[Gary H]

I just started restoration on a 65' GTO with a 4 speed. This is an original owner car that the son now owns, the original owner passed away and left it to him. The car is VERY original and unmodified, 389 single 4 bbl with A/C. My question is about the shifter handle. It's an original round Hurst handle but doesn't have the "Hurst" script on the sides of it. It looks like a 64' GTO shifter to me. Is it possible that this car came with that shifter? I haven't had a chance to pull it out yet to get the numbers off the body of the shifter.

[rare4k]

Build month ?

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

[dld]

Early cars got the 64 style shifter

[dhcarguy]

The only one I ever seen, If I remember correctly, was in a 3rd week Sept.

[60sstuff]

Can you post a photo of the shifter and your data plate.

Very early production = bent arm and no Hurst.

Next version = bent arm with Hurst.

Last version = straight arm with Hurst.

All the above may vary as to the plant of build, supplies etc.

[theamcguy]

Originally Posted by 60sstuff

Can you post a photo of the shifter and your data plate.

Very early production = bent arm and no Hurst.

Next version = bent arm with Hurst.

Last version = straight arm with Hurst.

All the above may vary as to the plant of build, supplies etc.

Any pictures of the 3 types? Thank you

[Peter Serio]

The chrome part of a 64-66 GTO factory shifter is unionized into the base mechanism. It is not removable because these were all "purpose built" assemblies.

To get the chrome stick out of the shifter base the entire shifter has to be taken apart 100%. The shifters that GM bought for the GTOs were made for assembly line use only and as-such they only had to fit the car which was being built at that time.

[Gary H]

The car was built the last week in December. The shifter looks like the 64' GTO in Peter's first picture above. I haven't got it out of the car yet so I don't have any information date wise or part number

[dhcarguy]

Last week of Dec. should have the "Hurst" logo.

[6t5gto]

My build date is 12B and I have the bent shifter with the Hurst logo.

[60sstuff]

Post #8,#9,#10 coincide with my files on Unrestored Survivor cars.

With or without console the 3 GTOs (Dec. builds) below came with the bent shifter and Hurst name.

1) 12A - BF with console.
2) 12E - BAL without console
3) 12D - BAL with console

Chris

[John V.]

Hi Gary, couple thoughts.

1. Which Plant?
2. Does PHS show that it was built with the 4 spd?
3. Is the Muncie "matching nos." with the VIN stamp on the main case?

Back in the '70s, the first '64 I bought had the base 3 spd. I quickly found a used 4 spd with shifter and swapped it in. It was a '64 shifter (no Hurst stamp) so nothing visually suspicious about it in a '64 but had I owned a '65 might have been confusing until the nos. were checked when it would have been obvious as a swap.

The original shifter in the '64 you did for me was early year, car built late Nov. '63.

The Shifter Body was stamped "Pat. Pending". Later '64s were stamped with the actual Patent No. from what I recall.

Depending what is stamped on the one in the '65, if it was original, I doubt it would be an early '64 one stamped Pat. Pending. Assuming it shows the Pat. No., knowing that some early '65s got the '64 shifter will make it hard to prove one way or the other. The Sept.-Oct. strike is another wrench in the works.

If it was built at the Fremont Plant, another wrinkle. That Plant was more militant and didn't like the settlement so it wasn't as quick as other Plants to resume production as they felt the national had sold them out. I doubt a late Dec build was started before the strike started but if it was mine I'd want to turn over every rock before deciding it isn't the original "built with" shifter.

[Gary H]

Thanks for the information John.

OK, got the shifter out of the car and it has a handle stamp of either 2315,or 2375 on it. The body of the shifter has a stamping of 2479 on it. I couldn't find any date codes on it.

[John V.]

You didn't mention the Plant where assembled.

According to older threads here, Hurst never put a Date Code on their stuff.

The 2315 is correct for a '64 handle and 2479 is correct for the '64 shifter body.

In this thread, Peter Serio talks about the "batch code" on the shifters that some have thought were date codes. I don't think my '64 shifter had this "batch code".

http://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/...2466&p=4288088

A post in that thread also says that the Patent Pending continued in '65, says the patent not issued until later in '65.

