Go Back   Sports Car Forum - MotorWorld.net > Automotive Brands Forum > American Cars

American Cars Area dedicated to American Cars from Classic, Muscle, to Modern!



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-05-2003, 05:21 PM   #31
graywolf624
Regular User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hellaware USA
Posts: 3,865
Default

"BTW if im gonna spend upwards to 35 grand on a Car, ill get a Cobra thank you very much.
"
The cobras not going to seat 4 comfortably. Not to mention the gto would spank the cobra around a turn. Definitly different types of cars. And still very few cars for under 40k seat 5 and have sub 13.5 times. Especially in America. As for sleeper, you yourself thought it would only run 14s with a professional driver and complained that it looked slow. If it made you think that, couldn't it make others think that? It is the epitome of sleeper.

"Yea but, back in the day all you had to do was a few tunes, and some mods and you were running into the 13s."

Some mods= more like alot of mods. A new engine or a blower doesnt equal some mods. Simply what was fast then is no longer fast now. Think about it.
graywolf624 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2003, 08:45 PM   #32
blah
Regular User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Santa Clarita, CA, USA
Posts: 2,539
Default

You didnt have to get a new engine, i mean look how powerful the 426 HEMI was in its day. People used to just Bore out the engine. and the GTO cannot run a 13.5 ever. That thing needs to go fall off a cliff.
__________________
blah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2003, 09:42 PM   #33
hemi_fan
Regular User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,670
Default

Old muscle cars werent slow. The 426 Polara from the factory ran 11.4s and the 427 Ford Thunderbold (64) ran 11.6s. These were the fastest two muscle cars that I know of, but pretty much any well-optioned hemi or 425+ CI car was in the 13s range. If you really want to get into it I'll crack out the old "American Muscle Car" book which has most of the 1/4 mile times for most of the cars between 64 and 73.
__________________

1990 Ford Mustang GT
Factory Rated: 225hp, 300lbs tq
http://www.cardomain.com/profile/hemi_fan
hemi_fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2003, 09:44 PM   #34
graywolf624
Regular User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hellaware USA
Posts: 3,865
Default

Bore an engine is not a simple mod either. Not to mention the 426 Hemi and any of those other engines aren't as powerful as your thinking. Engines were measured as gross hsp rather then net, which results in the numbers being larger then they are compared to what we have today. The hsp of the new gto would be very close to that of the hemi your touting.

And as for GTO can't run a 13.5, what are you basing this on? If the car stays relatively similar to the preproduction version(which its supposed to), the car weighs close to the same weight as an fbody and has more hsp then an ss. An ss runs a quarter in a 13.2 by the way. Aerodynamics may not be as good, but they aren't that horrid. Furthermore, I love how you would make such an assumption before anyone other then gm engineers have driven the final product.

In fact, according to the OFFICIAL numbers already released by gm:
5.3 sec 0-60 with the 6 speed manual
350 hp 360 torque

Another one of the designers is quoted as saying expected runs will be less then 14 secs in quarter.


base price 32,495 including destination charge.

source is gto.com- which is a gm corporate web page.
graywolf624 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2003, 09:47 PM   #35
graywolf624
Regular User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hellaware USA
Posts: 3,865
Default

"The 426 Polara from the factory ran 11.4s and the 427 Ford Thunderbold (64) ran 11.6s. "

Your dreaming if you think they ran 11s.

Both ran mid 13s.

Source http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...s-50fast.shtml

64 polar 500- 13.7

Neither were common either.

As you can see, the quickest cars of the era ran 13s. Most of these cars were the high end rare options. Your average muscle car doesn't run 13s, your highest level does. The gtos predicted numbers put it near the top of this list. Now look at modern car numbers. I personally consider the average numbers somewhere in the 15s for cars. Meanwhile, the level of the most expensive cars worldwide has snuck well into the 11s , and thats not looking at tuner cars.

Oh and to make a point which may have been covered up. I like muscle cars. I wanted a charger, I bought an 88 iroc because it was easier to find one in good shape for my budget at the time. I just realize that in general the cars from back then are not as fast comparably as they are now.

