In 1971 I wasn’t even old enough to get a driver’s license but I bought a 1963 4-cylinder Tempest for $125. My brother, our dad and I rebuilt the engine and cleaned up the car. We needed a camshaft and couldn’t find one. I wrote a letter to Pontiac and they sent me one for free. They shipped it to me on a passenger bus! Had to go pick it up at the Greyhound station.
@@greyarea3804 nice! Mine was a 3 on the floor as well. The torque tube kept cracking near the access opening in the front. After the fourth time I had to pull it out and have it welded, I sold the car.
This story is metal: Imagine ANY company taking care of someone using their "used" product, today. Kudos to the parts manager at Pontiac bold enough to send a kid a free camshaft for a re-build. This is an American business model I can get behind.
That story has it all. That's the kind of Company response that builds a loyal customer base. In my mind's eye you bought a Bandit TA after graduation.
I recently pulled a 63 Tempest convertible out of a barn where it had been sitting for 50 years. Luckily it needs virtually no body work aside from a dent in the left quarter panel. I've rebuilt the 4 cylinder engine 100%, and I'm hoping that by fall it'll be moving under its own power for the first time in 5 decades.
Best of luck. They all need to be saved whenever possible, if only to remind us that 1.) Pontiac existed and 2.) GM was once an American company, not an importer of boring Chinese SUVs (a.k.a what today passes for "Buick.")
@@biffdelmonte4139 I’m sure you will enjoy it. After pulling out the torque tube for the fourth time to repair where it cracked, I sold mine. I recommend welding some plates on there to reinforce it!
@@cglaurer Sounds like the design needed a kind of motor mount bushing system at the torque tube instead of a direct bolt on connection to the engine. The motor torquing against the mostly inflexible torque tube would seem to be an obvious problem in the design stage. Also maybe a slip coupling in the fore section of the tube instead of the suggested buffer mounting, to replace the rigid mount, or maybe a combination of the two.
Allow me to expand on the transaxle. The automatic transmission was basically a mildly beefed up Corvair Powerglide. When the Corvair PG was designed, they made it so it could be driven from either the front or the rear. For 63, Pontiac beefed it up even more (to handle the 326 V8), and added a Park position. The differential was Pontiac's own design. It was more rugged, and offered more gear ratios than the Corvair. When Pontiac was building their 421 powered Tempests for drag racing, they put one 2 speed PG trans in front, and another PG behind the differential, complete with its own special casting, to create a 4 speed automatic. Manual transmissions for the Tempest were basically stock Corvair 3 or 4 speed transmissions. Final note: Pontiac was forced to purchase the aluminum 215 V8 from Buick or Olds, and therefore, it was an expensive option, which is why they put the 326 in for 63.
Where was the park position located on shifter for 63 models? Did it still have that lever on the dash? I never saw that, although I know my parents had a 61 Tempest and we always had to put a log under the rear wheel when parking on incline as parking brake was not sufficient.
My dad had a '63 wagon with a 326ci V8, floor mounted 3-speed manual trans and a 2-barrel carburetor. He used to let me shift the gears when he would drive it. I was in the fourth grade. I miss those days. He was the one that got me interested in cars. I miss him too.
Truly, nothing illustrates love more than a dad letting his son or daughter shift gears to introduce him/her to the driving experience. I did not have that experience, but some relatives did let me occasionally shift the automatic transmission from drive to reverse and back again. That was pretty exciting. (Stopping first, of course) 😂
My aunt & uncle had a '63 Tempest station wagon with the four-cylinder engine; they drove that car for a very long time as it was apparently economical for them. The reason for their ultra-intense penny pinching was that they wanted to save as much as they possibly could for retirement even though both worked in the public sector with defined-benefit pensions. Two things very fortuitous for both of them happened such that they were able to retire early with full benefits (my aunt was only 47!), and they toured the world at least twice with their savings. So that old Tempest proved to be quite beneficial for them in the long run after all.
@@fastinradfordablelove it man ! I had a VW Caddy in school the diesel it would run about 75 wide open but got 50 ish day in day out. And being a mechanical diesel I didn’t even need a battery. Hauled my dirt bike all over. Thanks for sharing brother that’s cool as F I wish I could find another one and do some kind of swap, whatever’s cheapest and available. ✌️🇺🇸
@@kimchipig I actually used mine in some autocross, it was so tourqy it did well in those small parking lot couses especially after some suspension upgrades and injection udjustments to make it a bit more snappy
Back in 1971 I helped my friend rebuild the 326 in his 1963 convertible Tempest with the 3-speed floor mounted shifter. You quickly learned not to have you hands anywhere near the shifter knob when starting or shutting down the engine because it made a violent side-to-side shaking motion that really hurt if it caught you on the knuckles. Some years later I was working at Classic Auto Restoration in Farmington, Michigan and found out that the CEO, Wally, previously worked at Pontiac in the 1960's as an engineer. Turned out he worked on the design of the "rope drive" and knew exactly why the shifter shook the way it did. The flexible steel drive shaft had a resonate frequency due to it being attached at the ends and free in-between. As Wally described it, at the right RPM, it would vibrate like a guitar string. He said that the shaft diameter was larger than necessary for the amount of engine torque but the initial tests with a smaller diameter failed because the resonate frequency was above engine idle speed and it destroyed itself. He went on to say that even the larger shaft still resonated but it only happened at start-up and shutdown when the RPM's passed through the critical frequency. And that's the reason the shifter shook. As a side note, my friend and I escaped unscathed from a rollover accident in the Tempest. He was attempting to pass another vehicle and the power of the freshly rebuilt 326 was too much for the tires, suspension and driver. Danny lost control and started fishtailing. The car got sideways and flipped over onto the convertible top. We slid down the road for what seemed like forever. I could feel the pavement sliding under the convertible top - no seat belt so I was laying on the upside down roof. Once we stopped sliding I punched out the plastic rear window and we both got out without a scratch. Don't recall what happened to the car. It was fun while it lasted.
WOW, that's quite a story man! Glad you survived the rollover and especially in a convertible! That's really interesting about the resonant frequency -- thanks for sharing.
I rolled my '63 too, but it was down to inexperience and a 3" height difference between pavement and gravel which tipped the sideways sliding car over when it hit. I had just repaired the seatbelts three weeks previously!! So I escaped unscathed. Fun fact: the independent rear suspension in the 1963 Tempest was the first thing GM ever designed with a computer.
My brother and I bought and restored a 62 Tempest convertible with the 215CU V8 about 10 years ago. We've had a great time showing it at car shows until he passed away last year. Very rare combination of convertible, V8 and automatic. Still have it.
@@raymond3803 At some point GM decided that the 215 was too small for what they were doing and the entire engine tooling was sold to Rover in the UK. They appeared in many English cars and an expanded/improved version is still used today.
@@junkmangeorge6363 Thank you. I assume Rover = Land Rover? Sprint Car Racing (Winged & Non-winged) is my auto sport of interest. In the 410 cu. inch class, with the exception of 2 Fords 2 Toyotas, and about 5 old Mopar. Every 410 sprint car in the US Canada Mexico Australia New Zeland & South Africa (Thousands of teams) run an aftermarket aluminum replica of the 1955 SBC. While every street rod enthusiast swear LS is superior to the SBC, the LS (in any version) does not exist in in Sprint Car Racing. The only reason NASCAR uses LS is because Chevy got NASCAR to mandate LS. There's not a sprint car team on earth who would use LS if you gave them the engine as a gift. On or about 2004, Chevy went to Ron Shaver (#1 sprint car engine builder at the time) with a blank check. *_Do whatever you have to do to make LS compete with SBC._* in performance. Two years, $ Millions in R&D, and about 8000 man hours later. 840 HP was the most Shaver could get out of a naturally aspirated methanol burning 410 cu inch LS. Every sprint car engine builder in the US & Australia was getting at least 900 HP from a 410 cu inch SBC. Today it's 950 HP from a 410 SBC. Sprint cars have the greatest power to weight ratio. 1,400 pounds w/driver 950 HP. In the sprint car world, an all-aluminum 410 Chevy LS is a boat anchor, at best. Ditch-stop material at worst. At almost 1/2 the size of a 410 SBC. This all aluminum 215 cu in would have made its way to the popular USAC Midget class. Second week of January the Midget Chilli bowl is ran indoors in Tulsa. And gains at least 350 entries each year.
@@raymond3803 Rover shared their version of the 215 Buick V-8 among a lot of English cars, their own cars, of course, but anything, from a Morgan to a Triumph got the V-8 in one model, or another. I think the only British manufacturers who didn't take the opportunity to run that V-8 were Bristol (who ran Chrysler V-8s) and Sunbeam (who ran Ford V-8s). Personally, when I was younger, I raced Chevrolet 302s........................
326 was a dependable engine with middle of the road performance . I had a 66 LeMans and a 67 GTO 6.6 … The GTO was faster but did have issues the Lemans never did .
@@pooddescrewch8718 We had the car for four years, and I don't think the engine ever gave us any trouble. I remember Dad working on the rear suspension. He mentioned "U-joints", so maybe it was something to do with the swing-axles. I think the 326 was just a 389 with a smaller bore. There is a story about how that engine actually displaced 336ci, but GM management decreed that no other division could have a small-block bigger than the Corvette's 327, so it was labelled as 326ci. I think a year or two later it was actually changed to correct the displacement. I don't know if it's true, but it's a good story.
@@jimf4492I wonder if that’s the engine Pontiac should have used to create a four cylinder. At 168ci it might have been a bit smoother and not a lot less powerful than the 194.
@@guylr7390 Well, it kind of was... The 326 was developed from the 389, but that was after the 4cyl. That might have been a smoother engine with a smaller displacement. After 1963, the next Tempest/Le mans was going to be a bigger car, and the 4cyl would be too small. I think there was a pushrod straight six, followed by their 6cyl OHC "Sprint" engine.
I owned a 1963 Le Mans convertible with the 326 and Powerglide. It had the floor shift with a T-handle on the front of a console. The previous owner was worried about a possible transmission issue because of an occasional squeak. I got it for $125 and replaced one of the transaxles with a $5 junkyard transaxle. Problem solved. I had it through two years in high school and two years in college. Good times.
Fell in love with the B-O-P-ettes, as they were called, when they first came out in '61. I was just a kid, but dreamed of having one. Eventually I did. My first car was a beat up old '63 F-85 that I bought for $350 (about ten times that in today's money) and eventually I acquired a beautiful '62 Skylark hardtop. (The Buicks were my favorites of the three but I loved them all and they were all quite different from each other.) Great memories. Wish I still had them both!
Thank you again for another interesting video on the 1961-1963 Tempest. You did neglect the fact that Pontiac dropped the aluminum V-8 for the 1963 model year. They brought out a 326 cid (actually 337 as you've mentioned in another video) V-8 based on the 389/421 castiron block. During my senior year (1965) in highschool, I was lucky enough to have a 1963 Temoest Custom Sports Coupe with the 2-bbl, 260 net hp V-326 with a 3-speed manual transmission. An awesome looking Cordovan Brown Metallic baby GTO that handled great due to its rear IRS. Dad helped me install an EMPI camber compensator monoleaf spring that was a version of what Chevrolet finally added to the 1964 model year Corvair to solve the swingaxle tuck-under that challenged Corvair drivers. I might add that all 1961-63 Tempests came with 15" wheels while the Buick Specials and Olds F-85s had 13 inch wheels. Never quite knew the reason for that. Thanks again for reminding people of this unique little automotive gem.
My father sold Pontiacs during this time period. I remember him picking me up at elementary school in one of these. All the while giving me [a 7 year old] the sales pitch about the engineering of the Tempest...lol... What I really remember was the awesomeness of his '62 Bonneville. Now THAT👈🏼 was a car!