In this thread, I posted that my shifter handle did NOT show the 2315 and the shifter body did NOT show the 2479. Not sure if I ever found it after it was cleaned up. When I posted in 2011, I wasn't sure where to look for the nos. and the shifter had not been cleaned or disassembled.

The most interesting posts for you in the thread however are #15 and #21.

It says a 1st week Dec. Fremont built '65 4 spd Lemans was delivered with no Hurst on the handle.

http://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/...d.php?t=658312

Anomalies are the worst. Hard to prove or disprove. If it's an original 4 spd car and the trans has the matching VIN stamp on the main case, I'd be inclined to believe the shifter is original also. The real problem is that '65 guys will expect it to have the Hurst stamp. Even if several other examples turned up from the same Plant built around the same time without the Hurst stamp, not many '65 hobbyists would ever be aware of it and still think the shifter was "wrong".

The Owner will have to decide which way to go. If it was me and the car was always in my family, I'd leave it as is unless I had reason to think my dad had swapped it out. And even then, it would matter to me if I knew WHY he swapped it out, might still want to keep it as is.

Chris shows a 12A Fremont build with the Hurst stamp, among others from Baltimore. So it might not matter where it was built.

But I'm still curious where it was built.

It occurs to me that if I took delivery of an early built '65 4 spd GTO and it didn't have the Hurst stamp, I might have complained to my dealer. And entirely possible that the dealer would have obtained the Hurst stamped shifter and swapped it out. Who's to say how many buyers may have done that? The Hurst shifter was a big deal in the GTO and the stamped shifter was prominently featured in advertising and the Sales Brochure. If many were built without the Hurst stamp, it almost seems unlikely that a '65 GTO buyer didn't complain about the missing Hurst stamping on the shifter. Too bad the original owner isn't around to learn what he might say about it.

[John V.]

Chris, you sure about that 12A Fremont build?

See your post #12 in this thread, complete with pix of a one owner 12A Fremont '65 GTO, no Hurst stamp!

http://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/...d.php?t=793718

[John V.]

And here's a thread I started in 2011.

http://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/...d.php?t=659589

Looks like I was trying to learn about the '65 shifter choices. Peter Serio explained about the 3 choices.

Post #7, 6t5gto noted his 12C GTO was built at Pontiac, bent lever with Hurst stamped. I assume same GTO that he noted in this thread.

Post #3, dld noted his 12C GTO built at Baltimore, came to him with a bent lever WITHOUT Hurst. He also posted in this thread. He acknowledged at the time that he couldn't swear it was the original and decided to install the tall, straighter lever during restoration believing it was more widely accepted in the hobby.

Peter explained that the Assembly Manual indicated the tall, straighter lever was supposed to be installed with Console, the bent lever was supposed to be installed without Console. And both were supposed to have the Hurst stamping.

Another interesting post was #21, bigpop related a story of an original owner '65 GTO, owner got mad when a judge nicked him for not having the Hurst stamping. No details on the Time Built or Plant but likely yet another '64 type shifter in a '65.

Seemed to me at the time (and still today) that there is a lot of evidence of the bent lever without the Hurst stamping getting installed in various '65s. Too many to simply pass them all off as just swaps. JMO.

In that old thread, it occurred to me that nobody claimed to have the tall, straighter lever in early cars, with or without Console and with or without the GTO option.

I raised the question but got no input as to how early that stick appeared. See my Post #18. I noted the p/n of the tall, straighter shifter seemed chronologically later than other start of production '65 MY p/ns. The p/ns weren't always released in chronological sequence but if they weren't being installed early year, perhaps they had yet to be released or perhaps Hurst had yet to start delivering them early in the MY.

Peter stated that Hurst quit shipping bent lever shifters by the end of Nov. '64 and that only the tall, straighter shifter was being installed by March '65.

But the question remained, when did PMD start installing the tall, straighter shifter at each of the 4 Plants?

[Gary H]

I checked and the car was built in Pontiac. The shifter body also has "Patent Pending" on it as well, as you mentioned you had seen before. As of right now I believe I'm going to leave it in the car. This car is so original that I really believe it came with this shifter, plus, the original owners son who's restoring it really is not all that concerned with points judging and such.