buickpower
polytetrafluoroethylene
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2003
- Messages
- 1,079
list
that list has the gnx down as doing 13.7 ? what gives
that list has the gnx down as doing 13.7 ? what gives
What Is Your Opinion Of The Meanest Muscle Cars
- Thread starter NJTurbo
- Start date
Welcome!
By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.
EightSecV6
MDBL
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2001
- Messages
- 2,514
I thought the baddest musclecar was whatever I owned at the time! Believe it or not, a Cavalier Z24 was the BADDEST MF'r on the street at one time!
Pressure-Less
Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2002
- Messages
- 372
Yeah I agree. There are some good cars missing from this list. I don't know who compiled it. You have to remember on some of these times posted. It depended on driver expertise, weather and conditon of the track. All of these vehicles were tested by some sort of car magazine who supplied their own drivers.
Goes back to driving experience and definitely technical skill.
Drew
Goes back to driving experience and definitely technical skill.Drew
RobsIron
Silent but Violent
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2003
- Messages
- 5,607
In 1987 I raced a Z24 in my new 300ZX non-turbo from Jax. to Daytona for Spring Break. We stayed in the Emergency Lane 75% of the way. It pulled pretty good......Aahhh the good 'ol days.....
OBW a Z24 shouldn't even be in this thread....
OBW a Z24 shouldn't even be in this thread....
RobsIron
Silent but Violent
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2003
- Messages
- 5,607
In 1987 I raced a Z24 in my new 300ZX non-turbo from Jax. to Daytona for Spring Break. We stayed in the Emergency Lane 75% of the way. It pulled pretty good......Aahhh the good 'ol days.....
OBW a Z24 shouldn't even be in this thread....
OBW a Z24 shouldn't even be in this thread....
Gary Wells
White turbo Buick trailer park trash
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2002
- Messages
- 9,778
FWIW & IMHO:
I believe that Ford Thunderbolts were 427 center oiler, high rise motors, featuring dual 4 bbls. There were only 100 built. None were ever sold at a dealership. They were all ordered and sold by a company named Dearborn Steel Tubing. 1 was a Chrysler Hemispherical head with the heads machined to fit a Ford block. I don't believe that any of the originals were side oilers. The 1st 10 or 12 were shipped to DST semi complete or complete, and the balance were shipped in pieces and assembled at DST. About 60 are known to exist today. Almost all that you see at shows are replicas and even those are probably an easy 50K to build, if done properly, or so I've heard. I believe that the 1 Chrysler hemi-head version might have had side by side carbs, with the balance of 99 being inline dual 4's, not to be confused with the famous, or infamous, depending on how you want to look at it, Ford Autolite Inline carb. I believe that even the Ford race cars were built by DST. Not all were built exactly alike. All were radio, heater, 1 windshield wiper, sound deadener delete cars.
I believe that Ford Thunderbolts were 427 center oiler, high rise motors, featuring dual 4 bbls. There were only 100 built. None were ever sold at a dealership. They were all ordered and sold by a company named Dearborn Steel Tubing. 1 was a Chrysler Hemispherical head with the heads machined to fit a Ford block. I don't believe that any of the originals were side oilers. The 1st 10 or 12 were shipped to DST semi complete or complete, and the balance were shipped in pieces and assembled at DST. About 60 are known to exist today. Almost all that you see at shows are replicas and even those are probably an easy 50K to build, if done properly, or so I've heard. I believe that the 1 Chrysler hemi-head version might have had side by side carbs, with the balance of 99 being inline dual 4's, not to be confused with the famous, or infamous, depending on how you want to look at it, Ford Autolite Inline carb. I believe that even the Ford race cars were built by DST. Not all were built exactly alike. All were radio, heater, 1 windshield wiper, sound deadener delete cars.
Take the 440-6 motor, put it in the Dart body (like Mr. Norm did) and you had a street terror.
Factory built, I'll take a 440-6 pack in a Challenger or Cuda and most likely show the tail lights to the heavier B-body cars.
I had a buddy who owned a Hemi-Cuda and another who had a 440-6 pack Cuda. The Hemi was a beast to tune and keep in tune - the 440 was an animal that killed a lot of cars in its day with just a few minor exhaust-related mods.
Love those old Mopars!
Factory built, I'll take a 440-6 pack in a Challenger or Cuda and most likely show the tail lights to the heavier B-body cars.
I had a buddy who owned a Hemi-Cuda and another who had a 440-6 pack Cuda. The Hemi was a beast to tune and keep in tune - the 440 was an animal that killed a lot of cars in its day with just a few minor exhaust-related mods.
Love those old Mopars!
vicious6
Turbo Regal Obsessed
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Messages
- 2,787
As far as the Thunderbolt disputes go, this site should shed some light on the questions!!!
http://www.angelfire.com/hi/427fairlane/index.html
I always loved the 63 1/2 and 64 427 Galaxies as well!!!!
http://www.angelfire.com/hi/427fairlane/index.html
I always loved the 63 1/2 and 64 427 Galaxies as well!!!!
