How to get the most bang for your restoration bucks......Weigh the cost vs the benefit!!!

People get caught up restoring cars and reading the buff magazines and often it causes them to spend thousands of dollars that they don't have to. One thing you have to realize is a lot of the advice given on engine building or car building is for an all-out race car. For a street machine / daily driver or a show car that only gets the occasional "Stoplight Gran Prix" or weekend trip to the drags-a lot of the "Gotta Haves" are completely unnecessary. For example many Chevrolet enthusiasts cite an article ran by Hot Rod magazine back in the '80's where they asked Smokey Yunick how to build a small-block Chevy to be COMPETITIVE in NASCAR WINSTON CUP RACING!! Basically-how would he build an engine to win Daytona?!!  So when he said that you "had" to have a 4-bolt main block, a forged steel crank,forged pistons, screw-in studs in the heads, etc-he was right-IF you are building an engine that has to turn 7,800 rpm for 500 miles at Daytona!!  Because of the backlash of this article-Smokey himself published another clarifying that. He said-if you were building a street engine-or even a circle-track "Hobby Stock" or "Street Stock" engine-that you'd race on a 1/4 mile or 1/2 mile track-where the main event is 50 laps-basically 12.5 or 25 miles-that two-bolt main blocks were fine. As were cast cranks, as long as revs didn't go over 6,500. He said cast pistons were fine for this type of use as long as you weren't running nitrous. He also said what I've said-that in 40 years-he'd seen rocker arms break, he'd seen pushrods break, he'd seen timing chains jump-but even with pressed in studs in a street engine or this type of racing-he'd NEVER seen a stud pull out of a head. He was pissed because it looked like the magazine was laying down the law-like Moses with Tablets from the mountain-if you didn't spend 10 grand-you had shit for a motor. People get caught up in that shit all the time. I hate to be cynical and harp on the same point-but magazines have to push their advertisers products, and again- a lot of their recommendations are for all out racers. For example-why does every single magazine project car have to have a custom-built Currie 9 inch Ford rearend?  I've said it before- and I'll say it again-I have NEVER in 40 years seen anyone break a Chrysler 8 3/4 rear, under ANY circumstances. I've never seen anyone break a GM 12 bolt, or for that matter- a GM 10 bolt. I have owned 400, 4-speed '70's T/A's and popped the clutch at 4,000 rpm incessantly and powershifted until I broke a shifter rod-but I didn't break the rear end. I know "5.0" Mustang racers that are running 10s with wrinkelwall slicks and have never broken the 8.8 rear. Because that 1/2 inch or 1/4 inch on the ring gear makes SO much difference in reliabilty?  Puhleeeze. The same goes for transmissions. I have seen C4s stand up to 500 hp blown 302s and 351Ws. I have seen TH350s behind 500 hp 455 Pontiacs. The "Weak" BW T5 that was used in millions of Camaros, Firebirds and Mustangs in the '80's and '90s?  Again-I know "5.0" Mustang racers that are running 12s or 11s with nitrous and have never blown this "weak" tranny. A friend put a Stompin' 385 hp 350 in his '83 Camaro and it lasted 13 months-with him going to the drags every other weekend and putting 30 hard passes a month on it. If it had been a daily driver or if he'd been less of a maniac-it would have lated several years. I know Buick Grand National racers that are running 11s-with 200R4s. So the crap that you "Gotta Have" a TH400, or a C6, or a 727 automatic, or a Muncie or Richmond 4 or 5-speed rated for 500 lbs of torque is bullshit. A BW T10 supposedly has a 375 lb ft torque rating. Yet Hayden Proffit and Bill "Grumpy" Jenkins had them in their fire-breathing 421 Pontiac and 409 Chevy racers in the early '60s and they held up fine-behind big-blocks producing 500 plus lbs ft of torque, and having the clutch dropped at 3,500-4,000 rpm with slicks!!  Remember the biggest and best and latest thing is not always the best. I work in Subaru dealership. Everyone knows about the blisteringly fast WRXs. However-my own experience and Car and Driver road tests will bear this out-the 5-speed, 265hp base model is faster to 60 mph than the much more expensive, 6-speed 305 hp STI model!!!  The difference is in the gearing. In the quest for more speed-the engineers thought the lower gearing would do it. However-they didn't have faith in their own product. The Turbo boxer engine actually has some good torque-especially above 3 grand-and hot-rodding it-if you shift out of low at 6,500 rpm you'll hit 2nd about 4,800-right in the thick of the boost. And you'll hit 60 while still in 2nd. With the stiffer gearing of the STI you have to shift to third-twice instead of once. So the base model does 0-60 in like 5.2 seconds, and the STI does it in like 5.4. That's 2 car lengths in a drag race-and although the STI may pass you by 80 or 90 and certainly before the end of the 1/4-your "Street Cred" with the young guys that buy and drive these cars is hurt. If it gets out that the base model thats seven grand cheaper is also quicker to 60-that's going to hurt sales. Any how-think hard before you spend big bucks on a "Gotta Have." Mastermind      

