Actual Horsepower Of '60s/'70s Muscle Cars

[harddrivin1le]

Car Life (June, 1964) got a stock Pontiac GTO 389, with 3.23 gears, from 0-100-0 in 19.4 seconds. The 0-100 mph time was 14.9 seconds, so 100-0 took only 4.5 seconds...

Take a look at the brakes and tires (which play a far more crucial role in braking than in acceleration) on this E55 AMG and Audi RS6, each of which required roughly 4.5 seconds to stop from 100 MPH: http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/i...2003125126.gif

This 911 turbo has some of the best MODERN street car brakes in the world and needed 4.2 seconds to stop from 100 MPH:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/i...2003125156.gif


The brakes in any of those cars have enough stopping power to literally smash your face into the windshield if you stomped on them at 100 MPH and weren't wearing a shoulder belt.

The GTO's brakes would feel PATHETIC in comparison.

Yet you're essentially saying is that a 3,600 pound car from 1965 on dog-sh*t tires and equipped with 9.5" drum brakes could stop in the same amount of time as that 911 turbo...


Do you have ANY commonsense whatsoever or do you merely accept ONLY THE BEST figures from 40 year old magazines without questioning the results and understanding the physics of the situation.

You do realize that MISPRINTS and ERRORS occur - right?

That is why INTELLIGENT people use MULTIPLE data-points before forming conclusions.

[nota]

That being said, I think they'd have given most Euro Sedans of the period a good run for their money in terms of overall handling. Braking was probably "decent" (for the period) with the optional front discs. And ~ 300 net HP (the best W30s) certainly isn't bad by 60s/early 70s standards.

"60s/early 70s standards" the critical phrase here, since nothing from that period handled well by today's definition.

You need to drive more cars from that period because I can name a few euros of that era that handle well by any definition

[henk4]

You need to drive more cars from that period because I can name a few euros of that era that handle well by any definition

it was not for nothing that I asked ages ago in this thread which car won the very first Trans-Am race. It was a nimble 1600 cc Alfa Romeo GTA (driven by Jochen Rindt)....

[Fleet 500]

Yet you're essentially saying is that a 3,600 pound car from 1965 on dog-sh*t tires and equipped with 9.5" drum brakes could stop in the same amount of time as that 911 turbo...

I didn't say it... I was posting it from a Car Life article.

Do you have ANY commonsense whatsoever or do you merely accept ONLY THE BEST figures from 40 year old magazines without questioning the results and understanding the physics of the situation.

A more important question is: Do you EVER praise '60s muscle cars? Or do you just go out of your way to criticize them?

You do realize that MISPRINTS and ERRORS occur - right?

I doubt it was a misprint. It was in the spec box but also mentioned in the text. And for such a good figure, they most likely double-checked the figures.

That is why INTELLIGENT people use MULTIPLE data-points before forming conclusions.

I agree. Then find some more 0-100-0 data for '65 GTOs!

[nota]

it was not for nothing that I asked ages ago in this thread which car won the very first Trans-Am race. It was a nimble 1600 cc Alfa Romeo GTA (driven by Jochen Rindt)....

Noticed that

My favourite Oz Falcon racer Allan Moffat previously won a Trans-Am race in a Cortina

For openers, how would you currently rate the handling of these Henk?

Various Issigonis BMCs including (but by no means restricted to) the famous Cooper S
Those sensational handling Alfasuds
Citroens including GS ..

[Matra et Alpine]

Various Issigonis BMCs including (but by no means restricted to) the famous Cooper S
Those sensational handling Alfasuds
Citroens including GS ..

hmm , avoiding the risk of being too romatic about history ...

Handling was awful compared to modern cars !
BUT for their day the handling of the best were well head of the ordinary street car.
Bad variation in camber, bump steer, dive steer, variable brake performance, live axle tramp, wheel bounce, wheel chatterclutch slip, suspension movement, toe-in/out affected by brake/acceleration.turning, limited damper operation, limited spring movment. And we've not even started on the engine, fuel and ignition

However, put in competition bushes, mult-link axle, rose-joints and multi-rate shocks and springs and they can handle nearly as well as a modern car. Modern brakes and replace rears with disks with variable bias. Modern fueling, piping and ignition and in terms of TIME will be faster than the modern cars -- all due to WEIGHT.

[nota]

Bad variation in camber, bump steer, dive steer, variable brake performance, live axle tramp, wheel bounce, wheel chatterclutch slip, suspension movement, toe-in/out affected by brake/acceleration.turning, limited damper operation, limited spring movment. And we've not even started on the engine, fuel and ignition

Hang on I don't see excessive camber change in stock Minis, nor any dive in comparable terms, or live axle blues for any I've mentioned

I reckon that, given equal quality footwear, the original Minis and Mokes I've driven (and Alfasuds too) would blitz that current Corolla I rented last year, in the tight stuff at least

[harddrivin1le]

hmm , avoiding the risk of being too romatic about history ...