And before I hear a comment about how, but the 427 was an option on such a car. The vast majority of all the cars you see on that list had the bigger engines as options. Furthermore, the majority of those cars were ordered with the smaller engine.
graywolf624 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2003, 10:08 PM   #36
dis3as3d
Regular User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Seattle, Washington
Posts: 278
Default

Tires sucked back then... no where near the super compounds that we have today. If you just put slicks on alot of those cars 11's were not out of the question.
__________________
Black 2000 Camaro SS
322.8 rwhp 333.4 rwtq - STOCK
dis3as3d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2003, 10:11 PM   #37
graywolf624
Regular User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hellaware USA
Posts: 3,865
Default

Major issue there. The slicks from that era sucked as well, so the improvement wouldn't put those cars into 13s. Furthermore, their trap times are not consistant with 11 s runs, I would bet high 12s low 13s. (No way to really know. An all original unrestored car now would be slower then it was so long ago). Lastly, the gto would do better then it does stock with slicks as well. As would any car. I can see your point that the muscle cars would benefit more from slicks, however it's not all that important in an arguement on whether the new gto is a sleeper. The point is, the new gto does everything the stock muscle cars did and manages to handle as well. Putting on slicks moves the car out of the stock category(as well as the street driving category).
graywolf624 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2003, 10:42 PM   #38
blah
Regular User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Santa Clarita, CA, USA
Posts: 2,539
Default

its not a sleeper. Everyone knows what the GTO is, and its history. Even the most riced out ricer knows that when you see a GTO badge, theres something good under the hood.
__________________
blah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2003, 11:17 PM   #39
graywolf624
Regular User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hellaware USA
Posts: 3,865
Default

"theres something good under the hood."
your conflicting yourself completely.

So is it fast enough to know it's fast(13.5 sub). But it can't run 13.5 because you think it can't. But you would think it can because it's a gto? huh?

Oh and the name badge isn't exactly all that noticable in the dark.
graywolf624 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2003, 11:45 PM   #40
hemi_fan
Regular User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,670
Default

Quote: "1964 Dodge 426 Hemi (polara body), Representative Performance; 0-60: 4.1s, 1/4 mile: 11.40@125mph, HP: 425, Torque: 480, Weight: 3210lbs, Production: Less than 40. It's a factory build super stock class quarter-miler with aluminum body panels, lightweight interior, race-hemi, and factory slicks. It wouldnt have been pleasant, but this car was street legal" Kings of the street

"1964 Ford Thunderbolt, Representative Performance; 0-60: NA, 1/4 mile: [email protected], HP: 425, Torque: 480, Weight: 3225lbs, Production: 100. to compete in super stock drag racing against lighter rivals, Ford squeezed its competition 427 into the midsize fairlane. Fibreglass panels and an ultra-stark cabin kept its weight down. [it also came with legal slicks]" Kings of the street

There were some 11s cars from the factory, although very few were built and you had to know your way around a special order sheet to get one. Just like the COPO cars from GM. But more muscle cars than you think were in the 13s range. I'll list the ones off from this book.

1962 Pontiac Catalina Super Duty 421 - [email protected]
1963 Plymouth 426 Wedge - 13.66@107
1963 Pontiac Super Duty 421 - 13.7@107
1964 Didge 426 Hemi (above) - 11.40@125
1964 Ford Thunderbolt 427 (above) - [email protected]
1966 Plymouth Satellite 426 Hemi - 13.8@104
1967 Dodge Coronet R/T Hemi - 13.5@105
1968 Dodge Charger R/T Hemi - 13.8@105
1968 Dodge Dart GTS 440 - 13.3@107
1968 Hurst/Olds (455) - 13.9@103
1969 Yenko Camaro 427 - 13.5@102
1969 Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 (427) - 13.16@110
1969 Chevrolet Chevelle COPO 427 - 13.3@108
1969 Yenko Nova 427 - 13.2@103
1969 Dodge Super Bee Six Pack (440) - [email protected]
1969 Ford Mustang Mach 1 428 Cobra Jet - 13.9@103 (yes a mustang made it)
1969 Plymouth Road Runner Hemi - 13.55@105
1970 Buick GSX Stage 1 (455) - 13.8@101
1970 Chevelle SS 454 - 13.7@103
1970 Dodge Challenger R/T 440 Six Pack - 13.7@105
1970 Dodge Charer R/T SE Hemi - 13.9@105
1970 Ford Torino Cobra 429 - 13.99@101
1970 Plymouth Hemi 'Cuda - [email protected]
1970 Plymouth Roadrunner Hemi - 13.49@106
1970 Pontiac Trans Am (400) - 13.9@102
1971 Dodge Charger R/T Hemi - 13.7@104
1971 Ford Mustang Boss 351 - 13.9@102 (somehow made it, but boss 429/302 didnt?)
1971 Plymouth GTX 440+6 - 13.7@102
1971 Firebird Trans Am (455) - 13.9@103