You don't HAVE to do it the way the magazines do it.....

In the last post I talked about how people go overboard on a resto-replacing stuff that doesn't need to be replaced and driving the cost way up. If you want to do a frame-off resto and can afford it and want basically a brand-new old car when your done-go ahead, no ones saying don't do it. But for the rest of the population that don't have a 100 grand to put into a project-95% of us-here's some more tips to keep the price down while still building a quality car. # 1. Don't rebuild or replace a part that doesn't need to be rebuilt or replaced. This should be a no-brainer-but I've seen people pull a perfectly running engine that had good compression, good oil pressure,didn't smoke, didn't use or leak a drop of oil, and ran like a champ, and then tear it down, have it line-bored, the crank turned .010 over, the rods resized,and replace every internal part. Why? "I wanted more power" they say. Ok-what's wrong with adding headers or an Edelbrock intake and maybe even a cam? You don't have to overhaul the whole engine to get more hp out of it. If the engine ran fine before-why would it not run fine with a new carb and intake? Or even a set of aftermarket heads?  And if you are rebuilding an engine with a lot of miles on it-not every block needs to be bored. I've seen engines with 150,000 miles on them and the cylinder walls looked great. And the crank looked great-not every crank needs to be turned. Some may need polishing or minor cleanup, but often you can just replace the rings and bearings. ( Make sure you mark the pistons and put them back in the hole they came out of.) The other thing they do-if they do rebuild the engine-they do the tranny too. Why? Especially if you have a TH400, a C6, a 727 Torqueflite-etc-their bulletproof in bone-stock trim. And if it was working fine behind the old engine, it will work fine behind the new one. Add a shift kit or higher stall converter if you want-but there's a couple grand you don't need to spend. Ditto for sticks-if your Muncie Rock-Crusher, or BW T10, or Ford Top-Loader, or A833 Chrysler 4-speed worked fine behind your old engine, it will work fine behind the new one. I'd replace the clutch disc and pressure plate while the engine was out,and maybe send the shifter to Hurst to be freshened up-but if the tranny shifted fine and didn't leak oil-leave it alone. The same goes for rear ends. Honestly-outside of someone with a 600 hp engine,wrinklewall slicks bolted to the rims, and 5 grand converter with a trans brake-when have you ever seen anyone break a Mopar 8 3/4 rear or a Ford 9 inch? For that matter-when have you seen someone break a GM 10 bolt-or a Ford 8" or 8.8"?  If it's not leaking the fluid and not making noise-and the posi works good-Leave it Alone!!  Why spend $2,500 bucks on new gears,axles, bearings etc-that you don't need, and won't need for 100,000 more miles if you change the fluid once in a while??!!  Brakes are squeaking? Fine-replace the pads and turn the rotors-just like you would in your 2005 Chevy work truck. Why do you need to replace the calipers, the hoses, the master cylinder, the booster,and everything else-that wasn't leaking and worked fine?? Need lower ball joints? Do em and an alignment-but why replace the entire front end if the only thing that has slop in it is the lower ball joints?  See what I'm saying?  Fix what's wrong, but don't replace every nut and bolt on the car whether it needs it or not-which is what the magazines do with their project cars. But they have a basically unlimited budget-and they have to showcase their advertisers products to stay in business. They can put $60,000 into a small-block Nova. You don't need to. Mastermind      

How NOT to lose your ass on a Musclecar project.....

