Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Muscle cars by definition are midsize cars with high-displacement engines. That's a Nova (compact) with a 350 (small block).
Still a cool car, though.
Know how I know you aren't a true petrol head? When you say such asinine things as this.
And for the guy who basically said "I'm right and I know it"....well no you aren't but you aren't wrong either. In this discussion there is no right or wrong. It's simply subjective opinion.
And for the guy who basically said "I'm right and I know it"....well no you aren't but you aren't wrong either. In this discussion there is no right or wrong. It's simply subjective opinion.
Only the preference itself is subjective. But here are the facts I know I'm right about: This is considered by many highly annoying, it can sometimes cause hearing loss, one reason offered for it is "I like the sound", the other reason offered is "performance gains", one person liking a sound does not automatically mean others should have to hear it, and "performance gains" of that nature are not necessary unless you race for a living (which might beg other questions).
I'm looking to get an axle-back for my WRX but most are either muffler deletes, or just WAY too loud.
I just want to hear the boxer rumble a bit more and sound a bit more mean but... Unfortunately if you want a "classy" exhaust note you're paying a bit more for it.
I think in general that there's annoying exhausts and those that are loud when they need to be. I'm not terribly old, but already I'm leaning towards the quieter spectrum.
Who decided on that definition? There is a wide range of what can be considered to be a muscle car. "High displacement" is a relative term. When muscle cars first began, most cars had 6 cylinders or much smaller V8s. A 350 was fairly big back in the day. And it's not specifically about size; it's about output.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wcu25rs
Know how I know you aren't a true petrol head? When you say such asinine things as this.
Those of who were "petrol heads" growing up in the 1970s and '80s had it hammered into us from every reliable source that the 1964 Pontiac GTO was the first muscle car, and that the term defined a mid-size two-door car equipped from the factory with a high-displacement - "high displacement" generally accepted to mean each individual company's big-block offering - engine.
As the old-timers have died off or lost interest the definition has blurred to include any performance car regardless of engine or body size and whether or not the car was equipped from the factory that way, mostly the result of automakers wanting to capitalize on the popularity of the term to sell whatever performance models they want to trot out.
So go ahead and use the term however you want, and I'll use it the way I want which is the way it was originally intended. If you want to get your shorts in a knot about it, that's your problem, not mine.
Last edited by duster1979; 07-20-2012 at 05:30 AM..
Those of who were "petrol heads" growing up in the 1970s and '80s had it hammered into us from every reliable source that the 1964 Pontiac GTO was the first muscle car, and that the term defined a mid-size two-door car equipped from the factory with a high-displacement - "high displacement" generally accepted to mean each individual company's big-block offering - engine.
As the old-timers have died off or lost interest the definition has blurred to include any performance car regardless of engine or body size and whether or not the car was equipped from the factory that way, mostly the result of automakers wanting to capitalize on the popularity of the term to sell whatever performance models they want to trot out.
So go ahead and use the term however you want, and I'll use it the way I want which is the way it was originally intended. If you want to get your shorts in a knot about it, that's your problem, not mine.
It is arguable that the 389 in the '64 GTO wasn't a big block, based on a few articles I just read in the topic, since at the time Pontiac didn't differentiate between small block and big block. That shoots your definition down.
Only the preference itself is subjective. But here are the facts I know I'm right about: This is considered by many highly annoying, it can sometimes cause hearing loss, one reason offered for it is "I like the sound", the other reason offered is "performance gains", one person liking a sound does not automatically mean others should have to hear it, and "performance gains" of that nature are not necessary unless you race for a living (which might beg other questions).
"Fact" one is still subjective. We dont care if you or anyone else finds stuff annoying. Whether something is annoying is strictly on a subjective level.
"Fact" two would be backed up by anecdotal evidence at best. Since age 16, Ive been around the car scene whether it be muscle car or import, as Ive owned multiple examples of both, and Ive never heard of anyone having hearing loss due to a simple aftermarket exhaust on a vehicle. The only way I could see your point is for someone who is DDing a car built for the track that has an extremely loud exhaust and no sound deadening in the car.
"Fact" three....on the flip side of what you said, one or a group of people not liking a sound, does that mean the person who does like the sound should have to sacrifice what he enjoys just to appease the others? It's a two way street. Just because you dont like something doesnt mean you have the right to tell them what should or should not be done to their vehicle.
Also, who are you to say that performance gains are not necessary unless you race for a living? For example, my simple stage 2 setup on my WRX has made my car so much more enjoyable to drive than it was stock, yet I dont track it. I dont have to track it to get the effects of my modding. Also, you dont have to drive like a moron out on the street to feel the effects of added horsepower. But let's not stop at power adding, let's follow your inane observations a step farther. Performance gains arent just power adders, as many enthusiasts upgrade the way their car handles, shifts, and behaves(drivetrain mods). If some of those people dont track their car, are you saying they shouldnt do those things?
It is arguable that the 389 in the '64 GTO wasn't a big block, based on a few articles I just read in the topic, since at the time Pontiac didn't differentiate between small block and big block. That shoots your definition down.
No it doesn't.
Please note the phrase "generally accepted" in my previous post. There never has been a be all-end all consensus on what constitutes a "muscle car" power plant.
Please note the phrase "generally accepted" in my previous post. There never has been a be all-end all consensus on what constitutes a "muscle car" power plant.
Nor has there been a consensus on what a muscle car is. If the definition of the original muscle car is based largely on the engine, and said engine doesn't fall under a specific definition, well...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
