Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 85

Thread: 40-60 mph: '67 Ferrari VS '64 Cadillac

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    San Fernando Valley, Calif.
    Posts
    6,794

    40-60 mph: '67 Ferrari VS '64 Cadillac

    I was looking through a Car & Driver magazine (July, 1967) at a comparison test between a '67 Mercury Cougar XR-7 and a '67 Jaguar 420. Also in the issue was a road test of a '67 Ferrari 330/GTC and I noticed the 40-60 mph time was 3.5 seconds. I remember a Car Life (July, 1964) test of a '64 Cadillac in which the 40-60 mph was 3.7 seconds. Surprising that the Cadillac had such as close time. As most people know, once the weight is overcome, big and heavy cars can have some good passing times.

    Here are the actual specs:

    ---------------------------- '67 Ferrari--------------- '64 Cadillac
    ---------------------------- 330/GTC---------------- Sedan de Ville

    Engine---------------------- V-12 242-cu-in/3,967 cc- V-8 429-cu-in
    Rated horsepower----------- 300 @ 7000 rpm--------- 340 @ 4600
    Rated torque---------------- N.A.-------------------- 480 lbs/ft @ 3000
    Compression ratio----------- 8.8:1-------------------- 10.5:1
    Transmission---------------- 5-speed manual---------- 3-speed auto
    Axle ratio------------------- 3.44:1------------------- 3.21:1
    Curb weight----------------- 3,160 lbs---------------- 4,900 lbs

    Wheelbase/length----------- 94.4"/177.4"------------- 129.5"/223.5"

    0-30 mph------------------- 2.2 secs----------------- 3.4 secs
    0-60 mph------------------- 6.8---------------------- 8.5
    0-80 mph------------------- 11.3--------------------- 14.1
    0-100 mph------------------ 16.7--------------------- 23.5

    1/4 mile--------------------- 15.1 @ 96 mph----------- 16.4 @ 86 mph

    40-60 mph------------------ 3.5 secs------------------ 3.7 secs
    50-70 mph------------------ 4.1----------------------- 4.5
    30-70 mph------------------ 6.7----------------------- 7.6

    Top speed------------------ 153 mph (estimated)------- 121 (observed)

    Speed in gears @ rpm (mph)
    1st------------------------- 50 @ 7000 rpm------------ 46 @ 4400
    2nd------------------------- 72 @ 7000---------------- 77 @ 4400
    3rd------------------------- 97 @ 7000---------------- 121 @ 4650
    4th------------------------- 122 @ 7000--------------- - - - - -
    5th------------------------- 142 @ 6800--------------- - - - - -
    '76 Cadillac Fleetwood Seventy-Five Limousine, '95 Lincoln Town Car.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    6,534
    With such a vastly bigger engine, the torque surge would be nice at that speed range. Also the Caddy probably didn't have to change gear. Interesting thing - seems the Caddy has a very high compression ratio for the time, or was that pretty normal?
    Life's too short to drive bad cars.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    San Fernando Valley, Calif.
    Posts
    6,794
    Quote Originally Posted by pimento View Post
    With such a vastly bigger engine, the torque surge would be nice at that speed range.
    It would be nice... even when pushing a 4,900-lb car.

    Also the Caddy probably didn't have to change gear.
    Going by the specs listed, it looks like each car was shifted one time during the 40-60 mph run.

    Interesting thing - seems the Caddy has a very high compression ratio for the time, or was that pretty normal?
    No, I would say it was normal. Even the big luxury cars (Cadillac, Lincoln, Imperial) had high-compression engines. At least until 1970-'71.
    '76 Cadillac Fleetwood Seventy-Five Limousine, '95 Lincoln Town Car.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rozenburg, Holland
    Posts
    27,329
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleet 500 View Post



    Going by the specs listed, it looks like each car was shifted one time during the 40-60 mph run.
    If the Ferrari had stayed in 2nd gear it might have been quicker...
    "I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    San Fernando Valley, Calif.
    Posts
    6,794
    Quote Originally Posted by henk4 View Post
    If the Ferrari had stayed in 2nd gear it might have been quicker...
    According to the chart, 2nd gear was used up to 72 mph, so it looks like it was in 2nd gear for the 40-60 mph acceleration. Or did you mean 1st gear?
    '76 Cadillac Fleetwood Seventy-Five Limousine, '95 Lincoln Town Car.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    33,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleet 500 View Post
    According to the chart, 2nd gear was used up to 72 mph, so it looks like it was in 2nd gear for the 40-60 mph acceleration. Or did you mean 1st gear?
    I doubt it was using the "appropiate" gears for maximum acceleration, but rather taller gear to see the flexibility of the engine.

