For the folks that remember the Real Muscle Cars!!!!!!

[LagerHead]

My dad got a '57 Chevy Sport Sedan (4 door coupe, basically) with a blueprinted 327 for $135. He lost two things in that car: A race to a '69 GTO Judge and his license. 

[Spots]

I love old muscle. I have pictures of my dads 70 Chevelle with the LS6 454, 4 speed, and him and his brother swapped in a spool and 4.56 gears into the rear end. I love hearing stories about that old car.

[DMark]

As much as I love the Old Muscle, you can't deny that today's performance cars are leaps and bounds ahead of that great era of the 60s and early 70s.

 

Example - - - The new 2015 Mustang GT's 5.0-liter (302 c.i.) engine produces 435hp and 400 lb-ft of torque while getting a combined 20+mpg.

 

AND you don't have to adjust any solid lifters, clean & re-gap the plugs, or set the points before every weekend! 

[Will Carry]

I remember those cars well. If you got 70,000 miles on one it was incredible. Not because they weren't well built but because we drove them so hard.

[bersaguy]

As much as I love the Old Muscle, you can't deny that today's performance cars are leaps and bounds ahead of that great era of the 60s and early 70s.

 

Example - - - The new 2015 Mustang GT's 5.0-liter (302 c.i.) engine produces 435hp and 400 lb-ft of torque while getting a combined 20+mpg.

 

AND you don't have to adjust any solid lifters, clean & re-gap the plugs, or set the points before every weekend! 

Yep, they are leaps and bounds ahead of the 60 and 70's with 302  5.0 engines producing all that horsepower and foot pounds of torque and it is impressive but back in the 60's and 70's all the horsepower being made by those cars, 90% of it was getting to the rear tires to make the cars fast. Today a little less than 60% of all that horse power is getting to the rear tires to get that great fuel mileage all the real horse power is being sucked up by the computer programs, Rear gears and transmissions of today's cars before any gets to the rear tires. Not saying they don't have some serious top end speeds in some of the new cars but You have to make sacrifices in one place to get something someplace else and they have sacrificed raw horse power at the rear tires for fuel mileage on the highways. I hear all these advertisements about 0 to 60 in 7 seconds these days.  How about 0 to 130 in 7 seconds. That was the cars of the 60's and 70's. If you want to see some serious street races like took place back in the 60's and 70's tune in to Street Outlaws on the Discovery Channel Monday night around 7 or 8 PM. They are some serious dudes racing there.........................jmho 

[Guest ab28]

Cars today are actually a lot better. They last longer, ride better, are safer, and get better mileage. Back in the muscle car days, cars like that were junk at 100k miles, today it's not uncommon for a car to get close to 300k before it's junk. 

 

There's a youtube vid of a 1959 Bel Aire running into a 2009 Malibu, the old car is smashed up much worse. Structural engineering has come a long way in vehicle safety.

 

I've always seen a vehicle as an appliance, like a washing machine. I'd go out, spend a grand on a beater, then run it into the ground, did all my own maintenance. They lasted 4 or 5 years, usually, then when the engine or transmission went out, I scrapped it. My last car was a 1989 Taurus wagon with 265K on it when I junked it. Lasted me 7 years with no major issues, was very reliable. It was beat up and ugly, and the shocks were gone, but it ran. Paid 1300 for it and got 200 out of it when I scrapped it. 

 

Never seen the obsession with speed thing either. Fastest most people are gonna go is 70 or so on the interstate, so smaller cars with a top speed of about 85 is all that is really needed.

Edited August 1, 2014 by ab28

[Tempest455]

As much as I love the Old Muscle, you can't deny that today's performance cars are leaps and bounds ahead of that great era of the 60s and early 70s.

 

Example - - - The new 2015 Mustang GT's 5.0-liter (302 c.i.) engine produces 435hp and 400 lb-ft of torque while getting a combined 20+mpg.

 

AND you don't have to adjust any solid lifters, clean & re-gap the plugs, or set the points before every weekend! 

 

Won't argue that. My wife's intercooled, turbo 4 cyl 4 door is faster than my bone stock '69 Road Runner. For a daily driver, that technology is hard to beat. However, there is no comparison in the fun and cool dept w/ the older Musclecars.

