Remember when? Now those were the days.

[SLCraig]

Originally Posted By: mpvue
Originally Posted By: CourierDriver
A 66 GTO IS BETTER THAN ANY OF TODAYS SEWING MACHINE 4 BANGERS, IMHO. PS. its not about gas mileage, it was an era of autos that cant be expressed by todays drivers unless you were in that time zone and it was fun while we had them.

ah, nostalgia.
the only thing better is the styling. the underpinnings were terrible in stock form.
the best of both worlds is to modernize that '66 GTO w/ modern suspension and brakes, and a modern LS engine that can get good MPGs AND have plenty of power.


I agree entirely.. I love the old school looks with modern underpinnings. I like Chip Foose designed cars for that very reason. I'd take that '70 Cuda and drop in a new 6.4L HEMI. Oh yeah!

 

[johnachak]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: crinkles
widowmakers.



NONE, not a single one, can touch my old 2006 Chrysler.

Quicker, faster, better braking, better cornering, WAYYYY better safety systems, etc. Quieter, better mpg... need I go on.

It's hard to outrun a fond memory... but modern V6's run better than many cars in that horribly inaccurate article!


Notice I included the SRT8 in my first comment... I should've included them all not just the challenger, Sorry...

 

[PF52]

Originally Posted By: johnachak
Just consolidate trips and use some gas saving driving techniques.


Aww, man, now you're sounding like they did back in the 70s! Ride your bike! Set up a carpool! Take the bus! Don't have a leadfoot!

We don't do that stuff anymore; we've got hybrids!!!

 

[eljefino]

The fun part, IMO, was people arguing over how a buick big block was better than a pontiac or chevy-- they were all slightly different! Or how the different ford 351's were somehow better.

If you watch a classic 60s or 70s show there was great uniformity-- everyone drove a low slung land barge. VW beetles really stood out.

 

[L_Sludger]

Originally Posted By: johnachak
Quote:

Right.
While you're getting 15mpg on premium fuel during an awful, down economy, I'll mosey on by in my little wussy hybrid getting 60-65mpg, consistently! on standard puke 87 octane gas, and the money i save is money that keeps me that much farther away from being homeless.


If people didn't waste the extra money for the Hybrid option, they could afford the gas. I'm sure buying a regular used car with average mileage is more cost efficient than buying a new Hybrid vehicle. Just consolidate trips and use some gas saving driving techniques.
I would rather drink cheaper beer, and use store brand paper products than drive one of those little cars.

Well, I bought a used old hybrid for less than $3,000 - and that is the vehicle I pull 60-65mpg with on a per-tank basis.

I don't care what other people think about me anymore. I drove the big fancy car and found that it only served to make people resentful of me. I've actually had women show a whole heck of a lot more interest in the hybrid than any other car I've owned! Why? It's because women are CHEAP and hate spending money on things like gasoline

 

[Torino]

Originally Posted By: daves87rs
I'll just own both and have the best of both worlds...
Yes, exactly what I do. Of course, my 68 Torino is an original hybrid--burns gas and tires! John--Las Vegas

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: johnachak
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: crinkles
widowmakers.



NONE, not a single one, can touch my old 2006 Chrysler.

Quicker, faster, better braking, better cornering, WAYYYY better safety systems, etc. Quieter, better mpg... need I go on.

It's hard to outrun a fond memory... but modern V6's run better than many cars in that horribly inaccurate article!


Notice I included the SRT8 in my first comment... I should've included them all not just the challenger, Sorry...



FEAR NOT! All is well. My car is generally a 'sleeper' in that no one notices it much.

I've always liked that the best. If you could just see the look on the old guys face in his STS-V caddy as I pull past him at very high speed...

 

[Jarlaxle]

Same here...mid 12s in a 4500lb Caddy with wheelcovers. I love going fast with cars & parts that arent supposed to go fast!

 

[johnachak]

Originally Posted By: css9450
Originally Posted By: johnachak
Just consolidate trips and use some gas saving driving techniques.


