These are text only versions of recent articles from The Legend, magazine of the GTO Association of America (http://www.gtoaa.org)

The 1964 GTO factory header that almost was

Jeff Lovich

Published in The Legend, July, 2006

            Few would contest the fact that the 1964 GTO was the car that ushered in the muscle car era. The combination of a mid-size body and a full-size engine in the form of a 389 was a combination that other auto makers copied for almost a decade. Most enthusiasts know that the pinnacle of performance in the 1964 GTO was the Tri-Power option, with three two barrel carburetors, rated at 348 horsepower. But did you know that Pontiac may have planned to outfit the top rated engine with factory cast iron headers? If you answered no, read on.

            I first found out about the cast iron header mystery relative to the 1964 GTO at the Pontiac Oakland Club International meeting in Hershey, Pennsylvania in the early 1980’s. One of the tech speakers was asked why the factory part numbers for the 1967 HO/Ram Air exhaust manifolds were of 1964 vintage. If you didn’t know, Pontiac assigned part numbers more or less sequentially, with older series generally using lower numbers. Page 4 of Pete McCarthy’s famous book, “Pontiac Musclecar performance: 1955-1979,” lists the part numbers issued by Pontiac in 1964 as ranging from 9773XXX-9777XXX. For 1967 part numbers ranged from 9785XXX-9789XXX. The part numbers that were used for the 1967 HO/Ram Air factory headers were 9777641 (right hand) and 9777646 (left hand). These were clearly assigned 1964 vintage numbers from the factory. According to the speaker, Pontiac had intended to use the factory headers on 1964 Tri-Power GTO’s, but for some reason (production problems?), they were sidelined until they appeared on HO and Ram Air GTO’s in 1967.

            During the ongoing restoration of my 1964 GTO’s, I noticed more tantalizing evidence that Pontiac was considering the use of factory headers on these cars. When I replaced the motor mounts on one of my cars, a post sedan, I noticed that the drivers side unit (a Pontiac original with a 1964-series part number cast in the rubber) had two holes drilled in it by the factory that exactly matched the attachment points on the reproduction 1967 HO/Ram Air battery cable tube I purchased so I could use a 1967 factory headers on my car (see photo). Despite the fact that the car was originally sold as a four barrel, automatic, the motor mount was already set up to accept the 1967-only HO/Ram Air battery cable tube!

            What was even more interesting is that this same car was originally equipped with the positive battery cable running along the frame crossmember instead of running through the tube that attaches to the head bolt between cylinders number 5 and 7 as is more typical. The latter route is impossible with factory headers as there is insufficient clearance between the manifold and the block to install the metal battery cable tube and secure it to the lower head bolt stud as is the case with standard exhaust manifolds. Instead, the route went from the starter relay mounted on the inner fender (typical for 1964), down toward the fuel pump where it clipped into a steel retainer bolted to the lower front of the head to keep it from touching the front of the exhaust manifold, along the frame crossmember, and then to the starter. The factory had the wire wrapped in asphalt coated fabric loom and held fast to the crossmember, away from the exhaust manifold, by a double pronged spring steel clip retained by the upper two bolts on the frame to engine mount bracket. Would this have been the “early” arrangement to keep the battery cable from being burned by the factory header or is it coincidence? Given that this is the same route that the battery cable takes on 1967 GTO’s with HO and Ram Air engines suggests that the factory was trying to find a safe passage for the battery cable around factory headers before 1967.

            My other car, a one previous owner hardtop has the more common arrangement with the battery cable going between the head and the exhaust manifold between cylinders number 5 and 7, but it too has the holes for securing the 1967-only HO/Ram Air battery cable tube! Do these holes provide more proof of plans by Pontiac to install the early factory headers on the first GTO? I think so. Whatever the case, I’m one of many hobbyists taking the dream of a factory header on a 1964 GTO and making it a reality by installing the beautiful 1967 manifolds on my car. Or are the really 1964 manifolds?

This article is Copyrighted^© 2006 by Jeff Lovich and may not be re-posted, stored electronically, or reprinted without the written permission of the author.

There were two different 1964 Tri-Power manifolds

Jeff Lovich

Published in The Legend, August, 2006

            I’ve been collecting and restoring GTOs and other Pontiacs for over 30 years. Twenty-six GTOs later I’m still learning. Today we have a wealth of reference books to help us determine the correct part, finish, or installation to help us with our restoration, but it wasn’t always that way. Thirty years ago we didn’t have those resources but enough original cars remained that we could solve many of the mysteries confronting a restorer by examining survivor cars. Regardless of experience and reference books there are still some interesting discoveries to be made about our cars and their parts.

