Muscle Car Horsepower

[Okie Sawbones, SASS #77381]

Not long after I bought my '70 1/2 Z-28 my brother bought his 1st '69 Road Runner with a 383 and 4 speed. My Z-28 cleaned his clock no matter how we started. Off the line, rolling 15, rolling 60 it didn't matter.

 

He went out and bought a second '69 Road Runner, this one had the 440 Magnum and automatic trans. It did not run as fast as the other.

 

He gave up on Mopars and started building a nitrous powered 4 wheel drive Ford pick up.

 

 

 

 

It was that automatic.

[Blackwater 53393]

Someone with a lot of money migh try to challenge this for horsepower to displacement ratios. It WOULD require cubic money.

 

There is no other internal combustion engine that has produced anywhere near 20 hp to 1 cubic inch. The top fuel engines today produce in excess of 10,000 horsepower with a basic design that was new in the early 1950s. They are not allowed any computer controls and can only take feedback from sensors in the system to use in analysis for the next pass. The ignition is old school. They use magneto ignitions based on the old Ronco/Vertex design from the early 1900s, a supercharger designed for compressing air to be pumped into mine shafts and later to pressurise the combustion chamber on the old Detroit two stoke deisel engines. Even the fuel injection is totally mechanical.

 

These engines are restricted to 500 cubic inches and use pushrod style valve trains.

 

The American hotrodder is one of the most resourceful and intuitive people in the world and many of these ideas were not the product of years of training as engineers and designers, but rather a product of a willingness to try what hadn't been tried and a refusal to accept that "That won't work," was reason enough not to try.

[Professor Tull, SASS #66742]

If you had to use only one word, I would use compression. Typical engine has more compression than they used to. That's how we are getting high hp and high fuel economy. Along with high pressure fuel managment systems, etc...

Cash

 

Actually, on the current big inch muscle car crate engines - Mopar Hemis 426 & 526, Chevy 502, 572, 565, 454 - Ford 427 SOHC, Boss Nine - the compression ratio is lower today than in the 60's.

Of the above listed engines, the highest compression ration being used for an engine that will be in a street car, is 11.00-1. With most in the 10.5 to 1 range.

Back in the 60's it was not uncommon to find ratios 12.75 to 1 and higher.

Leaded 100+ octane gasoline, no pollution controls - made for some serious horsepower.

A 61 Pontiac Catalina [super duty 421] that was campaigned in NASCAR by Smokey Yunick, and then returned to John Zink to be used as a drag racer put out 673 hp. Bluprinted Hemis of the era were consistently in the low 800 hp range. 427 side oilers were in the 740 hp range. And the 427 in the Vettes which originally stated 450 hp and were later downplayed to 425hp, were putting out closer to 565 hp - without blueprinting.

Loved the horsepower wars.

 

I also fixed the Jon Kaase Link on my last post - sincerest apologies for not checking it when I posted.

 

Professor Tull

[Yellowhouse Sam # 25171]

Actually, on the current big inch muscle car crate engines - Mopar Hemis 426 & 526, Chevy 502, 572, 565, 454 - Ford 427 SOHC, Boss Nine - the compression ratio is lower today than in the 60's.

Of the above listed engines, the highest compression ration being used for an engine that will be in a street car, is 11.00-1. With most in the 10.5 to 1 range.

Back in the 60's it was not uncommon to find ratios 12.75 to 1 and higher.

Leaded 100+ octane gasoline, no pollution controls - made for some serious horsepower.

A 61 Pontiac Catalina [super duty 421] that was campaigned in NASCAR by Smokey Yunick, and then returned to John Zink to be used as a drag racer put out 673 hp. Bluprinted Hemis of the era were consistently in the low 800 hp range. 427 side oilers were in the 740 hp range. And the 427 in the Vettes which originally stated 450 hp and were later downplayed to 425hp, were putting out closer to 565 hp - without blueprinting.

Loved the horsepower wars.

 

I also fixed the Jon Kaase Link on my last post - sincerest apologies for not checking it when I posted.

 

Professor Tull

 

 

Well, I lived through all that but never in my wildest dreams suspected they were understating HP. If anything I was betting overstatement. But then again me and my 57 stock Belair passed many a Ford at 110 mph and they swore they were clicking 130!

[Rye Miles #13621]

My very first new car was a 1967 Cutlass Supreme, it was stock with a 350 V8 and a four barrel carb. I don't know what HP it had but I could keep up with a lot of so called muscle cars with that V8 automatic! Triple black, 2 door and it could burn rubber if I stepped on it. I loved that car!

 

Rye

[Blackwater 53393]

Rye, there were a number of cars sold in the middle to late '60s that had all of the hardware underneath, but looked like mom's grocery getter on the outside. We called 'em sleepers. My mom had a '69 Impala two door notchback that came factory with a 375 hp 396, a turbo 400 trans, and a 3.73:1 twelve bolt posi third member. You talk about embarassing some pretty stout muscle cars with all the stripes and badges.

 

My folks were on vacation and left the car for me to drive. I spun a main bearing at about 130 mph one night and managed to limp it home. My cousin had just finished a 2x4 427 Super Sport engine for me and we stuck it in the car on Sunday morning. It had the afore mentioned two four barrel intake with the matched 750 cfm Holleys and an LS 7 camshaft and lifters, the big square port heads, forged crank, roller rockers, headers, dual point ignition, and all of the good stuff installed. Mom and Dad got back late Sunday evening.

 

On Monday morning, she went down to the garage to leave for work, started the car and imediately shut it off. She stormed up the stairs and into the bedroom where my dad still slept, (he worked nights). "Thomas!! there's something wrong with the car!" she shouted.

 

Dad got up, walked down to the garage in his pajamas, started the car, listened for a minute and then opened the hood. He studied the scene for a second, slammed the hood and said, "Tommy and Sam, (my cousin) just did a tune up and replaced the mufflers. It's okay!" and went back to bed.

 

That was over forty years ago, and I'll bet the tire marks are still in that driveway to this day! I finally told my mother what happened about three years ago.

[Ugly, SASS #18106]

Rye, there were a number of cars sold in the middle to late '60s that had all of the hardware underneath, but looked like mom's grocery getter on the outside. We called 'em sleepers. My mom had a '69 Impala two door notchback that came factory with a 375 hp 396, a turbo 400 trans, and a 3.73:1 twelve bolt posi third member. You talk about embarassing some pretty stout muscle cars with all the stripes and badges.

 

My folks were on vacation and left the car for me to drive. I spun a main bearing at about 130 mph one night and managed to limp it home. My cousin had just finished a 2x4 427 Super Sport engine for me and we stuck it in the car on Sunday morning. It had the afore mentioned two four barrel intake with the matched 750 cfm Holleys and an LS 7 camshaft and lifters, the big square port heads, forged crank, roller rockers, headers, dual point ignition, and all of the good stuff installed. Mom and Dad got back late Sunday evening.

 

On Monday morning, she went down to the garage to leave for work, started the car and imediately shut it off. She stormed up the stairs and into the bedroom where my dad still slept, (he worked nights). "Thomas!! there's something wrong with the car!" she shouted.

 

Dad got up, walked down to the garage in his pajamas, started the car, listened for a minute and then opened the hood. He studied the scene for a second, slammed the hood and said, "Tommy and Sam, (my cousin) just did a tune up and replaced the mufflers. It's okay!" and went back to bed.

 

That was over forty years ago, and I'll bet the tire marks are still in that driveway to this day! I finally told my mother what happened about three years ago.

 

 

There's something 'bout gunfighters and high-performance cars; traded my '65 Chevy SS in for a '68 Charger/440 magnum; that sucker would just fly. My wife still remembers and likes the sound of those huge exhaust pipes, sounded even better when I opened the exhaust cut-outs. We used to line the back seat with pillows for our baby daughter; totally illegal today but, what did we know then? Aww, memories.