Aww, man, now you're sounding like they did back in the 70s! Ride your bike! Set up a carpool! Take the bus! Don't have a leadfoot!

We don't do that stuff anymore; we've got hybrids!!!

In the 70's I had a 66' Impala SS. What point are you trying to make? I moved up to a 77 Caprice. Maybe you're not getting it. To me a car is a part of me. I would never be caught in little juice box. A Big Ford or GM Hybrid, maybe, they are acceptable, but I don't see any price / vs fuel savings advantage. I love driving too much. I like to have a few hundred horses available when I need them. I can live with the extra $15 a week VS the extra $5-8,000 cost of the Hybrid option. I NEVER said carpool, take the bus etc. YOU did. You said you are putting along. I just said if you need to save money as you stated, drive economically.
You can't justify to me, if you have no money, buying a foreign Hybrid (with batteries that are super polluting to make / dispose of / expensive to replace).
I would NEVER consider it.
Car companies need to sell those to bring down their fleet mileage and they actually get people to spend more money to save money????
I'm not in the 70's I have a couple of 21st century cars that I am amazingly happy with and that get really good mileage compared to the performance / fun they provide...

Just keep putting along.
If you think the Babes like guys that don't spend money, I need to know what planet you live on.

 

[johnachak]

[/quote]


FEAR NOT! All is well. My car is generally a 'sleeper' in that no one notices it much.

I've always liked that the best. If you could just see the look on the old guys face in his STS-V caddy as I pull past him at very high speed... [/quote]

You can take a STS-V? WoW! How about the newer 560 BHP CTS V's? Ever run one? I dusted a Mustang GT in my DI CTS. (304 BHP, but I think they underrated it or I just got a good one)

 

[65cuda]

Yep I need a few hundred extra HP at least once a week. Honestly though while I don't see spending the extra for a hybrid I certainly can't justify a big led sled either.

 

[Spazdog]

Ahhh the good old days....

I thought I was king of the street when I dusted a 1969 400 cu in Firebird on my 1981 Kawasaki GPz550.

That's not the cool Uni-Trak and full fairing GPz. That was a handlebar mounted fairing and twin shock GPz. A KZ550 with better carbs.

Fast forward to today. A stock 2012 Camry V6 runs a faster 1/4 mile time than the mighty 400 Poncho Firebird. And gets at least 2X the gas mileage doing it.

A Camry!!!

That hurts.

 

[expat]

I think nostalgia often allows use to look back with Rose coloured glasses.

I fist visited North America in 75. Being a young Motorhead I was really interested in some of the Hot American Iron around at the time.
My first impression (perhaps because in Europe a Big car is an expensive car) the Pontiacs, Chevys, and Fords I saw did not seem 'that' well put together!
Brakes (Drums on the front!!) and often handling were often woefully inadequate.
Sure they were powerful, but slow off the line and Low geared, so a cruse at higher highway speeds was quite uncomfortable (with just a 3 speed transmission)
Fuel consumption was also appalling!

Like many things, perhaps the 'Feeling' of those times was better than reality?

 

[PF52]

Originally Posted By: johnachak
Originally Posted By: css9450
Originally Posted By: johnachak
Just consolidate trips and use some gas saving driving techniques.


Aww, man, now you're sounding like they did back in the 70s! Ride your bike! Set up a carpool! Take the bus! Don't have a leadfoot!

We don't do that stuff anymore; we've got hybrids!!!

In the 70's I had a 66' Impala SS. What point are you trying to make? I moved up to a 77 Caprice. Maybe you're not getting it.... I need to know what planet you live on.


I know sarcasm is hard to express on the internet, but I thought my post was pretty thick with it.

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Fast forward to today. A stock 2012 Camry V6 runs a faster 1/4 mile time than the mighty 400 Poncho Firebird.