Handling was awful compared to modern cars !
BUT for their day the handling of the best were well head of the ordinary street car.
Bad variation in camber, bump steer, dive steer, variable brake performance, live axle tramp, wheel bounce, wheel chatterclutch slip, suspension movement, toe-in/out affected by brake/acceleration.turning, limited damper operation, limited spring movment. And we've not even started on the engine, fuel and ignition

However, put in competition bushes, mult-link axle, rose-joints and multi-rate shocks and springs and they can handle nearly as well as a modern car. Modern brakes and replace rears with disks with variable bias. Modern fueling, piping and ignition and in terms of TIME will be faster than the modern cars -- all due to WEIGHT.

I agree with most of that.

New cars have MUCH better structural rigidity, though. That provides less frame/unibody flex, which in turn allows for less variation in intended suspension geometry.

Suspension geometry itself had improved significantly during the past couple of decades. It often times isn't possible to duplicate that in an old car without making radical alterations.

You can MODIFY an old car to increase its rigidity, but that adds a disproportionately high amount of weight. Ditto for modifying suspension pick-up points.

Modern cars incorporate those features into their basic structures and therefore do so in a much more weight efficient manner.

The MB E class of the mid 1980s is recognized as the father of modern production car structural rigidity. ALL others have since followed that path.

New cars also tend to be much more aerodynamically efficient than the older ones. That matters A LOT at elevated speeds.

It's going to take a HELLUVA lot of mods and money to get an old car to run with this one, which can be bought brand new for around $44K (US$) from the right dealers.:

http://www.caranddriver.com/assets/d..._z51_08_ss.pdf

[Matra et Alpine]

Hang on I don't see excessive camber change in stock Minis

You've been looking at a racing Mini setup then with adjustable Hi-Los with added camber

nor any dive in comparable terms

Dive/dive steer - Hillman Imp

or live axle blues for any I've mentioned

Cortina In standard trim it had NO links.
I takes the Atlas 5-link deal to get it under control as used in racing Cortinas and developed in the Mk1 Escort.
Competed in them all

I reckon that, given equal quality footwear, the original Minis and Mokes I've driven (and Alfasuds too) would blitz that current Corolla I rented last year, in the tight stuff at least

Originals don't stand a chance if there is anything longer than 100metres
TUNED originals definately do.
It's easy to forget that the original 997 Cooper only had 50ish hp !!

[nota]

You've been looking at a racing Mini setup then with adjustable Hi-Los with added camber

In honesty I was judging it by years of watching stockers on the street, and road tests, and those driven by self, and of course numerous old Bathurst vids where none of those mods you mention were allowed

Dive/dive steer - Hillman Imp

Didn't mention the Imp (but have owned a modded Imp as you'd know)

Cortina In standard trim it had NO links.
I takes the Atlas 5-link deal to get it under control as used in racing Cortinas and developed in the Mk1 Escort.
Competed in them all

Nor cite any of these

Originals don't stand a chance if there is anything longer than 100metres
TUNED originals definately do.
It's easy to forget that the original 997 Cooper only had 50ish hp !!

But IIRC the Cooper S 'bomb' had a whopping 78hp

[Falcon500]

You need to drive more cars from that period because I can name a few euros of that era that handle well by any definition

Alot of jap cars of the period where fine handelers too.

Datsun 1600
Datsun 1000
Earky skylines handeled pretty fine too.
your early "mustang" celicas werent too bad either.

[nota]

The MB E class of the mid 1980s is recognized as the father of modern production car structural rigidity. ALL others have since followed that path.

Not wishing to be too pedantic but worth correcting that the car you mention (E class or W124) was in its design essence just an enlarged W201 (190E) which in 1982 intro'd Benz's fantastic five-link rear suspension

Multi-link suspension - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[nota]

Alot of jap cars of the period where fine handelers too.

Datsun 1000

I've got > something < for you




(admittedly not much in the way of camber change tho)

[harddrivin1le]

Not wishing to be too pedantic but worth correcting that the car you mention (E class or W124) was in its design essence just an enlarged W201 (190E) which in 1982 intro'd Benz's fantastic five-link rear suspension

Multi-link suspension - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I know what a multi-link suspension is and don't require Wikipedia's input.

The press in this country universally proclaimed the 300E as setting a new standard in structural rigidity for passenger cars.

The 190E was a much smaller car and was universally slammed as being a poor vehicle overall.

[Falcon500]

I've got > something < for you




(admittedly not much in the way of camber change tho)

Well I have pictures of minis doing the same I have posted many times before When I get my old pics on this computer ill repost it

my father owned a coupe Delux tranverse leaf suspeansion in it and handeled like a go kart