[Professor Tull, SASS #66742]

Well, I lived through all that but never in my wildest dreams suspected they were understating HP. If anything I was betting overstatement. But then again me and my 57 stock Belair passed many a Ford at 110 mph and they swore they were clicking 130!

 

Sam

 

There was one example of grossly overated horsepower. The BOSS429 Mustang.

Originally a NASCAR engine, that when banned, became an addition to the Mustang [and 2 Cougars]. Detuned, it was advertised as 375 HP.

In actuality, it would barely clip 330 - and one had to do some tuning to get that.

No bottom end AT ALL! ! ! Upper RPM range was where it excelled.

A well prepared BOSS302 would usually smoke a BOSS429. Plus, one had to drill a hole in the firewall just to change the back two spark plugs.

But, you pop the hood and have an instant "WOW" factor that is off the charts.

Also, current resale value of one of the original BOSS429's is also off the charts.

Tull

[Cremony]

When was the last time you heard a new computer controlled car start up in an enclosed parking lot, and set off car alarms on 3 floors of the garage? ? ? ?

One of the cars parked next to my Vette already had the alarm going off as I came back. I felt depressed for a moment because surly I would have touched off his alram with that low mean rumble from the Chevy. But when I fired it up, the car on the other side of me alarm's went off. I smiled as I drove away with both alarms wailing. Funny how a little thing like that can make your day.

[Cremony]

I love 60's muscle cars, but they truly are no match for today's cars.

As long as you went in a straight line for a very short time.

 

Chevy Chevelle SS 396, 375-hp -- now that was a car!

To much mass to corner.

the cars have much better steel now, cars used to rust out at 3-4 yrs.! .. Now the bodies last a lot longer.

That's because they galvanized the frames.

Today's cars don't rust cuz they ain't got no metal in them bodies....all fiberglass and plastic today!!

Better would be carbon-fiber.

 

[Cremony]

I love 60's muscle cars, but they truly are no match for today's cars.

As long as you went in a straight line for a very short time.

 

Chevy Chevelle SS 396, 375-hp -- now that was a car!

To much mass to corner.

the cars have much better steel now, cars used to rust out at 3-4 yrs.! .. Now the bodies last a lot longer.

That's because they galvanized the frames.

Today's cars don't rust cuz they ain't got no metal in them bodies....all fiberglass and plastic today!!

Better would be carbon-fiber.

 

[Smokey Shayne]

A little over 15 years ago, I was doing a lot of drag racing. Raced my daily driver 68 Camaro. I ran pretty much every "old school" small block Chevy had to offer, my favorite being the last 327 I built. High compression, high lift cam, large journal steel crank in a 4bolt main 350 block. It was a beast...especially trying to drive it every day with 4:11 gears and high stall converter. A co-worker was just getting started into hot rodding as I was getting out of it. He bought a new 2000 model Trans Am. We did a lot of changes, intake, heads, headers, cam, gears, actually just your basic horsepower mods. It was a blast. We would load up in the car, drive a couple hours to the track...a/c running, cd player going, getting 20-22mpg. Slap on the slicks when we got there, plug in the laptop, run low 11's to high tens all day long. Reprogram and put street tires back on and driver home a winner.

The computers and electronics I believe makes the biggest difference in the old school and new school power. But nothing really matches the old classic styles. My Camaro now has a mild 350 in it. My 70 model truck that Im about to start on will have a new 5.3 fuel injection....simply for reliability, driveability and style points

[Ethan Cord]

It was that automatic.

 

That's what my brother said too! I Agree.

[Injun Ryder, SASS #36201L]

 

 

I'll betcha no one ever writes a cool song about Yugos or Hyundais!

 

But there is THIS!

 

[Blackwater 53393]

One of my favorite underrated engines was a QB model '63 425 hp 409. The 425 hp rating was a little low to start with and if you pulled the heads and removed one of the head gaskets, (they came with two steel shim head gaskets installed on each side from the factory) it probably made closer to 525 hp. Mine was sold to me by a guy who had totaled his '63 Bel Aire and put the engine in a T-Bucket roadster. He never even pulled the valve covers.

