When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Now that I think of it I remember reading they were not boxed all the way.. They box them further due the the cracking and even further later on... The owner told me it was all original except the shifter, he when he had the engine rebuilt...
in 64 they were boxed from one end to the other. In 65 they shortened the boxing and later in the model year, into the 66’s, the boxing was extended due to control arm failure.
in 64 they were boxed from one end to the other...SORRY you are wrong it was not boxed all the way maybe half. I think I have seen more than you in my life time. Under the car too.
I watched this E-bay . It was bid up to $8500 . (22 bidders )
And it still hadn't reached reserve !
The auction was closed just minutes before the end . And is listed as no longer available ?
I predict that this car will re-appear on E-Bay again several times , and each time the high bid will be lower .
I've seen this happen many times .
This guy should have dropped his reserve , and taken the money and ran .
He started bidding at $1900 (probably what he paid for it).
He would have more than quadrupled his money . What the he!! else did he want ?
I clicked on the link and its not available, but Ebay did "find another one for me". It was at almost $7,000 with 13 hours to go. The ad claims its "numbers matching", but has no motor or transmission. Figure that one out for me.
in 64 they were boxed from one end to the other...SORRY you are wrong it was not boxed all the way maybe half. I think I have seen more than you in my life time. Under the car too.
well, I’ll respectfully disagree with you, Gerald.
From a friends 64 442
This is from my 64 442
The vast majority of 64 442s were built in Lansing. Of the 80 known cars on the 442 list, only 7 were built in Fremont, which means not a lot were around in California. Thankfully I grew up in the Midwest and saw plenty of real 64 442’s.
Last edited by Keener; June 24th, 2018 at 07:37 AM.
All I know I should have bought it... I didn't realize that aftermarket floor pans were available for the year... I'm sure the only reason the auction was cut short due to a deal made off line per say....
Keener, I hate to say it, but that looks like a home
made box control arm to me...
they are not home boxed. Both cars are documented 442’s. Here is another picture of another friends 64 442 with the same boxed control arm. He has two cars and both look like this...
I wonder what the deal is with the ones on the car in question & the bell housing.. ?
the trans and bell housing were replaced along the way. The m20 housing in 64 needs casting number 3831325. The photo that was shown of the trans appeared to be 3885010, which is a 66-67 Muncie.
Yeah, I'm sure the car had some street racing back in the day and he damaged the trans and replaced it with what ever was available... That's what I did with my 69 442...
Last edited by 65B01Delta; June 24th, 2018 at 12:38 PM.
Reason: typo
i have an early 65 cutlass parts car with a sway bar (one of the reasons i bought it) ..those look exactly like the boxed control arms on my car, about half of the control arm is boxed.......i even waited to look at my car again before i commented...
i have an early 65 cutlass parts car with a sway bar (one of the reasons i bought it) ..those look exactly like the boxed control arms on my car, about half of the control arm is boxed.......i even waited to look at my car again before i commented...
i have few thoughts on why the 64 442 listed (previously) on eBay had these short boxed control arms. Although Gerald disagrees and states the 64 did not have full boxing, the evidence that I have contradicts his thoughts. I’d like to see proof to the contrary. With that said:
1. The 7B build date is late in the 442 production and all cars I’ve seen are from April, May and Early June. So, maybe these later build date cars had shorter boxing. But I’d need proof of other documented cars showing this type of short boxing. The 65 442s did have short boxing.
2. The control arms could have been changed over the years for unknown reasons.
3. The car could have been cloned which was running rampant already in the 80’s (purchased by prior owner in 1978).
The car does have an original air cleaner...hard part to find. I did not see how the holes were drilled for the 442 emblems. Would also be nice to see inside of front fenders to see if there are chalk marks designating the need for the assembly plant to drill holes for the emblems. Would also be nice to see the Julian date code on the engine. If the trans was replaced, maybe the engine also met this fate.
The 442 holes on the 64 fenders were punched out not drilled. I'm right on the boxed arms only half way.
