Muscle Car Review mistake?

Wasted · February 5th, 2009, 06:52 PM

In the February edition of Muscle Car Review they have what they say a 65 Cutlass 442 in the treasure hunt section. To me the grill looks like its from a 64 so I was wondering did the magazine make a mistake?

http://img27.imageshack.us/my.php?image=olds65ec1.jpg Here is the picture sorry its not the best.

a64olz · February 5th, 2009, 07:05 PM

It's a 65 with a 64 front end, it has 65 body side mouldings, the 64 front will bolt on to the 65 and as well as the other way around, I bought a 64 with a 65 front end on it. It was a complete front from a VC core support, radiator, inner fenders as well.

rocketraider · February 5th, 2009, 07:13 PM

Muscle Car Review make a mistake? Surely you jest, it could never happen...

Yah right. I've seen more outright bullshit printed as fact in that magazine than almost any other car mag I've ever read. Its current iteration does not compare to the days when it was simply Car Review, with people like Terry Boyce and Tony Hossain writing. People who knew what they were talking about, in other words.

Wasted · February 5th, 2009, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by a64olz

It's a 65 with a 64 front end, it has 65 body side mouldings, the 64 front will bolt on to the 65 and as well as the other way around, I bought a 64 with a 65 front end on it. It was a complete front from a VC core support, radiator, inner fenders as well.

Alright that makes sense, I just never seen some one take a 64 front end and put it on a 65.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rocketraider

Muscle Car Review make a mistake? Surely you jest, it could never happen...

Yah right. I've seen more outright bullshit printed as fact in that magazine than almost any other car mag I've ever read. Its current iteration does not compare to the days when it was simply Car Review, with people like Terry Boyce and Tony Hossain writing. People who knew what they were talking about, in other words.

So I take it you dont like the magazine...lol. I just bought it 30 minutes ago to see how it was. Muscle Machines seems alot better so far.

joe_padavano · February 5th, 2009, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wasted

Alright that makes sense, I just never seen some one take a 64 front end and put it on a 65.

Funny you should mention that. I had a 65 442 convert back in college. The front end was crunched and all I could find was a 64 front end, so that's what I put on. Later I did find the correct 65 nose and swapped.

MN71W30 · February 6th, 2009, 05:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joe_padavano

Funny you should mention that. I had a 65 442 convert back in college. The front end was crunched and all I could find was a 64 front end, so that's what I put on. Later I did find the correct 65 nose and swapped.

My friend just showed me an old MC reveiw magazine with an all original 69 W32 convertible with a 4 speed. You could see the scoops were 68's because of the width. Don't those writers and editors know the cars? I only saw one 69 W32 20 years ago the guy bought it new and it had black inner fenders and that caused alot of critisism from the Olds crowd. He would get mad and say " I bought the car new and they were black"
Sometimes weird things happened but a 64 and a 65 mixed together?

wmachine · February 6th, 2009, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MN71W30

My friend just showed me an old MC reveiw magazine with an all original 69 W32 convertible with a 4 speed. You could see the scoops were 68's because of the width. Don't those writers and editors know the cars?

I think it helps to understand the dynamics here. It is virtually impossible for a magazine staff to be knowledgeable about every make out there. Especially a less mainstream make like Oldsmobile. So in most cases, information and cars they feature are described by others, like the car owners. It isn't practical to totally research every bit of info they are given.
But what they *can* do is not try to act like they know it all and attribute the information to where it came from. Which interestingly would get them off the hook for the accuracy.

aliensatemybuick · February 6th, 2009, 07:23 AM

Just enjoy the magazine for the pretty pictures, haw haw!

442scotty · February 6th, 2009, 07:30 AM

And for those he might want to attempt such a front end swap its all or nothing because 64 fenders are slightly shorter than the 65 so its all gotta go

joe_padavano · February 6th, 2009, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MN71W30

My friend just showed me an old MC reveiw magazine with an all original 69 W32 convertible with a 4 speed. You could see the scoops were 68's because of the width. Don't those writers and editors know the cars? I only saw one 69 W32 20 years ago the guy bought it new and it had black inner fenders and that caused alot of critisism from the Olds crowd. He would get mad and say " I bought the car new and they were black"
Sometimes weird things happened but a 64 and a 65 mixed together?

All 1969 W-32 cars came with black inner fenders.

As for the front end swap, this was often done as part of collision repair. I've seen more than one 68/69 hybrid car, for example.

KeithA0000 · February 6th, 2009, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joe_padavano

I've seen more than one 68/69 hybrid car, for example.

Like mine, for example....

February 5th, 2009, 06:52 PM	#1 (permalink)
Wasted Registered User Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 211	Muscle Car Review mistake? In the February edition of Muscle Car Review they have what they say a 65 Cutlass 442 in the treasure hunt section. To me the grill looks like its from a 64 so I was wondering did the magazine make a mistake? http://img27.imageshack.us/my.php?image=olds65ec1.jpg Here is the picture sorry its not the best. Last edited by Wasted; February 5th, 2009 at 06:54 PM..

February 5th, 2009, 07:05 PM	#2 (permalink)
a64olz Registered User Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 46	65 442 It's a 65 with a 64 front end, it has 65 body side mouldings, the 64 front will bolt on to the 65 and as well as the other way around, I bought a 64 with a 65 front end on it. It was a complete front from a VC core support, radiator, inner fenders as well. __________________ cars commute....wagons haul

February 5th, 2009, 07:13 PM	#3 (permalink)
rocketraider Oldsdruid Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Danville Vajenya, the Last Capital of Dixie Posts: 1,214	Muscle Car Review make a mistake? Surely you jest, it could never happen... Yah right. I've seen more outright bullshit printed as fact in that magazine than almost any other car mag I've ever read. Its current iteration does not compare to the days when it was simply Car Review, with people like Terry Boyce and Tony Hossain writing. People who knew what they were talking about, in other words. __________________ I know absolutely nothing about Oldsmobiles. Just ask the owner of Oldspower.com

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Hemmings Muscle car of the year award	f85w31	General Discussion	14	November 27th, 2008 06:39 PM
Muscle Car: 71 cutlass S 455, tons of pics, video soon	kylem4711	Cars For Sale	5	December 19th, 2007 03:53 PM
Texas Outsiders Nostalgia Muscle Car Race	Dago Red	Other	0	April 27th, 2006 01:45 AM
Is the Hurst Olds 442 the fastest Muscle Car?	Michael Kent	Big Blocks	3	September 30th, 2004 08:09 AM

February 6th, 2009, 07:23 AM	#8 (permalink)
aliensatemybuick Registered User Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 237	Just enjoy the magazine for the pretty pictures, haw haw!

February 6th, 2009, 07:30 AM	#9 (permalink)
442scotty Registered User Join Date: May 2008 Location: Calgary Alberta Posts: 228	And for those he might want to attempt such a front end swap its all or nothing because 64 fenders are slightly shorter than the 65 so its all gotta go