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.
Better yet...find Fleet and me another '65 K-code Autolite 4100 600 CFM manual choke.
You just dropped your wife's engagement ring in the lake and it sank down 10 feet in the mud.......find it.
Again, that wasn't the question that was asked. The question is, what handles and performs better, vintage or modern cars. Most people would take the charger, but that's irrelevant
It depends. If wanted a daily driver for a family of four which can also double a fast, fun car then of course Honda wins.
There is a whole family of super sports sedans with such notable entries as BMW M 3/5, Porsche Panamera GTS, M55/63/65 C/E/S/CLS sedans, AUDI RS6/8, Cadillac STS-V and many, many others.
These sedans as stock would beat most modified classic muscle cars and modified beat anything that rolles on wheels.
It depends. If wanted a daily driver for a family of four which can also double a fast, fun car then of course Honda wins.
There is a whole family of super sports sedans with such notable entries as BMW M 3/5, Porsche Panamera GTS, M55/63/65 C/E/S/CLS sedans, AUDI RS6/8, Cadillac STS-V and many, many others.
These sedans as stock would beat most modified classic muscle cars and modified beat anything that rolles on wheels.
Hondas are not for me, so I would choose the classic car.
And those modified sedans you mentioned would not "beat anything that rolls on wheels."
Hondas are not for me, so I would choose the classic car.
And those modified sedans you mentioned would not "beat anything that rolls on wheels."
You would put a family of four in a charger? That's child abuse.
And of course these sedans in modified form would beat anything that rolls on wheel, some of them come with over 600HPs stock.
The engine in Cadillac CTS-V is better than any engine was produced in the era of classic American cars.
You would put a family of four in a charger? That's child abuse.
Yeah, "child abuse." People with a family of four drove around in Chargers and similar cars back then.
Quote:
And of course these sedans in modified form would beat anything that rolls on wheel, some of them come with over 600HPs stock.
Would they beat that 8.99 second Charger that Riverboat Gambler posted? Did you know that a 426-Hemi could be modified to make 700-750 (gross) horsepower without a supercharger and running on pump fuel?
Quote:
The engine in Cadillac CTS-V is better than any engine was produced in the era of classic American cars.
For long-term longevity, that remains to be seen. I would be satisfied with the Mopar 440 or the 472 in my '69 Cadillac.
Yeah, "child abuse." People with a family of four drove around in Chargers and similar cars back then.
Yeah. And that's child abuse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet
Would they beat that 8.99 second Charger that Riverboat Gambler posted? Did you know that a 426-Hemi could be modified to make 700-750 (gross) horsepower without a supercharger and running on pump fuel?
Do you know that 2012 Buggatti Veyron comes 1200HP stock while it actually handles like a sports car?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet
For long-term longevity, that remains to be seen. I would be satisfied with the Mopar 440 or the 472 in my '69 Cadillac.
No, for performance. That's the topic in this thread and not longevity.
This stock engine would beat your stock Mopar withouth a sweat.
Modfied would beat your modified Mopar as well.
Are you serious? If you really think that is "child abuse," what about putting 4 kids in a 1960s VW?
Quote:
Do you know that 2012 Buggatti Veyron comes 1200HP stock while it actually handles like a sports car?
Do you know that "car" is ridiculously overpriced? A tune-up probably cost $100,000!
Quote:
No, for performance. That's the topic in this thread and not longevity.
This stock engine would beat your stock Mopar withouth a sweat.
Modfied would beat your modified Mopar as well
Status:
"48 years in MD, 18 in NC"
(set 15 days ago)
Location: Greenville, NC
2,309 posts, read 6,104,814 times
Reputation: 1430
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverboat Gambler
LMAO You are a damn fool. A STOCK K-code 289 was 271 HP at the factory. You're fool of BS...I'm done with you prankster.
That was 271 FWHP, I said 265-275 RWHP. You see here, you're the one that has no clue. You take your 265 RWHP, add back in the draintrain losses of about 17% (stick) and you have 319 FWHP. That's a gain of 48 HP, not bad for a bunch of bolt on parts. And why did you buy the cast iron heads when you could have easily gotten a set of aluminum heads for the same price?
Are you serious? If you really think that is "child abuse," what about putting 4 kids in a 1960s VW?
+1....a 1968-70 Dodge Charger (presuming that's what you meant) is actually a very spacious car inside.
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.
People with a family of four drove around in Chargers and similar cars back then. 
If you really think that is "child abuse," what about putting 4 kids in a 1960s VW?
And why did you buy the cast iron heads when you could have easily gotten a set of aluminum heads for the same price?
