worked on all kinds of automotive and non-automotive design projects. Corvette body kits and add-on parts became very popular though the ‘70s and ‘80s. Three-time Indy 500 winner, Rick Mears teamed up with Shinoda and businessman Jim Williams in 1991 to create and offer the Rick Mears Special Edition Corvette.

Arguably the cleanest full-body-kit ever offered for a C4 Corvete, the coupe version lowered the coefficient of drag on the car from .34 to .30. The complete kit cost approximately $5,200, plus $3,000 for installation, and around $1,000 for a new paint job. With a cost of just over 10 grand on top of a $32,455 new ‘91 Corvette, there weren’t many takers. But, it was a very nice design.


Shinoda C5 Sting Ray Concept

The all-new C5 1997 Corvette was released in the Fall of ‘96 and Larry Shinoda got right on it. Note the date on the rendering, “1-6-97.” Obviously, Larry wanted to see more “Sting Ray” in the new C5. If you’re a mid-year Corvette fan, Shinoda’s concept looks pretty good. Larry died the following November and to the best of my knowing, there was never an effort to make a full-body kit based on what may well have been Larry’s last Corvette design project. Any fiberglass fabricators out there that would like to take a shot at the Shinoda C5 Sting Ray???

Dodge Unveils Next-Gen Sprint Cup Car in Vegas…..

……OR…WHAT THE CHARGER SHOULD HAVE BEEN AT THE START
By: Jen Dunnaway
                    Posted On: 3/12/2012 9:14AM

SuzyBruisy

Following the precedent set by Ford with its hot new NASCAR Fusion, Dodge unveiled a muscular Charger that’ll be running Sprint Cup during the 2013 season. Dodge enjoys the distinction of being the only Cup car that’s based on an actual RWD V8 civilian version, but the reveal also comes at a problematic time for the manufacturer: with Penske Racing having just announced that it’ll be leaving Dodge for Ford, the only Charger in the field is run by independent Robby Gordon. SRT Motorsports chief Ralph Giles says all options are on the table, including pulling Dodge from the series altogether. What do you think, does Dodge have a future in NASCAR? After seeing this new Charger, I kind of hope so. More info at NASCAR.com, pics via Autoblog.

1957 Aston Martin – Restoration

I ran across this on Classic Recollections. I’m not a Aston guy, but this DB Mark III is pretty nice. The owner did a lot of work on this thing. Nicely done! Oh, but cleaning those wire wheels…..ya killin’ me!!

Thanks for reading

Tim

[vodpod id=Video.16177451&w=425&h=350&fv=%26rel%3D0%26border%3D0%26]

Corvette Mouse Pad Give Away – Corvette Engine Contest Final Winner

Here you have the final winner:

Roy Obert (you’ve seen his work here – Quickiefilms) from  Mi., with his C3 – with a tiny but functional engine.

The specs? Oh...he just says..."Bad Ass".

What a profile!!!!!!!!

Thanks for the fun.  More contests coming up.

Thanks for reading.

Tim

TrackVids Racing4Vets – BWM

Got this from my circle over on Google Plus:

Lawrence – the Beamer is Looking good.

Hey everybody, just a quick update on the TrackVids Racing4Vets BMW E30 325 ground up build. Here are a few photos of the cage and interior paint work. Very clean, very tidy, gonna be lots of fun!

BMW Shell getting some paint.

Interior Sprayed

Cage shot

Can’t wait to see it done.

Thanks for reading.  Here is their Site:    https://plus.google.com/u/0/112504538024847827140/posts

 

Tim

Five vehicles from Ron Pratte’s collection set to cross the block at Barrett-Jackson – Hemmings.com


Tucker #1043. Photos courtesy Barrett-Jackson

The big Scottsdale auction week is finally here, now with six companies set to to drop the hammer on literally thousands of collector cars in a mere handful of days. In typical fashion, Barrett-Jackson was the first to usher cars through the stage lights, and it’s here where we’ve been alerted to the probable sale of this 1948 Tucker (chassis #1043) currently owned by none other than noted Barrett-Jackson attendee and enthusiastic car collector Ron Pratte.

Specific details about the Tucker are lacking, other than mention of its restoration, on Barrett-Jackson’s auction description. And we use the phrase “probable sale” simply because unlike most of the lots at B-J, the Tucker is listed as having an undisclosed reserve. That said, Mike Schutta of the Tucker Historical Foundation, provided more insight.