@jimmyd3360 Thx man, appreciate it. Hah!... I don't know how many times how he told me how he out-ran a Maine State Trooper out of Lisbon Falls one night in that Bonneville. I still chuckle when I think of it...😊
A high school friend drove a 61 or 62 Tempest with the 4 cyl. engine and automatic. It was a hand-me-down, the year would have been 1971 or 1972. My recollection was that it was attractive, roomy and very comfortable. I also remember the engine vibrated noticeably at idle and it seemed very slow, underpowered and crude compared to (say) a contemporary Chevrolet Impala with a 289 V8. I was not aware of the unusual drive train at the time and we were not worried about economy as we were high school kids and gas went for 0.26 cents per gallon. In reality they are very cool and I would enjoy an opportunity to drive one today.
it's 1973, and Honda is about to release their CVCC-engined Civic. Speaking of innovation! It was such a big deal that Ford and Chrysler had both signed up to license the technology. But not GM. In fact, here's what the CEO of GM, Richard Gerstenberg, said of Honda's technology: "Well, I have looked at this design, and while it might work on some little toy motorcycle engine…I see no potential for it on one of our GM car engines." 😂
This statement got back to Soichiro Honda. He bought a 1973 Chevy Impala with a 5.7L V8 and had it air-freighted to Japan. He instructed his engineers to design and build a CVCC system for the GM V8. They replaced the intake manifold, cylinder heads, and carburetor of the engine so that it used Honda's CVCC technology. He then had it flown back to Ann Arbor, where it was tested by the EPA. The system Gerstenberg had derided as only suitable for "some little toy" engine allowed the 5.7L V8 to pass the new EPA emissions requirements without a catalytic converter. Horsepower remained at 160 HP, and some tests even showed a slight fuel economy improvement. NOx emissions were still higher than a catalyst-equipped car, but even so, the CVCC V8 was far cleaner burning than most engines of the timr and easily passed the EPA's requirements.
I was in the fifth grade, around 1970, when my dad told me about this design. I had to know everything about it so I went to our local library and dug up the initial road tests in the car buff magazines on microfilm. This car always intrigued me, and my research let me predict the punchline on "My Cousin Vinny" years later.
So much wrong with the automotive expert's testimony. 1963 Pontiac Tempest wheelbase was 112inches.1964 Buick Skylark wheelbase was 115 inches. The rear suspension on the Tempest was a swingaxle or semi- independent suspension. As the wheels traveled up and down, they did NOT stay flat and even, they traveled in an arc. So that when the suspension was fully compressed the top of the wheel was angled in and when at the lowest point of available travel, the top of the wheel was angled out. The axles only had a universal joint in near the transaxle and not one out near the wheel. That is the reason the wheel traveled in an arc. If you put a Tempest up on a lift, the rear wheels fully drop in suspension travel and will be almost at a 30- degree angle. I worked in an auto repair facility at the time and saw many Tempests on a lift.
@@scrambler69-xk3kv and it is because of this arc that the risk of rollover was accentuated . But as you all know Corvair suffered this similar fate until Knudsen came over from Pontiac to fix the problem in 1962. 61-62 Pontiac Tempest eliminated most of the incident problems by making the Tempest spring rates stiffer/adding a compensator to the transaxle and changing the wheel size. All GM compacts- Corvair, Olds F-85, Buick Special, and Ford with Falcon, Mercury comet, and Chrysler with the Plymouth Valiant use 13" wheels. Pontiac was the only compact to use the 15" wheel and the reason is the the 15" wheel decreases the arc the wheel has to travel and the incident of tucking never shows up in the arc. Ever try to figure out why VW's used to come with 16" wheels???? Porsche knew the problem-that is why the originals are 16". Chevrolet decided to eliminate the problem altogether in 1965 by going the Tempest route with double jointed axles which VW also did on the 68
Yes, I've had several Scouts. The first was with a 152 cubic inch (half of a 304) then a 196 (half of a 392) and a new Scout II with a 304, no, not half of a 608. They also had a 345, but never heard of it getting 'cut' in half. Does anybody know? Thanks.
@@sebastian0107 wasn't the first Chevy II offered with a base 4 cylinder that was half a 283? Few people bought that too, opting for the six or V8 instead.
@sebastian0107 4 cylinders, bigger displacement ones in particular have poor balance inherently. Especially compared to say a V8. Hence, balance shafts
@@chickenfishhybrid44 Yes, they make all the difference; but this one, the Chevy 2 and the Iron Duke didn't have one, if I'm correct. I do remember how smooth the 2.0 Mitsubishi's ran in the late 70's; practically like an L6, but balance shafts are a complicated way to mitigate an inherited problem.
My unce had one of these cars, a convertible with the 4barrel and 4speed trans. He got it used while in HS. Something went wrong with the trans and the Pontiac dealer and other shops had never seen one and told him the car was never made by the factory. There was a guy in the neighborhood that fixed it in his home garage. Then a Pontiac dealer contacted him and told him it was a prototype that never should have been sold. Now I know the truth about it, thank you for this great video on the car. My uncle caled it a triple 4. 4 barrel, 4 speed 4 cylinder, Til the day he died he said it was his favorite car.
My mom had a 62 tempest Le Mans convertible with the 4 cylinder. I was 12 years old when she drove that car, and growing up with the Connecticut winters, one fact that was remarkable about that car was its ability to drive in the snow. Dad had a 60 chevy Impala, but when it snowed he took the tempest to work. that car could cut a path through 8" of snow with no problem. It just left two groves where the tires rhode and an indentation for the body rub. another fact I remember is it had a thin sheet metal valance under the chrome bumper that would get bent in from driving in the deep snow. In the spring Dad would lay in the driveway and pull it back into shape. Alas the car succombed to rust and corrosion due to all the winter driving.
Another great video from an articulate and creative Detroit insider! I never knew exactly how that "rope" driveshaft worked relative to the torque converter. It's amazing to think how inventive GM could be in those days. Thanks, Adam.
One really remarkable thing about the range of engines for this car was that the slant 4, V6 and V8 were all almost the same displacement, despite their radically different running characteristics.
Hi Adam, good video! I am 64 years old, and I was an automobile mechanic moat of my life, including working at a transmission shop. Thank you for explaining the difference between a compact car vs. a senior compact car. Most people do not realize the difference. The Chevrolet Corvair, (GM Z-Body) and Chevrolet Chevy II - Nova, (GM X-Body) where GMs compact cars, as was the Ford Falcon, Fords compact car. The early Pontiac Tempest - LeMans, early Oldsmobile F-85 - Cutlass and the early Buick Special - Skylark, (GM Y-Body) where all senior compact cars that did share sheet metal, glass and mechanical parts with each other. The GM senior compact(s) did not become full mid-size (GM A-Body) until 1964 along with the Chevrolet Chevelle. Ford did the same thing. Fords first senior compact car was the Mercury Comet, after that the Ford Fairlane. The Comet and Fairlane where not be full mid-size cars until 1966. You mentioned that the luggage trunk capacity in this senior compact was larger than a mid-size Chevrolet Malibu or a Toyota Camry trunk space? That is because this early 1960s senior compact car(s) had a bigger car than todays mid-size cars. For an example, the mid-size 1970 Chevrolet Chevrolet Malibu is almost two times that of the size as a current time mid size Malibu. Back in the 1960s to the mid 1970s, the current Chevrolet Malibu and the Toyota Camry would be classified as a compact car. Most young people have no idea what a 1960s to 1970s full-size car is. The early senior compact Pontiac Tempest and LeMans's used a transaxle and rear suspension that was 90% the same as the compact Chevrolet Corvair. The Pontiac Tempest (2 speed only with automatic) was called the Tempest Torque Tube Automatic Transmission. It was much the same as the Chevrolet Corvair (2 speed only with automatic) Corvair Powerglide, (not to be confused with the Chevrolet aluminum case rear wheel drive 2 speed automatic). Both the Tempest Torque and the Corvair Powerglide air cooled transaxle(s) where air cooled by means of a continuously rotating torque converter with a stamped steel cooling shroud that was spot welded to the exterior of the converter. Please reply. Dave...
Dave I have a question did that so-called rope drive have idler bearing on it or was it left to flop around inside the torque tube and was this a unibody car?
@@jeffoverturf4138 I have never serviced a Tempest Torque Tube flexible driveshaft. In the mean time, I would say the idler bearing that your referring to is worn out. Their are machine shops that can produce custom maid bearings. I would say contact an early Pontiac-Tempest car club, for more information. Please keep me posted. Dave...
@@jeffoverturf4138 The unibody construction of the vehicle is entirely separate from the torque tube system. I never serviced a torque tube, but in the mean time, I would say the bearing is worn out. I would say contact a Pontiac Tempest car club for a correction for the issue. In the mean time, their are machine fabrication shops that will produce custom maid bearings. Please keep me posted. Dave...
@@daveridgeway2639 Ok, couple of notes here...1. this was not a unibody car. it had a full frame. 2. there were 2 or 3 bearings in the torque tube. the shaft had a coating on it that kept it from rusting. The bearings might go bad, wear off the coating, quickly deteriorating the drive shaft, and it would break. Otherwise a cool design.
@@ccgrider1014 What I meant was that it car had a unibody shell, bolted to the chassis, (the suspension and powertrain for that matter) kind of like a subframe. GM senior compact(s) did not a full "X" frame and nor a full "perimeter" frame, until 1964 when the GM senior compact(s) became a full mid-size with an full "perimeter" frame. Dave...
If you thought that half of a 389 was awesome, you should've seen the 12 1963 cars (6 LeMans Coupes & 6 Tempest Wagons) that Pontiac built with 405 hp 421 V-8s! Quite awesome on the dragstrips (ex., Arnie "The Farmer" Beswick) and one that dominated the Daytona 500 one year!
My first car in 1969 was a Pontiac Tempest LeMans 326. Had 2 speed transmission. 15 inch wheels. Very fast car. Mine was fully loaded with air conditioning and tinted indows. It all worked well. The styling was amazing for its time. Loved it.
I bought a '70 Pontiac Tempest LeMans station wagon new in 1973 (New old stock) for not very much money, because of the way it was ordered. 400 ram air V motor (and hood), 4 speed manual, 4:10 posi. No PS, PB, air, radio, or any other options.
I have always heard of rope drives, and I thought it was a cable linking the engine and the transmission Your explanation that it was more like a torsion bar clears this up.
I was seven years old when the 1961 Tempest came out, but I remember it well, because it was a common source of conversation among both boys and grown men. Nobody could fathom why, in the age of ever-larger V-8s, ANYBODY would want a 4 cylinder car.
Had a 63 tempest when I was in college in the late 1960's. It was a convertible in dark blue with a with a white vinal top and white interior. It had the 326 V-8 and a 3 speed manual, on the floor. Loved that car. Did have to get the drive shaft replaced once. I might have popped the clutch a few times. It was a chick magnet.
My Father worked on this Car back before they were fully developed and ready for production, my Father had a handful of Diamond Lapel pins given one for every idea used in the car! He was the one who put forth the idea of half a V8, I understand he heard about a bad batch of V8 blocks so he said hey let's build a 4-cylinder and it vibrated so badly, that's why it had the Rope Shaft, which was in the day called Wire Rope because it was woven Cable. He loved the transaxle because of better weight distribution. He had a buddy have heavier springs on one so it'd handle better with near 50/50 bias, with full.gas tank lol
Our family had one. Nice car with hardly any traditional rear wheel drive driveline hump in the passenger compartment. Rear transaxle, still a good idea for front engine cars in 2024. Wish we still had it.
These are great looking cars, and it is amaxing to me how much cars changed in look in only 4 years. Astounding to think that only 4 years separated this from the '57 Chevy, for example. They look like they should be 20 years apart.
If GM came out with a car today that looked like this, it would sell like hotcakes versus how everything wants to look like a Kia, a BMW, a Camry, or a Cadillac and they all kinda look the same. Modern cars aren't necessarily ugly.. but none of 'em have class like the Tempest did. Or a whole bunch of other '60s GM and Ford cars. And even some Mopars ;-)
My grandmother had a 63, and I remember the enormous trunk, the flat front floor, and the interior room....quite large compared to other cars in the late 60s...hers was obtained used in 67 or 68 IIRC. I wondered at the slant four up front. I remember checking the transaxle fluid by pulling up a mat and a cover, and pulling a dip stick. The auto trans had a neat little shift lever on the dash, though that was fun after growing up with three-on-a-tree and floor shifters. I was a little too young to drive it, but found it fun to ride in, and it handled pretty well...went around corners a lot flatter than the conventional cars with a lot of body roll.
I worked for Harry Ferguson Research in the early 69s and GM were interested in 4wd. One of these were was converted to 4wd. Everybody at HFR marvelled at this car. The rear gearbox layout was used later by Alfa Romeo and Porsche, but was never as good as this. The drive train was ingenious and worked beautifully. The handling and ride was good and the rear suspension was not a simple swing axle. It da an extremely good layout similar to a Watts linkage which effectively limited tyre scrub. This was a very impressive car overall.
