1967 A body frame compatibility
#1
1967 A body frame compatibility
Hi guys.
I have a question about the 1967 GM A body frames. Olds advertised "heavy duty " frames in there 442, but, other then the convertible were the frames of other GM A bodies interchangeable. What made me curious was a frame I was looking at for sale from a regular cutlass, I noticed it only had one set of holes where the rear upper control arm mounted as opposed to two set (on each side) on my 442 frame. Are there other differences and are Pontiac, Buick, & Chevy different from the 442 also?
I have a question about the 1967 GM A body frames. Olds advertised "heavy duty " frames in there 442, but, other then the convertible were the frames of other GM A bodies interchangeable. What made me curious was a frame I was looking at for sale from a regular cutlass, I noticed it only had one set of holes where the rear upper control arm mounted as opposed to two set (on each side) on my 442 frame. Are there other differences and are Pontiac, Buick, & Chevy different from the 442 also?
#2
Tom, I think the 442 frame and the cutlass frame were the same, and extra holes were added to the 442 ones along the way. There was an option for heavy duty frame on at least the non-convertible 442s that was simply the boxed convertible frame under the non-convertible car. This may have been available in other trim lines of Olds A body as well.
#3
It's my understanding that the convertible frames are the heavy duty frames offered in 442's, the same thing. I'm sure the experts will chime in here.
My 66 convertible frame also has the two sets of mounting holes but the hole diameter is smaller on the unused set. I have no idea why that is or what the purpose was for but they are different in size. I have two pics here that illustrate that. They aren't the best pics but you'll see the difference. I hope this helps
My 66 convertible frame also has the two sets of mounting holes but the hole diameter is smaller on the unused set. I have no idea why that is or what the purpose was for but they are different in size. I have two pics here that illustrate that. They aren't the best pics but you'll see the difference. I hope this helps
#4
I'm not an expert, but will share that the 1964-67 4 speed cars had a different frame than the automatic ones. The 4 speed frame was one piece in front and over the rear axle. The automatic cars had a splice just in front of the rear axle. I don't know for sure if the 66&67 frames had the 4 holes for the shock mounts, or the extra gusset for the front cross member. But I'm pretty sure both 64&65 did.
#6
You are correct, which is why the heavy duty frame option was not available on convertibles - those cars already had it.
#7
The advertising statement "heavy duty frame" was just hype; all F85s had the same frame, except for the convertibles/F35 true HD frame. There were two suppliers, A.O. Smith and Pontiac. The latter is the "one hole" type which also shows more welded together areas vs. the more "molded" Smith. I have found the Pontiac only under automatic cars, but some auto's had the Smith frame.
#8
There are a lot of differences between the automatic frame and the standard shift frame. the convertible frame is boxed on the frame rails, unlike the other two variations.
442 had the same heavy duty, or standard shift frame, no matter if it was automatic, or standard shift.
442 had the same heavy duty, or standard shift frame, no matter if it was automatic, or standard shift.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
sixty9olds
General Discussion
1
June 14th, 2011 06:43 PM
1969goatman
Parts For Sale
0
August 30th, 2010 07:44 PM