 

I pulled the heads and the pan and removed the extra gaskets, did a little body work on the pan and installed it in a '72 Vega wagon. With a powerglide and a 12 bolt rear end properly narrowed and installed, a set of Don Hardy rotors installed on the front and some creative header and muffler work, it was my daily driver for a year. The wife even drove it to the school where she taught on pretty days.

 

It was a ball to drive and suprisingly nimble with the proper tires and shocks. It would also carry the front wheels thirty or forty feet on concrete pavement.

 

The next year I aquired a '64 Impala SS and the 409 went into it. The Vega took the nasty small block of unknown origin that came out of the Impala and became a drag only car.

 

 

This Impala had the heavy duty Z11 rear end housing and a 6.17:1 gear installed when I got it. Before I swapped a 4.11 into it, I made one pass at the drag strip. Oh yeah! The Impala was a 4 spd car. It would only run 1/8 mile, which was what the track was and it did it in 7.06 seconds at 89 mph. They told me that it didn't set the front wheels down 'til halfway through second gear. It quit accelerating at least fifty feet from the finish line. It wasn't meant to run that kind of gearing, but the looks from the Mustang and Camaro guys and one young man with a hemi Roadrunner were priceless as we loaded it back on the trailer.

 

I sold that car for twice what I had in it when the body started cracking right in front of the C pillar. It got to where you couldn't roll the back windows up and down and I got tired of welding it back together and repainting it .

 

Dang!! I miss those days.

 

Prof. That BOSS 429 was a jewel in the rough. Bob Glidden ran a version of it quite successfully in Pro Stock. It was D@MNED impressive as a 500 incher!!

[Cremony]

Sorry it took me so long to find it. Roger Penske explains in this short video, why your Ford is one little Hotrod.

 

Whats the reason: carbueration/fuel injection; better fuels, outright superior engineering, or what?

My Ford 3.5L v6 turbo exceeds the HP of that old GTO.

Bernie Ecclestone's F1 cars will be powered by V6 1.6-litre turbo engines. They will be rev limited to 15' date='000 rpm, and all engines must have six cylinders arranged in a 90 V configuration. The normal section of each cylinder must be circular and the overall weight a minimum of 342 lbs. [/color']F1 rules

 

Roger Penske said that he sees the turbocharged V6s 3 liter, as a good formula for all types of racing. Chevy wanted a V6 turbocharged with direct injection, because that is what they sell worldwide. Variations of this engine will drive more manufacturers back into the sport. Win on Sunday, sell on Monday. See: Roger Penske

 

GM: Chevrolet's IndyCar 2.4 liters, V-6, twin-turbocharged, direct-injected racing engine will be powered by renewable ethanol fuel. The powerplant will have an aluminum block and cylinder heads, and will be a fully stressed chassis member supporting the gearbox and rear suspension.

 

Honda: Honda will produce a new twin-turbocharged 2.4-liter V6 available for lease at a price 40-percent below the current engine's price.

 

Lotus: The first Judd-developed 2.2-liter Lotus turbo V6 IndyCar engine is due to run on the dyno for the first time in September.

 

Lincoln: According to June's 2011 issue of Road & Track, Lincoln may produce a lightweight, mid engined two-seater with a supercharged V6. See: The Lincoln Connection

 

[Iditarod Kid]

My late mother had a string of big block cars..... '63 Dodge Polara 383 convertible, '65 Pontiac Wildcat 455 convertible..... then she decided in 1965 ( I was 15, no license till 16 in NC) that she needed a STATION WAGON! She let me go along Bobby Murray Chev in Raleigh to "help" order the Impala. "Mom, 396, Positraction, 3.73.... that's what you need!" It was cream with "wood" down the sides, and "mag wheel" covers. No weight over the rear wheels+LOTS of torque=short rear tire life/lots of rubber on the pavement. I only got to drive it a few times, as she loved that car. Traded it for a four door Caprice in '72. 454 of course. You literally could see the needle move on the fuel gauge with that one. Talk about surprising a few people in muscle cars! My dad sold that one to a guy who only wanted the drive train to transplant into a Camaro.

