The Last of the Finest.....Know what your looking at!

Since the musclecar market has gone insane, and profiteers are building cars from junk to make big dollars, the term "Buyer Beware" has never been more relevant. I see cars advertised in Hemmings and on the Internet for big dollars that are obviously fakes-they tout options that were not available on that model or that year. Like the 1973 Challenger with a 383.  I may miss a few, but here's a list of things to remember to avoid an expensive mistake. # 1. Although they were built through 1974, the Chrysle E-bodies ( Cuda / Challenger ) did not have big blocks after 1971. From 1972-74 the only engines available were the 318, 340 and 360 small blocks.  # 2. 1972 was the last year a big-block was factory installed in a Camaro. They were 402 cubic inches, but still marketed as "SS396".  # 3. 1974 was the last year you could get a 454 in a Corvette.  # 4. 1971 was the last year you could get a 429 in a Mustang. 1972 and 73 models were the same bodystyle, but the largest engine was a 351C.  # 5. 1976 was the last year you could get a 455 in a Trans-Am. The 400 was available until 1979.  #6  The last "Real" Hurst / Olds was built in 1975. This was the last one built on the "A" body Cutlass platform, and the last one with a 455 V8. The 1979 model was built on the downsized "G" body, had a 350, and was built entirely by Oldsmobile in Lansing. The 1983-84 models were based on the same "G" body, and had an even more anemic 307 inch Olds V8.  # 7. The last "Real"  i.e.-Javelin based AMX was built in 1974. The 360 and 401 engines were still available. The 1977-78 AMX's were ( Ugh! ) Hornet based and had a 258 inch 6 cylinder or a 304 V8 both with 2bbl carburation and about 130hp . Yuk.  # 8. There is no 1983 Corvette. The 1982s had an extended model year-( Like the 1969 Camaro ) and the C4 was introduced in April 1983 as a 1984 model.  Hope this helps everyone out. Mastermind      

Read the fine print or footnotes!!

Sorry I haven't posted in a while but moving was rough. I'm back online now. I've had people ask me why in modern road tests of Hemi Challengers, Camaro SS's and Boss 302 Mustangs the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times vary as much as 1/2 second. People have also noticed this in vintage road tests of musclecars when they were new. There are a lot of factors involved, and they all contribute to this disparity between performance figures from one magazine test to another. I'll list them in no particular order. # 1. The miles on the test vehichle. A vehichle with less than 500 miles on it may not be "broken in" and could be noticeably slower than an identical vehicle with more miles. Hot Rod tested two different 5.0 Mustangs back in the early '90's. They were both 5-speeds with 3.08 rear ends.  The red one ran a 15.29 in the 1/4, and the blue one ran a 14.72.  However, the red one had only 150 miles on it. The blue one had been in the press fleet a while and had 5,600 miles on it. This happened to Car and Driver with two Buick Grand Nationals. The one with 3,000 miles on it was 3 or 4 tenths quicker than the one with only 800. # 2. Make sure your comparing "Apples to Apples."  The difference between a manual or an automatic trans can be minimal or substantial, especially if different axle ratios are involved. A 4-speed, 3.42 geared "Smokey and the Bandit" T/A is going to run a lot quicker than a 2.56 geared automatic model.  Same with modern stuff. Car and driver tested two different Hemi Challenger R/T's. The six-speed manual with a 3.92 axle was nearly 1/2 a second quicker than the 5-speed automatic with a 3.06 rear end.  Duh!!!         # 3.  Read about "Launch technique" and what the "professional driver on a closed course" really did. Back in the '70's Road and Track and Hot Rod tested 400, 4-speed WS6 Trans Ams. Road and track ran a 15.30, while Hot Rod ran a blistering 14.61-a lot quicker.  However Road and Track slipped the clutch at 1,800 rpm to "minimize" wheelspin and all shifts were "lift-throttle".  Hot Rod popped the clutch at 4,300 rpm, let the posi do it's job, and powershifted . That could do it.  # 4. Beware of "Ringers".  Some 40 years later, Jim Wangers finally admitted what we already knew. Car and Drivers May 1964 GTO test car that ran a blistering 4.6 sec 0-60 and 13.1 second 1/4 on 7.75-14 bias ply tires was a ringer. Royal Pontiac had pulled the production 389 and installed a blueprinted 421.  In 1993 Mitsubishi claimed a 13.7 sec 1/4 for their 3000 GT. With 15 psi in the tires, the rev limiter and knock sensor disabled, 104 octane gas in the tank, and the "professional driver" dropped the clutch at 6,200 rpm and powershifted at 7,000, which blew the $5769 transaxle after two runs.  Not exactly the way the average guy would drive the average production example.  Mastermind        

Relocating........