[nightrunner]

Never seen the obsession with speed thing either. Fastest most people are gonna go is 70 or so on the interstate, so smaller cars with a top speed of about 85 is all that is really needed.

1. This thread is not for you.

2. Yes a car that only goes 85 top speed is dangerous. Most normal people drive about 75-80 cruising on the interstate, not 70, thats for grandpa and soccer moms. So you are doing 80, cruising and you need to pass a semi and not slowpoke around at it. Guess what? in a normal car or truck with enough power to get out of its own way, you will be doing 90-95 to safely pass the semi. Not so in your little matchbox car. And also around town, lack of acceleration is also dangerous. I drive a v8 z71 4x4 truck every day. I once borrowed a dodge stratus and about got run over i dont know how many times. Sometimes when you pull out into traffic you need to get with the flow of traffic pretty quickly, not being able to is dangerous.

Excessive speed could be dangerous ( never known of such a concept but ok) but lack of power is also dangerous as well.

Some people drive muscle cars simply for the look and not the performance as well.

For most red blooded Americans with some youth left, if you have the horsepower, you will find a way to use it :)

[bersaguy]

Cars today are actually a lot better. They last longer, ride better, are safer, and get better mileage. Back in the muscle car days, cars like that were junk at 100k miles, today it's not uncommon for a car to get close to 300k before it's junk. 

 

There's a youtube vid of a 1959 Bel Aire running into a 2009 Malibu, the old car is smashed up much worse. Structural engineering has come a long way in vehicle safety.

 

I've always seen a vehicle as an appliance, like a washing machine. I'd go out, spend a grand on a beater, then run it into the ground, did all my own maintenance. They lasted 4 or 5 years, usually, then when the engine or transmission went out, I scrapped it. My last car was a 1989 Taurus wagon with 265K on it when I junked it. Lasted me 7 years with no major issues, was very reliable. It was beat up and ugly, and the shocks were gone, but it ran. Paid 1300 for it and got 200 out of it when I scrapped it. 

 

Never seen the obsession with speed thing either. Fastest most people are gonna go is 70 or so on the interstate, so smaller cars with a top speed of about 85 is all that is really needed.

I saw that same you tube Video of the 59 Chevy and the 2009 Malibu. I would like to note that there was a period of time that General Motors did have cars with the X frames that where very dangerous and almost considered death traps. I am guessing they use a 59 Chevy because it had one of those frames. They were only use for 4 years before they began using twin rail frames. If they would have performed that test with a 65 Chevrolet Impala or Bel Air the Malibu would have been completely destroyed................jmho

[Guest ab28]

I saw that same you tube Video of the 59 Chevy and the 2009 Malibu. I would like to note that there was a period of time that General Motors did have cars with the X frames that where very dangerous and almost considered death traps. I am guessing they use a 59 Chevy because it had one of those frames. They were only use for 4 years before they began using twin rail frames. If they would have performed that test with a 65 Chevrolet Impala or Bel Air the Malibu would have been completely destroyed................jmho

It's structural engineering. With your 65, the impact would be transferred to the driver instead of the vehicle if it didn't crush. There are polymers much stronger than steel nowadays, aluminum foam, ect. Cars today are meant to completely collapse, saving the driver. What looks like a bad wreck today, you could walk away from, whereas an older vehicle, probably not. I don't have an issue with old cars, it's just the advancement in physics, chemistry, ect since then have been phenomenal.

[hipower]

1. This thread is not for you.

2. Yes a car that only goes 85 top speed is dangerous. Most normal people drive about 75-80 cruising on the interstate, not 70, thats for grandpa and soccer moms. So you are doing 80, cruising and you need to pass a semi and not slowpoke around at it. Guess what? in a normal car or truck with enough power to get out of its own way, you will be doing 90-95 to safely pass the semi. Not so in your little matchbox car. And also around town, lack of acceleration is also dangerous. I drive a v8 z71 4x4 truck every day. I once borrowed a dodge stratus and about got run over i dont know how many times. Sometimes when you pull out into traffic you need to get with the flow of traffic pretty quickly, not being able to is dangerous.