Truly an odd car.. My folks bought a new yellow '62 tempest with a V8 and the floor shifter in Monterey CA and "As my dad remembers it at 98 years old" it was a four speed manual, three days later the dealer showed up at our door to take the car back as they sold it to us by mistake. We received a different car with the V8 however not the same transmission and later that week we saw "A like car" practicing on the road course track at Laguna Seca raceway, "Possibly the same car." performing quite well against the Porsche 356 and Alpha Romeo's during practice. (Yes the original track was built in 1958)
My dad bought a '61 Tempest wagon with a 4 speed trans. It suffered from some chatter problems with the clutch up front and puny driveshaft but it was a fun car to drive, specially for a young teen.
A friend of mine had a 63 Tempest with the 4 banger and he would rev the engine wide open then dump it into drive many times, the poor car rusted out but the driveline never gave up. Weird but superior engineering!
I revved our 63 to about 3000rpm ONE time, threw it in low gear and WHAMO!! snapped the driver side axle at the u-joint...I explained to my dad that it was the rough road...
Not sure about that. In their Ed Cole/DeLorean-Era they tried out a whole bunch of innovations: Corvair, OHC 'Sprint' L6, Tempest, etc. None of them really catched on. The conventional cars just sold way better, until CAFE. Then they were suddenly forced to be TO inventive ...
I picked up a 1962 tempest LeMans several years ago at a farm auction. It's a 2 door, 4 cylinder, 4 barrel, 4 speed with bucket seats, all factory. Neat car, I really love the looks of it. Haven't gotten around to getting it back on the road yet however.
I had a 63 lemans with this transmission. A true barn find selling firewood. Broke the diff on a rock in our driveway. Replaced the automatic with a 3 speed manual from a scape yard. Bolted right in, no cutting or any modifications. A 326 with a floor mounted 3 speed at 18, sure wish I still had that car.
When I was in high school I had a 61 Tempest with the 4 cylinder engine and 4 barrel carb. I always referred to the driveshaft as a spring like a speedometer cable. Wish I still had it. I had a lot of fun in that car.
A 1963 Tempest was the first car I remember riding in. It was a manual three on the tree. In 1967 we drove it from Ohio to Arizona on vacation. The funny thing about remembering this trip is that I wasn’t even three years old yet, but somehow I remember it.
I am 73 years old and this is the first time I learned that a car was made during my young years that had such an unusual drivetrain and transmission arrangement. Now I know that the 1961 -1963 Pontiac Tempest had this unique drivetrain and transmission arrangement. During my young years I was aware of the typical engine in front, the transmission mounted to the back of the engine and a rear wheels differential. The other arrangement I was aware of was the Volkswagen Beetle arrangement with the engine in the rear.
Might be interested to learn many Corvettes use a rear mounted transmission although it's solidly connected to the engine via what they call a torque tube, instead of this rope drive
Another front engine rear transmission car is the Alfa Romeo Alfetta series, starting in 1974 though 1986. This has the clutch in the rear so the tailshaft is spinning as long as the motor is running. That tailshaft has 3 rubber donuts that can be high maintenance if the car is driven hard.
My first car at 17 (July 1968) was a 2 door, Trophy 4, automatic with bucket seats! A cousin had a 389 Catalina that he raced. Bored my block and fitted it to 389 hi-po parts. It lasted 2 years until I threw a rod & piston through the hood. Dropped the pan , welded the hole in the block shut and drove on 3 cylinders for another 4 months!
I grew up in a '63 Tempest. I've owned and rebuilt all three years, even hot rodding the four with a hotter cam, super duty rods, factory four barrel intake. That wagon had a lof of power for a four banger, and it almost never had to downshift into low because it had so much torque. It was a great car.
My parents bought a white ‘61 Tempest with the Trophy Four engine and automatic transmission as a car for my mother and older siblings. The shift lever was uniquely positioned on the front of the instrument panel and was about 5” long. And yes, that motor vibrated a lot, especially at idle at a traffic light with the car in drive. Great memories.
Very interesting! I would imagine that the Tempest was a pretty good snow car, with the added weight of the rear mounted transmission on the drive wheels! Thank you.
It was a fantastic snow car! My '61 had no trouble showing the Subarus of the day (late '80s-mid '90s) taillights when the snow got over 8" deep, which it did back in SLC of old.
Thanks for the learning! I knew it was posi-traction from "My Cousin Vinny", but I'd never heard of the "rope shaft with the tranny in the rear" deal before. It makes perfect sense (right after it's been explained to you). Thanks!
Many years ago I worked at a gas station. One day a friend of the owner came in and complained that after he ran over a dear in the road his Porsche no longer had "passing gear". He brought it in one day and asked me to put it on the lift. I did so. After tracing the gas pedal cable through the firewall then down under the car I lifted it higher. I then traced the same cable to the back of the car where a clip should have held the cable onto a linkage on the transaxle. The clip was gone. While I was fabricating a makeshift clamp to hold the cable in place the owner of the station came in and the fun rivalry between these friend began. Both of them were under the front of the car looking at the oil pan commenting on the unusually small (ahem) transmission. "No universal joints on the drive shaft??"
The “swing axle” was problematic for two reasons. 1, the rear wheels, mounted directly to the swing arms would lose contact patch on heavy braking and cornering. Also the bias ply tires of the time were crap.
Un-safe, B.S. slinging Ralph Nader's B.S. was used just like Hitler's B.S. Reichstag fire to frighten fools into having Gov. agencies come & "save" us from the evil car makers!
The transformation of my Tempest due to modern day gas shocks all around, and a set of 205-70R15 BF Goodrich Touring T/As was nothing short of phenomenal! The car came to me with VW Beetle size 165R15s, which people put on due to the narrow steel rims. But those tires were inadequate and handling was frightening. The T/As made that car drive like a modern rig (this was in 1990).
Good point. The 61-62 used basically Corvair parts, and were known for their evil handling on occasion. The 63 still was on swing axles, but they were longer, and had the totally different control arms that you mention. The handling was much improved, but still could be tricky. If GM had adapted the Corvette/65 Corvair rear suspension, it might have been a great handling car.
Another interesting video Adam.Your automotive knowledge knows no bounds.One of my favorite channels. Keep up the great work.As always cheers from Eulethra.
We had a 61 Tempest station wagon with the 4 barrel carburetor. I drove it to college in 1970 but by then the body was rusted out and the motor bearings were gone. But it made it over 100k miles, not bad for that time period.
Very cool video, thanks Adam. Imagine if GM had kept or bought back the aluminum V-8 engine how much better it might’ve been in the late 70s early 80s then some of what they came up with like the HT 4100 for example
The HT4100 was in a thousand pounds heavier car than a 215 in a Tempest. Early versions suffered from the same soft cam and lifter issues as a wide variety of other period GM (and other makes too) junk, but later 4.1/4.5/4.9 was a solid engine. I have one in a '94 DeVille and unlike the head bolt eating Northstar, it's still on its original head gaskets-30 years later.
I have a 1931 Franklin Airman sedan. 6 cylinder aircooled. Engineers designed so that the squirrel cage in the front of the motor moved more air at idle then at 45 mph. Rock and rattle oiling to the upper valve train sitting in a valve cage on top of a cylinder jug. Just like an aircraft engine. Matter of fact Charles Lindberg loved aircooled Franklins for this very reason. You can never overheat these cars.Made to run in the 250 degree range with low viscosity oil and in 1931, rated at 105 HP. Valve cages have large felt pads over each rocker which get hand oiled every 300-350 miles. The engine heat makes an oil "fog" from these saturated felt pads. Valve cage covers just snap off.
You may want to consider looking at the "3 on a tree" manual transmissions. I had a '72 Pontiac Ventura with a six cylinder. It really had good performance, but shifting gears using something that looked like a turn signal arm was strange. Love your channel!
This is an awesome video! GM knew their Corvair design was BAD. So they amortized the design by putting the engine at the front and the transmission at the rear and used the "rope drive" Porsche did this twice, with the 924 and the 928, but they did it differently. GM put the engine drive through the center of the transmission on the Tempest to drive the transmission from the REAR, where a Corvair engine would normally be mounted. This required a flexed drive shaft, which is just plain WEIRD. Porsche used this torque tube system on their 928 and 924 cars, but I'm a 928 historian and expert and I am told they bought a Tempest and took it to Germany before they designed these two cars. They took it apart and realized that while it worked, it was completely a cost cutting measure. The 924 was actually an engineering project for Volkswagen, a small sporty coupe to be called "Scirocco". It used a 2.0 liter VW LT van engine at the front with a torque tube that always spun, connected to an Audi FWD transmission mounted at the rear, and the whole car would use as many VW/Audi parts as necessary. There was a change in management at Volkswagen, and the project with Porsche was shed. The Scirocco became a Golf with a lower body, and the car that Porsche had developed for Volkswagen was purchased back and became the Porsche 924, and eventually the 944 and 968. The 928 was a bespoke design which used no other parts, and you can see it with the V8 engine and the fact that the rear transmission is in front of the final drive. I drove daily an '85 928S2 5 speed, a gray market car from Austria, for 19 years. That thing was WAY faster than a contemporary '85 Corvette. And the handling was night and day better due to the perfect chassis balance.
German engineering was pretty complete as they were supposed to last a while. I worked for a VW dealer in 1969, we had one of the Tempests traded in on a Bug. It did appear a bit less impressive that VW Products at the time. Finding any shop who was equipped to repair the problems associated with the unique engineering issues, of the Tempest was what appeared to be the downfall of most of them. Falcons are the big selling Compact car in the USA. I still have a couple Rancheros in the yard. You can drop a 302 in them and drive away. I do understand the attraction of Porsche, they tried hard to compete in the 1970's. Ford simply was the Car maker who covered the Nation with Falcons. Parts and Mechanical assistance were abundant.
As I recall, the 944 was even more like these Tempests in that they too had the half V-8 slant four as well as torque tube and rear transaxle. (We too, imported a 928S grey-market.)
@@randyfitz8310 True. The 944 engine was essentially the passenger side bank of the M28 V8. The difference in the chassis is that the 928 has it's clutch just behind the engine while the 944 has it attached to the rear mounted transmission. This is because the 928 transmission is used only on this car and is ahead of the rear axle, while the 944 transmission is a FWD Audi transmission mounted at the rear, with most of the gearbox behind the rear axle.
944 turbo's were much better handling than the porky 928's, and the The Z51 C4 handled so bad pulled .95 G's (Porsche didn't get their for probably 20+ years) that it destroyed the the 944 Turbo's for half a decade in the racing. In fact after a year or two embarrassing Porsche, the Corvettes had to add 200+LB's so Porsche wouldn't further embarrass Porsche. The Corvair handled so bad that they dominated many SCCA racing classes for decades, and at least for 4+ decades. Otherwise much of your opinions and info are very interesting.
@@markr5132 So what year of Chevette (oops, my bad...) Saturn (damn! Again, sorry...Why do I keep having these Freudian slips?) do you own, corvette fanboy? My '85 S2 5 speed turned 13 second quarters with minimal mods. There was not one single factory C4 that could beat it, and the "Weissach" rear axle allowed you to enter corners at stupid speeds and then NOT spin out when you hit the brakes. You can quote magazine article specifications [Oh, of course car magazines are accurate! It's not like they sell advertising space to GM or anything....] all you want, 928's and 944's kill sloppy nose-heavy corvettes all day long. 928 vs 951? That could be a discussion, but Porsche really didn't many 951's. -The average corvette owner has gray hair and has never had the engine past 3000 RPM. The average 928 owner has gray hair, but probably installed the clutch himself and races the car at PCA drivers education events. OH you better believe he makes use of that 6750 RPM rev limiter! Now, run along and enjoy your Fiero (See? Freud again....) and make sure you move into the right lane when I come up behind you please. Have a nice day!
I think what drove the development of the Tempest, Corvair. Chevy 2, Falcon, and other compacts read a less severe fuel crisis than the 70s one, and this could have been a valuable learning experience for Detroit to properly engineer small, light, efficient vehicles ahead of the 70s. Unfortunately, they dropped this Tempest quickly. the small Chevy 2, and the small Falcon platform too soon, yet the Corvair actually persevered thru 1969. The Vega came only 2 years later, woefully unprepared for the market.
