• Mustang Forums
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-

Im impressed "long post"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Warlok
  • Start date Start date Dec 31, 2006
W

Warlok

New Member
Oct 11, 2006
89
0
0
Dec 31, 2006
#1
  • Dec 31, 2006
  • #1
The other night on Speedvision they had a 1969 era top muscle car show down. The cars were tested for for accereration, braking, cornering, but the 1/4 mile times were what I cared about.

Im 52 years old, and was a freshman in high school when these car's were new. Back then I would have been lucky to have a model car like these!


Here is the list of cars that were tested, and every one by the same driver. Each car has just freshly been compleatly restored to original and they all ran on the stock type tires.

Each car is a 4 speed, and they all had either 3:91 or 4:11 gears.

69 Shelby GT 500 with the Super Cobra Drag Pack, 428 CI Super Cobra Jet:
14.08 @ 91 MPH

69 GTO specially built by Royal Bobcat Pontiac with the 400 ram air IV:
13.04 @ 106 mph

69 AMC Scrambler 390 CI: 13.87 @ 101 mph

69 " super rare" Yenko Nova "Yenko say's it all" 427 CI:
13.41 @ 106 mph

69 Yenko Camero 427 CI:
13.41 @ 106 mph

69 Grand Spalding Dodge Super Bee 440 Six Pac:
13.83 @ 102 mph


So I feel just great about my 07 GT with a tiny 281 CI engine. My car with only a Brenspeed 93 octane tune, and C&L CAI, is right with all of these cars, and in front of some of them. The Shelby was a real "dog". It was a beautiful car, but they said it was too heavy, and too loaded with comfort options etc.

All of those cars could have done better or worse on any givin day, but my 07 GT is in good company.
 

90mustangGT

I felt sorry for girls because
Founding Member
Jan 15, 2002
2,773
17
89
Dallas, GA
Dec 31, 2006
#2
  • Dec 31, 2006
  • #2
Basically, those cars were mostly about torque, but couldn't plant it. Not only were they running polyglass tires, but the rear suspension didn't do anything towards controlling the car durring launch. Those engine just didn't have the top end like todays cars have, but that grunt when you punch the gas, they had a lot of that. The main reason the "Muscle Car Era" was so highlighted is because they looked like monsters compared to what was being brought out in the mid-late 70's and into the 80's. The Five-Point-Oh, even in stock form was considered a beast when I was in H.S., I'm now 28.

Even if one of those cars hung with you, or even passed you on the straights, with the brakes and suspension of the '07 GT, it would be no contest in a road course. Technology is great.
 
0

03 SVT VERT

New Member
Jun 7, 2004
154
0
0
Dec 31, 2006
#3
  • Dec 31, 2006
  • #3
The biggest player was tires. One has to remember that most of todays drag radials are equel (or better) than the slicks of the 60's and 70's. Those cars had a lot of power, but the tires couldn't get it to the ground.

Case in point, my buddy had a Motion Chevelle back in the 70's that, when he put a good set of slicks on it (good for 1976) it ran low 11's. I have no doubt that that car, with a modern set of slicks, would run 10's. Without the slicks the car wouldn't run much better times then those Yenkos (low 13's to mid 12's).
 

kooldawg6

mine works really well and can take a fair amount
Aug 31, 2006
1,679
2
38
Central VA
Dec 31, 2006
#4
  • Dec 31, 2006
  • #4
Another thing with the muscle cars mentioned is the gearing they used. With the steep gearing they could only achieve just over 120 MPH for a top speed. I would much rather have one of today's cars just about any day over an older car. Yeah they are mean looking and very powerful, but how many of them can go 200 miles on a tank of gas, run at 140+MPH with the AC blasting on a hot summer day and not beat you to death doing so. Not to mention being able to slow and stop from those speeds. Today's cars are enginered so much better that they can deliever equal performance with half the power.
 
W

Warlok

New Member
Oct 11, 2006
89
0
0
Dec 31, 2006
#5
  • Dec 31, 2006
  • #5
True

kooldawg6 said:
Another thing with the muscle cars mentioned is the gearing they used. With the steep gearing they could only achieve just over 120 MPH for a top speed. I would much rather have one of today's cars just about any day over an older car. Yeah they are mean looking and very powerful, but how many of them can go 200 miles on a tank of gas, run at 140+MPH with the AC blasting on a hot summer day and not beat you to death doing so. Not to mention being able to slow and stop from those speeds. Today's cars are enginered so much better that they can deliever equal performance with half the power.
Click to expand...

Ya I agree, our cars are light years ahead but then it was 38 years ago these old car's were in there prime. I just think its cool to be able to experience this level of performance squeezed from such a tiny "in comparison" engine. And of course the handling of our cars probobly couldnt have been matched by many exotic rides of the day.

I wonder what the Mustangs will run like in 38 years? WIll our cars seem like sleds?
 

Marine One

New Member
Jan 28, 2004
276
1
0
North Topsail Beach, NC
Dec 31, 2006
#6
  • Dec 31, 2006
  • #6
Being just a year younger than Warlok, I too remember those days. What continues to amaze me about today's cars is that we have them in spite of the terrible direction that the industry was headed in the mid 70s through the mid 80s. When you think about the average car from about 1973 on, with their huge ugly bumpers and detuned engines, crappy performance handling & gas mileage, then look where we are today, it's just amazing.
Remember those butt-ugly 4-door mid-size GM cars from around 1974? They were not to be outdone by FoMoCo cars like the Granada & Monarch. Ford acutally had an ad campaign that showed a woman bragging that she got a parking ticket in her new Granada but the policeman mistakenly wrote the ticket out for a Caddilac Seville!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
351w swap in 2004 questions (set up like a 95 Cobra)
  • jonathansw1601
  • Mar 24, 2018
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Replies
4
Views
3K
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Jun 28, 2018
jonathansw1601
J
Excellent Hagerty Article About The "kings Of The Street"
  • FoxMustangLvr
  • Sep 21, 2017
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
11
Views
4K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Sep 21, 2017
NIKwoaC
My Cousin's Nova (the final stupid story)
  • CarMichael Angelo
  • Jul 22, 2011
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
15
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jul 23, 2011
'13_ImpactBlue_GT
The Night of the Hurricane (a really long stupid story)
  • CarMichael Angelo
  • Jun 26, 2011
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
32
Views
5K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jul 1, 2011
VibrantRedGT
Only got one run in, but it was a good one! - Long Read
  • cowtown
  • May 13, 2007
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
2
Views
661
2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk- May 13, 2007
cowtown
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?