1965 442s were only boxed half way. Why would they be full length boxing in 1964 then switch to half length for 1965 only to switch back to full length for 1966 & later?
The 442 holes on the 64 fenders were punched out not drilled. I'm right on the boxed arms only half way.
where’s the proof, Gerald? Every 64 442 that I know to be real, with a pedigree, has fully boxed control arms? Gerald, the car you remember is a very late build 442...likely 7D. So, my point above regarding different control arms, late in the model year, may be true. I just need concrete proof to draw that conclusion. Ed Vickers, author of the 64 442 article in JWO, back in 2014, has the same belief as me...fully boxed control arms in 1964. I guess I’ll reach out to Bob Hamby to see if he knows about the shorter boxing late in the production run.
1965 442s were only boxed half way. Why would they be full length boxing in 1964 then switch to half length for 1965 only to switch back to full length for 1966 & later?
That is a great question, Dave! Not sure why but this is the sequence of control arm boxing. If you search this forum, you will find discussion on the control arm failure issues in 1965, and then the change to full boxing again in 1966 or possibly during the 1965 model year.
That is a great question, Dave! Not sure why but this is the sequence of control arm boxing. If you search this forum, you will find discussion on the control arm failure issues in 1965, and then the change to full boxing again in 1966 or possibly during the 1965 model year.
[/left]
Last edited by Asusport; June 25th, 2018 at 06:32 AM.
Look on Ebay right now there is a red 65 442 Conv't 4 sale look in the large pics and tab down to the last pic and it shows a half boxed arms.
REST my case. And Dave and I are right.
Gerald
Go to 442bro.com and find 100 points and tab down it shows half way.
Were right you are wrong.
those are 1965 cars. Are you aware we are talking about 1964, Gerald? What you fail to accept is that owners with original, documented cars from “1964” have fully boxed control arms. What happened in 1965 is completely different.
Look on Ebay right now there is a red 65 442 Conv't 4 sale look in the large pics and tab down to the last pic and it shows a half boxed arms.
REST my case. And Dave and I are right.
Gerald
again, 1965 is NOT 1964. Dave is not agreeing with you, Gerald. He is asking a question to determine why this would be done (fully boxed, half boxed, then fully boxed again). Which I don’t have an answer.
so, Gerald, unless you show some proof from your claimed “rightness” for “1964”, when all the proof from original 1964 442 cars shows otherwise, you cannot be considered correct without a valid inference.
The 64 and 65 are the same. In the pics posted of the 64 they were welded not bye Factory but bye a shop. The Factory had a cup plate welded in to support the bolts being tightened. You believe what you want I will stick to what I have seen on 64-65 442.
There is something inside - like a tube - else the control arm would crush when the sway bar was tightened. I looked inside the opening in the back to satisfy my curiosity.
As I mentioned, I have an original, unrestored, 64 442 F-85 Base Club Coupe with the long plate.
Looks like this is just turning into a big pissing contest and nobody is going to resolve it.
i wouldn't say that.believe me if i was looking at a 64 442 i would want to know everything 442 specific,there are just too many clones and incorrect cars out there.
I bought my car as a 442 and spent a lot of time and effort validating it before claiming it as such. I have a pretty good checklist of items that goes way beyond the air cleaner and emblems. What I found out later, was the chalked marked fenders were in tact along with many other important items.
When I bought the car, I didnt realize that non-Cutlass 442s were even more rare - 148 made of the 2 door post.
It really bothers me to see so many fake cars. In all honesty, that is fraud. I am doing all I can to help others like others have helped me validate my car.
Here is what I wrestle with: the more I fix, the more the car is changed... obviously, I do want to fix what’s broken such as the gaping holes in the floorpans, but it is hard to know where to stop - the car is very original, runs and drives, but has lived a full life already
I have no reason to believe that this has been removed or changed as of right now. Engine does not look to have been removed, all engine dates are correct, trans is correct.
June 23rd, 2018, 10:17 PM
