say there is an attitude on here because someone presents a fact.
I was not talking about, Dave. I was talking about you. Now read what I said and what Dan said about his conversation with George.
You got the wrong guy Henry, Classic shooting the messenger. If you take the time to read my posts properly you will see that I have always referred to Pontiacs, Acadians and Beaumonts. I have never referred to an Acadian or Beaumont as a Pontiac. I have repeatedly said on numerous posts that the word Pontiac does not appear on these cars and that GM started them out as a separate marque. I thought that was your point. We owned one when I was a kid so I know. I went to school in it every day for 4 years looking at those little Maple Leaves above a capital A. Yep it was called an Acadian alright. I have been accused of having a lot of things over the years but you are the first to say I have an attitude, I'm writing that on the calender. What I have is an open mind. An apology is not necessary because I'm not the type to hold a grudge.
I was wondering about the later GTO's around 1970-'74. So '64 starts with an 8, might have something there as to why in '65 Acadian lost it.....
67BBSD wrote:
I just appraised a 1964 Pontiac GTO convertible-the V.I.N. starts with an 8. I know this has nothing to do with Canadian models, just added for the purpose of this debate or interesting information. It does say Pontiac on the tail panel-someone here wasn't sure.
__________________
Acadian and Beaumont... "Only made in Canada,... Pity!"
I just appraised a 1964 Pontiac GTO convertible-the V.I.N. starts with an 8. I know this has nothing to do with Canadian models, just added for the purpose of this debate or interesting information. It does say Pontiac on the tail panel-someone here wasn't sure.
I sold my 64 GTO convertible (clone) about a year and half ago. The car started life as a 6 cyl Tempest, and the first digit in the VIN was a 6 as I recall. I believe the first digit on those cars at least indictated number of cylinders. From what I know, 64 was the last year the Tempest/Lemans/GTO VIN worked that way.
__________________
1966 Strato Chief 2 door, 427 4 speed, 45,000 original miles
1966 Grande Parisienne, 396 1 of 23 factory air cars
And to get back to the debate, I'm so used to people calling my car a Nova that it really doesn't bother me if it's called a Pontiac. I think the Nova title probably bugs me more, because I want to think it's unique, not just another Nova.
Oh, and before the Nova guys get on my case here, if you look at my signature you'll see I own one of them too!
__________________
1966 Strato Chief 2 door, 427 4 speed, 45,000 original miles
1966 Grande Parisienne, 396 1 of 23 factory air cars
73SC wrote:You got the wrong guy Henry, ...... I have never referred to an Acadian or Beaumont as a Pontiac.
No, I don't have the wrong guy! Let me refresh your memory regarding your second comment. You repeatedly make references to Acadians and Beaumonts being 'in the Pontiac Family'. If a person is in the "Jones family" that sounds a lot like he is in "Jones"
The following are only a few things that you wrote.
I was raised mostly on Pontiacs during the exact Acadian/Beaumont era, mom had a 63 Acadian that we went to school in, dad had the 61 Strato Chief, 65 Laurentian and horrors a 70 Tempest the Beaumont replacement car. We considered ourselves a Pontiac family. I know the word Pontiac does not appear on those cars but I always considered them part of the Pontiac family. I'm kind of disappointed to see the Pontiac name so vehemently opposed.
I think that one thing is pretty clear, GM Canada made a decision to build Pontiacs, Acadians and Beaumonts based on Chevrolets and marketed through Pontiac dealers using different and distinctive levels of trim and models. I hope we can agree on this commonality. I've always considered the cars to be part of the same family and I think GM Canada does too, if you look at my attached photos you will see what I mean. I think that owner of the butternut cream SD does too.
I know an Acadian was not really a Pontiac but we had one because we were a Pontiac family.
The manufacture's VIN identifying the car as a Pontiac is pretty compelling evidence. Also vindicates George Zapora's documents identifying the cars as Pontiacs given that is what the manufacturer's VIN says they are. He has no VIN for Beaumont. Not likely to end the debate but does shed quite a beam of light the topic.
73SC wrote:You got the wrong guy Henry, ...... I have never referred to an Acadian or Beaumont as a Pontiac.
Henry you are very unreasonable. Those posts do not call the cars Pontiacs, and I never did. Most of my posts were made to calm you down and try and help you find common ground. It is unfortunate that someone like me who is trying to be conciliatory is the brunt of your rampage. Being part of a family is not the same thing. I am part of my wife's family but I do not have the same name, I don't know how more plain and simple an example that can be. I fail to see how you can't understand that.
