Old vs New.....They both have their charms......

I hear the debate all the time-are the old musclecars better than the new ones or vice-versa?  It depends on what you consider "Better."  I've driven new Z06 Corvettes and I've driven a friends 435 hp 427 Stingray. I've driven my buddy's 440 Six-Pack Super Bee and I've driven new Hemi Chargers. I've driven 428 Mach 1s  and I've driven new Mustang GTs. One thing for sure-they all haul ass and their all fun to drive, but they have distinctly different personalitys.  For example-# 1. The Corvettes. The new 'Vette is a refined sports car. It accelerates, turns and stops better than just about anything else on the planet. The steering, brakes, clutch and shifter are all driver-friendly and make "Joe Average" feel like the long-lost Andretti brother. The only cars that can equal or beat it's performance-the Nissan GT-R, Audi R8, or Porsche 911 Turbo-all cost anywhere from $30,000-$100,000 more!!  GM wins hand-down on the bang-for-the-buck factor. And the A/C will form an icicle on your nose in 90 degree weather, the CD player sounds like a concert hall, the car is comfortable on long drives. A true 'Gran Touring" car. The old 'Vette, on the other hand is Jules' Wallet from "Pulp Fiction."  The earth shakes and the sidepipes roar. Nothing sounds like a high-compression, solid-lifter big-block Chevy. That long-duration solid-lifter cam gives it a badass lope, yet stable idle. The clutch is stiff, and pulling on the chrome shifter to put the Muncie "Rock-Crusher" 4-speed into gear is like racking the slide on a 12-guage shotgun. You can't take off without frying the tires. The front fenders rise, the Rat wails-Crack! goes the exhaust as you shift to second, and the car lays another 75-100 feet of rubber. The redline comes quick-Crack! into third. The fenders are still flying high,-and Crack!-into 4th. Your going way too fast now so you hammer the brakes-the 4-wheel discs don't have the feel of the later ABS-enhanced model-but they slow the big beast quickly down to reasonable speed. Continue up the country road-and it feels great at what Magazines call "8 / 10ths " driving. Fast-but not at the absolute limit. Push the limits, and the front end plows under the massive weight of the Rat-Motor, and the skinny F70-15 tires squeal their displeasure and start to slide. It may be a helluva drag race between the two in a straight line, but in the twisties the new car would run off and leave the old one. So which is better?  That's a subjective opinion. For my $60-70K I'd take the old 427 model every time. The "Captain America" chopper from "Easy Rider" isn't as comfortable to ride or as good-performing as a new Harley "Street Bob" either-but it would sure be cool to have and make you the badass of the drive-in or poker run when you pull up on it!!  # 2. I like the New Hemi Chargers. They look cool, the engine idles smoothly, the seats are comfortable, and the suspension doesn't rattle your fillings loose. You can live with them every day. And they've got enough power that you don't have to take crap from little boys in rice-rockets or soccer moms in V8 Cherokees. They accelerate, turn and stop way better than a 4,200 lb sedan has any right to. That's the best of both American and German engineering. You've got a Chrysler Hemi V8 stuffed in a last-generation Mercedes E55 chassis. ( Courtesy of the merger with Daimler-Benz a few years ago ). But they don't make me feel like Kowalski on his last ride through the Nevada desert, or Bo Duke. I'm not reminded of my pal's Six-Pack Super Bee, I'm reminded of a '70's "Gentleman's Express" luxury-performance car-like a Hurst / Olds, or a 455 SJ Pontiac Gran Prix or a 454 Monte Carlo. And there's nothing wrong with that. Car and Driver said it best-the Charger is not the car for politically correct green types. It's the car for middle-aged guys who want to die with a Glock in one hand and a Jalapeno double-chesseburger in the other. That's true, but it's still not as badass as a '69 Super Bee. # 3. The new Mustang GT has been called "America's M3". Especially after Car and Driver found a $28,000 Mustang G/T was equal to or damn close to a $64,000 BMW M3 in every performance category-0-60, 1 / 4 mile, 70-0 mph braking, skidpad G, and lap times around Willow Springs Raceway. With the miniscule difference in performance, and the huge difference in price, they declared the Mustang the hands-down winner of the comparo. And that was the GT model. The Boss 302, with upgraded suspension, tires and brakes, and 32 more hp ( 444 vs 412 for the GT ) actually smoked the Bimmer around Willow Springs and at $41,000-was still more than 20K cheaper!!  I like the new Mustangs. The 5.0 "Coyote' has a lot more torque than the old 4.6, and that makes them a lot more fun to drive. The 4.6s were stellar performers, but the tach had to be above 4,000 rpm to get the most of it. The 5.0 feels much more like a musclecar engine with power right off idle. And they do handle like a slot-car. C / D hit it on the head again-it feels like an M3 with a bigger, torquier engine. And that's an awesome engineering feat, especially with a solid rear axle. But it's dossn't feel like a '60's or '70's model. I've driven them with 289s, Boss 302s, 351Ws, 351Cs, 390s, and 428s. The 390s and 428s were nose-heavy and not very good handlers, even by '60's standards. The '70's 351C models were bigger and heavier and saddled with smog controls and salt-flats gearing. The Boss 302 is badass-from 3,000 rpm to 7,000. There's a reason they were only available with a stick and 3.90:1 or 4.30:1 gears!! Oddly-the base-model '69 Mach 1-the 290 hp 351W with a 4-speed offered the best balance of performance, drivability, handling and value. The Mach felt as good as any small-block Camaro for that nostalgic, "Ponycar" feel. . But for my $30,000-I'd have to go with the new car.  The modern Mustangs have a vintage look, and they run so strong and handle so good, that I just can't say I'd rather have an old one without my nose hitting the wall. Mastermind