Looks like a 6467? Nice bike too.![]()
Looks more like a '65 to me. Bad ass none the less. The '64 is longer and the '66 is rounder.Looks like a 64
Had a 66, so no doubt about that. You're probably rightLooks more like a '65 to me. Bad ass none the less. The '64 is longer and the '66 is rounder.
You got it. Difficult to ID without a front or rear shot. Muncie and T10 were different tranies. The T10's came first.I had a 64 1/2 Cutlass 442. The difference between the 64 and 65 is the grill/headlights and rear mouldings and tail lights. The body is the same.
Really? I had no idea. That Hurst shifter sure was smooth though.You got it. Difficult to ID without a front or rear shot. Muncie and T10 were different tranies. The T10's came first.
Nice car
Yes they were.Really? I had no idea. That Hurst shifter sure was smooth though.
Still see some on the road today. They were very good riding cars and I could yank the front wheels off the ground in first and second gear.Some don't know but for years the Cutlass was the biggest selling car in America.
does not surprise me a bit after driving this oneSome don't know but for years the Cutlass was the biggest selling car in America.
I like it.
I used to have a '68 that I raced the crap out of. Up and down Blue Ridge in the good old days.
2.73 are definite freeway gears. I had mine over 140 a couple times.
Changed them out for 4.10's and went through all the gears in a 1/4 mile.
Of course gas was only what .50 a gallon in the '70's?