My company is transferring me to Las Vegas this coming week. I'll try to post something relevant or interesting, but If you don't see a new post for a few days, it's because I'm busy moving. I will be back soon with new stuff and my usual cynicism. Thanks for your patience. Mastermind

$2,000 for 30 hp? Like Ditka says-"Come on Man!"

I saw an article in High Performance Pontiac magazine about how they intalled a hydraulic roller cam in a 462 powered '70's T/A. It was admittedly a "Built" motor to begin with-429 hp and 544 lbs of torque on the dyno. They were happy that with no other changes, it picked up 30 horsepower. However-unlike later model small and big block Chevys, small-block Fords, and Mopar "Magnum" engines, Pontiacs never had roller cams as original equipment. Thus, all the parts for the conversion cost a total of $1,945!!!  Are you kidding me? 2 grand for a cam change?!  My brother and I built the 400 in his GTO for 2 grand from a junkyard core out of a 74 Gran Prix. On the dyno it cranked out 381 hp and 422 lbs of torque.  Another guy in his Goat club built a 400 that dyno'd 440 hp and 460 lbs of torque for $4,400, and that included $1,700 for aluminum Edelbrock heads!!  What are the editors thinking?  They should recommend parts that offer the most bang for the buck. A Performer Rpm intake manifold costs $219 through Summit Racing and makes 40 more hp than a stock intake. A set of Hedman Headers for a '70's Firebird costs $286 through Summit and ads 50 hp over stock iron exhaust manifolds. And they think 2K for 30 hp is worthwhile?  For 2 grand they could buy a balanced rotating assembly to stroke a 400 to 461 inches which will make a lot more than 30 ponies. As will the previously mentioned patterned after Ram Air IV Edelbrock Heads. I'd have stuck with a regular $300 hydraulic cam and spent the other $1700 on a high stall converter, some stiffer gears, a set of headers and new exhausts-( for some reason this car was built with stock iron exhaust manifolds) and maybe traction bars and drag radials to put all that power to the ground. I think these magazine writers say good things about certain parts because they stay in business off their advertising dollars. But they don't realize how stupid they sound sometimes. In another issue they said how great a fuel injection system was that cost 3 grand, and only made 8 hp and 17 lbs of torque more than the $600 Edelbrock Performer intake and carb combo it replaced. So do some research before you lay out your hard earned cash for some "State of the Art" thing that offers a minimal gain for a lot of dollar outlay. Mastermind      

Now that you know what you want, what do you Really need?

Like I said in the last post-a lot of people spend a lot of money buying or building a musclecar, and then rarely drive it, or sell it for a lot less than they invested, because their disappointed in the cars performance. A lot of the time, it's because they listened to friends, or fell into the bigger-is-better abyss. Here's how to avoid this problem. # 1. Let's say the musclecar you've decided on is going to be a driver or a weekend cruiser. If you live in a big city with a lot of traffic, an automatic transmission is a lot easier to drive in stop and go traffic than a stick with a heavy-duty clutch. If you live in Florida or Las Vegas or Arizona where it's hot the year round, it might behoove you to buy a car with functional, or at least repairable air conditioning. If you live in a rural area 50 miles from the nearest town, 4.11:1 gears are not going to be very pleasant on your commute. A car with 3.23 gears would get much better gas mileage and be a lot less buzzy at highway speed. See what I'm saying? # 2. Don't fall into the bigger is better trap. If you want a Corvette convertible to take your wife on cruises through the Napa Valley wine country or up to Lake Tahoe, does it have to be a solid-lifter 427 model with a "Rock Crusher" 4-speed and 4.56 gears? Wouldn't a hydraulic-cammed 350, automatic model with 3.36:1 gears be a lot more pleasant? # 3. When "Restifying" don't go crazy with expensive upgrades that have no real impact on the car's value or performance. For example-do you really need a Wildwood or Brembo aftermarket 4-wheel disc brake setup? Unless your hot-lapping at Laguna Seca, be it GM, Ford or Mopar, the stock braking system on you musclecar-especially if it has front discs-is more than adequate to safely stop the car in daily driving or at the weekend trip to the drags. When have you ever seen someone break a GM 12 bolt or Chrysler 8 3/4 rear end? Unless you have a 700hp engine with a 5 grand converter and a trans-brake, and wrinklewall slicks bolted to the rims, you aren't going to break one either. So why does your project need a custom-built Currie 9 inch Ford setup? Because that extra 1/8 to 1/4 inch on the ring gear makes such a huge difference? # 4. Be honest about your mechanical and tuning abilities. Not everyone can or wants to do bodywork. If you can't, then maybe spend a little more money for a car with a better body. If you can do basic maintenance, but aren't really a mechanic, then don't try to rebuild a numbers-matching engine. It might behoove you to pay a professional to do it, or buy a crate engine from GMPP, Ford SVO, or Mopar performance. If your not a mechanic and don't have access to an infrared exhaust analyzer, a scope, or carb synchronizers, then don't try to "Upgrade" to a multi-carb setup or aftermarket fuel injection. If a super stock Firebird can run 11.30s with a quadrajet, you don't really "need" a tri-power or dual quad setup, or fuel injection for anything other than the "Wow" factor when you open the hood. A simple 4bbl carb and intake might be best for you. Hope this helps everyone out Mastermind      

Plan your project around what you REALLY want, and you'll be a lot happier!