The brackets are for Displacements, Hemis are 426ci (if u didnt know that then I dont know why ur here). out of approximately 200 cars, those are the sub-14s ones. Mostly Hemi or special order. Slowest car in the book is the 1960 Chrysler 300F at 16.00@85, almost all of the other cars were in the 14s, with a few in the 15s, and none in the 12s. If u want n e more detailed info on n e cars i'll look it up for ya just tell me. If you were wondering, the Boss 429 stang was 14.0 even so i didnt include it lol, but i bet u didnt think there would be that many cars in the list. I think theres 29 in my list, unless I counted wrong, and that site that was posted up a few posts has 50 sub-14s cars so there are a lot of them. Im tired now, better catch some Z's.
__________________

1990 Ford Mustang GT
Factory Rated: 225hp, 300lbs tq
http://www.cardomain.com/profile/hemi_fan
hemi_fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2003, 12:17 AM   #41
graywolf624
Regular User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hellaware USA
Posts: 3,865
Default

My point is, the cremdelacrem of the 60s and 70s ran 13s. Your avg muscle car ran 14s and 15s. The top crust now is well beyond the 13s. A 16s muscle car you came up with. Now please close your eyes and think of what cars run 16s. Would you call them performance cars? Would you call a current v6 mustang (they run a 15.2) a performance car? I wouldn't. (ignoring cornering ability which is a seperate issue) What's fast has steadily increased over the years. A 02 ss camaro runs a 13.2. That new gto is expected to be sub 13.5. Neither of these cars are the top of the speed food chain. Mean speed of all vehicles has clearly increased, as well as top speed, and mode speed.

As for the hemi and thunderbolt, never heard of them. However, please note they are kind of inconsequential to the arguement that the gto holds up to the performance mantle and standard of its forebearer. It has the performance and the sleeper look for a reasonable for the masses price. That is the definition the makers of the original car gave it.
graywolf624 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2003, 10:46 AM   #42
blah
Regular User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Santa Clarita, CA, USA
Posts: 2,539
Default

Originally Posted by graywolf624
"theres something good under the hood."
your conflicting yourself completely.

So is it fast enough to know it's fast(13.5 sub). But it can't run 13.5 because you think it can't. But you would think it can because it's a gto? huh?

Oh and the name badge isn't exactly all that noticable in the dark.
Something good under the hood, as in the LS1, but i still dont think it will run a 13.5 If you believe hype from a GM worker, then i dont know what to tell you. You can see badges at night, its really not that hard.

And gray, those cars he listed are some of the most famous cars of that time. The Hemi Super bee is just a awesome car, when you think of muscle those are the cars you think of. Also the Boss 429 is a beast!
__________________
blah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2003, 01:08 PM   #43
graywolf624
Regular User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hellaware USA
Posts: 3,865
Default

"Something good under the hood, as in the LS1, but i still dont think it will run a 13.5 If you believe hype from a GM worker, then i dont know what to tell you. You can see badges at night, its really not that hard.

And gray, those cars he listed are some of the most famous cars of that time. The Hemi Super bee is just a awesome car, when you think of muscle those are the cars you think of. Also the Boss 429 is a beast!"

I wasn't referint to the super bee or boss 429. I meant the thunderbolt and polara bodied hemi.

And it's not just basing on gm workers. Look at the performance versus weight and the gearing. Those numbers all point to a speed in the neighborhood of 13.5. Obviously the sleeper image works if you don't think its that fast.
graywolf624 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2003, 04:41 PM   #44
hemi_fan
Regular User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,670
Default

hahaha, the GTO would be a sleeper if it were home-made, but this thing no doubt will have some kind of exhaust kit and when a ricer pulls up beside it expecting to hear a V6 rev back, hes going to notice just a little bit of a different sound dont you think? regardless if he could see the car or not. Older cars are better sleepers because even the slow ones could have a throaty V8 sound to them.
__________________

1990 Ford Mustang GT
Factory Rated: 225hp, 300lbs tq
http://www.cardomain.com/profile/hemi_fan
hemi_fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2003, 05:59 PM   #45
blah
Regular User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Santa Clarita, CA, USA
Posts: 2,539
Default

[quote="graywolf624"]"Something good under the hood, as in the LS1, but i still dont think it will run a 13.5 If you believe hype from a GM worker, then i dont know what to tell you. You can see badges at night, its really not that hard.

And gray, those cars he listed are some of the most famous cars of that time. The Hemi Super bee is just a awesome car, when you think of muscle those are the cars you think of. Also the Boss 429 is a beast!"

I wasn't referint to the super bee or boss 429. I meant the thunderbolt and polara bodied hemi.



theres alot more to running a fast Quarter mile than considering weight, and gearing. You must conisder drag, weight distribution, how the ECU works, lots of other things.

My guess is that the car will run 13.8-14.3 or so. The Holden its based of runs about a 14.6, and the only big difference is that the GTO will have just a few mor horses, and more torque in lower revs. And
__________________
blah is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump