Pontiac, Oldsmobile, and Buick joined Chevrolet in the compact car movement in 1961. Using the new Y-body platform, the Tempest was born with the LeMans as a trim option. The LeMans was promoted to series status in 1963, the last year before the cars were upgraded to A-body intermediates in 1964. The seller’s ’63 LeMans convertible is one of about 16,000 produced that year, and all we know is that it’s been idle for three years. Located in Hamersville, Ohio, this drop-top edition is available here on Facebook Marketplace for $10,000 (reduced from $11,000).
When the Tempest/LeMans debuted, GM’s only compact in the game was the Chevy Corvair (the Chevy II/Nova didn’t arrive until 1962). The Pontiac, along with Oldsmobile’s F-85 and Buick’s Special, was considered a “senior level” compact compared to the Ford Falcon or Rambler American. The Tempest/LeMans differed from its corporate cousins in that it used a front-engine/rear-transaxle layout that split the car’s weight evenly front to back and also had independent rear suspension for crisper handling (there was no driveshaft, so the interior floors were flat).
In 1963, LeMans buyers had their choice of two engines: the 194.5 cubic inch “Trophy-4,” which was half of a 389 V8, or a 336 CI V8 motor. The seller of this ragtop doesn’t say which is present here and does not pop the hood for pics. This, plus a general lack of information about the Pontiac, may explain why it’s still on the market after five weeks. But we’re told the vehicle has an automatic transmission and has amassed 126,000 miles.
No mention is made of the car’s running status, but it would be safe to assume it does not if it’s been sitting for at least 36 months. The interior and body may be okay, but more photos would help. The seller is in a hurry since he/she is moving, so the price may be further negotiable. Thanks for the “Poncho” tip, Barn Finder “Ted”.
V8 was 326.
No, it is a 336 cubic inch V8 which was a one year only I1963) engine. It is a 389 with a smaller bore. For 19t4 the small Pontiac V8 was a 326.
Pontiac called it a “326” in 1963, but it actually was 336 ci.
Believe the misnomer was to pretend they were complying with a GM edict on displacement limits.
Pontiac played fast and loose with the GM mandate limiting smaller cars to 330 c.i. (Think ‘64 Olds 442)
They borrowed the GMC 336 V8, and “pretended” that it was 326 c.i. The next year the limit was raised to
400 c.i.
GM had a loose policy of “protecting “ the Corvette as “America’s Sports Car”, much to the chagrin of non-Chevrolet GM divisions. The displacement limitation was intended to prevent intermediate sized GM cars from having a “bigger” (whether it was more powerful or not), engine than what you could get in a Corvette, which in 1963 was still a 327. Pontiac used their “GMC” 336 and called it a 326 to get around the 330 CID corporate limit. GM corporate figured out the shenanigans Pontiac was trying to pull immediately and Pontiac de-bored the 336 to 326 actual cubic inches.
This is my favorite year Tempest/Lemans. Nice car at 10k with any engine available.
None of the other divisions raised an objection when Pontiac marketed the 336 as a 326 to sidestep GM’s rules, but when Buick put a 401 into the 1965 Skylark GS and called it a 400, other divisions objected. The competitive landscape had changed dramatically in just two years.
It would be a 2-speed automatic transaxle, as these only had a choice of 2-Speed Automatic PowerShift transaxle, 3-Speed manual Transaxle, and 4-Speed manual Transaxle. All shared with the Chevy Corvair.
Not having the grill badge or trunk emblem showing the 326 V8 my guess is it’s a 4 cyl.
My very first car, over 50 years ago, was one of these. Mine was red with red interior and the white convertible top. Mine also had the 4 cyl. and automatic. The zipper for the back window had gave up way before I got it so in the winter the snow would blow off the top and swirl around and into the car. It was a big surprise to any people who asked for a ride home from school. It was actually a good little car but this 16 year old just didn’t appreciate it.
small exauast pipe by rear tire makes me think its a 4 cyl i had a 62 with the 4 i thought it was pretty peppy
I love this! If it is as rust free as in the pictures. Then the price is fair. I have always liked the body style and the John Z. Fingerprints all over the drive train make me an enthusiastic fan. I wish time, money and location were optimum for me.
New Barnfinds terminology. TML. (TIME, MONEY, LOCATION) As that seems to fit many of us when we see something that we would like to have.
lot of info in that listing. NOT!
Ok, my comment disappeared. I love it, and would like it parked in my driveway. (Provided the tin worm has not hidden away it’s desires.)
New Barn Finds monenclature
TML. Would love to have it BUT “TIME MONEY and LOCATION” make impossible.
My high school girlfriend’s dad bought her one of these when she first got her license. Drop top and same color too. It was a fun car and didn’t seem to have any issues. Of course, at the time it was only 3 years old.
I had a 63 Old F-85 and my ex-wife had a 63 Buick Special. There is apparently more differences in these cars than I thought, especially in the drivetrain. Would love to have either of them back.
had one 326 v8 3 speed on the floor crazy fast loved it white coupe red inter ahhh the good ol days
No driveshaft? How did the power get from the engine to the transaxle. I think you meant there is no transmission hump.
It had what was called a “rope” drive shaft. It was a flexible steel cable that ran from the engine to the transaxle. It sounds weird, and it is, but it worked just fine. I never heard of an issue or a failure. During Hot August Nights they close off downtown to traffic for a couple of days. Working in an automotive repair facility I told the techs about the rope drives haft on the Tempest parked at the curb across the street. None of them believed me. Each one went to take a look and came back shaking their heads. It is very easy to see as when the car is parked, it hangs down slack. Again weird, but true.
I owned a 63 Tempest coupe 326 (260 hp), 3- speed manual in 1965-66 during my senior year and 1st year in college
The driveshaft (a shot-peened, coated steel torsion bar that was enclosed in a steel housing from clutch housing to rear transaxle) does NOT “hang down.” It is enclosed. Mine broke and left me stranded 90 miles away in San Antonio. The Pontiac field rep told me that it’s coating had been scratched and that induced a stress fracture.
Neat car but that “rope” driveshaft was not failure free.
For those that think it was a braided cable… NO. It’s a simple torsion bar.
Rope drives haft. Which is a steel braided cable.
NO… it’s a special steel alloy torsion bar, arched and supported by two rubber-mounted bearings inside a steel enclosure that runs from the front bell housing to the rear transaxle. Mine was a 326 with a 3 speed manual. The automatic did a magic trick with the internals shuttling power to a rear torque converter and then forward to the automatic gears and differential!
But no…. the driveshaft was NOT a giant braided speedometer cable.
I owned a 63 Tempest coupe 326 (260 hp), 3- speed manual in 1965-66 during my senior year and 1st year in college
The driveshaft (a shot-peened, coated steel torsion bar that was enclosed in a steel housing from clutch housing to rear transaxle) does NOT “hang down.” It is enclosed. Mine broke and left me stranded 90 miles away in San Antonio. The Pontiac field rep told me that it’s coating had been scratched and that induced a stress fracture.
Neat car but that “rope” driveshaft was not failure free.
For those that think it was a braided cable… NO. It’s a simple torsion bar.
Possibly 1963 was changed. I have seen and touched the “rope driveshaft” I didn’t know the year of the car I was under. I was told by an old Pontiac guy who worked for the division when these came out it was used to help cushion torque inputs to the (basically) Corvair gear box in the rear. Seeing them still in use after 50 some years is quite the testament to the design. Although I don’t think that we’re using the shaft and gearbox on the 421Dragwagons!
I had a 64. If I had this Lemans. ,. First thing I,d do is replace that trans axle. It caused me to flip mine near Ravenna,Ohio in 1972. I also didn,t care much about the manual gear shift. It was sloppy. Mine was medium blue with a black top. With the mileage on this car –the price is a good bit too pricey. What has been replaced on this car and what does the underneith really look like? The saler needs to furnish more information .
Johnny,
If you had a 64 model, it had neither the transaxle nor swing axles. A 64 Tempest/Lemans was the new upsized A-body with a solid rear axle/differential. If you flipped it, it wasn’t because of the older Y-body’s unique IRS.