See you down the trail......

[Professor Tull, SASS #66742]

 

Prof. That BOSS 429 was a jewel in the rough. Bob Glidden ran a version of it quite successfully in Pro Stock. It was D@MNED impressive as a 500 incher!!

 

BD -

 

I seem to remember that Mustang - he ran it in the early 70's before switching to a Maverick. Had NO idea it was a 500 inch BOSS429.

 

I am doing my best to relive those days with the Mercury.

 

Went to the Street Rod Nationals in OKC last year. Out of 1700 or so cars, there were about 40 late 60 to early 70 Mopars - I had the only HEMI there - and it was a Ford.

 

I sometimes wonder, with all the current technology that is available, just how fast someone could do the quarter mile in a pushrod driven vehicle with no restrictions as to cubic inches, number of engines, size [or number] or rear tires, 2 or 4 wheel drive, traction control, etc.

 

Tull

[Blackwater 53393]

Long Branch Louie, on 09 September 2012 - 06:16 PM, said:

I love 60's muscle cars, but they truly are no match for today's cars.

 

As long as you went in a straight line for a very short time.

 

I've had a few sixties and seventies "muscle cars" that did in fact handle extremely well. The first that comes to mind is the '66 Nova SS. A set of Corvette wheels, some really good shocks and springs, and a bushing kit in the front end with some low profile radial tires made it a slot car. It made a bunch of late '90s and 21st century sporty car owners really mad on Friday and Saturday nights. I could give you a litany of others that I've owned or worked on, but time and space dictate that I let it go here.

 

Okie Sawbones, SASS #77381, on 09 September 2012 - 09:36 PM, said:

Chevy Chevelle SS 396, 375-hp -- now that was a car!

 

To much mass to corner.

 

The '69 through '72' Chevelles could be made to pull nearly 1g with some fairly inexpensive chassis work and a good set of tires, sway bars, and shocks, and you could do it in about a weekend!

 

Rye Miles #13621, on 09 September 2012 - 06:39 PM, said:

the cars have much better steel now, cars used to rust out at 3-4 yrs.! .. Now the bodies last a lot longer.

 

That's because they galvanized the frames.

 

New metalurgy is really one of the better advancements in basic car construction.

 

Krazy Kajun, on 09 September 2012 - 08:56 PM, said:

Today's cars don't rust cuz they ain't got no metal in them bodies....all fiberglass and plastic today!!

 

Better would be carbon-fiber.

 

While the new plastics are lighter and comparatively nearly as strong, their introduction has not resulted in major weight savings. They have also driven up the cost of repairs and in some cases have forced unit replacement as opposed to repairing them at all. They are not the be all and end all of automotive development.

 

Some of the electronic fuel management and ignition control are possibly the greatest contributors to new car performance. We've put state of the art electronics on well built, really old, (1955-1980) engines and obtained some staggering results.

 

I'm in the process of assembling a 406 cid. small block Chevy engine for my '60 model Jeep COE pickup. Using a period Quadrajet carb and dual point distributor, it will produce around 500 hp on pump gas. If I use a late '90s tuned port fuel injection and ECM controlled ignition system with feedback sensor system, it has the potential of 650 to 700 hp. There are other options that will be just as driveable, but even more expensive that could increase that to 800 hp. This is all with the same engine assembly and only the perifrials being changed.

 

In the days when the MUSCLE CAR were king, most of us didn't look for the world class handling that some new cars brag about. Yes, these newer offerings from the manufacturers have in some ways improved the breed, but the dash on my '66 Nova still hasn't cracked like the one on my sister's 21st century Lexus. The cost of new cars is higher in comparative dollar value.

 

I'll repeat this for those of you who may have missed it in Hotrodding 101.

 

 

The ONLY substitute for cubic inches is CUBIC MONEY!!