Nice... our own Forum (for American V8's that is)

[RC45]

But the Viper falls short of the "cheap body with engine stuffed inside" definition of the GTO's, Chevelles and such like.

I can see the Z06 not being a "classic" muscle car in that theme, nor the S7 (but not because it is midengined) nor the Mosler - the Cobra and Z28/SS and Firebird/Hawk are then as pointed out earlier, the true Pony cars.

The Viper can still lay claim to being the AC Cobra of the modern automotive world though. (not that the Viper is a British sports car, but the SRT-10 is a is from the drawing board of an import guy... right? )

[dis3as3d]

OMG how can you say the corvette isnt a muscle car? The only real thing that makes it alittle iffy now is the transaxle setup... it may not be traditional muscle, but it definately is American Muscle.

[blah]

Originally Posted by graywolf624 The GTO actually is the muscle car of the bunch. A muscle car is defined as simply a big sedan with a big engine. The original GTO was also as such. The Corvette has never been a muscle car, and neither has the camaro or mustang. The camaro and mustang are pony cars (smaller cars 2+2 with a big engine) while the corvette is a true sports car. "a 383 tri-power if I am not mistaken" Depends on year. The biggest engine for the gtos was a 454 I think. They were always just a tempest or a Lemans with a slightly different body and a big engine.

Muscle cars arent all sedans. I think of the Mustang/Camaro/Firebird as apart of the Muscle car category.

And the GTO just doesnt have the musculer lines that its predecessor had.

[RC45]

Originally Posted by dis3as3d OMG how can you say the corvette isnt a muscle car? The only real thing that makes it alittle iffy now is the transaxle setup... it may not be traditional muscle, but it definately is American Muscle.

It is definitely American Muscle - but bearing in mind that is was a purpose built 2 seater, that only developed muscles after years of working out ('53 was a six-banger.. ) - while the "classic muscle" cars burst onto the seen as over-powered econ-boxes (paraphrasing here) from the get-go...

The classic muscle cars kind of did with cubic inches, and "economy" cars what the ricers have tried unsuccessfully to do with the econoboxes (civics and integras... ) - instead of cubic inches and hp, they got stuck with the hp/litre formula, forgetting to add any more litres...

I would not get caught up in the transaxle debate - that just goes to show the original intent of the Corvette was power and handling - at what ever cost, even if it meant designing anew drive train - where as the "classic muscle" car formula just required a trip to the GM/Mopar/Ford parts bin to find the biggest baddest motor to stuff into Auny Emma's grocery getter...

[novass]

cool we have an American Muscle forum.

as for the topic you started RC45, im not sure. ive always considered the old American cars to be the true muscle cars. big carbed engines, brutal acceleration, frightning handling and braking. most of the American cars have seemed to resolve certain issues that makes the cars seem less beast-like. i do like the Z06, Viper and all the other recent ones, i like anything thats fast.

just my opinion. its just when i think what best describes the term muscle, when applied to cars, is a fast car with comprimises LOL. you can go fast in a straight line, its loud as hell, just dont try a fast turn or stop quickly lol. but i really dont know, its kinda hard to say what is and isnt a muscle car, guess it depends on your own opinion.

[graywolf624]

"Muscle cars arent all sedans. I think of the Mustang/Camaro/Firebird as apart of the Muscle car category. "

If you look at what was originally termed muscle cars, not all were sedans. All however were big cars for the time. None handled real well either. As for the GTO, your forgetting what the gto looked like when it first came out. They werent all judges with the hood scoop, the original ones looked like just about everything else on the road. Once the gto gets a hood scoop perhaps it will be that, till then it's a good sleeper.


The camaro mustang and firebird are too small to be muscle cars..

American muscle.. thats a new term and it may very well be defined as something entirely different.

[hemi_fan]

o man, i died, went to work, came back, and it was heaven. Lmfao... I love this new section. Great idea. As for this. I dont really consider the Saleen/Viper/Shelby to be muscle cars, more american super cars. I do consider the Stang, vette, and newer maros/birds to be muscle. My question to you is... what about Ford's new vehicles, the Marauder and teh new T-Bird, are they in this category???

[graywolf624]

Tbird- no, never was. It was always more of a boulevard cruiser.

Maurauder- Is muscle, but seems to be a failure when it comes to actual performance numbers.

[666fast]

Cool, a forum dedicated to the cars Iv'e grown up with!