    Hence my earlier comment.
    Lack of charisma can be fatal.
    Visca Catalunya!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rozenburg, Holland
    Posts
    27,329
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleet 500 View Post
    According to the chart, 2nd gear was used up to 72 mph, so it looks like it was in 2nd gear for the 40-60 mph acceleration. Or did you mean 1st gear?
    I would expect that staying in 2nd gear from 40-60 would give a better time than redlining 1st and then loosing time during the gearhift to 2nd.
    "I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lansing, MI
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleet 500 View Post

    No, I would say it was normal. Even the big luxury cars (Cadillac, Lincoln, Imperial) had high-compression engines. At least until 1970-'71.
    do you know why they made the switch from the high compression engines on those bigger luxury cars?

    really impressed the cadillac kept up with the ferrari on that race though.
    Last edited by henk4; 07-18-2011 at 10:03 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    San Fernando Valley, Calif.
    Posts
    6,794
    Quote Originally Posted by joesharp View Post
    do you know why they made the switch from the high compression engines on those bigger luxury cars?
    I would say the compression was raised higher and higher for more power.
    Cadillac had 10.0:1 in 1957. By 1959, it was up to 10.5:1 and stayed at that level all through the '60s. 1956 Cadillac had 9.75:1. Lincoln and Chrysler probably had similar ratios for those years.

    really impressed the cadillac kept up with the ferrari on that race though.
    Yes, I think it is impressive.
    '76 Cadillac Fleetwood Seventy-Five Limousine, '95 Lincoln Town Car.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lansing, MI
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleet 500 View Post
    I would say the compression was raised higher and higher for more power.
    Cadillac had 10.0:1 in 1957. By 1959, it was up to 10.5:1 and stayed at that level all through the '60s. 1956 Cadillac had 9.75:1. Lincoln and Chrysler probably had similar ratios for those years.



    Yes, I think it is impressive.
    that makes sense. thanks for the response. did you know those figures off the top of your head, or is there a place to go for power figures like that on cadillac or other brands? thanks

    js
    Last edited by fisetdavid26; 07-22-2011 at 10:08 PM. Reason: Spam link removed.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    └A & Connecticlump
    Posts
    5,367
    Quote Originally Posted by pimento View Post
    With such a vastly bigger engine, the torque surge would be nice at that speed range. Also the Caddy probably didn't have to change gear. Interesting thing - seems the Caddy has a very high compression ratio for the time, or was that pretty normal?
    Big V8s on leaded gas from that era had some quite impressive compression ratios.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    430
    Quote Originally Posted by pimento View Post
    . Interesting thing - seems the Caddy has a very high compression ratio for the time, or was that pretty normal?
    American luxury cars (like their somewhat related muscle cars) all had high compression. In the US, the name of the game was bigger and more powerful until 1971 or so, because of emissions regulation and reduced availability of high octane fuel.

    The caddy had a very tall gearbox (it is a three speed auto after all). But it had gobs of torque. So? It weighed close to 5000 pounds. Of course the pony is going to win! Closer gears, faster revving engine, lighter car. No comparison. I quite frankly don't understand the comparison, these cars are not built for the same market
    "Don't think your time on bad things
    Just float your little mind around"
    Jimi Hendrix

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    33,489
    So a 7 litre car is more suited to in-gear acceleration than a 4 litre one.

    In other news scientists from the MIT say water is wet.

    Probably.
    Lack of charisma can be fatal.
    Visca Catalunya!

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    San Fernando Valley, Calif.
    Posts
    6,794
    Quote Originally Posted by Ferrer View Post
    So a 7 litre car is more suited to in-gear acceleration than a 4 litre one.

    In other news scientists from the MIT say water is wet.

    Probably.
    Do you mean a 7 litre car which weighs almost two tons more than a 4 litre one?

    No doubt, many people would be surprised at the slight difference in 40-60 mph times. I sure was.
    '76 Cadillac Fleetwood Seventy-Five Limousine, '95 Lincoln Town Car.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rozenburg, Holland
    Posts
    27,329
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleet 500 View Post
    Do you mean a 7 litre car which weighs almost two tons more than a 4 litre one?

    No doubt, many people would be surprised at the slight difference in 40-60 mph times. I sure was.
    the torque of the Ferrari is 240 lbft at 5000 revs, which is half that of the Caddy....
    "I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Really useful performance listings...
    By Egg Nog in forum Technical forums
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 04-18-2021, 05:13 PM
  2. Car brochures
    By ginza in forum Books, magazines, brochures and posters
    Replies: 1001
    Last Post: 09-23-2017, 05:21 AM
  3. all cars all years 0-60 and 1/4mile time
    By matheus in forum General Automotive
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 04-26-2015, 06:29 PM
  4. Gran Turismo 5
    By Sauc3 in forum Gaming
    Replies: 1020
    Last Post: 05-19-2014, 03:16 PM
  5. 200mph and up
    By werty in forum Multimedia
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 02-28-2004, 05:19 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •