TSTE vs. '74 Z28 4 speed

[dbtk2]

Actually there were two muscle cars that ran 10's right out of the factory (the HEMI DART and HEMI CUDA) but thats not the point. I wasn't saying that v8's are better in any way. I was just comparing the POWER between a turbo charged car and a muscle car.A 440 c.i (375 HP, 480 Lb Ft natually aspired(Chiltons auto repair manual) 1967 Plymouth GTX, or the 454 LS6 (450 Hp 500 Lb Ft.Naturally aspired (http://www.fast-autos.net/chevrolet/chevroletchevelle.html) motor compared to a 96 Supra Twin turbo and a 96 dodge Stealth RT (320 HP, 315 lb Ft twin turbo(autotrader.com). I'm not that nieve to think that muscle cars are superior to modern cars.

Actually, I'm pretty sure the Dart & Cuda weren't that fast.  It would take a VERY light car (and those weren't that light) to make a 425hp car run 10's, especially the old 425hp rating.  Cars that run 10's have 600-700hp, so for some reason I find that hard to believe.  IIRC they did run 13's, but i could be wrong so I'm not gonna argure.  I just know that I read somewhere that some particular car was the "fastest muscle car." and it ran 13.2's.  And its not like they made a lot of the hemi darts or cudas anyways, the production was so limited they may as well have never been built.  But anyways, the power output was rated MUCH differently back then.  Which is why the year the power ratings changed, the same engines were making 100-200 LESS horsepower.  You put that 440 or 454 on an engine dyno and I would imagine you would see somewhere around high 200's or low 300's for power.  

We had a '62 Plymouth Savoy Station Wagon a couple years ago with a 440 in it, and that car was BALLSLESS.  I would guess it was probably a high 15, low 16 second car.  It was SLOW.  There is no way that it had what 375hp would be now.  It felt like maybe it had 250-280 horsepower or something like that, but I would bet a LOT of money it wasn't close to 375.  At the same time we also had a '48 Plymouth with a 365hp 327c.i. Corvette Engine in it.  That engine had some power, but it wasn't 365hp.  It was probably a mid 14 second car...so with its weight and gearing put into consideration I would say it was also around 280 horsepower or so.  

And I wasn't saying that V8's WEREN'T better, because the same engine with more displacement is gonna make more power, just that there are 4 cyl and 6 cyl engines that can make the power those engines made then because of technology.  The muscle car era really wasn't that great.

But I would definately rather have a modern forced induction, fuel injected V6, then a Carburated N/A V8.  I like being able to turn the key and have the car start the first time everytime.

Shawn

[maximage]

I have a friend with an all original '71 Hemi Cuda. His dad bought it brand new, and gave it to his son for his college graduation. Sorry to say it, but that is NOT a 10 second car. My Supra stomped a mudhole in that thing so bad it hurt, and it was only a 12 second car. And yes, the guy can drive as good as I can. We grew up together and have been in families who have raced for years. It's a 13 second car all the way, but nothing more. Also, that Hemi Cuda has 40k original miles, and is in BEAUTIFUL shape both mecanically and cosemetically. Very impressive car, but NOT a 10 second car.

As a matter of fact, I can't think of 1 muscle car that was under a high 12 factory, except the gasser vette, which was a low 12, high 11 I believe. But it wasnt a factory stock car ether.

[maddux31]

I don't know or care if the name "muscle car" applies or not but if someone gave me the choice of a newer, cleaner, more efficient car with exceptional performance or a Carroll Shelby Cobra 427 S/C I would take a replica cobra with that kind of powertrain and whip 99% of anything you could throw at it.  Probably top out at 160-170, run the 1/4 in about 10 seconds, and run around an autocross track like a slot racing car.  Not to mention one of the most sought after cars of all time.  I watched one of these (replica) that was street driven to a track chew a new ass for a corvette Z06 with modifications which probably cost the guy $50,000.   Also seen a 1970 Datsun 240Z with I believe a 426 Hemi blow the same Cobra off the track later that day.  The Z was tubbed, narrowed, and fully caged but an 8.95 in the quarter mile is faster than a lot of motorcycles.  just my 2c's on the debate that is raging here.  Car & Driver says that the original 427 Cobra ran the 1/4 mile in 12.1 seconds if I remember correctly and the base price was $6,500, car only weighed 2400 pounds.

