1968 Chevrolet Impala

327 V8. 83k miles. Looks to be almost like new.

http://www.hemmings.com/classifieds/dealer/chevrolet/impala/654880.html

 

I had a '68 Impala sedan in the same colors and same drivetrain as this wagon. In 1979, I paid a whopping $300 for it - AND drove it from Mississippi to Colorado!

 

1968 Impala is such a great looking year, and this is in great condition!

This one has very few options, but looks luxurious just because of great design.



David

 

My mom and I saw a brand new '68 Caprice woody at a shopping center car dealer display. It was white with that tan colored interior, and did not seem to have any options, maybe automatic, power steering, power brakes, and nothing else, not even a radio. But it was gorgeous, and it was surprising to me that mom liked it enough to want it. This one here is neat with the SS wheelcovers on it, and the lack of options on it or a lot of the others means nothing to me anymore.

 

Beautiful car, but I have to have my AC.

 

Me too... A/C is a must on any car I own, even if its not working. lol.

 

Great looking car. Must be a Turbo Hydramatic instead of a Powerglide trans? See the red painted upright metal piece and a cable in the area of the right side motor mount? That was added as part of a recall for that model I believe. Maybe someone else remembers the details? :confused:

 

Very nice looking wagon! Great color too!

 

Oh, I remember those - boxes and boxes of them! I was working in a Chevy Parts department in the summer of '72 when they issued the recall. The recall was for cracking motor mounts, but you didn't get new (or redesigned) mounts. Instead, you got a steel cable and a couple of brackets that would restrain the engine from 'jumping' when torqued after a mount broke. There where some cases where the engine jumped so much it jammed the accelerator cable open. Recall was on most V-8 equipped vehicles IIRC.

 

I got this from the Center for Auto Safety site.

On December 4, 1971, General Motor (GM) announced it would recall over 6.68 million 1965-70 Chevrolets with defective engine mounts. The recall covered 1965-69 full-size Chevrolets, 1965-69 Chevy II's and Novas, 1967-69 Camaros, and 1965-70 Chevrolet/GMC light trucks, all with V8 engines. (NHTSA Recall 71-0235, now 71V-235.)
Engine mount breakage causes a self-perpetuating chain of events. When the left-side mount breaks, engine torque causes the engine to rise up, pulling open the accelerator linkage; this causes even more upward movement, and consequently more opening of the accelerator linkage, until the engine's movement is stopped by the closed hood. Moreover, the engine's upward movement pulls the power brake booster vacuum hose loose, thus greatly increasing the force needed to stop the car. Also, the automatic transmission "PRNDL" quadrant would shift itself over one position to the right (e.g., from D to L), affecting all gear positions; this meant that the car no longer had a Park position, and could be started in Reverse.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) received its first report of a broken Chevrolet motor mount in September 1969, and contacted GM a few weeks later. However, even before it received GM's reply that indicated a total of 14 reports on 1968 models Chevrolets alone, NHTSA placed the investigation on "inactive status." NHTSA informed GM of this "inactive status" in a June 1970 letter.
The case (IR 162) remained in abeyance until NHTSA received a second report in late August 1970. Only then did the agency begin to arrange independent tests of effects of broken Chevrolet motor mounts on driver control, but even these tests (in October 1970) were flawed. The test facility used a Chevrolet without power brakes or power steering, thus preventing an examination of brake assist loss. Nonetheless, the tests demonstrated the throttle-opening effect that consumers had noted.
In December 1970, NHTSA sent a second, more comprehensive information request to GM. The company's January 1971 reply indicated a total of 172 reports of failed motor mounts, with 63 accidents and 18 injuries; GM also advised that it had been using the same mount since 1958. Despite this clear indication of a widespread defect, NHTSA did nothing further on the matter until June 1971, when it sent questionnaires to 63 consumers who had reported broken Chevrolet motor mounts. NHTSA sent a third information request to GM that August. On September 1, 1971, Ralph Nader sent an extensive letter to NHTSA about deficiencies in NHTSA's investigative procedures, including the handling of the motor mount defect. Robert Irvin, long-time automotive writer for the Detroit News, took interest in the matter after receiving a copy of Nader's letter, and subsequently wrote over 70 articles about the motor mount case. Irvin's articles, many of which appeared on the front page played a key role in putting public pressure on GM and NHTSA to force a recall.
On October 15, 1971, NHTSA issued a consumer protection bulletin advising motorists of the "potential risks" of broken GM engine mounts. Around this same time, GM President Edward Cole declared that a broken mount was the equivalent of a "flat tire or blowout", and that anyone who could not control a car with a failed mount at 25 mph "shouldn't be driving."
A few weeks later, NHTSA sent two staff members to GM's engineering facilities in Warren, Michigan to witness more tests of failed motor mounts; their findings corroborated the results of the earlier tests. Around this same time, NHTSA Administrator Doug Toms visited GM headquarters and test drove Chevrolets with severed mounts with GM President EJ Cole in the test vehicles, but NHTSA did not place a record of Toms' visit in the public files.
NHTSA sent a letter to GM on December 1, stating that it was close to determining that a motor vehicle safety defect did exist. Three days later, GM announced its recall, but the company refused to admit that the vehicles contained a safety defect.
One irony of the recall is that on over 95% of the vehicles recalled, GM did not replace the defective mounts themselves, but rather installed a bracket and cable to restrict engine movement if a mount broke. By avoiding replacement of engine mounts on all 6.68 million cars, GM managed to cut its recall costs considerably; the cable and bracket assembly cost about $1 per car, far less than the $50 cost of new motor mounts.
For a comprehensive report and materials on the failure of NHTSA to obtain a more timely recall, see Hearings on Auto Safety Repairs at No Cost, Senate Commerce Comm, 93rd Cong., 1st Sess. Pp 200-58 (Jan. 30-31, 1973) including Oct. 11, 1972, letter from Chairman Harley O. Staggers, House Interstate & Foreign Commerce Comm. to NHTSA Administrator Douglas W. Toms.


David

 

That happened to my dad with his first Impala wagon, back-in-the-day. He got frustrated about something, punched the accelerator and had the mount crack, jamming the accelerator wide open. Fortunately he wasn't traveling too fast and had the presence of mind to shut off the ignition. It spooked him pretty good.

 

Did GM pay for repairs? And his laundry bill ? :confused:

 

oh baby baby

okay,okay, so this Chevy might be my style. Chevy themselves Tri-powered the 327 for Corvette. One version pumped out around 395 bhp AND torque. Although, with all this talk of bad motor mounts, maybe leaving the 327 stock would be a good idea.

 

Love the paint on that one.

mike

 

He was in the parking lot of the garage after having picked it up and heard that they couldn't address the issues he had described. He got annoyed at their response and punched the accelerator which caused the car to run into the corner of the garage. Very little damage to the car. They finally did fix his issue and put in new mounts and the aforementioned safety cable. I don't believe that GM got involved. It was a used car and Dad likely didn't think to go any further than the local garage.