67 Parisienne convertible

Ritchie · Newbie

67 Parisienne convertible

CdnGMfan · Canadian Poncho Superstar!

Your '67 Parisienne, being a convertible will have a boxed frame (fully enclosed frame rails rather than an open C-section frame). In general the full size 1965 through 1970 Chevrolets and Canadian Pontiacs shared the same 119" wheelbase frames. Some body styles used additional body mounts (4-door hardtops), plus as mentioned the convertibles used fully boxed main frame rails.

Oh, I almost forgot, Welcome to Canadian Poncho!

-- Edited by CdnGMfan on Tuesday 27th of April 2010 03:25:26 PM

Ritchie · Newbie

Thanks a million, certainly clears that up. Was unable to find that info until now. Had checked out a 66 Impala coupe but it has the C frame.

eeluddy · Uber Guru

Ritchie wrote:

Thanks a million, certainly clears that up. Was unable to find that info until now. Had checked out a 66 Impala coupe but it has the C frame.

It will be hard to source a boxed frame ,so just box in the 66 Impala frame and maybe add some gussets for a stiffer result. I have seen guys do this with the mid 60's Corvette frames.

StriperSS · Poncho Master!

If you're going to box the 66 Impala frame, it should be bolted to a jig or the car to keep it from twisting during the process.

67rag396 · Poncho Master!

I think we also established that suspension pieces are different 66 to 67
ie rear control arms and front spindles

StriperSS · Poncho Master!

I've just dug out my GM parts book, and looked up the frames.
67 and 68 frames are listed under the same part number for convertibles. 66 is different, and 69 is different.
So look for a 67, 68, and just box it like your ragtop frame, but it should be jigged to keep it from twisting.

So the part number we're interested in is 3916429, as '67' is the convertible model number.

-- Edited by StriperSS on Tuesday 27th of April 2010 06:32:01 PM

CdnGMfan · Canadian Poncho Superstar!

Thanks for the clarification, guys. I guess I should have said the frames were the same but with possibly minor differences between certain years. But I didn't

.

I have read that the 1965 frames had some minor tweaks in the suspension for 1966, understandable with an entirely new frame design in 65. GM back then was doing minor changes to the big car line every year, more significant changes every 2 years (65-66, 67-68, 69-70). They are all very closely related. Four piston front disks became optional for 1967 so I could understand the front spindle changes to support that possible option. Spindles aren't technically the frame proper but the front suspension anyway. In 1969 they went with single piston floating calipers for the disk brakes. Heck, 11" drums were still used on most full-sized Chevy & Pontiac big cars through 1970.

StriperSS · Poncho Master!

According to the notes in the parts book, the differences are minor, but may require cutting brackets off the old frame, and welding them to the new frame.

65wagon · Poncho Master!

Ritchie wrote:

After reading a lot of the information on frames I still need clarification.

What years and models from Pontiac and Chev fit my 67.

Thanks for your help

hey Rich i didnt want to read through the whole blog but all the frames are boxed under the canadian cars thats why we have rust issues, around the fuel tank they are c chanel as a crush zone dont box. 65-66 is the same frame physically as later frames excecpt from the way the front stearing linkage attaches the peices were harder to find and more expensive. now the part you want to Know convertible frame is only a convertible frame. its wider heavier than sedan or wagon to keep the body from saging i would not be tempted to use anything but or your doors might not open and close for very long

67Poncho · Uber Guru

This is a discussion we had before on here. All '65 to '70 full size frames either Chevrolet or Canadian Pontiac that I have seen are boxed. The only notible difference being that the convert frames are wider down the rocker panel part of the car and have an extra mount in the middle as well.

That being said, I did use a 4-dr sedan frame under my '67 Rag with no issues what so ever and that has been the late '80's until I started driving the car in '95. I have a '70 4dr sedan frame under my '67 coupe and other than changing the rear section, no issues.

If you can't find a convert frame, I am sure a solid non-convert frame will be fine just as it has for me. But, '67-'70 frames will be your best bet other than having to install the '67 tail section into your '69 and '70 frame.

2drpost · Uber Guru

as vincent said,
all b-body frames are boxed through the front and mid section, c section behind the rear wheels.
convert frames have a wider boxed rail through the mid section and another body mount below the doors for more strength.
'65-'66 frames use a different idler arm and different upper rear crossmember, along with longer upper rear control arms.
'67-'68 frames are the same, difference is whether it is convert or sedan.

-- Edited by 69 belair on Tuesday 27th of April 2010 08:10:09 PM

gparis7 · Canadian Poncho Superstar!

Agree with all those noting that all frames are boxed, everywhere except the tail section. But I have found that a solid original convt frame is stiffer than the sedan frame - you can feel the difference in the drive quality. I think your best bet is a convt or 4 dr ht frame. Also agree with Vincent - 67-70 frames are best; they have better rear suspension geometry, and more likely to have F40 components.

Ritchie · Newbie

Thanks again, very helpful, I located a frame in western Canada last year that comes from a 67 convertible so that's my best bet so i don't have to make modifications.

67curves · Addicted!

Hi Ritchie. I have a frame from a 1967 pontiac parisienne 2D.H.T. 2+2. I also live not far from Calgary.

Ritchie · Newbie

does it meet all the criteria for the convertible? How do I get in touch besides this forum?

67curves · Addicted!

Hello. My cell # 1-403-660-9522- Dave Ritchie i'm not sure if the frames are exact but this was a big block car and 2D.H.T so maybe the frame was stronger.This I don't know.