Pontiac GTO Forum banner

1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello guys n gals. Sooo, here goes. 1965 needing total frame off. Numbers matching. True "P" code car. PHS. It appears very original. Tags on carb rear and tranny. Someone got the car and painted it black. Most likely because Iris Mist wasn't cool. A bit of rust on inner rear wheel wells and lower front fenders. Most likely some on lower rear quarters. Floors are good. Seats are great.

So I am planning on making this a driver. The only non stock items would be front disc, and some engine internals. I would like to put a 65 WT 389 in it and keep the original wrapped up. I am in well over my head, but plan on moving slow. Taking lots of video on my ipad before I disassemble stuff. I am not a mechanic and have never done a restoration, so it's gonna be an interesting journey. Garage is small so space management is crucial.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Good luck with it. I myself love the Iris Mist color, should be a nice looking car. If you are not gong to use the original 389 then the world is your oyster regarding other engines, why the 65 WT specifically? Is it a manual trans car?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,659 Posts
Nice project. Another vote for Iris Mist. Had a '67 conv. special paint code Iris Mist and someone did not like it either, painted it a dark blue.

Plenty of help and information here to assist in your rebuild. Just take it a step at a time. Taking a lot of disassembly pics and bagging/labeling parts is the way to go. Do not set a time frame for completion and have a basic budget, but know that it always goes over.

Should be fun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Yes, its 4 speed wide ratio. 3.23 rear end. WT is not a must have. If one come up for a reasonable price I would get it. Otherwise, i'm pretty open. Some interesting stuff comes through ebay once in a while.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Nice project. Another vote for Iris Mist. Had a '67 conv. special paint code Iris Mist and someone did not like it either, painted it a dark blue.

Plenty of help and information here to assist in your rebuild. Just take it a step at a time. Taking a lot of disassembly pics and bagging/labeling parts is the way to go. Do not set a time frame for completion and have a basic budget, but know that it always goes over.

Should be fun.
Thanks Jim. That's the plan. Moving slow. Budget is a tough one. Right now sticking to the gotta have it to drive it. Figure body prep and paint around 10k. Rest about 6-8K. I'll have the pros reassemble the front end to get the gaps right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
177 Posts
I really like the iris mist as well. The contrast between the pretty floral color and a screaming muscle car motor inside is perfect. And it really is pleasant to look at, in my opinion. I have considered going with iris mist if I ever have my 65 painted again. The original burgundy it was born with seems too dark to my eyes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,659 Posts
Wow a 67 Iris Mist. That's a rare rare car.
Yes, you could order special paint codes in '67-'68. The Data Tag did not have a code, I think is was a "1" or "2" or something like that which has been covered here before. I was young and did not know what I know now and back then, it was just a fast GTO. How many '67 convertibles do you think they made in Iris Mist, close ratio 4-speed, 3.90 gears, and the RA hood option? National Geographic magazine had an ad for a 1967 GTO hardtop in Iris Mist - which I have.

I think I have decided to paint my '68 Lemans Iris Mist, and paint the top white so as to contrast the color. I have the vinyl trim to break it up and I am installing a white interior. I think it will look good.

In 1968 Pontiac offered a special color called Pink Mist, but it does appear to be a light pink and different from the Iris Mist.

I saw the enclosed '68 convertible at the Pontiac Nationals. A website says it is Pink Mist, but it looks closer to Iris Mist to me.
1968 Pink Mist.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
I know most on the sight will consider this blasphemy but...
In all honesty, keep the original motor and put an LS3 in it. It will be faster, safer, cleaner and way more efficient
I’d definitely bring it back to Iris Mist. I have a number of 67 GTO convertibles, super rare Plum Mist, White, Mariner Turquoise, Red, Tyrol Blue. Never ever seen nor heard of a 67 Iris Mist.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
I got a buddy that's doing the body stuff for friend rate. Leaving about 6k for paint. Maybe I'm off on the estimate. It's always more. ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,659 Posts
I know most on the sight will consider this blasphemy but...
In all honesty, keep the original motor and put an LS3 in it. It will be faster, safer, cleaner and way more efficient
I’d definitely bring it back to Iris Mist. I have a number of 67 GTO convertibles, super rare Plum Mist, White, Mariner Turquoise, Red, Tyrol Blue. Never ever seen nor heard of a 67 Iris Mist.
Well here you go, the ad is from National Geographic. Not the best copy via my scanner, but Iris Mist and what looks like the ram air hood option, just as I had.

First pic is the only one I have of the car showing the color still at the firewall area behind the fender. Second pic is blown up for a little better look - around 1979-80 I believe. Yes, Iris Mist as only the exterior was painted blue and the underside of the trunk, behind th fenders, in the door jams......still Iris Mist. When I sold the body, the guy who purchased it was going to repaint it silver. Sad part is that you cannot trace the special paint colors, so it may still be around after all these years, and no one would know it was Iris Mist. Now you can say you have seen one.

With regards to the LS engine........please sell you collection of Pontiacs to a person who can appreciate then for what they are - Pontiac powered.

