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.
It was said back after WWII that Plymouths were faster than the very similar Dodges, and some police departments started buying them. So I guess the 1947 Plymouth would be a pretty sad "muscle car".
1936 Buick Century and 1949 Oldsmobile 88. Some might even argue for 1951 Hudson Hornet or 1955 Chrysler 300.
With the definition being a mid-sized car with a big V-8, capable of ~15.5 seconds in the 1/4 mile or better, and in the low-price range, the 1964 Pontiac GTO was the first muscle car.
I know it it useless, but all cars in the world in the seventies were basically POS. I lived in Spain when I was a kid and we "enjoyed" our Renaults, Citroen and Seats... when there were on the road or not rusting.
The 301 turbo Trans Am performed as well as the 403cid powered Trans Am at 16.30 1/4 mile. My 1985 Oldsmobile 442 with a 307Olds also did 16.30 1/4mile as did the Monte Carlo SS from the era. Incidently, this is also similar to what a 1976 455CID equipped Trans Am does as well. The 301T as shown is a WS6 with four wheel disc brakes and handling in the area of .81gs on the skid pad test. Outstanding for its day and later.
Plenty of slow cars back then and now. We thought they were quick because they did have some torque which provided the illusion of power.
1974 Pontiac GTO no different than a low compression Nova SS with a 350Chevrolet and 4spd except the engine is a Pontiac. Back then that would be considered a solid platform for improvement. Not every teen in the early-mid 1980s could not afford the big, big inch engined muscle cars from the 1960s/early 1970s.
Even in the "Classic" era there was a 2bbl carb. option for the GTO and 442. Turnpike cruiser was the nomenclature.
The garish Mustang Cobra is difficult to defend except one can hope the decals were removable.
As a kid, my grandpa owned a 1975 Chevrolet Nova coupe that had the 350 cubic inch with a 4-barrel. And to me, that car was a hot-rod. My grandpa drove slow as molasses, so driving with him was no fun. But whenever my dad borrowed the car, I would always tag along, because my dad had a heavy foot, and he drove that car like it was meant to be driven! LOL.....Even my dad, who lived during the hot-rod 1950s/1960s, would often comment about how grandpa's car was a 'fairly hot car' for it's time. Riding around in grandpa's Nova with my dad at the wheel is what really turned me on to fast cars. Most of my family at the time (early 1980s) had little econo-box cars with wimpy 4-cylinders or timid family sedans with 6-cylinders (at a time when V6 engines were weak), so grandpa's NOVA was the hot-rod in the family or even on the block. That car moved when you steeped on it, and it had that loud, deep growl (roar) when the 4-barrel opened up and sucked in air. I loved riding in that car.
But as I got older, after researching specifications on cars, I was shocked to find that grandpa's old Nova was only rated at 155 net horsepower in the 350 4-barrel form -- a shockingly low horsepower output considering how fast the car actually felt. Maybe a lot of that perceived quickness and power came from the torque output, or a combination of the torque output and the Turbo-Hydromatic transmission -- a combination that maximized the car's output.
... I was shocked to find that grandpa's old Nova was only rated at 155 net horsepower in the 350 4-barrel form -- a shockingly low horsepower output considering how fast the car actually felt....
But it WAS a light car, so 155 h.p. wasn't too bad. I bought new '86 and '88 Saab 9000 Turbos, both the same cars for the most part. ('88s had anti-lock brakes but little else changed.) I had the 5-speed manual transmissions in both of them and thought they were pretty hot cars. Iirc, they had 165 hp 4-bangers, and the turbo didn't kick in until something like 2000 rpm. They were sure nice road cars, however. They were nimble at posted speeds, quick at passing, and hugged the country roads like sports cars at 135 mph.
From 1971 until more recent years, we had crap available. I got out of the Air Force in Nov. 1970 and had planned to order a new '71 Buick GS. But 1970 was the end of horsepower in new cars. I finally ordered the Skylark Custom instead -- basically the same car without the bigger (but still anemic) engine. We didn't realize then just HOW long we'd have to wait for performance to return to an American car. And the gas mileage! I had a '76 Mercury Grand Marquis that couldn't seem to get into double figures for gas mileage, and it wasn't that quick, either! (Not that we needed quick for 55 mph.) We downsized after that, started buying foreign cars (and a fast cross-country airplane).
Watched the Movie Starman yesterday. The car they drove was a 1977 Ford Mustang (II). Mettalic copper with cobra on the side and big, wide black stripes down the top. looked pretty cool but we all know about the MII.
But it WAS a light car, so 155 h.p. wasn't too bad. I bought new '86 and '88 Saab 9000 Turbos, both the same cars for the most part. ('88s had anti-lock brakes but little else changed.) I had the 5-speed manual transmissions in both of them and thought they were pretty hot cars. Iirc, they had 165 hp 4-bangers, and the turbo didn't kick in until something like 2000 rpm. They were sure nice road cars, however. They were nimble at posted speeds, quick at passing, and hugged the country roads like sports cars at 135 mph.
From 1971 until more recent years, we had crap available. I got out of the Air Force in Nov. 1970 and had planned to order a new '71 Buick GS. But 1970 was the end of horsepower in new cars. I finally ordered the Skylark Custom instead -- basically the same car without the bigger (but still anemic) engine. We didn't realize then just HOW long we'd have to wait for performance to return to an American car. And the gas mileage! I had a '76 Mercury Grand Marquis that couldn't seem to get into double figures for gas mileage, and it wasn't that quick, either! (Not that we needed quick for 55 mph.) We downsized after that, started buying foreign cars (and a fast cross-country airplane).
Horsepower was still available thru 1972. 1973 was the first year of stringent emissions regulations.
The Chrysler Hemi and 440 were still packing horsepower in 1971.
The horsepower rating system changed in 1972 (from SAE gross to net), so the published horsepower numbers did appear to change drastically at that time.
Horsepower was still available thru 1972. 1973 was the first year of stringent emissions regulations.
The Chrysler Hemi and 440 were still packing horsepower in 1971.
The horsepower rating system changed in 1972 (from SAE gross to net), so the published horsepower numbers did appear to change drastically at that time.
1971 and later engines were designed to burn unleaded gasoline -- lower octane. That meant engines had to have lower compression. 1971 was the turning point.
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.