The title to this post seems so simple, yet I talk to many people who spend big dollars restoring a car, and then don't drive it much because they don't like how the car performs. Here's some tips to avoid this problem. # 1. Be realistic about what you want. Is it going to be a show car, a driver, a weekend cruiser, or a race car?  You may think you want a badass replica of Mark Donohue's Camaro or Richard Petty's Charger, but clambering around an 8-point roll cage every time you get in or out of the car gets old real quick.  If your going to drive the car at all, sometimes a later model is a better choice. Here's an example-I had a chance to buy a 1957 Pontiac ( No, it wasn't a fuelie Bonneville convertible ) or a 1965 Pontiac Catalina for about the same price. Since I wanted it as a driver / weekend cruiser I bought the 65 model. Here's why- the '57 had no power steering, no power brakes, kingpin front suspension, and drove like a dump truck. Further, it had a 347 inch Pontiac engine, and the horrible "Slim-jim" hydro-matic that won't shift over about half-throttle.  The '65 model had power steering, power brakes, control-arm front suspension, a 389 V8 and a Turbo 400 trans. The difference was night and day-the '65 drove like a modern car. If I wanted more power-there's a ton of speed equipment for 65 and later Pontiac V8s-(Practically nothing for the old 347 ) a Turbo 400 is an awesome tranny that will stand up to anything, and I could adapt later-model disc brakes or sway bars to the suspension without major work. Not so the '57.  See the difference?  # 2. Be realistic about how much power you really need or want. We all say we want 500 or 600 hp, but do we really?  That much power requires a lot of cubic inches, compression and camshaft. And that requires a lot of converter and stiff gears and a drag-style suspension to put all that power to the ground. Yes, in a magazine that 12:1, solid-roller cammed 600+ hp GMPP Rat Motor or Mopar Performance Crate Hemi looks and sounds great, and you can dream of your 10 second time slips. However-3,500 rpm converters, 4.56 gears, the motor buzzing at 4,000 rpm on the freeway, and two cans of octane booster per tankful while getting 5-8 mpg does not make for a pleasant driving experience. If your going to drive the car at all, compression ratios around 9.5:1 and a cam that idles at 800 rpm make a lot more sense. The GMPP "Turn-Key" ZZ4 350 in my 442 is rated at 355 hp and 405 lbs ft of torque. It idles at 750 rpm, pulls hard to 6,000 rpm, never gets over 180 degrees even in rush-hour traffic with the A/C on in 90 degree weather, gets 16 mpg, and if it didn't have headers on it, you wouldn't be able to hear it run. It runs high 13s in the 1/4 on street tires, through the mufflers on 89 octane gas. I don't have to take crap from little boys in their rice-rockets, or middle-aged guys in Hemi Chargers or turbo BMWs. I absolutely love driving the car, because it's so easy to drive. Yes, there's faster cars out there new and old, but not many, and none are as head-turning and unique as my Hurst / Olds. I had a radical 455 in it once ( I still have it if I sell the car to someone who wants Original Olds power ) but it's way nicer to drive now. For 99% of us a 400 hp engine will be more than enough, and easy to build and live with.  # 3. Be realistic about your cars capabilities, even with modifications. For example if you want to go autocrossing or slaloming, a '70s Firebird would be a much better choice than a '60s Gran Prix. If I have to explain this one-then you have no business on this site, or around a car at all. If you want a drag racer a Nova is a better choice than an Impala. # 4.  Don't go crazy on buying an Ultra-premium model. This is most people's major goof. Now you've got a Boss 429 Mustang or a Hemi Cuda. That sits in the garage 11 months out of the year and isn't driven 100 miles a year because "It's too valuable" and the owner is terrified of wrecking it or blowing the motor. He'd be much happier with a 351W Mach 1 Mustang or 383 Challenger that he could take to work or to the store once in a while, and even run through the gears and ( Gasp!! ) powershift and spin the wheels on it once in a while!  # 5. A vintage car is a toy, not an investment. Buy the goddamn 350 / automatic Malibu convertible because you want a Chevelle convertible. Don't pass that up and pay more for a 4-speed SS396 hardtop "Because it'll be worth more if I sell it."  Huh?  Your buying something solely on what it's worth if or when you get rid of it?  Did you marry your wife because you thought she'd give you a better divorce than the other women you dated?  Hello?!!!   If you follow these rules, you'll be a lot happier with your car. Mastermind