            In 1964 there were only three V-8 intake manifolds in production for all Pontiac models. Low performance 326 and 389 engines used a two barrel manifold (part number 9770273). The 326 HO, higher performance 389s and “low performance” 421s came with four barrel manifolds (part number 9770274) designed for the Carter AFB (Aluminum Four Barrel) carburetor. The top 389 and 421 engine options came equipped with a Tri-Power manifold that was home to three Rochester two barrel carbs. All Tri-Power manifolds carried part number 9775088 and all V-8 manifolds were cast iron.

            After examining scores of 1964 Tri-Power manifolds over the years I noticed that there were actually two different castings, both bearing the same part number. Although the differences are minor, the castings can be easily be discriminated from one another on the car with little more than a glance. One casting has a smooth roof (Figure 1) over the water crossover on the front of the manifold. The other casting has two prominent ridges cast into the roof of the water crossover that run parallel to the length of the manifold (Figure 2). The ridges are about 1/8” in width and 3 ¼” apart. The one on the driver’s side is about 1” long and the one on the passenger’s side is about 1 ½” long.

            I was curious if there was a difference in the casting dates between these two castings so about a year ago I started recording casting dates for 1964 Tri-Power manifolds that I saw on cars, in parts collections, or on eBay. To date I recorded the casting dates and casting styles for 37 manifolds dated from September 24, 1963 (I243) to July 16, 1964 (G164). So far the earliest ribbed casting I know of is April 14, 1964 (D144). All  manifolds with casting dates prior to that are smooth (23 manifolds from I243 to D94).

            However, it’s not that simple because I have seen both smooth and ribbed castings made on April 14, 1964 (D144). I also found both smooth and ribbed castings bearing an April 30, 1964 (D304) casting date. All manifolds (a total of ten) after May 2, 1964 (E24) were ribbed. Based on these casting dates it looks like Pontiac cast both styles for much of April. After that they were all ribbed. If readers have information that is different from this I’d be very interested in hearing from you.

            It’s interesting that the bottom of the “smooth” manifold is, well, smooth (Figure 3), while the bottom of the “ribbed” manifold contains six more ribs (Figure 4). These ribs vary in length and run diagonally to the length of the manifold.

            I have don’t know why the castings were different but I have a hypothesis. It is possible that the ribs provided stiffening over the large expanse of smooth cast iron in areas vulnerable to cracking but I’m not aware of any failures in these areas that would necessitate such modifications based on my own experience with Pontiacs. Whatever the reason it is clear that Pontiac made two castings for the Tri-Power manifold in 1964 making restoration of GTOs, and other Tri-Power cars, a little more interesting. Which one do you have?

This article is Copyrighted^© 2006 by Jeff Lovich and may not be re-posted, stored electronically, or reprinted without the written permission of the author.

The ugly 1964 GTO Tri-Power throttle cable bracket

Jeff Lovich

Published in The Legend, October, 2006

            Pontiac engineering created many components that integrated form and function to the very edge of art, or beyond. Consider the factory headers manufactured for GTOs, Firebirds, and some big cars during the period from 1967-1974. Their design has elements that go far beyond mere function with curves that look more like modern sculpture than lowly exhaust manifolds. How about the elegant design of 1965-1968 Ram Air pans? These were clean stampings with a “bare essentials” look that evokes the minimalist and utilitarian simplicity of Scandinavian design. As another example, the 1964 wood-grained steering wheel was perhaps the most beautiful steering wheel ever put in an automobile. The rich hue of the wood-grain, four brushed metal spokes, and a handsome red-trimmed center cap went far beyond mere function. Steering wheels like this look just as good in a car as they do on a wall! Sound like the ranting of an overenthusiastic car buff? Maybe, but these are just a few examples of visually-appealing engineering and design that would resonate with most Pontiac enthusiasts. The combination of these elegant components created some fantastic cars that had far greater impact than the mere sum of their parts alone. However, there were some instances where engineering did a less than stellar job tailoring parts for our favorite Pontiacs.

            Consider the inelegant (read “ugly”) 1964 GTO Tri-Power throttle cable bracket (TCB) for cars with a manual transmission. All GTOs used stamped steel TCBs that were secured to the intake manifold and, in turn, secured the throttle cable in a position required to operate the throttle linkage. In 1964 all GTO TCBs attached to the driver’s side of the intake manifold using the two rear intake manifold to head bolts. From 1965 until the bitter end of GTOs the TCB was attached to the intake manifold with the same two bolts, but, in addition, there was a separate smaller bolt that secured it to the manifold even when the intake manifold to head bolts were removed.

            If you shop for intakes at swap meets you’ve no doubt noticed that 1964 and earlier Tri-Power manifolds rarely, if ever, come with the TCB. That’s because as soon as the manifold is removed from the car, the TCB is left hanging on the throttle cable and often forgotten. Later model TCBs remain attached to the intake by the extra bolt, unless deliberately removed.