Ironic that the future leader of the US Green Party was the same guy that condemned the compact first gen Corvair with his book, 'Unsafe at any Speed". I believe the book came out around the same time that GM addressed many of the issues with the release of the second gen Corvair. It seems like the book killed off some of the innovative spirit at GM.
@@martinliehs2513 The corvair, the beetle, the pontiac tempest, and any other of their ilk, had the same problem...single joint rear axles...fixed with double joint rear axles and matching suspension. If I remember correctly, that started about 1967.
In '63 they brought the LeMans. Same basic car as the Tempest with completely different front and rear treatment. The 194/5 Trophy four was kicked up in power to 166 hp. That engine was listed as a super duty!. I own one and it gets up and goes. It's a fun handling car, perfectly balanced front to rear.
I had a 63 Tempest with the 326 V8. In a straight line I could keep up with a 68 model 383Dodge Charger. The problem was going around a corner if you floored it the rear wheels would fold up. The transmission was basically a power-glide so indestructible.
Wow, that really is an interesting setup. I'd never heard of any of this mentioned until now. Thanks for taking the time to share this stuff. You pointing out that the "rope" driveline didn't need to be so robust due to the torque converter being at the rear and not having multiplied the torque yet was one of those "aha!" moments that helped clear up a lot for me.
The problem with the rope drive was the driveshaft seals. I bought a used '63 LeMans (formerly the Tempest LeMans) with the 326 and TempesTorque. It was a gorgeous car and I loved it. BUT, I had to sell it after having to replace the engine seal TWICE and the transaxle seal THREE times. These were expensive repairs, and I gave up. This was all within maybe 2 years of owning it. I can only assume that the flexibility of the driveshaft was the culprit, making it hard to seal. Also, the bearing was unavailable and no proper crossover info was available. I was never 100% sure I was buying the correct bearing. I just had to match it by measurements. I could write a book on the mechanical misadventures of owning that car for the short time I did. Sexiest car I ever bought, but what a PITA.
The reason for the air cooled torque converter was that the water cooling system was at the other end of the car, so there was no way to add a trans cooler to the radiator without running long lines back to front. Corvair had a similar problem because it didn't have a water cooling system at all. The Corvair also has an air cooled torque converter, however it's much less exposed than on the Tempest.
In '68, taking my 3nd year auto mechanics course as a senior, I got a different instructor. He assigned me to replace the clutch on a 63 Tempest for my first job that year. I knew about the transaxle before I started. I had it all torn apart, when the instructor kept insisting that I pull the transmission, he wanted to see that transmission on the FLOOR! NOW! I kept telling him that it didn't have to, yet he kept insisting! I finished the job, the guy didn't ever look at the transmission as he wouldn't get under the car. He wound up kicking me out of class for "insolence". It would have more correct to say "disgust". Finished that year with my first Auto mechanic teacher.
I owned a 1962 with the 4 cylinder engine. When I got it the transmission was pulled out and the parts were in the trunk I took it to a transmission shop and they told me there was quite a few major parts missing and they couldn't rebuild it. Long story short I ended up setting the car down on a 1980 Malibu frame because the wheel base was extremely close. I put a 400ci engine down in it and a built 400 turbo transmission. Talk about a fast fun car. But like alot of us guys I had to get rid of it because my first child came and money got tight
Dad bought a '63 Tempest Safari wagon in August '63. I think the 326 V-8 's power surprised him. It had that funky toggle shifter. When I found out Arnie Beswick raced one of these, I fell in love with it. Too young to buy it though.
Yes. Arnie "The Farmer" Beswick did drag race his well-modified Safari wagon. I believe he had the BIG Pontiac V-8 under the hood. I remember watching him launch that car with the front wheels barely on the ground. In 2010 I went to the World Wheelie Contest at the Byron, IL, Dragstrip where wheel stand cars had even the rear wheels come off the ground. Arnie, who was not young, had his Pontiac Pro-Stock car there, not a tempest but never got more than 60 ft. because every time he launched the car would backfire and launch a big ball of flame out of the hood scoop. After he did it twice, on his 3rd attempt I was ready with my camera and got the fireball. I got to talk with him for 20 minutes or so simply because I mentioned watching him run at Alton Dragstrip. Chris "The Greek" Kramesines who ran the first 200 mph 1/4 mile at Alton. Of course, Don Garlits claimed the same. The Greek was still running Top Fuel Dragsters into his 90s (even though he would never state his real age experts pegged him in his 90s). The Tempest wagon was chosen by Beswick because the wagon had more weight over the rear wheels. I have been blessed in the fact that I have been able to talk to some of the greats, Art Arfons, Don Garlets, Don Schumacher, John Force, Don Prudhomme, Raymond Beadle, Austin Coil, et al. Yes, I am a motorhead who is not afraid to step up and talk to those guys. Mentioning seeing them or reading about their start in Drag Racing usually opened the door.
My dad worked on these when I was young. A customer had a 63 with a 326 and a 4 speed manual and drag raced it. He broke the rope shaft several times and my dad and I would replace it. Some people would paint pinwheel stripes on their converter so you could see it spin behind the car.
I`m prepared! Have our Thoroughbreds for backup transport. Have had to use them a couple of times when all the trucks had something wrong with them & needed parts to have the mechanical ones operational! 😃
My first car was a '65 Corvair. Those transmissions (Gotta be careful with the short version, these days.) probably were stock Corvair units. Same design. The manuals were the same. I put a Tempest transmission in my Corvair and it was perfect. The unique thing is the output shaft is hollow and the input/drive shaft runs through it.
The Tempest version was a little beefier, with more clutch plates and stronger struts/bands. It also had a bigger differential in it, of Pontiac's own design.
My buddy has a 62 tempest gasser, with a 6-71 blown 421 Pontiac motor, using all speed parts from Mickey Thompson from the 60’s, and a narrowed 57 olds rearend.. His car started off completely stock like these with the 4cyl and the transaxle
Loved that first gear whine in my 1963 3-speed 326 V-8. I heard that Pontiac blamed the whine for that non-synchro 1st gear and "those damn Chevrolet gears "
Looks to me like it has an oversized drive pulley, maybe an "underdrive" pulley so it's spinning slower than the engine and less load on the engine? I could be wrong but I think they also made lower-compression versions of this compressor, I think the Vega with factory AC was even fitted with this compressor!
The late years of the 4 cylinder engine got a super heavy duty timing chain. It can be identified by having "X"'s between the chain links. Republic auto parks used to sell an exact replacement chain as part number "P-355X", but I don't see it listed anymore. P-360 is the standard V8 timing chain. Some older auto parts stores still have the P-355X chain in stock though and I use it in V8's, as they are the same size.
This was a feature of American auto design I knew nothing about. Most unusual. I would not have expected the linking component in that system, being as slender as it was, to remain in production for as long as it did (3 years) and you do mention the reliability issues. The photo with the empty shoes (?) is very odd and something I have never seen before as well as the plan view of passenger accommodation showing six remarkably fit and trim *adults* with plenty of room between them. Thank you for this entry.
It was the 1960s. Dexedrine was over the counter legal and everyone smoked and there was no high fructose corn syrup. I had several Tempests, and I drove 'em like I stole 'em, and never had any trouble with the rope drive.
Great video, and a VERY sexy car by anyone's measure. Im in the UK and my father had a Rover 3.5L EFI Vitesse(1981) and that engine pulled like a train..... 155hp from half a V8, well that's some achievement! There was some fantastic and creative engineering which appeared in the first new generation of peeps post WWII. 👍
It's a damned shame Pontiac didn't do more with that engine. I mean, sure, they had problems, but they could have corrected them and been miles ahead of everyone else. A friend of mine, back in the 1980s built a T-bucket kit car and powered it with an OHC Pontiac six. Hand-built intake with three 1-bbl carbs, and an early 700R4 slushbox. For a six, it would really scoot, and it always drew curious stares. He infuriated legions of IROC-Z owners with that thing.
In the 70's, many Army bases had craft programs which included repair shops where the soldiers could maintain their personal vehicles. I worked at one as a civilian and I recall helping a guy change the clutch on one of these cars. My most distinct memory was pulling that long driveshaft out of the rear of the car so that the clutch plate could be removed.
In 1971 I wasn’t even old enough to get a driver’s license but I bought a 1963 4-cylinder Tempest for $125. My brother, our dad and I rebuilt the engine and cleaned up the car. We needed a camshaft and couldn’t find one. I wrote a letter to Pontiac and they sent me one for free. They shipped it to me on a passenger bus! Had to go pick it up at the Greyhound station.
I managed to find a four-barrel carburetor in manifold for 63 4- cylinder but mine was a LeMans. It was also a 3-speed manual on the floor
@@greyarea3804 nice! Mine was a 3 on the floor as well. The torque tube kept cracking near the access opening in the front. After the fourth time I had to pull it out and have it welded, I sold the car.
Cool story ❤
This story is metal: Imagine ANY company taking care of someone using their "used" product, today. Kudos to the parts manager at Pontiac bold enough to send a kid a free camshaft for a re-build. This is an American business model I can get behind.
That story has it all. That's the kind of Company response that builds a loyal customer base. In my mind's eye you bought a Bandit TA after graduation.
I recently pulled a 63 Tempest convertible out of a barn where it had been sitting for 50 years. Luckily it needs virtually no body work aside from a dent in the left quarter panel. I've rebuilt the 4 cylinder engine 100%, and I'm hoping that by fall it'll be moving under its own power for the first time in 5 decades.
Derek from Vice Grip Garage would be proud!😉👍
Best of luck. They all need to be saved whenever possible, if only to remind us that 1.) Pontiac existed and 2.) GM was once an American company, not an importer of boring Chinese SUVs (a.k.a what today passes for "Buick.")
@@biffdelmonte4139 I’m sure you will enjoy it. After pulling out the torque tube for the fourth time to repair where it cracked, I sold mine. I recommend welding some plates on there to reinforce it!
@@cglaurer Sounds like the design needed a kind of motor mount bushing system at the torque tube instead of a direct bolt on connection to the engine. The motor torquing against the mostly inflexible torque tube would seem to be an obvious problem in the design stage. Also maybe a slip coupling in the fore section of the tube instead of the suggested buffer mounting, to replace the rigid mount, or maybe a combination of the two.
Allow me to expand on the transaxle. The automatic transmission was basically a mildly beefed up Corvair Powerglide. When the Corvair PG was designed, they made it so it could be driven from either the front or the rear. For 63, Pontiac beefed it up even more (to handle the 326 V8), and added a Park position. The differential was Pontiac's own design. It was more rugged, and offered more gear ratios than the Corvair. When Pontiac was building their 421 powered Tempests for drag racing, they put one 2 speed PG trans in front, and another PG behind the differential, complete with its own special casting, to create a 4 speed automatic. Manual transmissions for the Tempest were basically stock Corvair 3 or 4 speed transmissions. Final note: Pontiac was forced to purchase the aluminum 215 V8 from Buick or Olds, and therefore, it was an expensive option, which is why they put the 326 in for 63.
Where was the park position located on shifter for 63 models? Did it still have that lever on the dash? I never saw that, although I know my parents had a 61 Tempest and we always had to put a log under the rear wheel when parking on incline as parking brake was not sufficient.
The borrowed aluminum 215 V8 from Rover and decades later removed 2 cylinders and became the cast iron GM 3.8L V6?
@@trickyricky12147no, Rover bought the 215 v8 from GM. Buick did later derive the V6 from the same design.
That's wild! Will have to check that out. Thanks!
So u are saying they offered a 326 in this same type setup with a rear 3-4speed auto transaxle to the public ?
My dad had a '63 wagon with a 326ci V8, floor mounted 3-speed manual trans and a 2-barrel carburetor. He used to let me shift the gears when he would drive it. I was in the fourth grade. I miss those days. He was the one that got me interested in cars. I miss him too.
You had an awesome Dad! I was four years old in '63. Thanks for sharing. I miss my Dad too.
@@user-vp1sc7tt4m Thank you for the kind words. God Bless and take care.