As for the original intention of the thread. It's a damn hard question to answer. I think many of the cars mentioned could fit into the muscle car group, but I don't think they are "muscle" cars. Yes they have a lot of pwer and are definately fast, but they really are entirely different creatures compared to the original muscle cars.
The only current Mustang that I would consider a muscle car would be the Cobra and Cobra R. The only Camaro that I would consider a muscle car is the Dale Earnhardt edition. The SS came close but no cigar.
Firebirds, Camaros, Trans Ams, they are Pony Cars. If you don't know what a pony car is, it's basically a detuned muscle car. During the gas crisis of the 70's, car manufacturers had to decrease gasoline consumption and obviously the muscle car era had died. Most of the cars were still built with more econimical engines, therefore, they has less power.

There has been a few comments on that muscle cars were straight line oriented. That is only partially true. The Camaro was built for GT racing and it did very well. There were a few others as well.

The Saleen S7, in my opinion is not a muscle car. It's a supercar, thats a totally different league.

For a new car to be considered a muscle car, the definition of the term Muscle car has to changed and updated. When I think of Muscle cars, I have a very hard time considering cars built today being part of that group. Even the ones I stated above are very hard to be considered one. Cars today really are completely different from what they were 30-40 years ago.

[blah]

Originally Posted by graywolf624 "Muscle cars arent all sedans. I think of the Mustang/Camaro/Firebird as apart of the Muscle car category. " If you look at what was originally termed muscle cars, not all were sedans. All however were big cars for the time. None handled real well either. As for the GTO, your forgetting what the gto looked like when it first came out. They werent all judges with the hood scoop, the original ones looked like just about everything else on the road. Once the gto gets a hood scoop perhaps it will be that, till then it's a good sleeper. The camaro mustang and firebird are too small to be muscle cars.. American muscle.. thats a new term and it may very well be defined as something entirely different.

GTO isnt a sleeper because its slow. it runs a 14 with a professional. It would get smoked by other LS1s. the GTO at its greatest point was the Judge, so thats what im basing what the new GTO should look like. Right now it looks like crap, try again. Muscle cars shouldnt look like BMWs, they should look like they are possed by demons. Example 429 Boss, i think that may be the sexiest muscle car ever!

[Kangaroo Boy]

hehehe,The LS1 in the GTO is WAY DETUNE,lol

[graywolf624]

Funny, the information on the gtos quarter times have yet to be released. A GM officer announced, and I quote "The 2004 GTO will be among if not the fastest Factory GTO. "F-body like Performance" is expected, meaning low 5 second 0-60 times and sub 13.5 second quarter-mile times."

The car won't be released until Thanksgiving. Wait until someone really tests it first. It wont be as fast as the fbody, but it should be close. And it's a 4 door sedan. It will be a great sleeper.


Wrong, the ls1 engine in the gto actually has more hsp then the standard holden version. Pushing 340hp.

Will I buy the car? No, because it looks like my last car, the 97 grand prix. Do I think it has a place with enthusiasts- yes. Do I think it will be bought by the masses? Maybe if SLP makes a hood scooped version pushing 360 hp which they are discussing.

I've had the opportunity to sit in the GTO and look the car over closely. It is very well appointed. The reviewers have only been allowed a ride in the passenger seat of the car so far, because all they have running is a preproduction show car up to about 2 weeks ago.

*Through my dealing with certain organizations I get to see some of gms cars before most people.

[RC45]

A GM officer announced, and I quote "The 2004 GTO will be among if not the fastest Factory GTO. "

Not too hard since I doubt there is a "classic muscle" car from the 60's or 70's that could run quicker than 14 or 15s in factory stock form - including the orginal GTO.

[graywolf624]

Yup, there are exceptions (mainly rare stuff. 69 ZL1 camaro was under 14 I bleieve), but back then a 15 sec car was quick. I do believe the judge ran a low 15. But the point to stress was the sub 13.5 numbers. Thats a far cry from 14 with a professional driver and very quick for a sub 40 k car that can seat 5.

[blah]

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. The Cars had much more potential back then than some cars now adays. Didnt the GT-500 run like 13.8s? Also, the GTO will not be a sleeper because everyone who knows just a tad about cars knows about the GTO, and the legend.

BTW if im gonna spend upwards to 35 grand on a Car, ill get a Cobra thank you very much.