            As a result of the design of the 1964 GTO Tri-Power TCB a large number of enthusiasts have never seen an original. Many of the cars I see at local, and even national events, are retrofitted with Tri-Powers that have four barrel or even two barrel TCBs. The former, in particular, fits very poorly on a Tri-Power manifold, and often requires spacers to align the throttle cable. In over 30 years of searching I couldn’t seem to find a correct Tri-Power TCB for my 1964 GTO. I was blessed to have found and owned a 421 Super Duty intake with carburetors, a 421 Super Duty crankshaft, an AFX Tempest aluminum front end, a complete WW Ram Air IV engine, mint Ram Air II exhaust manifolds, complete sets of NOS Tri-Power carburetors, NOS 1964 exhaust splitters, every factory GTO Ram Air induction system from 1965-1970, NOS aluminum break drums and other rarities, but I couldn’t find that blasted TCB! What’s the difference you might ask? Why not use a two barrel TCB?

            Pontiac used four different TCBs on V-8 A bodies (Tempest, LeMans, and GTO) in 1964. Two barrel cars were equipped with a TCB that was assigned part number 9775930 and is shown in Figure 1. Four barrel cars had a very different TCB (look at the location of the throttle spring attachment holes for example) that was assigned part number 9775928 (Figure 2). The story of Tri-Power manual transmission TCBs is where the shade tree engineering comes in. It turns out that the factory took two barrel TCBs cut them in half and then welded them back together with an intermediate piece of steel to obtain proper position (the top part that secured the throttle cable was welded forward of the original position by about 0.25 inches), relative to the carburetors. Thus, they are three piece assemblies, not a single uncut stamping as in two barrel and four barrel equivalents. Why Pontiac did this we may never know, but my theory is that it was easier to modify an existing part than to come up with a new stamping. In my experience with Pontiacs, this is a rare instance where backyard engineering crept into otherwise highly specialized development of components.

            Some of you may not believe this, and ask, “How do you know the TCBs you have weren’t cobbled together by some shade tree mechanic?” Well, after over 30 years of searching, I finally found an NOS TCB (part number 9777062) for a 1964 GTO with Tri-Power and manual transmission and it is shown in Figure 3 with its factory sticker and part number. About a year later, I found a second one that was used but in excellent condition, also shown in Figure 3. The interesting thing is that the component parts are welded on opposite sides in my two TCBs. Notice that the NOS item has the intermediate part welded on the driver’s side (when viewed from behind) of the lower part, while the used item has the intermediate part welded on the passenger’s side of the lower piece. I believe that this is evidence that someone set up a work area on the side where workers took two barrel TCBs, cut them in half, slapped them together with sometimes sloppy welds and little regard for position, and then cadmium plated them for Tri-Power applications. Final proof that Pontiac did this is shown in their own literature. If you look at the photo of the Tri-Power in the 1964 GTO dealer brochure with a magnifying glass, you can clearly see that the TCB was cut and welded with a big blob of metal pooled on the driver’s side of the assembly (Figure 4) The top part is also positioned a little forward by the process, just like the assemblies I have.

            The fourth TCB used on 1964 A bodies was the Tri-Power with automatic transmission version. It was assigned part number 9776281. To the best of my knowledge, I have never seen one of these. It is possible that the used version I have is one of these since the position of the weld is different from the NOS unit that is known to be correct for manual transmission applications by virtue of the part number sticker. However, I have no basis to support that theory. It’s easier to believe that the welders sometimes got the position wrong. If any of you have a totally original 1964 GTO with automatic transmission and Tri-Power it would be very interesting to know what your TCB looks like.

            As rare as 1964 GTO Tri-Power manual transmission TCBs are, they can easily be fabricated by cutting a two barrel TCB and welding it back together with an intermediate piece of metal shaped like a parallelogram. All of the reproduction TCBs I’ve seen for Tri-Powers are actually two barrel TCBs but they too can be cut and welded to look like originals. A two barrel TCB will work on a Tri-Power with no other modification but the throttle cable will be bent in a slightly awkward position.

            1964 GTO Tri-Power TCBs are not exactly engineering works of art, but I’m sure glad I found a couple after all those years of searching. I think I’ll hang my extra TCB on a wall in our house to admire along with the pictures my wife hung; or maybe not. 

This article is Copyrighted^© 2006 by Jeff Lovich and may not be re-posted, stored electronically, or reprinted without the written permission of the author.

Ram Air redux: little-known and oft

forgotten trivia about GTOs top engines

Jeff Lovich

Published in The Legend, February, 2007

            By now many excellent books and articles have been written documenting the history and specifications of Pontiac’s top dog Ram Air engines from 1965-1970. Rather than rehashing that history the objective of this article is to focus on information that is not widely known among GTO enthusiasts, or scattered in various sources.

1965        Factory Ram Air induction packages first debuted for use on 1965 GTOs with Tri-Power. However, the Ram Air induction system was not a regular production option installed by the factory, but rather was available over the counter as an accessory package (including pan, foam seal, replacement hood scoop and instructions). It could also be ordered alone without the extra scoop. As documented in the GTO Restoration Guide, the Ram Air pan was not available until August 17, 1965, extremely late in the model year. As such this pan was very limited in production. No one knows how many were produced and originals are very rare. This was the only Ram Air pan from 1965-1970 that had the outside edge or lip of the stamping turned down. All others had a narrow lip that turned up and helped hold the foam seal in place while it was glued on at the factory. Although metal reproductions were recently offered by the aftermarket, they are based on a 1966 stamping (see below) modified to accommodate the small middle carburetor used in 1965.

1966        The 1966 Tri-Power Ram Air pan, while superficially similar to the 1965 unit, had some significant differences beyond the fact that the middle carburetor hole was larger that year. As mentioned above, the lip on the edge of the pan curved up for the first time. In addition, there were three dimples stamped around the periphery of each carburetor hole to hold the original equipment air cleaner screens in place. The stamping included extra clearance for the gas filter that attached to the driver’s side of the front carburetor that year, and there were two drain holes in the rear of the pan instead of the single hole used in 1965. I wonder if some customers had their Ram Air pans fill up while driving in the rain, causing their engine to lock up during the warranty period. The pan was not as deep as the one used in 1965 either. According to the GTO Restoration Guide, the accessory package was released on January 31, 1966. This is surprising in light of the late release of the 1965 version. One would think that the 1966 equivalent would be offered by Pontiac earlier in the model year to increase sales. Although the pan could be ordered over the counter by owners of 1966 GTOs with Tri-Power, this was the first year that Pontiac offered buyers a special Ram Air engine as a regular production option that was internally different from the standard Tri-Power engine. The block code used in this package (available in February, 1966) was XS and the engine came with a special high performance camshaft, stiffer valve springs and special fuel fittings. According to Pete McCarthy, only 190 of these engines were produced by Pontiac and perhaps 185 made it into factory-assembled cars.

1967        This was the first year Ram Air was available on a four barrel engine. Surprisingly, this engine used a four blade fan not unlike those used on many low performance Pontiac engines. Cars with Ram Air engines also used the same steering box coupler as cars with tilt steering. The part numbers for the exhaust manifolds were of 1964-vintage but they were not used until 1967. See the July 2006 issue of The Legend for the story on the exhaust manifolds. Ram Air GTOs sold in California had a crankcase ventilation tube in a feeble attempt by engineering to evacuate crankcase fumes without an enclosed air cleaner. 49 state cars had a square rubber grommet that fit into the rear of the pan instead of the fitting for the ventilation tube.

1968        This was the first year for two Ram Air engine options in the GTO. The Ram Air I was the only one available until March 15, 1968 when the round port Ram Air II was introduced by Pontiac. All cars ordered after April 1, 1968 were equipped with the Ram Air II engine so there was a short period of overlap when, theoretically, one could order either engine. The Ram Air II was not a cheap option with a Manufacturers Suggested Retail Price of $473.94 according to Pontiac sales promotion literature to dealers dated May 16, 1968. The bulletin also listed horsepower for Ram Air II engines in the GTO as 366 hp @ 5,400 rpm and torque as 445 lb. ft. @ 3,800 rpm. As in the previous year, GTOs with Ram Air engines used a four blade fan. Amazingly, the air cleaner stud (five inches long) was the same part number used on 1964 GTOs with four barrel carburetors, and 1964 Tempests and LeMans’ with the 326 HO option!

1969        Again, two Ram Air options were offered this year, this time the Ram Air III and Ram Air IV. Early Ram Air III engines with manual transmissions (through engine serial number 709185) used the Ram Air I camshaft (1966-1968) part number 9785744. According to my recollection, this serial number carried through until sometime between December, 1968 and March, 1969 because Judges that I owned with the early cam were built or sold sometime in that time frame. However, I can find no factory literature to substantiate that claim. The front of the cam was stamped with the letter “H”. Later manual transmission engines (and all automatic transmission Ram Air IIIs) used the milder 1965-1966 Tri-Power cam part number 9779068 stamped with the letter “S”. The early H cams had choppy idles (advertised durations of 301^o intake, 313^o exhaust) and definitely attracted attention at the drive-in. I’ll never forget the sound of my 1969 Judges with early Ram Air IIIs back in the day. One now-famous Pontiac expert even accused me of putting a Ram Air IV cam in one when he heard me start the car after a club meeting.

1970    Although the 1970 and 1969 Ram Air pans looked the same, they had different part numbers. Ram Air III and Ram Air IV pans had different part numbers as well due to variations in ducting installed by the factory to provide warm air to the carburetor on startup. In all, there were four different part numbers and variations of what look like the same basic pans.