RIP to all our dads and driving on his lap shifting gears you name it thank God for dads like that. God bless you 🙏
@@bradpnw1897 Thank you so much. Take care
Truly, nothing illustrates love more than a dad letting his son or daughter shift gears to introduce him/her to the driving experience. I did not have that experience, but some relatives did let me occasionally shift the automatic transmission from drive to reverse and back again. That was pretty exciting. (Stopping first, of course) 😂
My aunt & uncle had a '63 Tempest station wagon with the four-cylinder engine; they drove that car for a very long time as it was apparently economical for them. The reason for their ultra-intense penny pinching was that they wanted to save as much as they possibly could for retirement even though both worked in the public sector with defined-benefit pensions. Two things very fortuitous for both of them happened such that they were able to retire early with full benefits (my aunt was only 47!), and they toured the world at least twice with their savings. So that old Tempest proved to be quite beneficial for them in the long run after all.
I drive a vw rabbit pickup with a used 1.9 tdi swap that gets 75mpg
Imagine how much I get to put into saving compared to buying a ‘real truck’
@@fastinradfordableI had a 79 Wabbit diesel in college. 56 mpg and diesel was 79 cents a gallon. It was a big money saver plus a good car.
@@fastinradfordablelove it man ! I had a VW Caddy in school the diesel it would run about 75 wide open but got 50 ish day in day out. And being a mechanical diesel I didn’t even need a battery. Hauled my dirt bike all over. Thanks for sharing brother that’s cool as F I wish I could find another one and do some kind of swap, whatever’s cheapest and available. ✌️🇺🇸
@@MUUKOW3 I used to buy and resell Rabbit diesels in university. Excellent little cars, an absolute blast to drive!
@@kimchipig I actually used mine in some autocross, it was so tourqy it did well in those small parking lot couses especially after some suspension upgrades and injection udjustments to make it a bit more snappy
Back in 1971 I helped my friend rebuild the 326 in his 1963 convertible Tempest with the 3-speed floor mounted shifter. You quickly learned not to have you hands anywhere near the shifter knob when starting or shutting down the engine because it made a violent side-to-side shaking motion that really hurt if it caught you on the knuckles. Some years later I was working at Classic Auto Restoration in Farmington, Michigan and found out that the CEO, Wally, previously worked at Pontiac in the 1960's as an engineer. Turned out he worked on the design of the "rope drive" and knew exactly why the shifter shook the way it did. The flexible steel drive shaft had a resonate frequency due to it being attached at the ends and free in-between. As Wally described it, at the right RPM, it would vibrate like a guitar string. He said that the shaft diameter was larger than necessary for the amount of engine torque but the initial tests with a smaller diameter failed because the resonate frequency was above engine idle speed and it destroyed itself. He went on to say that even the larger shaft still resonated but it only happened at start-up and shutdown when the RPM's passed through the critical frequency. And that's the reason the shifter shook.
As a side note, my friend and I escaped unscathed from a rollover accident in the Tempest. He was attempting to pass another vehicle and the power of the freshly rebuilt 326 was too much for the tires, suspension and driver. Danny lost control and started fishtailing. The car got sideways and flipped over onto the convertible top. We slid down the road for what seemed like forever. I could feel the pavement sliding under the convertible top - no seat belt so I was laying on the upside down roof. Once we stopped sliding I punched out the plastic rear window and we both got out without a scratch. Don't recall what happened to the car. It was fun while it lasted.
Fascinating about the resonate frequency. Thanks for sharing!
WOW, that's quite a story man! Glad you survived the rollover and especially in a convertible! That's really interesting about the resonant frequency -- thanks for sharing.
Same culprit took down that bridge around Tacoma (I think) - the famous 'galloping roadway' film we've all seen. Harmonics.
@@carlsaganlives6086 Yep, the Narrows Bridge is indeed, in Tacoma, between it and Gig Harbor. I live here so see it on the regular.
I rolled my '63 too, but it was down to inexperience and a 3" height difference between pavement and gravel which tipped the sideways sliding car over when it hit. I had just repaired the seatbelts three weeks previously!! So I escaped unscathed. Fun fact: the independent rear suspension in the 1963 Tempest was the first thing GM ever designed with a computer.
My brother and I bought and restored a 62 Tempest convertible with the 215CU V8 about 10 years ago. We've had a great time showing it at car shows until he passed away last year. Very rare combination of convertible, V8 and automatic. Still have it.
GM producing a 215 cubic inch aluminum block V-8 in the early 60s fascinates me.
Did it have aluminum heads? If so, what did it weigh?
My 63 olds 215 was all aluminum. 3 speed automatic. Hydramatic with torque amplifier. Something like that
@@raymond3803 At some point GM decided that the 215 was too small for what they were doing and the entire engine tooling was sold to Rover in the UK. They appeared in many English cars and an expanded/improved version is still used today.
@@junkmangeorge6363 Thank you. I assume Rover = Land Rover? Sprint Car Racing (Winged & Non-winged) is my auto sport of interest. In the 410 cu. inch class, with the exception of 2 Fords 2 Toyotas, and about 5 old Mopar. Every 410 sprint car in the US Canada Mexico Australia New Zeland & South Africa (Thousands of teams) run an aftermarket aluminum replica of the 1955 SBC. While every street rod enthusiast swear LS is superior to the SBC, the LS (in any version) does not exist in in Sprint Car Racing. The only reason NASCAR uses LS is because Chevy got NASCAR to mandate LS. There's not a sprint car team on earth who would use LS if you gave them the engine as a gift. On or about 2004, Chevy went to Ron Shaver (#1 sprint car engine builder at the time) with a blank check. *_Do whatever you have to do to make LS compete with SBC._* in performance. Two years, $ Millions in R&D, and about 8000 man hours later. 840 HP was the most Shaver could get out of a naturally aspirated methanol burning 410 cu inch LS. Every sprint car engine builder in the US & Australia was getting at least 900 HP from a 410 cu inch SBC. Today it's 950 HP from a 410 SBC. Sprint cars have the greatest power to weight ratio. 1,400 pounds w/driver 950 HP. In the sprint car world, an all-aluminum 410 Chevy LS is a boat anchor, at best. Ditch-stop material at worst.
At almost 1/2 the size of a 410 SBC. This all aluminum 215 cu in would have made its way to the popular USAC Midget class. Second week of January the Midget Chilli bowl is ran indoors in Tulsa. And gains at least 350 entries each year.
@@raymond3803 Rover shared their version of the 215 Buick V-8 among a lot of English cars, their own cars, of course, but anything, from a Morgan to a Triumph got the V-8 in one model, or another. I think the only British manufacturers who didn't take the opportunity to run that V-8 were Bristol (who ran Chrysler V-8s) and Sunbeam (who ran Ford V-8s).
Personally, when I was younger, I raced Chevrolet 302s........................
That Pontiac independent rear suspension is what saved the main characters in the movie “My Cousin Vinney” from going to jail!!!!! 😂😂😂😂😂😂
I really wanted this to be narrated in Marisa Tomei’s voice. 😅
@@cl604driver I want Marisa Tomei...
His suits pure class👍
One of the funniest films I have ever seen. And Marisa Tomei - absolutely gorgeous and a petrolhead to boot! If only.......
Do you mean the two yoots?
Dad bought a new '63, with the 326. He always said it was one of his favorite cars.
326 was a dependable engine with middle of the road performance . I had a 66 LeMans and a 67 GTO 6.6 … The GTO was faster but did have issues the Lemans never did .
@@pooddescrewch8718 We had the car for four years, and I don't think the engine ever gave us any trouble. I remember Dad working on the rear suspension. He mentioned "U-joints", so maybe it was something to do with the swing-axles.
I think the 326 was just a 389 with a smaller bore. There is a story about how that engine actually displaced 336ci, but GM management decreed that no other division could have a small-block bigger than the Corvette's 327, so it was labelled as 326ci. I think a year or two later it was actually changed to correct the displacement. I don't know if it's true, but it's a good story.
@@jimf4492I wonder if that’s the engine Pontiac should have used to create a four cylinder. At 168ci it might have been a bit smoother and not a lot less powerful than the 194.
@@guylr7390 Well, it kind of was... The 326 was developed from the 389, but that was after the 4cyl. That might have been a smoother engine with a smaller displacement.
After 1963, the next Tempest/Le mans was going to be a bigger car, and the 4cyl would be too small. I think there was a pushrod straight six, followed by their 6cyl OHC "Sprint" engine.
I owned a 1963 Le Mans convertible with the 326 and Powerglide. It had the floor shift with a T-handle on the front of a console. The previous owner was worried about a possible transmission issue because of an occasional squeak. I got it for $125 and replaced one of the transaxles with a $5 junkyard transaxle. Problem solved. I had it through two years in high school and two years in college. Good times.
Absolutely love early 60s cars. Really any 60s cars. Just beautiful. The small economy cars were even great looking
Fell in love with the B-O-P-ettes, as they were called, when they first came out in '61. I was just a kid, but dreamed of having one. Eventually I did. My first car was a beat up old '63 F-85 that I bought for $350 (about ten times that in today's money) and eventually I acquired a beautiful '62 Skylark hardtop. (The Buicks were my favorites of the three but I loved them all and they were all quite different from each other.) Great memories. Wish I still had them both!
Thank you again for another interesting video on the 1961-1963 Tempest. You did neglect the fact that Pontiac dropped the aluminum V-8 for the 1963 model year. They brought out a 326 cid (actually 337 as you've mentioned in another video) V-8 based on the 389/421 castiron block.
During my senior year (1965) in highschool, I was lucky enough to have a 1963 Temoest Custom Sports Coupe with the 2-bbl, 260 net hp V-326 with a 3-speed manual transmission. An awesome looking Cordovan Brown Metallic baby GTO that handled great due to its rear IRS. Dad helped me install an EMPI camber compensator monoleaf spring that was a version of what Chevrolet finally added to the 1964 model year Corvair to solve the swingaxle tuck-under that challenged Corvair drivers.
I might add that all 1961-63 Tempests came with 15" wheels while the Buick Specials and Olds F-85s had 13 inch wheels. Never quite knew the reason for that.
Thanks again for reminding people of this unique little automotive gem.
15" wheels and left hand threads on the drivers side wheel lugs... engineers, eh??
Yep, just like my parent's 1957 Buick Special. This way wheel rotation will keep them nice and tight. Too much engineering for many to comprehend.
larger wheel diameter usually means larger brakes that wouldn't fit inside the 13 inch wheels.
My Dad always said the Tempest came with bigger wheels so it would ride better. Also maybe more contact patch area for better handling.
My father sold Pontiacs during this time period. I remember him picking me up at elementary school in one of these. All the while giving me [a 7 year old] the sales pitch about the engineering of the Tempest...lol...
What I really remember was the awesomeness of his '62 Bonneville.
Now THAT👈🏼 was a car!
We had a 62 Catalina. Blue with white top, 2 door. Beautiful car!
That's a great little memory.... thanks for sharing. As a guy who drove demos for more than a few years it really made me smile. God Bless your pops 🙏
@@paulgandy7347
Pontiac was really at the top of their game during that period.
@jimmyd3360
Thx man, appreciate it. Hah!... I don't know how many times how he told me how he out-ran a Maine State Trooper out of Lisbon Falls one night in that Bonneville. I still chuckle when I think of it...😊
Bonnevilles are awesome no matter the year.
A high school friend drove a 61 or 62 Tempest with the 4 cyl. engine and automatic. It was a hand-me-down, the year would have been 1971 or 1972. My recollection was that it was attractive, roomy and very comfortable. I also remember the engine vibrated noticeably at idle and it seemed very slow, underpowered and crude compared to (say) a contemporary Chevrolet Impala with a 289 V8. I was not aware of the unusual drive train at the time and we were not worried about economy as we were high school kids and gas went for 0.26 cents per gallon. In reality they are very cool and I would enjoy an opportunity to drive one today.
One of my favorite cars of all time!
There was a time when GM was the world leader in innovation and engineering.
it's 1973, and Honda is about to release their CVCC-engined Civic. Speaking of innovation!
It was such a big deal that Ford and Chrysler had both signed up to license the technology. But not GM. In fact, here's what the CEO of GM, Richard Gerstenberg, said of Honda's technology:
"Well, I have looked at this design, and while it might work on some little toy motorcycle engine…I see no potential for it on one of our GM car engines." 😂
This statement got back to Soichiro Honda. He bought a 1973 Chevy Impala with a 5.7L V8 and had it air-freighted to Japan. He instructed his engineers to design and build a CVCC system for the GM V8. They replaced the intake manifold, cylinder heads, and carburetor of the engine so that it used Honda's CVCC technology. He then had it flown back to Ann Arbor, where it was tested by the EPA.