I've talked to a lot of people lately who say they've lost a ton of money on musclecar projects and it makes them hesitant to do another. One guy had $35,000 in a Road Runner that he sold for $21,000 because he needed the money to buy a house and no one offered him anywhere near what he had in it. Another guy had $25,000 in a Camaro that he sold for $15,000-he'd max'd his credit cards building the car and then his wife had a medical emergency and couldn't work for a while and the car had to go to pay bills. And again-he took the highest offer he got out of desperation but it was still a huge loss. The reasons they've lost money vary-but it all comes down to three things-I'll list them and then address them one by one. # 1. They picked the wrong type of car to do. # 2. They took on a project that was beyond their mechanical capabilities. # 3. They went way overboard replacing everything whether it needed to be replaced or not. # 1. The wrong type of car. How do you pick the "wrong" type of car you ask? There's several different ways this happens and I'll explain each one and how to avoid it. #1-They pick an ultra-rare, premium model that's missing some key components. Three easy examples-a Hemi powered Chrysler vehicle missing the Hemi engine, or a Boss 302 or Boss 429 Mustang missing the "Boss" engines. The cost of trying to find an engine and all the correct parts to finish a project like this is so prohibitive-that even if you had Donald Trump's bank account-from a financial standpoint you'd be better off just finding a complete car and buying that. # 2. This is almost as bad-even if the car is basically all there-they pick something so obscure that any parts are going to be obscenely expensive and almost impossible to find. Things in this category would include 427 Thunderbolt Fairlanes, 426 Hemi Darts, 421 SD Pontiacs ( with the aluminum front end!! ) Charger Daytonas and Road Runner Superbirds, 429 Mercury Cyclones,Shelby GT500s, Two-seat AMX Javelins,Studebaker Avantis or R3 Challengers-you get the drift. Yes, the cars are worth a lot when their done, but they cost a lot to refinish-way more than a lesser model. # 3. They picked the wrong brand. Like it or not, Chevys are by far the easiest to restore because the parts are readily available and are way cheaper than they are for anything else. Because of the popularity of the GTO and Trans-Am, ( and parts intechangeability with Camaros and Chevelles, and Impalas ) Pontiacs are a close second on the list of being cheap and easy to restore. If you have a Ford or Mopar, it's going to cost substantially more to build than a Chevy or Pontiac, period. And if your building a Buick or an Oldsmobile or an AMC offering, their going to cost way more than a Ford or a Chrysler. I'm not saying this in a "Chevy rules, and everything else sucks" way. I'm just stating an irrefutable fact-restoring a '70 Buick Skylark GSX is going to cost double what it will to do a '70 SS Chevelle. A '68 Cougar will cost you more to restore than a '68 Camaro. A Duster 340 will cost more to do than a Nova SS 350.  Live with it.  # 2. Taking on a project beyond your ability. This is 90% of the populations major goof. A car with major rust issues or one missing the engine and transmission, or one that needs major bodywork is not a deal no matter how low the price is. Especially if you are not a bodyman or mechanic by trade-your better off spending more money initially and just starting with a better car. Most professional restoration shops charge $100 per hour or more. It's awful easy to rack up a 10 or 20 thousand dollar bill on something that needs a lot of work. If your not a guy who can pull and rebuild an engine and transmission in your own garage with your own two hands and own tools, be very careful. Even if you found a completely done car-sans engine and tranny-your in for a HUGE expense. Here's why. 1st off-even if you don't care about matching numbers and plan to buy a badass crate motor-that's 5 to 10 grand depending on how radical you get-and then you have to pay a shop to install it. And that decreases the cars value at sale time-not having the original engine. God help you if your trying to go numbers matching. Where are you going to find a 327 Chevy with 1962 date codes to put in the Impala SS that you "stole?" Or a 1969 Date coded 440 for that engineless Super Bee you got such a "great" deal on? Then you have to chase down all the tin and brackets, and have someone professionally rebuild it for you. And that "Six-Pack" setup you "GOTTA HAVE"-yes Edelbrock sells the manifold, Holley sells the carbs, and Mopar Performance sells the throttle linkage and air cleaner, but by the time you buy all that-your out $2,500 for just the induction system. Hmm....Maybe you can live with "just" a 4bbl??  # 3. Going overboard on the restoration. Here's what bites everyone in the ass. Apparantly-these people never heard the saying "If it's not broken, don't fix it." I had a friend who did this on a Charger he was restoring. The car needed paint and a vynil top and the front seats re-done. Otherwise it was remarkably well preserved. He went shithouse crazy. Even though the car ran like a scalded cat, had good compression, didn't smoke and didn't use or leak oil, he pulled the engine and had it rebuilt. He replaced the radiator even though the car wasn't overheating, and the radiator wasn't leaking. He replaced the power steering pump even though the one on the car wasn't leaking, wasn't making any noise and worked perfectly. He replaced the alternator and starter even though the car started every time you turned the key and the battery was always charged. Even though the car had good brakes and stopped like a dream-no squeaking or pedal vibrations, no leaks anywhere in the system-he replaced the rotors,pads, calipers,hoses,drums,shoes,wheel cylinders and hardware, and the master cylinder and booster!! He replaced every nut and bolt whether it needed it or not. Why??? This drove the cost of his resto WAY up, didn't bring extra money at sale time. He ended up having almost 50 grand in the car-( a 383 model, not a Hemi!! ) and he was crushed when he sold it for $30,000. If he'd listened to me and just did the cosmetic work he'd have had less than 15 grand in it including the purchase price and he'd have been happy as a clam driving it and showing it, and when he sold it-he may have only got 15 or 20 grand for it, but he'd have broke even or made a little instead of taking a $20,000 bath!!  That unnecessary new radiator, alternator, starter, brake system, etc didn't bring him any more value. I just sold my Hurst / Olds. It needed a new vynil top and the swivel buckets recovered and a new coat of paint. Otherwise it was in great shape, it was legally registered and I drove it and raced it often. It ran like a scalded cat with the Chevy crate motor in it, and it wouldn't take much to put the Olds engine and tranny back in it if you wanted to. The guy went over it with a fine-tooth comb, nit-picking every little thing-( I had Center Lines on it instead of the original wheels, and the white knob on the Hurst shifter wasn't the original one ). We agreed on a price and he drove away. He emails me a week later and says-"I've the got the body off the frame,the frame's on the rotisserire being cleaned and powder-coated, and I'm having the body stripped to bare metal." The Olds engine and tranny are being re-built." I'll send you pictures as we go."  1st off-I don't give a shit what he does with the car-I sold it because I didn't want it anymore. But what gets me-If he was going to do a frame-off resto and replace every single nut and bolt-why did he fly across the country and search the galaxy for a two-owner remarkably well-maintined, rust-free Nevada car,pay a premium price for it, and the cost to ship it back to the midwest?!!!  He could have bought a beater one for way less and started with that? By the time he's done he's going to have 30 grand in it-and even pristine-a '73 H/O 442 depending on equipment only brings about 12-18K at the Barrett-Jackson auction. They just don't bring the money that the '68-72 models do. If he's going to keep the car forever-who cares-he did it his way. But if he ever trys to sell it-he's never going to re-coup his investment. Anyhow-remember "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."  Hope this helps out. Mastermind                    

When NASCAR mattered.......

I'm disgusted with NASCAR and the "Car of Tomorrow" that everyone is running. First off-It's not futuristic in any way, shape or form. You have plastic replica bodies of front drive 4-door sedans ( Camrys and Fusions, Really? )  on rear-wheel drive tube frames using 1965 technology. Until this year-they ran a carburator!!! And the so-called "Fuel Injection their running now is just a 4-barrel throttle body on an Edelbrock or Team G manifold. Not only are modern overhead cam designs not allowed-they don't even run roller cams-flat tappet only. When Toyota wanted to compete-they couldn't run their OHC 5.7 i-Force V8. NASCAR forced them to run a pushrod V8-they had to build basically their own small-block Chevy clone. And not the modern LS type-no a 1955 technology type!! Ford isn't allowed to run their OHC Mod Motors-their running "Clevors"-351 Windsor blocks with Cleveland style heads. 1970 technology. Dodge boys aren;t running modern 5.7 Hemis-their running the Old "LA" style 360s-1967 technology.  They've gotten so far from their roots its unbelievable. NASCAR stands for "National Association of Stock Car Racing." That's where the term "Win on Sunday, Sell on Monday."  Came from. Racing improved the breed. Fireball Roberts and Smokey Yunick dominated in their Fire-Breathing 421 Pontiac Catalinas. In 1961-62 he won 22 races. This caused Chrysler to debut the legendary Hemi in 1964, Ford to unleash their 427 in 1963 and Chevrolet to introduce the famous "Rat Motor" in 1965-but it was based on the famous 1963 "Daytona Mystery Engine" that they ran in Duh-the Daytona 500. Through the '60's and '70's it was awesome. Richard Petty and his Chargers, Cale Yarborough and Junior Johnson and their Monte Carlos, David Pearson and the Wood Brothers Mercurys. You could buy a car from your local dealer just like they were racing. You could get a Rat motor in a Monte Carlo, a 429 in a Montego or a Torino and a Hemi in a Charger. Later when they lowered the cubic inch limit to 360-same deal-You buy a 350 Chevelle or Monte Carlo, a 351C Torino or a 360 Dodge Charger. Even in the '80's-you could buy a Monte Carlo SS like Dale Earnhardt drove-rear-wheel drive with a V8. You could buy a Ford Thunderbird like the one Bill Elliott won the championship in-rear-wheeldrive with a V8. When GM killed the G-Bodies-( Cutlass, Gran Prix, Monte Carlo, Regal ) in 1988-that was the death knell. That's when they started running Ford Taurus and Chevy Lumina bodys-replicas of front-drive shitboxes on a tube chassis. Nascar should have laid down the law like they did in the '60's-You had to sell them to the public to race them. That's why we got the Street Hemi, the Superbird, the Boss 429 and other cool stuff. Ford could have ran '80's and '90's Mustangs, and GM could have ran Camaros and Firebirds. And 302 or 305 cubic inches-only what was available to the public. That would have made for some exciting racing. In the '90's-they could have allowed everyone to run the new technology-let Ford run their OHC Mod Motors-in a Mustang Body. Let Toyota run a Lexus SC400-a rear-wheel drive coupe with an OHC V8. Even now- they could scrap the ill-handling "Car of Yesterday" ( Technologically speaking ) and allow the manufacturers to run their flagships. Chrysler could run a Hemi Challenger-Ford could run a  Mustang, Chevy a Camaro SS, and Toyota a Lexus ISF. All rear-wheel drive cars that come from the factory with 400+ hp V8s. That would drum up interest and have fans cheering for their favorite brand of car because they could tell what it is, and they could go buy one just like it at their local dealer. A lot better than 40 cars that all look like a Camry or a Honda Accord going around the track, powered by pushrod V8s that were designed 60 years ago!! Start writing NASCAR and demand that they go back to their roots "Stock Car Racing".  Just a thought. Mastermind 

Can we at least be objective when testing and ranking cars, either old or new??

This question shouldn't have to be asked, but it does. The current issue of Car and Driver bears this out. They had a 3-way comparo between a Nissan GT-R, a Porsche 911 Turbo and a ZL-1 Camaro. All premium, megabuck cars with more than 500 hp. This is what I love about magazine writers-even though the GT-R had the fastest 0-60 time, the fastest 1/4 mile time, the shortest stopping distance from 70 mph, and the quickest time in the 0-100mph-0 "Sprint", it finished third out of three in their ranking. Huh? WTF?  Your testing ultra-performance sports cars, and the one that wins all the relevant performance tests finishes last?  How does that math work?  Like this-The GT-R was "Too Refined". It's smooth 545 hp twin-turbo V6, six-speed dual clutch auto and all-wheel drive drivetrain-while rocketing to 60 in 2.9 seconds and through the 1/4 in 11.1-blowing the doors off the other two by a wide margin-delivered that massive power too smoothly and seamlessly!!! And the car was too "easy" to drive fast!!  Hello??  A $100,000 sports car is SUPPOSED to be easy to drive fast!!!  That's why people who can afford them buy Ferarris, and Aston-Martins, and Audi R8s, and BMW M3s and M5s.  These macho assholes preferred the tail-happy ill-handling, noisy 911, and the loud, solid axle-Camaro that fried the tires at the slightest application of throttle. Puhleeze. Of course, these are the same people that said a four-wheel drive,dual rear wheel,diesel, one ton, crew-cab Ford F350 had ride and handling that was "too trucklike". Duh!!  These same people complained that the new for 2015 Subaru WRX STI that had 305 hp,a six-speed,Brembo brakes, 18" wheels and a driver adjustable suspension and limited-slip axle and transfer case-was "peakier" and rode harder, and wasn't as "pleasant" to drive or "user-friendly" as the 265 hp base model with standard brakes, a five speed, 17" wheels and a non-adjustable suspension!!  Really? Do you think a 12:1, solid-lifter L88 427, 4-speed Corvette with 4.56:1 gears would be a little more tempermental than a 9:1, hydraulic cammed, LS5 454 with 3.36:1 gears?  A 400, 4-speed, WS6 Trans-Am is "peakier" and has a harsher ride than a 403 Olds / Automatic base model?  Shocker!!   Anyhow-these masters of the obvious seem to have great influence over the public. One buff mag had a "Movie and TV Musclecar battle". They pitted a '69 Charger done up like the "General Lee" against a "Smokey and The Bandit" '77 Trans-Am. Even though the Trans-Am- pulled .080g on the skidpad, stopped repeatedly from 70 mph in 144 feet, handled like a slot car,had supportive seats and that awesome engine-turned, easy to read guage panel and was faster in the slalom and around the race track-the writers-and the readers that voted via the internet decided that the Charger-which handled like the Queen Mary-wallowing through turns and around the skidpad at .067g-( an S10 Blazer does better than that ) took 228 feet to stop from 70 mph the first time, and as the 4-wheel drum brakes faded got worse and worse finally needing over 300 feet, had flat bucket seats so slick and unsupportive that the driver had to hang onto the door strap or the shifter to stay behind the wheel-depending on if he was turning left or right-and was waaayy slower in the slalom and around the track was declared the winner!!  Yeah, that's logical. Because there's no way a '70's Pontiac can beat a '60's Mopar, right?  Like Ditka says-"Come on, Man!!"  Really-If I see one more Dodge Pickup with a sticker of Calvin ( of the "Calvin&Hobbes" comic strip ) pissing on a Chevy bowtie, or a Camaro with a "Friends don't let Friends drive Fords" bumper sticker, I'm going to go all "Road Warrior" and ram them with my Old Buick!  Like whatever you want to like, but when your comparing hard performance numbers-be reasonable and objective. Any one else want to weigh in on this? Mastermind                  

How about an "Economy Sedan" pro stock style drag challenge?......