Excessive speed could be dangerous ( never known of such a concept but ok) but lack of power is also dangerous as well.

Some people drive muscle cars simply for the look and not the performance as well.

For most red blooded Americans with some youth left, if you have the horsepower, you will find a way to use it :)

Absolutely Correct. There will always be the thrill of speed and power that is in most of us older guys, and a large portion of the youngers set. Look at all the tuner mods on cars today.

It's a guy thing. So strap on your 'nads and don't worry about those of us who love the sound of horsepower.
 
 

It's structural engineering. With your 65, the impact would be transferred to the driver instead of the vehicle if it didn't crush. There are polymers much stronger than steel nowadays, aluminum foam, ect. Cars today are meant to completely collapse, saving the driver. What looks like a bad wreck today, you could walk away from, whereas an older vehicle, probably not. I don't have an issue with old cars, it's just the advancement in physics, chemistry, ect since then have been phenomenal.

The love of muscle cars isn't about structural engineering.

[bersaguy]

I had to laugh about my older brother. He is 68 years old and has been haing his toys all his life. He is at age 68 still a Street outlaw and still shows up for outlaw street drags and he has a small FWD Dodge Daytona but only the body is Dodge. The rest is a frame and suspension designed and built by Hoger Engineering and it is a rear wheel drive car sporting big rear tires inside the fenders on a narrowed rear end  and sporting a 568 cubic inch Rodak power plant putting out about 1000 HP on Dyno machine. He is going to send me pictures of it to post when he gets time. He has not lost a race in over a year.............. :up: :up:

[HvBikeWlTravel]

Owned a couple of "souped-up" Nova SS's(327 & 350) and a 68 ragtop Goat(400 block). Fun times because there was less traffic and more places to explore.

Rode in and drag-raced(mainly as passenger) some of the baddest local muscle cars of the 60's and early 70's. Great acceleration in a straight line but I'll never forget my first trip in a 70 Z. 240 that is! We took a cloverleaf on-ramp at 70mph, rolled on up to 130, then clamped up those 4-wheel discs and decelerated faster than we accelerated. For me that marked the slow transition to vehicles that were the complete package performance-wise. Fun to drive all day and in any circumstance; not just for cruisin' or puttin' to the grocery store.

The American Muscle Car has obviously stood the test of time way better than the early Z cars. 60's Chevys, Fords, and Chrysler products are out there in numbers. But try to find a Datsun 240Z;  forgetaboutit!

Edited August 2, 2014 by HvBikeWlTravel

[Guest ab28]

Absolutely Correct. There will always be the thrill of speed and power that is in most of us older guys, and a large portion of the youngers set. Look at all the tuner mods on cars today.

It's a guy thing. So strap on your 'nads and don't worry about those of us who love the sound of horsepower.
 
 

The love of muscle cars isn't about structural engineering.

I was talking about in regards to safety in a wreck, for the structural engineering thing. I just see a vehicle as an appliance, long as it runs and is efficient, that's all that matters. As far as speed and acceleration goes, my taurus had plenty, I could merge on the interstate, pass semis, ect. It had great acceleration, just not a high top speed. Most drivers don't have the skill to handle vehicles moving really fast. 

 

As far as being a guy thing, I never defined myself by what I drove or the things I owned. I'm the same person, whether driving a Corvette or a Taurus, really doesn't matter. 

[nightrunner]

You can tell alot about a man by what he drives and how well he takes care of it.

[NextExit]

In Sevierville we have the muscle car museum. It has an amazing collection that is always changing. It costs $10 and would take the average person well over an hour to look at everything. And the best part is they DO allow you to take photos. I know the last time I was there he has some amazingly rare pieces. The one that really stood out to be was a 1969 Impala station wagon with wood grain side. What made it special is it was factory built with a high horse 427 with a 4 speed and 4.10 positraction rear end. They also had two Hemi Cudas on the floor as well as some other extremely rare cars.

Nice place but my only complaint is the lighting in there is bad.  You need a flashlight to look inside the cars.

 

As much as I love the Old Muscle, you can't deny that today's performance cars are leaps and bounds ahead of that great era of the 60s and early 70s.