The system Gerstenberg had derided as only suitable for "some little toy" engine allowed the 5.7L V8 to pass the new EPA emissions requirements without a catalytic converter. Horsepower remained at 160 HP, and some tests even showed a slight fuel economy improvement.
NOx emissions were still higher than a catalyst-equipped car, but even so, the CVCC V8 was far cleaner burning than most engines of the timr and easily passed the EPA's requirements.
Mind you this is at a time just 10 years after Honda produced their first automobile in 1963. 😂
@@ButterfatFarmsMost people back then believe the gas crunch to be a scam,most still do
@@peter455sd Irrelevant. I don't know what point you think you're making.
I was in the fifth grade, around 1970, when my dad told me about this design. I had to know everything about it so I went to our local library and dug up the initial road tests in the car buff magazines on microfilm. This car always intrigued me, and my research let me predict the punchline on "My Cousin Vinny" years later.
So much wrong with the automotive expert's testimony. 1963 Pontiac Tempest wheelbase was 112inches.1964 Buick Skylark wheelbase was 115 inches. The rear suspension on the Tempest was a swingaxle or semi- independent suspension. As the wheels traveled up and down, they did NOT stay flat and even, they traveled in an arc. So that when the suspension was fully compressed the top of the wheel was angled in and when at the lowest point of available travel, the top of the wheel was angled out. The axles only had a universal joint in near the transaxle and not one out near the wheel. That is the reason the wheel traveled in an arc. If you put a Tempest up on a lift, the rear wheels fully drop in suspension travel and will be almost at a 30- degree angle. I worked in an auto repair facility at the time and saw many Tempests on a lift.
@@scrambler69-xk3kv and it is because of this arc that the risk of rollover was accentuated . But as you all know Corvair suffered this similar fate until Knudsen came over from Pontiac to fix the problem in 1962. 61-62 Pontiac Tempest eliminated most of the incident problems by making the Tempest spring rates stiffer/adding a compensator to the transaxle and changing the wheel size. All GM compacts- Corvair, Olds F-85, Buick Special, and Ford with Falcon, Mercury comet, and Chrysler with the Plymouth Valiant use 13" wheels. Pontiac was the only compact to use the 15" wheel and the reason is the the 15" wheel decreases the arc the wheel has to travel and the incident of tucking never shows up in the arc. Ever try to figure out why VW's used to come with 16" wheels???? Porsche knew the problem-that is why the originals are 16". Chevrolet decided to eliminate the problem altogether in 1965 by going the Tempest route with double jointed axles which VW also did on the 68
Microfiche days. Dating yourself there Good Buddy. Lol😂 Happy Memories. I was in Kindergarten in 1970.
@@cabaneencac5168Great Info there!!! Glad I'm reading these comments.
I had a IHC Scout with a similar Slant 4. Engine
Yes, I've had several Scouts. The first was with a 152 cubic inch (half of a 304) then a 196 (half of a 392) and a new Scout II with a 304, no, not half of a 608. They also had a 345, but never heard of it getting 'cut' in half. Does anybody know? Thanks.
Love this. There was a crazy video calling this a failure. Such a great car.
I wouldn't call it a failure: more like a ropey, vibrating 4 cil. no one really wanted and asked for ...
@@sebastian0107 wasn't the first Chevy II offered with a base 4 cylinder that was half a 283? Few people bought that too, opting for the six or V8 instead.
@@adotintheshark4848 2.5; it too had these strong vibrations. Plenty of torque though. That lump was on offer in the Nova until 1970!
@sebastian0107 4 cylinders, bigger displacement ones in particular have poor balance inherently. Especially compared to say a V8. Hence, balance shafts
@@chickenfishhybrid44 Yes, they make all the difference; but this one, the Chevy 2 and the Iron Duke didn't have one, if I'm correct.
I do remember how smooth the 2.0 Mitsubishi's ran in the late 70's; practically like an L6, but balance shafts are a complicated way to mitigate an inherited problem.
Love Pontiac and GM innovation of the early 60s!
My unce had one of these cars, a convertible with the 4barrel and 4speed trans. He got it used while in HS. Something went wrong with the trans and the Pontiac dealer and other shops had never seen one and told him the car was never made by the factory. There was a guy in the neighborhood that fixed it in his home garage. Then a Pontiac dealer contacted him and told him it was a prototype that never should have been sold. Now I know the truth about it, thank you for this great video on the car. My uncle caled it a triple 4. 4 barrel, 4 speed 4 cylinder, Til the day he died he said it was his favorite car.
My mom had a 62 tempest Le Mans convertible with the 4 cylinder. I was 12 years old when she drove that car, and growing up with the Connecticut winters, one fact that was remarkable about that car was its ability to drive in the snow. Dad had a 60 chevy Impala, but when it snowed he took the tempest to work. that car could cut a path through 8" of snow with no problem. It just left two groves where the tires rhode and an indentation for the body rub. another fact I remember is it had a thin sheet metal valance under the chrome bumper that would get bent in from driving in the deep snow. In the spring Dad would lay in the driveway and pull it back into shape. Alas the car succombed to rust and corrosion due to all the winter driving.
Another great video from an articulate and creative Detroit insider! I never knew exactly how that "rope" driveshaft worked relative to the torque converter. It's amazing to think how inventive GM could be in those days. Thanks, Adam.
One really remarkable thing about the range of engines for this car was that the slant 4, V6 and V8 were all almost the same displacement, despite their radically different running characteristics.
There was never a V6 engine option available in a Tempest, but yes the displacements of the four and Buick V8 were similar.
Hi Adam, good video! I am 64 years old, and I was an automobile mechanic moat of my life, including working at a transmission shop. Thank you for explaining the difference between a compact car vs. a senior compact car. Most people do not realize the difference. The Chevrolet Corvair, (GM Z-Body) and Chevrolet Chevy II - Nova, (GM X-Body) where GMs compact cars, as was the Ford Falcon, Fords compact car. The early Pontiac Tempest - LeMans, early Oldsmobile F-85 - Cutlass and the early Buick Special - Skylark, (GM Y-Body) where all senior compact cars that did share sheet metal, glass and mechanical parts with each other. The GM senior compact(s) did not become full mid-size (GM A-Body) until 1964 along with the Chevrolet Chevelle. Ford did the same thing. Fords first senior compact car was the Mercury Comet, after that the Ford Fairlane. The Comet and Fairlane where not be full mid-size cars until 1966. You mentioned that the luggage trunk capacity in this senior compact was larger than a mid-size Chevrolet Malibu or a Toyota Camry trunk space? That is because this early 1960s senior compact car(s) had a bigger car than todays mid-size cars. For an example, the mid-size 1970 Chevrolet Chevrolet Malibu is almost two times that of the size as a current time mid size Malibu. Back in the 1960s to the mid 1970s, the current Chevrolet Malibu and the Toyota Camry would be classified as a compact car. Most young people have no idea what a 1960s to 1970s full-size car is. The early senior compact Pontiac Tempest and LeMans's used a transaxle and rear suspension that was 90% the same as the compact Chevrolet Corvair. The Pontiac Tempest (2 speed only with automatic) was called the Tempest Torque Tube Automatic Transmission. It was much the same as the Chevrolet Corvair (2 speed only with automatic) Corvair Powerglide, (not to be confused with the Chevrolet aluminum case rear wheel drive 2 speed automatic). Both the Tempest Torque and the Corvair Powerglide air cooled transaxle(s) where air cooled by means of a continuously rotating torque converter with a stamped steel cooling shroud that was spot welded to the exterior of the converter. Please reply. Dave...
Dave I have a question did that so-called rope drive have idler bearing on it or was it left to flop around inside the torque tube and was this a unibody car?
@@jeffoverturf4138 I have never serviced a Tempest Torque Tube flexible driveshaft. In the mean time, I would say the idler bearing that your referring to is worn out. Their are machine shops that can produce custom maid bearings. I would say contact an early Pontiac-Tempest car club, for more information. Please keep me posted. Dave...
@@jeffoverturf4138 The unibody construction of the vehicle is entirely separate from the torque tube system. I never serviced a torque tube, but in the mean time, I would say the bearing is worn out. I would say contact a Pontiac Tempest car club for a correction for the issue. In the mean time, their are machine fabrication shops that will produce custom maid bearings. Please keep me posted. Dave...
@@daveridgeway2639 Ok, couple of notes here...1. this was not a unibody car. it had a full frame. 2. there were 2 or 3 bearings in the torque tube. the shaft had a coating on it that kept it from rusting. The bearings might go bad, wear off the coating, quickly deteriorating the drive shaft, and it would break. Otherwise a cool design.
@@ccgrider1014 What I meant was that it car had a unibody shell, bolted to the chassis, (the suspension and powertrain for that matter) kind of like a subframe. GM senior compact(s) did not a full "X" frame and nor a full "perimeter" frame, until 1964 when the GM senior compact(s) became a full mid-size with an full "perimeter" frame. Dave...
Rope drive transaxle and 1/2 a 389 V8 ! Awesome 👌
And at some point they added the 326(which was in reality almost a 340). They were pretty quick. I rode in one back then.
If you thought that half of a 389 was awesome, you should've seen the 12 1963 cars (6 LeMans Coupes & 6 Tempest Wagons) that Pontiac built with 405 hp 421 V-8s! Quite awesome on the dragstrips (ex., Arnie "The Farmer" Beswick) and one that dominated the Daytona 500 one year!
Adam, found the video 19 minutes after you posted. Already had 461 views! You should be very proud. Cheers.
My first car in 1969 was a Pontiac Tempest LeMans 326. Had 2 speed transmission. 15 inch wheels. Very fast car. Mine was fully loaded with air conditioning and tinted indows. It all worked well. The styling was amazing for its time. Loved it.
They were sporty....
I bought a '70 Pontiac Tempest LeMans station wagon new in 1973 (New old stock) for not very much money, because of the way it was ordered. 400 ram air V motor (and hood), 4 speed manual, 4:10 posi. No PS, PB, air, radio, or any other options.
I have always heard of rope drives, and I thought it was a cable linking the engine and the transmission Your explanation that it was more like a torsion bar clears this up.
Thanks for the explanation of such a unique drive train. Much appreciated!
I was seven years old when the 1961 Tempest came out, but I remember it well, because it was a common source of conversation among both boys and grown men. Nobody could fathom why, in the age of ever-larger V-8s, ANYBODY would want a 4 cylinder car.
Had a 63 tempest when I was in college in the late 1960's. It was a convertible in dark blue with a with a white vinal top and white interior. It had the
326 V-8 and a 3 speed manual, on the floor. Loved that car. Did have to get the drive shaft replaced once. I might have popped the clutch a few times. It was a chick magnet.
My Father worked on this Car back before they were fully developed and ready for production, my Father had a handful of Diamond Lapel pins given one for every idea used in the car!
He was the one who put forth the idea of half a V8, I understand he heard about a bad batch of V8 blocks so he said hey let's build a 4-cylinder and it vibrated so badly, that's why it had the Rope Shaft, which was in the day called Wire Rope because it was woven Cable. He loved the transaxle because of better weight distribution. He had a buddy have heavier springs on one so it'd handle better with near 50/50 bias, with full.gas tank lol
Gotta get me a Tempest. A whole cubic yard in the trunk.
A huge trunk to carry...that's right spare parts, you will need them...
Our family had one. Nice car with hardly any traditional rear wheel drive driveline hump in the passenger compartment. Rear transaxle, still a good idea for front engine cars in 2024. Wish we still had it.
These are great looking cars, and it is amaxing to me how much cars changed in look in only 4 years. Astounding to think that only 4 years separated this from the '57 Chevy, for example. They look like they should be 20 years apart.
If GM came out with a car today that looked like this, it would sell like hotcakes versus how everything wants to look like a Kia, a BMW, a Camry, or a Cadillac and they all kinda look the same. Modern cars aren't necessarily ugly.. but none of 'em have class like the Tempest did. Or a whole bunch of other '60s GM and Ford cars. And even some Mopars ;-)
My grandmother had a 63, and I remember the enormous trunk, the flat front floor, and the interior room....quite large compared to other cars in the late 60s...hers was obtained used in 67 or 68 IIRC. I wondered at the slant four up front.
