Pony car.
Muscle cars are the full size, mostly big block cars of the 60s and 70s.
Pony cars are smaller lighter and for the most part have smaller dyisplacement v8 engines.
What if I had a three gauge pod on my pillar . Does that count . Probably more than a giant tach.
Always wondered about that when Chevrolet started stuffing 396's and 427's in Camaro's, Ford put 428's, and Boss 429's in Mustangs, and Chrysler put 440's, and 426 Hemis in Challengers...
that's because the above statement is totally eronious, and without basis.
The day a fckin' Mitsubishi Expo made more power than a 94 Mustang gt was the day somebody swapped it's engine for a 5.0
To me, "Muscle Car" did have an original meaning that Mustang5L5 outlined, which was a full size vehicle with a big block. The problem is that the definition changed over the years as people started to lump in anything that was fast, sporty, and had a relatively large engine into the category.
You have to realize that in 1970, a 302 V8 was considered a small engine, a ~350 sized engine was middle of the road, and 390+ was the large option. Fast forward to 1985, and the GM 350 was pretty much the largest engine you could get in a car (Trucks and Vans were different) and the 302 and 305 in the Mustang and Camaro were the most common size for a V8. There really weren't a bunch of other V8 powered performance cars, so the Mustang and Camaro/Firebird pretty much took the "Muscle Car" title at that point.
Valid point. A straight six '67-'69 Camaro would not be considered a Muscle Car any more than a early Nova with a 307, but later versions had 396 and in some cases even a 427. If you had a stock '93 Cobra it wouldn't be considered a muscle car, but swap in a 408 and I would say yes.That's not accurate at all. Shoot, a huge chunk of the Mustangs and Camaros came with straight 6s back then. I think you would be a little astounded if you actually went back and got the production numbers for those cars. They didn't sell that many big block cars. If that were the perception of a muscle car, there wouldn't have been many of them.
Kurt
Valid point. A straight six '67-'69 Camaro would not be considered a Muscle Car any more than a early Nova with a 307, but later versions had 396 and in some cases even a 427. If you had a stock '93 Cobra it wouldn't be considered a muscle car, but swap in a 408 and I would say yes.
I submit that you have two categories of muscle cars. Those that came equipped from the factory with large displacement engines: Boss 429, tri powered GTO, Hemi Cuda, etc. and then those vehicles that were modified with larger engines: Shelby Mustang, Yenko Camaro, etc. The early Shelby Cobras with the 289 weren't muscle cars, but a 427 equipped Cobra certainly would be.
BTW, if you haven't seen Ford v Ferrari yet you should.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?