 

Example - - - The new 2015 Mustang GT's 5.0-liter (302 c.i.) engine produces 435hp and 400 lb-ft of torque while getting a combined 20+mpg.

 

AND you don't have to adjust any solid lifters, clean & re-gap the plugs, or set the points before every weekend! 

But the old cars were easy to work on.  $20 mechanical fuel pump and a $5 inline fuel filter easily changed compared to today's all-in-one pump/filter costing up to $300 not including the fun of dropping the gas tank.  Also no computers on those old cars.  If it didn't start, it was usually an easy fix.  Now if it don't start, you end up towing it to the dealer only to find some sensor died or your anti theft/immobilizer unit lost it's programming.  (Had a 98 Taurus SHO that I towed to the dealer cus it wouldn't start.  The key wouldn't communicate with the computer. $100 for the tow, $80 for key, $200 to reprogram the module.  I sold it right after that)

[bersaguy]

Nice place but my only complaint is the lighting in there is bad.  You need a flashlight to look inside the cars.

 

But the old cars were easy to work on.  $20 mechanical fuel pump and a $5 inline fuel filter easily changed compared to today's all-in-one pump/filter costing up to $300 not including the fun of dropping the gas tank.  Also no computers on those old cars.  If it didn't start, it was usually an easy fix.  Now if it don't start, you end up towing it to the dealer only to find some sensor died or your anti theft/immobilizer unit lost it's programming.  (Had a 98 Taurus SHO that I towed to the dealer cus it wouldn't start.  The key wouldn't communicate with the computer. $100 for the tow, $80 for key, $200 to reprogram the module.  I sold it right after that)

Yep, I will not argue that cars maybe somewhat safer but when it comes to some of the repairs it is totally ridiculous and it is really not your neighborhood mechanics fault. I owned a family operated Auto Repair center for almost 20 years before turning it over to my son and grandsons when I went disabled and I saw coming what they have been going through since I got out coming. Just about 2 years ago they had to purchase their 4 generation computer Scanner/ Programmer to be able to continue working on cars and light trucks. It cost them right at $3,200.00 because they needed it to  begin programing the transmissions in the newer cars after rebuilding them to make the compatible with the On Board computers in the cars. My Grandson was having an issue with his 2000 Dodge Intrepid shutting off on him while do 70 mph on interstate. Check engine light came on so he ran by Auto Zone to have them scan it and tell him what the problem was since they do it for free. Thing is those computer scanner they use that might cost $129.00 told him it had an intermittent miss code. Well lets see............ :ugh: :ugh: that really narrowed it down. It continued to cut off on him at all speeds so he took it up to his uncle and my son put his $3,000.00 computer on it and it showed that the Crankshaft Sensor was intermittently dropping out causing the on board computer to shut the car off. It would start back but for how long was the question.  My son ordered a Crankshaft Sensor and installed it and the sensor was $44.97 and took 20 minutes to put on. I called the Dodge Dealer here locally to get and estimate on how much it would cost to get a crankshaft sensor installed on a 2000 Intrepid and the part was $89.97, Computer scam to confirm it needed the Sensor. I told them it had already been scanned and we knew what the problem was and I was told that they didn't take another companies word for a problem so they would charge $55.00 to scan it and labor to install the Sensor  $109.00. I ask them what their labor rate was in the shop and I was told $70.00 per book hour. According to the All Data online labor manual the repair called for .57 hrs which is not quite 1 hour. At $70 and hour the labor should have been $59.80 and not $109.00  So all I can say is welcome to the world of Technology. You have honest mechanics and garages and then you have the rest of them such as the dealer I called. Now My son said if his Nephew would have been a customer off the street the repair costs to do the repair would have been about  $128.00 + tax.   At the dealer the same repair would have been 253.97 + tax. They are working very hard at putting auto repair centers like my sons out of business forcing people to depend on dealers for all their car repairs. About 7 years ago the manufacturers made it a rule that the only people that wold have access to the on board Computer codes for repairing automobiles in a major move to put independent garages out of business and a bunch of them filed a class action suit against the manufacturers and the garages won the case because the Supreme court said that for the manufacturers to not share their information would be creating a monopoly and found in favor of the garages so the manufacturers were forced to sell the information to the manufacturers of the testing and repair equipment companies like Snap-on and All data and other companies the repair codes. That is when the Scanners went from about $300.00 to $3,000.00 for independent garages. That is why I drive a 1997 Jeep. Something an average Joe can work on. If I was to buy a new vehicle it would be one with a 100% Bumper to Bumper Warranty for 100,000 miles. I would pay to have oil changes and tires and the rest would be up to them to fix...............jmho  

[Wyldk2]

As much as I love the Old Muscle, you can't deny that today's performance cars are leaps and bounds ahead of that great era of the 60s and early 70s.

 

Example - - - The new 2015 Mustang GT's 5.0-liter (302 c.i.) engine produces 435hp and 400 lb-ft of torque while getting a combined 20+mpg.

 

AND you don't have to adjust any solid lifters, clean & re-gap the plugs, or set the points before every weekend! 

Yes, But today's cars are a dime a dozen. Lot of the old muscle cars are so rare you don't see them that often. I personally like the looks of the older cars better, but If i ever get a sporty car again it might be one of the newer mustangs. As much as I like the older cars, I gotta have my music and my Ipod. Plus cupholders are a nice feature. I remember my 1985 Olds cutlass having no cupholders, no cd player( cassette) none of the newer convienences. But it sure looked sharp when it was clean. Being a black car, it stayed clean maybe 15 minutes after i washed it.

[nightrunner]

Yes, But today's cars are a dime a dozen. Lot of the old muscle cars are so rare you don't see them that often. I personally like the looks of the older cars better, but If i ever get a sporty car again it might be one of the newer mustangs. As much as I like the older cars, I gotta have my music and my Ipod. Plus cupholders are a nice feature. I remember my 1985 Olds cutlass having no cupholders, no cd player( cassette) none of the newer convienences. But it sure looked sharp when it was clean. Being a black car, it stayed clean maybe 15 minutes after i washed it.

Get the best of everything, although it is quite expensive depending on how deep you go with it. A pro-touring musclecar. All the modern conveniences pick and choose which ones you want, in the classic look. You can have fuel injection, overdrive trans, upgraded springs or even air suspension, big brakes, creature comforts inside. All the will outhandle and brake and ride a new corvette plus you have the look and feel of a muscle car knocking down 20mpg.

[Hershmeister]

My '69 firebird has power windows, power steering, power brakes and a/c!

[Guest ab28]

You can tell alot about a man by what he drives and how well he takes care of it.

Not really. My cars said nothing about me as a person.

 

I drove beaters that I kept in good mechanical condition, but I never washed them, and the body had dents and rust and parts held on with duct tape and coathangers. They were reliable and dependable, but i didn't care what they looked like, as long as they ran well. That Taurus wagon I had looked like it belonged in a junkyard, and I never washed it for the 7 years I had it, but it never broke down on me, and I took it for numerous hiking trips to GA, KY and a couple of other states, with no issues at all. I've never paid more than $1,500 for a car, and all of them lasted 4 years or more.

 

I think your comment is a reflection on our society, people judging people by what they own and not who they are as a person. My job, how much I make, whether I own a house or not, my car, I see this from women all the time when it comes to dating. It usually comes out pretty quick. I don't have a job because I am very financially responsible, and I get GI Bill and student loans. Also, having a job when I am in college as a chemistry and math major doesn't leave enough study time. I'll probably get one anyway a day a week or so just because, but college is my job right now. I don't have a car because I live right next to campus and I can walk or take the bus wherever I need to go. More people are realizing that owning a car is a huge pain in the ass and are becoming auto independent.

Edited August 4, 2014 by ab28

[Someotherguy]

Here is a slideshow of the car show this wknd...I was one of the judges :)

 

http://s82.photobucket.com/user/wayne121170/slideshow/Car%20show%202014?sort=3

[bronco302]

Back in those days before marriage I had a 1950 Ford Pickup with Chevy running gear, 327ci,350 turbo hydramatic.
When I wanted a change up of wheels I had access to my Fathers 66 Corvette Roadster. Several times on
Cumberland Avenue setting at a red light I had gals from UT just climb in that Vette and ask where are we going.


Joe W.