Perspective

[Richard F.]

Re: Perspective

Joe, I'm still on the tire kick. If you were just looking for performance "in the day" you could have gone Blue Dots or M & H slicks. But I would expect that even a narrow C2 size radial would be a huge improvement. I run 255/60 BFG's on 8 inch rims with F41 on my 68. No clearance problems. My F70 Goodyears on the 7 inch rims are never allowed to touch the ground.

[Joe L.]

Re: Perspective

Jim-----

"...as it surely will end as the other one did."

Truer words were never spoken. The "seeds" that will end the current muscle car era have already been sown.

[Gerard F.]

Re: Perspective

Joe,

From my persective, it's the memories and not the performance that counts. When I bought my 67 (base engine) in 68, I was 23 years old. Across the country and many years later, I rever the many memories I have had in this car.

135 mph in 1970, and later running up the Twain Harte grade at 100 with the top down and with a babe at my side, just sticks in my mind. Also taking it to the snow country with chains, and skis on the rack.

And thanks to this Board, I have it back to almost the same running condition when, it was new. If we do a running start at 60 mph, I can beat most "muscle" cars with my 300 HP 3.08, except for the newer ones.

But who cares, I still have my memories, and sometimes feel like a kid again.

Jerry Fuccillo
#42179

[Joe L.]

Re: Perspective

Jerry-----

There's no doubt that there can be a lot of great memories with old cars. They don't even need to be "muscle cars" for that. I'd love to have my 1961 Sunbeam Alpine back. That car had wonderful memories for me.

My 1969 Corvette, which I've owned since new, also has wonderful memories and, as I say, there's no other car I'd rather drive. I have 200,000 miles of memories with it.

All I'm saying is that the notion that "muscle cars" of the 60's were the epitome of high performance is false. The cars of today are the epitome of high performance----in just about every way, shape, manner, and form.

[Chris Patrick]

Re: Perspective

Joe, I think this line of thinking happened during the '70s and even the '80s. Performance took a dive, and a '60s Corvette could never go to one end and back before a mid '70s Corvette could get to the other end, or at least it seemed that way.

A 15 second Corvette 110 mph top speed was nothing when compared to the 13 second Corvettes or the 150-160 mph ones. And that condition lasted for several years. The 1984 was boasting of "Life Begins at 150" but in reality, that was about as fast as it would go. It's quarter mile times were about the same as a '63 Corvette, as was its top speed, and only the lateral G force was greater, and that was mainly achieved by lots of babysitting by a group of engineers determined to get 1 G for marketing purposes. Most people would get somewhere around .98 G.

But it didn't take long until performance surpassed the '60s after that. The TPI, better suspension still, frame stiffening, and so on. I remember hearing someone joke that the new C5 would blow away almost any old Corvette while running the air conditioning, listening to your favorite music, and carrying two bags of golf clubs in the back! (Remember the "requirement" for golf clubs?)

But then, would we want it any other way?

[Joe C.]

Re: Perspective

Joe,

Can't remember exactly where I saw this, but probably somewhere in 1985, in Car & Driver mag, was a head-to-head, 1/4 mile test of a 1967 Corvette with L88 versus a 1985 Corvette with L98 and Doug Nash 4+1 (the 700R4 actually is quicker!).
Guess which car had the better E.T.?

The L88, but by a very slim margin. The L98 was ahead until the final couple hundred feet, when the L88 finally overtook it.

I have tried to find this article before, with no success. If anybody can help me out here, I'd appreciate it.

Joe

[Loren L.]

The Reality of "Perspective", both then

and now, is that you have NO idea what the manufacturer provided for testing. I can only recall one occasion where a magazine refused to include a GTO(?) in a comparison test because of how it had been "massaged".

If anyone thinks that does NOT happen in 2007, I'm still looking for investors for my ocean marina in Wikieup, AZ. Call soon, all the good spots will go early.

A late friend of mine, Jim Wilkinson (father was Chief Engineer for Franklin), told me that they always went over in late July for a look at next year's Corvette - at Bill Thomas's shop in Anaheim. When Bill was done, the car would be taken to Frank Milne at Harry Mann and the calls to the magazines would begin.

[Dick W.]

Re: Perspective

I guess what most miss the the "kick in the pants" that a big block would give you while emulating loud moans, groans, and roars from under the hood, while the tires went up in smoke. The modern cars are so sophisticated that one does not really sense the performance unless you take time to look at the speedometer. The traction control systems have basically done away with the smokey acceleration of yesteryear. Crudeness has been replaced with sophistication. Now if we could have the best of both........

[Donald B.]

Re: Perspective

Your comment regarding a new muscle car and a vintage muscle car is right on the money.

When I go to Donut Derelicts (held every Saturday morning in Huntington Beach) I've observed new Ferrari's drive in and NO ONE, NO ONE even looks. However everyone stops and watches as the 50s, 60s, or even 70s classic drives by.

[Richard F.]

Re: Perspective

I think there is an interesting parallel in the motorcycle world. Your average Japanese crotch rocket (Ninja, GSX-R, etc.) will destroy a Harley. But the Harley is more of a visceral experience when they are built up to really run. Noisy, rough, pounding, belching fire, nasty. Think chrome bumper Vette.

[James C.]

Re: Perspective

Before Corvettes got really fast with the Z06, remember the ZR1 which was 15 years ahead of it's time, the 89 Turbo Trans Am and the Buick Grand National and of course the Shelby inspired 1996 Dodge Viper coupe.Those are the muscle cars that will be what our kids collect because Dad owned one back in the day. At least that is what my 32 year old car guy son tells me...Jim

[Joe L.]

Re: Perspective

Don-----

There's no question that older cars draw a lot more attention than newer cars. That holds true whether they are 60's "muscle cars" or any other old (but well kept) car. No question, at all, about that. So, if one is trying to attract attention to oneself, driving in with an old car is a very good way to accomplish that. And, in the case of "muscle cars", if folks want to THINK that these are the fastest cars ever built for the street, so be it. The chances are that the new Ferrari that no one is looking at will FAR outperform any of the "muscle cars" by ANY standard of performance.

By the way, while nobody else might be looking at the new Ferraris when they drive in, if I was there, I'd be looking at them. I like Ferraris (except Testarossas). I guess it's the full-blooded Italian in me.

[Dennis C.]

Joe L. - 10/4 on the Ferraris... Bu-T-Ful *NM*

[Mike M.]

Re: Joe L. - 10/4 on the Ferraris... Bu-T-Ful

was the recent purchase of the XKE for sondra's birthday leading up to the purchase of a ferraris for the dipstick's next birthday? stick with USA-manufactured products, ya big dummy. mikie

[Dennis C.]

Hey #14, Mr Head in the sand... The last Chev...

...rolet 383" crate engine I bought was hecho en Mexico. Said so cast on the block. Most chrome/whatever add on's are made in China and the instructions are written in French. Wasn't my idea... Sincerely, Your favorite big dummy...