Gary Wells
White turbo Buick trailer park trash
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2002
- Messages
- 9,778
FWIW & IMHO:
I should have denoted the reference site where that information came from, and I did not. Whether i did it through absent mindedness, lameness, old age senior monents, or whether I wanted everybody to think that I actually knew something, or remembered something from reading something previously, I'll never cop to. Totally taking the fifth here. What the hell is it called when you steal some author's work, phlagarism, or something like that. My bad.
http://www.lvmx.com/1964_thunder_main.html
I should have denoted the reference site where that information came from, and I did not. Whether i did it through absent mindedness, lameness, old age senior monents, or whether I wanted everybody to think that I actually knew something, or remembered something from reading something previously, I'll never cop to. Totally taking the fifth here. What the hell is it called when you steal some author's work, phlagarism, or something like that. My bad.
http://www.lvmx.com/1964_thunder_main.html
Re: list
Yes, I would like to see what other numbers came from other mags. Also, depends on the temp when it was run.
One thing I do find interesting.. out of 50 cars, it's the only 6 cylinder in the pack.
Originally posted by buickpower
that list has the gnx down as doing 13.7 ? what gives
Yes, I would like to see what other numbers came from other mags. Also, depends on the temp when it was run.
One thing I do find interesting.. out of 50 cars, it's the only 6 cylinder in the pack.
Re: Re: list
There might even be 2 if they took the '71 Boss 351 of the list.
Motor trend used sister publications Car Craft's test car that had headers and slicks (and other mods) to run 13.80. Of Course Motor Trend would never do such a thing
Boss 351's DID NOT run 13.80's stock, but mid 14's (what Car Craft's car ran before slicks, headers, other mods...note: Same car)
Car and Driver's 13.9@99 for the 86 GN would put it at somewhere close to 51 on the current list.
The List Predates the TTA, so that would definately make 2.
Originally posted by gn85
Yes, I would like to see what other numbers came from other mags. Also, depends on the temp when it was run.
One thing I do find interesting.. out of 50 cars, it's the only 6 cylinder in the pack.
There might even be 2 if they took the '71 Boss 351 of the list.
Motor trend used sister publications Car Craft's test car that had headers and slicks (and other mods) to run 13.80. Of Course Motor Trend would never do such a thing
Boss 351's DID NOT run 13.80's stock, but mid 14's (what Car Craft's car ran before slicks, headers, other mods...note: Same car)
Car and Driver's 13.9@99 for the 86 GN would put it at somewhere close to 51 on the current list.
The List Predates the TTA, so that would definately make 2.
87buick3825
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2004
- Messages
- 399
and they were 1964 T Bolts
87buick3825
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2004
- Messages
- 399
hey I have scene 13 sec cars at the drags makin "over" 500 hp
RD
The list is not objective...
The printed list that showed the GNX at 13.7 and others with some oddly slow or fast times is just too inconsistent to be taken seriously.
First, different test drivers. Then, different dates, different tracks, different times of year and on and on. Unless you run all the cars on the same track on the same day with the same driver on the same tires, etc, it is not an objective test. And those facts need to be consistent for accuracy.
Also, the list is NOT complete. I do not see the one magazine test (Car and Driver or Car Craft?) that had an '86 GN - bone stock - running 13.6. Somewhere around here, I've got that story so I know it exists.
The Viper is more powerful than listed - 450 hp on the list, currently at 500.
What about the 2003/2004 Cobras? They're not even on the list yet they are solid high 12 second cars. However, I think that they are not on there may be due to the fact that the 'newest' test date listed is in 1997 so that would explain the omission.
So, as it said on the list's page, it was put together to stir thought and debate. And that is always a lot of fun!
I don't put any credence in it other than for that.
Remember a few years back when Popular Mechanics ran a same day test with several 'MuscleCars', including a Turbo Buick? That test had more validity than citing different results gleaned over the years.
Don't get me wrong - the 50 Fastest List is interesting reading, for SURE. But it is just too varied in statistics to be taken as accurate.
The printed list that showed the GNX at 13.7 and others with some oddly slow or fast times is just too inconsistent to be taken seriously.
First, different test drivers. Then, different dates, different tracks, different times of year and on and on. Unless you run all the cars on the same track on the same day with the same driver on the same tires, etc, it is not an objective test. And those facts need to be consistent for accuracy.
Also, the list is NOT complete. I do not see the one magazine test (Car and Driver or Car Craft?) that had an '86 GN - bone stock - running 13.6. Somewhere around here, I've got that story so I know it exists.
The Viper is more powerful than listed - 450 hp on the list, currently at 500.
What about the 2003/2004 Cobras? They're not even on the list yet they are solid high 12 second cars. However, I think that they are not on there may be due to the fact that the 'newest' test date listed is in 1997 so that would explain the omission.
So, as it said on the list's page, it was put together to stir thought and debate. And that is always a lot of fun!
I don't put any credence in it other than for that.
Remember a few years back when Popular Mechanics ran a same day test with several 'MuscleCars', including a Turbo Buick? That test had more validity than citing different results gleaned over the years.
Don't get me wrong - the 50 Fastest List is interesting reading, for SURE. But it is just too varied in statistics to be taken as accurate.
