Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
won't even be close in straight line either. I loved thru both eras and owned musclecars dating back to 65. My new Mustang GT would beat every car I have owned.
Yeah, good point, looking at some 0-60 times, a 69 440 is around 6.2 seconds, hell my 2011 V6 will keep up with it at 6.4 seconds.
40 years of improvements will work wonders.
won't even be close in straight line either. I loved thru both eras and owned musclecars dating back to 65. My new Mustang GT would beat every car I have owned.
yeah with lighter cars, higher tech drivetrains, etc these days, those of us from an older generation who were lucky enough to drive cars when they werent classics but just everyday rides.... well rare would one of those be able to outrun a current version. Especially small block cars, many fell in the 14 sec area which 4 cyl cars can hit now.
Stock for stock i may be able to be faster/quicker in one of the newer cars i've owned, but the sensation/personality of the older cars would still make my heart jump a bit. but that's likely another thread lol
Stock for stock i may be able to be faster/quicker in one of the newer cars i've owned, but the sensation/personality of the older cars would still make my heart jump a bit. but that's likely another thread lol
Agreed, I enjoyed my 72 Gran Torino like no other car I've owned, the vibrations, the rumble, and oh the torque, being able to break the tires free at will with some damn traction control system sticking it's nose in where it doesn't belong.
yeah with lighter cars, higher tech drivetrains, etc these days, those of us from an older generation who were lucky enough to drive cars when they werent classics but just everyday rides.... well rare would one of those be able to outrun a current version. Especially small block cars, many fell in the 14 sec area which 4 cyl cars can hit now.
Stock for stock i may be able to be faster/quicker in one of the newer cars i've owned, but the sensation/personality of the older cars would still make my heart jump a bit. but that's likely another thread lol
I concur that new vehicles, even boring sedans like the Camry, could probably take on the "muscle cars" of yore with relative ease, BUT the sedans will never have the same soul, style, personality, or sound that a big V8 engine stuffed into a muscle car was able to evoke. I'd much rather cruise around in a slower 1969 Pontiac GTO or 1967 Corvette than one of those Japanese rice burners anyday. I have a friend who drives a 4 cylinder Mazda that sounds like someone sneezed when he revs the engine; absolutely pitiful. Call me old fashioned but the ONLY sports car/muscle car/pony car I will ever own is one that has a high-displacement V8 engine with dual exhaust producing a harmonious symphony. It'd also be nice to have about 500 horsepower under the hood but that's another story altogether.
I concur that new vehicles, even boring sedans like the Camry, could probably take on the "muscle cars" of yore with relative ease, BUT the sedans will never have the same soul, style, personality, or sound that a big V8 engine stuffed into a muscle car was able to evoke. I'd much rather cruise around in a slower 1969 Pontiac GTO or 1967 Corvette than one of those Japanese rice burners anyday. I have a friend who drives a 4 cylinder Mazda that sounds like someone sneezed when he revs the engine; absolutely pitiful. Call me old fashioned but the ONLY sports car/muscle car/pony car I will ever own is one that has a high-displacement V8 engine with dual exhaust producing a harmonious symphony. It'd also be nice to have about 500 horsepower under the hood but that's another story altogether.
as i'm one of those older who maybe had more chances to drive hi-po cars of yesteryear then someone frmo the younger generation, & while i agree a cammed v8 has a sound like no other, sometimes these days it's "easier" especially for a youngster to slap a turbo on a honda then find a nice classic car and rebuild it. I've been lucky to spend time in 500+hp cars from the old days (including a 501+ ci rat powered 69 'maro) and lately in my daughter/soninlaw's built s2000 now. While their blown Honda is a rush, can slam you in the seat and will scream like a banshee on boost in vtec; that big block Camaro under full throttle was a ride like no other i've been in. But if i can ever get a ride now in their friend's 9.7 sec civic, i may change my mind on the whole "v8 thing" lol
Yeah, good point, looking at some 0-60 times, a 69 440 is around 6.2 seconds, hell my 2011 V6 will keep up with it at 6.4 seconds.
40 years of improvements will work wonders.
Remember, that '69 440 was making acceleration runs on '69 tires! Modern tires (back then) would have helped a lot.
My 68 chager 440, holley 750cfm4 barrel, edelbrock high rise intake (440toker) solid state distrubuter, headers, will get 23mpg if I drive it like I have a egg under my foot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toby Lee
How do you guys deal with such a large engine in this era of $3 plus gas?
Like said before a mustang is a pony car, when it first came out it was marketed towards mom, as a economical grocery getter for the smart woman of the 60's and the charger is a mussel car.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