I remember checking the transaxle fluid by pulling up a mat and a cover, and pulling a dip stick.
The auto trans had a neat little shift lever on the dash, though that was fun after growing up with three-on-a-tree and floor shifters.
I was a little too young to drive it, but found it fun to ride in, and it handled pretty well...went around corners a lot flatter than the conventional cars with a lot of body roll.
I worked for Harry Ferguson Research in the early 69s and GM were interested in 4wd. One of these were was converted to 4wd. Everybody at HFR marvelled at this car. The rear gearbox layout was used later by Alfa Romeo and Porsche, but was never as good as this. The drive train was ingenious and worked beautifully. The handling and ride was good and the rear suspension was not a simple swing axle. It da an extremely good layout similar to a Watts linkage which effectively limited tyre scrub. This was a very impressive car overall.
Truly an odd car.. My folks bought a new yellow '62 tempest with a V8 and the floor shifter in Monterey CA and "As my dad remembers it at 98 years old" it was a four speed manual, three days later the dealer showed up at our door to take the car back as they sold it to us by mistake. We received a different car with the V8 however not the same transmission and later that week we saw "A like car" practicing on the road course track at Laguna Seca raceway, "Possibly the same car." performing quite well against the Porsche 356 and Alpha Romeo's during practice. (Yes the original track was built in 1958)
My dad bought a '61 Tempest wagon with a 4 speed trans. It suffered from some chatter problems with the clutch up front and puny driveshaft but it was a fun car to drive, specially for a young teen.
A friend of mine had a 63 Tempest with the 4 banger and he would rev the engine wide open then dump it into drive many times, the poor car rusted out but the driveline never gave up. Weird but superior engineering!
I revved our 63 to about 3000rpm ONE time, threw it in low gear and WHAMO!! snapped the driver side axle at the u-joint...I explained to my dad that it was the rough road...
If only GM was this innovative today, they'd have 50% market share in the U.S. just like in the '60's.
Sadly CAFE standards have ruined automobiles.
@@joshuagibson2520 True. Cylinder deactivation and other lousy ideas wouldn't have made it to the streets without ridiculous efficiency standards.
Not sure about that. In their Ed Cole/DeLorean-Era they tried out a whole bunch of innovations: Corvair, OHC 'Sprint' L6, Tempest, etc. None of them really catched on. The conventional cars just sold way better, until CAFE. Then they were suddenly forced to be TO inventive ...
Innovation has to be reliable.
Too often, they innovated, didn't get it right before selling, fondle fixed it, then canceled it.
I picked up a 1962 tempest LeMans several years ago at a farm auction. It's a 2 door, 4 cylinder, 4 barrel, 4 speed with bucket seats, all factory. Neat car, I really love the looks of it. Haven't gotten around to getting it back on the road yet however.
I had a 63 lemans with this transmission. A true barn find selling firewood. Broke the diff on a rock in our driveway. Replaced the automatic with a 3 speed manual from a scape yard. Bolted right in, no cutting or any modifications. A 326 with a floor mounted 3 speed at 18, sure wish I still had that car.
When I was in high school I had a 61 Tempest with the 4 cylinder engine and 4 barrel carb. I always referred to the driveshaft as a spring like a speedometer cable. Wish I still had it. I had a lot of fun in that car.
A 1963 Tempest was the first car I remember riding in. It was a manual three on the tree. In 1967 we drove it from Ohio to Arizona on vacation. The funny thing about remembering this trip is that I wasn’t even three years old yet, but somehow I remember it.
It didn't skip a tooth because of vibration. The V8 had the same problem. A plastic cam gear that broke up and the chain would slip.
I am 73 years old and this is the first time I learned that a car was made during my young years that had such an unusual drivetrain and transmission arrangement. Now I know that the 1961 -1963 Pontiac Tempest had this unique drivetrain and transmission arrangement. During my young years I was aware of the typical engine in front, the transmission mounted to the back of the engine and a rear wheels differential. The other arrangement I was aware of was the Volkswagen Beetle arrangement with the engine in the rear.
Might be interested to learn many Corvettes use a rear mounted transmission although it's solidly connected to the engine via what they call a torque tube, instead of this rope drive
Another front engine rear transmission car is the Alfa Romeo Alfetta series, starting in 1974 though 1986. This has the clutch in the rear so the tailshaft is spinning as long as the motor is running. That tailshaft has 3 rubber donuts that can be high maintenance if the car is driven hard.
Wow- the potential vibration of a curved driveshaft sounds crazy
My first car at 17 (July 1968) was a 2 door, Trophy 4, automatic with bucket seats! A cousin had a 389 Catalina that he raced. Bored my block and fitted it to 389 hi-po parts. It lasted 2 years until I threw a rod & piston through the hood. Dropped the pan , welded the hole in the block shut and drove on 3 cylinders for another 4 months!
Prototype Geo Metro 😀
I grew up in a '63 Tempest. I've owned and rebuilt all three years, even hot rodding the four with a hotter cam, super duty rods, factory four barrel intake. That wagon had a lof of power for a four banger, and it almost never had to downshift into low because it had so much torque. It was a great car.
Great video. Back in the late '60s I knew these as 'bent shaft'.
My parents bought a white ‘61 Tempest with the Trophy Four engine and automatic transmission as a car for my mother and older siblings. The shift lever was uniquely positioned on the front of the instrument panel and was about 5” long. And yes, that motor vibrated a lot, especially at idle at a traffic light with the car in drive. Great memories.
Many a lady liked that vibration I'm sure.
@@shawntailor5485 Oh come ON! He's talking about his mother for God's sake...
Very interesting! I would imagine that the Tempest was a pretty good snow car, with the added weight of the rear mounted transmission on the drive wheels! Thank you.
It was a good snow car because the trans. was a posi-traction.
It was a fantastic snow car! My '61 had no trouble showing the Subarus of the day (late '80s-mid '90s) taillights when the snow got over 8" deep, which it did back in SLC of old.
Thanks for the learning! I knew it was posi-traction from "My Cousin Vinny", but I'd never heard of the "rope shaft with the tranny in the rear" deal before. It makes perfect sense (right after it's been explained to you). Thanks!
Thanks for the technical explanation of the drivetrain. I’ve always been curious about how they worked.
Many years ago I worked at a gas station. One day a friend of the owner came in and complained that after he ran over a dear in the road his Porsche no longer had "passing gear".
He brought it in one day and asked me to put it on the lift. I did so. After tracing the gas pedal cable through the firewall then down under the car I lifted it higher. I then traced the same cable to the back of the car where a clip should have held the cable onto a linkage on the transaxle. The clip was gone. While I was fabricating a makeshift clamp to hold the cable in place the owner of the station came in and the fun rivalry between these friend began. Both of them were under the front of the car looking at the oil pan commenting on the unusually small (ahem) transmission. "No universal joints on the drive shaft??"
The “swing axle” was problematic for two reasons. 1, the rear wheels, mounted directly to the swing arms would lose contact patch on heavy braking and cornering. Also the bias ply tires of the time were crap.
Un-safe, B.S. slinging Ralph Nader's B.S. was used just like Hitler's B.S. Reichstag fire to frighten fools into having Gov. agencies come & "save" us from the evil car makers!
The transformation of my Tempest due to modern day gas shocks all around, and a set of 205-70R15 BF Goodrich Touring T/As was nothing short of phenomenal! The car came to me with VW Beetle size 165R15s, which people put on due to the narrow steel rims. But those tires were inadequate and handling was frightening. The T/As made that car drive like a modern rig (this was in 1990).
Always interesting. Thanks for presenting, Adam!
1963 had revised rear trailing arms that reduced the camber changes. I think a camber compensator might have cured all of the handling ills on a 63.
Good point. The 61-62 used basically Corvair parts, and were known for their evil handling on occasion. The 63 still was on swing axles, but they were longer, and had the totally different control arms that you mention. The handling was much improved, but still could be tricky. If GM had adapted the Corvette/65 Corvair rear suspension, it might have been a great handling car.
Another interesting video Adam.Your automotive knowledge knows no bounds.One of my favorite channels. Keep up the great work.As always cheers from Eulethra.
We had a 61 Tempest station wagon with the 4 barrel carburetor. I drove it to college in 1970 but by then the body was rusted out and the motor bearings were gone. But it made it over 100k miles, not bad for that time period.
Very cool video, thanks Adam. Imagine if GM had kept or bought back the aluminum V-8 engine how much better it might’ve been in the late 70s early 80s then some of what they came up with like the HT 4100 for example
The HT4100 was in a thousand pounds heavier car than a 215 in a Tempest. Early versions suffered from the same soft cam and lifter issues as a wide variety of other period GM (and other makes too) junk, but later 4.1/4.5/4.9 was a solid engine. I have one in a '94 DeVille and unlike the head bolt eating Northstar, it's still on its original head gaskets-30 years later.
I have a 1931 Franklin Airman sedan. 6 cylinder aircooled. Engineers designed so that the squirrel cage in the front of the motor moved more air at idle then at 45 mph. Rock and rattle oiling to the upper valve train sitting in a valve cage on top of a cylinder jug. Just like an aircraft engine. Matter of fact Charles Lindberg loved aircooled Franklins for this very reason. You can never overheat these cars.Made to run in the 250 degree range with low viscosity oil and in 1931, rated at 105 HP. Valve cages have large felt pads over each rocker which get hand oiled every 300-350 miles. The engine heat makes an oil "fog" from these saturated felt pads. Valve cage covers just snap off.
So cool. Id love to have one of these
My grandfather sold Pontiacs from 1953-1968 and I’m a Pontiac guy but didnt know about the driveline on these.
I have learned so much from Adam's video about the era of cars that I love!
You may want to consider looking at the "3 on a tree" manual transmissions. I had a '72 Pontiac Ventura with a six cylinder. It really had good performance, but shifting gears using something that looked like a turn signal arm was strange. Love your channel!
This is an awesome video! GM knew their Corvair design was BAD. So they amortized the design by putting the engine at the front and the transmission at the rear and used the "rope drive" Porsche did this twice, with the 924 and the 928, but they did it differently. GM put the engine drive through the center of the transmission on the Tempest to drive the transmission from the REAR, where a Corvair engine would normally be mounted. This required a flexed drive shaft, which is just plain WEIRD.
Porsche used this torque tube system on their 928 and 924 cars, but I'm a 928 historian and expert and I am told they bought a Tempest and took it to Germany before they designed these two cars. They took it apart and realized that while it worked, it was completely a cost cutting measure. The 924 was actually an engineering project for Volkswagen, a small sporty coupe to be called "Scirocco". It used a 2.0 liter VW LT van engine at the front with a torque tube that always spun, connected to an Audi FWD transmission mounted at the rear, and the whole car would use as many VW/Audi parts as necessary. There was a change in management at Volkswagen, and the project with Porsche was shed. The Scirocco became a Golf with a lower body, and the car that Porsche had developed for Volkswagen was purchased back and became the Porsche 924, and eventually the 944 and 968.
The 928 was a bespoke design which used no other parts, and you can see it with the V8 engine and the fact that the rear transmission is in front of the final drive.
I drove daily an '85 928S2 5 speed, a gray market car from Austria, for 19 years. That thing was WAY faster than a contemporary '85 Corvette. And the handling was night and day better due to the perfect chassis balance.
German engineering was pretty complete as they were supposed to last a while.
I worked for a VW dealer in 1969, we had one of the Tempests traded in on a Bug.
It did appear a bit less impressive that VW Products at the time.
Finding any shop who was equipped to repair the problems associated with the unique engineering issues,
of the Tempest was what appeared to be the downfall of most of them.
Falcons are the big selling Compact car in the USA.
I still have a couple Rancheros in the yard.
You can drop a 302 in them and drive away.
I do understand the attraction of Porsche,
they tried hard to compete in the 1970's.
Ford simply was the Car maker who covered the Nation with Falcons.
Parts and Mechanical assistance were abundant.
As I recall, the 944 was even more like these Tempests in that they too had the half V-8 slant four as well as torque tube and rear transaxle. (We too, imported a 928S grey-market.)