No,boys and girls I have not lost my mind and I'm not talking about Honda Civics or Nissan Sentras ala-"Fast&Furious" style. I'm talking about American entry-level sedans that make great hot rods because of their light weight-Novas,Dusters,Mavericks etc. Maybe we could get some of the buff magazines to participate-Super Chevy could build a Nova, Mopar Action could build a Duster, Mustangs and Fast Fords could do a Falcon or Maverick. When the cars are finished, meet at a dragstrip for a shootout to see who's fastest. Maybe some readers could get involved too, and make it a torunament like the Pure Stock drags. Maybe you could even break it up into two classes-say Small-Block / Street Stock and Unlimited. Here's how I'd break it down. Small block cars would have to use tires that fit in the stock wheelwells and the induction system would have to fit under the hood so the cars looked like everyday drivers, and no strokers,forced induction or nitrous. Stock block, normally aspirated engines. This would keep the costs down and allow low-budget guys to be competitive. They may not look sexy-but a 350 Nova, a 360 Hornet, a 360 Duster, or a 351 Maverick can be made to go awful fast with not a lot of money outlay. The competition would be fierce in this class. The Unlimited class would be awesome as well. Guys could put Mopar Performance 426 or 472 inch Crate Hemis into Darts, 455 Pontiacs into Venturas, 454 or 572 Rats into Novas, and 460 or 514 Fords into Mavericks or Comets. Or they could run stroked small blocks-347 and 392 inch Fords, 383 Chevys, and 408 Mopars. Tunnel Rams and blowers would be allowed. "Unlimited" remember?  Narrowed rear ends and radiused and flared fenders to clear monster tires would be allowed. Because GM played musical engines in the '70's because of smog laws-"Cross-Breeding" would be allowed-i.e. a 350 Chevy in a Buick Apollo, etc. I personally think these cars would be way cool to build and watch. Maybe inquire about starting such a class at your local strip?  Mastermind  

Where are all the badasses? No one builds evil,wicked mean and nasty stuff anymore....

I hate to always be so damned cynical, but the current state of affairs in the Hot Rod / Musclecar hobby is what does it to me. I am so sick of "Pro Touring" that I want to vomit Day-Glo. If I see one more buff magazine with a '69 Camaro with an LS motor,Recaro seats, and 18 inch wheels on it, or a "Bullitt / Dukes of Hazzard" Charger with an SRT8 Hemi in it and 20 inch wheels, I'll drive to L.A. and committ Hari-Kari in the Lobby of Peterson Publishing. ( Which Publishes Hot Rod, Car Craft, and others ). I get sick of hearing about "drivability" and "good gas mileage" and "smooth idle quality". Then go buy a Toyota Camry! A hot rod should be Jules' Wallet from "Pulp Fiction"-a bad mofo. Forget a numbers matching SS396 or a 428 CJ Mach 1-I'm talking a base-model Malibu or Nova with a snarling Rat motor. By snarling-I mean high-compression, with a lumpy solid-lifter cam, and dual-quads on an Edelbrock or Offy manifold or even a tunnel ram, backed up by a Rock-Crusher 4-speed and 4.11 or 4.56 gears. Or a Duster with a stompin' 360 based 410 inch stroker, a 727 with a high-stall converter and 4.30 gears that runs 11s easily. I don't care if it only has 10 inches of vacuum at idle-that's what the stall converter is for! How about a Mustang coupe or even a Maverick with a "Mock Boss" 302-( Edelbrock or Trick Flow "Cleveland" heads and the "E-Boss" manifold ) or 351C with a hot solid-lifter cam and an original Torker that comes on like "gangbusters" between 3,500-7,500 rpm?  What about a '70's Camaro with a 350 with a 6-71 Blower protruding through the hood?  I want BAD manners!!  If I wanted a car with comfortable seats that was practical on a long trip and rode and handled great,idled smooth, got 20+mpg and was still real fast-I'd buy a Subaru WRX hatchback!!  If your not going to leave it stock-then a musclecar should fear no import or modern muscle machine-because it should be-like the old joke-"Yea, though I walk through the shadow of the valley of the death, I fear no evil, "For I am The Meanest Mother in the Valley." Please, next time some rag talks about an "Evil" Buick-let it be a '70 Skylark with a 455 and a Muncie 4-speed, or a "Cross-Breed" with a 572 inch 720 hp Rat with a Trans-Braked TH400, not a Grand National with Computer chip and an aftermarket waste gate!!  Write to the buff mags and let them know you feel the same way, that were all tired of LS motors in old GM Iron and modern Hemis in classic Mopars!!  As Ving Rhames said in Pulp Fiction-"Let's get Medieval". Mastermind