[dbtk2]

I don't know or care if the name "muscle car" applies or not but if someone gave me the choice of a newer, cleaner, more efficient car with exceptional performance or a Carroll Shelby Cobra 427 S/C I would take a replica cobra with that kind of powertrain and whip 99% of anything you could throw at it.  Probably top out at 160-170, run the 1/4 in about 10 seconds, and run around an autocross track like a slot racing car.  Not to mention one of the most sought after cars of all time.  I watched one of these (replica) that was street driven to a track chew a new ass for a corvette Z06 with modifications which probably cost the guy $50,000.   Also seen a 1970 Datsun 240Z with I believe a 426 Hemi blow the same Cobra off the track later that day.  The Z was tubbed, narrowed, and fully caged but an 8.95 in the quarter mile is faster than a lot of motorcycles.  just my 2c's on the debate that is raging here.  Car & Driver says that the original 427 Cobra ran the 1/4 mile in 12.1 seconds if I remember correctly and the base price was $6,500, car only weighed 2400 pounds.

Oh, you bet your ass I would take the Cobra as well, but thats not exactly a muscle car.

Shawn

[maximage]

Mmmmm.... AC Cobra......

[SpeedDemon]

I have a friend with an all original '71 Hemi Cuda. His dad bought it brand new, and gave it to his son for his college graduation. Sorry to say it, but that is NOT a 10 second car.

Maybe so but the 1968 HEMI DART was finished by herts (you know the herts 4-4-2 cutlass) and DID RUN 10's (http://www.budgetperformance.com/articles/hemidart/) with a weight of 2100 lbs was the fastest muscle car ever made. I rest my case. :D

[maximage]

While the Hemi Dart was sweet, that specific model was not a "Production" model muscle car. It was a factory built drag car, and there was even a disclaimer that had to be signed with those stating it would not be driven on public roadways, although they could still be regisstered(talked to an original owner about that at an all Mopar show). It's actually the equivalent of buying a Corvette C5-R.

I'm not saying muscle cars dont deserve respect. I'm just saynig that There is a replacement for displacement- Technology.

[pvt num 11]

Yup, love the V8 argument.  It doens't matter how much torque you can make, if your engine can't breathe freely.

My '88 GTA has the L98 350 in it, and it only ran 15's.  Why?  It was heavy and TPI is a restrictive intake design, once you try to rev past 4800 rpms.  It had plenty of torque, making it a great street cruiser, but it fell flat on it's face after 4800 rpm, so it didn't fare well after the first 1/8th mile.  In the first half, it would whoop up on LT1's.  The LT1 doesn't have the low-end grunt the L98 had, but it has a much simpler intake design, and flows a lot more high-end.  LS1?  Even better, and that engine design is just about ten years old already.  The mid and late seventies are known for making smogger V8's, as the EPA was cracking down on pretty much everything.  Lower compression heads that flowed terribly, mounted with non-OD transmissions in cars that were gaining weight.  Not that it's unfixable, it's just that the golden age of Muscle and Pony cars was over.

Yep, technology is a wonderful thing, and can substitute for cubic inches.  Big cubes AND technology, though, is hard to beat.  Look what it did for the LS-series of V8's...

[Jeff M]

I am in an Automotive Technology program at a vocational school.  So for half the day I go to high school and the other half I go to this class.  Well, today a kid from my class (he will be refered to as Robby from now on) brought in a '74 Camaro Z28 4 Speed.  When it pulled in the shop it was obvious it was a V8.  Robby let it sit an idle, and definately had a little cam lope.  Anyways, Robby and his friend that rode to our vocational school in it with him were talking about how it was so quick and all that had ever been done to it was a different intake manifold and carburator.  Most of the kids in my class laugh at me when I talk about my car being quick because it is a 3.1L V6...it can't be fast.  So anyways, when Robby was letting it idle and talking about the engine, I just kind of descretely said, "I'll race it Robby."  Right away he replies with "OK!!!."...............Shawn

I am just going to go with, nice fcking race!!! :D And with you being stock then too!! :shock: , must have enjoyed the fun of that race, congrats, V8/muscle car blah-blah whatever, I enjoyed the story/topic!! 8)

Jeff M

[dbtk2]

Wow....this is an old topic.  How do people dig this stuff up?