@@randyfitz8310 True. The 944 engine was essentially the passenger side bank of the M28 V8. The difference in the chassis is that the 928 has it's clutch just behind the engine while the 944 has it attached to the rear mounted transmission. This is because the 928 transmission is used only on this car and is ahead of the rear axle, while the 944 transmission is a FWD Audi transmission mounted at the rear, with most of the gearbox behind the rear axle.
944 turbo's were much better handling than the porky 928's, and the The Z51 C4 handled so bad pulled .95 G's (Porsche didn't get their for probably 20+ years) that it destroyed the the 944 Turbo's for half a decade in the racing. In fact after a year or two embarrassing Porsche, the Corvettes had to add 200+LB's so Porsche wouldn't further embarrass Porsche. The Corvair handled so bad that they dominated many SCCA racing classes for decades, and at least for 4+ decades. Otherwise much of your opinions and info are very interesting.
@@markr5132 So what year of Chevette (oops, my bad...) Saturn (damn! Again, sorry...Why do I keep having these Freudian slips?) do you own, corvette fanboy?
My '85 S2 5 speed turned 13 second quarters with minimal mods. There was not one single factory C4 that could beat it, and the "Weissach" rear axle allowed you to enter corners at stupid speeds and then NOT spin out when you hit the brakes. You can quote magazine article specifications
[Oh, of course car magazines are accurate! It's not like they sell advertising space to GM or anything....]
all you want, 928's and 944's kill sloppy nose-heavy corvettes all day long.
928 vs 951? That could be a discussion, but Porsche really didn't many 951's.
-The average corvette owner has gray hair and has never had the engine past 3000 RPM. The average 928 owner has gray hair, but probably installed the clutch himself and races the car at PCA drivers education events. OH you better believe he makes use of that 6750 RPM rev limiter!
Now, run along and enjoy your Fiero (See? Freud again....) and make sure you move into the right lane when I come up behind you please.
Have a nice day!
I think what drove the development of the Tempest, Corvair. Chevy 2, Falcon, and other compacts read a less severe fuel crisis than the 70s one, and this could have been a valuable learning experience for Detroit to properly engineer small, light, efficient vehicles ahead of the 70s. Unfortunately, they dropped this Tempest quickly. the small Chevy 2, and the small Falcon platform too soon, yet the Corvair actually persevered thru 1969. The Vega came only 2 years later, woefully unprepared for the market.
Ironic that the future leader of the US Green Party was the same guy that condemned the compact first gen Corvair with his book, 'Unsafe at any Speed". I believe the book came out around the same time that GM addressed many of the issues with the release of the second gen Corvair. It seems like the book killed off some of the innovative spirit at GM.
@martinliehs2513 excellent point!
@@martinliehs2513 The corvair, the beetle, the pontiac tempest, and any other of their ilk, had the same problem...single joint rear axles...fixed with double joint rear axles and matching suspension. If I remember correctly, that started about 1967.
In '63 they brought the LeMans. Same basic car as the Tempest with completely different front and rear treatment. The 194/5 Trophy four was kicked up in power to 166 hp. That engine was listed as a super duty!. I own one and it gets up and goes. It's a fun handling car, perfectly balanced front to rear.
The LeMans debuted in '62. I had one :-)
I had a 63 Tempest with the 326 V8. In a straight line I could keep up with a 68 model 383Dodge Charger. The problem was going around a corner if you floored it the rear wheels would fold up. The transmission was basically a power-glide so indestructible.
Wow, that really is an interesting setup. I'd never heard of any of this mentioned until now. Thanks for taking the time to share this stuff. You pointing out that the "rope" driveline didn't need to be so robust due to the torque converter being at the rear and not having multiplied the torque yet was one of those "aha!" moments that helped clear up a lot for me.
The problem with the rope drive was the driveshaft seals. I bought a used '63 LeMans (formerly the Tempest LeMans) with the 326 and TempesTorque. It was a gorgeous car and I loved it. BUT, I had to sell it after having to replace the engine seal TWICE and the transaxle seal THREE times. These were expensive repairs, and I gave up. This was all within maybe 2 years of owning it. I can only assume that the flexibility of the driveshaft was the culprit, making it hard to seal. Also, the bearing was unavailable and no proper crossover info was available. I was never 100% sure I was buying the correct bearing. I just had to match it by measurements. I could write a book on the mechanical misadventures of owning that car for the short time I did. Sexiest car I ever bought, but what a PITA.
The reason for the air cooled torque converter was that the water cooling system was at the other end of the car, so there was no way to add a trans cooler to the radiator without running long lines back to front. Corvair had a similar problem because it didn't have a water cooling system at all. The Corvair also has an air cooled torque converter, however it's much less exposed than on the Tempest.
It's the hidden Star of the movie My Cousin Vinnie!😊😮😅❤
In '68, taking my 3nd year auto mechanics course as a senior, I got a different instructor.
He assigned me to replace the clutch on a 63 Tempest for my first job that year. I knew about the transaxle before I started. I had it all torn apart, when the instructor kept insisting that I pull the transmission, he wanted to see that transmission on the FLOOR! NOW!
I kept telling him that it didn't have to, yet he kept insisting!
I finished the job, the guy didn't ever look at the transmission as he wouldn't get under the car.
He wound up kicking me out of class for "insolence". It would have more correct to say "disgust".
Finished that year with my first Auto mechanic teacher.
That's a beauty of a car. The era of unbridled engineering from 1952 until 1970 was an amazing time for all of the automakers.
I owned a 1962 with the 4 cylinder engine. When I got it the transmission was pulled out and the parts were in the trunk I took it to a transmission shop and they told me there was quite a few major parts missing and they couldn't rebuild it. Long story short I ended up setting the car down on a 1980 Malibu frame because the wheel base was extremely close. I put a 400ci engine down in it and a built 400 turbo transmission. Talk about a fast fun car. But like alot of us guys I had to get rid of it because my first child came and money got tight
Dad bought a '63 Tempest Safari wagon in August '63. I think the 326 V-8 's power surprised him. It had that funky toggle shifter. When I found out Arnie Beswick raced one of these, I fell in love with it. Too young to buy it though.
Yes. Arnie "The Farmer" Beswick did drag race his well-modified Safari wagon. I believe he had the BIG Pontiac V-8 under the hood. I remember watching him launch that car with the front wheels barely on the ground. In 2010 I went to the World Wheelie Contest at the Byron, IL, Dragstrip where wheel stand cars had even the rear wheels come off the ground. Arnie, who was not young, had his Pontiac Pro-Stock car there, not a tempest but never got more than 60 ft. because every time he launched the car would backfire and launch a big ball of flame out of the hood scoop. After he did it twice, on his 3rd attempt I was ready with my camera and got the fireball. I got to talk with him for 20 minutes or so simply because I mentioned watching him run at Alton Dragstrip. Chris "The Greek" Kramesines who ran the first 200 mph 1/4 mile at Alton. Of course, Don Garlits claimed the same. The Greek was still running Top Fuel Dragsters into his 90s (even though he would never state his real age experts pegged him in his 90s). The Tempest wagon was chosen by Beswick because the wagon had more weight over the rear wheels. I have been blessed in the fact that I have been able to talk to some of the greats, Art Arfons, Don Garlets, Don Schumacher, John Force, Don Prudhomme, Raymond Beadle, Austin Coil, et al. Yes, I am a motorhead who is not afraid to step up and talk to those guys. Mentioning seeing them or reading about their start in Drag Racing usually opened the door.
My dad worked on these when I was young. A customer had a 63 with a 326 and a 4 speed manual and drag raced it. He broke the rope shaft several times and my dad and I would replace it. Some people would paint pinwheel stripes on their converter so you could see it spin behind the car.
People better start buying this stuff up. Its all you will be able to keep alive in the near future.
Provided one can still get decent quality gas.
I`m prepared! Have our Thoroughbreds for backup transport. Have had to use them a couple of times when all the trucks had something wrong with them & needed parts to have the mechanical ones operational! 😃
My first car was a '65 Corvair. Those transmissions (Gotta be careful with the short version, these days.) probably were stock Corvair units. Same design. The manuals were the same. I put a Tempest transmission in my Corvair and it was perfect. The unique thing is the output shaft is hollow and the input/drive shaft runs through it.
The Tempest version was a little beefier, with more clutch plates and stronger struts/bands. It also had a bigger differential in it, of Pontiac's own design.
My buddy has a 62 tempest gasser, with a 6-71 blown 421 Pontiac motor, using all speed parts from Mickey Thompson from the 60’s, and a narrowed 57 olds rearend.. His car started off completely stock like these with the 4cyl and the transaxle
You could heard a Tempest of this year with a manual transmission coming blocks away. The whine of the gears preceded it.
Loved that first gear whine in my 1963 3-speed 326 V-8. I heard that Pontiac blamed the whine for that non-synchro 1st gear and "those damn Chevrolet gears "
That is amazing that the 4 cyl engine could run the big A6 AC compressor.
Looks to me like it has an oversized drive pulley, maybe an "underdrive" pulley so it's spinning slower than the engine and less load on the engine? I could be wrong but I think they also made lower-compression versions of this compressor, I think the Vega with factory AC was even fitted with this compressor!
You do a great job with this channel
Excellent video :) nice information about the 1960 Pontiac Tempest cars and so cool too hear about it !
I have always thought the Tempest was the best and most interesting of the "BOPettes". A very enjoyable video, Adam.
Internataional also did a half V8 for their Scouts. My brother-in-law had one.
One of your best videos to date. I had no idea!! Loved this.
The late years of the 4 cylinder engine got a super heavy duty timing chain. It can be identified by having "X"'s between the chain links. Republic auto parks used to sell an exact replacement chain as part number "P-355X", but I don't see it listed anymore. P-360 is the standard V8 timing chain. Some older auto parts stores still have the P-355X chain in stock though and I use it in V8's, as they are the same size.
Back in the day, a common upgrade to a hot Pontiac V8 was to purchase the timing gears, chain, and tensioner setup for the Tempest four.
Fascinating 😎👍🏻
I never knew the Tempest had such an unconventional layout.
Adam, Yes, it is certainly a good thing the later Tempest GTO did not have this weird transaxle.
Thanks for this. I was 11 in ‘61 and I never knew such a drivetrain existed. It wasn’t until’67 I got more into cars.
This was a feature of American auto design I knew nothing about. Most unusual. I would not have expected the linking component in that system, being as slender as it was, to remain in production for as long as it did (3 years) and you do mention the reliability issues. The photo with the empty shoes (?) is very odd and something I have never seen before as well as the plan view of passenger accommodation showing six remarkably fit and trim *adults* with plenty of room between them.
Thank you for this entry.
It was the 1960s. Dexedrine was over the counter legal and everyone smoked and there was no high fructose corn syrup.
I had several Tempests, and I drove 'em like I stole 'em, and never had any trouble with the rope drive.
Great video, and a VERY sexy car by anyone's measure.
Im in the UK and my father had a Rover 3.5L EFI Vitesse(1981) and that engine pulled like a train.....
155hp from half a V8, well that's some achievement!
There was some fantastic and creative engineering which appeared in the first new generation of peeps post WWII.
👍
What about Pontiac’s overhead cam inline six? Another oddball concept with an early timing belt.
It's a damned shame Pontiac didn't do more with that engine. I mean, sure, they had problems, but they could have corrected them and been miles ahead of everyone else.
A friend of mine, back in the 1980s built a T-bucket kit car and powered it with an OHC Pontiac six. Hand-built intake with three 1-bbl carbs, and an early 700R4 slushbox. For a six, it would really scoot, and it always drew curious stares. He infuriated legions of IROC-Z owners with that thing.
@@xaenon Yes. GM missed the boat on that one.
I had a 62 Tempest with the half a V8 and manual trans as well as a 66 Tempest with the OHC 6. This was back in the late 70's.
Thanks for a great vid...it brought back a TON of memories...
Is this the car that played a critical part of the defense strategy in “My Cousin Vinny” ?
Yes
i love their willingness to try new things back then. you can really see why alot of this stuff didnt catch on
These were such nice looking cars. Way ahead of their time.
In the 70's, many Army bases had craft programs which included repair shops where the soldiers could maintain their personal vehicles. I worked at one as a civilian and I recall helping a guy change the clutch on one of these cars. My most distinct memory was pulling that long driveshaft out of the rear of the car so that the clutch plate could be removed.