This car is very nice and most Tucker fans are keeping a close eye on this auction to see if it will set a new record price for a Tucker. The current record is $1,127,500 paid for Tucker #1045 about 18 months ago. This Tucker is in much better condition.

An interesting tidbit is that Tucker #1043 was used as part of an advertising scheme for a golf driving range in a western suburb of Chicago back in the ’50s. It was painted Tropical Rose and Snowshoe White to match the driving range buildings.

While surfing through the Barrett-Jackson website for more information on the Tucker, we stumbled upon four other Ron Pratte-owned vehicles that will also be offered at Westworld during the weekend, beginning with the car pictured above: the 1947 Bentley Mark VI with coachwork by Franay. The Bentley was last offered for sale by Barrett-Jackson – at no reserve – at their 2006 Palm Beach auction, where the hammer fell at $1,728,000 (including buyer’s premium). At that sale, details of the Bentley were as follows:

4.5 Liter Inline 6 with a four-speed. Coachbuilt by Franay. Magnificent restoration to Pebble Beach Concours d’Elegance winning standards. This is the first major winning Concours d’Elegance car after WWII. Winning the first two major Concours in 1948, back-to-back, on the 12th of June at Enghien and the 17th of June at Bois de Boulogne. Mr. Gudol, the original owner and visionary of the Franay, was an industrialist whose sole purpose was to prove to the world that France was not only back from the rigors of war, but ready to reassert its dominance of haute couture and automotive design elegance. The awards the Franay has won over the decades is proof of his timeless vision. Mr. Gudol, in his wisdom, continued to enhance and advance the performance capacity and design elements of the Franay to push the envelope of an ever improving competitive edge in Concours d’Elegance competition. Mr. Gary Wales, who has shepherded the Franay through over 50 major awards and honors since 1990, has scaled back the number of public appearances so that the car is currently eligible for any and all Concours d’Elegance events.

Like the Tucker, the Franay Bentley touts an undisclosed reserve.

Then there’s Pratte’s 1957 De Soto Adventurer convertible, again with an undisclosed reserve. Oft-repeated generic De Soto history aside, specific details provided by Barrett-Jackson state:

Powered by the famous 345/345hp Hemi V-8 with dual quads, an automatic transmission, push-button shifter on dash, and independent torsion bar front suspension. With the division’s top Hemi V-8 under the hood, the Adventurer was an early muscle car with a set of the most aesthetically pleasing tail fins ever seen on virtually any car.

The only two cars listed by Pratte without a reserve are this pair of 2007 Shelby GT500s, which are to be sold as a pair. Details per the auction site are identical for both Shelbys:

In January 2006 Ron Pratte bought the Ford Motor Company’s newest car, a 2007 Ford Shelby GT500 VIN 00001 that benefited Carroll Shelby’s Children’s Foundation. In the past, Ford reserved the first fifty cars produced for Ford family members and senior executives or by other people on a selective list. Ford was so grateful to Ron for his generosity, they offered him the opportunity to buy two more, VIN 00002 and VIN 00005. While Ron is keeping VIN 00001, he is selling the orange Coupe and matching convertible as a pair. The successful bidder will get both cars for one price. These cars are special in other ways as well, as part of the purchase of VIN 00001 was a trip to the Flat Rock assembly plant where these legendary cars are manufactured. At the end of the tour of the assembly plant, Ron was presented with the keys to VIN 00001, VIN 00002 and VIN 00005 by Carroll Shelby and Carroll autographed all three cars for Ron. Along with his cars were three other 2007 Shelby GT 5000′s, for Carroll Shelby, Steve Davis and Gary Bennett. Ron then threw Ford a curve and said he didn’t want any of these cars shipped by rail to the owners, he wanted them trucked, enclosed, to his facility in Chandler, Arizona, bypassing the traditional dealer delivery and inspections. All of the cars, including Carroll’s personal GT 500, were delivered to the respective owner this way. This is a unique opportunity to own two pieces of Shelby and Ford history.

Barrett-Jackson’s Scottsdale auction started Sunday and will run through this weekend. For more information, visit Barrett-Jackson.com.

I personally love the De Soto.
 
Thanks for reading.
Tim