1967 GTO - Iris Mist 001.jpg
1967 GTO  Iris Mist.JPG
02  Iris Mist.JPG
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Jim I’ve got plenty of beautiful Pontiac powered Pontiacs. In fact some of the rarest and nicest in country. But if a car doesn’t have a numbers matching motor, LS3 is the way to go. Faster, Safer, Cleaner and way more Efficient.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,659 Posts
Jim I’ve got plenty of beautiful Pontiac powered Pontiacs. In fact some of the rarest and nicest in country. But if a car doesn’t have a numbers matching motor, LS3 is the way to go. Faster, Safer, Cleaner and way more Efficient.
Well, I will never agree that the LS3 is ever the way too go. I have yet to see where the costs are lower to do the swap with all the changes and modifications required, so it is not cost effective in my book.

Then, I have yet to ever hear the 'Pontiac" sound coming out from the rear pipes of an LS3 conversion and if you have never heard and felt the iconic sound of the Q-jet snapping open and its droning tone, or that sucking sound of all three carbs wide open on a tri-power set-up, then you have missed out what Pontiac engines are all about.

Faster? Than what? Cleaner? Hmmm, apples and oranges with all the electronics/computer controls and other means used. With all the different EFI's and other add-on electronics you can now install on these older engines, you may be able to bring them up to cleaner standards. Isn't that what the mid-70's and '80's were all about? Efficient? See previous note.

If I wanted an LS engine in my Pontiac, I'd buy a Chevelle or Camaro and stick it in that. But a Pontiac? Nope, not until you have stuffed a Pontiac engine in a Pontiac and driven it first, then if you didn't care for it, sell the Pontiac with the Pontiac engine and get a Chevelle or Camaro.

Just my opinion of course. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Well I stumbled across a 1965 WT motor within 3 weeks build date of the engine in my car. I rolled the heads in lots of cardboard and am sending them off to Butler for porting and rebuild with screw in studs and upsized intake. Apparently #77 heads can't get 1.77 exhaust valves, so maybe a higher ratio rocker arm to keep the flow ratio? I was also going to send the intake for porting but I am rethinking that maybe I want a later intake ported. Anyone know the flow difference between the pre 67 and post 67. Since I will be stroking the motor I figure flow numbers are more critical. I am going for a stock look so not really hunting for aluminum aftermarket stuff.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
881 Posts
I've always been a fan of the odd (Not so common colors) and as indicated a buyer could pretty much pay to have there new Pontiac just about any color.
I have a friend who bought his '65 new and didn't like any of Pontiacs offerings, so he paid extra to have it painted in a Chevrolet color.
Now a 1967 GTO in Iris Mist is not too common, to say the least. :cool:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,659 Posts
Well I stumbled across a 1965 WT motor within 3 weeks build date of the engine in my car. I rolled the heads in lots of cardboard and am sending them off to Butler for porting and rebuild with screw in studs and upsized intake. Apparently #77 heads can't get 1.77 exhaust valves, so maybe a higher ratio rocker arm to keep the flow ratio? I was also going to send the intake for porting but I am rethinking that maybe I want a later intake ported. Anyone know the flow difference between the pre 67 and post 67. Since I will be stroking the motor I figure flow numbers are more critical. I am going for a stock look so not really hunting for aluminum aftermarket stuff.
With the #77 heads you are sticking with an overbored 389CI which will have the matching valve reliefs in the piston domes? The valve angle & spacing of the #77 389 heads is different than the 1967 and up 400CI heads. This is why the larger 1.77 valves won't fit.

Assume 4.25" stroker kit. The limiting factor will be head flow, but Butler will increase the port flow and do a quality 3-angle valve job, so flow won't be such a problem. The difference between the slightly larger intakes and stock exhaust will be negligible in flow ratio. Pontiac heads typically want a little more duration/lift on the exhaust valve to compensate for the unbalanced flow ratio. So pick a cam as such.

Keeping the stock look, 1967 and up intakes are generally Q-jet, and will not look stock. Depending on budget, the 1966 tri-power with larger center carb would be my choice and look stock. Stock using a 4Bbl would be an intake using an AFB carb. I would wany at least the 750cfm carb, but it has larger secondary throttle bores and may not fit on top of the factory intake designed for the smaller throttle blades. In this case, I would look to either going era period correct with an aftermarket aluminum intake, or go aluminum and grind all manufacturers names/numbers off and paint factory color. Most today will not know and with the big factory pancake GTO air cleaner, or RA air pan if you go that route, will never see it anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Thanks Jim always learning when you write. So when I say stock "looking" I don't wan't KRE heads slapping you in the face. I am looking for period correct with drivability. So don't judge to harshly at my plan. I am going with the Sniper EFI, but I figure it's gonna be tucked under the air cleaner. I am planing using a reproduction 4bbl ram air pan set up from a 67. I'm gonna try manual 4 wheel disc with stock 15 inch RallyII. Yes the 4.25 stroke. Roller cam and rockers. Butlers 8 bolt hi flow Flowkooler. With their performance oil pump. Sooooo stockish? Sorta. My concern was pre 67 4bbl intake would undo my head porting. I did ask butler if they would port my 65 intake and they said yes. Not sure if that would be good enough or if i'm wasting time and $ doing so.
 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Top