Its interesting to read stuff that was said that long ago, I forget about some of this stuff.  

And, interestingly enough, after this me and Robby became much greater friends.  I have since raced his decently modded '93 Z28 (after helping him with some of the mods) with my Lumina on the same road we raced before on and even with all his mods (without using his 150 shot of course) he only had ~4 carlengths on me at 140.  Last night we went out to a party and we once again went out on the same road and beat on my TA that I just picked up...

Shawn

Shawn

[no_doz]

To tell you the truth if he hadn't lit it up at the start he would have walked on you (although the guy seems to not know how to handle a rwd car. What a dumb ass) Next time race him for slips and give the car to someone more worthy of it, haha just kidding. You also have to put into consideration the fact the this was a 1974 camaro not a late 1960's camaro (3 years after the end of the MUSCLE CAR ERA. So don't be so disipointed). To be truthfully honest NO (I mean NO) STOCK v6 wether it be turbocharged or not, is no match for the power of any muscle car. Even my 1967 plymouth with a 318 ci engine and weight of 3800 lbs can run high 14's (not bad for 230 Hp and 340 Lb Ft of torque 2 barrel engine huh. well....... its not a 2 barrel any more 8) ) But besides all that congrats on you win, It's not every day that a turbo v6 beats a car with the kind of racing heritage as the camaro.

unless you are talking the 302 or the big block models-id be willing to bet a tgp can take/hang with most of the 67-69 camaros. considering these hp ratings were done with mostly no accessories, at the flywheel, & with very free flowing tube headers that didnt come out the back of a car.

First-generation engines

1967-1969 L26 230 cu in (3.8 L) I6 140 hp (104 kW)
1967-1969 L22 250 cu in (4.1 L) I6 155 hp (116 kW) @ 4200 rpm, 235 lb·ft (319 N·m) @ 1600 rpm
1967-1969 Z28 302 cu in (4.9 L) V8 290 hp (216 kW) (rated) 350 hp (261 kW) actual
1967-1969 LF7 327 cu in (5.4 L) V8 210 hp (157 kW)
1967-1968: L30 327 cu in (5.4 L) V8 275 hp (205 kW)
1969: OMC 307 cu in (5 L) V8 225 hp (168kW)
1969: LM1 & L65 350 cu in (5.7 L) V8 255 hp (190 kW) and 250 hp (186 kW)
1967-1969 L48 SS350 350 cu in (5.7 L) V8 295 hp (220 kW) (1969 300 hp (224 kW)) @ 4800 rpm, 380 lb·ft (515 N·m) @ 3200 rpm
1967-1969 L35 SS396 396 cu in (6.5 L) V8 325 hp (242 kW) @ 4800 rpm, 410 lb·ft (556 N·m) @ 3200 rpm
1967-1969 L78 SS396 396 cu in (6.5 L) V8 375 hp (280 kW) @ 5600 rpm, 415 lb·ft (563 N·m) @ 3600 rpm
1968-1969 L34 SS396 396 cu in (6.5 L) V8 350 hp (261 kW) @ 5200 rpm, 415 lb·ft (563 N·m) @ 3200 rpm
1968-1969 - L89 aluminum cylinder head option for the SS396/375 engine - lightened the engine by ~100 lb (45 kg).
1969 COPO 9561/L72 427 cu in (7 L) V8 425 hp (317 kW) @ 5600 rpm, 460 lb·ft (624 N·m) @ 4000 rpm
1969 COPO 9560/ZL1 427 cu in (7 L) V8 430 hp (321 kW) @ 5200 rpm, 450 lb·ft (610 N·m) @ 4400 rpm

also if i remember correctly starting in 72 the compression ratios were dropped like hell & with a tuned chip, intake, & exhaust-245 crank hp shouldnt be hard to achieve.

210 crank hp---3450lbs
245 whp-------3850lbs-rwd & torquey-burnouts galore

with a tune & light intake/exhaust mods as well as a good diver-id say the tgp is FAR from getting walked all over... im just surprised that these things will do 120 without the overdrive being on!

[TGP Nick]

Dude stop bringing up old posts