Yes, with the < 5" wide, harder than rocks, stock tires of the day. Give it the bite it deserves with decent tires and it's a whole 'nother story for the much beloved refrigerator on wheels.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Fast forward to today. A stock 2012 Camry V6 runs a faster 1/4 mile time than the mighty 400 Poncho Firebird.


Yes, with the < 5" wide, harder than rocks, stock tires of the day. Give it the bite it deserves with decent tires and it's a whole 'nother story for the much beloved refrigerator on wheels.

I watched a 400 Firebird on decent tires get absolutely destroyed by a Civic. Now the Civic wasn't stock and IIRC had low 13's to its name, but the race wasn't even close.

 

[mechanicx]

A hipo Pontiac 400 had about 350-370hp and 450 tq gross and set up right with good traction could run high 12s 1/4 mile basically stock. If you have a lowpo or low compression smogger 400 or 2bbl with
I think those classic Firebirds look cooler just sitting than any Camry

. For the price of a new V6 Camry you could make that classic car run 10's or better and/or out handle it too if you know what you're doing. Heck for $2600 people are making over 420hp with a SBC and running I want to say low 12s ET. It's all in how you look at it.

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
A hipo Pontiac 400 had about 350-370hp and 450 tq gross and set up right with good traction could run high 12s 1/4 mile basically stock. If you have a lowpo or low compression smogger 400 or 2bbl with


It was a '69. It wasn't a smogger. That model was rated at 325hp, but that wasn't SAE hp. That was "no accessories and we can tweak the carb as much as we like to get those numbers" hp.

It was on RWL Radials....early '80s RWL Radials but Radials nonetheless. Not bias-belted poly-glass whatevers. 2nd run was from a 30mph punch.

and the little 12.6 second GPz(with a magazine's pro-rider...figure my 17 year old self to be a bit slower) slapped it down hard both times. I do believe a V6 appliance mobile Camry would be embarrassingly close if it didn't beat it outright.

Originally Posted By: mechanicx

I think those classic Firebirds look cooler just sitting than any Camry

. For the price of a new V6 Camry you could make that classic car run 10's or better and/or out handle it too if you know what you're doing. Heck for $2600 people are making over 420hp with a SBC and running I want to say low 12s ET. It's all in how you look at it.


Oh, I agree....it's just sad that the Camry is that close.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
A hipo Pontiac 400 had about 350-370hp and 450 tq gross and set up right with good traction could run high 12s 1/4 mile basically stock. If you have a lowpo or low compression smogger 400 or 2bbl with
I think those classic Firebirds look cooler just sitting than any Camry

. For the price of a new V6 Camry you could make that classic car run 10's or better and/or out handle it too if you know what you're doing. Heck for $2600 people are making over 420hp with a SBC and running I want to say low 12s ET. It's all in how you look at it.


This car couldn't run 12's with a Termi pushing it. And 350HP SAE GROSS is like 250HP NET (using the 35% figure); slightly more than a stock 302HO, which in a 3200lb Fox, would go low 14's on a tire (unless you had a real ringer, as those would run high 13's).

I agree that the Firebird was a WAY better looking car than a Camry, never disputed that. But having seen some of these old girls running at the drag slip, even warmed up a little, they weren't fast.

Now the guys who actually got into them, cleaned-up the heads, put a modern camshaft in it...etc. THOSE will move. But I've seen a pile of "resto" cars and just plain stockers (or close to it) run and there are a lot of modern V6's that are faster

 

[mechanicx]

I think the Ram Air 400's would run high 13's totally stock with the tires they had back in the day. When I said high 12's basically stock I mean't basically stock heads and cam but with exhaust and induction induction work and of course gearing and suspension set up. So I guess not really stock.

But a lot of the restos aren't running the good factory high compression heads and big solid lifter cam on top of not being tuned and running right, so they are slower than the originals.

I don't think 350 HP gross is necessarily 250 HP net or will 25O hp net necessarily get you 350 HP gross. But I think 370 HP 450 lbs ft of torque gross can get you into the high 12's if all you are doing is running an alternator and low restriction dual exhaust and the car is set up right.