Bad modification to a 64

Discussions about general body work and modifications
Post Reply
tiomev
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 6:57 pm

Bad modification to a 64

Post by tiomev »

Greetings All,

I recently acquired a beautiful 64 289 Caliente with a non standard
C4 automatic. To get the C4 to fit, a structural channel running
crosswise was removed and a homemade x-member installed. The
homemade member is bolted to the side rails. To install the bolts,
holes were torched in the rails.

Does this modification significantly effect structural integrity?

Also does anyone have pictures of the underside of the car?
I'd like to know how it's supposed to look.

Thanks

Mark

Lou's Comet
Posts: 1539
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2011 8:56 pm
Location: Jeannette, Pa.

Re: Bad modification to a 64

Post by Lou's Comet »

tiomev wrote:Greetings All,

I recently acquired a beautiful 64 289 Caliente with a non standard
C4 automatic. To get the C4 to fit, a structural channel running
crosswise was removed and a homemade x-member installed. The
homemade member is bolted to the side rails. To install the bolts,
holes were torched in the rails.

Does this modification significantly effect structural integrity?

Also does anyone have pictures of the underside of the car?
I'd like to know how it's supposed to look.

Thanks

Mark
Without seeing the work hard to say if the integrity is compromised.

Others have removed the channel, is the car going to be a hot rod or a cruiser?

Here is picture of underneath.

Image

Hope it helps

Lou

tiomev
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 6:57 pm

Re: Bad modification to a 64

Post by tiomev »

Lou,

Thank you for the picture. The arch in the tunnel was removed.
The horizontal ends remain. The car will be a Sunday driver.
I'll try to post a picture.

Thanks
Mark

User avatar
poboyjo65
Moderator
Posts: 7037
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 9:40 pm
Location: Camden, Tenn.

Re: Bad modification to a 64

Post by poboyjo65 »

You'll be ok! Roy raced his for years without that tunnel brace, doing a wheel stand every 1/4 mile :lol: , so a sunday driver should be ok. a couple more holes in the frame wont hurt nothing either.


Image
Image
Johno

redhotcomet
Posts: 349
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 2:22 pm
Location: Saskatchewan, Canada

Re: Bad modification to a 64

Post by redhotcomet »

Its pretty common to cut that arch when installing a T5 as thats where the shifter comes thru the floor. Lots of people have cut it (myself included) without any apparent effects. Although I did install subframe connectors beforehand.
1964 Caliente hardtop, 302/T5/8.8"

Image

User avatar
Jims65cyclone
Posts: 2754
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2014 10:29 pm
Location: Lexington, SC

Re: Bad modification to a 64

Post by Jims65cyclone »

Welcome aboard! As you can see, you're in the right place for experience and advice.
Jim
Image

User avatar
SASSY
Moderator
Posts: 5123
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 12:32 am
Location: Wynndel, BC CANADA

Re: Bad modification to a 64

Post by SASSY »

Ya I hacked mine out in the 70s for a Cleveland and toploader, went drag racin with no probs.
Fred
Image
I'd rather do it myself if it's done right or not,,,isn't that what hotrodding is all about

Image

Comechero65
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 10:37 pm
Location: Santa Clara, Ca

Re: Bad modification to a 64

Post by Comechero65 »

The entire crossmember didn't have to be removed. Just cut out the center section. then the common 'c4 conversion mount' as it's called will still bolt in for whatever trans you choose to use. Mount can be trimmed as need be for more clearance for trans. C4 or T5 should be no problem. AOD could be a little tight but still should fit with trimming.
imageBELLYb.jpg
imageBELLYb.jpg (69.39 KiB) Viewed 2152 times

Looks like this though on mine the crossmember is all still there but looks similar.
IMG_3739A.jpg
IMG_3739A.jpg (138.54 KiB) Viewed 2152 times
Ron
Image

tiomev
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 6:57 pm

Re: Bad modification to a 64

Post by tiomev »

Gentleman,

Thank you all!

MarkV

Post Reply