Correct, I think they were 8.15 x 15 cross-plies.

Dr Terry

8.15 x 15in tyres for 1967-8 Impala and Pontiac from the brochure.

1966 and before are 7.50 x 14 and 3.55 diff.

Factory Air-con only on 1968 it says nought about such in 1967.

Why the 327 starts from 230hp in 1966, 240hp in 1967 and 250hp in 1968.

Looking back in the days them Ford Galixies were just so much better car than GMH could offer.
A mate owned a 1967 Impala and another mate owned a 1968 Impala.

But look at what you could get from 1960 on, it's Ford Galaxie all the way that was the better car.

Look at the greatness of the 1965 Galaxie vs a XP Falcon there is no question that the gal is much more advanced better car, sure the ZA Fairlane was good in 1967 but it only had rear leaf springs. look at the HD what a bucket of and the GMH Impala and Pontiac with 2 speed auto and only the little 327 V8. when the Gal got option of the big 390 V8 with 3 sp auto.

The only thing that makes the Impala and Pontiac worthy is the 4 door Hardtops. now a USA type with big blocks and there advanced dash etc would of been something but what we got was nothing near as good.

Maybe we need a good old Holden and Ford debate. ha ha I love them.

Here is some more on that beautiful 1963 Mark1 427 engined Impala. An important name (Bill Mitchell) also crops up in the article that was important in the scheme of the development of our own Muscle Car, the GTS327.

https://www.streetmuscle...evrolet-z11-impala-427/

And more on another special early 60's Super Car. The name mentioned here will be important to you Castellan - Bunkie Knudsen. He is the sole reason behind the engine in the car that is most important in Australia to Ford fans - the Cleveland. He essentially copied the MarkIV Chevy Big Block heads when he left GM to head to Ford in the later 60's, and took a few Engineers with him. They developed the Cleveland engine.

https://www.streetmuscle...atalina-lightweight-421/

Edited by user Saturday, 10 November 2018 4:52:00 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Not much in the USA in those earlier 60's in GM Chevrolet got a TH400, only the really high power engines. The rest got Powerglides until the TH350 started to appear very late in the 60's. GMH always had the bigger Chevrolets alongside the Holden, and until the dawn of the 60's they were only 6cyl here. My old 'Pagewood built '57 Chevy only had 60,000 miles on it when I bought it in the 90's and it ran rings around a 1957 Holden in how it drove. It was dead stock original apart from radial tyres. My only criticism is with the non synchro first gear - it was a pain sometimes. Would have been a far better car though with a 283 4BBL engine and a Powerglide, but we never had that option here. GMH didn't stop building and selling the big boats until they got the HQ Statesman. GMH would never had sold a BBC car here in the 60's though.

I'm not into older GMH vehicles, I'm not interested in anything without a V8, although I do have some interest in HD-HR as they are basically the same car as a HK when you pull them apart and see how they were built. I wouldn't call the older Holdens rubbish though, they served their purpose well and outlasted and outsold any other product imported. When you really research the monumental effort and logistical undertaking it took in the 1940's right up until even the 1970's that it took to build mass produced vehicles totally from scratch in Australia that not only would sell, but were durable enough to survive on Australian roads in the 50's, you really start to appreciate it. Remember GMH not only built the cars, but built them across 5 local assembly plants in a Country approx. as big as the North American continent with only a fraction of the population. Plus assembled the cars as far away as Trinidad and South Africa, plus exported to Asia and Europe plus all over the Pacific. The cars can't have been that unfit for purpose! They were utilitarian though, not performance cars.

The old greys aren’t my cup of tea either, but they did their job. They were pretty much outdated by 1963 though.

That L30 327 was available from about 1965 in Impala in the USA and Canada. It wasn’t 275hp until it got the Quadrajet in 1967, before that it was 250hp I think. What is was in essence was flat top pistons, general purpose hydraulic cam, 1.94/1.5 fuelies and 4BBL carb. The L76 was the good engine in Impala in 1964, it was lumpy top forged pistons, solid cam, 2.02/1.6 fuelies and Carter carb. It morphed into the L79 in 1965 which had a higher performance hydraulic cam.
None of these could have powered an Aussie car in 1964-5 though as they were 10:1 to 11:1 engines and our fuel was good for maybe 9.5:1 max.

The GTS327 engine is identical to a 1968 L30 (275hp) other than the heads. The L73 is what we got here, and it was the standard 327 engine in 1968 US Impala (some models had 307 standard). It was also the highest volume V8 in Impala in the USA. The 275hp was optional. Both came with Powerglide if auto optioned but could be had with TH box if desired. Most were 3spd manual standard, even the 396 and 427 versions.

Edited by user Monday, 12 November 2018 2:03:05 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

I think you are looking at the past thru 'rose-coloured' glasses.

Yes, the old Greys were underpowered & yes, the 50s Holdens weren't that flash, but any other car anywhere near the money was so much worse. That's why they had 50% of the market in the late 50s. Their first 'real' competition was the Falcon & Valiant & that wasn't until the early 60s.

Look at the Aussie car market in the 40s & 50s, the FX's main opposition @ release was the Austin A40 !! The rest of the market was either underpowered Pommy stuff or large (read expensive) American iron. The closest Ford got was arguably the MK2 Zephyr, but it was heavy & again expensive. This made the Ford Aust. management reject it in favour of the XK Falcon, a good decision in hindsight.

Chevs, Pontiacs & Galaxies were over twice the price of a Holden & back then we weren't as affluent as we are today. Radios & heaters were considered 'luxury' items.

The Falcon 170 was no competition for the EH 179 (manual or auto) you needed the 200 'Super Pursuit' to out run the 179. Of course the Valiant 225 could eat both of them for breakfast, but again the Val was expensive. The base Valiant was the same price as an EH Premier & the Holden had a loyal customer base whereas Chrysler had to convince the buying public that the Val was a better proposition to the Royals etc. that was their main sales weapon up until then.

Dr Terry

The 179 was a good performer in automatic form as well. The manual was a bit more responsive than the old Hydramatic but 1/4 mile times weren't that much slower. My own low miler EH 149 Auto is a lot quicker than many manual trans cars built in that same era.

Mk III Zephyr release was July 1962, it was an expensive car compared to Holdens & Falcons.

They performed OK as long as you kept the rpm up with the 4-sp box, the 156 ci motor only had 98 bhp, compared to 101 for the Pursuit 170 & 115 bhp for the Red 179. They were also heavier than the Holden & Falcon.

The Zephyr's achilles heel was the McPherson strut front end, too weak for a large car. These weren't perfected until the Volvo 240, P76, Rover SD1 & VB Commodore of the mid to late 70s. They were OK in smaller cars like the Mk I & II Cortina, Escort & Capri.

Dr Terry